The instinct of self-preservation alone should make the bicyclist want to obey traffic laws i.e. stopping at Stop signs unless they're out to win a Darwin award. Why is this? A bicyclist should not want to mess with a vehicle going at speed, for it's force is mighty and the bicyclist's mass is lite. In other words, bad things happen when a metal monster (a vehicle) meets a meat sack on a bicycle.
As a former cyclist and still a driver and a lifelong pedestrian I have to note that Stop signs are also there to give pedestrians a prayer of getting across the street alive if slightly winded
If a cyclist finds it too difficult or inconvenient to stop-start-go for every intersection with a stop sign I would suggest it’s far more difficult to do that maneuver from inside a pine box six feet below ground.
Recently (in Calgary) I was stopped at a red light while waiting to make a right turn on red (permitted here) when a cyclist on the sidewalk tried to commit suicide by riding in front of me against the 'Don't Walk' sign. So much going on here! First, right turn on red is anti-pedestrian and shouldn't be allowed. If a pedestrian can cross the road, it should be forbidden to a motorist at that time. That's one reason why there are pedestrian-controlling signals. Cyclists should stick to roads or a dedicated bike lane if there is one (in this case, a block East, or the other side of the arterial road) and get off the sidewalk (there are also many dedicated bike paths in Calgary, but not at this location). Smart cyclists don't try to ride on arterial roads, for so many obvious reasons. Motorists should respect cyclists as bicycles too are vehicles.
Before anyone complains about my views - I rode a bike at school and university in England, and after immigrating to Canada, in Regina, I rode to work on side roads; there was only one arterial for me to cross. I didn't even try to ride along it. Now, bicycles are more widespread and cyclists and motorists need to learn how to behave on the roads and bike paths (not sidewalks!)
Is part of the Ontario problem related to new motorists buying black market driver's licenses rather than learning to drive, and taking a test from a legitimate testing authority?
>>” Motorists should respect cyclists as bicycles too are vehicles.”
I’ve always considered cyclists as vehicles as well, albeit human-powered. But as cycles lack any of the safety cage surroundings afforded to powered motor vehicles, it becomes the responsibility of the cyclist to ensure that THEY act in as safe a manner as possible when sharing the same road as vehicular traffic. Physics doesn’t care about the philosophy of inconvenience, and neither does the mortician.
Your logic is impeccable but the behaviour of humans is seldom governed by logic. We are rationalizing not rational beings. I spent almost 30 years in Toronto on both sides of the battle (driver and biker). It has been my experience that both sides are immune to sway through reason and will discount all the arguments of the other to the extent required to rationalize their own behaviour wherever it may fall on the scale of reasonable and sensible. Cars and bikes are largely incompatible modes of transportation. They need to be separated. Trying to impose bikes onto a network designed exclusively for cars (or for pedestrians) has always been a no win exercise. Until we demand urban design that accommodates all three plus public transit by design good luck improving the situation. Cars and other motorized vehicles have valuable roles to play in our society but the level of deference we pay to their needs over ours and the mental gymnastics we will engage in to rationalize our continued subservience to them is absolutely astounding. There will be no change unless and until we start electing governments that have not sold their souls to the interests who benefit from the dominance of the automobile in our culture.
As a cyclist, I breeze through the stop signs that are there only to slow down cars. The problem with some cyclists, they apply this approach to ALL stop signs. Just an hour ago, at a stop, I had the right of way in my car, but a cyclist ran the stop sign and cut me off.
If you are on a bike and you come to a STOP sign facing you - *stop*. Otherwise the driver of the car with the right of way may annihilate you. You lose your life, or get a serious injury; the driver may get a slap on the wrist and a car repair requirement, which your estate may have to pay.
To the "ALL USERS OF THE ROAD MUST BE TREATED THE SAME" crowd may I suggest one take a bus some time, arrive early & choose a stop near a stop sign & count how many motorists ACTUALLY come to a full & complete stop. (Hint: Llittle to none is the answer.) Furthermore in Ontario there are some different rules for different vehicles, eg: Vehicles must Yield to Transit buses that are reentering traffic & one must pull over & stop to allow emergency vehicles to pass. Commercial vehicles have different licensing & are subject to frequent inspections. Delivery vans are almost NEVER ticketed for blocking a bike lane (I was cut off by one a couple of months back as it pulled into my bike lane & I almost slammed into it when it jammed on it's brakes as it parked.) In some cities bikes are ALLOWED on certain sidewalks. Even now, one size does not fit all.
When the current Ontario law requiring vehicles to give 1m clear when passing a cyclist were being proposed I suggested to a friend who was leading the legislation that they also include Idaho stops. While supportive, she didn't want to "at this time" as the opposition in the committee (ie Conservative legislators) would delay the implementation of the bill becoming law.
