kickstart

That can be tricky when fringe zealotry becomes the rationalization for the topic in question.

I too am car free and sometimes take liberties with traffic laws. The difference is I simply make those choices as circumstances dictate, not because I feel morally entitled. While I may not entirely agree with you on the topic, I can respect your opinion because you're not justifying it by placing yourself above others who choose to do different.

FBinNY 

We're on the same page. I have no issue with the fact that someone chooses to flaunt, or take liberties with traffic code, since it's no my problem. I also have no issues with whatever reason (or no reason) someone uses to justify his conduct. But when that reason is made the issue at hand, as happened on this thread, then I feel entitled to comment on it.

BTW- I have similar sentiments to those who want to broadly characterize folks who take liberties with the traffic code, as somehow hurting the "cause" of cycling.

spare_wheel

i believe active and mass transit modes are more *ethical* than low-occupancy motoring. i have no absolutely opinion on the "morality" of transportation modes. and i do not make value judgements about people's transportation choices.

spare_wheel

My main goal is to avoid getting in anyone's right of way when I bike. The idea that I'm blowing stop signs to "stick it to the man" is ILTB's strawman.

I-Like-To-Bike

What you consider unnecessary hairsplitting I consider unnecessary baloney about slowing down or stopping in order to check the traffic conditions at clear intersections.

FBinNY 

I never said stopping was necessary, so while I support the Idaho law in principle, I'd likely violate it just the same by treating reds as yields not stops.

As for slowing down, that might be more matter of geography. I live in an area that's either built up, or wooded. We don't have plains and therefore intersection sight lines are limited. If I lived someplace where I could see 100 yards or more down a crossing road, I wouldn't bother slowing, but I don't.

But I still say it's hair splitting. Either you believe in law and order and stop and wait at lights, or believe in "pre-traffic light" rules of the road and use common sense and proceed when there's no right of way conflict, or your a total cowboy and ignore the basic rules of the law altogether and take your chances.

I-Like-To-Bike

Well I'll be hornswoggled! Must have been somebody else using your moniker to post all those value judgement rants about people who make different transportation choices than you. Or were those just ethical rants?

bluefoxicy

I've had enough close-calls to spend the money for rebranded Morse brakes. It's a long story, but it comes down to my dad always putting cheap tires and brakes on my first vehicle until I took over the maintenance... which happened after a terrifying event in which light rain made a $30 pair of tires (brand new, $15 per wheel, Kelly tires) float like a boat on I-95.

I assume 2,880 pounds of metal moving at 40mph-ish is some sort of flying death machine, so I'm a bit obsessive about keeping it under precise control. It doesn't help that everyone around me is a moron with a death wish.

spare_wheel

i can see how my comment above could have been construed to be a value judgment and i regret that. i should have said i feel that cycling is a more ethical transportation mode.

bluefoxicy

Hey now. My choices make me morally superior to anybody else who has similar needs and makes different choices because my financial sense is better.

I stretch out the lifetime of my car by bicycling and, one day, will begin commute by motorcycle. My job is 13 miles away and I am not that hardcore; a folding bike and the light rail station 2 miles away saves money and wear-and-tear. I'll be out of debt 3 years after I bought this house (with $700 down payment woot!). I'll have my own isolation tank, for $3500 including soundproofing the room, rather than spending $3000/year to continue using a commercial service.

I woke up one day broke on a low salary and said, "You know, in 5 years, I should be ready to retire in hellish conditions. Then, if I get laid off, I can just give my boss the finger and job hunt with no cause for alarm." I am almost there.

Waking up and walking directly out of your wage slavery system makes me superior. It's not the bike; it's the abandonment of ties to earthly indentured servitude.

Or some such biologically processed horse feed.

Chitown_Mike

I don't know whether this is genius or borderline crazy. However to equate moral superiority to financial solvency sounds like you are chasing it for the same reason the poor play the lotto; one day strike it rich and not care because now you have that which you think gives you power. Good luck with that but chasing money as a means of security has never made sense to me because in the end it is just paper backed by a government's word. Unless I completely misread what you wrote.

bluefoxicy

It's probably more genius, to completely abandon all sense of modesty. I mean, I argued for an end to wage slavery, which is an ethical imperative; but I argued from the point of view of me beating the system, rather than fixing the system so it doesn't do that to people anymore.

I think I simultaneously made a good point and achieved a level of ludicracy greater than ILTB at his peak.

