SBRDude

Loopy logic. Again.

Digital_Cowboy

You certainly appear to becoming from the position that because your judgement/opinion is better then the experts and those who have drafted and passed the laws that you are entitled to use your judgement to supersede the law(s) of your state.

ChasH

SBRDude has repeatedly taken the position that he is entitled to run red lights if his personal judgement of the situation indicates the risk of doing so is acceptable (to him of course).

The more experienced cops must be all too familiar with people having such an attitude about the regs. I assume that at least some of them know just how to deal with them. Let's hope so anyway.

'Dude: do you hold a position with serious responsibilities, in your profession or line of work?

SBRDude

Wrong. I choose to interpret the law as an effort to promote public safety. Considering that there is no safety issue in cautiously proceeding through an empty intersection's stop sign, I am respecting the intent and spirit of the law, but not the letter of it. Furthermore, as others have already stated, law enforcement doesn't care about these "criminal acts" because they don't present anything close to a safety problem, just as most jaywalkers and motorists speeding don't present a problem.

SBRDude

Yes, let's hope cops know how to clean up society by starting with all those terrible jaywalkers, speeders, cyclists blowing through empty stop signs at 7mph, and filthy sidewalk spitters. Once that criminal element is off the street, then they'll have time to focus on crimes that actually hurt other people.

ChasH

You haven't answered my question. What are you professional responsibilities?

Your last post reminds me of one reason why Giuliani was a much better Mayor of New York City than Dinkins.

Digital_Cowboy

Wrong, you actions lead to confusion on the roads which in turn makes the roads MORE dangerous and NOT in any way, shape or form safer. Really, you don't think that jaywalkers or motorists speeding present a problem? That is why I doubt the soundness of your judgement.

You cannot see that your actions are not doing anything to improve the safety of the roads. You are just as deluded as the motorists who speed and run red lights and/or stop signs.

Digital_Cowboy

Haven't you figured out that that's his M.O.? He expects everyone that he asks questions of to answer them, but he doesn't have to answer anyone else's questions. Also he is free (cause he's a "rules/ethics are situational/ends justify the means" type person) to twist others peoples words around and to assume they meant something other then what they actually said. But no one is allowed to do that to him. Cause after all he knows better then the experts.

ChasH

Anyone who seriously believes that breaking the law by running red lights promotes safety is way, way beyond being convinced otherwise. I would give up the effort if I were you Cowboy. It is a waste of your time.

Digital_Cowboy

Agreed, sadly it'll probably take him being hit by a car in his "empty" intersection to learn that lesson, and even then I don't think that I'll he'll have learned anything.

SBRDude

I haven't answered your question because it's none of your damn business.

SBRDude

You just make one unsubstantiated assertion after another and then whine about it. Good grief.

SBRDude

Yeah, I was the one who blatantly changed "walking" to "running" when talking about a wounded person. You're an abject liar.

SBRDude

Only a certified fool would believe one can get hit by a car in an empty intersection. If you don't believe an intersection can truly be empty, stopping for it isn't going to change anything. You're paranoid, pal.

Digital_Cowboy

How the bloody hell is it an unsubstantiated assertion to say that not following the law causes confusion leading to unsafe conditions? How many people have to tell you that they've had close calls with motorists who didn't stop because they didn't expect the cyclist in front of them to stop?

Just where do you think that those motorists are learning that cyclists don't stop for red lights and stop signs?

Digital_Cowboy

No, only a certified fool would believe that an intersection will always be empty and that circumstances surrounding said intersection never change. You're delusional "pal."

Jaywalk3r

+1

There's a reason Idaho's cycling fatality rate did not increase when they adopted their "treat stop signs like yield signs and stop lights like stop signs" law for cyclists. It does not detract from safety.

SBRDude

Ridiculous. I never said any intersection would always be empty. You're making stuff up AGAIN. Liar.

Digital_Cowboy

Then why haven't all states adopted the Idaho stop? And how do you explain the close calls that cyclists have had with motorists who didn't expect the cyclists to stop?

Digital_Cowboy

That has been the implication, that you expect the intersection to remain empty while you slowly ride through it. I've explained to you how and why conditions can change only to have you repeatedly say that the intersection is empty. As if it is always going to remain empty.

SBRDude

DC, you are completely irrational. Whatever highly unpredictable event might happen - such as the Star Trek Enterprise suddenly appearing in an intersection - applies equally to situations of stopping or merely slowing down to 7 mph. Seriously, the more you try to sound rational, the crazier you get. Just keep on diggin that hole.

Jaywalk3r

I have no way of knowing that. It is, however, wholly irrelevant to whether or not Idaho stop laws have increased cyclist accident rates. They haven't.

???
To what close calls are you referring, and what do they have to do with Idaho stop laws?

You do realize that Idaho stop laws don't ever give a cyclist a right of way that (s)he wouldn't have in any other state, right? They only allow cyclists to not have to yield to no one (double negative intended).

Digital_Cowboy

You keep going on and on and on about how the intersection is empty as if situations don't ever change. Even when given examples of how and why that isn't always true. But because you're a "ethics/rules are situational/the ends justify the means" type of person, that for whatever reason you can't accept that.

You're going on and on about how the intersection is "empty" has you as the one who is digging the hole. As despite your perception of things you are NOT promoting pubic safety. You are contributing to the confusion on the roads. As motorist look at you and those like you who constantly run red lights and stop signs when it is "safe" to do so and learn to expect cyclists will not stop for them. Thus creating a dangerous and unsafe environment for those cyclists who do stop for red lights and stop signs.

But like the typical motorist who is more concerned with getting where they're going that that is all that matters.

Digital_Cowboy

Could part of the success of the Idaho stop have anything to do with the nature of Idaho itself? Namely that it is a relatively flat open state that doesn't have the population density of other states? And just because the Idaho stop works in Idaho doesn't mean that it would work in other states with higher population densities?

Given the number of cyclists practicing the Idaho stop in states without the Idaho stop law they're teaching motorists not to expect cyclists to stop for red lights or stop signs. Which leads to confusion on the roads which leads to making the roads unsafe not safer.

Jaywalk3r

There's no reason why it wouldn't. If there is someone else in the intersection, cyclists have to yield in Idaho, just like any other state. The population density doesn't make the least bit of difference. Either there's someone at the intersection to whom the cyclist must yield, or there isn't. There are no circumstances where the change will negatively affect other road users. (The changes can, however, positively affect other road users by minimizing the time they have to spend waiting on cyclists who arrive at intersections before they do.)

I've never heard of any drivers being told that cyclists don't stop at intersections. I practice Idaho stopping. I stop for/yield to anyone at an intersection. Typically, I do that even if they arrive slightly after I do. If I don't stop, it was because there was no one there to stop for, nor was there anyone almost there. My behavior does not confuse motorists. I never just blow through intersections. I always slow enough to allow me to make sure nothing is coming, allowing myself plenty of time and space to completely stop when necessary. Further, I ride the same way in the presence of police. Not one cop has ever said a word about it in any city I've lived and ridden in.