cyclezealot

I have to agree with the OP when cyclists so blatantly dis-regard traffic laws. But, I don't agree our number of those of disobey traffic laws are all that out of proportion to those in the motoring public who do the same.. Example. In his suburban setting with stop signs every 200 feet or so. How many motorists blow by those stop signs in a California stop. That is illegal too you know.

dedhed

Part of your problem is they're Illinois drivers - said the cheesehead. : )

Chris516

While I agree with the overall sentiment, I do have to mention that, motorists are just as bad if not worse.

I was on my way back from the drugstore the other day when, I had to stop at a four-way intersection, despite intending to make a right-turn. At that intersection, there is a right-turn arrow for, the right-turn I needed to make. A vehicle came up behind me and honked. I made the turn despite the jerk's ignorance about the state traffic laws. So, Because of the motorist, I ended up breaking the law.

unterhausen

when I was a cheesehead, that was a really common subject of discussion. It's like New York drivers around here. Of course, the New Yorkers probably complain about the Pennsylvania drivers.

Six jours

And Al becomes the latest person to learn that, on A&S, the cyclist is never at fault. Or, at worst, that even if the cyclist is at fault, it's okay, because car drivers are like a million times worse.

Damned car drivers!

unterhausen

I would welcome a post about advocacy to educate cyclists about road safety. I am at the limit of my tolerance on posts like the OP. You'll note that the horrific incident referenced in the OP, nobody's life was threatened except that of the cyclist. I'll bet the cyclist in question rolls that same stop sign when he is a motorist. There was a post earlier in the thread that lists 40-odd studies that show motorists typically ignore stop signs that are only there for traffic calming and don't meet the requirements of the MUTCD. Sounds exactly like the situation described in the OP.

Six jours

IOW, it's okay, because car drivers are like a million times worse. Damned car drivers!

At any rate, I hold that the primary value of posts like the OP's is in demonstrating how one-sided -- not to say completely blinded by ideology -- a significant portion of A&S participants are. This can be helpful for rational people who may be otherwise have been deluded about the value of advice presented here.

That sort of opinion has bought me moderator trouble in the past, however, so I'll quit while I'm still allowed to post.

prathmann

I think the lesson is rather that it makes little sense to rail against actions that reflect pretty basic human nature and pretend that it depends on their choice of transportation mode.

People will generally ignore rules when:
1) the rule is rarely enforced (i.e. they feel they can get away with it), and
2) they don't see the need for the rule.

In the case of urban traffic this means that cyclists commonly run stop signs and frequently also red lights; pedestrians jaywalk; and motorists exceed the speed limit (at least by the margin regarded as 'safe' from tickets) and roll through stop signs and right-on-reds. That doesn't make any of these groups better or worse than others - just makes them all human.

And when the rules are set up rather arbitrarily it makes it that much more likely that people will ignore them. In the case cited here, stop signs were installed in great abundance presumably to keep car speeds low (since mere speed limit signs tend to be ignored in the absence of a cop with a radar gun). The stop signs are somewhat annoying to car drivers but are tolerated since most car trips quickly leave the residential streets with stop signs so the annoyance is minor. But cyclists tend to spend much more of their overall city travel time on streets with these extra 'traffic-calming' stop signs and it takes more effort to accelerate after a stop. So such signs are far more of an annoyance for cyclists and they are also recognized as not serving any real need with regard to cycling. They're installed to keep the streets safe from car drivers who would otherwise speed - not because there's really a need for such traffic control at every intersection. Small wonder then that cyclists so frequently violate the stop sign rules.

Chicago Al 

I'm glad this thread has taken a more constructive (if ironical) tone. Last night someone left a pretty inflammatory message, so much so that I thought the only response was to ignore it, and this morning it's gone, so the guy must have sobered up. I wonder if he was wearing a helmet while posting.

Anyway, I tend to be prolix, evidently not the only one around here with that malady. My initial post could have been much shorter and simpler, in the form of a word problem:

You are riding on a narrow two-lane street, approaching a stop sign, following a car that has signaled for a right turn. The car has stopped and there are no other vehicles or pedestrians in the intersection, so it is presumably about to make its turn. Do you:

a. slow down or stop, let the car make its turn, and then proceed.

b. pass the car on the left as it makes the turn.

c. assume that the car's driver sees you, assume that he will wait, assume that he will yield to you, and pass on the right.

What happened was some version of c. And it seems that some who have responded above evidently would make the same choice.

When I am driving, I really don't want someone making those assumptions about me.

I certainly don't make them about drivers in general, when I am riding, walking, or driving myself. My whole experience in driving, in life, is that very few people actually consider my life and safety their highest priority. A shame, but there it is.

