Cyclists don’t break traffic laws any more than drivers, says new study
Cyclists don’t break traffic laws any more than drivers, says new study | Cycling Today
cross-posted from: https://feddit.org/post/15639363
I drive and cycle.
When I’m riding my bike and break traffic rules, I’m a suicidal idiot.
When I’m driving my car and break traffic rules, I’m a dangerous menace to others.
Drivers don’t get to clutch pearls when their actions directly cause death and injury to others. A cyclist riding like an idiot is like a motorcyclist without a helmet - the vast majority of the danger is on themselves.
Sometimes breaking traffic laws is literally the safer option. The laws are written for cars not people on bikes. Me sitting in the turning lane between a bunch of massive trucks hoping people notice my bike with a flag on the back and remember I'm there when the light changes. Or I ride on the sidewalk and use the crosswalk. Technically one is legal and the other is not (depending on the local laws obviously).
Seriously though. I got the flag after the first time a massive truck pulled up behind me. Realized they literally could forget I'm there their Field of view is so bad.
I really don't know how they are legal. I mean I do. But they shouldn't be. Only thing that big should literally require a commercial license and a valid reason for use.
they literally could forget I’m there their Field of view is so bad
I'm a school bus driver and last year we had an incident where I was behind another bus driver and we were both waiting to turn left at an intersection. While our light was still red, a cyclist rode up on the right and came to a stop right next to the bus ahead of us. I was like "that dude is gonna get hit" and sure enough when the driver ahead of me made her left turn, her tail swing clipped the cyclist and knocked him over. I had tried to warn her but our radios don't work half the time.
The dude was unhurt but irate and after we'd pulled over I had to stand in front of the guy and physically prevent him from climbing on her bus while he yelled. I'm also an avid cyclist and I told him it was entirely his fault for creeping up next to a school bus, which is an even worse thing to do than with most trucks because of how much bus protrudes behind the rear wheels (which causes the tail swing when turning). He of course refused to see this - he cycles around our district a lot and is one of those insane people who thinks bicycling on the wrong side of the road against traffic is a smart thing to do, even around blind turns.
I cycle daily and drive once or twice week.
When I’m riding a bike and break traffic rules, i do it carefully and slowly; knowing that those rules are made mostly to protect users from motorized speed (and mass that's unnecessarily getting even bigger with each passing year)
When I’m driving a car, i never break traffic rules; knowing how dangerous a car is.
having wrote that, I see bikers and e-scooters running red lights into traffic, forcing cars to stop in order not to kill them. I don't get it.
I used to live in center city Philadelphia and it was very common to see cyclists sailing through red lights, not only without stopping but without even looking to see if there was cross-traffic coming. I just don't understand how they could do this without dying at incredibly high rates, given that cars there don't pay much mind to red lights either. Bike fatalities are very common in Philly, but it's usually some law-abiding cyclist in a bike lane getting flattened by a truck making a right turn.
The only offense I tend to see cyclists is blowing through stop signs, but if you consider the ol' "rolling stop" cars as rightfully illegal, then pretty much everyone ends up guilty at stop signs.
Plus as everyone notes, it's a hell of a lot less dangerous for pedestrians if a bike zooms past vs a car (especially SUVs and Trucks, oof).
I see that and red light runners but it's always delivery bikes. So it's more like a symptom of a different problem.
Breaking rules with a deadly metal machine vs. breaking rules with a few kilograms machine.
The outcome is sort of the same if those kilograms break rules in front of a 2 ton brick obeying laws.
I admit not obeying traffic rules all the time when cycling. When I break rules I do so when it is safe. Often there is a choice between the rules and safety. Some bike lanes are unsafe and need to be avoided. Sometimes I break rules in the interest of conserving momentum, because building speed takes effort. I only do so when it is safe. As a cyclist I have a good view of traffic around me and I can often get off the road if necessary, which cars can't.
I'm not going to go through the red light when there are cars passing through... That would be stupid.
I was designated driver last night. Zero alcohol. I brought 6 friends to a concert in van.
Driving home, I felt like I was the drunk. I was swerving out of the way of cyclists a d nearly killed a dude at a green light who decided to ride his e-bike through the crosswalk right in front of me.
