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

[Anonymous]

That’s exactly the point. Most of you millennial aging Lycra-clad inapt and out of shape bikers are wanting to make a point and piss the drivers off. Nothing else explains such complete disregard for the most basic rules and terrible cycling I see here.

So yeah, cycle like you know you could get hit

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Mary Cheh will continue to endanger pedestrians with this nonsense until she or a family is injured.

Next she will be advocating for bicyclists on the sidewalk.

Bikes are already legally allowed in sidewalks outside of the old city.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not quite, the proposal is to allow Idaho stops which lets cyclists treat stop signs as yield signs. It is actually associated with fewer cyclist injuries.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idaho_stop

This is true. It also is associated with greater pedestrian injuries.

Mary Cheh doesn't care about pedestrian safety. She blew me off when I was injured by a Safeway truck in a dangerous cross walk.

I will never forget avoiding a horrific collision by a split second with a speeding bicycle messenger in a crosswalk in another city. Unfortunately, he hit another pedestrian walking next to me, causing severe open wound, broken bone injuries to the person next to me. The cyclist's bicycle was twisted in a knot and the front wheel became disengaged.

THIS, above. Sure, Idaho stops are better for cyclists. For pedestrians, not so much. It's going to take a pedestrian getting killed by a cyclist to get anyone to realize that pedestrians are vulnerable and that cycles hitting a pedestrian can indeed kill the pedestrian.

A pedestrian has been killed by a cyclist. She was a colleague of mine.

https://talkingbiznews.com/they-talk-biz-news/man-charged-in-bike-accident-that-killed-kiplinger-editor/

[Anonymous]

The reality is that a majority of the drivers in DC don’t know how to drive safely and don’t obey they most basic rules (like one way streets, signaling, lights at night). You do you, but if you get hit, I would get you help but wouldn’t lift a finger to prosecute the driver and would make civil action pay out a max of $50.

[Anonymous]

That’s “cyclists” not drivers.

Start fining the cyclists till they learn

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not quite, the proposal is to allow Idaho stops which lets cyclists treat stop signs as yield signs. It is actually associated with fewer cyclist injuries.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idaho_stop

This is true. It also is associated with greater pedestrian injuries.

Mary Cheh doesn't care about pedestrian safety. She blew me off when I was injured by a Safeway truck in a dangerous cross walk.

I will never forget avoiding a horrific collision by a split second with a speeding bicycle messenger in a crosswalk in another city. Unfortunately, he hit another pedestrian walking next to me, causing severe open wound, broken bone injuries to the person next to me. The cyclist's bicycle was twisted in a knot and the front wheel became disengaged.

THIS, above. Sure, Idaho stops are better for cyclists. For pedestrians, not so much. It's going to take a pedestrian getting killed by a cyclist to get anyone to realize that pedestrians are vulnerable and that cycles hitting a pedestrian can indeed kill the pedestrian.

A pedestrian has been killed by a cyclist. She was a colleague of mine.

https://talkingbiznews.com/they-talk-biz-news/man-charged-in-bike-accident-that-killed-kiplinger-editor/

Wow. Cyclist got off with no penalty; in the civil proceedings claimed the Fifth and declared bankruptcy.

[Anonymous]

The cyclist that missed me but plowed into the woman next to me was blowing this whistle for us to get out of the way. He was coming over a hill and we could not move fast enough. We had had the right of way. That woman may have lost her arm, it was that bad. Luckily she was not killed.

We alreasy have enough reckless cars and scooters doing whatever they want without regard to pedestrians who have the right of way in the crosswalk. I can't dodge cyclists too.

[Anonymous]

I think Mary Cheh became a city council member for another paycheck.

She should just be silent for the remainder of her term. Enough of her already.

[Anonymous]

every time there is a complaint about pedestrians about cyclists they bring up cars - which is a totally different issue. Cars behaving badly doesn't provide an excuse to cyclists menacing pedestrians.

This would make it much more dangerous for pedestrians crossing in cross walks as most cyclists yield only to cars and expect pedestrians to leap out of their way

Same with ringing the bell or yelling on your left as they wiz by on the side walk witihout slowing down. Having walked in DC for 25 years and not driving - bikes, scooters etc.. are a major concern when trying to navigate around the city. I don't see why a bike's need to "maintain momentum" needs to put pedestrians in danger

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:every time there is a complaint about pedestrians about cyclists they bring up cars - which is a totally different issue. Cars behaving badly doesn't provide an excuse to cyclists menacing pedestrians.

This would make it much more dangerous for pedestrians crossing in cross walks as most cyclists yield only to cars and expect pedestrians to leap out of their way

Same with ringing the bell or yelling on your left as they wiz by on the side walk witihout slowing down. Having walked in DC for 25 years and not driving - bikes, scooters etc.. are a major concern when trying to navigate around the city. I don't see why a bike's need to "maintain momentum" needs to put pedestrians in danger

No, of course motorists behaving badly isn't an excuse to cyclists menacing pedestrians. But pointing that out does lay bare the intellectual bankruptcy of the people taking the position that Idaho stops shouldn't be implemented because cyclists terrorize pedestrians.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not quite, the proposal is to allow Idaho stops which lets cyclists treat stop signs as yield signs. It is actually associated with fewer cyclist injuries.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idaho_stop

This is true. It also is associated with greater pedestrian injuries.

