Booger1

So what make you think more rules and billboards are going to help.....Folks don't follow the ones we have now.....

Red lights are universal the world over...By about the age of 5,everybody on the planet knows red means stop....Everyday it gets worse and worse with people running reds.

People don't do this because they don't know any better.....

I don't really care what other people do,I stay the hell out the way....Maybe I'll get some free entertainment.

And if you do happen to get into an accident,don't stick around to see if you killed anyone....RUN!

Can't legislate morality....That's Mom/Dad's job.....

spare_wheel

Exactly. One of the best ways to undermine existing irrelevant laws is to...undermine them.

I don't need to. Local politicians here (with a few exceptions) don't give a damn about bike scofflaws.

kickstart

Ah yes, the new "golden rule", do unto others before they do unto you because you're better then them.

spare_wheel

cognitive dissonance (1 and 2) and sadism (3). bravo.

spare_wheel

exactly. what gives motorists the right to spew pollution and toxins into our shared environment while also injuring, maiming, and/or killing millions?

Booger1

(1-2) Other people aren't your parents.....

(3) Sadist.... Yep,Mom had a weird sense of humor.....

You guys are funny......

achoo

Says the sheltered naif who lives at the very top of a pyramid based on exploiting the environment.

But he rides a bike to work...

spare_wheel

mr_bill

EPAMD - Electric Personal Assistance Mobility Device
EPMAD - Electric Personal Assistance Mobility Device Mispeeled

-mr. bill

JameB

How is a traffic light shoving you out of the way? Or how is it car-centric?

You're honest, but a fool nonetheless. You come off as a POS that drivers hate because you act like an entitled little ___ on the road. Just because you're being "environmentally friendly" doesn't mean you selectively follow the rules.

Oh and no, I'm not going to come to Portland because you can't follow the basic rules of the road.

kickstart

Evangelism and hypocrisy are usually bedfellows.

Be dependent on and enjoy all the advantages of society, then put a few affectations on display to feel morally superior.

mrodgers

You misspelled misspelled.

mr_bill

Your observent.

-mr. bill

spare_wheel

https://meggsreport.wordpress.com/201...appier-travel/

Why cyclists should be able to roll through stop signs and ride through red lights - Vox

spare_wheel

Exactly. Billions of dollars spent subsidizing the global tragedy of the commons that is low occupancy personal vehicle use and motorists still complain about jaybiking.

JameB

All of those reduced fatality rates can be explained by the fact that the state of ID is one of the least populated state in all of US. Its capital city has like 200K people living in it.... clearly the # of fatalities will be low because there will be so much free space for everyone.

Try doing something like this in New York or LA or any well populated cities, I guarantee you, the fatality rates will go up. Also, most of the reasons outlined to let the cyclists circumvent the law can be applied to cars too. Cars too can slow down and proceed through intersections, why not do that too eh? They too are capable of yielding instead of stopping, they too use up more energy when starting out from standstill. In fact, environmentally, we'd be better off if all cars were allowed to just go through intersections like that.

Or why don't we try what works in Antarctica? No roads, no traffic lights, no cops, nothing! It has lower crime rate than the US!

spare_wheel

European Cities Allowing Bikes to Run Red Lights - WNYC

howsteepisit

Tragedy of the commons refers to the overconsumption of free public goods, resulting the the decimation of that good. Good examples are the cod fisheries of the east coast of the US, or overgrazing for free i Montana back in the late 1800s. Single use autos are neither free, nor are they free to operate. I fail to see how you refer to them as a tragedy of the commons. I would argue that the subsidization of automobiles has been more than paid for by the advances to the general wellbeing, but there is no arguing with a sanctimonious zealot so I will not bother.

FBinNY 

To keep this on point, we need to separate the issue of "running" a red light from treating one like a stop sign. A bicyclist can easily tell (once stopped) whether there's cross traffic and proceed safely if not. Traffic signals are in place to streamline flow of auto traffic and bicyclists can easily slip through the cracks.

OTOH - "running" a red light without first stopping (or slowing to a near stop) to check for crossing traffic is a very different thing and can easily lead to an accident.

It's a matter of using some common sense and judgement, not one of moral superiority.

BTW- The :Idaho Law" would work just as well in NYC or anywhere if used as intended. Here in NYC police will cite cyclists who run reds with impunity, but ignore those who slow and cross when there's no cross traffic (motor or pedestrian). It's about right of way, and is no harm, no foul if nobody's right of way being violated.

BTW- every cyclist who proceeds through a clear intersection is one less vehicle that must cross later on when it might be busier. This actually helps when there's lots of turning traffic.

JameB

In Europe, there are A LOT of people who bike everywhere; it is an accepted norm in the society to be on a bike on a road. In US, many people literally hate cyclists because they're riding on "their" roads. In that situation, the first step isn't to let cyclists run lights, it's to make bikes a normal thing to ride on a road.

timvan_78

Two things:

1.) It's EPAMD, not EPMAD. <---- (Edit, Mr bill beat me to it.)

2.) OP needs to go live in a cabin in the woods.

I agree 100% with FBinNY 's assessment of cycling through traffic signals in cities.

kickstart

Who in turn subsidize the ecocrits by providing their food, clothing, shelter, and energy which enables them to live like everyone else.... minus a few carefully selected discretionary items that fit their desires.

I-Like-To-Bike

Almost correct. A bicyclist can often easily judge whether there's cross traffic and proceed safely at a clear (of traffic and visual obstruction)intersection without slowing down or stopping, and without regard to traffic signals or signs. Legally no, safely yes.

achoo

And it's downright risible that someone who proudly breaks laws designed to keep everyone safe - for no other reason than his own personal advantage - invokes "tragedy of the commons" in the first place.

The "WHOOOSH!!!" is so bad I think MH370 is probably sitting under spare_wheel's bed.

FBinNY 

More unnecessary hairsplitting.