I run red lights. There, I said it.
Views: 182
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Tim S on
-
Ryan L.
"What has really been weirding me out lately is how to approach stop signs. I've noticed a rising trend where cars actually refuse to go through the intersection until I go first. I've even tested out this issue by completely acting like a car and waiting my turn and still cars will just sit there till I go through."
I have noticed this as well.
-
Permalink Reply by Spencer "Thunderball" Thayer! on
-
This is almost identical to the Idaho 'Rolling' Stop. Which is almost identical to common sense...
I too have noticed that cars expect you to behave in a certain way and if you do not it injects uncertainty into the dynamic thus increasing risk. Accepting that this is how cyclists function and adjusting the laws accordingly is just good law.
-
Permalink Reply by Martin Hazard on
-
Last time I checked (1990) the definition of a "vehicle" in the Illinois Motor Vehicle Code book was "any form of transportation not powered by human force". I know because it got me out of a ticket in the burbs. I don't know if that has changed, but it did exempt bikes from obeying any traffic control devices unless failing to yield the right of way in doing so. Any one want to look that up?
-
Permalink Reply by Brendan Kevenides on
-
It isn't.
Tank-Ridin' Ryan said:How is that different from the 'Idaho stop' law?
Chicago Bicycle Advocate said:Ryan:
I must respectfully disagree. In no way would what I am advocating legalize or permit carelessness or negligent use of the roadway. A statute of the kind I am proposing would look something like this:
"A person operating a bicycle approaching a stop sign or stop light shall slow down and, if required for safety, stop before entering the intersection. After slowing to a reasonable speed or stopping, the person shall yield the right-of-way to any vehicle in the intersection or approaching on another highway so closely as to constitute an immediate hazard during the time the person is moving across or within the intersection or junction of highways, except that a person after slowing to a reasonable speed and yielding the right-of-way if required, may cautiously make a turn or proceed through the intersection without stopping."
Such a statute would uphold the duty of the bicyclist to use due care and caution at intersections. Failure to do so would violate the law. Ignoring traffic control devices as if they did not exist at all is not something I would ever promote. Frankly, for those who would charge into a controlled intersection without plan or concern it wouldn't matter a lick what the law is.
Tank-Ridin' Ryan said:I agree with Frank. If this were passed in Chicago (which would be foolish given the size of our city), it would only legalize the foolish and dangerous behavior that already is practiced by some cyclists.
-
-
The law requires bicycles to obey traffic control devices and other rules of the road.
Martin Hazard said:Last time I checked (1990) the definition of a "vehicle" in the Illinois Motor Vehicle Code book was "any form of transportation not powered by human force". I know because it got me out of a ticket in the burbs. I don't know if that has changed, but it did exempt bikes from obeying any traffic control devices unless failing to yield the right of way in doing so. Any one want to look that up?
-
Permalink Reply by carl harris on
-
I want a pony
-
Permalink Reply by Doug Haynes on
-
Me too, it annoys me because I try to take my proper turn and often end up awkwardly resuming quickly where I had planned to stop so I do not hold up traffic.
Tim S said:Ryan L.
"What has really been weirding me out lately is how to approach stop signs. I've noticed a rising trend where cars actually refuse to go through the intersection until I go first. I've even tested out this issue by completely acting like a car and waiting my turn and still cars will just sit there till I go through."
I have noticed this as well.
-
Permalink Reply by T.C. O'Rourke on
-
Bah, I call Bullshit. Sort of.
Yes, getting a jump on traffic makes for a more pleasant ride. True, there are often times that running stop signs and signals can be safer even.
But the primary reason both you and I (cautiously) disobey these traffic controls is that we get where we are going faster, without any danger to ourselves or others.
And, in practice, we are allowed. Any cyclist waiting needlessly has something to prove.
Omitting the base reason makes you look disingenuous.
-
Permalink Reply by Lee Diamond on
-
This sort of goes along with my theory that the worst thing about cycling is all these damn cyclists.
