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:

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.

Are you suggesting we should defend ourselves from people trying to harm us?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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

The cars are on the road where cars go. You are a special kind of stupid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

The cars are on the road where cars go. You are a special kind of stupid.

Ah, but bikes go there too. So, what’s your next talking point ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

Here's the section of the DC code that covers passing and overtaking:
http://dcrules.elaws.us/dcmr/18-2202

Show me where it says that crossing on a double yellow is illegal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

The cars are on the road where cars go. You are a special kind of stupid.

Ah, but bikes go there too. So, what’s your next talking point ?

Thank you for once again demonstrating my last talking point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

The cars are on the road where cars go. You are a special kind of stupid.

Ah, but bikes go there too. So, what’s your next talking point ?

Thank you for once again demonstrating my last talking point.

So if I understand you correctly, your goal is to get all bikes off the road?

Good luck

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

The cars are on the road where cars go. You are a special kind of stupid.

Ah, but bikes go there too. So, what’s your next talking point ?

Thank you for once again demonstrating my last talking point.

So if I understand you correctly, your goal is to get all bikes off the road?

Good luck

Not exactly. I just wish bikers who advocate share the road would try to understand the meaning of the word share.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

The cars are on the road where cars go. You are a special kind of stupid.

Ah, but bikes go there too. So, what’s your next talking point ?

Thank you for once again demonstrating my last talking point.

So if I understand you correctly, your goal is to get all bikes off the road?

Good luck

Not exactly. I just wish bikers who advocate share the road would try to understand the meaning of the word share.

Care to expand on that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

The cars are on the road where cars go. You are a special kind of stupid.

Ah, but bikes go there too. So, what’s your next talking point ?

Thank you for once again demonstrating my last talking point.

So if I understand you correctly, your goal is to get all bikes off the road?

Good luck

Not exactly. I just wish bikers who advocate share the road would try to understand the meaning of the word share.

Care to expand on that?

Clearly, sharing the road means dedicating 99.5% of road space to cars and expecting that cyclists dismount from their bikes and kneel in deference whenever a car approaches.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

The cars are on the road where cars go. You are a special kind of stupid.

Ah, but bikes go there too. So, what’s your next talking point ?

Thank you for once again demonstrating my last talking point.

So if I understand you correctly, your goal is to get all bikes off the road?

Good luck

Not exactly. I just wish bikers who advocate share the road would try to understand the meaning of the word share.

Care to expand on that?

Clearly, sharing the road means dedicating 99.5% of road space to cars and expecting that cyclists dismount from their bikes and kneel in deference whenever a car approaches.

That would really slow traffic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

The cars are on the road where cars go. You are a special kind of stupid.

Ah, but bikes go there too. So, what’s your next talking point ?

Thank you for once again demonstrating my last talking point.

So if I understand you correctly, your goal is to get all bikes off the road?

Good luck

Not exactly. I just wish bikers who advocate share the road would try to understand the meaning of the word share.

Care to expand on that?

Clearly, sharing the road means dedicating 99.5% of road space to cars and expecting that cyclists dismount from their bikes and kneel in deference whenever a car approaches.

That would really slow traffic.

Cyclists should kneel in deference on the sidewalk, silly! Unless, of course, the act of kneeling in deference obstructs pedestrians, in which case they should jump into the nearest trash can so that drivers can continue on their journey unimpeded.

[Anonymous]

It might be more equitable, and result in more responsible bike behavior, if bike owners had to also register their bikes and pay some similar inspection and municipal tax in a manner similar to car owners, but for a smaller amount of course.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It might be more equitable, and result in more responsible bike behavior, if bike owners had to also register their bikes and pay some similar inspection and municipal tax in a manner similar to car owners, but for a smaller amount of course.

How exactly is it more equitable? And what makes you think that mandating an inspection (what should even be inspected on a bicycle??) and taxes would result in more responsible bike behavior? Observe drivers on the Beltway or 270 and tell me with a straight face that the inspections they undergo and registration fees they pay result in more responsible behavior.

[Anonymous]

I'm a cyclist and in full agreement with the concept of bike registrations. Bikes are vehicles with a growing number of public roadways partially or fully dedicated to their use. Requiring cyclists who wish to use their vehicles on public roadways to register them not only ensures a greater level of fairness between motorized and non-motorized vehicles, but also holds cyclists to a much higher degree of accountability when operating their vehicles on public roadways.

[Anonymous]

+1