6 ms·

Yeah, it seems like all the little stuff, bikes, ebikes, and electric scooters should Idaho stop. The stuff that kills people should have to do the full stop.

by joshe 8y ago

monkeywork 8y ago
Your living a pipe dream if you think that a bike, ebike, or electric scooter can't kill someone. 180lbs going 15-20MPH smashing into someone who is unaware, someone who is elderly or very young, etc etc. Rolling stops should be done much much slower than that I'm aware, however the problem is peoples perception of what they can get away with furthers then... currently the LAW is to STOP but instead people roll cause they feel they can get away with it, when the LAW is to ROLL they will start to blow through it (many already do anyway)...
- Johnny555 8y ago
  They can, as can other pedestrians, and even a little chihuahua dog can trip someone and kill them... But bike-bike and bike-pedestrian deaths are so rare that they make front page news (and in SF, the Bucchere case from 15 years ago is always brought up when people want to point out how dangerous bikes are). Yet cars kill about 20 people a year in SF, and people just shrug and ignore it.
- ihattendorf 8y ago
  > currently the LAW is to STOP but instead people roll cause they feel they can get away with it, when the LAW is to ROLL they will start to blow through it (many already do anyway)... Slippery slope...
  - moate 8y ago
    ...And if the law allows them to blow through they'll just start putting armor on their bikes and a bike with armor is just a car and then people will cite the armor-bikes as precedent for why cars can drive through a stop light and cats and dogs, living together, mass hysteria!!!
- joshe 8y ago
  In Idaho the LAW is for bikes to treat stop signs as yield signs, so they must slow and be prepared to stop. They are still at fault for crashing into someone. Colorado and Delaware have similar laws. 14 pedestrians were killed in SF traffic accidents last year, all by cars. 0 by bikes. Bikers in SF aren't cited for rolling stops so we are already living in the Idaho stop world. It is very safe. [1] Bikers should indeed be very observant when approaching crosswalks and intersections. And they usually are, because if nothing else, their lives depend on it. [1] http://visionzerosf.org/ http://visionzerosf.org/
  - pound 8y ago
    Couple of years ago I was stopped by police for not making full stop. Wasn't cited, just verbal warning, but still.. Also what sucks was the fact that bunch of people in front of me just flew through the stop sign without even slowing down, and then me, who slows down at every stop to almost full stop (just short of tilting the bike and putting leg on the ground) was stopped by police car behind me.
    - stcredzero 8y ago
      You're supposed to spread the word to your friends as an example, but it sounds like the lesson learned is to fly through the intersection even faster so you're harder to be stopped by the police.
      - deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
  - stcredzero 8y ago
    14 pedestrians were killed in SF traffic accidents last year, all by cars. 0 by bikes How many bike riders got themselves killed in intersections? Bikers should indeed be very observant when approaching crosswalks and intersections. And they usually are, because if nothing else, their lives depend on it. And yet, I keep on running into situations where I think to myself, "How in the hell do you think you can survive while doing that!?" Here's the thing. The level of lack-of-foresight that makes someone a cringey inconsiderate nuisance in a car is about the same lack-of-foresight that makes someone a likely organ donor on a bike. Tongue in cheek tinfoil hat stuff: Maybe the bike trend is just a machination of aging oligarchs who want to ensure transplant organ supplies? Biking is popular in exactly the places where the population is healthier (better donors) and left leaning (more likely to donate.)
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- clarry 8y ago
  > currently the LAW is to STOP but instead people roll cause they feel they can get away with it, when the LAW is to ROLL they will start to blow through it (many already do anyway)... Not true IME, but it may be a cultural difference. Stop signs are relatively uncommon in Finland. I can only recall one intersection with a stop sign in my previous home town of about 20k people. I have not found any stop signs yet in my new place with 140k people. Most intersections have yield signs or lights; only the smallest of streets have no signs whatsoever. Traffic works pretty well and I don't really see people dangerously blowing through intersections. Cyclists and pedestrians in particular can be too careful as they often stop and wait for a car to go by even though the car is supposed to yield. I'm all for letting them roll through stop signs and red lights as long as they pay attention and respect the yield rules.
  - Symbiote 8y ago
    In Britain, stop signs are intentionally kept very rare, so that when you see one you stop. It's not always obvious what the danger is until it would have been to late to stop otherwise.
    - PJDK 8y ago
      Fun fact, each new stop sign must be approved, in writing, by the Secretary of State (a government minister!)
    - wool_gather 8y ago
      That's very interesting. I've been to a few places in the U.S. where many, many intersections had no signage. To me it seemed absolutely crazy, but maybe the thinking was the same as the British practice: "this way people will have to pay attention".
      - tyldum 8y ago
        Most EU countries have a base rule: you have to yield to traffic coming on your right hand side unless signs tell you otherwise.
      - 8y ago
stcredzero 8y ago
Yeah, it seems like all the little stuff, bikes, ebikes, and electric scooters should Idaho stop. Idaho stopping is really just a hacky manual substitute for electric assist and automatic stabilization wheels. It's one that has an unfortunate slippery slope built into it.
- sitkack 8y ago
  It isn't. It separates bike traffic from car traffic. I had a fairly long commute that was punctuated by a set of lights. If I rode up to the red and waited for the green, I ended up passing and getting passed by countless numbers of the same set of cars during this stretch of road. If I blew the red, and got ahead of the pack of cars, I exposed myself to 1/10 the number of collision instances.
  - wand3r 8y ago
    As someone who doesn’t cycle this is mind boggling. Obviously if you arbitrarily pick which laws you follow you will be better off. I can’t stand cyclists they observe laws like pedestrians when it’s convenient but want to be treated and afforded all the same space on the roadways as cars.
    - sitkack 8y ago
      It isn't arbitrary, it minimizes the chance of a car/bicycle collision. Most car drivers are bad at interacting with cyclists. The downside for someone in a car is a messed up bumper and scratched paint, the downside for a cyclist is injury or death. Bicycles are in a 3rd place between motor vehicles and pedestrians, of course they can transition between modes in ways that cars or pedestrians cannot. So can people on skateboards, skates and the myriad of personal electric vehicles. I am extremely cognizant of how I operate a bicycle around pedestrians, the onus should be on the person operating the dangerous device in the interaction. Cars don't own the road. Look at the history of jay walking and how the person car dynamic has changed over time. https://www.vox.com/2015/1/15/7551873/jaywalking-history https://www.vox.com/2015/1/15/7551873/jaywalking-history

