TransitBiker

I apologize for using "super" so many times in one post. It seems to automatically start typing/pronouncing itself when a large amount of cow patty and otherwise stupid nonsense requires a language based response. I'll call it "automatic condescending sarcasm syndrome" or ACSS for short. I don't like acting like an ACSS, nor do I enjoy observing others suffer.

Running a red light or stop sign is a primary oftence. You want to risk going to court or injury/trauma/death just because you think roadway control devices don't apply to you? Guess what? Motor vehicle traffic control was originally taken from the railroads, before the bicycle we know today existed. Semiphore, high for stop, flat/low for go. High being red and low being green later when lights started being used. Early automobile traffic signals were red/green and used a modified semaphore design. So it really has nothing to do with "sticking it to the evil car centric world". Riding bicycles and railroads came before automobiles. The automobile was replacement for the horse drawn carriage. Carriage is where we get car from. I could go on forever but I'm not. Plain and simple if one wishes to change the laws and have an impact (that isn't one being physically collided with) one must lead by example. Translation? You're making ME look bad, stop! -insert stop sign pun here-

- Andy

genec

Example: Idaho stop laws.

Such laws would make a lot of innocent "law breaking" a non event. It would still be illegal to "blow through through a red light" though.

JoeyBike

I doubt that a significant percentage of scofflaw riders wish the laws were different. I sure don't. The Idaho Stop Law is worthless to me as far as red lights go (it would be OK for stop signs). If I have to STOP, then I might as well take a breather. It's the stopping that kills me (us). If I come upon an intersection with good lines of sight and no crossing traffic, why would I stop, then go? I am just going to slide right through.

If we get an Idaho Stop Law, then motorists will have even MORE to whine about. "Look, we made a law specifically for cyclists and they are STILL BREAKING IT. Waaaaaah."

I don't want Idaho Stop in my community. We already have it figured out. Cyclists do what they want, locals understand it - and often even EMBRACE it, and the cops don't care. Perfect. What I WOULD like to see is a day when motorists cease with the hypocrisy. Now that would be a great day for cycling!

genec

And yet it works in Idaho...

Joey, you want to continue breaking the law because NO is something of a lawless land...

mr_bill

Quite frankly, I (and probably a significant percentage of people) simply don't care what you wish. You've bailed on applying any traffic rules at all - to people in motor vehicles, to people on bicycles, or to people on foot.

You are happy with Joey world. Good for you.

-mr. bill

mr_bill

NOLA is not lawless. And there is nowhere that is perfectly lawful. Don't buy into Joey's hype.

-mr. bill

JoeyBike

I can't say for sure because I have never encountered a traffic signal AND a cyclist at the same time in my limited time in Idaho. I have my doubts that many, if not ANY cyclists in Idaho stop and put a foot down at a clear intersection. Maybe they do. Maybe someone who lives and cycles in Idaho can chime in.

I do not want to live in a Puritanical society that obeys every rule no matter how silly. You can call that lawless if you want to. I call it something else. NOLA, even with all of it's troubles, remains the free-est place in the USA, and I have visited a lot of places in my life. You can be any kind of person you want here. You want tattoos all over your face...we don't care and see that every day. It barely stands out more than an eye-catching pair of sunglasses. Every type of human being is socially comfortable here IN PUBLIC. Except of course...fundamentalists. I imagine they are not all that happy in New Orleans - but there is a never ending amount of "work" for them to earn their way into the Promised Land. So in a sense, even the rigid savers of souls can find some kind of happiness here.

genec

And I see useless laws as something to abolish. "Putting your foot down..." Really? I can stop and go and never put a foot down... I don't see that as a requirement except to some jerk LEO.

BTW how often do drivers actually stop at red light right turns?

JoeyBike

I am just a victim of my environment. You don't need a ton of laws if people are nice and have common sense. It always amazes me how traffic is non-existent in NOLA when the power goes out and all of the traffic signals go dark. People become more cautious and just take their turns. It hurts no one to ignore certain laws.

JoeyBike

I think motorcyclists are required by law to put a foot down for a legal stop in most places. Why would that not be the same for an Idaho Stop?

It is pretty laid back here.

mr_bill

The other common "myth" is that you have to count one-mississippi-two-mississippi before proceeding after a stop. Both "myths" are told mostly by people who should know better but want to see "lawless" behavior everywhere.

I agree. But you are afraid of your own city. I'm not.

genec

Speaking of motorcyclists... look at all these states that have recent changed laws for motorcyclists... allowing them to go through dead reds...

https://www.thestreet.com/story/1322...s-legally.html

Most of these laws have been passed in the last 10 years.

