> A cyclist's head is much closer to the end of their vehicle, and they have a much more unobstructed view around them. By the time they are a few feet from the

> A cyclist's head is much closer to the end of their vehicle, and they have a much more unobstructed view around them. By the time they are a few feet from the stop sign, they can already see much further down the street than a driver in a car could. There are two problems with that argument: 1. Very few intersections meet the criteria where a cyclist would be able to see approaching cross traffic significantly earlier than a motorist could. In over 30 years of motoring and over 15 years of on road cycling in various locations, I have not encountered an intersection where I'm not able to see approaching cross traffic when motoring but could see while cycling 2. No one argues for treating stops as yield for motorcyclists > Coming to a complete stop doesn't really add any more safety It really depends on the intersection. An intersection where one cannot really see approaching cross traffic until shortly before entering it would have a safety benefit if drivers came to a full stop and checked for traffic before entering the intersection. Other intersections where the roads don't intersect at near right angles or where cross traffic is moving at higher speeds also have a safety benefit by adding a requirement that traffic stop and check before entering. > Further, while accidents that harm pedestrians do certainly happen, and shouldn't be minimized, the vast majority of the time the biggest danger to a cyclist is themselves. Traffic control designating right of way isn't about minimizing harm. It's about preventing collisions in the first place by having a clear set of rules about who has the right of way and who does not and has to yield it. Just because a certain vehicle/driver combination has less mass compared to another doesn't mean that they shouldn't be following the same right of way rules. Regardless of the amount of damage caused or who gets injured, a crash still causes harm and costs money. In this particular case[1], the cyclists didn't get harmed, but their actions in terms of violating the established rules designating right of way resulted in significant property damage > As a final thought, most red lights in America could probably be stop signs or yield signs. This is the actual root cause of this issue in the US. But even so, if cross traffic is moving at higher speeds, it's best for drivers of all types of vehicles to stop and check before entering the intersection. In the US, this is the case for many types of intersections (a side road crossing or joining an arterial with traffic moving in excess of 40 mph). But for residential neighborhoods with sparse traffic and low traffic speeds, full stops are not required. [1] https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/car-collision-cyclist-over-hulton-16021891 https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manches...