Choose Your Location
|
![]() |
SAN FRANCISCO (Map, News) - Bicyclists, who often raise the ire of drivers and pedestrians for their loose interpretation of traffic laws, could be allowed to roll through stop signs and travel through red lights after halting.
The “stop and roll” proposal is patterned after a state law in Idaho in which bicyclists are legally able to treat stop signs as yield signs, and interpret red stoplights as stop signs. Currently, California bicyclists must stop and put one foot on the ground at stop signs, and follow the same stoplight rules as drivers.
The Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s bicycle advisory committee will be discussing the proposal Thursday. If the group recommends the plan, the MTC staff will further investigate the idea and possibly bring it before the agency’s governing board, which could eventually propose state legislation to change the California vehicle code, said Sean Co, MTC’s bicycling coordinator.
Though the MTC envisions the possible legislation as a way to encourage bicycling as gas prices soar, police said the idea would likely lead to more bicycle-to-car collisions.
The proposal comes only months after San Francisco officials unveiled a plan to nearly double The City’s existing network of bike lanes.
Capt. Greg Corrales, chief of the San Francisco Police Department’s Traffic Company, said bicyclists have a sense of entitlement and have long ignored existing traffic laws, especially at stop signs. As a result, he said his office repeatedly cites bicyclists. More importantly, he said, the rate of bicyclist fatalities is higher than it should be because they rarely abide by basic traffic rules.
Between 2005 and 2007, 56 Bay Area bicyclists died after colliding with cars, according to the California Highway Patrol.
“There’s a small minority of bicyclists who actually obey the law,” Corrales said.
Bicyclists said they were in favor of the idea, especially because it is difficult to start pedaling from a dead stop and stoplights occasionally do not recognize bikers because of their size.
“Bicyclists are already perceived as outlaws who never stop at stop signs,” said Andy Thornley, program director of the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition, who added that bicyclists see drivers as aggressive and pushy.
Drivers, meanwhile, said they would not be as excited about such legislation.
“I think [bicyclists] need to be pressed to obey existing laws more than they need more special privileges that make them even more dangerous,” said San Francisco cabdriver Bud Hazelkorn.




Comments from Examiner Readers
11:13 PM MST on Mon., Jul. 28, 2008 re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
10:32 PM MST on Mon., Jul. 28, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
1:30 PM MST on Thu., Jul. 17, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
3:35 PM MST on Tue., Jul. 8, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
11:21 AM MST on Tue., Jul. 8, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
9:10 AM MST on Wed., Jul. 2, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
9:09 AM MST on Wed., Jul. 2, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
10:29 PM MST on Tue., Jun. 24, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
2:09 PM MST on Mon., Jun. 23, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
7:08 AM MST on Mon., Jun. 23, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
9:08 AM MST on Fri., Jun. 20, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
7:14 PM MST on Thu., Jun. 19, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
5:39 PM MST on Thu., Jun. 19, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
5:32 PM MST on Thu., Jun. 19, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
5:19 PM MST on Thu., Jun. 19, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
4:57 PM MST on Thu., Jun. 19, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
3:49 PM MST on Thu., Jun. 19, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
3:21 PM MST on Thu., Jun. 19, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
1:25 PM MST on Thu., Jun. 19, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
12:36 PM MST on Thu., Jun. 19, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
11:15 AM MST on Thu., Jun. 19, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
8:49 AM MST on Thu., Jun. 19, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
8:31 AM MST on Thu., Jun. 19, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
8:20 AM MST on Thu., Jun. 19, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
11:17 PM MST on Wed., Jun. 18, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
10:53 PM MST on Wed., Jun. 18, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
10:02 PM MST on Wed., Jun. 18, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
9:54 PM MST on Wed., Jun. 18, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
9:51 PM MST on Wed., Jun. 18, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
7:44 PM MST on Wed., Jun. 18, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
7:43 PM MST on Wed., Jun. 18, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
6:52 PM MST on Wed., Jun. 18, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
5:58 PM MST on Wed., Jun. 18, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
4:23 PM MST on Wed., Jun. 18, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
4:19 PM MST on Wed., Jun. 18, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
3:30 PM MST on Wed., Jun. 18, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
3:02 PM MST on Wed., Jun. 18, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
2:38 PM MST on Wed., Jun. 18, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
2:26 PM MST on Wed., Jun. 18, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
2:16 PM MST on Wed., Jun. 18, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