The instinct of self-preservation alone should make the bicyclist want to obey traffic laws i.e. stopping at Stop signs unless they're out to win a Darwin award. Why is this? A bicyclist should not want to mess with a vehicle going at speed, for it's force is mighty and the bicyclist's mass is lite. In other words, bad things happen when a metal monster (a vehicle) meets a meat sack on a bicycle.
As a former cyclist and still a driver and a lifelong pedestrian I have to note that Stop signs are also there to give pedestrians a prayer of getting across the street alive if slightly winded
If a cyclist finds it too difficult or inconvenient to stop-start-go for every intersection with a stop sign I would suggest it’s far more difficult to do that maneuver from inside a pine box six feet below ground.
Recently (in Calgary) I was stopped at a red light while waiting to make a right turn on red (permitted here) when a cyclist on the sidewalk tried to commit suicide by riding in front of me against the 'Don't Walk' sign. So much going on here! First, right turn on red is anti-pedestrian and shouldn't be allowed. If a pedestrian can cross the road, it should be forbidden to a motorist at that time. That's one reason why there are pedestrian-controlling signals. Cyclists should stick to roads or a dedicated bike lane if there is one (in this case, a block East, or the other side of the arterial road) and get off the sidewalk (there are also many dedicated bike paths in Calgary, but not at this location). Smart cyclists don't try to ride on arterial roads, for so many obvious reasons. Motorists should respect cyclists as bicycles too are vehicles.
Before anyone complains about my views - I rode a bike at school and university in England, and after immigrating to Canada, in Regina, I rode to work on side roads; there was only one arterial for me to cross. I didn't even try to ride along it. Now, bicycles are more widespread and cyclists and motorists need to learn how to behave on the roads and bike paths (not sidewalks!)
Is part of the Ontario problem related to new motorists buying black market driver's licenses rather than learning to drive, and taking a test from a legitimate testing authority?
>>” Motorists should respect cyclists as bicycles too are vehicles.”
I’ve always considered cyclists as vehicles as well, albeit human-powered. But as cycles lack any of the safety cage surroundings afforded to powered motor vehicles, it becomes the responsibility of the cyclist to ensure that THEY act in as safe a manner as possible when sharing the same road as vehicular traffic. Physics doesn’t care about the philosophy of inconvenience, and neither does the mortician.
Your logic is impeccable but the behaviour of humans is seldom governed by logic. We are rationalizing not rational beings. I spent almost 30 years in Toronto on both sides of the battle (driver and biker). It has been my experience that both sides are immune to sway through reason and will discount all the arguments of the other to the extent required to rationalize their own behaviour wherever it may fall on the scale of reasonable and sensible. Cars and bikes are largely incompatible modes of transportation. They need to be separated. Trying to impose bikes onto a network designed exclusively for cars (or for pedestrians) has always been a no win exercise. Until we demand urban design that accommodates all three plus public transit by design good luck improving the situation. Cars and other motorized vehicles have valuable roles to play in our society but the level of deference we pay to their needs over ours and the mental gymnastics we will engage in to rationalize our continued subservience to them is absolutely astounding. There will be no change unless and until we start electing governments that have not sold their souls to the interests who benefit from the dominance of the automobile in our culture.
As a cyclist, I breeze through the stop signs that are there only to slow down cars. The problem with some cyclists, they apply this approach to ALL stop signs. Just an hour ago, at a stop, I had the right of way in my car, but a cyclist ran the stop sign and cut me off.
If you are on a bike and you come to a STOP sign facing you - *stop*. Otherwise the driver of the car with the right of way may annihilate you. You lose your life, or get a serious injury; the driver may get a slap on the wrist and a car repair requirement, which your estate may have to pay.
To the "ALL USERS OF THE ROAD MUST BE TREATED THE SAME" crowd may I suggest one take a bus some time, arrive early & choose a stop near a stop sign & count how many motorists ACTUALLY come to a full & complete stop. (Hint: Llittle to none is the answer.) Furthermore in Ontario there are some different rules for different vehicles, eg: Vehicles must Yield to Transit buses that are reentering traffic & one must pull over & stop to allow emergency vehicles to pass. Commercial vehicles have different licensing & are subject to frequent inspections. Delivery vans are almost NEVER ticketed for blocking a bike lane (I was cut off by one a couple of months back as it pulled into my bike lane & I almost slammed into it when it jammed on it's brakes as it parked.) In some cities bikes are ALLOWED on certain sidewalks. Even now, one size does not fit all.
When the current Ontario law requiring vehicles to give 1m clear when passing a cyclist were being proposed I suggested to a friend who was leading the legislation that they also include Idaho stops. While supportive, she didn't want to "at this time" as the opposition in the committee (ie Conservative legislators) would delay the implementation of the bill becoming law.