Not to mention that cyclists can be hard to see behind a car, particularly if they are off to the right, so not in the main mirror, and perhaps camouflaged by overhanging trees, parked cars, etc. in the side mirror, so even a careful driver can have trouble spotting a cyclist approaching.

And maybe part of this non-accident was my fault, because I did specifically look for the cyclist, having passed him already, and when I saw he was not slowing down, I waited for him to pass me. Maybe that encouraged him, even caused him to speed up. Maybe I should have just made the turn in front of him and let him deal with the consequences. Maybe he was further back than I thought, maybe he wasn't going as fast as I thought, maybe he has really good brakes, maybe he is really good at evasive maneuvers, maybe I should not be so concerned with what is polite.

The whole question of how many stop signs, etc, is completely beside the point. If I wasn't there of course it would have been safe for him to go through the sign, he could do that through our whole neighborhood as far as I'm concerned as long as he watches out for the kids around the park and the ballet school. And the other kids. And the dogs. If there's no one else there I go through the stop signs too--on my bike.

Scanning A&S I can see that this is generally a contentious place, with some people's idea of 'advocacy' being very confrontational. It would be really easy to compare some of the more zealous voices here with the tone of political debate going right now, even this weekend in Washington...but I won't go there.

Crap...another long post.

crackerdog

Al, you did the right thing to avoid a collision, it is the first rule of transportation of any sort- no matter who has the rules on his side. Lots of the posts coming to the defense of cyclists are merely a response to the constant attack of cyclists in the media and on the road. If being quiet and reasonable were a good way to gain rights or to win a modern argument, we wouldn't have Faux News or have seen the civil rights marches. It takes all kinds to change the car centered culture to a more equitable sharing of public space. Talk is cheap and I don't hear of a lot of cyclists killing motorists but I do hear of motorists killing cyclists.
So if people get a little inflamed, even to the point of defensiveness, well, it happens and it is an appropriate way to vent the frustration.

gregf83 

A few comments:
1. All (or >90%) cyclists roll through stop signs while riding in the city. To expect cyclists to unclip and come to a full stop at every stop sign is not reasonable.

2. I would have ridden around you on the left instead of passing on the right. I would have also have been a little annoyed at you for passing on a narrow road and then immediately turning right. You wouldn't pass a car in those conditions so the courteous thing to do would have been to just slow up a little and follow the cyclist into the intersection. The cyclist will normally slow up at the stop sign and if it's clear proceed. Then you can stop and make your right turn.

3. Cyclists who roll through stop signs generally do it at relatively low speeds after ensuring the intersection is safe. They present much less of a danger than a 3000 lb vehicle so it's OK to cut them some slack on obeying the letter of the law on stop signs.

vrkelley

To the Op: Nature will take it's course. As a cyclist in hi vis gear, you are an easy target for the cops. Easy to watch, follow, film, and ticket.

jputnam

Must be a really loud horn if it could force your bike forward against its brakes. Did you leave skid marks?

electrik

It was your fault, sorry! Would you have proceeded if you were in a car or on foot? That is a basic driver ed rule around here - the guy behind you honkin' ain't gonna testify for you in court.

noisebeam

They were probably honking to warn you not to turn on red.

Also note that depending on where you live right turn on red arrow after full stop and when clear may be permitted unless otherwise posted. Of course that does not mean you must proceed even when clear.

Wanderer

I've been thinking about this for a couple days now - and, find myself wanting the cops to write more tickets to these brain dead idiots.

And, yes, I do obey all traffic signs and signals. If everyone did, this wouldn't be a problem.....

CB HI

Yet you just did!

CB HI

The OP and most motorist fail to understand this point while driving.

And remember, even though the OP was driving faster than the cyclist, the OP considers the cyclist to be the one SPEEDING.

Raiden

No kidding. I'm pretty loud about asserting my place on the road and about forwarding the cause of the cyclist, but do you all realize how quickly many of you picked up the 'cars are worse' 'defense'? Cars and pedestrians are irrelevant here- this was about a relatively new cyclist annoyed at what he perceived as a veteran cyclist's ignorance or hypocrisy. Also, the stop-signs-as-yield-signs angle is a little silly, considering Al's last turn was from a stop sign- if he wanted to take the right-of-way, it was probably legally his to take; if the cyclist wanted to then continue though on the right side, he would indeed need to yield for the vehicle already in the roadway. If there was no bike lane, continuing straight on the car's left would have been a great idea. I second whoever it was that suggested the cyclist was a bike-to-work-week-er.

Al, I get by by TRYING not to judge everyone as a group, but to take each case on its own and thinking about what I can do to fix it ('it' being either them or myself). I think you started on the right path simply by being aware of what was going on all the way around you.

