stevetone

I find justifications to break the law based on "when no other cars are around" or "when a cop isn't watching" to be very interesting. I would guess that many of those that think that way either do not have children or don't care about raising responsible children.

Children watch everything that grown-ups do, even if they are not their parents. And, they do not have the consistent mental discipline to make the judgement calls that many "adults" are using to justify breaking the law.

Next time you blow through an intersection, think "would I want my (or any) 10 year old to do this?".

bradw

My concern with the "when no one is around" approach centers on the ability to accurately assess when "no one is around."

Now if you are out in the middle of nowhere and and are approaching a desolate, uncluttered intersection, then you might be able to quickly and safely decide it's OK to run the light. But I live in an area where most intersections are surrounded with buildings, and quite often there is a limited view of the traffic coming at right angles to the intersection. Yet cyclists still roll these intersections at good speed.

I don't think it is safe to make quick decisions about dodging traffic controls, especially if you are in work out mode and are fatigued. I think we have all encountered drivers who almost run over us because they made a snap decision and didn't see us. And a driver has a generally better view of the road and usually no cardiovascular fatigue factors to deal with.

The cyclists I really worry about are not the ones on this list. Generally people here are talking about slowing down and scanning the traffic before proceeding. I encounter cyclists who roll into busy intersections and never touch their brakes, or at best slow down and weave around oncoming traffic. Packs of cyclists blowing red lights and stop signs while cars wait. And one cyclist violating the unloading school bus rules. In other words, cyclists who are on the verge of causing serious accidents.

brokenrobot

Sorry, but that's bogus. I've made a conscious and conscientious decision not to have or raise children, and I'm not going to be held responsible for the misbehavior of your children or anyone else's. If you've got kids, YOU have a responsibility not only to them but to EVERYONE to teach those children how to behave morally and respectfully, and you've got nobody to blame but yourself if they fail. You knew when you chose to have them that the world and other people in it don't necessarily hew to the same belief systems as you do, and it's unreasonable after the fact to expect everyone else to obey your will for the sake of your children.

-chris

SchreiberBike

I wish that were more common.

iceratt

I use uncommon sense, as I am the only one who has correct sense. Too bad there aren't more people trying to be just like me.

BTW, I slow down enough so that I can see absolutely for sure that there are no others coming. My rule is that I'm ok if I can stop for oncoming traffic before entering the intersection. Decreasing to 5 mph is a lot easier on the knees and alows me to get to my destination more quickly than coming to a complete stop every other block. I'm not riding on the major through-roads, because that isn't as safe- more traffic that is going too fast. Drivers and even police never seem to mind.

bradw

Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen.

Albert Einstein

stevetone

Belief system? We're talking about following the rules of the road. I didn't know that we could all just do what we wanted as long as it followed our so-called "belief system"...

erraticrider

Sorry, I disagree -- your decision not to have kids certainly has lowered your responsibility, but you cannot escape the fact that your irresponsible behavior might influence a kid (even when without regard the kid's parents have tried very hard to teach the kid). Perhaps you are younger or look cooler than the kids parents and the kid chooses to follow your example instead of the parents' teaching.

bkrownd

As somebody already said, this is bogus. To begin with, I'm not a 10-year-old. A 10-year-old would need to use a VERY different level of caution due to inexperience. I'm sure as hell not going to accept that I have to use the road like a 10-year-old should. 10-year-olds should be raised knowing that they're held to different standards than adults, and that they can expect a major ass-whooping if they act otherwise. At the same time, I wouldn't want 10-year-olds to be trained to mindlessly follow inappropriate rules either. I don't conduct my life in order to teach lessons to your apparently mis-parented children. That's your job. (though if you fail we can help out in the whooping department) Caution and courtesy are the primary rules of the road. Use them wisely. Use them in peace.

bkr

bkrownd

First of all, you're presuming there's some "irresponsible behavior". I don't think we're advocating "irresponsible behavior" here. We're talking about applying good responsible judgement to the situation at hand.

Secondly, as a full adult he has every right to follow his own judgement. This "you might influence a kid" crap is just lame.

bkr

gravel

I don't know if this statement is really true. I can recall many times I have driven under some sort of fatigue, and as peoples commutes are getting longer and longer, the potential for this to happen is even greater. When I'm in a car I feel very isolated from the world. On a bicycle I can hear and see much more, as well as have greater maneuverability.