1:43 PM MST on Wed., Jun. 18, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
12:22 PM MST on Wed., Jun. 18, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
12:10 PM MST on Wed., Jun. 18, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
12:10 PM MST on Wed., Jun. 18, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
12:05 PM MST on Wed., Jun. 18, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
11:59 AM MST on Wed., Jun. 18, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
11:50 AM MST on Wed., Jun. 18, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
11:43 AM MST on Wed., Jun. 18, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
11:39 AM MST on Wed., Jun. 18, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
10:01 AM MST on Wed., Jun. 18, 2008
re: "Proposal would change rules for bicyclists at stop signs"
Report as inappropriate
Examiner Reader said:
I really do hope that they change stop signs to be yields for people riding their bikes
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
I just started riding my bike to work and I lost motivation to do so when I found out that you have to put your foot on the ground for every stop sign. There's over forty stop signs on my way to work (which means not many cars are on this road because they don't want ot have to stop at every sign)So if knowing I could get a ticket for not stopping makes my want to just drive my car. Since it would be to much work and tax dollars to put bicycle lanes every where I think we schould be able to roll through stop signs. I don't have the confidence to go through a signal, I just go up the sidewalk and push the button for the crosswalk. Regardless I believe there are smart drivers and bicyclers and vise-versa. And yes there are always accidents but accidents are apart of life. To rap things up, I see freeway signs that say "Ride your bike to Work" Do they know how challenging that is when a city didn't accomidate for bikers.
1 agree | 0 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Most people want the bike riders, and less cars, however daily, we see instances of bike riders, running through red lights, ignoring pedestrians, signaling properly prior to changing lanes, riding around cars, on incorrect sides, circumventing autos, to get to the front, so they can slow up all the traffic when the lights change, bunching up and bypassing on green, just to get ahead, often risking accidents consistently in decisions, and general anti-auto verbal and visual signals, to drivers where they should be mindfull that some drivers ride public transportation daily, and are occasionally forced to drive downtown, when we do and when we see the chaos of the morning rider commutes, + ignorance of bike riders (not always the majority) in the poor decisions, we too vote to support the CAR groups, because my lanes are my lanes, regardless of when I need em, + when I use em.. Bike riders must also line up + play by the rules. Too often a rider should be ticketed but they go unchecked
1 agree | 1 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
bike rider and car driver said:
this would be really a bad idea. Please stop by the Presidio @ the GG bridge in the morning and see the chaos yourself. way too many riders are just plain arrogant cutting in front of bikes ( no I red too and I watch for traffic) if a bicyclist shoots over a stop sign from behind a car and he gets hit, would that be the car drivers fault? - very smart idea.
2 agree | 0 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader III said:
I almost never see a bicyclist actually stop at a stop sign. I've almost hit a few as a result. Encouraging more bicyclists to do the same will only make the safety situation worse.
2 agree | 1 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Bill Again said:
The comment box chopped of the last 3 letters of the word ROAD even when it fit in the comment box.
1 agree | 0 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Bill, Berkeley said:
I split the difference between driving and bicycling. It's too far for a daily bike ride so I drive about 2/3 to 3/4 of the way, park, then ride to work. When I bicycle, I follow the vehicular rules of the road, making stops at every stop sign and red light and yielding the proper right of way. I have been following the rules of traffic for over 25 years, since my first bike ride to school. I've had other bicyclist rear end me because they expected me to ride through stops, even when I put out the standard slow/stop hand signals. As a pedestrian, cyclist run stop signs and nearly ran me over. The worst offenders are the testosterone junkie racing attired enthusiasts. I think the steroids do not help. No license is required for bicycles and any idiot can buy one. Bicycles should all come with DMV manuals or bicycle stores should have a copy posted. Don't Change the laws to accomodate the lazy idiots. Don't saddle drivers with liability for jerks who think they own the r
4 agree | 0 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
There was no statistics shown on the worst bicycle accidents WITH PEDESTRIANS. These usually leave the pedestrian injured as the cyclist laughs and rides away, even with San Francisco Police looking on.
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
It is probable that bicycling produces less air pollution and is more healthy than driving. However, I would content it might actually increase traffic congestion. Please conduct a scientific study before assuming a shift to bicycles would improve traffic.
4 agree | 0 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
“There’s a small minority of bicyclists who actually obey the law,” Corrales said Just as small a minority of drivers obey the law. I'm hard pressed here in Pennsylvania to find anyone driving less than 10 MPH over the limit or using a turn signal.