While I agree with this sentiment and the spirit of the article, two wrongs don't make a right.
It's like that in my city too when people decide to drive on the streets designated as greenways. You want bikers out of your way? Give them another place to go and they'll gladly use it to get away from you. It sounds like you're describing a place where there is only car infrastructure so bikers are forced into traffic situations built for cars. That means every one of them interprets what they are supposed to be doing (either for safety or to follow the law) differently.
Think about it this way. Someone parked in the bike lane? I'm swerving into traffic. Person doesn't see me and starts merging at me? I'm swerving into another lane. Someone intentionally decides to ride my ass? I'm getting out of their way before they get violent, possibly putting me in front of you.
Tired of bikers in your 'car lanes'? Give them their own lane. A person in a car does not have any more value or rights than a person on a bike. And their infrastructure costs tons more.
Then go fucking slower so you don't risk killing people. It's not hard.
You understand that gottagofast is no less murderous intent than celebratory gunfire?
I think it depends on definitions. I treat stops like yields as do many cyclists I know and many places have codified it into law but many have not.
This is counterbalanced in the tally by most drivers speeding all the time.
In my area of London, I'd say 80-90% of cyclists think red lights don't apply to them. I've even been sworn at by another cyclist for stopping at a traffic light.
The illegal ebike users are the worst. My ex saw one hit a woman with two kids, because he just zoomed past a red when it was green man at the crossing.
Cyclists are the reason I've gone back to public transport. I actually felt safer on my cycle commute on the high road with cars, than I did on dedicated cycle lanes 😞
I still prefer walking over biking over transit with cars being only if no other option but yeah I have had the cyclist who is annoyed at me for following the law but to be fair I have also gotten that with cars. I was hit from behind by a guy who accelerated as I breaked as the light turned yellow. Then when he came out he said. Oh well I did not expect you to stop short like that. WTF!
Sure, but most car drivers also fail to come to a complete stop as well.
True and that is why I do the yield sign thing. Im pretty much not slowing down but not accelerating. Just coasting through while I keep an eye on if I need to stop. Bikes moves so slowly relative to cars that most cars "stop" is not much slower than my coast.
At lights? I constantly see cyclists go through reds because no car is coming.
Idaho stop is great—all jurisdictions ought to have it—but until yours does, doing it still counts as a violation. 😕
Well, then that would still mean cyclists endanger a lot less people than car drivers.
Not surprising that the rate of driver non-compliance was found to be 15% -- because that is the number traffic engineers shoot for. For example, when a traffic survey finds more than 15% drivers are exceeding the speed limit then the speed limit gets raised. Similarly, if enough drivers are observed running a red light, then the yellow time gets extended. Or if drivers aren't yielding at a crosswalk, then the crosswalk is removed.
By contrast, if a large number of cyclists are observed running a stop sign on a quiet street then the local police conducts a sting operation...
I find that 15% number interesting... For example, there's a highway near where I am with a 55 mph speed limit. But you'll rarely find people doing less than 60. Usually 65, with the occasional crazy person doing 80.
But I feel like raising the speed limit would defeat the purpose. Drivers would be happy, but then they'd just go 75. If traffic engineering amounts to "More than 15% are breaking the rules and driving in an unsafe manner, let's change the rules so that's legal," it seems pretty dumb. Like, that extra speed isn't suddenly safer because the sign says something else.
This "new" study is from 2018?
Fuck cars and up with cycling and bike infrastructure and all that but unless this study is more specific than the article states, it's useless. And if it is more specific this article may be misleading.
It just gives a percentage of "in compliance with traffic laws" and doesn't give a breakdown of what laws. Since most drivers speed at least a little quite often, and most cyclists are incapable of speeding anywhere near as much, what laws are the cyclists breaking to get them as low on compliance as drivers? If it's stop signs and red lights, that is right in line with the stereotype of them being dangerous scofflaws the article is saying this study shows is incorrect.
I'm not sure how useful it is to make comparisons like this anyway. Drivers and cyclists break different laws, some of which are more dangerous than others. Speeding and close passes in vehicles are far more dangerous than cyclists going on a red-that's-about-to-change where they can see that there's nothing coming.
