Arkansas has a new law allowing cyclists to treat stop lights as yield signs.
A cyclist several months ago ran a stop sign in front of me, but he was going pretty fast, and I thought perhaps he hadn’t seen the sign. I stopped, he came into the intersection, looked confused, and waved to me in thanks as he pedaled away.
Is this law supposed to make traffic safer for cyclists, or just speed up traffic?
I’ll need to be more careful of them at intersections.
Your example doesn’t seem to have much to do with what the new law does.
Efficient cycling is all about maintaining your momentum, which stopping at every intersection definitely interferes with. I’m fine with cyclists treating stop signs/lights as yields, IF they actually yield when there’s cross traffic. I find far too many cyclist blow right through stops with paying any attention. Perhaps a law like this that acknowledges the reality of cycling will make it easier to enforce the violations that are truly unsafe?
Wow, dude. I live on a corner with a stoplight, which is also a popular route for group rides. Yesterday a group of about 20 came by. The first 10 made it through on green…the next 7 on fresh yellow…the next 2 on a pretty stale yellow…and the last one sprinted to make it TO the intersection about the time it turned red. Jesus, I thought I was gonna see that stupid motherfucker die right in front of me.
Ya know, if a cyclist has a clear line of sight and doesn’t need to stop, then whatever. Go. But this dumbshit had NO view to the right; it’s blocked by a retaining wall and shrubs. And there’s an accident at that light pretty regularly.
Yeah, stopping is hell on my gas mileage too. Why do cars have to stop?
Because a bike is not a car. And many cars don’t fully stop either.
Why should that make difference? I don’t care if a bicyclist is operating at peak efficiency. The rules of they road are only useful when they are respected by everyone sharing the road.
If bicyclists want me to respect their right to use the roadway like any other vehicle, they should not expect special exemptions from traffic laws.
And it’s a shame they never get citations for doing that.
It’s not a special exemption, it’s a rule FOR BICYCLES. I’ll bet there are some roads bicycles are not allowed on so it’s not like they are equal participants in the rules of the road in the first place. I’ll bet there are other rules that apply to pedestrians. Pedestrians never get tickets for running stop signs, even if they don’t stop. But if there’s cross traffic they usually do stop why is that?
Also, OP misstates. Stop signs=yield signs, stop lights=stop signs. They get to a red light, they have to stop. If it’s safe to proceed then they don’t have to wait for the light to turn green. This makes a lot of sense to me. In particular, where I live there are a lot of lights that are activated to change by the weight of the car, or the metal in it, or something. Bicycles don’t activate this. So the light is going to change for the car, probably in something like 30 seconds, but it’s never gonna change for the bicycle, unless there’s a pedestrian button, and that’s often not all that convenient for a cyclist to access. (And also what are you, some kind of pussy that you need to push the pedestrian light?) There are also a lot of controlled intersections where the driver of a car would be unable to tell if it’s safe to go through that intersection, unless he stopped, and sometimes even then, but a bicyclist (or pedestrian) could.
Another advantage mentioned by the article is that it’s safer for the cyclist to be able to get a head start on traffic (where practical). And they then hold up the cars less. So that’s a win for everybody.
I just want the cyclists to stay off the damn sidewalks.
Because they are a different type of vehicle and some laws have to be tailored to the vehicle type. We have special traffic laws for trucks and school buses. Also laws not allowing bikes and some mopeds on interstates. In general these laws are set for safety, which is the stated reason for the new laws.
They are, the new law allows this.
Though I do disagree with your premiss. The laws are needed at times as to provide a framework to establish right of way and expected behavior, but unfortunately they are applied all the time, even when counterproductive (the law is a ass). In Haiti traffic laws are routinely ignored when except at congested major intersections, and traffic flows better and smoother then what I observe in the states in a like circumstance, and the difference is people following the law instead of common sense.
The law also gives a false sense of righteousness where one lauds it over others and condemns their driving even if the other person’s driving was totally safe.
If you think about law abiding bicyclist(s) approaching a stoplight, in some instances they may be riding in traffic taking ownership of a lane; sometimes they may be in bike lanes, the layouts of which can vary; sometimes they may be hugging the right side of the road; sometimes they may be in traffic and then filter their way between lanes to get to the front as vehicles are stopped at a red light (assuming that is legal there). It takes diligent motorists who regularly check mirrors and always shoulder check to be aware of cyclists among their surroundings in the best of times. I tend to recoil at anything that makes the rules cyclists should be abiding by less predictable. However if I trust those with roadway cycling expertise it should benefit the responsible ones who know what they’re doing and it’s not like the lives of the other ones are worth more than the concern they show for others. Now if cyclists are riding in a large posse they should probably as a group stick to obeying the lights and stop signs and slow down to wait if one of theirs gets held up by an amber light that’s about to turn red.
This law is often refered to as the Idaho Stop.
I use it often as I ride in ID a ton. Stop signs are yield signs, red lights are stop signs. It is a fantastic law. I wish WA would hurry up and get on board with it (I ride there often as well).
Bicyclists getting through intersections faster, as long as they are doing it safely, speeds up motorists. It’s a win-win.
If you’re not doing this you’re not qualified to be driving.
It’s why I think all drivers should undergo mandatory retesting every decade.
Actually the OP and the thread title are incorrect.
According to the link provided (and the actual law) “Bicyclists will be able to treat stop signs as yields and red lights as stop signs…”
Oh, you nailed it Suze. Drives me crazy. When this happens to me I try to take the least-worst option: I ride round the light on the sidewalk…
…so, sorry about that, Cats.
j
I’m sorry to revive this old thread, but I don’t know if I want to start a new one. Idaho Stop Law has now been around for multiple decades and I still get yelled at or meet people that have no idea it is legal. Nearby WA has a tamed down version that is more recent, but again, no one but cyclists seem to know. How do we get the word out that cyclists do have to abide by the laws of the road, but there are special rules for cyclists?
https://www.idahostatesman.com/entertainment/ent-columns-blogs/words-deeds/article261171507.html
The Wikipage for Idaho Stop has changed a lot since this thread was first posted. It’s a much better write up but also a number of additional states have adopted it. Note that there’s two different rules:
Many states have related laws, called Dead Red laws, that allow cyclists to run a red light if they’ve stopped and not gotten a green after a certain time. There’s a section at the bottom of that page about them and gives a link to a section of the page on traffic lights. Unfortunately, that section has been removed, so you can’t find out which states have Dead Red laws. We do here in Oregon, along with the Delaware Stop.
Are those laws strictly necessary? As far as I know, it’s always been legal to progress through an inoperative red light when it is safe to do so. A traffic signal that isn’t responding to a road-legal vehicle is certainly inoperative. For instance, in California:
https://codes.findlaw.com/ca/vehicle-code/veh-sect-21800.html
(d)(1) The driver of any vehicle approaching an intersection which has official traffic control signals that are inoperative shall stop at the intersection, and may proceed with caution when it is safe to do so.