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
""“Bicyclists are already perceived as outlaws who never stop at stop signs,” said Andy Thornley, program director of the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition, who added that bicyclists see drivers as aggressive and pushy."" Isn't this the same guy who chain smokes those kewl little dark cigarettes and at the same time advocates for "Health Saturdays in the Park"? Ha what a joker.
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Cyclist, S.B. & S.D. said:
I cycle 4+ times per week and I almost fully agree with the new law. I'm not a perfect cyclist (who is a perfect anything... really), I occasionally slow and roll through stop signs when no other traffic is around and same for just a few stoplights on an empty road. No matter what I do I'm mainly concerned about my safety (which involves the safety of everyone because if I hit someone or visa versa... I'm going to get hurt either way) so I always use common sense. To me common sense will be the limiting factor on this law because some people will abuse the ability to '"stop and roll"' and proceed through an intersection (whether a stop sign or light) when it's clearly not safe. They will ruin it for the rest of us... Therefore, I hope the law isn't as cut and dry as stated in the article... because clearly there are more issues that must be resolved within. Overall, I hope it passes in some form or another. [The next issue to tackle afterwards is group riding..]
1 agree | 1 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
genec also San Diego said:
Greg from San Diego... and others. This proposed law does not allow cyclists to "roll through" anything. The proposed law would allow cyclists to treat stop lights as stop signs... which still means stop, then go. Stop signs would be treated like yields, which means approach with caution, then go if it is clear. There is no "roll though." Greg, that cyclist you cited would have to stop even with the proposed law. Pedestrians will be in no more danger than they are now. The onus is still on cyclists to ensure the way is clear for their own safety.
5 agree | 0 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Greg, San Diego said:
I'm one of the cyclists that does follow the rules, and I think this proposal is a HUGE mistake. While it is perfectly fair relative to cars, it will endanger pedestrians. I stopped at a red-light yesterday at a T-intersection, where no cars would be crossing my path if I ran the red-light. A second bike, screamed at me for stopping, swerved around me at speed, and narrowly missed the pedestrian stepping out from in front of the car stopped next to me. It's not just about the bike! That said, I would favor allowing bicyclists to treat a red light like a stop sign, since we often don't trigger the sensor to change a light in our favor.
1 agree | 2 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
I can understand that cyclists flouting the law annoy motorists. It would annoy me, too. But these laws were created for motor vehicles, not bicycles, and they really do not fit with the transportation mode of bicycling. On many occasions I have seen law-abiding motorists get onto bicycles and blow straight through stop signs! In general I am in favor of abiding by the law, but in this case the law doesn't work: it creates law-breakers out of citizens who normally respect the law. Such a change is long overdue in my opinion. By the way, I almost always stop for stop signs and red lights. Much of the time the motorists wave me through... I do recognize that there is a rebel faction of cyclists, a little bit like there are motorists who engage in illegal drag racing. Every community has its high-profile delinquents.
1 agree | 0 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
From a cyclist who stopped riding on the road after seeing the abuse by SF riders. Cyclist need to be licensed and required to carry their license lest their bike be impounded. They need to obey the same laws as motorists. Motorists have physical power and don't take kindly to people who act like they are superior and disregard laws at their own discretion. Equal rights under the law are tied to obeying the same law. Please license cyclists over the age of 16, and throw them in jail when they endanger the public by riding irresponsibly. The cycling community needs to get some bad apples off the streets if they want fair treatment by a jury of 'peers' that share the road. This proposed relaxation of the law does not help.
3 agree | 3 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Don SF 2003 said:
Um, bikes follow this rule already. I have yet to seer a biker stop for anything. Red light. Stop sign. Pedestrian on a sidewalk. Baby stroller. They plow through the City on sidewalks (also illegal) with no repercussions.
0 agree | 6 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Any cyclist who has had to stop at a T-intersection when they are going straight on the shoulder (on the top part of the "T") would appreciate this law. Unless a car is out of its own lane, there is no way the cyclist not stopping is hurting anyone. And to any motorist that complains about cyclists - I dare you to get out of your car and actually ride a bike to see what it's like on the "other side"!
3 agree | 2 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
running red lights is going to get you killed. car or bicycle. but where do they propose allowing cyclists to "run" red lights? as i read it a cyclist would have to stop at red light and only proceed if it is safe to do so. this seems reasonable to me as many of the lights in the bay area are not triggered by bicycles and as a cyclist you have to wait for a car to approach and trigger the light. what about car emissions? you want to tax cyclist to use the road? ok, i'll pony up an equitable amount based on the wear and tear i put on the road. please note i do own a car and do pay my taxes, i just use my car less. let's all get along and please don't run me over on my way home this evening.