Mary Cheh doesn't care about pedestrian safety. She blew me off when I was injured by a Safeway truck in a dangerous cross walk.

I will never forget avoiding a horrific collision by a split second with a speeding bicycle messenger in a crosswalk in another city. Unfortunately, he hit another pedestrian walking next to me, causing severe open wound, broken bone injuries to the person next to me. The cyclist's bicycle was twisted in a knot and the front wheel became disengaged.

THIS, above. Sure, Idaho stops are better for cyclists. For pedestrians, not so much. It's going to take a pedestrian getting killed by a cyclist to get anyone to realize that pedestrians are vulnerable and that cycles hitting a pedestrian can indeed kill the pedestrian.

A pedestrian has been killed by a cyclist. She was a colleague of mine.

https://talkingbiznews.com/they-talk-biz-news/man-charged-in-bike-accident-that-killed-kiplinger-editor/

Wow. Cyclist got off with no penalty; in the civil proceedings claimed the Fifth and declared bankruptcy.

Ugh. That makes me sad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:every time there is a complaint about pedestrians about cyclists they bring up cars - which is a totally different issue. Cars behaving badly doesn't provide an excuse to cyclists menacing pedestrians.

This would make it much more dangerous for pedestrians crossing in cross walks as most cyclists yield only to cars and expect pedestrians to leap out of their way

Same with ringing the bell or yelling on your left as they wiz by on the side walk witihout slowing down. Having walked in DC for 25 years and not driving - bikes, scooters etc.. are a major concern when trying to navigate around the city. I don't see why a bike's need to "maintain momentum" needs to put pedestrians in danger

What sidewalks do you frequent that see bikers speeding and ringing their bells? As a biker the only time I have even needed to use my bell or scream is on beach drive or the trails around mt Vernon where pedestrians seem to be fine walking 3-4 ppl wide and ignoring passing riders. We scream bc we don’t want to hurt you and you aren’t moving

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:every time there is a complaint about pedestrians about cyclists they bring up cars - which is a totally different issue. Cars behaving badly doesn't provide an excuse to cyclists menacing pedestrians.

This would make it much more dangerous for pedestrians crossing in cross walks as most cyclists yield only to cars and expect pedestrians to leap out of their way

Same with ringing the bell or yelling on your left as they wiz by on the side walk witihout slowing down. Having walked in DC for 25 years and not driving - bikes, scooters etc.. are a major concern when trying to navigate around the city. I don't see why a bike's need to "maintain momentum" needs to put pedestrians in danger

Yet people oppose bike lanes. If bikes had a safer place to operate, it would make the streets safer for cars and pedestrians.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not quite, the proposal is to allow Idaho stops which lets cyclists treat stop signs as yield signs. It is actually associated with fewer cyclist injuries.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idaho_stop

This is true. It also is associated with greater pedestrian injuries.

Mary Cheh doesn't care about pedestrian safety. She blew me off when I was injured by a Safeway truck in a dangerous cross walk.

I will never forget avoiding a horrific collision by a split second with a speeding bicycle messenger in a crosswalk in another city. Unfortunately, he hit another pedestrian walking next to me, causing severe open wound, broken bone injuries to the person next to me. The cyclist's bicycle was twisted in a knot and the front wheel became disengaged.

THIS, above. Sure, Idaho stops are better for cyclists. For pedestrians, not so much. It's going to take a pedestrian getting killed by a cyclist to get anyone to realize that pedestrians are vulnerable and that cycles hitting a pedestrian can indeed kill the pedestrian.

A pedestrian has been killed by a cyclist. She was a colleague of mine.

https://talkingbiznews.com/they-talk-biz-news/man-charged-in-bike-accident-that-killed-kiplinger-editor/

Wow. Cyclist got off with no penalty; in the civil proceedings claimed the Fifth and declared bankruptcy.

All you need to know is that none of those cyclists who pretend to care about pedestrian safety pretended to care enough to leave a memorial when one of their own killed somone. He got a citation. Atrocious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:every time there is a complaint about pedestrians about cyclists they bring up cars - which is a totally different issue. Cars behaving badly doesn't provide an excuse to cyclists menacing pedestrians.

This would make it much more dangerous for pedestrians crossing in cross walks as most cyclists yield only to cars and expect pedestrians to leap out of their way

Same with ringing the bell or yelling on your left as they wiz by on the side walk witihout slowing down. Having walked in DC for 25 years and not driving - bikes, scooters etc.. are a major concern when trying to navigate around the city. I don't see why a bike's need to "maintain momentum" needs to put pedestrians in danger

Yet people oppose bike lanes. If bikes had a safer place to operate, it would make the streets safer for cars and pedestrians.

Why can cyclists not engage the substance without engaging in whataboutism?