Hacker News Reader

Comment by SECProto | Hacker News Reader

The most common cycling injury is a right hook, where a car drives past the cyclist then turns right (into the cyclist or without enough space for them to stop). At intersections, many cars will be turning right. Allowing cyclists to proceed past the intersection before the drivers do will increase their safety.

(as an aside, right turning vehicles at intersections are allowed to behave much the same as a cyclist doing an Idaho stop - turning right on red, rolling stop)

View on HN

> (as an aside, right turning vehicles at intersections are allowed to behave much the same as a cyclist doing an Idaho stop - turning right on red, rolling stop)

Ironically, didn't DC just ban cars from turning right on red at the same time they allowed bikes to do this kind of thing?

I don't really see how banning right on red would address the right hook problem. Right hooks happen when the light is green.

In most states you are legally supposed to fully stop before making the right...

I'm in MI though and we have Michigan Lefts - I have also heard them called Minnesota lefts, where you turn left after the intersection.

At least in Ontario, this is yet another example of cyclists not knowing the rules of the road. Driver turning right is not obligated to yield to cyclists unless there is a bike lane _and_ it is physically separated and/or painted green and can legitimately stop flush to the right edge of the road before the turn, blocking everyone behind. Most drivers will let cyclists through anyway because as a driver you cannot rely on unlicensed people knowing the rules.

There should be much more of that infrastructure

As a cyclist, I agree!

"because as a driver you cannot rely on unlicensed people knowing the rules."

I agree, but I will add that I can't rely on licensed people to know and follow the rules either. The driving test is a joke in the US.

In the US, most states have a law that requires drivers to be as close as practicable to the right edge or curb before making their right turn. This precludes the possibility of through traffic passing a right turning vehicle on the right. As a motorist, when I turn right, I move close to the edge or curb to prevent cyclists from trying to pass me on the right. Most cyclists either wait behind me or pass me on the left.

When I cycle and I want to go straight through the intersection, I ride in the middle of the travel lane. Motorists will either wait behind me, pass me on the right to make a right turn, or pass me on the left and go straight (or make a left). But I don't have issues with right hooks because I take the lane.

Which part of the highway traffic act allows cars to drive into cyclists again?

That is not what I am saying. At all.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/amp/globe-drive/culture/comm...

We were talking about the right hook as a major danger to cyclists. That article is all about "cyclists shouldn't pass turning drivers on the inside". While that can be a contributing factor in some right hook collisions, many (most?) right hooks do not involve that situation. The article does highlight an error that most drivers make: if you're turning right across a painted bike lane are supposed to shift over tight to the curb when that lane becomes dashed. The driver essentially merges into the bicycle lane (and needs to do that merge action safely, which is the actual cause of most right hooks).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com