BTW there is NO legal requirement to put a foot down in a stop. The requirement is "come to a complete stop..." so if one is still rolling in some manner... you are NOT stopped. But no law that I am aware of cites a requirement for a cyclist or motorcyclists to "put a foot down."

JoeyBike

Generally speaking, you can have freedom OR security...but not both. Security is great if you are also happy on a tight leash.

JoeyBike

From a law Forum I just searched:

Failure to Come to a Complete Stop on a Motorcycle

mr_bill

From the "law forum" that you searched and dishonestly quoted. Shame on you.

-mr. bill

JoeyBike

Don't know what you are talking about. I quoted the second response (which is post #3) EXACTLY, word for word, in its entirety. The poster is flyingron.

Nice try. Try again. Failure to Come to a Complete Stop on a Motorcycle

The line worth quoting in that post is this: "(62) “Stop” when required means complete cessation from movement."

So who gets to make that call? The cop? A judge? Does wiggling your handlebars during a track stand count as "movement" or is it just forward movement? I could put a foot down and still be moving very easily (I understand that putting a foot down is not required). If I am cycling slowly laterally (parallel to the crosswalk ahead of me) but not moving forward, is that stopped?

mr_bill

And you did *NOT* quote at all from the third response (which is post #4). That's dishonest on your part, since the third response completely contradicts the second response. Is that so hard to understand?

But anyway, quote me a *law* that says that a motorcyclist (or a person on a bicycle) has to put a foot down at a stop sign. Good luck with that.

In the meantime, quoting a motorcycle police officer in California.

-mr. bill

JoeyBike

The quote I grabbed from the Law Forum didn't say anything about a foot down. It simply implied that the term "stop" had an unclear definition. "Complete cessation of movement" really should read "INSTANTANEOUS and complete cessation of FORWARD movement" IMO.

I found what i was looking for and stopped reading the thread. Never looked at post 4-300 or whatever.

And if YOU bothered to read up-thread just a TAD...you would have noticed that I have already admitted and stand corrected about the foot down reference.

Get it together man. That's two days in a row now.

-mr. joey

Paul Barnard

Dear God. How do you ever get the courage to make a right turn on red after stop, or pass through a yield sign without stopping or proceed after stopping at a stop sign?

JoeyBike

Or a stop light that is malfunctioning? Or basically, how do some folks get through an ordinary day with so many unsolvable puzzles thrown down like some genius gauntlet.

Someone here alerted me to this video recently. Time to re-post it. Even a teenage ape is bright enough to take care crossing a road.

Wild chimps take care before crossing the road." target="_blank">Wild chimps take care before crossing the road.

Or this one:


A monkey could do it. Literally. And as much as I love cats, they aren't nearly as bright as an ape.

genec

I really saw that total lack of understanding several years ago during the great southwest power outage... people in cars that apparently had never learned to judge when it was safe to cross an intersection on their own, were frozen in place at traffic lights that were off line...

Cyclists took it all in stride.

JoeyBike

[joey edit]

After all...crossing a street is such a HUGE commitment...

TransitBiker

Running a red light here basically means two things. One, you get hit/cause a huge pileup. Two, the light doesn't pick your bike up on the magnetic sensor loops.
The second one happens sometimes in a left turn only lane, and I -always- opt to wait till it magically catches me on a cycle. Mostly though the second one happens in the overnight hours when I'm practically the only one out on the road. This whole situation could be solved if traffic control systems were given proper sensors that can detect a cyclist. Hell, even mark out the spot so I know where to be. I wait for the thing to figure out that I'm there, for 30 seconds. After 30 seconds I cross with caution looking both ways.

- Andy

genec

No doubt crossing the street as a child just didn't seem to register with all the adults in the cars that I saw that simply failed to efficiently manage simple "signal out" conditions during the power failure.

Equinox

The point I wanted to make, with my original post was the issue of proportionality. Motor vehicles and their operators are the biggest threat to bicyclists and they are killing riders my the hundreds. Four hit in Angier, North Carolina, Nine hit in Kalamazoo, Two killed on the same day in SanFrancisco, Three hit in Vermont. These are just the high profile cases we know about. In light of this obvious reality, I'm angered by people who turn around, and place the blame (mostly imagined) upon cyclists who are being slaughtered on America's roadways. It's bad enough when the general public spreads misinformation about bicyclists, but it's even worse when self-loathing cyclists spread falsehoods (Such as cyclists go through active intersections without checking). They hurt the greater cause of cycling by perpetuating myths and taking the focus off of the real problem, which are the Motorists who are killing us left and right.