I agree there are those who are more reckless. You should see how they ride bikes in NYC. Talk about defiance of all laws. I see people barrel through red lights, ride the wrong way on a one-way street. It's amazing it works out so well.

JMPetersen

I have to agree that those who ignore stop signs and lights are wrong. I will also admit that I do it on occasion. Sometimes (usually after some yo-yo cuts me off) I get the attitude: "Hey, as soon as drivers start treating me like another vehicle, I'll start obeying traffic laws", which is stupid, I know. But when I'm biking home from a friend's house at midnight I feel dumb waiting at an empty red light when there are no vehicles to be seen anywhere.

chuckfox

Last night I sat at a red light in front of the Ames police station for about 2 minutes. For some reason I didn't trip the magnet--my bob trailer usually does. Anyway after no cars passed by and I didn't see any--Ames get's pretty quiet after 9pm--I just went. Seemed pretty irreverent to run a red light in front of the police station, but I figured the cops might wonder why I was loitering in front of the station??? I think you just have to use good judgement and hope that the police to as well. I have to admit I treat many stop signs as yield signs--but only at intesections were I have a clear view of traffic and will not interfere with anyone else.

LittleBigMan

I agree...

For me, average speed is a crapshoot. I don't run lights on the way to work, I just leave early enough to allow time for them.

There is one light I run because it will never change unless I wait for a car to trip it, so I treat it like a stop sign.

routhic

There is a lot of discussion about signals and sensor-tripping in this thread. Can anyone give some basic tips on tripping the sensors? Like other posters I have sometimes been in situations where I cannot trip the sensor. Granted, this has only happened a few times, but I think it could happen more if I start commuting.

Stubacca

I've got one like that too. I know it has a sensor since I trip it every second or third day. I'll be buggered if I can figure out exactly where it is, though... I think it's buried underneath the top layer of asphalt. When I don't trip it, I treat it as a stop sign. Very quiet road anyway...

madpogue 

Bicycles are vehicles in every state in the US. Yet some traffic control devices treat different vehicles differently. That is, they are only tripped by vehicles with sufficient iron to activate the sensor. I treat such signals as malfunctioning. By law, a malfunctioning traffic signal is a four-way stop.

Of course, the proper solution to this is to put these signals on a rotation that doesn't require a sensor. There may be a few cases where that's not called for, but in most cases, signals are set up this way to favor motor vehicle traffic, rather than all vehicle traffic. In the rare case where a sensor-driven signal is appropriate, it should be engineered to respond to anything which, by the laws governing its location, constitutes a vehicle. Anything less is a misuse of the taxpayers' money.

brokenrobot

Agreed, and I'm not arguing that the rules should be ignored. I'm merely arguing that if a given law is just, it should be obeyed for its own sake, and that the notion that the reason the laws should be followed is that to do otherwise might unduly influence the behavior of a stranger's child is, in my view, somewhat bizarre.

Chris L

That's not true. For one thing, the majority of drivers on the roads (around here at least) are so damn unfit that they couldn't even drive the distances that I ride. For another thing, if I'm in a traffic situation on my bike with a poor view, I can simply move into a better position in the lane. You can't do that in a car.

Trek Rider

For me it depends on the situation.

If I'm coming up to a 4-way stop and there is a car next to me going straight, I use him for interference and keep going.

If it's a 4-way stop, or just a stop my way and no cars are next to me, I check to see if it is safe for me to continue. If not, I stop.

If it's a red light, I stop and wait unless my bike doesn't trigger the sensor, which is common. Then I treat the red light as a stop sign.

Chris L

Which is actually quite legal in most parts of the world.

Trek Rider

Not in New York. We are "suppose" to obey all traffic laws, even if it means sitting at a red light until the cows come home.

Chris L

Again, I bet the same law applies to cars (it does here). If you have a non-functional signal, you are legally allowed to proceed through the light. Of course, the dilemma over here is the notoriously slow Queensland traffic lights, where waiting 20 minutes still is not conclusive proof that the signal is actually faulty.

crustedfish

this thread got lame real fast....

Chris L

Then don't read it.