Sorry if I came across as harsh. I have had a few encounters with cyclists much more aggressive than that.

Yes it does.

i'm a huge fan of running lights in this kind of situation. imo, people who sit at a T-intersection like hapless "bicycle drivers" make us all look bad.

because traffic statutes written by motorists for motorists are often irrelevant to cycling. also because the right of citizens to violate unfair and pointless laws is a fundamental aspect of democracy.

Bringing it back to the original topic. Is there a legitimate reason other than "it's the law" to stop at a red light if you are traveling on the shoulder of the straight section of a T intersection? You are in no danger from the traffic unless they take an extremely wide left turn veering off the road into the shoulder or they miss their turn and T bone you. Both of these are not likely.

I don't know about any other states where this might be legal, but at least in neighboring New Jersey, it's perfectly acceptable for a cyclist to go through a red light after they first come to a complete stop, as long as traffic conditions permit. So there are situations where it's legal to do something, but may not appear intuitive that it would be.

your walter mittyesque rant is irrelevant to the current the topic since no one here stated that they would "cross in front" or "cut in front".

Really! This is the first I've heard of this one, it's a good thing I have that bell on my bike.
I have encountered horses being ridden on bike routes/MUPs here, and the riders do appreciate it when the cyclists call out a warning and slow down before passing. I never want to spook a horse.

Back on topic: by following the laws, traffic is more predictable, less chaotic, and presumably safer and less stressful for all. The "everyone else does it" argument belongs to gradeschoolers. :)

And to traffic engineers. The 85% speed rule for example. The main point being, traffic is more predictable when everyone is following the same rules, not the "laws" such as stopping on the highway at the city limits. In most cases it's the same thing, most people are prudent drivers and are following the laws. That doesn't mean that devotedly following every law will make traffic more predictable and safer. There are many examples proving the truth of this - you can see it for yourself if you want to. Try driving one mile per hour under the speed limit in the left lane of a multi-lane highway, and never move out. You're obeying the law, anyone going faster is violating the law. But if you won't yield to faster traffic, then you're disrupting traffic and causing a potentially hazardous situation. And could be ticketed in fact.

btw, I think it's also still illegal to carry fencing wire cutters in your glove box.

+1 on Brennan's post:

In my experience, the only thing that infuriates motorists more than cyclists breaking traffic laws is cyclists scrupulously complying with traffic laws.

Personally, I'd watch for cars too. :lol:

in other words, cycling makes cyclists look bad.

I guess I'll stop at the red and run it in the early AM with little to no traffic around. I was thinking of the time I ran it in front of a police cruiser in Davis but it had a bike lane there, so there was no reason for me to stop unless the perpendicular traffic was left turning onto my bike lane. And the officer had every opportunity to stop me as he was on the right lane and in front of the light. Maybe I got lucky, or maybe it really was legal, so I had to ask if it's legal. And Davis is a pretty bike-friendly city that would enforce some laws at least sometimes - I was stopped and warned for no headlight at dawn and ticketed for a slow roll through a stop sign.

But if I'm behind a few cyclists who run the T here, I'm goin' with them. Legal or not, I do believe there's no point as long as I watch for pedestrians and other vehicles, especially if I'll be holding up bike traffic behind me since that seems to be the norm to run it. I feel it's one of those laws that just don't make sense and has minimal benefit to safety or convenience, such as no U-turn signs but left turns are ok when there's room for a safe U-turn.

Because, after all, inconvenient traffic laws are exactly like fundamental civil rights. Right to marry = being able to pass through intersection 15 seconds sooner? What could be a more appropriate comparison?

I do 80 mph on Interstate 5 through the San Onofre Border Patrol check point. The speed limit is 65. There are multiple LEO cars manning the checkpoint. This is done in full view of them. They never stop anyone. If I did the speed limit like a good "law abiding citizen" I would get rear ended, or incite road rage.

If I stopped on this red http://goo.gl/maps/D5rEz , I would just feel silly. The image shows the typical crowd of pedestrians who frequent it.

Yeah, no I don't think so. How often do you see motorists get irate and horny at cyclists who are illegally riding on the sidewalk? It doesn't happen.

It really just boils down to two things:

1) Motorists don't like to have to slow down for cyclists
2) Motorists don't like to have to drive more cautiously around cyclists to avoid killing them, because that takes mental energy

Go to YouTube and watch some of the many bike vs. car road rage videos and you'll find that the majority (I'm guessing at least 90%) of such incidents are the direct result of a cyclist riding in the middle of the lane for a prolonged stretch and impeding the motorist until his blood boils. Legality is not a factor whatsoever.

If you ride a bike on the streets you will always be hated by a small percentage of drivers, but as someone else here mentioned, the "bicycle drivers" will be hated more.

+1. My cycling behavior is based primarily on my personal safety. Once that is taken care of I concern myself with a combination of avoiding delays for myself and others. I routinely run red lights. No, I don't blaze thru the light without looking. I do sometimes stop at the light if there's traffic. But the "light" doesn't have much to do with my behavior. My conduct is based on the INTERSECTION and the TRAFFIC, not the presence (or absence!) of a stop light or stop sign.

By doing this I'm not only making my commute faster, I'm also making it faster for others. As a general rule, keeping myself moving is the best way to avoid delays for myself and others. My behavior may cause slight delays for select individuals but is still best for the overall pattern of traffic.