Chitown_Mike

Ahhh, I see. So biking naked means I spend less on washing and clothing....I might have to try this! I kid.

I won't say living below your means makes you morally superior if the end goal is beneficial only to yourself, my family and I try to do that as much as possibly which is why I commute by bike instead of a car for 90% of my trips, we still own a car, but we own it and I work on it. One could argue, like the traffic laws, that "wage slavery" doesn't exist, jobs are worth a certain amount so people are paid that for the job, unfortunately everyone wants a "living wage" but don't understand simple economics.

My hats off to you for working your way out of the rat race yourself, you may not get that sentiment from ILTB, but I will still enjoy any of his snarky remarks.

JoeyBike

Welcome to earth.

As for the video...running a red light safely is not a 50/50 chance of getting "blown up" with my eyes closed. Not even close. Laughable in fact.

I started cycling in the city at age 15 and I am now 56. I have very rarely owned motor vehicles. The best estimate for numbers of red lights run by me in that time is MINIMALLY 60,000 and that is not even counting the stop signs I never stop for unless someone else has right of way. So far, no locking up of brakes by any motorist due to my actions.

We live on a planet CHOCK FULL of knuckleheads. You will encounter them almost daily in cars, bikes, walking, whatever. If you don't like it, you should step off the planet and find one that suits you better.

spare_wheel

when i'm in cat 6 interval training mode i tend to track sit in front of the cars and then jump the light. for some reason this tends to irritate the safety nannies more than just blowing the light.

kickstart

Must be tuff for the truly awesome to share the planet with the rest of us.

mr_bill

Can I ask a stoopid question.

What harm is done by *GASP* stopping at red lights?

Would the world be better off if motorists *and* cyclists *stopped* at red lights?
(That's a rhetorical question.)

(BTW, enough of the Idaho stop crap. Even with the Idaho stop, you have to *gasp* STOP at a red light.)

I rarely worry about a right hook. It's the other right hook (right turn on red without stop) that spooks me.

-mr. bill

spare_wheel

i stop for people (in cars, on bikes, or on foot) i do not stop for no one.

i also often choose to intentionally violate laws that are irrelevant to safety, discriminate against active transport, and are largely unenforced.

FBinNY 

Not a stoopid question. The answer is that there's absolutely wrong with stopping at reds. And yes, the world might be nicer if everyone did everything 100% right 100% of the time.

However, that's not the world we live in, and basing all advice on what people should do, is out of sync with what people actually do. So we have to face tha fact that folks will go through reds, and speak about smarter or dumber ways to do that.

mr_bill

Good for you. And on top of that molehill, what would you say about the folks who *CHOOSE* to violate laws when people (in cars on bikes, or on foot) are present? (I'm sure you've seen that.)


How about 99% right 99% of the time?
How about 90% right 90% of the time?
How about 50% right 50% of the time?

Instead, we are headed for a world with less than 1% right less than 1% of the time.

If you wait for 100% compliance 100% of the time, enjoy waiting for Godot.
Using the 1% of 1% to justify that you don't have to follow the rules? No patience.

There are certain things that should be regarded as sacrosanct. At least pretending to stop at a stop light is one of them.

-mr. bill

FBinNY 

Let's just chalk it up to us having different world views. You're more focused on the Law of red lights, and I'm more focused on the reason for them, and the practical realities.

Traffic lights are there to establish alternating rights of way. One flow gets a green, all others wait. But if it's about right of way, then if there's nobody there there can't be a failure to yield, so no harm, no foul. So as far as I'm concerned, anyone who accurately establishes that the way is clear has met the purpose of the light.

As for the world we live in, I think I'd be happier living in one where people considered the actual consequences of their actions, rather than the letter of the law.

spare_wheel

presence is not the determining issue. it's right of way. if someone has right of way, i try to stop. for example, if a ped steps into a cross walk i will typically hard brake irrespective of whether an idjit in a cage is following too closely.

mr_bill

You both know that there are lots of cases where there IS somebody there and some bully (cyclist, pedestrian, motorist) decides they know better than the red.

-mr. bill

Lanovran

Segways and electronic wheelchairs (both classed in the same legal category) aren't operated on the road, though. They're meant for sidewalks and other pedestrian facilities.

JoeyBike

I love to answer questions with a question.

What harm is done by *GASP* running a red light when no one else is effected in the least (other than scuffing their tender sensibilities of SEEING me safely cross on a red light)?