I assume assume all other drivers are drunk / sleeping / texting / etc. I'm very alert when I do anything conflicting with the "default" behavior other drivers. My suspicion of drivers goes up about 10X when I'm riding a bicycle on roads.
Point being: We've got a bike path here that crosses a fairly busy state route at the edge of a town. Drivers coming into town don't slow down (even though the speed limit changes way back at the city limits and well before the bike path crossing).
When I'm waiting to cross, invariably, some "do gooder" driver coming into town will stop and motion me on. Meanwhile some driver behind them, not expecting someone to be stopped in the road (and going too fast), ends up braking hard to get stopped. I'm not going to put myself in front of that.
The "do gooder" usually doesn't want to "take no for an answer", either, so I end up having to sit for much longer than if they'd just done the correct thing. In some cases I've even gotten exasperated gestures from drivers, apparently miffed that I didn't take advantage of their "charity".
(I'm actually surprised at the amount of squealing tires I've heard, given that anti-lock brakes are on virtually every car on the road.)
I got in a car accident about ten years ago which resulted in my and another car getting totaled. I was going down a 35 or 45 mph four lane wide (two in each direction plus a median) street which was crossed every quarter mile or so by smaller two way residential streets. The cross streets had stop signs at intersections. The larger road I was on had left turn lanes but no stop signs.
I was in the right lane of the larger street going along at the speed limit. As I was passing a backup of several large vehicles waiting to turn left in the lane next to me, a car from a cross street pulled out in front of me from the left. I'm still shocked that I managed to steer so that I hit the back of the car instead of the front. The other car spun completely around, but neither of us had any injuries other than whiplash.
Apparently what happened was that the car I hit was waiting at the stop sign and got waved forward by the driver in the lane next to me. They decided to pull into the intersection despite the fact that they couldn't see the lane I was in, and thus didn't know that there was a vehicle in it.
Obviously, they shouldn't have pulled into the intersection without knowing that there wasn't a car going into it, but also if they'd refused to go until the cars with the right of way had turned it wouldn't have happened either.
As a cyclist, I've often been waved into an intersection by some well-meaning motorist when there's no way for me to be sure that the intersection is clear. I usually just shake my head and motion for them to go on. Usually they smile and go on, but sometimes they get visibly irritated.
I don't want "charity" from drivers (as a cyclist, pedestrian, or other driver). I want them to act predictably and safely.
So many things in the world would be better if people just did the thing they're supposed to do. If that's "negativity" so be it.
They're not doing anything nice. That's my point. They're putting themselves and others in danger for no benefit. I don't want my bicycle to be immediately in front of their car and, more than likely, they're taking more of my time than if they'd just driven on.
If restricted visibility does not allow you to assess whether the intersection is clear - stopping always is also the right thing to do.
So if you can reasonably see that there is no immediate traffic, you don't have to wait at an intersection and risk hoping that another driver at a 4 way stop will respect the stop sign. This whole law is being called the "Colorado Safety Stop" but was initially called an Idaho stop [1][2]. It resulted in a 23% reduction in bicycle crashes in intersections with STOP signs only [3].
Even if you think the results are not intuitive, they are certainly backed by data. Making this a law just means cyclists won't be harassed by law enforcement for doing what is statistically known to be safer.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idaho_stop
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HT_KdFCVEdc
[3] https://www.bikede.org/delaware-yield-crash-data/#page-conte...
Many a time I've come up to a stop right after someone else, and they start waving me on. But almost invariably, unless I immediately go (basically without even waiting for the 'go on' wave) they will wave me through, and then start driving through the intersection.
The point is these 'go on' people _are_ ignoring the laws about when a driver must yield. They're trying to tell a driver that must yield that its okay if they don't.
But if this is recreational exercise based biking then stopping and starting are perfect additions to the bike workout regimen!
For people at the extremely low ends of skill and risk tolerance - most of those people aren't cycling, especially not in the U.S., where driving is considered the "default" mode of getting around. The single best way to help them improve is putting in better bike infrastructure since people need a low-stakes place to gain experience and confidence.
Sure, but I'm responding to a comment that made a much broader claim. I think the claim I'm responding to is wrong.
Americans in particular don't really have a mental category like "road for bikes". I see it all the time...if it's for bikes, then that means it's really for pedestrians too, right? For kids learning to bike? For prams?
What I want in bicycle infrastructure is a means for regular people to get around. What I don't want is people learning to bike in traffic (where "traffic" means regular people on bikes just trying to get around!). If you're not a confident bicyclist, the road is not the place to learn. You should not be taking your little kids with their trikes on bicycle roads. You should be performing to some minimum standard of competence, such that you're not going to hurt or delay others.
