# Stop for traffic lights?



## mackar (May 7, 2012)

Do people in US and other countries stop for red? For some reason a lot of people in Sweden don't care at all.


----------



## whatthefunk (Apr 15, 2012)

I get that sort of thing on a daily basis. Here, most people stop for lights at major intersections, but at smaller ones, a lot of people blast right through them without even looking. I almost ran into a guy last week and he had the nerve to yell at me when I had the light!


----------



## Samadhi (Nov 1, 2011)

mackar said:


> Do people in US and other countries stop for red? For some reason a lot of people in Sweden don't care at all.


Sad to say, many cyclists don't pay much attention to traffic lights. I work in the middle of downtown dever and I see cyclists blowing red lights every day. It's pretty scary.

Also sad to say I sometimes do the same thing myself, but for different reasons. There are some intersections where the sensor loop that helps manage the trafic light's sequencing doesn't pick up my bike. If the loop doesn't pick something up it can be a long wait for a green light, especially if I'm the only person at the light. Sometimes I get impatient and run the light, but I've always been a complete stop for a few minutes beofre I proceed.

I usually don't come to a complete stop at stop signs. Having to stop and unclip every couple blocks is a real pain. It's an excellent reason to learn how to do a track stand.

One thing I've taken to doing is at lights where I know there will be delays, I'll pull off to the sidewalk and hit the "walk" button to force the lights into a green state for my direction. This is technically illegal, of course, but it's safer and saves the frustration of sitting at a light for 10 minutes waitying for a change (it's happened).

But those guys downtown? That's frikkin crazy!


----------



## chriscookz (Jul 2, 2012)

I'll stop at major intersections for reds, sure. Stop signs I want to say I stop, but in reality I usually just slow down. At 5-10mph you can pretty well see if there is anything coming, especially if it's a 4 way stop. I have run red lights though, but not before coming to essentially a stop to check if anything is coming, and almost always on very low traffic roads.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

Cyclists are riding bicycles, and according to any state motor vehicle handbook cyclists are to abide by the same laws as cars unless otherwise posted, the same is true with horse and buggy's.  You don't have to obey any law even in a car, but if you get caught you will or could get a ticket, if you are involved in an accident it will be your fault.

Now having said that I stop for all lights and signs in the city. If it's a very light traffic day and no cars coming for blocks I may go if I don't see a cop around either! In the country I will slow down to about 5mph maybe 10 depending on how far I can see before running stop sign, and then I look 3 times in each direction before I run it. But when I do this stuff I know darn right well that if a cop see's me I could get a deserving ticket. Also keep in mind that as more and more cities and towns and county's start to feel the pinch of the dollar that ticket issuing will increase. There was time up until just this last spring you could speed on any road in Fort Wayne up to 15 over and not get a ticket, not anymore, the city is in a financial pinch due to democrat mayor's wasteful spending and the police department was ordered to increase tickets by 300% from last year!


----------



## AnthonyL88 (Oct 9, 2007)

Its not the same if you are talking about those delivery people on bikes, who always run the traffic light or stop sign. I think most people who are into the sport of cycling obey the rules.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

AnthonyL88 said:


> I think most people who are into the sport of cycling obey the rules.


Incorrect...at least in the cities I've lived in; most cyclists break the rules whenever they can. You must live in the Emerald City of Oz because where you live it's not Kansas anymore.


----------



## pennyfarmer (Jul 8, 2012)

I almost always stop for traffic lights. But if no one is coming, I am going. 

There is an intersection on my commute that involves arrows and such. If I see a red for cross traffic and the head on left hand turn lane is empty I might just go against the light in my direction. I did this once and passed a car that was waiting to go straight, he laid on his horn the entire time I was in the intersection and then when he got his light he sped through like he was upset. From that day on I try to take into account that my actions while not directly affecting someone may completely piss them off.


----------



## genux (Jun 18, 2012)

I've observed that most cyclists (at least where I ride) tend to really follow the rules only when riding in groups, even if it's just the two of them. Maybe because it keeps them honest? Or that the concern for safety is higher?

My bad habit is "rolling through a red light" on a T-intersection with a dedicated bike lane. I've been slowing down lately when approaching that portion, but I noticed it annoys some of the cyclists behind me even when I signal that I'm stopping/slowing down.


----------



## ezdoesit (Sep 7, 2008)

I just skimmed through the answers but I always stop for a red light always.


----------



## Samadhi (Nov 1, 2011)

AnthonyL88 said:


> Its not the same if you are talking about those delivery people on bikes, who always run the traffic light or stop sign. I think most people who are into the sport of cycling obey the rules.


Not where I live .... 

The number of couriers in downtown Denver has gone down in recent years and you don't see anywhere near as many as you used to. Commuters have gone up, though, and many of these riders are ever bit as bad as the couriers ever were. Not all, of course, but you see a lot of commuters running reds.


----------



## Oxtox (Aug 16, 2006)

foot-down stops at red lights...if they go thru a complete cycle without giving me a green, I roll on when safe to do so.

I can count the number of full stops I've done at stop signs in the last year (including two in front of police cruisers last nite) on fingers and toes. I slow down significantly, check for traffic, and do whatever is necessary based on conditions...full stop, brief track stand, or roll on.


----------



## laffeaux (Dec 12, 2001)

froze said:


> Cyclists are riding bicycles, and according to any state motor vehicle handbook cyclists are to abide by the same laws as cars unless otherwise posted, the same is true with horse and buggy's. You don't have to obey any law even in a car, but if you get caught you will or could get a ticket, if you are involved in an accident it will be your fault.



