spare_wheel

+1000

daihard 

I like that. I only run red lights when I can't trigger the sensor, but I can agree to the notion that you're fine as long as you properly yield to the traffic that has the right of way.

kickstart

Well then it seems our differences are mostly in the vernacular rather than in practice.

I have been commuting daily for two weeks now, 8 miles one way, progressing from rural to suburban, retail center, town center, and finally industrial. There are 11 controlled intersections on my route, but only 3 of them I would consider appropriate for an Idaho stop and rarely catch me anyway, so for me its mostly a concern for when I'm working. I only see cyclists proceeding on a red a couple of times a year, I wonder how much that would change if the law did.

FBinNY 

I often wonder the same thing. IME it doesn't matter where the line is, folks will cross it. I think we're better off w/o the Idaho law (at least here in NY, as long as enforcement was limited to egregious examples. I suspect that changing the law,would increase cyclist aggressiveness at lights, ultimately to everybody's detriment.

BTW- back during the gas crisis many suburban towns programmed their lights to go to blinking red/blinking yellow (stop, caution) during the wee hours of the night. The thinking was that traffic was light enough that it wasn't necessary to have cars idling for no reason. I thought it made sense and worked well, so was surprised when they gave up on the idea. (maybe there were accidents, or maybe there was another reason).

FBinNY 

Whatever works for you is fine by me. Joeybike uses a quote of mine to the effect that with skill what looks foolhardy might not be.

I don't criticize other riders (unless I'm legally responsible for their safety) because I don't buy into group think or class guilt. How anyone rides doesn't affect me, and so isn't an issue.

licoricepizza

There's one light near me that I've started running.... it's in the middle of a long hill and the people coming down the hill will frequently roll into the intersection when they have a red light...

I've found in that case, since the LEO's don't seem to enforce what a stop line is for, it's far safer to just wait and run it than wait for a green light and have oncoming traffic sort of stop..

Solid_Spoke

One of the advantages of cycling IS being able to safely roll through red lights AFTER stopping to make sure the coast is clear. When cycling, I always treat stop signs like yield signs, and red lights like stop signs. It just doesn't make much sense to do otherwise!

FBinNY 

I don't see why you couldn't treat red lights as yield signs also. Like with yield signs, the amount you have to slow, or stop depends on sight lines, but if the sight lines are good, there's no need to stop.

howeeee

I ride alone so I can ride without a helmet and run red lights without fellow riders crying about it.
About 20 years ago I got sick of riding with 40 year old cry babies who just started riding cause they had a heart attack or were 40 pounds overweight and their doctors told them to get excercise, so they went out and spent 5 grand on equipment and want to tell me how to ride, when I have been riding bikes since I was 5years old and never stopped. I am 61, I ride a fixie and run red lights all the time. nya nya

Chris516

I don't run red lights. Because it is both dangerous, and the red lights exist for a reason. Cyclists' are suppose to stop at red lights, end of story.

Jaeger99

When I am out for a pre-dawn ride and come to a red light with no traffic in sight as far as the eye can see, I'll admit it - I'm going through. I don't just charge through - I come to a stop or nearly so to make sure there is no-one else on the road. In that situation there is no danger to myself or anyone else that I can comprehend. Usually by the end of such a ride there is at least some vehiclular and pedestrian traffic around and I will wait for the light.

hurricane harry

red lights are made for the automobile. get over it

daihard 

We have one scenario where I can see it makes sense to "run" a red light. Stewart Street in Seattle is a 4-lane, one-way artery that take much of the traffic off I-5 into downtown. The rightmost lane becomes "bus only" during rush hour and has bus-specific traffic lights. Those lights turn green, together with the pedestrian lights, before the lights for the regular traffic do. If you're a cyclist, you can take off when the bus lights turn green so that you can get ahead of the regular traffic. Since the lights on the crossing street are red, there is (supposedly) no danger of interfering with the crossing traffic.

JoeyBike

Did you know that there are actually "civilized" places on our planet that have similar signals specifically for bicycles so cyclists can get a few seconds head start on auto traffic - which allows even an unskilled rider to get started, stop wobbling, and establish their line and presence in the auto travel lane? Well, there are such places. But not where I live. So I just run reds as necessary to accomplish the same thing.


https://www.metrodcinjurylawyerblog.c...fic-Signal.jpg

daihard 

Seattle has places with bicycle-specific lights as well. Just not that street.

Come to think of it, I should probably read the WA traffic code to see if the bus-specific lights apply to cyclists as well. After all, the cyclists are allowed to ride on the bus-only lanes on that street.

JoeyBike

And if the answer is NO...are you still going to take the safest course and do it anyway? Or just avoid crossing the bow of a police cruiser when doing it?

It would be interesting to know for sure. In my case, I do what is safest for me regardless. Sometimes that means running a red, sometimes it is safer to just wait for a green. So in your situation, I would most likely just keep doing what has the best chance of getting me through the day.

daihard 

I want to know just out of my intellectual curiosity. I have run red lights on that street when the bus light turns green, and knowing the answer will not change my behaviour there.

spare_wheel

hilarious post. mean but hilarious.

bmontgomery87

i hope im this awesome when im 61 (serious)

Chris516

Cyclists' have to follow the same traffic laws as motorists'!!!! The only subjective abridgment to traffic laws is bike lanes and bike laws that don't make bike lanes absolute!!! Regardless of either, cyclists still have to stop at red lights!!!!

howeeee

Yea I am not a cyclist, I am a 61 year old bike rider,,,,and I run a red light whenever I get the feeling.

FBinNY 

You have a green light from me to stop at any and all red lights.

Chris516

For your sakes, I hope you don't have to be cleaned off the pavement as a result of running a red light.

I-Like-To-Bike

Nor you when you insist on taking the lane, one lane too far.

Chris516

I insist on 'taking the lane', because motorists can see a cyclist better, that is in their direct-line-of-sight. Not in their peripheral vision.