Yeah, it seems like all the little stuff, bikes, ebikes, and electric scooters should Idaho stop. The stuff that kills people should have to do the full stop.

by joshe 8y ago

Yeah, it seems like all the little stuff, bikes, ebikes, and electric scooters should Idaho stop. The stuff that kills people should have to do the full stop.

monkeywork 8y ago

Your living a pipe dream if you think that a bike, ebike, or electric scooter can't kill someone. 180lbs going 15-20MPH smashing into someone who is unaware, someone who is elderly or very young, etc etc. Rolling stops should be done much much slower than that I'm aware, however the problem is peoples perception of what they can get away with furthers then... currently the LAW is to STOP but instead people roll cause they feel they can get away with it, when the LAW is to ROLL they will start to blow through it (many already do anyway)...

Johnny555 8y ago
They can, as can other pedestrians, and even a little chihuahua dog can trip someone and kill them... But bike-bike and bike-pedestrian deaths are so rare that they make front page news (and in SF, the Bucchere case from 15 years ago is always brought up when people want to point out how dangerous bikes are). Yet cars kill about 20 people a year in SF, and people just shrug and ignore it.
ihattendorf 8y ago
> currently the LAW is to STOP but instead people roll cause they feel they can get away with it, when the LAW is to ROLL they will start to blow through it (many already do anyway)... Slippery slope...
- moate 8y ago
  ...And if the law allows them to blow through they'll just start putting armor on their bikes and a bike with armor is just a car and then people will cite the armor-bikes as precedent for why cars can drive through a stop light and cats and dogs, living together, mass hysteria!!!
joshe 8y ago
In Idaho the LAW is for bikes to treat stop signs as yield signs, so they must slow and be prepared to stop. They are still at fault for crashing into someone. Colorado and Delaware have similar laws. 14 pedestrians were killed in SF traffic accidents last year, all by cars. 0 by bikes. Bikers in SF aren't cited for rolling stops so we are already living in the Idaho stop world. It is very safe. [1] Bikers should indeed be very observant when approaching crosswalks and intersections. And they usually are, because if nothing else, their lives depend on it. [1] http://visionzerosf.org/ http://visionzerosf.org/
- pound 8y ago
  Couple of years ago I was stopped by police for not making full stop. Wasn't cited, just verbal warning, but still.. Also what sucks was the fact that bunch of people in front of me just flew through the stop sign without even slowing down, and then me, who slows down at every stop to almost full stop (just short of tilting the bike and putting leg on the ground) was stopped by police car behind me.
  - stcredzero 8y ago
    You're supposed to spread the word to your friends as an example, but it sounds like the lesson learned is to fly through the intersection even faster so you're harder to be stopped by the police.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
- stcredzero 8y ago
  14 pedestrians were killed in SF traffic accidents last year, all by cars. 0 by bikes How many bike riders got themselves killed in intersections? Bikers should indeed be very observant when approaching crosswalks and intersections. And they usually are, because if nothing else, their lives depend on it. And yet, I keep on running into situations where I think to myself, "How in the hell do you think you can survive while doing that!?" Here's the thing. The level of lack-of-foresight that makes someone a cringey inconsiderate nuisance in a car is about the same lack-of-foresight that makes someone a likely organ donor on a bike. Tongue in cheek tinfoil hat stuff: Maybe the bike trend is just a machination of aging oligarchs who want to ensure transplant organ supplies? Biking is popular in exactly the places where the population is healthier (better donors) and left leaning (more likely to donate.)
