Quote:
Originally Posted by someone123
Cyclists also travel relatively slowly and accelerate relatively slowly.
Allowing a cyclist to roll through a stop sign at 5-10 km/h is probably pretty low risk but saves quite a bit of work pedaling! Realistically a lot of drivers don't come to a complete stop either.
|
That's a true statement, but the difference is that it isn't institutionalized. Where vehicles are required to stop, there are big red Stop signs so that everybody understands what is supposed to happen. The change will mean that there are two meanings for the sign - stop for motorists and yield for cyclists.
From a regulatory standpoint, I see this is being confusing as cyclists are being told to obey the rules of the road, except for 'this and that', etc. However, in a practical sense I guess it's alright as most motorists realistically don't expect cyclists to follow any of the rules anyhow, which is how this conversation started. Most motorists expect cyclists to be unpredictable and thus grant them a lot of space when passing. Not stopping at stop signs is expected, so again this is just changing the laws to suit what everybody does anyhow.
I've been looking around the internet for information on sites which don't appear to be cycle-centric (i.e. 'fake news' as the orange man down south likes to allude to) and it does appear that this at least does not make it less safe for cyclists on the roads.
In this article:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-bike-study-getting-around-20161211-column.html
...the following stats are stated (from DePaul University):
Quote:
|
A study released Monday by DePaul's Chaddick Institute for Metropolitan Development found that just 1 cyclist in 25 comes to a complete stop at stop signs, and 2 out of 3 go through red lights when there's no cross traffic.
|
...which is no surprise to anybody who pays attention to how traffic works.
And further it goes on to state the point that you are making:
Quote:
|
"It legalizes something that people see as common sense ..." said Ken McLeod, state and policy manager for the League of American Bicyclists, a nonprofit advocacy group. "Legalizing the stop reflects that bicyclists already have a sense of self-preservation and will be safe when they approach intersections."
|
And I was not aware of this, but there actually appears to be an argument to align the laws to peoples' habits and a logical reason for this practice to increase safety for cyclists:
Quote:
"It's tough to step up enforcement without aligning the rules with reality," said study co-author Joseph Schwieterman. The study suggests that permitting the Idaho stop in certain circumstances would free up police to deal with more flagrant violations.
The Idaho stop recognizes that sometimes it is safer for a cyclist to get out in front of traffic so he or she can be seen, rather than waiting obediently at the light and risk getting smacked by right-turning traffic when the light goes green.
The report pointed to a 2007 London study that found that female cyclists were much more likely to be killed by trucks than men. The study suggested that female cyclists are more vulnerable because they are more likely to obey red traffic lights. By going through a red light, men were less likely to be caught in truck drivers' blind spots, the London study found.
|
They did add this caveat, which was the basis for my concern:
Quote:
|
He noted that the Idaho stop is about yielding and slowing down, not about blowing through a stop sign without paying attention.
|
And, they are looking at safety education, which is something that will probably not happen here:
Quote:
To address the problem of unsafe cycling, the study proposed lowering fines for cyclists who commit minor traffic violations and instead offering "diversion programs" such as traffic safety classes as an alternative.
Traffic fines for cyclists range from $50 to $200, though relatively few tickets are issued. Chicago Police Department records obtained through the Freedom of Information Act show that 3,301 citations were issued in 2015, mostly for riding on sidewalks, or about nine tickets per day. That's down from a high of 4,706 in 2014 and up from 2,293 in 2013.
There already is a kind of diversion program in the outreach events held by the city's "Bicycling Ambassadors," said program manager Charlie Short.
On 66 occasions this past year, volunteer police officers and bicycling ambassadors were posted at crash-prone street corners to stop cyclists and motorists if they do something wrong, and explain why a targeted behavior is unsafe, Short said. Tickets are not usually issued.
Short could not comment on the Idaho stop idea but noted that sometimes bicyclists make choices they think make them safer but can lead to other dangers. He said some cyclists and motorists don't know the rules of the road, others don't care and some are just doing what everyone else is doing. Short said education discourages unsafe behavior, which drops on corners where outreach events are held.
|
They did go on to say that cars not stopping at signs and lights are a bigger safety concern, which I wholeheartedly agree with. Car drivers in general are becoming more aggressive and less attentive with each passing year, and that has me concerned for the safety of bicyclists, motorcyclists, and even other car drivers.
Prev
Linear Mode
