Bumer

Sometimes I ride local paved trails (MUPs?). When these trails cross local roads they all have cross walks and "Yield for pedestrians" signs. What surprises me is that although lots of drivers slow down for cyclists, lots of them don't even try and just fly through.

Am I missing something here and drivers not supposed to yield to cyclists same way as to pedestrians?

I'm telling you, these f$%#ers just blasted through with no intention of slowing down. Good thing I am usually waiting to make sure drivers to slow down, before clossing.

prathmann

Depends on the details of the state vehicle/transportation code and I'm not sure what the one in Conn. says. In California there is no requirement for drivers to yield to cyclists at most trail crossings that lack traffic lights. Our local MUP also has signs on the cross roads to yield to pedestrians, but the trail has stop signs at the crossings so cyclists are supposed to stop and wait for traffic to clear. Most drivers stop anyway, but if they don't and there's an accident it would generally be judged to be the cyclist's fault.

conspiratemus1

^same here.
You want to have the right of way crossing the road, get off your bike and become a pedestrian. If the OP doesn't know this, I'm surprised he's not dead. (Motorist to policeman investigating road kill: "The silly f$%#er didn't even stop, he rode right out in front of me!")

MUPs are not roads!

Blinkie

Indeed.

Between here and Smyrna on the Silver Comet Trail, there are a lot of road crossings. At each, especially closer to Smyrna, there are crosswalk-type buttons for either a red flashing warning light or even a traffic light (yellow to red IIRC). I've been that way a few times, and I've seen two dangerous things: some cyclists who choose not to look thoroughly before crossing at speed, and vehicle drivers who don't even slow down when the warning light is flashing. Both of these may eventually lead to catastrophe (and in my mind, it seems the 'may' is most likely a 'will' with a vehicle driver saying "They just bolted right in front of me!" regardless of which happened).

dynodonn 

Good 'ol entitled US motorist road mentality, if liability automatically defaulted, unless proven otherwise, to the heavier, faster vehicle like it does in other countries, I'd guarantee that US motorists would have a whole lot different driving habits.

iheartbacon

Don't forget that the legal repercussions for a car hitting a bicyclist are about the same as a car hitting a deer. The excuses are about the same too. "I didn't see him." "He jumped right out in front of me."

Chris516

You are not missing anything. There is a bike/ped path in Northern Virginia, that goes along part of the perimeter on Reagan Washington National Airport. Part of the trail crosses several access roads along the airport property, along with along with at least one passenger access point. Vehicles driving down the access point to drop passengers for departure, will zoom through the crossing like they are having a medical emergency and are going to the airport for medical care, instead of the hospital.

adablduya

i disagree. you're missing plently.

you stand no chance going up against a car. period. given that, it is incumbent on us cyclists to behave in a manner indicative of self-preservation.

OP - you seem to be suggesting that the cross street (to the MUP) has no stop sign / light, or any other indication that CYCLISTS have any right of way to the crossing. from what you say, there is no reason AT ALL that motorists should stop for you. as posted earlier, you want to be treated like a pedestrian, get off your mount and walk your bike across the intersection.

for a cyclist to put his/her life in the hands of motorists based purely on perceived rights to the road is foolish. i base my decisions out there on a finely-tuned sense of self-presrvation; i'll do what most protects me, not just what i think me and / or mototists believe the law permits in questionable situations.

dynodonn 

I have place some trust in motorists, otherwise I should just park my bike permanently. I exercise my road rights on a daily basis, but vigilance is still the key word in the event that a motorist is being inattentive/careless.

spivonious

In PA at least, you only need to yield if someone is actually in the crosswalk. If the drivers see you standing at the edge of the road, they'll assume you aren't crossing and thus not stop.

nelson249

Sheer laziness. The same reason that drivers do not slow down for signs that read "hidden intersection" or "hidden driveways" or "school bus stop" (at the times when buses are out) or for obscured railway crossings. 99 times out of 100 they get away with it and no one is affected or gets hurt.

And that 1% of the time when something happens it is everyone's fault but their own.

Reminds me of a story of a former co worker told me. He is a brakeman for Canadian Pacific and was running five box cars over to an industrial siding at 5mph across a four lane road with a 70 km/h speed limit. The crossing had crossbucks but no lights or gates (a flag man is used here) as it was infrequently used. A woman in her car screamed up to the crossing, failed to see the locomotive and the front end of her vehicle hit the loco and the rest of the car flipped up and smacked the cab of the locomotive. She hit so hard she actually shifted the railway tracks. As she was being checked out by the paramedics she screamed at the engineer about she was going to sue. She was brought up short with retort that, au contraire, we're going after you for the damage to the locomotive, the tracks, and the fines for being late in delivering the box cars.

