Mary Cheh wants to make it legal for bicyclists for blow stop signs and stop lights

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She says it's important for bicyclists to be able to "maintain momentum."

Uh, what?

If you're too lazy to stop at stop signs, whether you're in a car or on a bike, maybe you shouldnt be on the road.

This being D.C., she is pairing this "safety" proposal with other plans to make it harder to drive a car.

This is what being captured by special interests (i.e., the bike lobby) looks like.

https://twitter.com/marycheh/status/1496223827524820995

what's the Idaho stop?

The second item from the bill is legalizing the practice of bike/scooter yielding at stop signs and treating red lights as stop signs.

This practice is known as the "Idaho Stop" and acknowledges the need of riders to maintain momentum + reduce exposure/proximity to car traffic.

It's called lazy and they already do this. How about needing a license and plate to ride-then reckless bikers could be ticketed just like reckless cars.

Mental exercise. You are on a two lane road with a double yellow line at stop signs at every intersection. You are behind a cyclist who has legally taken the lane and comes to a full stop at every intersection. How many blocks will it take you to get frustrated and illegally pass the cyclist, crossing the double yellow lines?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She says it's important for bicyclists to be able to "maintain momentum."

Uh, what?

If you're too lazy to stop at stop signs, whether you're in a car or on a bike, maybe you shouldnt be on the road.

This being D.C., she is pairing this "safety" proposal with other plans to make it harder to drive a car.

This is what being captured by special interests (i.e., the bike lobby) looks like.

https://twitter.com/marycheh/status/1496223827524820995

what's the Idaho stop?

The second item from the bill is legalizing the practice of bike/scooter yielding at stop signs and treating red lights as stop signs.

This practice is known as the "Idaho Stop" and acknowledges the need of riders to maintain momentum + reduce exposure/proximity to car traffic.

It's called lazy and they already do this. How about needing a license and plate to ride-then reckless bikers could be ticketed just like reckless cars.

Mental exercise. You are on a two lane road with a double yellow line at stop signs at every intersection. You are behind a cyclist who has legally taken the lane and comes to a full stop at every intersection. How many blocks will it take you to get frustrated and illegally pass the cyclist, crossing the double yellow lines?

The exact legal meaning of a double yellow varies quite a bit from state to state but generally it is not per se illegal to pass on a double yellow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She says it's important for bicyclists to be able to "maintain momentum."

Uh, what?

If you're too lazy to stop at stop signs, whether you're in a car or on a bike, maybe you shouldnt be on the road.

This being D.C., she is pairing this "safety" proposal with other plans to make it harder to drive a car.

This is what being captured by special interests (i.e., the bike lobby) looks like.

https://twitter.com/marycheh/status/1496223827524820995

what's the Idaho stop?

The second item from the bill is legalizing the practice of bike/scooter yielding at stop signs and treating red lights as stop signs.

This practice is known as the "Idaho Stop" and acknowledges the need of riders to maintain momentum + reduce exposure/proximity to car traffic.

It's called lazy and they already do this. How about needing a license and plate to ride-then reckless bikers could be ticketed just like reckless cars.

Mental exercise. You are on a two lane road with a double yellow line at stop signs at every intersection. You are behind a cyclist who has legally taken the lane and comes to a full stop at every intersection. How many blocks will it take you to get frustrated and illegally pass the cyclist, crossing the double yellow lines?

Guys like the PP believe that cyclists shouldn't be allowed on the road in the first place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why spend another penny when cyclists disdain the already existing infrastructure? Here in the burbs we have many trails and bikers ride on the street directly adjacent to them and then complain about car traffic. The majority of these selfish entitled jerks are biking recreationally. Nothing is worse than folks who DGAF about anybody else wanting everyone else to GAF about them.

The old "perfectly good bike trail" trope.

What's wrong with it? All I hear is bikers saying "car bad, car bad". If cars are so bad why do you want to ride with them and subject yourself to possible injury when you could use the trail where there are no cars??????????

The reason people ride in the road when there is a trail nearby is because the road is a better place to ride. Even with the cars. Many, many trails flat-out suck. They are usually designed and built by people who don't ride and know nothing about what it's like to ride.

In other words-I bike on the road because I can go faster. I can't go faster than the cars, I can't stop at stop signs or red lights, I cannot possibly maintain the speed limit, I'm effing up lots of people's work commute, and sometimes I like to ride in a pack and take up the entire lane because hey my rights and yada yada yada.......