This is not completely true. Each state makes their own traffic laws in the US. In my state (Idaho) once a bicycle stops at a red light they are then free to proceed in any direction if it is safe to do so. Bicyclists are not required to wait for a green light.

I have no idea what the law is in Sweden (as per the original question). Check their local traffic laws to see what is permitted.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

laffeaux said:


> This is not completely true. Each state makes their own traffic laws in the US. In my state (Idaho) once a bicycle stops at a red light they are then free to proceed in any direction if it is safe to do so. Bicyclists are not required to wait for a green light.
> 
> I have no idea what the law is in Sweden (as per the original question). Check their local traffic laws to see what is permitted.


First off I wasn't talking about any other country other then the USA.

Second off Idaho is the only state to have permitted running a stop only after they have stopped first, problem is most cyclists don't stop at all. However Idaho has not had a case yet to contest the new law, as soon as a cyclist is killed due to this law the law will be contested and revoked, just wait and see. Utah has killed their version of the bill due to potential liability problems should a cyclist get killed. A lot of communities just turn their backs to cyclists breaking rules, but again if an accident occurs it will be the cyclists fault. 

In a lot of cases it could be safer for the rider to run a stop, I understand that, but most of the time I see cyclists running stops leaving very little room for the opposing car to do nothing but slam on their brakes, cyclists should not be cutting it that close, even in Utah it's not legal for the cyclist to force others to slam on their brakes, the cyclist has to use reasonable precautions, most fail to do that.

Keep in mind even if the law sweeps the nation it will still be the fault of the cyclist if they legally run the stop but are hit by a car due to failure to yield. Which is the way is anyways.


----------



## laffeaux (Dec 12, 2001)

froze said:


> First off I wasn't talking about any other country other then the USA.


The OP was waking about laws in other places. US laws mean nothing in Europe where bicycles and pedestrians are often given preference over cars (unlike the US).



froze said:


> However Idaho has not had a case yet to contest the new law, as soon as a cyclist is killed due to this law the law will be contested and revoked, just wait and see.


It's not a new law. It's been that way for quite some time - 15+ years.



froze said:


> Keep in mind even if the law sweeps the nation it will still be the fault of the cyclist if they legally run the stop but are hit by a car due to failure to yield. Which is the way is anyways.


You are correct, if a cyclists blows a stop sign and is hit by a car that has the right of way, the cyclist is at fault. It's no different than if a car does the same thing. The difference is that bikes are not obligated to stop if it is safe to proceed (unlike a car). The law does not change who has the right of way.


----------



## Guod (Jun 9, 2011)

I don't know of anyone I ride with that's been known to blast through red lights. I've gone through if it becomes aparant I'm not going to trip the light and no one is coming, but thats about it. Pretty much everyone in my area obeys the lights. Stop signs....eh, we roll through if it's clear.


----------



## rider9 (May 27, 2011)

In DC, they do it all the time. Wrong way on one way streets is another one.

The most annoying for me personally is when they ride on the sidewalk and blast past me without warning. This is in an area of DC where it is illegal to ride on the sidewalk.

[I walk from my bus stop to work (11 blocks by choice - I get out of the bus on the first stop and walk the rest of the way).]


----------



## Guest (Jul 11, 2012)

froze said:


> First off I wasn't talking about any other country other then the USA.
> 
> Second off Idaho is the only state to have permitted running a stop only after they have stopped first, problem is most cyclists don't stop at all. However Idaho has not had a case yet to contest the new law, as soon as a cyclist is killed due to this law the law will be contested and revoked, just wait and see. Utah has killed their version of the bill due to potential liability problems should a cyclist get killed. A lot of communities just turn their backs to cyclists breaking rules, but again if an accident occurs it will be the cyclists fault.
> 
> In a lot of cases it could be safer for the rider to run a stop, I understand that, but most of the time I see cyclists running stops leaving very little room for the opposing car to do nothing but slam on their brakes, cyclists should not be cutting it that close, even in Utah it's not legal for the cyclist to force others to slam on their brakes, the cyclist has to use reasonable precautions, most fail to do that.


as you said, if a cyclist runs a red (a stop under Idaho law), or proceeds through a stop (a yield sign under Idaho law) when it is not clear to do so, they are guilty of failure to yield and therefore at-fault for the accident. The cyclist himself should be the only person with any liability in that scenario. 

It's legally no different than if I drive my car through a yield sign in front of the path of another driver -- I'd be at fault for failure to yield. 

That said while in most cases I do think it's reasonable to treat stop-as-yield, that shouldn't be allowed in ALL cases. In neighborhoods stop signs are often install not because of limited visibility or high volume of pedestrian traffic, but as "traffic calming" devices to force cars to slow down. The thought being if stop are frequent, drivers won't be as likely to inadvertently build up to well over the speed limit. Cyclists aren't capable of sustaining 30mph+, so most of these stops should be treated as yield if there's enough visibility to justify it. But stop signs in places with legitimately poor visibility where it's not even safe to judge whether it's "clear to go" from a distance should be treated as a stop for everyone, cyclist included.

IMO the best way to go would be to have posted exemptions to things like stop signs and no-right-on-red for bicycles in select locations, such as on designated bike routes. Alternatively If they did in fact expand an Idaho rule across the coutnry, then on a case-by-case basis there should be explicitly posted CYCLISTS MUST STOP exceptions.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

laffeaux said:


> The OP was waking about laws in other places. US laws mean nothing in Europe where bicycles and pedestrians are often given preference over cars (unlike the US).
> 
> You are correct, if a cyclists blows a stop sign and is hit by a car that has the right of way, the cyclist is at fault. It's no different than if a car does the same thing. The difference is that bikes are not obligated to stop if it is safe to proceed (unlike a car). The law does not change who has the right of way.


