Advocacy & Safety - A picture is worth...

http://fwix.com/share/1_bd28f68e13#

Watching things in fast motion cracks me up.




...so how many people got injured in that video?

I like how cyclists "blow through" but cars "roll through".

Dumpster fodder.

Looks pretty normal. Cars, peds, bikes doing what they do. 90 bikes "blew through" the intersection and none got squashed. Imagine that. Some here think the gates to Hell will open right up and swallow cyclists disobeying the law. More video evidence that it just ain't true.

Watching things in fast motion cracks me up.

It's even funnier if you watch it while listening to Yakety Sax.:lol::lol:

I was wondering ... a lot of cyclists ... mass transit ... can this be America?

Then I saw that Ford Falcon cruise by ... Detroit iron!

Ok let's see who can come up with crash data on this corner.

Notice the illegally parked vehicle at the corner. It blocked the view of the motorist that would normally just blow through the stop sign.

The cyclist could see over the vehicle and could run the sign as they normally do.

That is an idea, permanently park a vehicle in the illegal position at stop signs to get motorist to slow down at least a little.

that leftbound mini cooper somewhere around 1:20 nearly took out three or four pedestrians. Some left turning nastiness around :50 too...

What is the difference between a "pause" and a "complete stop"? Yesterday I followed a couple through Oceanside, where bicyclists have been getting ticketed aggressively by the local police, and each of them was actually putting a foot on the ground at every sign. I can only guess that one or both of them had been ticketed recently, but I have argued strongly against defining a complete stop as putting a foot down, which I do only if I have to yield right-of-way. Otherwise, I trackstand briefly ("pause"?) and continue, and argue that I am fully obeying the spirit of the law.

Neat video. The comment: It should also be noted that several vehicles performed "California rolls," is quite the understatement. It was a tiny minority of motorists who actually came to a stop, and most of those stopped because there was traffic that prevented them from going without stopping. I'm a "Law and Order" person about stopping at stop signs, but trashing what one vehicle type does while giving another vehicle type a pass when everybody is driving wild in the streets isn't helpful.

From the camera angle, it's hard to tell just how risky the behavior of motorists, bikers, and pedestrians is. You can't see what the "threats" are.

Speedo

What is the difference between a "pause" and a "complete stop"? Yesterday I followed a couple through Oceanside, where bicyclists have been getting ticketed aggressively by the local police, and each of them was actually putting a foot on the ground at every sign. I can only guess that one or both of them had been ticketed recently, but I have argued strongly against defining a complete stop as putting a foot down, which I do only if I have to yield right-of-way. Otherwise, I trackstand briefly ("pause"?) and continue, and argue that I am fully obeying the spirit of the law.

I often put a foot down to indicate that I know someone else has ROW and had better take it.

I don't like motorists assuming I am going to run a light or trying to wave me through. I put down a foot to say "I AM stopped."

Of course if I can just track stand my stop, all the better.

Otherwise, I trackstand briefly ("pause"?) and continue, and argue that I am fully obeying the spirit of the law.If your wheels stopped turning, then you are following the letter of the law.

Part of the motorcycle test in Hawaii is to come to a "complete" stop without putting a foot down, hold it for a second and then proceed. Still did not stop a ill informed cop from giving me a ticket.

If your wheels stopped turning, then you are following the letter of the law.

Part of the motorcycle test in Hawaii is to come to a "complete" stop without putting a foot down, hold it for a second and then proceed. Still did not stop a ill informed cop from giving me a ticket.

This is the real issue, do you really need to stop and wait long enough that you would fall over? I mean, I often stop and start again before I could fall over on the bicycle, and I see some motorcyclists doing the same thing. I think people are too used to cages where you stop, look, wonder about the sign, then proceed.

One of my big peeves is that the letter of the law is irrelevant when it comes to traffic law, and the result is that it is very unclear to all concerned exactly what the rules are when we are on the road.

Does a sign that says "Speed Limit 25MPH" mean that this is a minimum or a maximum limit? A study of the law would imply that it is a maximum, yet a study of behaviour would imply that it is a minimum.

Signs for stopping, or right turns on red equally are so often ingnored by motorists that we use the term 'California stop' to indicate a stop which is not a stop.

The other issue that I have, is that I feel that the most important laws are those which are designed to protect others. Although both tragedies, I have much more sympathy for a cyclist who 'blows through' a stop sign and hits a pedestrian than I do for an SUV driver who 'blows through' a stop sign and hits the same pedestrian. The expected outcome is so much more serious - the penalties should be commensurate. If I were in charge, for all moving violations, there would be a base rate for the fine which would be multiplied by the weight of the vehicle. In cases of excess speed, since the energy increases as the square of the speed, I would make the ticket cost proportional to mv^2, with the excess speed squared.

In terms of the video - the camera position is such that we do not know what traffic controls are on the other four corners of the intersection, and with the speed increased, it is very difficult to tell what is going on.