Chicago Al 

Mr Hawaii:

I was being 'ironic' in that political comment (look it up) and the little funny face with the wink was a signal that it was all a *joke*. You see, I made a little bit of a political comment, then pretended that I hadn't done so, kind of like coming to a line you're not supposed to cross and sticking your toe over it anyway. Not very clever, I'll admit, but I thought it would at least add some lightness to the dreadful earnestness of threads like this.

I was going to respond to your other post but clearly 'failing to understand' is your specialty, and if you think 'speeding along behind me' means that he was literally 'speeding' I have to assume that there is a language barrier.

I would have sworn that English was spoken last time I was in Hawaii, though. In Canada too!

Note to Mr CB HI: The winking face above means that line was a joke, also. See how it works? I am afraid this one was a bit mean-spirited though. I really have to watch that.

buzzman

Been lurking in this thread and just re-read the OP and I'm having a different thought now than at first read.

My first impression was to side somewhat with the OP and assume from his description that the cyclist was almost entirely at fault but then I looked again.

What you describe here is a somewhat generic and typical suburban American layout. My experience in riding in these types of neighborhoods is that the majority of traffic is comprised of people who live in that neighborhood. Therefore there is a kind of polite mode that most drivers get into as they move through the neighborhood. A kind of "Chip N' Dale" mentality of, "After you." "Oh, no, no. After you." When cycling in such an environment the cyclist can get lulled into a kind of complacency. After all every time they get to a stop sign 99% of the drivers wait for them to go even if they got there 2nd (or if at a 4 way- 4th). I think the cyclist assumed (wrongly) that the OP was being polite, like most of the neighbors and offering some deference to the neighborhood guy that rides his bike to work every day.

Instead the OP was harboring just a touch of resentment. The OP just started riding, he's taking himself somewhat seriously as a "cyclist" and even though he's in a car he sees himself as part of the tribe and may even feel a little twinge of guilt that this well-equipped upscale commuting cyclist was riding when the OP was not. And so, with a touch of displacement and passive aggressive hostility waits for the cyclist not out of politeness but rather to prove the point that he is a superior cyclist even though he's in his car. He finds fault in the cyclist much the same way cyclists are prone to find faults in drivers. Drivers that may very well be doing things that the "cyclist" might be doing were he behind the wheel of the car.

This thread is yet further proof that we are only "cyclists" when we are riding a bike.

CB HI

Seems you have the A&S rudeness (that you complain about) down pat in your post.

So, when YOU say speeding in the context of traffic, you do not really MEAN speeding, YOU mean something else. And you claim I am the one having problems with English and comprehension.

Giordana

I'm a new biker and a new driver. I've had a license for 22 years, but I could never afford a car until November. I also spent 9 years in Boston, where cars are an expensive nuisance.

I think commuting to work made me a better driver. On a bike, I had to be more aware of my surroundings because I was the smallest thing on the road.

That said, I'm terrified of ninja bikers (dark clothes, no lights or reflectors). I work second shift, and I rode along country roads with no sidewalks and few streetlights. I had a headlights, a blinking red light in back, reflective decals on my helmet, and a reflective vest with lights. I really wanted to be seen. I almost hit a ninja biker while leaving my job (on a bike). Back in December, I almost hit a female ninja biker, who was on the wrong side of the road and ran a stop sign. I don't want to be part of anyone's death wish.

CB HI

^^^

Check the Electronics, Lighting, & Gadgets forum
https://www.bikeforums.net/forumdispl...ghting-Gadgets

and select a good HID or similar helmet mounted light.

That will bring even the cross street ninjas out of the dark background and generally stops them and bad motorist in their tracks.

The cost of the lights are well worth it for anyone that regularly rides at night.

Pscyclepath

It's every bit as reasonable as expecting a motorist to come to a complete stop at every stop sign and red light. The basis of our right to use the public roadways is that bicyclists have exactly the same rights, and all the responsibilities of drivers of vehicles. Sure... it costs us energy to have to stop and accelerate back up to speed, but it's also wasteful of fuel for motorists to do the same. Until we can come up with streets that don't intersect, but still get you where you need to go, we're going to have to take turns as appropriate with crossing traffic. And I'll grant, the vast majority of our STOP signs could be better replaced with YIELD signs, with the same level of safety.

I teach VC, so I spend a lot of time watching cyclist behavior, at and in-between intersections. Roll through at realtively slow speeds? Tell that to Matthew Hanger-Lynch, who was killed about this time last year when he blew through a red light at speed in an alley cat race. Around here (Arkansas), over the past three years the Number 1 Killer of bicyclists has been the cyclist running a stop sin or red light and failing to yield to traffic.

Obeying traffic signals is one of my peeves, but there's some reasoning behind that.