The reason bicycles and pedestrians are given preference over cars in Europe is because there are more of them then cars, here in America it's the other way around. 

The safe to proceed issue is up for scrutiny because a cyclist will some day not see a car till it's too late or saw the car but misjudged it's speed and distance, that's when the family of the cyclist will sue the state for allowing that law to take effect. The state will argue that the cyclist failed to yield, the cyclist family will say the risk would not have been there if the law was for them to stop. Who do you think will win? 9 times out of 10 the dead persons family wins. The multi million dollar settlement will change the law back to the way it was.


----------



## Guest (Jul 12, 2012)

froze said:


> The reason bicycles and pedestrians are given preference over cars in Europe is because there are more of them then cars, here in America it's the other way around.
> 
> The safe to proceed issue is up for scrutiny because a cyclist will some day not see a car till it's too late or saw the car but misjudged it's speed and distance, that's when the family of the cyclist will sue the state for allowing that law to take effect. The state will argue that the cyclist failed to yield, the cyclist family will say the risk would not have been there if the law was for them to stop. Who do you think will win? 9 times out of 10 the dead persons family wins. The multi million dollar settlement will change the law back to the way it was.


In this sort of case, the family shouldn't win if the decedent is the one at fault in the death. Just like the guy whose family is suing strava shouldn't (read: IMO doesn't deserve to) win that suit either. They may will prevail in reality of course though. 

Now one case I can think that might have merit is someone on a bike rolls through an intersection and doesn't see a legally crossing pedestrian, and kills the pedestrian. The next-of-kin would have a slam dunk claim against the cyclist, and a more reasonable case against the state as well. This is why I think in cases where pedestrian interactions are likely, or visibility is restricted, cyclists should be forced to stop as well. It shouldn't be a blanket rule that cyclists can treat ALL stops a yields.

Ultimtely a better solution would be better design roads with fewer stop signs. Neighborhood streets should use things like roundabouts more often. I spent a summer in New Zealand and the roads there make far more sense than roads in the US. They also only use stop signs in cases where they're actually justified, yield signs in neighborhood/residential streets instead of two-way stops, and roundabouts instead of four-way-stops. I noticed motorists there actually respect the stop signs more than here because they're less "desensitized" to them. 

Their philosophy on speed limits also makes a lot more sense -- the posted limit is actually the fastest speed that the road can safely support, and it's treated as a true maximum. Going over by any amount is usually enforced, and "unsafe speed for conditions" (even if below the speed limit) is also enforced more often. This is in stark contrast to the US approach of making the speed limit 10-15mph slower than what most people actually go, cops not pulling people over unless they're going 10+ over, and most everyone on the road treating the limit like a minimum (ie drivers routinely get pissed off at people for going at or below the speed limit).


----------



## teekster (Jul 2, 2012)

I seem to be the only one who stops at red lights in downtown Minneapolis.


----------



## cda 455 (Aug 9, 2010)

froze said:


> Cyclists are riding bicycles, and according to any state motor vehicle handbook cyclists are to abide by the same laws as cars unless otherwise posted, the same is true with horse and buggy's. You don't have to obey any law even in a car, but if you get caught you will or could get a ticket, if you are involved in an accident it will be your fault.
> 
> Now having said that I stop for all lights and signs in the city. If it's a very light traffic day and no cars coming for blocks I may go if I don't see a cop around either! In the country I will slow down to about 5mph maybe 10 depending on how far I can see before running stop sign, and then I look 3 times in each direction before I run it. But when I do this stuff I know darn right well that if a cop see's me I could get a deserving ticket. Also keep in mind that as more and more cities and towns and county's start to feel the pinch of the dollar that ticket issuing will increase. There was time up until just this last spring you could speed on any road in Fort Wayne up to 15 over and not get a ticket, not anymore, the city is in a financial pinch due to democrat mayor's wasteful spending and the police department was ordered to increase tickets by 300% from last year!





laffeaux said:


> This is not completely true. Each state makes their own traffic laws in the US. In my state (Idaho) once a bicycle stops at a red light they are then free to proceed in any direction if it is safe to do so. Bicyclists are not required to wait for a green light.
> 
> I have no idea what the law is in Sweden (as per the original question). Check their local traffic laws to see what is permitted.





froze said:


> First off I wasn't talking about any other country other then the USA.
> 
> Second off Idaho is the only state to have permitted running a stop only after they have stopped first, problem is most cyclists don't stop at all. However Idaho has not had a case yet to contest the new law, as soon as a cyclist is killed due to this law the law will be contested and revoked, just wait and see. Utah has killed their version of the bill due to potential liability problems should a cyclist get killed. A lot of communities just turn their backs to cyclists breaking rules, but again if an accident occurs it will be the cyclists fault.
> 
> ...



In other words, Laffeaux is correct.


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

froze said:


> The reason bicycles and pedestrians are given preference over cars in Europe


Unless established by signage for a specific place, cyclists are not given automatic preference over cars in any European country in a traffic situation.

This notion probably comes from the fact that in Holland, the law protects cyclist involved in an accident with a motor vehicle. It initially assumes that the driver is at fault. If the motorist disagrees, he or she must prove that the cyclist was at fault. So there is a preference. But it is a legal one and exists (as far as I know) in one European country only.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

Roundabouts are great, problem is in our country the streets are already designed without those in mind, it would take a huge outpouring of taxpayers money to start putting in roundabouts in neighborhoods and cities...money we just don't have.

