I generally do the same at a 4 way stop. I slow, observe the vehicles, if I am going to be the first to the intersection and the cars appear to be coming to a stop I continue through the intersection. If a car is going to beat me to the intersetion I slow more in the hopes that they will go before I have to come to a stop. If there are a lot of vehicles I just plain stop. I've had people honk and yell when I clearly would have had the right of way had I come to a complete stop. I guess they either wanted to have to wait longer while I got back up to speed or wanted to just cut me off...

This doesn't answer the question. Why should someone cycling on a sidewalk, behaving as a pedestrian, dismount for a crosswalk?

The part about the Jamis is probably true...therefore I am unique! In a good way of course....

This is probably the best part of the thread so far, I can agree with....other than my posts..haha Who knew this would be so popular...appreciate all your input so far.

I agree, even though most laws are well intentioned, there has to be some spirit to them and little understanding between riders and drivers...to say it's cut and dry with no ounce of a gray area seems a little closed minded. Share the road, try to look at it from the others perspective....

ftfy.

That may be true for Stop signs. Virginia changed the law last year wrt red lights: after one cycle, if the lights don't change (because bicycles are not heavy enough to trigger the sensors), cyclist can treat it as yield sign. It was sponsored by local state delegate and I was very happy he did that.

Because it is a cross walk. Not a cross ride. Safety of pedestrians, etc. He stated he was a "pedestrian" in his post. Here are his state laws:
257.660c Operation of bicycle upon sidewalk or pedestrian crosswalk.

(1) An individual operating a bicycle upon a sidewalk or a pedestrian crosswalk shall yield the right-of-way to pedestrians and shall give an audible signal before overtaking and passing a pedestrian.(2) An individual shall not operate a bicycle upon a sidewalk or a pedestrian crosswalk if that operation is prohibited by an official traffic control device.
(3) An individual lawfully operating a bicycle upon a sidewalk or a pedestrian crosswalk has all of the rights and responsibilities applicable to a pedestrian using that sidewalk or crosswalk.

You are battling semantics here. He was on the street, he blew a stop sign and wants justification. By law, he can cross on a cross walk, but has to yield to pedestrians, has to obey official traffic control devices, such as stop signs, etc.

If you are riding a bike, you aren't behaving as a pedestrian. If you want to be treated like a pedestrian, walk.

Well, no, you didn't. There's numerous areas where it's both legal and reasonable for someone to on a bike, on a sidewalk. It's not something I do, but that's completely beside the point.

Restating an assertion in a dogmatic fashion isn't actually an explanation or argument.

I assumed we'd moved on from the OP's example, in which he's clearly legally wrong. Your quoted text above pretty clearly indicates that it's legal in his area for a cyclist to ride a bike on a sidewalk, into a crosswalk, and behave as a pedestrian if they choose to do so and yield to other pedestrians. That's not what the OP was doing, but you still pretty clearly refuted your own claim.

Riding on the sidewalk is usually a bad idea, a lot worse than the stop sign thing.

Running a stop sign (or a light) when no one's around and you can hear the sound of crickets isn't going to hurt anyone.

When you ride on the sidewalk, people coming out of driveways don't yield to you the way they would if you were on the road. Pedestrians do unpredictable things, because nobody expects them to hold their line like they would on the road. Cyclists have hit pedestrians on the sidewalk, usually little old ladies.

I unclip, then stop at the sign. Then clip in, then continue through the intersection, like other traffic.

Yup...A&S!

And when operated on a sidewalk, the cyclist must follow a different set of rules, none of which include ignoring traffic control devices. I am willing to bet that the OP does not have a bell, horn or whistle, which seems to be required by his state law, though a verbal warning may constitute an audible signal.

In Texas, at crosswalks, esp. the police controlled crosswalks, the cyclists are asked to demount before crossing. I do this with my kids. If I am riding on the street with my kids, I teach them to signal, stop, obey traffic laws and operate their bikes like they were any other vehicle.

Character is what one does when no one is watching. I teach my kids that. Rules are rules, laws are laws, follow them, unless to do so would hurt you or others. My actions speak much louder than my words.

No, it did not. I says he has to obey traffic laws. My assertion is that he claimed to be a pedestrian not a cyclist. He arbitrarily changes his label as suits him. Pedestrians walk. Cyclist ride and OBEY traffic control devices, as stated above.

Absolutely. I think we've been talking past each other.

Not everyone's concept of character includes following laws without fail.

Indeed, the OP's in the wrong. That's long settled. There's not much point in acting like that's being disputed.

I'm only aware of the "Idaho Stop Law." https://legislature.idaho.gov/idstat/...SECT49-720.htm Here in MA, you are a vehicle, and must stop at all stop signs. Do I? Who's askin'?

And a stop sign doesn't mean you have to unclip. As long as you cease all forward momentum, however briefly, you have satisfied the requirement to stop.

I don't even stop at 4 way stops in my truck if there isn't a need to. I'm a fan of rolling stops. Cops(atleast around here) aren't going to write you a ticket for it.

Yep, the law says you have to stop. You want all the rights of a vehicle and you have to obey all the laws of a vehicle. If you don't stop and you get hit - guess who the insurance company is going to blame!

Track stand!

Who the insurance company blames seems wildly arbitrary in any case. The only traffic accident I've ever been involved in was when I was T-boned by a woman running a stop sign. I still paid a deductible and still saw an increase in insurance rate. Suffice it to say, I do not trust insurance companies.

This depends on the skill of your lawyer.

I do the same, with the addition of no pedestrians around approaching a crosswalk. If nobody was there to see it, did it really happen?

While bicycles follow all the same laws here in CA as cars, in reality this breaks down quickly. For one thing, bicycles are human-powered, so are in a different legal class to begin with. They can be operated on the shoulder for instance, while cars can't, and shoulders aren't subject to normal traffic rules. You can ride in any direction, one-way signs don't apply, don't have to stop for lights or stop signs, etc. You can reenter the roadway at will whenever it's safe to do so. This means you can often just move over 2' to the right and legally roll past a stop sign, then reenter the road a little further down. Often this is extended to bike lanes in 3-way intersections, where the limit (stop) line isn't painted into the bike lane. Bikes can also ride on MUPs, and use crosswalks, paths, and sidewalks that reasonably provide access to it. (Under a presumption of public easement, basically the same reason people have a right to drive cars across sidewalks to and from garages, parking lots, etc.) Then, finally, safety or impossibility is a solid defense against just about all traffic infractions. If you're coming up to a stop sign and plan to turn left you're supposed to signal a stop and a turn while stopping and turning, with the turn signalled throughout the turn. Well, you can't both hand signal a stop and a turn at the same time. It's also dangerous to stop or attempt to start a bicycle with only one hand on the bars. Basically, it's both impossible and unsafe to attempt to comply with many laws, because they wren't made with bicyclists in mind. For instance, the law says a bicyclist can stop and get off at a curb, but what if it's a no stopping zone? With designated bicycle parking on the sidewalk, why can't you ride up to it from the nearest curb cut, like a car can drive across the sidewalk to get into a garage? (Assuming of course proper precaution.) Cars obviously don't get to park on sidewalks. And bicycles can't legally be parked in the street. Which just illustrates the legal differences.