What I find weird is why do cyclists break the law the same amount when they have so much more to lose? I run a red in my car, another car hits me, maybe a minor injury but I likely walk away. I run a red on my bike, a car hits me, I’m fucking dead or at least laid out. As a biker you have more incentive to obey every law all the time.
If the infrastructure/driving conditions are bad enough you run almost the same danger when driving lawfully. Eventually you learn to trust your senses more than traffic laws. Sometimes it's actually safer to break some laws as a pedestrian/cyclist. Maybe people who ride a lot get used to it eventually and don't see running a red light (when no cars are passing) as more dangerous than going on green.
It's cars that cause injuries, not red lights. If you can see there are no cars coming and the light is red, it's safer than going on green and just assuming that all the cars stop at their red. On a bike the main thing protecting you from injury is situational awareness. Traffic laws are a distant second.
I’ve been in both camps over the years and it’s only the assholes that you remember.
The only time I’ve seen a cyclist stop for a red light is when I stare them down while crossing the bike lane with my small child. Rest of the time it’s tally ho motherfuckers. NYC specifically
Some biker flipped me off just because I honked at him and flipped him off for running a red in a busy intersection. Pisses me off.
But i love bikes, and hate cars. Still want nore bike infrastructure
Some [person] flipped me off just because I ... flipped him off
Shocking, he didn't kiss your ring??
This seems right for NYC, in that I see both bikes and cars frequently running through reds and riding where they aren't supposed to be
When I visited my friends in NYC they had a rule about 2 wheelers not stopping but 4 wheelers will stop. I was only there a few days but crossing the bike lane when I had the right of way as a pedestrian was scarier than crossing the street.
Oh 4 wheelers don't stop half the time. You have to lock eyes with the driver and assert dominance as a pedestrian so they understand that you will sue them for everything they're worth if they touch you.
To give you an idea of NYC drivers, I almost got run over once by a guy flooring it in reverse out of a one way side street, turning sharply onto the pedestrian crossing. We flipped each other off then he sped off
I see you've never been hit by a truck.
I think that depends on country...
"Cyclists should give way to pedestrians on shared use cycle tracks and to horse riders on bridleways." - nope, you hear a bell you dodge as they're not slowing down. Happens every time I use a shared path.
"Only pedestrians may use the pavement. Pedestrians include wheelchair and mobility scooter users." - nope, we get plenty mounting the pavement illegally; again, you hear a bell and you dodge. Happens 1--2 times a day on my trip to work.
I reckon people in a hurry just bend the rules more readily than people taking their time.
Yes. Even accounting for those idiots, car drivers still break more traffic laws. And it's exponentially more dangerous when they do. This is what the article is getting at.
Huh, neat. So as a percentage of the population, drivers break the law more often, and it is always more dangerous when they do.
Any chance of a link to those stats for the UK? It'll be great to show my students.
What happened to the old stuy?
Billy Joel walked through it alone.
not a high bar to pass though
was this study made by cyclists?
How could they? There are WAY more traffic laws for cars.
Not really. The only car-specific parts traffic laws are about keeping the car in working order and behaviour on car-only roads.
On the other hand, bike-specific parts of traffic laws are about keeping the bike in working order and behaviour on cycling lanes.
But for the most part car-laws also apply to cyclists going on the road.
Look, as long as they're not right in front of me slowing me down, there won't be a problem, I either got shit to do or I really have to use the bathroom in those instances
I would bet the people fixating on how ‘cyclists break the law all the time!!’ are actually just completely numb to the way cars constantly break the law. I have to engage in what I call ‘defensive walking’ a lot of the time crossing the street or even just walking down the sidewalk, because of how little drivers pay attention to anything that isn’t another car.
I used to work in a downtown neighborhood, and parked several blocks from my building. I was nearly hit by a car on 5 or 6 separate occasions walking between my building and my car.
One time I was walking back to my car in the dark, i had to cross several streets to do so. This was a one way road and cars would only come from behind me. Unfortunately on the other side of the street from me was a black guy walking the same path. At every crossing I checked over my shoulder for a car, and I'm 1000000% sure the poor guy thought I was watching him. That was 20 years ago and I STILL feel bad about that. I just really didn't want to get hit by a car.