A lot of lawsuits are won by people not deserving to win. I have a lot of examples but one that is grossly unfair was a case in Glendale California about 30 years ago of a lady who described herself as being single and highly attractive (I never saw her so I can't comment on how she looked, this was what her lawyer said), went to the biggest bar in town where supposedly she got drunk. Problem with that is the bar was located on the far east end of town on Brand blvd known to be a bar strip, and bars were scattered all along Brand blvd, most people there would bar hop, start at one end and work their way down. Anyway she gets drunk to the point where she is 2 1/2 times over the legal limit! She gets into her car and speeds down Brand blvd at 70mph in a 35mph zone, gets to the far west end of Brand blvd and loses control of her car, she jumps a curb crosses a sidewalk, severs and knocks down a light pole where the car comes to a rest. She sues the city of Glendale for putting a light pole to close to the street, she sues the manufacture of the pole for failure to make a pole that would break safely under impact, and this made the case famous, she sues the manufacture of her car for making a car that goes too fast...she had a Porsche! And part of the lawsuit contained money for the fact she received lacerations to the face and her spline needed to be removed and the resulting scars left her unattractive to possible mates! She won all the cases and settled for 2.4 million dollars total! Yes, you can be a completely at fault idiot and win lawsuits, this has been proven over and over and over in America.


----------



## kikoraa (Jul 19, 2012)

I always stop but a lot of lights have sensors that change when a car pulls up. It never changes when I pull up on my bike. I'll wait for an opening and run it when its safe.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

kikoraa said:


> I always stop but a lot of lights have sensors that change when a car pulls up. It never changes when I pull up on my bike. I'll wait for an opening and run it when its safe.


Nothing wrong with that. I think most cyclists do that, if we didn't we could be waiting 10 minutes for a light. What most cyclists fail to do is do what you do, stop first. I always make sure there's no cops around before I go through a red light...just in case they disagree with me not wanting to wait forever.


----------



## velodog (Sep 26, 2007)

If crossing a main artery at a light I will stop and wait. If crossing a side street or secondary road at a light I will stop and proceed when traffic warrents.

If crossing at a stop sign, I will slow and and proceed if there is no traffic, but if there is other traffic I will yield the right of way or take the right of way when it's mine.

If traffic is light and I am waved through the sign by a driver who has the right of way I will take the wave but if traffic is heavy I will decline the wave as others may become impatient and jump the sign out of turn.


----------



## dutchgenius (May 29, 2012)

always stop at reds when going straight (Redmond, WA is very bike friendly and has traffic loop sensors in the bike lanes)

rarely stop at light when doing a right turn on red (just take the corner tight)

for crosswalk red lights, make sure the people are clear and just dont stop


this is probably not all legal, but practical and mostly safe if you are smart


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

dutchgenius said:


> always stop at reds when going straight (Redmond, WA is very bike friendly and has traffic loop sensors in the bike lanes)
> 
> rarely stop at light when doing a right turn on red (just take the corner tight)
> 
> ...


It's a good thing you have bike friendly road sensors, Fort Wayne In is still behind the times with that stuff.

And your right, running the reds, turning or not, is illegal, and a cop has the option to ticket you which in most states goes on your driving record because it's a basic road law violation that autos have to obey.


----------



## dutchgenius (May 29, 2012)

froze said:


> It's a good thing you have bike friendly road sensors, Fort Wayne In is still behind the times with that stuff.
> 
> And your right, running the reds, turning or not, is illegal, and a cop has the option to ticket you which in most states goes on your driving record because it's a basic road law violation that autos have to obey.


you are right, I cannot argue that.

Traffic jams are so bad near Microsoft campus that I rarely see cops... although that is no excuse.


----------



## Steve B. (Jun 26, 2004)

froze said:


> A lot of lawsuits are won by people not deserving to win. .


Yeah, here's a good one. Local road club rider has an accident while trying to get thru a dip in road construction. The rider behind falls as well. 2nd rider sues the town, the water dept. that had the work done, the contractor AND the rider in front.

New York Decision explains the doctrine of Primary Assumption of the Risk for cycling. « Recreation Law

Cotty v Town of Southampton, et al., 2009 NY Slip Op 4020; 64 A.D.3d 251; 880 N.Y.S.2d 656; 2009 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3919 « Recreation Law

Has zip to do with the OP but I suspect that as cycling continues to get more popular, especially with commuters, I suspect more will sue for poor road conditions.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

Steve B. said:


> Has zip to do with the OP but I suspect that as cycling continues to get more popular, especially with commuters, I suspect more will sue for poor road conditions.


You can count on it. With the economy going into the toilet frivolous lawsuits will only get worse. 

Sometimes I think every time a new adult bike is sold there should be a registration fee attached, like 5% of the value of the bike; then in the process of paying for the registration you have to sign a waiver stating that you understand roads aren't built for bicycles, and if you should get hurt using one you deny your rights to sue for compensation, and you ride at your own risk. I'm sure though some attorney would get around that anyways.


----------



## velodog (Sep 26, 2007)

froze said:


> You can count on it. With the economy going into the toilet frivolous lawsuits will only get worse.
> 
> Sometimes I think every time a new adult bike is sold there should be a registration fee attached, like 5% of the value of the bike; then in the process of paying for the registration you have to sign a waiver stating that you understand roads aren't built for bicycles, and if you should get hurt using one you deny your rights to sue for compensation, and you ride at your own risk. I'm sure though some attorney would get around that anyways.


Sure, and once this waiver establishes the fact that "roads aren't built for bicycles" how long before bicycles are legally denyed access to said roadways?

Enjoy the MUT.


----------



## Steve B. (Jun 26, 2004)

froze said:


> It's a good thing you have bike friendly road sensors, Fort Wayne In is still behind the times with that stuff.
> 
> And your right, running the reds, turning or not, is illegal, and a cop has the option to ticket you which in most states goes on your driving record because it's a basic road law violation that autos have to obey.


