5/12/14 2:39 PM

Here's an article arguing for different rules for bikes at intersections. Essentially, this means red lights should function as stop signs for bikes, and stop signs should require only a yield. Apparently, this is the rule of the road in Idaho.

I've always been a 'same road, same rule' kind of guy, and while I always stop and remain so at red lights, I do take liberties with stop signs. Anyway, reactions?

why-cyclists-should-be-able-to-roll-through-stop-signs-and-ride

5/12/14 4:11 PM

I believe those rules are also on the books in some other states. They make sense as "same road, same rules" is really unrealistic for 20 pound 15 mph vehicles contending with 4500 pound 70 mph vehicles. We have some advantages and some limitations and the law is wise to recognize them.

5/12/14 4:35 PM

It's well written and makes perfect sense.

Which is why it'll never be enacted upon in most states. NY as example, could not agree that the term "3 feet" needed to be included in the law pertaining to allowing safe passing distance. Seems they polled maybe 2 police departments who's comment was "we can't enforce it" so the phrase was left out. Sigh.

I could easily see a radical and forward thinking NYPD commissioner (or mayor) suggest this for NYC, except that it then deprives them the income they get from writing tickets on the West Side MUP. NYC has for whatever reason, installed countless traffic lights at intersections along my commute, most at intersections with the side streets being one-way. There is minuscule traffic at some of these intersections and no real reason for traffic lights where a stop sign was sufficient or non-existent Now I have to pay very close attention for cops as they love nothing better then to harass cyclists.

5/12/14 7:12 PM

This concept (stop lights treated as stop signs, stop signs treated as yield signs) is known as the Idaho Stop Law, because it is the law in Idaho. To my knowledge, Idaho is the only state with this law.

Many motorists harbor visceral hatred of bicyclists who run red lights and stop signs, so logic will not win the day in arguing for this change.

5/13/14 6:32 AM

quote:

---

NY as example, could not agree that the term "3 feet" needed to be included in the law pertaining to allowing safe passing distance.

---

5/13/14 1:25 PM

Generally I like the application of common sense being applied. Bikes are dramatically different than motor vehicles and appropriate adaptations of the law should exist.

A good example is signaling a right turn. You still see a few riders who insist on using a raised left hand to signal a right turn as if they are sitting inside a car that does not have turn signals with their arm out the window. First off, most motorist do not know that is a signal for a left turn and may think you are just waiving at them. Second is it puts you in an awkward position when you should be focused on braking, turning, reading the corner, etc. You have so much more control signaling a right turn by extending your right arm and pointing where you are going.

Logic aside, different rules can become a slippery slope even if they make common sense. Bikes are prohibited from using the interstate highways. It is not too much of a leap for non-cycling legislators to apply their own version of common sense and exclude bikes from other roads. Careful what you wish for.

5/13/14 2:03 PM

Granted, some of the rules can be inconvenient. But having the same rules apply makes it easier to creates common expectations. I don't know how many times I've been stopped at an intersection, waiting my turn, and had someone (or ones) "wave me on through." Unfortunately, my traveling through that intersection out of turn will violate the expectations of one or more other drivers. I usually try to politely decline, and often traffic is kind of screwed up through the intersection for a moment.

I would love being treated like everyone else on the road.

5/13/14 4:55 PM

Re the 4 ft rule- had a senior bump a guy I ride with last sunday-just very slight side to pedal contact, but still... senior gets loud and obnoxious until my friend shows him his badge and instructs him on the 4 ft rule, suddenly the dude becomes super polite...asshat

5/13/14 6:55 PM

quote:

---

You still see a few riders who insist on using a raised left hand to signal a right turn

---

5/13/14 8:28 PM

quote:

---

The law has just been changed in Michigan allowing what most of us consider to be the proper/normal right turn signal...

---

5/13/14 10:57 PM

I still use the bent left arm for a right signal. In OR both this and the right arm signal for a right are legal.

I don't like taking my right hand off the brake/shifter in trafficy intersections/turns myself...

5/14/14 5:36 AM

...that any driver born after the 1970s would even know what a bent left arm means. They'd probably just think you were waving at them.

