Discussions of bicyclists' behavior at stop signs always seems a bit surreal to me, because they start with the assumption that *motorists* stop at stop signs.
Actually, they don't. In my experience, motorists tend to treat stop signs as "emphatic yield" signs: they stop if they have to, but if they can get away with it, they slow down and drift through the intersection -- just like bikes. To see what I mean, spend some time by a stop sign at a low-traffic intersection (or, better yet, a four-way stop) and see how the cars behave. If there's cross-traffic, they'll almost always come to a full stop (which makes sense). If not, some cars will slow *almost* to a stop, and others will drop down to bicycle speed, but very few will achieve "complete cessation of forward motion." Actually, I don't think this behavior is all that terrible; but if cars drive like this, why do motorists complain when bikes do more or less the same? And if bikes show perfect obedience to stop signs, will it make a difference? Probably not. Impatient motorists resent bikes because we're in the way. If we disobey traffic laws while we're in their way, they'll complain about bikers who violate the law. But if we get in their way while we have the right of way, in compliance with the law, they'll complain anyway -- just as they complain about pedestrians in crosswalks and motorists who insist on driving 55 mph on the Beltline. In general, it's a good idea to obey traffic laws, because we're usually safer if we do. But let's not kid ourselves -- we won't gain motorists' respect by obeying the law. _______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies
