Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In D.C., bicycles can now legally go through red lights after stopping at intersections where it's permitted by signage: https://waba.org/blog/2023/01/bicycle-stop-as-yield-arrives-in-dc/

In actual practice, as I know from bike commuting, a lot of cyclists do ride through red lights. Though more of us stop for them than many drivers seem to think.

I have not seen that - the majority of cyclists that I have seen don't bother to slow down either just blow right through.

This is because you’re only noticing the ones that blow right through a light. I sit at stop lights in bike lanes with multiple cyclists behind or in front of me on my way to and from work all the time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are bikes allowed to ignore every single traffic law?

Legally, no.
But the law is rarely applied, and sometimes it's safer for cyclists to cross an intersection when cars have stopped.
Perhaps you're not mature enough to understand this, or the fact that there are a ton of laws in every state that for various reasons are not enforced.

It's not that it's safer for cyclists to go through stop signs and traffic lights -- that's obviously crazy. It's that it would suck if they had to stop and start at every single intersection. That would be really tiring and be so slow.

The worst is when it's rush hour, and you have a slow biker blocking traffic, but due to oncoming traffic it takes you forever to pass them. You finally get past, then hit a red light, and the biker blows by you again as they completely disregard the light, and then you are stuck driving 10 mph yet again as you struggle to get around them once again in traffic.

You know what's slowing you down, in your car, during rush hour? Other people in their cars. And you them.

See a lot of cyclists blowing through stop signs regardless of who has the right of way, as if it's everyone else's job to get out of their way. Not how Idaho stops are supposed to work. Also, a great way to get yourself killed.

Biker here. My rule of thumb is to roll through red lights and stop signs PROVIDED that it has no effect on any traffic that would normally have the right-of-way. If a car has to slow down (or jam on its brakes) because I'm crossing against the light then that's a big mistake on my part. However, sometimes the most efficient path is to roll through a stop sign if the driver to my left or right is starting to slow for a stop - by the time they are actually stopped, I'm long through the intersection and they can actually get going more quickly than if I come to a complete stop.

There's some simple physics also. It's a PIA to get a bike going again after coming to a complete stop. If you have to do that every block, it gets really bad. Better for everyone if I slow down, verify that there is no oncoming traffic, and then keep the momentum going.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And yes, I wish police would stop drivers who run red lights as well, but I was shocked at these biking parents putting their children at risk like that.

Cyclists are absolutely terrible at safety judgments. I always shudder when I see someone swerving through cars with their child on the bike.

It's bizarre that there are basically no rules for taking a child on a bike. If they were in a car, that child would have to be strapped into a government approved car seat.

Anonymous wrote:In D.C., bicycles can now legally go through red lights after stopping at intersections where it's permitted by signage: https://waba.org/blog/2023/01/bicycle-stop-as-yield-arrives-in-dc/

In actual practice, as I know from bike commuting, a lot of cyclists do ride through red lights. Though more of us stop for them than many drivers seem to think.

I have not seen that - the majority of cyclists that I have seen don't bother to slow down either just blow right through.

Anonymous wrote:And yes, I wish police would stop drivers who run red lights as well, but I was shocked at these biking parents putting their children at risk like that.

Cyclists are absolutely terrible at safety judgments. I always shudder when I see someone swerving through cars with their child on the bike.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are bikes allowed to ignore every single traffic law?

Legally, no.
But the law is rarely applied, and sometimes it's safer for cyclists to cross an intersection when cars have stopped.
Perhaps you're not mature enough to understand this, or the fact that there are a ton of laws in every state that for various reasons are not enforced.

It's not that it's safer for cyclists to go through stop signs and traffic lights -- that's obviously crazy. It's that it would suck if they had to stop and start at every single intersection. That would be really tiring and be so slow.

The worst is when it's rush hour, and you have a slow biker blocking traffic, but due to oncoming traffic it takes you forever to pass them. You finally get past, then hit a red light, and the biker blows by you again as they completely disregard the light, and then you are stuck driving 10 mph yet again as you struggle to get around them once again in traffic.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are bikes allowed to ignore every single traffic law?

Legally, no.
But the law is rarely applied, and sometimes it's safer for cyclists to cross an intersection when cars have stopped.
Perhaps you're not mature enough to understand this, or the fact that there are a ton of laws in every state that for various reasons are not enforced.

Idaho stops for all! For bikes! For cars! For trucks! For scooters! It's equity, man.

I see motorcyclists now ignoring stop signs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are bikes allowed to ignore every single traffic law?

Legally, no.
But the law is rarely applied, and sometimes it's safer for cyclists to cross an intersection when cars have stopped.
Perhaps you're not mature enough to understand this, or the fact that there are a ton of laws in every state that for various reasons are not enforced.

It's not that it's safer for cyclists to go through stop signs and traffic lights -- that's obviously crazy. It's that it would suck if they had to stop and start at every single intersection. That would be really tiring and be so slow.

Anonymous wrote:I was trying to figure out if the actions was not only risky, but illegal. I think that question has been answered. They did not stop at the light before making the illegal turn. I support bikes, but they need to follow the law.

Why do you care? (Other than to be a busybody)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are bikes allowed to ignore every single traffic law?

Legally, no.
But the law is rarely applied, and sometimes it's safer for cyclists to cross an intersection when cars have stopped.
Perhaps you're not mature enough to understand this, or the fact that there are a ton of laws in every state that for various reasons are not enforced.

Idaho stops for all! For bikes! For cars! For trucks! For scooters! It's equity, man.

Anonymous wrote:Are bikes allowed to ignore every single traffic law?

Legally, no.
But the law is rarely applied, and sometimes it's safer for cyclists to cross an intersection when cars have stopped.
Perhaps you're not mature enough to understand this, or the fact that there are a ton of laws in every state that for various reasons are not enforced.

Are bikes allowed to ignore every single traffic law?

Anonymous wrote:I was trying to figure out if the actions was not only risky, but illegal. I think that question has been answered. They did not stop at the light before making the illegal turn. I support bikes, but they need to follow the law.

No laws do no apply to bikers.