5/14/14 6:54 AM

I don't signal right turns unless there's someone on my right

5/14/14 7:08 AM

quote:

---

I seriously doubt......that any driver born after the 1970s would even know what a bent left arm means.

---

5/14/14 9:07 AM

"I don't signal right turns unless there's someone on my right"

The law here says you have to signal for 100' or there can be a ticket. Exceptions being debris, ruts etc that might make not holding the bars with both hands a safety issue...

My bent left arm has a distinct finger pointing, folks in PDX in cars are more cautious and courteous to bike than any other place I have ridden.

Law here also state you gotta have a good reason to not be using a bike lane if it is there. And only leave it for good reasons, like it having something in it on etc. I see no language that suggests you have to stop rather than coming out of the lane to use the car pane when impeded, glass, garbage cans..

Last edited by Sparky on 5/14/14 9:12 AM; edited 1 time in total

5/14/14 9:09 AM

I don't signal right turns either, especially with oncoming traffic present that is waiting to make a left.

95% of the time my experience has been that when I signal to a motorist that I'm turning right and if I'm the only traffic they are waiting for, they will turn first and cut me off. Thus I don't signal and pretend I'm going straight.

Survival techniques.

5/14/14 10:18 AM

quote:

---

...Thus I don't signal and pretend I'm going straight.

Survival techniques.

---

5/14/14 7:21 PM

Whether we're talking about making hand signals of one kind or another, or expectations at intersections, I guess safe use of the roads for me as a bicyclist gets down to the foundational concept of being predictable, and, if doing something out of the ordinary or unusual, communicate. The predictable framework I'd sort of adopted has been the same road, same rules approach, and generally that works for me.

However, riding a bike is different than driving a car. And I'd like to see vehicular codes be made more flexible to accommodate bicycles. Doing each has made me better at the other.

Regarding predictability, I have a friend who bikes home on a narrow roadway. Traffic is usually light but can be somewhat fast. He is a longtime rider and very capable, but in this section of road he deliberately weaves a bit instead of riding a straight line. Doing so communicates unpredictable movement to approaching drivers. And he finds they give him a wider berth when passing than when he rides a straight line. I've tried it too, and it works.

5/14/14 7:32 PM

"Doing so communicates unpredictable movement to approaching drivers. And he finds they give him a wider berth when passing than when he rides a straight line. I've tried it too, and it works."


I find this is true. I come out more from the edge as the car approaches, exhibit a slightly squirrely line.
Then I move back to the right as they pas to get a bit more separation.

The other thing is that 60 lumen blinky light. The are aware of me sooner, there is no doubt in my mind.
But I have been doing a lot of group riding of late. That light would annoy anyone behind me close on a bike. No problem, usually no one behind me. ;)

5/15/14 5:48 AM

...I just ride far enough out in the road that drivers see that they need to maneuver around me. I've found that if you hug the edge of the road, drivers tend to ignore you since you're not a "threat" or an obstacle to them continuing on their chosen path. I think of riding out in the lane a bit or weaving as others have mentioned as "active safety", as opposed to the "passive" method of trying to stay as far away from traffic as possible.

As for signals, I typically only signal when there's the possibility of a conflict with a car, meaning that I'm taking a lane, crossing in front of a vehicle or one is coming toward me at an intersection and turning in the same direction. I use the arm on whichever side I'm turning, as I don't see any point in the bent left arm nonsense. When I point, I know that drivers understand it. I have a brake on each side of the bars if I need it and I've already shifted into the gear I need before I make the turn, so it doesn't matter if I take my right hand off the bar to signal.

5/15/14 9:55 AM

"or one is coming toward me at an intersection and turning in the same direction."

That's exactly when I DON'T signal that I'm making a right turn as I find that even though I have right-of-way, the oncoming and turning car will ignore my right and turn into me. Make them guess what I'm going to do.

And I like the being squirrely trick from others.

5/15/14 11:47 AM

quote:

---

And I like the being squirrely trick from others.

---

5/15/14 2:00 PM

quote:

---

...he deliberately weaves a bit instead of riding a straight line. Doing so communicates unpredictable movement to approaching drivers. And he finds they give him a wider berth when passing than when he rides a straight line. I've tried it too, and it works.

---