For example, there's a very busy four lane highway that I ride on for about 500 yards of my commute. I get on it in the right lane but I need to make a left turn at the intersection I'm approaching. Frequently cars are backed up at the light for several hundred feet. If I merge over into the left turn lane and wait my place in traffic then when the light turns green the waiting drivers will all charge for the light, trying to see that they make it thru before the left turn signal turns red. As we all start moving, the cars in front of me quickly accelerate and put an increasing gap between me and them. Now the cars behind me are frustrated with the slow bicyclist that's causing them to not make the light. They are likely to make unsafe passing opportunities so I stay out in the lane blocking them, further frustrating these people. Imagine their glee if I make it thru the light just before it turns red, but having prevented some 25 drivers from doing the same.

I avoid all that as follows. When the traffic is backed up like that I cruise between the lanes of traffic to make make my way up to the very first spot waiting at the left turn signal and in the right most portion of that left turn lane. When the light turns yellow for the perpendicular traffic I usually find a safe opportunity to start my left turn before my left turn signal turns green. In any case I make it a wide left turn, giving the cars behind me quite ample room to make a tighter left turn at full speed. They're all turning left onto another multi-lane road so as I complete the turn and occupy the right lane, I'm not holding up anybody.

This is of course illegal as hell. I weave between the lanes of (stopped) traffic and frequently I run the red light (just before it turns green). But this is the safest way to get me through the intersection. Some of the drivers probably still get angry at "that damn cyclist" that ignores traffic laws. But they're actually happier in the end, their route is unimpeded by my presence, I'm safer, and we all get home sooner.

To me the value of traffic laws is that they define who has the right of way. Right of way is important only when two vehicles want to occupy the same real estate. If there's no such competition, I see no value in the law. And as has been stated, the laws are designed primarily with rules that make sense for cars. Bicycles are just shoehorned into that infrastructure without due consideration of how bicycles are different. A bicycle and rider may be 200 pounds of mass moving at 15 miles per hour and with far greater visibility and maneuverability than automobiles that are more likely 2,000 pounds of mass moving at 50+ miles per hour. The increased danger to others is orders of magnitude.

After seeing this photo, personally I wouldn't give the light a passing though. My attention would be on vehicles merging from the left. I have stated in another post that sometimes it's safer to jump a light than to fight with the drag race that happens when the light changes.

Most drivers are uneducated, and believe that the cyclists belong on the sidewalk to begin with. So, of course this example would never happen. I offered my opinion as a motorist because I do not yet, and won't until I get comfortable on my new bike, have any experience as a cyclist riding on the road. Because of the fact that I have not ridden on the road, I have been pondering how I will behave once I begin doing so. I have also been talking to friends, family, and just about anyone else who would listen, and beyond a few who share the "bikes belong on the sidewalk" attitude, every single one of them (none are cyclists by the way) has stated that what annoys them about cyclists is the fact that they seem to believe they don't have to follow the rules of the road. Running of red lights and stop signs has been mentioned by several people, but the overwhelming majority are most annoyed by the cyclists who ride in the traffic lane, then move to the shoulder and pass everyone at traffic lights, causing them to have to pass the cyclist over and over again.

As a general rule, I would say this comment mostly applies to those who; a) are going to hate cyclists no matter what, and/or b) are unaware that cyclists are supposed to ride on the road, and believe they belong on the sidewalk.

Anyone who experiences road rage towards a cyclist, or can be inconvenienced to the point of their blood boiling, is someone who this is going to happen to no matter what. Some people are just miserable, hateful people that have and will continue to use cyclists as the target for their rage. As to the cyclist vs "bicycle driver" point, I have talked to enough non-cyclists to be convinced that, at least to start with, I will be a "bicycle driver" when I start riding on the streets, as I believe that will gain the most respect from those drivers that will be around me.

I guess my point is that there are certain people that will always harbor a certain disdain for cyclists, and there is nothing that can be done to change their opinion. But, I feel through my own experiences as a driver, when encountering cyclists on the road, as well as many conversations with non-cyclists, that following the rules of the road will be the best way to improve the other peoples perceptions of cyclists, as well as my own safety when riding. I guess I'll see how that goes when I start riding on the road...

I think you are in for a bad experience with that attitude. Riding your bike like you're driving a car is not safer. On very rare occasions, I need to keep cars from passing me, but 99% of the time, I stay out of the way. Never been hit or ticketed in many years of riding.

I should have clarified that I will absolutely stay out of the way as much as possible, use the shoulder if free of debris, etc. However, there is NO shoulder on any of the roads between my home and work, so I will stay as far right as possible. I do not plan on impeding traffic if I can avoid it. I will however be stopping at 2 red lights at t-intersections where I could, if I end up in front(remember, no shoulder), ride straight through safely, as well as several other 4 way stop lights & stop signs.

So I've just started riding. And when I'm on the street, this comes up frequently. SOme of the lights at intersections here are activated by sensors. My motorcycle doesn't set them off much less a bicycle. At these intersections, I stop, look both ways and proceed in the direction I need to. This is not legal but failing sitting there til a car comes to activate the sensor I see no option.

I also note that here in GA and other states, legislatures are looking at passing laws allowing motorcycles (and bicycles) to turn left on a red if the light doesnt change after a certain interval.

Here's a link to one state with left turn law

http://www.ksl.com/?sid=25189591

Well we certainly wouldn't want you to feel silly. Go ahead and pick and choose which laws you obey, then.

I thought it was legal everywhere. If the light doesn't work, obviously you don't have to sit there all night waiting for it. But I'm guessing you're not stopping in the right place. Are your wheels right over the cut mark where they install the loop?

As I understand the arguments:

1) The Good Citizen: If we want to be respected as being on a legal par with automobiles, we need to be law abiding riders and set a good example.

2) Tit for Tat: Drivers don't obey the law, so why should we?

3) Entitlement: I only obey the law when it suits me.

4) Apathy: Whatever.

Dd I miss anything?