Originally Posted by
Vlaam4ever
I get your point. But a bike does not carry the same responsibility as a car. The damage you do on a bike has significantly less consequences then a htat of motor vehicle in the same manuever. Hence a cyclist is not required to carry liability insurance.
Not arguing that anybody needs to run stop signs or redlights. These should only be argued on a case-by-case basis, as I also have many lights that I stop at, and many stop signs that I treat as yield signs on my regular routes.
I always have a problem with this argument.... Because it ignores other consequences. Yes if a cyclist makes a wrong decision by running a red they have more exposure than a person in a car does, but it does not end there. You run a red light and make a judgement error. Now a driver either hits you and suffers psychological issues for something is not their fault or trys to avoid you and hits another car or object.
There is no more justification for the selfcentered argument " I am inconvenienced by the red light, and can make my own judgement if it is safe and break the law" for a bicyliest than there is for a motorcyclist or auto driver.
__________________
Life is too short not to ride the best bike you have, as much as you can.
Last edited by squirtdad; 03-23-12 at 06:16 PM.
Reason: clarity