How in the hell is this true?
 

36 years, interesting. Where do you live?

Must be Texas.

Already one person describing this as an exaggeration
 

I've typed Idaho stop needs to go Nationwide at least a dozen times.

Perhaps
 

Hell yes it does :)
 

Idaho stop laws.
 

I was going to guess Idaho.

The reason for the paradox is because the Idaho Stop is inherently libertarian in nature, recognizing the rights of others as equal to our own, and acknowledging personal responsibility for the consequences of our actions. When that philosophy is respected and observed consistently, we don't need artificial constructs such as signs or laws to impede our travel when there is no reason to stop -- no competing traffic. And we respect others who arrived first at the intersection and allow them to proceed first rather than behaving like bullies and barging ahead because we have a bigger or faster vehicle or money and influence to buy our way out of trouble.

Most of the US has become increasingly entrapped in a life philosophy that distorts personal rights into a fetish while rejecting personal responsibility for the consequences of our choices and actions. The attitude trickles down from the top and bubbles up from the depths of our own swamps. Basically, "Gimme mine, screw you. It's your fault if you got hurt by anything I did. You should have a bigger, faster, stronger vehicle. You should have acquired the wealth, power and influence to skew things your way."

The Idaho Stop is great when we're lucky enough to encounter kindred folks, whatever means of conveyance they choose. I don't mind if drivers cruise carefully through stop signs as long as they're observing it as intended -- with equal respect and regard for the rights and safety of others.

The problems, invariably, are due to the reckless indifference of drivers who indulge in selfish stuff like texting while driving, and the passive-aggressive drivers who could accommodate other drivers who signal turns and lane changes, pedestrians who try to cross lawfully at crosswalks, etc., but instead choose to press every situation into an unnecessary confrontation by refusing to lift a bit of pressure off the accelerator, or applying a little pressure to the brake, or changing lanes when there was plenty of time and space to do so. And that's not even counting the outright hostile and aggressive drivers who are deliberately trying to hurt someone. It's mostly the heedless, reckless, indifferent and passive-aggressive folks who create most of the problems I see in traffic.

we have in-place a button the ped pushes before a light in order to engage the timer for crossing purposes. It overrides the weight/magnetic sensors. Cuts the time delay down, but it is still very lengthy of a wait...
What it really only does is enable the "Walk" light whereas normally it would remain in the "Dont Walk" state no matter the traffic signal IF the ped button has not been pushed.

less than .09% respect the "walk" when the aforementioned ped button is pushed. I will proceed with caution & witness with my very own eyes of vehicles barely stopping [if at all] to complete their turn... I've also witnessed a vehicle get A-packed by another vehicles b/c the A-packed vehicle abided by the traffic signal awaiting the ped to cross as it was s'posed to do.

In most cases those types of people are those that cannot themselves stand there own ground & must use other measures/means for acting aggressive or demonstrating such offensiveness. ie: revenge of the nerds.

Most people I have met, in the right setting are really good beings--caring and kind and interested in others. It seems though that some, once isolated in a metal box in which they feel like the Commander of All, with no one there to oversee ... act really badly, and they use the car to act out or compensate for all the issues which really need a little psychotherapy.

When you figure out how to improve the general nature of people, so that laws are observed uniformly, let me know.

Until such time, I have to assume that no matter what the law is, the person behind the wheel thinks he or she makes the law as it suites that person's desires at each passing moment.

Fines that'll eventually revoke the license to drive, followed up with eliminating the offenders ability to use a motorized vehicle by confinement. It'll unfortunately take trial... with there errors to engage each section of event, but the system seems logical for executing...

I've encountered courteous, law-abiding drivers while touring in ID. Was just there again in June of 2017. Spent a night in Wallace then went back into MT via Dobson, King and Thompson Passes. And unless you have interviewed every motorist, you are, in fact, exaggerating. A lot. Maybe it's you.

If SpudLives drives a car in addition to cycling, then his claim that "not one" single driver knows about these wonderful laws is an exaggeration.

From the title I thought a wheel truing thread, but it's just a "where does a spudtroll live " thread.

If I can see there are no pedestrians, I routinely run lights at 3-way intersections where the breakdown lane literally does not intersect with anything. Occasionally, a driver honks at me out of some sense of fairness, I guess, but I am technically violating the law, so I don't really begrudge them that.

The one that drives me nuts and will launch me into a tirade is someone screaming I need to "get out of the road" because I'm supposedly required to be to the right of a right turn lane (often leading to the on-ramp of an interstate). State law is very clear that I am supposed to go on the road in that circumstance, and common sense should dictate that as well. They really can't wrap their heads around the fact that the state law actually requires drivers to slow for bicyclists in those situations.

My state has moderately bike-friendly statutes and markedly bike-unfriendly drivers, some who will actually go out of their way to harass you.

I stop for baked potatoes. Yum.