How is one person on a bike effing up lots of people's work commutes? Just pass them. It slows you down for like 45 seconds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She says it's important for bicyclists to be able to "maintain momentum."

Uh, what?

If you're too lazy to stop at stop signs, whether you're in a car or on a bike, maybe you shouldnt be on the road.

This being D.C., she is pairing this "safety" proposal with other plans to make it harder to drive a car.

This is what being captured by special interests (i.e., the bike lobby) looks like.

https://twitter.com/marycheh/status/1496223827524820995

what's the Idaho stop?

The second item from the bill is legalizing the practice of bike/scooter yielding at stop signs and treating red lights as stop signs.

This practice is known as the "Idaho Stop" and acknowledges the need of riders to maintain momentum + reduce exposure/proximity to car traffic.

It's called lazy and they already do this. How about needing a license and plate to ride-then reckless bikers could be ticketed just like reckless cars.

Unnecessary to license bicyclists, mostly because it's much safer to ride a bike than to drive a car. Yes, I know, sometimes bicyclists crash into and injure or kill pedestrians. But it's far less common than car accidents. And in most cases, if a bike crashes into something, the only thing being damaged or hurt is the bike and the rider.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why spend another penny when cyclists disdain the already existing infrastructure? Here in the burbs we have many trails and bikers ride on the street directly adjacent to them and then complain about car traffic. The majority of these selfish entitled jerks are biking recreationally. Nothing is worse than folks who DGAF about anybody else wanting everyone else to GAF about them.

The old "perfectly good bike trail" trope.

What's wrong with it? All I hear is bikers saying "car bad, car bad". If cars are so bad why do you want to ride with them and subject yourself to possible injury when you could use the trail where there are no cars??????????

The reason people ride in the road when there is a trail nearby is because the road is a better place to ride. Even with the cars. Many, many trails flat-out suck. They are usually designed and built by people who don't ride and know nothing about what it's like to ride.

In other words-I bike on the road because I can go faster. I can't go faster than the cars, I can't stop at stop signs or red lights, I cannot possibly maintain the speed limit, I'm effing up lots of people's work commute, and sometimes I like to ride in a pack and take up the entire lane because hey my rights and yada yada yada.......

How is one person on a bike effing up lots of people's work commutes? Just pass them. It slows you down for like 45 seconds.

That's my experience. I drive a lot in the region and in my experience the impact of cyclists is minimal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why spend another penny when cyclists disdain the already existing infrastructure? Here in the burbs we have many trails and bikers ride on the street directly adjacent to them and then complain about car traffic. The majority of these selfish entitled jerks are biking recreationally. Nothing is worse than folks who DGAF about anybody else wanting everyone else to GAF about them.

The old "perfectly good bike trail" trope.

What's wrong with it? All I hear is bikers saying "car bad, car bad". If cars are so bad why do you want to ride with them and subject yourself to possible injury when you could use the trail where there are no cars??????????

The reason people ride in the road when there is a trail nearby is because the road is a better place to ride. Even with the cars. Many, many trails flat-out suck. They are usually designed and built by people who don't ride and know nothing about what it's like to ride.

In other words-I bike on the road because I can go faster. I can't go faster than the cars, I can't stop at stop signs or red lights, I cannot possibly maintain the speed limit, I'm effing up lots of people's work commute, and sometimes I like to ride in a pack and take up the entire lane because hey my rights and yada yada yada.......

How is one person on a bike effing up lots of people's work commutes? Just pass them. It slows you down for like 45 seconds.

That's my experience. I drive a lot in the region and in my experience the impact of cyclists is minimal.

Well these are Very Important* people whose time is being wasted. 45 seconds is a big deal! Stopping at stop signs is for plebians. Get out of their way, duh.



*very self-important

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She says it's important for bicyclists to be able to "maintain momentum."

Uh, what?

If you're too lazy to stop at stop signs, whether you're in a car or on a bike, maybe you shouldnt be on the road.

This being D.C., she is pairing this "safety" proposal with other plans to make it harder to drive a car.

This is what being captured by special interests (i.e., the bike lobby) looks like.

https://twitter.com/marycheh/status/1496223827524820995

what's the Idaho stop?

The second item from the bill is legalizing the practice of bike/scooter yielding at stop signs and treating red lights as stop signs.

This practice is known as the "Idaho Stop" and acknowledges the need of riders to maintain momentum + reduce exposure/proximity to car traffic.

It's called lazy and they already do this. How about needing a license and plate to ride-then reckless bikers could be ticketed just like reckless cars.