I think in "most" states a moving violation on a bike DOES NOT count as points on a drivers license, if that's what you are referring too as "driving record". In NY it doesn't.
n


----------



## Guest (Jul 28, 2012)

> Nothing wrong with that. I think most cyclists do that, if we didn't we could be waiting 10 minutes for a light. What most cyclists fail to do is do what you do, stop first. I always make sure there's no cops around before I go through a red light...just in case they disagree with me not wanting to wait forever.


I did someonthing similar to this recently. I was stopped at a red in the middle of the night with very little traffic around. The light wasn't turning for me, and was about to just say "screw it" and proceed anyway. I looked down the road and saw a taxi approaching in the distance and said to myself "I'll wait until after this taxi passes, then run the light".

As the "taxi" got closer I realized it was actually an older model year police cruiser . Shortly after that another vehicle came up and tripped the light sensor and I went through on green. 



Steve B. said:


> I think in "most" states a moving violation on a bike DOES NOT count as points on a drivers license, if that's what you are referring too as "driving record". In NY it doesn't.
> n


I know that AZ bicycle citations are separate from motor vehicle citations. It really doesn't make sense for an infraction on a bicycle to count toward a driving record, or to be considered by insurers the same as a citation in an automobile. Bicycling doesn't require a license, and auto insurer don't provide liability coverage to people riding bikes who are at-fault in accidents.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

Steve B. said:


> I think in "most" states a moving violation on a bike DOES NOT count as points on a drivers license, if that's what you are referring too as "driving record". In NY it doesn't.
> n


From what I can find out only a handful of states will not count the tickets against your driving record, the states that I know of that do not give your points are:

HI
MS
KS
LA
MN
RI
WA
WY


----------



## matfam (Jul 13, 2012)

velodog said:


> If crossing a main artery at a light I will stop and wait. If crossing a side street or secondary road at a light I will stop and proceed when traffic warrents.
> 
> If crossing at a stop sign, I will slow and and proceed if there is no traffic, but if there is other traffic I will yield the right of way or take the right of way when it's mine.
> 
> If traffic is light and I am waved through the sign by a driver who has the right of way I will take the wave but if traffic is heavy I will decline the wave as others may become impatient and jump the sign out of turn.


Exactly what I do!!:thumbsup:


----------



## BianchiJoe (Jul 22, 2005)

I don't stop for nothin'.


----------



## Cobaltss_King (Jul 30, 2012)

Stop signs I want to say I stop, but in reality I usually just slow down. At 5-10mph you can pretty well see if there is anything coming, especially if it's a 4 way stop.


----------



## Steve B. (Jun 26, 2004)

froze said:


> From what I can find out only a handful of states will not count the tickets against your driving record, the states that I know of that do not give your points are:
> 
> HI
> MS
> ...


An hour on Google added this.

NY - N
PA - N
CO - N
OH - N
GA - N
CA - N
MN - N
ID - N
CT. - N

FL - Y
AZ - N/Y

AZ has a number of on-line articles pertaining to the the code as applied by assorted judges. So Y & N.

Some points:

1) It's hard data to ascertain. The info. is not typically in the easy-to-read sections of a states DMV website and not always in a bicycle brochure. 

2) As I looked into it, adding what I found to what you found, the majority and typically do not asses points. You found 8 that don't but then don't list any that do, I found another 8 that do not asses points with 2 that do, which seems to be the trend. 

3) From what I'm reading typical state law pertaining to points against a license is written to deal with licensed drivers only. Bicyclists are not required to carry their drivers license, usually only some form of legal ID is recommended (but not required), thus the typical statutes do not assess points against a bicyclist for an infraction.


----------



## scorchedearth (Mar 22, 2012)

rider9 said:


> In DC, they do it all the time. Wrong way on one way streets is another one.
> 
> The most annoying for me personally is when they ride on the sidewalk and blast past me without warning. This is in an area of DC where it is illegal to ride on the sidewalk.
> 
> [I walk from my bus stop to work (11 blocks by choice - I get out of the bus on the first stop and walk the rest of the way).]


I was driving to see a friend a couple of weeks ago pulling off of the Rock Creek Parkway onto Mass Ave. I sat at the red, waited for it to change and when it did, I waited just that one moment. Luckily so because a cyclist blasted through the red light, not wearing a helmet. That would have been a great T-bone if I were in a hurry to get through the intersection.

Did I mention this was at night too?


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

Steve B. said:


> An hour on Google added this.
> 
> NY - N
> PA - N
> ...


That is correct about license vs unlicensed riders. 

Are those states in addition to the ones I mentioned? Even if they are in addition it's still not a majority of states, and my state is not mentioned. California must have changed their laws within the last 10 years because I use to live there and when I did it went on your record except for bike specific tickets, but moving violations like running a stop sign went for points. 

I don't think any state will put points on your record for a violation unique to bicycles only. Regardless, it's sort of rare for a bicyclist to get a moving violation anyways so it's almost a moot point. I kind of wish cops would come down on cyclists breaking traffic laws, especially in the cities and suburbs, maybe a crackdown on offenders would improve the survival rate of cyclists.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

scorchedearth said:


> I was driving to see a friend a couple of weeks ago pulling off of the Rock Creek Parkway onto Mass Ave. I sat at the red, waited for it to change and when it did, I waited just that one moment. Luckily so because a cyclist blasted through the red light, not wearing a helmet. That would have been a great T-bone if I were in a hurry to get through the intersection.
> 
> Did I mention this was at night too?


And probably no lights and non effectual reflectors if any.


----------



## Steve B. (Jun 26, 2004)

froze said:


> Even if they are in addition it's still not a majority of states, .


No, hardly, but it's really tedious doing the research. In essence, of the 19 states we listed, only 2 assessed points. So that's a weak statistical sample, but telling none the less. My gut feeling is with you, that cops rarely ticket cyclists for moving violations, though in NYC (as well as occasional other major cities as well), there are frequent crack downs on cyclists where they do. 

Problem is, that the typical beat/traffic cop has a poor understanding of what is the law pertaining to cyclists. Obviously a stop sign or red light is easy to understand, but it doesn't take a whole lot of research on the cycling forums to come up with ton's of example where the police write tickets for infractions that are not valid. The NYPD is notorious for this, as if the cops know the ticket is BS, but they're attitude is "take it to court". Which is hardly a good way for the enforcement folks to interact with the cyclists, it develops into an adversarial attitude. 

So currently, I do not trust cops to fairly enforce a crack down on illegal cycling habits. Now part of that is regional in attitude. I happen to do a lot of riding in NYC and see the problems first hand, in an environment that is very hostile to cycling (regardless of the gazillion miles of bike lanes), so my attitude is going to be different then what you see in Fort Wayne. 

Lot's of things need to change, including improvements to the infrastructure to encourage and allow safe cycling, significant improvements to the education of motorists to understand that the roads are shared, education to the cycling community to encourage legal riding habits, changes to the legal system to better understand the particular needs of cycling (like the Idaho law that allows a roll thru of a stop sign) and changes to the law enforcement community to better educate the cops as to the applicable laws and reduce the adversarial attitudes. 

Not holding my breath


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

I'm with you on the education. I think it starts with that. None of the driver-ed programs even mention the word bicycle to the students; then maybe starting in grade school, since most people killed on bicycles are kids, is to educate them on the rules and safety of properly riding a bike instead of teaching them the proper way to put on a condom, or the fundamentals of sex!. 

Problem with improving the infrastructure, which I agree with, but it takes a lot of money we don't have, and you just can't keep raising taxes only to watch it be squandered away by wasteful spending, and as soon as you raise taxes for projects like cycling infrastructure and the government needs money for something else they "steal" it away to fund other stuff. 

Cops give out BS tickets to car drivers too, so that's nothing new. Most cities, and all state patrol organizations have a certain number of tickets each officer must bring in each month, that's why more tickets are handed out in the last week of each month because the officers find themselves behind, and if you don't meet the quota you could lose your job. But still think tickets should be given out to cyclists, especially in cities and suburbs to teach them to ride according to rules.


----------



## ptizzy (Aug 4, 2012)

Red lights at a major intersection, yeeeah if its busy, stop signs, or small intersections, better believe im blasting through that! 

Get out of my way!!


----------



## Pskidder (Aug 4, 2012)

"...keep yer eyes on the road and your hands upon the whee-el.." ....er...handlebars


----------



## Steve B. (Jun 26, 2004)

An interesting take on it:

http://forums.roadbikereview.com/general-cycling-discussion/if-kant-were-cyclist-287130.html


----------



## Flairball (Aug 1, 2012)

pennyfarmer said:


> I try to take into account that my actions while not directly affecting someone may completely piss them off.


Last night I saw three cyclists stop and wait for the red to turn green. There was no cross traffic and they could have proceeded safely, and without impacting anyone's right of way. They had also pulled far enough up on the corner to prevent a few cars from making the legal right on red (maybe they were impacting someone's right of way?). When the light turned green the right turning cars all had to wait for these three to limp through the intersection. They did the "right " thing, and still pissed off drivers. Sometimes there is no winning. 

I say ride in a fashion that doesn't impact anyone. When I'm driving I don't want to have my right of way impeded by either a ped, or a cyclist, so when I'm cycling or crossing a street I will not impact another's right of way. Will I go through a red? Hell yeah, but you better believe only when it's safe, and will not impact the right of way driver (or cyclist, or ped). I won't blow through a red, but will proceed after stopping and waiting for it to be safe. If there is any doubt as to if it's safe then it's not safe, and I wait. Pretty simple really. Kind like a golden rule of right of ways. I guess you could say I respect the right of way more than the signal. 

Not worried about the cops around here. They've got better things to do, I know a ton of them. Actually, it's kinda laughable; a Boston cop giving a cyclist a ticket?


----------



## AnthonyL88 (Oct 9, 2007)

Flairball said:


> Last night I saw three cyclists stop and wait for the red to turn green. There was no cross traffic and they could have proceeded safely, and without impacting anyone's right of way. They had also pulled far enough up on the corner to prevent a few cars from making the legal right on red (maybe they were impacting someone's right of way?). When the light turned green the right turning cars all had to wait for these three to limp through the intersection. They did the "right " thing, and still pissed off drivers. Sometimes there is no winning.
> 
> I say ride in a fashion that doesn't impact anyone. When I'm driving I don't want to have my right of way impeded by either a ped, or a cyclist, so when I'm cycling or crossing a street I will not impact another's right of way. Will I go through a red? Hell yeah, but you better believe only when it's safe, and will not impact the right of way driver (or cyclist, or ped). I won't blow through a red, but will proceed after stopping and waiting for it to be safe. If there is any doubt as to if it's safe then it's not safe, and I wait. Pretty simple really. Kind like a golden rule of right of ways. I guess you could say I respect the right of way more than the signal.
> 
> Not worried about the cops around here. They've got better things to do, I know a ton of them. Actually, it's kinda laughable; a Boston cop giving a cyclist a ticket?


