4 ms·

This is a very bad idea! It'll cause far more accidents as the result. You'll have some crazy bicyclist who'll fully ignore the stop sign and fly through them.

This is a very bad idea! It'll cause far more accidents as the result. You'll have some crazy bicyclist who'll fully ignore the stop sign and fly through them. The problem is that you have some minority of cyclists ruining it for everyone else. I have arrived on a stop sign in SF on many times. I do my full stop, I have the right of the way, only to see a cyclist just fly by. And then give me the birdy when I hunk at him. At the same time, many of them just fly through pedestrians. For those who are not familiar with SF, the cult of cyclist in SF is becoming rather entitled. They have (not sure she is still there) a PR women that make the perfect deputy for Karl Rove. The SF cyclist are basically the NRA of SF, IMO. They have a strong lobby and are getting everything they want. Including having a special privilege that puts them above cars and pedestrian.

bgentry 11y ago
This is a very bad idea! It'll cause far more accidents as the result. You'll have some crazy bicyclist who'll fully ignore the stop sign and fly through them. What you describe is illegal now and will remain illegal if this law is passed. The proposal is for cyclists to be able to yield, but not fully stop, if it is safe for them to do so. Blindly flying through an intersection at full speed is and will remain illegal.
- ajmurmann 11y ago
  The rule we have right now is much easier to follow and leaves nothing up to interpretation, yet SF cyclists seem unable to follow it as it is. I doubt that replacing that with a rule that makes things much fuzzier will do much good. If the existing easy rule is neither followed not enforced, how is the new fuzzy rule gonna be anything than a permission to do even more problematic stuff. I am really not worried about cars here, but am terrified as a pedestrian.
  - salimmadjd 11y ago
    Exactly right. Stop sign is a simple rule to follow. You make full stop and then you go. yield is open to interpretation.
    - QuercusMax 11y ago
      How is yield a fuzzy rule? It's simple: if nobody is in your way, then go. If they are, you need to wait till it's clear, then go. It's basically the same as a stop sign, except you aren't forced to artificially stop. In practice, many people treat stop signs as if they were yield signs ("rolling" or "california" stops). The real problem is when people treat yield signs like they just plain don't exist. Or when they treat them like a stop sign at freeway on-ramps.... but that's a whole other discussion.
      - corin_ 11y ago
        I support this change - and am glad it became legal here in Paris a few months ago, since most people here already went through red lights - but it clearly is more subject to interpretation. If a vehicle is already in the junction as you speed through at 30mph on your bike and swerve to avoid the vehicle, you could argue "I got through so clearly there wasn't anything in my way so I didn't need to yield". In this example sure we can all agree the cyclist is in the wrong, but for every metre further away the car is, and the slower the bike is moving, the more reasonable the cyclist's argument to continue becomes. <Comment transitions here to personal anecdotal experience> Personally I'm pretty good at keeping an eye out for pedestrians, I always slow down for stop signs unless I have a literally unblocked view of everywhere somebody could step/drive out from (in 6 months living here and cycling at least once most days I've only fucked up once, and even then I was perfectly safe avoiding people, just possibly gave them a slight surprise to see me curving around them as they crossed - and that was completely a case of mea culpa, I fucked up). But many cyclists here are pretty terrible road users, even when not going through red lights. Then again, pedestrians here are just as bad - if I'm cycling near them I am constantly paying attention to where they are and whether they might step out in front of me, I've never known a city so full of people willing to walk backwards into a road without looking around first, it's astonishing. And drivers are even worse... and motorbikes are the worst yet. Seriously, it doesn't matter what vehicle / lack of vehicle you use in Paris, the majority of people seem to follow a "fuck everyone else, I'm the priority" mindset when it comes to getting around.
jimminy 11y ago
Yeah I've been hit multiple times by bikers ignoring pedestrians in the city, thankfully no injuries. One time the biker got pissed at me, when he had a red and was making a turn in the wrong direction at night. He and the biker in front of him didn't slow down at all. I narrowly missed the first biker and paused when the next guy hooked me with his handlebar.

bgentry 11y ago

This is a very bad idea! It'll cause far more accidents as the result. You'll have some crazy bicyclist who'll fully ignore the stop sign and fly through them. What you describe is illegal now and will remain illegal if this law is passed. The proposal is for cyclists to be able to yield, but not fully stop, if it is safe for them to do so. Blindly flying through an intersection at full speed is and will remain illegal.

ajmurmann 11y ago
The rule we have right now is much easier to follow and leaves nothing up to interpretation, yet SF cyclists seem unable to follow it as it is. I doubt that replacing that with a rule that makes things much fuzzier will do much good. If the existing easy rule is neither followed not enforced, how is the new fuzzy rule gonna be anything than a permission to do even more problematic stuff. I am really not worried about cars here, but am terrified as a pedestrian.
- salimmadjd 11y ago
  Exactly right. Stop sign is a simple rule to follow. You make full stop and then you go. yield is open to interpretation.
  - QuercusMax 11y ago
    How is yield a fuzzy rule? It's simple: if nobody is in your way, then go. If they are, you need to wait till it's clear, then go. It's basically the same as a stop sign, except you aren't forced to artificially stop. In practice, many people treat stop signs as if they were yield signs ("rolling" or "california" stops). The real problem is when people treat yield signs like they just plain don't exist. Or when they treat them like a stop sign at freeway on-ramps.... but that's a whole other discussion.
    - corin_ 11y ago
      I support this change - and am glad it became legal here in Paris a few months ago, since most people here already went through red lights - but it clearly is more subject to interpretation. If a vehicle is already in the junction as you speed through at 30mph on your bike and swerve to avoid the vehicle, you could argue "I got through so clearly there wasn't anything in my way so I didn't need to yield". In this example sure we can all agree the cyclist is in the wrong, but for every metre further away the car is, and the slower the bike is moving, the more reasonable the cyclist's argument to continue becomes. <Comment transitions here to personal anecdotal experience> Personally I'm pretty good at keeping an eye out for pedestrians, I always slow down for stop signs unless I have a literally unblocked view of everywhere somebody could step/drive out from (in 6 months living here and cycling at least once most days I've only fucked up once, and even then I was perfectly safe avoiding people, just possibly gave them a slight surprise to see me curving around them as they crossed - and that was completely a case of mea culpa, I fucked up). But many cyclists here are pretty terrible road users, even when not going through red lights. Then again, pedestrians here are just as bad - if I'm cycling near them I am constantly paying attention to where they are and whether they might step out in front of me, I've never known a city so full of people willing to walk backwards into a road without looking around first, it's astonishing. And drivers are even worse... and motorbikes are the worst yet. Seriously, it doesn't matter what vehicle / lack of vehicle you use in Paris, the majority of people seem to follow a "fuck everyone else, I'm the priority" mindset when it comes to getting around.

jimminy 11y ago

Yeah I've been hit multiple times by bikers ignoring pedestrians in the city, thankfully no injuries. One time the biker got pissed at me, when he had a red and was making a turn in the wrong direction at night. He and the biker in front of him didn't slow down at all. I narrowly missed the first biker and paused when the next guy hooked me with his handlebar.