mcours2006

This is a silly, and if I'm not mistaken, still illegal, practice . I'd just go straight through when traffic is clear.

Kontact

I think you'd have a hard time getting a ticket to stick against a cyclist that made a U turn. Some auto rules really don't apply to bikes because we can make tiny turns, occupy lanes too small for cars, roll on and off sidewalks, etc.

jon c. 

Never thought about it in those terms, but that's a pretty good rule of thumb.

And although that might not always keep one strictly within the letter of the law, it will tend to keep one sufficiently within the spirit that sanctions are unlikely.

Daniel4

U-turns are legal. I looked it up.

Regardless, you are against it claiming it's illegal but choose to do something else that's also illegal.

mcours2006

Exactly!

Ryan Olivas

As a cyclist, it's our responsibility to stay away from danger, thus we should obey the traffic laws and same goes with motorcyclists and any drivers out there.

Kontact

Following the law and avoiding danger aren't always synonymous.

Maelochs

A citizens, it is our responsibility to follow the law. Avoiding danger is not part of it ....

As citizens on the road it is our responsibility to obey the laws ... but as sentient beings with some self-preservation drive, we probably act in whatever way seems to best ensure our survival, regardless of the laws.

noisebeam

I've never encountered a situation when driving which required me to break a traffic law to be safe. I intend to follow all traffic laws no matter what vehicle I drive and believe I have been very successful at doing so.

jefnvk

You've obviously never stopped a motorcycle or bike at a streetlight at 3am when it wasn't heavy enough to activate the trigger to change and no other traffic was around to help.

I used to live by one of those. I suppose you can argue that I could have picked a different path, but the alternative was a couple miles out of my way. I'd simply wait a reasonable amount of time, make sure the road was very clear, and go.

noisebeam

1. You don't understand the technology. Weight has nothing to do with it.
2. What traffic law was broken?

jefnvk

1) I will fully admit that I don't know the technicalities of the detection strategies in place. That is fairly irrelevant, what is relevant is there are many strategies that will not trigger for things like bikes or motorcycles. Sit at one for three, four, five minutes, and you'll quickly learn that.

2) Traveling through a red light, albeit in a safe and controlled matter.

noisebeam

1. If you understood you wouldn't find yourself waiting anywhere near as much and could tell the city where the inoperable sensors are.
2. Provision for inoperable traffic lights

jefnvk

1) Ah yes, because when I'm dodging potholes a foot deep, replacing a light because it wont trigger for a motorcycle is high on a municipalities list of things to do. And secondly, if you have to have a technical understanding of how the various triggers work to make the light switch, it is a poorly designed system. And, that town was full of poorly designed systems, to the point many had to have signs put up even telling cars exactly where to stop to trigger the light.

2) As far as I have ever been able to ascertain, Michigan does not have any such provisions.

mr_bill

I know how to trigger the detector, and also understand why some don't.

So, if one does not work (and they actually exist in this world where we ride) I start by contacting the city/town where the intersection lives, who gives me:

* A lesson on how to trigger the detector!

Followed by

* An explanation that the detector sensitivity can not be increased without triggering false positives, and occasionally an estimate of how many years it will be before a bike friendly detector will be installed in the intersection.

OR

* An explanation that those few square meters of tarmac are controlled by the state or an independent state agency (that part of the road is not considered a city/town road), and I should contact them instead.

In the later case, if contacting the state, they give me:

* A lesson on how to trigger the detector!

Followed by

* An explanation that the detector sensitivity can not be increased without triggering false positives, and occasionally an estimate of how many years it will be before a bike friendly detector will be installed in the intersection.

OR

* An explanation that those few square meters of tarmac are controlled by the city/town or an independent state agency (that part of the road is not considered a state road), and I should contact them instead.

If contacting the independent state agency, they give me:

* A lesson on how to trigger the detector!

Followed by

* An explanation that the detector sensitivity can not be increased without triggering false positives, and occasionally an estimate of how many years it will be before a bike friendly detector will be installed in the intersection.

OR

* An explanation that those few square meters of tarmac are controlled by the city/town or the state (that part of the road is not controlled by the independent state agency), and I should contact them instead.



This may not be an acyclic graph.


ps. The provision for dead reds died in the committee on transportation again this year.

-mr. bill

noisebeam

Find a better municipality to live in. When I report to the city I get a call back and told when it is fixed and ask to confirm it now works.

wphamilton

Let me first say that I have no problem with either of these. But I wonder, in the second case (I'm assuming it's the not-busy cross street case) why not just ride through? Is it in case someone sees you, that they'll know you're riding lawfully? Logically, the U-turn maneuver cuts across the same lanes in a less "normal" area, and is a more extended maneuver, so it is more obtrusive to traffic rather than less, if that's the motivation. I wouldn't claim that it's "legal" to go straight through, but I could make an argument that it's "better".

KraneXL

I could just image the judge's response when you use that as your defense in court.

mr_bill

Since you understand the technology you clearly understand why the bicycle detector in this LTOL has been disabled, and why the other detectors in the LTOL can not have the sensitivity increased without generating false positives.

They are promised to be fixed in the next major revision of the intersection, several years from now. In the meantime, two stage left turn boxes have been installed in the intersection. (Even though the engineering *practice* of two stage left turn boxes is widespread in Massachusetts, the legislature hasn't managed to pass legislation making two stage left turns codified into either M.G.L. or C.M.R.)

-mr. bill

Maelochs

had friend ... the short route to work involved a light his bike (Yamaha 100) wouldn't trigger. Long route was about 20 miles longer.

In some states there is a provision in the law for non-responsive traffic lights.

Common sense solves most problems ... which is why so few problems get solved.

donnaeastman

I also observe in my town cyclist don't follow traffic rules.

KraneXL

Be the vanguard, and show them the path to enlightenment.

Maelochs

Yes, and in fact that very situation is one half of the premise of this whole discussion.

Ald1 

The other day, in my car, I was making a left at an intersection. Went out to middle as I saw an impending opening. Last car went through and noticed a cyclist sprinting to make light. Light went yellow and cycles still chugging, decided to not turn as he appeared to have no intention of stopping. Light turned red. About one second later cyclist blew through red light followed by me turning on red to get out of the way. We both were law breakers that day.

AlmostTrick

As long as one enters the intersection on green or yellow, there is no red light violation if it changes to red while in it.

I almost never enter until I know I will be able to make it though. I wait at the line. There is more danger waiting in the middle of the intersection, and sitting there also limits ones sight lines, especially when the oncoming left turn driver is doing the same.

It's quite ridiculous how much drivers often limit what they can see in these situations. Often they end up waiting through gaps I could have easily cleared, because they can't see and/or have no space to get a rolling start.

If the light turns yellow before I get a suitable gap, I will then usually enter, depending on oncoming traffic speed and behavior.