9 agree | 2 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
genec said:
Too all those that object to this, the right on red law is basically the same thing... treating stop lights as stop signs, this just extends the law to stop signs. And for all those motorists that comment on how cyclists don't obey the laws now... seriously ask yourself when you last obeyed the speed limit. And for those motorists that insist on cyclists being taxed... most cyclists are also drivers, they are taxed just as you... and their use of a bike to commute just gives motorists that much more space on the road... and one more parking space when you get to where you are going.
4 agree | 3 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
bad ideas all around said:
Having witnessed two accidents caused by bikers not obeying laws and being hit by a bicyclist running through a stop sign, I think this is about the worst possible idea. Cars at least have the pretense of stopping at stop signs, even if they roll through. So many bikers don't even bother to slow (not all, mind you, but enough). If you allow stop signs to become yield signs, we are just blurring the lines about intersection etiquette, which will create more accidents, invite lawsuits and create even greater discord between bikers and drivers.
1 agree | 6 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
SF bike commuter said:
I'm part of the tiny minority that does obey the law. The reason the Idaho law works is that it is far more rural. Enacting this law in California will result in more deaths and rancor between cars & bicycles.
2 agree | 3 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Bernal Family said:
There is no question. This idea won't work. There will be more accidents, plain and simple. The lack of support for this plan is due to the fact that in a city crowded with all types of vehicle and pedestrians, we know all too well that too many loose-cannon knuckleheads who are going to take this proposed change to the extreme, and get their stupid selves killed, creating more stress, strife and sorrow in our city. As a pedestrian, I can "see and hear" a car. I'm glad you've not been in a clash with a bicycle. I know those who have. Not fun. I'd rather NOT get hit by ANYTHING. This proposal will increase that chances many of us will.
5 agree | 6 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
I agree that most bikers don't obey the laws, but the law does not afford equal protection for bikers as for other means of transportation. Even when the cars violate the bikers rights and hit the cyclist, the bias in the news media AND by law enforcement, effectively make prosecution of a hit/run or even a felony vehicle accident with a bike a non-occurrence. There are those that do follow the rules (like me) however the real problem are cars. Cars treat everyone horribly, and there are NO GOOD DRIVERS at least in the bay area. They all drive like morons, behave like babies, and feel they are entitled. This is how cars view each other, so put a bike or a motorcycle in the flow of traffic and you have real big problems.
4 agree | 2 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
some things to keep in mind 1) stop signs are really to regulate motor traffic 2) bike riders can see and hear more than drivers 3) drivers don't stop at stop signs either 4) drivers get exeedingly annoyed when bikes stop at stop signs 5) the law would be about treating stop signs as yield signs if you're on a bike, NOT about "ignoring" the stop sign altogether. 6) part of the reason there are stop signs is to protect pedestrians from cars; bikes don't pose as much of a danger to them.
7 agree | 3 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Bernal Family said:
A DUMB IDEA NOT EVEN WORTH CONSIDERATION. This would be like allowing pedestrians to legally jaywalk. While a cyclist may say that he/she would be doing this at his/her own risk, guess what - no one is going to leave an incident better off than before it. What with injuries, lawsuits and inevitable fatalities, why would anyone think this is a good idea? And no one has considered how this will affect pedestrians, who would concievably be in the cyclists way when crossing the street.
4 agree | 9 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Cody Larsen said:
How about requiring licensing fees for bicyclists? They use the roads, demand road striping, signs and privileges. Who pays for road maintenance? Drivers through gas tax. It's time for the spoiled children of the road, the Bay Area cyclists, to pony up!
2 agree | 13 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
SF Bicycle Coalition Member said:
WOW, i can't beleave this is being proposed.Im a daily rider here in SF that rides safe,im also a retired Fire Fighter/EMT that has ran a far share of vehical verses bicycle calls there ugly Remember MASS * Velocity=OUCH!!! WEAR A HELMET PLEASE!!!
3 agree | 2 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
How to tell MTC that THEY ARE CRAZY. If you plan on submitting comments to the Commission in writing, you can do so via fax at: 510-817-5848, Attn: Rosy Leyva, Commission Secretary. Make sure you note that you would like this handed out at the Commission meeting on June 25. Or you can mail it to MTC, 101 8th Street, Oakland, CA 94607. If you plan on coming to the Commission meeting on June 25, 2008, you need to fill out a blue card that is located at the table with handouts and give it to the Commission Secretary. The Chairperson will call for public comment. Only in the Bay Area would a public agency try to exempt a type of vehicle from laws for the safety of All of us that use the streets of California. Trying to bring a law from Idaho where the population of the ENTIRE state is about 1.4 Million to a state of 40 Million people. Who does the MTC listen to...Bike Messengers?