Everyone has an easy time justifying their own particular brand of safety and lack thereof. I admit that I break laws of a variety of types and orders or have, or know someone who has. I have also acted self-righteous as I caught up to the helmetless, brakeless, clipless, chain-belted fixed-gear cyclist that blew lights and so forth, perhaps not externally, but in my cycling soul. I have also done far more things that were illegal OFF of the bike as well, as I believe most of society does. Sometimes it is jaywalking, or spitting on the sidewalk, or not full stopping on red on a bike or in a car, or recording a police action with your cell phone or any of a number of things.
We do this because the creation of a law is not followed by the enforcement of the law in crimes that society thinks are actually not too bad. Enforcement is actually more up to the citizenry than the law's creation, but that is usually ignored. If society felt a law's enforcement was important they would call and harass and complain to alderman, police liasons, mayoral aides and every other secretary and gatekeeper we could find until they bugged their boss to call the cops and start getting serious about a law. Take bike theft. That is definitely illegal. There are also an increasing number of occasions of systematic enabling of bike thieving and the prevention of justice about an illegal act. This is also part of the social contract, and in a society like ours, a property theft crime is insignificant to the mindset of the police, who take their cue from the citizens of their community, who think it is absolutely outrageous. When it happens to them.
Lots of laws sound great until they are enforced, and then the inconvenience of the law sets in and it is no longer something people want....like red light cameras. In the case of bicycles, I think the multi-stop situation with cars waiting for us to go is actually a reaction from the social contract that Spencer points out. They do expect us to go. They even get irritated when we don't go. We have to pedal up to speed, sometimes clip in, etc. Many drivers are irritated when you stop. Some of the same ones are irritated when you go as well.
In the end, the idea that resonates with me is the notion that the law is something to be concerned about in this abstract, and in that world, the idea of laws acting like bikes are vehicles are antiquated sounds nice. It is even logical.
The problem is that the social contract that we have between drivers and cyclists is that drivers really don't want what they say they want. Drivers who are irritated when a cyclist breaks a law really just want to be free of cyclists altogether. They are envious when a cyclist blows a red in large part because the social contract says you can do that without getting a ticket in most cases, but a car can't. No fair! But they fail to recognize the absurdity in the consequences if they do it, or a cyclist does it. Two to three thousand pounds of material moving at you at 1 mph can kill you quite easily, so a rolling stop in a car vs. a blaze-through-the lights-kamikazee-run-around-the-knife still is far more likely to kill the squishy rolling thing in the event of a collision.
The efforts I make to obey the law have a lot to do more with the image I want to project of cycling. My less proud moments of narcissistic selfishness, are merely that.
Cheers - Lee
-
-
Fair. There are I suppose lots of reasons to run stop lights and signs. Getting from point A to B faster is one of them. But it isn't a good one. There is in my view one damn good reason to disobey a traffic control device, to get away from motorized traffic, and that is the case I wished to make. Some bicyclists are being asses when they run a light, but not all of them. In fact many, as I've pointed out, do it for a legitimate reason.
Brendan.
T.C. O'Rourke said:Bah, I call Bullshit. Sort of.
Yes, getting a jump on traffic makes for a more pleasant ride. True, there are often times that running stop signs and signals can be safer even.
But the primary reason both you and I (cautiously) disobey these traffic controls is that we get where we are going faster, without any danger to ourselves or others.
And, in practice, we are allowed. Any cyclist waiting needlessly has something to prove.
Omitting the base reason makes you look disingenuous.
-
Permalink Reply by Davo on
-
Last night I more or less ran a red light going NW on Lincoln. No traffic to speak of but I did get yelled at by a cyclist rideing on the sidewalk. I thought about stopping and saying that we both were assholes but didn't really care that much about it. Just thought it was kind of funny
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
Groups
-
Chicagoland Beer Explora…
203 members
-
Wednesday Night for Mort…
1 member
-
Great Lakes Ultra Cycling
270 members
-
Major Taylor Internation…
1 member
-
Critical Mass discussion
261 members
© 2008-2016 The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.
Powered by