Actually when I'm heading toward a traffic light, I never stop on the right side of the turning lane. I will proceed to the left side of the turning lane, this is safer for me and my buddies who are riding and the car can make the right turn too.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

Flairball;4044913 Not worried about the cops around here. They've got better things to do said:


> I think that's the problem in probably 99%of all the towns and cities in America...they don't give out tickets to cyclists so the cyclists think they can get away with anything...and their right when it comes to tickets but wrong when their hit by a car.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

AnthonyL88 said:


> Actually when I'm heading toward a traffic light, I never stop on the right side of the turning lane. I will proceed to the left side of the turning lane, this is safer for me and my buddies who are riding and the car can make the right turn too.



Good point, I've done the same thing for years, I think most cyclists do this? But I think in Flairball's situation was no dedicated turn lane, then in those cases I take the lane so someone can't cut me off by turning right into me. But I also think if there is no traffic coming that once you stopped and looked both ways and know there's no traffic coming then it's probably safer to proceed across the intersection. Two problems with this though: proceeding against the red is that it is illegal in 49 states and if by chance a cop sees you he has the right to ticket you; and most riders think it's good to go regardless of traffic coming and won't wait for the absolute clear due to impatience, or it's cutting into their training program. 

If I'm riding in the city I'm not training, if I want to train I go out onto the county roads, I find it crazy that riders think they can train on busy city streets.


----------



## Steve B. (Jun 26, 2004)

froze said:


> If I'm riding in the city I'm not training, if I want to train I go out onto the county roads, I find it crazy that riders think they can train on busy city streets.


Sometimes there's no choice but to train, if not on the city streets, then in the parks. I'm fortunate to live in the suburbs and can mostly ride out of my house to get a decent ride in, but if you live in Manhattan or Brooklyn the only option is Central or Prospect Parks. Many riders are immensely frustrated with the parks and the constant conflicts and crowding and just brave the streets. Not the easiest place to live if your a Cat 2 or 3. 

This article has a take on the problems, but note that it's the Daily News. 

Central Park now a danger zone for pedestrians as News finds 16 cyclists breaking 25 mph limit on their speeding road bikes - NY Daily News


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

Steve B. said:


> Sometimes there's no choice but to train, if not on the city streets, then in the parks. I'm fortunate to live in the suburbs and can mostly ride out of my house to get a decent ride in, but if you live in Manhattan or Brooklyn the only option is Central or Prospect Parks. Many riders are immensely frustrated with the parks and the constant conflicts and crowding and just brave the streets. Not the easiest place to live if your a Cat 2 or 3.


I use to live in a big city, Los Angeles, I knew people who trained on the streets but their training was not that great because they had to stop all the time, watch their speed, watch traffic etc. I just took my car over to the LaCanada/Flintridge area and rode the mountain roads from there. A lot of those guys did use trainers at home but trainers bore me and with the weather like So Calif I couldn't find any reason to be sitting on a trainer at home. I know a couple of people here that for whatever reasons riding on the road scares them so they ride a park that has a 2 1/2 mile bike path circle, and they just go around and around and around, I can't stand doing that, I've got to get out and see new stuff or boredom becomes a huge issue and there's no incentive for me to ride.


----------



## Fixed (May 12, 2005)

I obey all laws while riding. 

Well, there is a mountain descent with a 60 mph limit I'm trying to break, but not quite there, yet.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

Fixed said:


> I obey all laws while riding.
> 
> Well, there is a mountain descent with a 60 mph limit I'm trying to break, but not quite there, yet.


I can't remember if Tramway was 45 or 55, either way I may have been speeding. I once got a speeding ticket for doing 35 in a 25 active school zone by a radar cop. I told the cop I didn't have a speedometer, but he didn't care. So I took it to the judge to decide, he looked at the ticket and started laughing, he then read it out loud for the others waiting their turn in court and they all started laughing, then the judge looked at me and said: "Froze, it appears that you have to go fast no matter if your driving a car or riding a bicycle; you made my day, I'm dismissing the ticket." You see, he kind of knew me from past antics.


----------



## rider9 (May 27, 2011)

froze said:


> snip...snip So I took it to the judge to decide, he looked at the ticket and started laughing, he then read it out loud for the others waiting their turn in court and they all started laughing, then the judge looked at me and said: "Froze, it appears that you have to go fast no matter if your driving a car or riding a bicycle; you made my day, I'm dismissing the ticket." You see, he kind of knew me from past antics.


You definitely need some rep.


----------



## bent_remy (Jul 24, 2011)

Do I stop at red lights... yes. 
Do I stop at stop signs... yes. 
Do I run red lights... yes. 
Do you I run thru stop signs.... yes. 

I'm not blowing through stop signs and red lights doing 30 because I don't want to get killed, but I'm not waiting at a red light for 10 minutes if there are no cars in sight. Like other have said roll up to the light or sign, stop then pass when clear. The majority of cars on the road don't come to a complete stop a stop signs, at least not here in NYC. The cops only harass cyclists in particular locations or when Bloomberg decides he needs some quick $. 

I rolled thru through a red light on 112 st and first ave today in front of a police car and they didn't give me a second look. Real cops have real work to do!

I did see a delivery guy get pulled over today on 79th and 1st but he probably deserved it.


----------



## serfur1 (Sep 17, 2007)

I've only got 2 traffic lights on a 11km commute, everything else is round-a-bouts. I do stop when they are red, otherwise you're taking your life into your own hands here in Italy.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

rider9 said:


> You definitely need some rep.


 ?????


----------



## freighttraininguphill (Jun 7, 2011)

I stop at all red lights, but if there's no traffic and the light sensor can't be tripped by a cyclist, I will do a "right turn fakey" as I saw it referred to on a cycling forum years ago. I will go down about half a block and make a U-turn.

Stop signs I approach with caution and stop completely if there's any traffic at all. If no traffic I proceed after slowing enough to make sure it's safe first.

I regularly break speed limits on descents, but where I go climb there's never any cops when I'm around.


----------



## hir0 (Aug 16, 2012)

If there's no cars - I'd go.


----------



## Lick Skillet (Aug 21, 2011)

I follow the points outlined in the article posted by Steve B. - just common sense riding.


----------



## rider9 (May 27, 2011)

froze said:


> ?????


A. The judge knows your name and your driving habits.

B. The judge laughed and dismissed the ticket!


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

rider9 said:


> A. The judge knows your name and your driving habits.
> 
> B. The judge laughed and dismissed the ticket!


What's your problem with that? I use to do a lot street racing, and would get tickets. Back in the 70's in that city I lived we use to be able to plead innocent and request a trial by jury, the city not wanting to pay for a jury trial would plea bargain the tickets, so instead of speeding, or exhibition of speed, or speed contest tickets, I got a lot parking tickets! The judge was the same judge for about 90% of the time I went in because he was the traffic judge. The judge found it very humorous that first off it was a speeding ticket on bicycle, and that it was me that got the ticket for it.


----------



## rider9 (May 27, 2011)

froze said:


> What's your problem with that? I use to do a lot street racing, and would get tickets. Back in the 70's in that city I lived we use to be able to plead innocent and request a trial by jury, the city not wanting to pay for a jury trial would plea bargain the tickets, so instead of speeding, or exhibition of speed, or speed contest tickets, I got a lot parking tickets! The judge was the same judge for about 90% of the time I went in because he was the traffic judge. The judge found it very humorous that first off it was a speeding ticket on bicycle, and that it was me that got the ticket for it.


Um, I thought you needed some rep. I couldn't give you rep. I don't have a problem with your post(s). I wondered why the ???? post, though. I was a bit confused. Still am, but for me, that is normal.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

rider9 said:


> Um, I thought you needed some rep. I couldn't give you rep. I don't have a problem with your post(s). I wondered why the ???? post, though. I was a bit confused. Still am, but for me, that is normal.


I don't know what a rep is!!! I think now I understand you're saying do I need representation, like do I need an attorney. I fought all my traffic tickets without an attorney because it was too simple to get a plea bargain down to a parking ticket back then. The judge got so use to seeing me coming in there and pleading the same thing he wouldn't even let me speak after awhile, he just say: "let's knockoff with the formalities and just pay a parking ticket fine". Old judge Hodges was too lenient, he would almost all but release drunk drivers with a slap on the wrist; so while Hodges was good as far as I was concerned, he was bad with others that should have gotten much worse punishments. But this was back in the 70's and drunk driving offenses were not a big deal then until MADD got attention.


----------



## rider9 (May 27, 2011)

froze said:


> I don't know what a rep is!!!


Look under everyone's name and number of posts. Rep = one at a boy or girl. Reputation is added to your persona on RBR when people like what you post. Ever notice the green dots on the lefthand side of the page under each person's ID? That represents reputation on RBR.

I could not give you rep, because I gave you rep recently, so the system won't let me.

See the thumbs up on the lefthand side of the web page in a thread? Hit that and it gives the poster some reputation.

Click on My Account at the top of the page in dark blue. Notice the list underneath that shows who has given you rep and why.

Then click on My Profile to see your green dots and statistics.


----------



## rider9 (May 27, 2011)

froze said:


> I don't know what a rep is!!! I think now I understand you're saying do I need representation, like do I need an attorney. I fought all my traffic tickets without an attorney because it was too simple to get a plea bargain down to a parking ticket back then. The judge got so use to seeing me coming in there and pleading the same thing he wouldn't even let me speak after awhile, he just say: "let's knockoff with the formalities and just pay a parking ticket fine". Old judge Hodges was too lenient, he would almost all but release drunk drivers with a slap on the wrist; so while Hodges was good as far as I was concerned, he was bad with others that should have gotten much worse punishments. But this was back in the 70's and drunk driving offenses were not a big deal then until MADD got attention.



Dang it, you're pulling my chain and boy I fell for it. Doh! How could you have over 3000 posts and not know what rep is?


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

rider9 said:


> Dang it, you're pulling my chain and boy I fell for it. Doh! How could you have over 3000 posts and not know what rep is?


This may sound funny to you, but I never even gave it any thought about that stuff!!! Just never paid attention to it because I simply didn't care nor have the time to care! I also don't have time to read all the posts that pop up on any one post, so I'll read the first one but beyond that I'll just scan fast then reply, so sometimes I could say the same thing another poster already posted but I didn't catch it because I didn't read all the posts. I just don't have all day to be trying to figure out what a rep is, or to read every single post, maybe when I retire I can get more involved with that sort of thing. It's also like Facebook, I had friends trying to get me involved in Farmville and some sort of gangsta thing, I don't have time for that stuff either, nor do I even have time to post on Facebook.


----------



## 55x11 (Apr 24, 2006)

the examples in the video were not "blasting through" red lights. Almost all of them were done at pedestrian, walking speeds - 5mph or so. In one case they were actually walking the bikes through the crosswalk when the lights turned red.

Not to excuse this behavior (I never run red lights myself and don't advise others to do this) but this is sort of equivalent to jay walking. You can shoot many hours of videos of people walking across "don't walk" sign, in semi-deserted low-traffic streets (or even high traffic streets) but would it be THAT outrageous?


----------



## nalaing (Aug 21, 2012)

Obcourse its the law to stop on red lights. Cars here are really very busy specially in the city so one must be really careful specially on crossing the traffic lights. If you don't obey the rules you can get accident or can get others into accident.


----------