1 agree | 4 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
I totally am against this change in the law. Why should they be any different than any other motorist sharing the road. As a pedistrian I have almost been hit many times by bicyclist who dont even yeild for someone in the cross walk. I feel that the SFPD should do a crackdown on them and give them moving violation citations for not stopping for a stop sign or red light. Bicyclist want equality on the road then abide by the LAW as it is now. STOP for all stop signs and red lights.
4 agree | 3 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
No no no no no. Ridiculous idea. They already do that, and cause endless trouble. This is a horrifying idea. A red sign means stop, everywhere. Period. This is beyond stupid.
3 agree | 4 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader 99 of 100 said:
Legislators should make laws regulating motorists and cyclists MORE similar, not less. Bicyclists and motorists pay for the streets they use and should be bound by the same laws. Bicyclists should be licensed, as are car owners, and should be required to display their state-issued license number. That way, the scofflaws, traffic violators and bad actors in both camps may be properly identified -- and punished.
3 agree | 1 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
I think it's a good idea. After all, cars are already doing it at almost all stop signs (and at a few select reds, too, I'm sure).
3 agree | 2 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Dan said:
From a safety point of view, I see no change, at least in San Francisco, as this is how cyclists (and for that matter, many car drivers) already act. To me, a big benefit is it forces cops, when they decide to crack down on cyclists, to get off their b*tts and go for the guys actually causing the problem, rather than hiding at some isolated T intersection and grabbing the easy targets, running up their quota. Come on, there's plenty of riders out there actually cutting people off, violating right-of-way. It just takes more work to get them.
4 agree | 2 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Montira said:
I'm not sure what's more absurd: 1) that they're trying to adapt the law of a small, somewhat rural mountain state (which has only 1.3M people, all told) to fit the country's 4th largest metropolis (which has 7.1M people); or 2) that they're trying to make it legal for cyclists to keep running red lights.
6 agree | 2 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
I am not sure legally how this would work when it comes to accidents. Idaho is not an ideal place to compare to California.
5 agree | 2 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Bob Shanteau said:
"California bicyclists must stop and put one foot on the ground at stop signs" Wrong. The California Vehicle Code says only that a stop is required. It says nothing about putting a foot on the ground. "stoplights occasionally do not recognize bikers because of their size" Wrong again. Inductive loop detectors at actuated signals do not detect bicycles because they are designed to detect large horizontal sheets of metal, such as the bottom of a car, whereas motorcycle and bicycle wheels are vertical. The only place a conventional loop (square or circle) can detect a motorcycle or bicycle is on top of a slot. By adding a diagonal slot, though, a loop will then detect motorcycles and bicycles. I am on a statewide committee developing new guidelines for motorcycle and bicycle detection at all new and modified actuated traffic signals in California. When our work is done, all bicyclists will need to do to be detected is to stop in a 6'x6' square at the limit line centered in the lane.
5 agree | 2 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
49-720. STOPPING -- TURN AND STOP SIGNALS. 1. A person operating a bicycle or human-powered vehicle approaching a stop sign shall slow down and, if required for safety, stop before entering the intersection. After slowing to a reasonable speed or stopping, the person shall yield the right-of-way to any vehicle in the intersection or approaching on another highway so closely as to constitute an immediate hazard during the time the person is moving across or within the intersection or junction of highways, except that a person after slowing to a reasonable speed and yielding the right-of-way if required, may cautiously make a turn or proceed through the intersection without stopping. 2. A person operating a bicycle or human-powered vehicle approaching a steady red traffic-control signal shall stop before entering the intersection, except that a person after slowing to a reasonable speed and yielding the right-of-way if required, may cautiously make a right-hand turn without stoppi
2 agree | 2 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
“There’s a small minority of bicyclists who actually obey the law,” Corrales said. Cyclists always wonder why no matter how the cyclist got it, it always seems to by the cyclist's fault. Anybody else think this head-of-department cop is a little bias???
