5 ms·

I'm pretty well known in my local community (and here) as a strong advocate for pedestrians and thus often a critic of cyclists, but even I support the Idaho st

I'm pretty well known in my local community (and here) as a strong advocate for pedestrians and thus often a critic of cyclists, but even I support the Idaho stop as long as that's really what it is. Slow, look, then go? Great! Godspeed to you, fellow non-driver. Don't even look or slow as you blast across a sidewalk or through an intersection? Not such a fan. I wish there was a way to support the first (which I know is the common case by a long shot) without enabling the second.

bombcar 4y ago
The second is the problem and the only real solution is policing it. Bike cops, perhaps.
uoaei 4y ago
> I wish there was a way to support the first (which I know is the common case by a long shot) without enabling the second. I think if we can all take a deep breath and acknowledge that it is a relative majority who ride with situational awareness and understand right-of-way, even if sometimes the specific dynamics of a specific interaction means the rule won't be strictly obeyed in all scenarios, and that's fine. There are many, many cases where I ride (SF bay area) where drivers are so extremely deferent and "nice" that they give up their right-of-way and just wait for a bike to roll through the intersection, even if it's clearly their turn and the obligation of the person on the bike to stop. But this gets back to the points made elsewhere about why right-of-way exists: for predictability. It's easier on everyone and conserves mental/decision-making effort to just do what right-of-way dictates. It gets to the point where I forcefully put both feet on the ground and stare through their windshield til they get the message and go. While we're on the point of complaining about unsensible driving practices: do not stop for bikes who want to ride across the street in a crosswalk! They are not pedestrians, they have to use the road! They can wait for traffic to pass, it's fine. No, I don't care if it's a mom with her baby on the back, she has strong instincts around safety anyway and won't do anything dumb around cars. Relax and trust other people.

bombcar 4y ago

The second is the problem and the only real solution is policing it. Bike cops, perhaps.

uoaei 4y ago

> I wish there was a way to support the first (which I know is the common case by a long shot) without enabling the second. I think if we can all take a deep breath and acknowledge that it is a relative majority who ride with situational awareness and understand right-of-way, even if sometimes the specific dynamics of a specific interaction means the rule won't be strictly obeyed in all scenarios, and that's fine. There are many, many cases where I ride (SF bay area) where drivers are so extremely deferent and "nice" that they give up their right-of-way and just wait for a bike to roll through the intersection, even if it's clearly their turn and the obligation of the person on the bike to stop. But this gets back to the points made elsewhere about why right-of-way exists: for predictability. It's easier on everyone and conserves mental/decision-making effort to just do what right-of-way dictates. It gets to the point where I forcefully put both feet on the ground and stare through their windshield til they get the message and go. While we're on the point of complaining about unsensible driving practices: do not stop for bikes who want to ride across the street in a crosswalk! They are not pedestrians, they have to use the road! They can wait for traffic to pass, it's fine. No, I don't care if it's a mom with her baby on the back, she has strong instincts around safety anyway and won't do anything dumb around cars. Relax and trust other people.