Bumer

Thanks for the responses! I agree about self-preservation part for this situation: I do not ride in front of cars assuming they have to stop for cyclists, but patiently waiting to make sure they stop before crossing.

After trying to satisfy my curiousity by searching some CT laws, I did not find anything specific. What did come up in search results a lot - lawyers websites offering to sue motorists who hit cyclists in mentioned crosswalks.

Based on that, the answer to my question is most likely - it's a grey area in state of CT... However, there seems to be lots of lawyers who would be happy to sue motorist if something happens to cyclist while crossing on crosswalk. Regardles, self-preservation is the key, and I'm not going to jump out in front of a car, even if the car has stop sign, unless I am sure the car has stopped, or is going to stop.

achoo

Umm, WRONG.

In many states, bicycles in a crosswalk ARE legally pedestrians - even when being ridden:

https://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp...0+cod+46.2-904

Chris516

+1

bandit1990

No, if bikers observed the rules of the road, and didn't put themselves in situations that caused motorists to "freak" when seeing a cyclist, there would be no problem. What country are you from? I'm not going to get into a FRAP arugment here, but really -- just think about it.

adablduya

so, do you feel safer with this pseudo-shroud of legal protection ? as long as the law says it's your right, you'll ride right into that street / cross-walk with the belief that that motorist is going to submit the right-of-way to you ? didn't think so......

good luck with that. i take my safety into my own hands, and not place it into the hands of someone i HOPE will behave predictably.

cruiserhead

Do you want to be right or do you want to be alive?

Even in a bike-centric forum like this, people are so misinformed about vehicular laws and they mentality is so hostile that
the bottom line is : it doesn't matter.

You have to be cautious (or not) because even if the driver is at fault, you still loose.
You will be injured, permanently living with the accident or dead. Most likely the driver will never admit fault or apologize and you get to go through the fun of the legal system and/or the insurance system.

There are two things you can do:
1. If you know a situation is dangerous, act appropriately to avoid an accident.
2. get involved in local gov and change the situation

most people will do neither.
The onus is always on the cyclist because the motorists will never change unless forced to by regulation or community pressure.

bandit1990

You, Sir, are a light of wisdom. Please forget that you are in a forum that hates anyone behind the wheel of a car. We try to share the road, but if cyclyists give way, they are subjeceted to the whims of the car drivers. Not so.

adablduya

well, to your point, there has to be some trust that motorists by and large do not intend harm to cyclists, such as running us off the road. i'm referring more to situations of right-of way, such as is the topci of this thread. i will NOT give a motorist the benefit of the doubt when the outcome of him/her being wrong is to my detriment.

adablduya

this is a different (and eloquent !) way of stating that self-preservation needs to be the motivating factor in many situations out there, not what you or i or any given motorist thinks who has the right-of-way.

Bikepacker67

Bullchit.
Dynodonn is right on with his assessment of entitled motorists.

achoo

Do you know what a straw man is?

No? Then learn.

Yes? Then stop doing it.

adablduya

yeah, i know what it is.

since you seem to think you're an authority, why don't you explain how i'm "doing it" ?
and if you're not, go stick it.

bandit1990

Let me guess...car free? There is no such thing as an entitled motorist, except in the vision of the self-proclaimed "bikes rule" class. The roads are the roads, plain and simple. Cars outweigh bikes. It's the standard "bigger mode of tranportation wins". You can cry foul all you want, and you won't get disagreement from me...but cyclists need to understand that mass wins; mass is the transport of choice right now. I will ride my bike in a manner that doesn't interfere with motorists, because in doing so I get to live another day not spent in the hospital. If you want to joust with them, good luck. Just understand that you are going to be on the receiving end, and not giving anything.

achoo

Really?

Right here:

That bilge was in response to this:

In that post, I never mentioned one word about anything except the fact that in many states, a person riding a bicycle in a crosswalk is legally a pedestrian.

So, what orifice did you pull your straw man argument "you'll ride right into that street / cross-walk with the belief that that motorist is going to submit the right-of-way to you" out of, anyway?

Well, I guess that clears up which orifice you pulled your straw man out of.

My response to your pejorative imperative? Grow a brain.