4 agree | 4 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Share the Road!!! said:
Essie, you're correct that the atrocious behavior of some cyclists can't be applied to all - but it's a substantial enough number that the problem needs desperately to be addressed. Study after study has demonstrated that in most cases when cyclists are hit, they're at fault, because they think the rules of the road don't apply to them. I was knocked to the ground on Post Street by a jerk who claimed that I'd stepped into a bike path, which was entirely untrue as there is not one on that particular block, and he was riding against traffic. My leg was badly bruised though no bones were broken. The pig attempted to ride off but was blocked by a driver. Thankfully a policeman was close by and he took an incident report. This person had been cited numerous times for blithely ignoring traffic laws. What if he'd killed me? I don't want to demonize all cyclists, but some of them really take the proverbial cake.
3 agree | 1 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Does the examiner seriously want us to take advice on lawlessness from the central figure of Fajitagate? The SFPD should have dumped that jerk years ago.
4 agree | 5 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Chriso said:
I have nearly been run down walking through a crosswalk by so many cyclists who don't obey traffic laws. Now you want to make it so it's perfectly legal for them ride like insane jerkoffs with no care for pedestrian safety? Screw that.
9 agree | 10 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Essie said:
Hi. Essie here again with one more comment--there is a really big difference between the average bike commuter who's just trying to get to work alive and the small but visible group of renegade bike messenger types who have no regard for pedestrians or, it seems, themselves. There is an undeniable natural hierarchy in the road that should be followed to benefit and protect the most people: Peds, bikes, public transit, commercial vehicles/trucks, taxis, high occupancy vehicles, single occupancy vehicles.
6 agree | 1 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
gregor said:
Drivers are Grumpy! What is your hurry? Why do you always honk your horn when you aren't in any danger?
6 agree | 4 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Dan said:
Obviously, if a cyclist crossing against the red is hit by a driver with a green, the cyclist was at fault, as he failed to yield to the car. That's how yield signs work. This law makes it EASIER to crack down on the scafflaw riders by restricting the law to actions which are truly unsafe. The whole point of traffic law is for road users to be safe, predictable, and hopefully courteous. It is completely possible to obey all three principles under this proposed law. A complete stop at stop signs, or waiting at red lights when there's clearly no cross-traffic, is simply not necessary on a bike to ride safely, predictably, or courteously. The canonical scorching fixie rider will still be able to be ticketed, so the anti-cyclist diatribes here are unnecessary.
7 agree | 3 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
SF Tax Payer said:
More enforcement of yielding to pedestrians, please. Several dozen pedestrians daily have to dodge bicyclists speeding through the light when crossing at the Sutter/Market stop light. If anyone says anything to the bicyclists, like "you're supposed to stop," the bicyclists swear back at them. There's no respect between bicyclists and pedestrians.
6 agree | 2 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Essie said:
Cycling is not only a sport, it is a mode of transportation. Transportation is about getting to your destination safely and efficiently. As long as lights are timed for cars and not bikes, I will continue to stop, look around for potential conflicts, and then go -- regardless if I have a green light. Staying safe is not "crap."
6 agree | 3 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
NO. I'm an avid cyclist, but I cannot support this. Accidents, as well as increased bad feelings toward all cyclists. Dear law-breaking cyclists: Please Stop your crap. You are ruining the entire sport of cycling in the bay area.
7 agree | 9 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Essie said:
This is a wonderful idea. The point isn't to give bicyclists a free pass to be flagrantly dangerous on the road, it's to give them the legal right to do what keeps them safe. The law explicitly says bikes must stop first and look around to see if there are any vehicles or pedestrians coming, and then if it is safe to go, they can go through a red light. If what we're really worried about is safety, then letting bikes gain back the balance they lost by stopping is much safer than trying to accelerate alongside a bunch of 2-ton cars. If we are talking about fairness, everyone who is driving a car has an equal opportunity to get on a bike and reap the same rewards that bicyclist do. I 100% support this change in law. Given the high gas prices and climate change crisis we are facing, maybe others will too, once they get on a bike and see how scary it is to ride with aggressive cars. This is not to say that psycho bike riders should continue their dangerous behavior. That's just stupi
9 agree | 2 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
P-chan said:
Dumb. Dumb. Dumb! This would be just raising the ante. It is the same as the logic behind raising the speed limit to 65; "people won't drive faster, they'll stay at the same speed but now they'll be within the law"...not. Everyone, myself included, increased their average speed; now I can drive 75-80 with less worry. The same will happen with this stupid law. At present the few 10-20% of cyclists stop at all stop signs and lights. With this law that will become the 10-20% that yield! The rest won't even do that. And drivers will be seen as the ones that are wrong. Dumb.
2 agree | 3 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree