I don't see him anymore. One day last year, he rolled through a red light in Koreatown, right into a truck which had the right of way. He was thrown from his bike about 20 feet and died from blunt force trauma and/or internal bleeding by the time paramedics arrived.
I feel notably worse inside a week when I stop cycling.
You know what the worst part of cycling is? The endless noise and pollution from cars.
Cars are a scourge. It is no wonder why drivers are so angry all the time. Who in their right mind wants to spend their time utterly immobilized, doing nothing but trying to avoid hitting other cars?
Cycling is always a bit of an adventure, always exhilarating.
Global warming, congestion, obesity epidemic, and arguably peak oil. Also: http://www.roadswerenotbuiltforcars.com/
I agree that many downtowns such as those of Las Vegas, Houston, and Atlanta simply are not bikable.
Except for the brake dust, noise pollution, CO2 emissions, and the tens of thousands of people who die in crashes every year.
I saw a cyclist roll through a pedestrian crossing with people in it on his side of the road at the intersection at the end of my street. I rolled up to him in my car at the next light and told him he was breaking the law. He asked "but is it safe?". The implication is, with this leading question, is that he thought it was safe to do. What he didn't observe was the car behind him not slowing down for the pedestrians because they were watching him.
Stopping at a crosswalk, or yielding right of way, is an important rule because it gives VISUAL indicators to other drivers of nearby vehicles. It's a backup mechanism for safety at times. Rationalizing laws don't apply to oneself because they cause delay do not include the fact it the action may also be the difference between life and death - for someone else. Are we really going to rationalize away the fact driver may float lights more if they see bikes doing it as well?
The way Davis, CA handles this is to install special lights for bikes. I would assume they thought through it and decided floating lights is bad.
For the last 4 years, up until a few months ago, I had been riding at least 5-6 hours a day on fairly busy roads. I've seen a lot of shit that people do as a result of other's actions, including bikes, and I do NOT think bikes should be precluded from obeying traffic laws, especially when the only point to it might be to speed up a bike commute or "save energy". Whatever that means.
In case you can't be bothered to read this either:
> He also calculated that a cyclist who rolls through a stop at five miles per hour instead of stopping fully needs to use 25 percent less energy to get back to full speed.
My entire comment was based on someone else's comment in these threads, not the article.
And, not that I give a shit what you think, I actually did read the article and don't have to agree with it regardless of whether I "bothered" or not.
>If a cyclist approaches a red light, meanwhile, he or she needs to stop fully. Again, if there's any oncoming traffic or a pedestrian, it has the right of way. If there's not, the cyclist can proceed cautiously through the intersection. Put simply, red light is a stop sign.
>This doesn't mean that a cyclist is allowed to blast through an intersection at full speed — which is dangerous for pedestrians, the cyclist, and pretty much everyone involved. This isn't allowed in Idaho, and it's a terrible idea everywhere.
Nobody is suggesting that cyclists should just ignore right of way.