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
clarry 8y ago
> currently the LAW is to STOP but instead people roll cause they feel they can get away with it, when the LAW is to ROLL they will start to blow through it (many already do anyway)... Not true IME, but it may be a cultural difference. Stop signs are relatively uncommon in Finland. I can only recall one intersection with a stop sign in my previous home town of about 20k people. I have not found any stop signs yet in my new place with 140k people. Most intersections have yield signs or lights; only the smallest of streets have no signs whatsoever. Traffic works pretty well and I don't really see people dangerously blowing through intersections. Cyclists and pedestrians in particular can be too careful as they often stop and wait for a car to go by even though the car is supposed to yield. I'm all for letting them roll through stop signs and red lights as long as they pay attention and respect the yield rules.
- Symbiote 8y ago
  In Britain, stop signs are intentionally kept very rare, so that when you see one you stop. It's not always obvious what the danger is until it would have been to late to stop otherwise.
  - PJDK 8y ago
    Fun fact, each new stop sign must be approved, in writing, by the Secretary of State (a government minister!)
  - wool_gather 8y ago
    That's very interesting. I've been to a few places in the U.S. where many, many intersections had no signage. To me it seemed absolutely crazy, but maybe the thinking was the same as the British practice: "this way people will have to pay attention".
    - tyldum 8y ago
      Most EU countries have a base rule: you have to yield to traffic coming on your right hand side unless signs tell you otherwise.
    - 8y ago

stcredzero 8y ago

Yeah, it seems like all the little stuff, bikes, ebikes, and electric scooters should Idaho stop. Idaho stopping is really just a hacky manual substitute for electric assist and automatic stabilization wheels. It's one that has an unfortunate slippery slope built into it.

sitkack 8y ago
It isn't. It separates bike traffic from car traffic. I had a fairly long commute that was punctuated by a set of lights. If I rode up to the red and waited for the green, I ended up passing and getting passed by countless numbers of the same set of cars during this stretch of road. If I blew the red, and got ahead of the pack of cars, I exposed myself to 1/10 the number of collision instances.
- wand3r 8y ago
  As someone who doesn’t cycle this is mind boggling. Obviously if you arbitrarily pick which laws you follow you will be better off. I can’t stand cyclists they observe laws like pedestrians when it’s convenient but want to be treated and afforded all the same space on the roadways as cars.
  - sitkack 8y ago
    It isn't arbitrary, it minimizes the chance of a car/bicycle collision. Most car drivers are bad at interacting with cyclists. The downside for someone in a car is a messed up bumper and scratched paint, the downside for a cyclist is injury or death. Bicycles are in a 3rd place between motor vehicles and pedestrians, of course they can transition between modes in ways that cars or pedestrians cannot. So can people on skateboards, skates and the myriad of personal electric vehicles. I am extremely cognizant of how I operate a bicycle around pedestrians, the onus should be on the person operating the dangerous device in the interaction. Cars don't own the road. Look at the history of jay walking and how the person car dynamic has changed over time. https://www.vox.com/2015/1/15/7551873/jaywalking-history https://www.vox.com/2015/1/15/7551873/jaywalking-history