Mental exercise. You are on a two lane road with a double yellow line at stop signs at every intersection. You are behind a cyclist who has legally taken the lane and comes to a full stop at every intersection. How many blocks will it take you to get frustrated and illegally pass the cyclist, crossing the double yellow lines?

The exact legal meaning of a double yellow varies quite a bit from state to state but generally it is not per se illegal to pass on a double yellow.

Yes, it is. Google it.

Seriously, you drivers don't even know the effing rules of the road.

https://driversprep.com/crossing-the-double-yellow-lines/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She says it's important for bicyclists to be able to "maintain momentum."

Uh, what?

If you're too lazy to stop at stop signs, whether you're in a car or on a bike, maybe you shouldnt be on the road.

This being D.C., she is pairing this "safety" proposal with other plans to make it harder to drive a car.

This is what being captured by special interests (i.e., the bike lobby) looks like.

https://twitter.com/marycheh/status/1496223827524820995

what's the Idaho stop?

The second item from the bill is legalizing the practice of bike/scooter yielding at stop signs and treating red lights as stop signs.

This practice is known as the "Idaho Stop" and acknowledges the need of riders to maintain momentum + reduce exposure/proximity to car traffic.

It's called lazy and they already do this. How about needing a license and plate to ride-then reckless bikers could be ticketed just like reckless cars.

Mental exercise. You are on a two lane road with a double yellow line at stop signs at every intersection. You are behind a cyclist who has legally taken the lane and comes to a full stop at every intersection. How many blocks will it take you to get frustrated and illegally pass the cyclist, crossing the double yellow lines?

The exact legal meaning of a double yellow varies quite a bit from state to state but generally it is not per se illegal to pass on a double yellow.

Yes, it is. Google it.

Seriously, you drivers don't even know the effing rules of the road.

https://driversprep.com/crossing-the-double-yellow-lines/

We should stop all highway and road expansions and improvements until drivers follow the law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She says it's important for bicyclists to be able to "maintain momentum."

Uh, what?

If you're too lazy to stop at stop signs, whether you're in a car or on a bike, maybe you shouldnt be on the road.

This being D.C., she is pairing this "safety" proposal with other plans to make it harder to drive a car.

This is what being captured by special interests (i.e., the bike lobby) looks like.

https://twitter.com/marycheh/status/1496223827524820995

what's the Idaho stop?

The second item from the bill is legalizing the practice of bike/scooter yielding at stop signs and treating red lights as stop signs.

This practice is known as the "Idaho Stop" and acknowledges the need of riders to maintain momentum + reduce exposure/proximity to car traffic.

It's called lazy and they already do this. How about needing a license and plate to ride-then reckless bikers could be ticketed just like reckless cars.

Mental exercise. You are on a two lane road with a double yellow line at stop signs at every intersection. You are behind a cyclist who has legally taken the lane and comes to a full stop at every intersection. How many blocks will it take you to get frustrated and illegally pass the cyclist, crossing the double yellow lines?

The exact legal meaning of a double yellow varies quite a bit from state to state but generally it is not per se illegal to pass on a double yellow.

Yes, it is. Google it.

Seriously, you drivers don't even know the effing rules of the road.

https://driversprep.com/crossing-the-double-yellow-lines/

Now go Google the actual state code for the state you're interested in. You know, the actual law? In some states crossing the double yellow is always prohibited. In some states it is allowed under certain circumstances, and in some states there is no statutory prohibition.

[Anonymous]

Well, since this is DC Urbam Moms, I can tell you that in DC, it is illegal.

If you want to debate this on Indiana Urban Moms, then for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She says it's important for bicyclists to be able to "maintain momentum."

Uh, what?

If you're too lazy to stop at stop signs, whether you're in a car or on a bike, maybe you shouldnt be on the road.

This being D.C., she is pairing this "safety" proposal with other plans to make it harder to drive a car.

This is what being captured by special interests (i.e., the bike lobby) looks like.

https://twitter.com/marycheh/status/1496223827524820995

what's the Idaho stop?

The second item from the bill is legalizing the practice of bike/scooter yielding at stop signs and treating red lights as stop signs.

This practice is known as the "Idaho Stop" and acknowledges the need of riders to maintain momentum + reduce exposure/proximity to car traffic.

It's called lazy and they already do this. How about needing a license and plate to ride-then reckless bikers could be ticketed just like reckless cars.

Mental exercise. You are on a two lane road with a double yellow line at stop signs at every intersection. You are behind a cyclist who has legally taken the lane and comes to a full stop at every intersection. How many blocks will it take you to get frustrated and illegally pass the cyclist, crossing the double yellow lines?

