Originally Posted by
madpogue
Wait -- the old man was ripping across the intersection full speed on a bicycle? And how does a rolling "stop" constitute "coming to a stop"? You do understand that the question was about the rolling-stop driver and the old man, right?
Actually, when entering the roadway in that situation, the driver should be looking to her/his RIGHT once again, AFTER looking left, exactly because a pedestrian may be entering the crosswalk after s/he has looked to the left. S/he should be sufficiently certain that car traffic from the left is sufficiently clear (that is, far enough away or non-existent) that s/he can look to the right again while entering the roadway.
But once again, since the most recent (suburban Maryland, dump site, etc) situation involves (which of the following two words is unclear?) NO INTERSECTIONS, this story is still irrelevant.
THIS HAPPENED IN LOS ANGELES ON A BUSY CITY STREET (Santa Monica Blvd) INTERSECTION. WITH THOUSANDS OF CARS PASSING THROUGH EVERYDAY. IT WAS NOT IRRELEVANT TO THE OLD MAN LAYING IN THE STREET. THE POINT IS A BICYCLE GOING FAST ENOUGH TO STAY VERTICAL, WILL RIDE OUT IN FRONT OF A DRIVER (doing a rolling stop or after a full stop) FROM THE DRIVERS RIGHT SIDE BEFORE THE DRIVER CAN STOP OR EVEN SEE THE BIKE. AND NINE TIMES OUT OF TEN BICYCLE RIDERS RIDING ON THE SIDE WALK DON'T STOP AT THE CORNER. THEY KEEP GOING STRAIGHT ACROSS THE STREET AND CAUSE DRIVERS TO JAM ON THEIR BRAKES.