MinnMan

https://www.kptv.com/news/new-oregon...3113d7bee.html

Mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, it makes the law conform to sensible normal riding behavior. Pretty much all cyclists already treat stop signs this way - slowing down to a safe speed and then continuing, rather than coming to a full stop.. OTOH, it could encourage some to blow through in unsafe ways.

work4bike

I prefer the Idaho Stop Law.

BobbyG

I agree with your assesment. It will be interesting to see how this actually plays out.

debade

Why would you think that with this law change it would embolden cyclists? Especially when the law is already being disregarded by cyclists yielding at stop signs. I think the only logical argument you can make is more people will now yield except the ones who have never yielded. They will continue not to yield and blow through stop signs.

This is a great change and I hope if comes to my hometown soon. And, I hope it adapts the entire Idaho Stop approach

MinnMan

I don't follow your train of thought at all. Who are you referring to you when you write "more people will yield?" As I said, most people are yielding now. And what do you mean "Never yielded"? It's not a boolean, it's a matter of degree. How much do people slow down? Not at all? Nearly to a stop, down to 5 mph, or 10 mph? My concern is that with the expectation being "yield", some who would have passed through at A mph will instead pass through at (A+B) mph and that difference will add risk and increase incidents.

It's analogous to what happens when the highway speed limit goes up. At 55 mph (if you are old enough to remember that), it was a joke because nobody went 55 - everybody went 65 or 70 (depending on location). Now in many places its say, 65, and fewer people are exceeding the limit (because 65 is a reasonable limit in some places), but more people are driving 80 than back when that was 25 mph over the limit.

Shorter: people may not slow down quite as much.

indyfabz

I was touring in Idaho back in June. Spent a night in Wallace, where there are actually stop signs and a few traffic lights. When I visit foreign places I try to be on my best behavior. At one point, while tooling around town, I found myself waiting at a red light even though there was no traffic around. After about 45 seconds I remembered where I was and laughed at myself.

u235

In my opinion, people that were previously passing through at A will probably still pass through at A. People that were passing through at B will still pass through at B. They were already going through at a speed they felt comfortable with regardless of the law that they had to actually stop. They were totally disregarding the previous law, not stretching it out a little. I just read the actual law.. The violation is "so close as to constitute an immediate hazard" (which is up to interpretation) or if you actually hit someone or something. At that point no matter your speed, it was too high.

trailangel

Operating a snowmobile in Minn. DWI is ok, but not stopping completely at a stop sign in OR is not ok?

Leisesturm

Your concern Is noted. The law, however, says nothing about speed. Whatever is the posted speed for the road will thus be a reasonable speed to approach an intersection, just as before. The prudent cyclist will be approaching the intersection at a speed that will allow them to STOP if cross traffic is observed, just like before. How can you find this controversial? IDK, this controversial (to you) change of legislation in Oregon has been on the books in Idaho for like 20 years! Again, IDK but I THINK that is plenty of time to determine whether it is a mistake to give cyclists the discretion to treat stop signs like yield signs. Count on it being adopted in even more cities. Maybe even yours. I suspect your concerns will vanish at that point.

MinnMan

Wow. I guess my original post lacked some nuance to elicit these kinds of responses. Guys - I LIKE this new law and I'd be in favor of it here in Minnesota. I wrote two lines praising it and half a line expressing reservations. Because people of all sorts, including cyclists, do unwise things with longer leashes. Is that such an unreasonable concern?

CliffordK

I have to say... take the stupid laws off the books, and one may actually get better general compliance.

Or, at least evaluate what is good and what is bad, what makes the streets safer, and what makes them less safe.

There will have to be some effort to train younger cyclists to be conscientious on the roads.

I-Like-To-Bike

I do not think I have ever seen any adult cyclist "blow through a stop sign" i.e. ride through a stop sign at speed without paying any attention at all to potential approaching traffic. No doubt they exist somewhere because so many BF posters castigate such reckless behavior, but I suspect that the bloody results of such behavior would remove these "red light blowing" scofflaws from the bicycling population, if not the general population in short order.