> For people at the extremely low ends of skill and risk tolerance - most of those people aren't cycling, especially not in the U.S., where driving is considered the "default" mode of getting around. The single best way to help them improve is putting in better bike infrastructure
We agree!
>since people need a low-stakes place to gain experience and confidence.
Except this bit. I think making it seem safer is certainly a thing that will result in more people bicycling. Part of it is affecting decisions made by people who are already competent cyclists ("Should I continue to cycle to work?"), and part of it is affecting the decision to start cycling for newbies. But you really shouldn't be on the road until you're some minimum level of competent; find a parking lot.
If you want to stop at stop signs, that's totally fine.
I'll cop to the claim being so broad that it includes the extremely, extremely low end of skill ("unable to reliably operate a bicycle"), which is a level where most people do not stay for long, especially in places where cycling is common for everyday tasks.
I can't think of a pithy way to rephrase the original claim, so I will nuance it instead, that any cyclist who has mastered the basics of a bicycle should feel free to continue their learning in public places.
After acquiring a basic ability to stay balanced, pedal, turn and brake, learning how to cycle and conquering the anxieties people have around negotiating their environments on a bicycle is trial-by-fire with (hopefully progressively) larger fires. This is even true for a lot of people learning to drive: many people in car-dependent suburbia figure out how to operate the steering wheel, pedals, and gears in a deserted parking lot somewhere, and then have to spend time on an actual road with cars to figure out how to interact intelligently with traffic. If learners weren't supposed to interact with traffic before they knew confidently how to interact with traffic, they'd be caught in a chicken-egg problem since it's fundamentally a trial and error process.
Ultimately cycling is by its nature much more forgiving to people who are still figuring it out since the probability of an accident is much lower, as is its expected severity. It's much easier for competent cyclists to identify people who are clumsy or slow in a timely manner, and navigate around them.
The guy had pulled up so close to my back wheel, and then "forgot" I was there. When the green turned, he immediately impacted my back wheel.
I was able to exit the bike in the brief second between that tap and when he seriously hit the gas. My bike proceeded to be crushed by the semi along with all my electronics in my bag strapped to the back. I was so lucky to get off the bike (admittedly I was incensed that someone had bumped me and I was about to get into a fight with the person), if I had tried to stay on that bike I would've definitely died!
Both were accidents I made while a newb biker, I became a lot more "seasoned" after these two events and became a way more defensive biker
sounds like you'd already taken the lane and didn't have a good out; would you just try to avoid the panic now?
Visibility can be partially obstructed for drivers at an intersection due to surrounding cars. This can create a situation where a car that is stopped 5 cars behind me, or is coming from the opposite direction, might not be able to see me. The risk is compounded at intersections with multiple lanes, where visibility is further decreased, and I may need to wait in the middle lane due to the presence of a dedicated turning lane.
The act of just starting a bicycle from a full stop also increases risk. I wear pedals that require me to unclip when stopping, and clip my feet in again when starting. This can take a couple seconds (I don’t always get it on the first attempt), during which time my maneuverability is severely limited, and I may need to look down at my feet for a moment instead of watching other cars in the intersection. Even for people using flat pedals, it can require more effort to turn the pedals when stopped vs. moving slowly, which decreases maneuverability and increases time spent in the intersection. Riders are also more likely to wobble when starting from a full stop.
So it’s not really about saving time, although that is certainly a nice benefit, but rather about improving safety for cyclists.
Just like when I'm on my motorcycle, I like to pass cars on the highway, not chill next to them waiting for them to merge into me. Keep moving and limit your time spent in dangerous situations.
Premised by a false dichotomy. There are more choices than 1. harm and 2. servile obedience to signs.
The alternative, which does help, is to wait in line behind a car, but often drivers dislike this more (have been shouted at for this as well).
Yes, it can also cause you to miss the light or be in the intersection when red, if it is a quick one and the driver up front is not paying attention, since the bike can't accelerate as quickly from the stop. But I will do this, if it seems safer for the intersection. It's all contextual…
You can get around this sometimes with a bunch of strong magnets stuck to your lower bracket, but only sometimes and it depends on the sensors' calibrations.
Point being, this change does have some practical benefits if you have to deal with such traffic lights - running the red in sight of the wrong cop is no longer a concern.
This is great for slow roads and neighborhoods - where many people prefer to be riding their bikes anyways.
In my experience drivers with the right-of-way will yield to cyclists, unpredictably, because they think they're being courteous. I see this at road crossings and intersections all the time. The driver has the right-of-way but they'll be "helpful" and try to let the cyclist go first.