I’m already stuck behind cyclists all the time (137x45 seconds). And I have absolutely no problem illegally passing entitled jerks like the posters above. Maybe you folks should do a little consideration for others mental exercise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She says it's important for bicyclists to be able to "maintain momentum."

Uh, what?

If you're too lazy to stop at stop signs, whether you're in a car or on a bike, maybe you shouldnt be on the road.

This being D.C., she is pairing this "safety" proposal with other plans to make it harder to drive a car.

This is what being captured by special interests (i.e., the bike lobby) looks like.

https://twitter.com/marycheh/status/1496223827524820995

what's the Idaho stop?

The second item from the bill is legalizing the practice of bike/scooter yielding at stop signs and treating red lights as stop signs.

This practice is known as the "Idaho Stop" and acknowledges the need of riders to maintain momentum + reduce exposure/proximity to car traffic.

It's called lazy and they already do this. How about needing a license and plate to ride-then reckless bikers could be ticketed just like reckless cars.

Mental exercise. You are on a two lane road with a double yellow line at stop signs at every intersection. You are behind a cyclist who has legally taken the lane and comes to a full stop at every intersection. How many blocks will it take you to get frustrated and illegally pass the cyclist, crossing the double yellow lines?

The exact legal meaning of a double yellow varies quite a bit from state to state but generally it is not per se illegal to pass on a double yellow.

Yes, it is. Google it.

Seriously, you drivers don't even know the effing rules of the road.

https://driversprep.com/crossing-the-double-yellow-lines/

Yes it makes one wonder why anyone would ride a bicycle with all these stupid drivers around. Doesn’t seem very intelligent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She says it's important for bicyclists to be able to "maintain momentum."

Uh, what?

If you're too lazy to stop at stop signs, whether you're in a car or on a bike, maybe you shouldnt be on the road.

This being D.C., she is pairing this "safety" proposal with other plans to make it harder to drive a car.

This is what being captured by special interests (i.e., the bike lobby) looks like.

https://twitter.com/marycheh/status/1496223827524820995

what's the Idaho stop?

The second item from the bill is legalizing the practice of bike/scooter yielding at stop signs and treating red lights as stop signs.

This practice is known as the "Idaho Stop" and acknowledges the need of riders to maintain momentum + reduce exposure/proximity to car traffic.

It's called lazy and they already do this. How about needing a license and plate to ride-then reckless bikers could be ticketed just like reckless cars.

Mental exercise. You are on a two lane road with a double yellow line at stop signs at every intersection. You are behind a cyclist who has legally taken the lane and comes to a full stop at every intersection. How many blocks will it take you to get frustrated and illegally pass the cyclist, crossing the double yellow lines?

I’m already stuck behind cyclists all the time (137x45 seconds). And I have absolutely no problem illegally passing entitled jerks like the posters above. Maybe you folks should do a little consideration for others mental exercise.

Holy smokes, you're an actual psychopath.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She says it's important for bicyclists to be able to "maintain momentum."

Uh, what?

If you're too lazy to stop at stop signs, whether you're in a car or on a bike, maybe you shouldnt be on the road.

This being D.C., she is pairing this "safety" proposal with other plans to make it harder to drive a car.

This is what being captured by special interests (i.e., the bike lobby) looks like.

https://twitter.com/marycheh/status/1496223827524820995

what's the Idaho stop?

The second item from the bill is legalizing the practice of bike/scooter yielding at stop signs and treating red lights as stop signs.

This practice is known as the "Idaho Stop" and acknowledges the need of riders to maintain momentum + reduce exposure/proximity to car traffic.

It's called lazy and they already do this. How about needing a license and plate to ride-then reckless bikers could be ticketed just like reckless cars.

Mental exercise. You are on a two lane road with a double yellow line at stop signs at every intersection. You are behind a cyclist who has legally taken the lane and comes to a full stop at every intersection. How many blocks will it take you to get frustrated and illegally pass the cyclist, crossing the double yellow lines?

The exact legal meaning of a double yellow varies quite a bit from state to state but generally it is not per se illegal to pass on a double yellow.

Yes, it is. Google it.

Seriously, you drivers don't even know the effing rules of the road.

https://driversprep.com/crossing-the-double-yellow-lines/

Yes it makes one wonder why anyone would ride a bicycle with all these stupid drivers around. Doesn’t seem very intelligent.

Makes me wonder why anyone would drive with all these stupid drivers around. Doesn’t seem very intelligent to me