CliffordK

Is that reserved for red lights? Youtube?

ThermionicScott 

I have to admit that I didn't parse your OP like that originally, either. Hopefully as drivers become aware of the new law, they'll watch a little better for cyclists taking the shot.

I-Like-To-Bike

I see most US bicyclists, and in my experience almost all cyclists in Philadelphia treat red lights AND stop signs the same as I have done for last 60+ years; looking to see if they can cross the intersection safely without conflict from approaching or nearby traffic (or the presence of a LEO), and then proceeding, regardless of the traffic signal or words on an inanimate sign. In order to determine the presence of potential conflicts, some otherwise traffic-free intersections require various reductions in bicyclist speed due to lack of clear views of approaching traffic. It isn't rocket science.

u235

Back in the day... as a reckless teenager on a BMX bike with no brakes riding in the hills of the burbs of Pittsburgh... I still evaluated everything I could. Yes, those that did not are probably gone by now. I'm more worried about the daydreaming mind wondering stressed out person coming home from work even if they are following all of the rules.

bpcyclist

At least here in Portland, this law is not, as suggested, likely to change what has been happening for a long time. Certainly, the majority of cyclists I have encountered are generally relatively responsible--but certainly not all. Those are the ones I am interested in watching. A few months ago, I barely avoided being hit by a cyclist at night with no lights, no reflectors, and no reflective clothing. He blew through a stop sign doing close to 30 mph. Miracle I saw him at the last moment. Truly. These morons will likely try to use the law to defend themselves the next time they seriously hurt someone--or themselves. I can see the litigation in Multnomah County coming now...

horatio 

I believe it. I saw a Dklein video he shot in Hollywood. His companions blew through stops at high speed. Granted they were residential streets, but they were hauling a$$. Not every Darwin award candidate takes himself out.

debade

Let's use different analogy than you presented; right turn on red. Adapted by Canada a few years before the States since the States continued to believe it was dangerous. The oil crises hits and a need to save fuel is required and right turn on red is introduced to the USA. Canada as a test market was not convincing enough. And, if I follow your logic, in short order we could have expected people turning right on red without stopping, analogous to the highway speed limit example. And while I agree with your highway example, it is not common for turning right on red without stopping in my experience.

This change will be helpful to cyclists in a few ways. It will lead to teaching 'actual' cycling behavior in drivers ed. It has been shown to reduce accidents. I am not certain but I expect the 'right hook'. And in some ways it will end up being an encouragement program as it makes biking easier and more fun.

BengalCat

I go through stop signs anywhere if I can see it is clear. I also go through traffic lights when it is a T intersection and I am riding along the top of the T. On four-way lights I stop.

MinnMan

That's a hopeful thought. But based on drivers' general ignorance of traffic law as it applies to cyclists, I wonder if they now teach *anything* in drivers ed about how to share the road with cyclists? My drivers ed was so many decades ago, and the topic was not mentioned. Also, in the written tests I've taken in years since to obtain drivers' licenses in various states, I can't recall a single question that pertained to cyclists behavior.

I hope that the topic IS covered and that it gets more attention in drivers education. That would help us all.

debade

Actually in WA they do teach some things. I was teaching a bike safety class and one of the volunteers passing out helmets was a driver ed teacher. She provided some good information about what was taught.

My preferred approach is to support SRTS programs for 6 graders.

KColeman32

Speaking of traffic laws to protect cyclists, do any non-riders in California recognize a "sharrow?" Many riders probably don't know what it is.

Leisesturm

IDK this might not be the most efficient way to poll non-riders. Speaking as a rider though, I think I would figure out what a sharrow was if I found myself on one. Those graphics are meant to be interpreted by human beings no matter their native language or place of origin. I still get passed on them though, what's up with that?

KColeman32

That's what I mean - most drivers don't know what they are, or don't see them painted on the road.