Originally Posted by
John Forester
Your statements about "not being able to ride through a stop sign" and "being required to touch a foot down" are the superstitions propagated by those opposed to vehicular cycling rather than being anything required by those, like myself, who advocate vehicular cycling. I have always stated that the laws about stop signs should be enforced equally for motorists and cyclists. It has long been recognized by both motorists and by police that crawling through a stop sign, particularly where such is required to get to the position where approaching traffic can be observed, is the normal means of operation. Furthermore, there is nothing in the law about anybody having to put a foot on the road. The most important part of the stop-sign law is that it requires yielding to approaching traffic; the actual stop is only a minor part of it.
and this is where i
vehemently disagree. laws should be based on rational appraisal of risks. violation of many, if not most, motorist-specific traffic laws by cyclists is often associated with very low risk of injury or property damage. for example, i often run lights and signals without slowing down appreciably because i have a clear line of site. while idaho is the only US state that legalizes this behavior, many european communities also allow cyclists to disregard traffic signals (at least in some contexts). i would also argue that the law and it's enforcement should recognize that
cyclists are privileged road users. imo, the dutch have the best implementation of this idea. for example, even when a motorist is not at fault the dutch automatically assess
50% liability :
http://bicycledutch.files.wordpress....-liability.jpg