This is a very good point. PR is huge. If we want to be respected
we need to show that we respect the established laws of riding on
roads. The other day I rode from campus to the square. If anyone
has gone up state street onto square and followed all the lights and
signs you know that is frustrating and makes no sense to not turn
right on red or to wait for the green to cross Dayton if it is
painfully clear. The reward is enjoying your turn when it is your
right of way. When you have waited for that light to change and
finally you get to go, enjoy it and make others that are trying to
take your right away aware that they are doing so with a simple bell
ring or "coming through".
-Michael
On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 11:19 AM, Kris Niemann <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I completely agree that there is no safety reason for a mature
bike rider to come to a complete stop at a stop sign, as we have
the advantage of being fully aware of our surroundings (vs. a
vehicle). Therefore, the only reason to come to a complete stop
is for PR, and this is an important one. If there are ANY CARS
around at all, I always emphasize stopping, not going through red
light, etc. because we NEVER want a bike-hater to be able to use
the argument that bikes don't follow the rules. Funny how we
have to play these childish games because of so many
closed-minded drivers.
kris
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* Grant Foster <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
*To:* "STRAWSER, Charles" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
*Cc:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Sent:* Thursday, May 17, 2012 9:49 PM
*Subject:* Re: [Bikies] "stop" legally defined
I actually think it's the wrong approach to advocate for equal
treatment, as in, treat me just like you treat a motor vehicle.
We are different and we should be treated differently. I believe
we should be afforded equal access to a safe and efficient
infrastructure, but pretending I'm a car is an easy way out. I
can't drive down the belt line on my bike and I don't want
to-it's unsafe and it would severely impact the motor vehicle
traffic. Let's advocate for equal rights, not equal treatment.
In the same way, I shouldn't ever have to come to a complete stop
at a stop sign unless the situation truly calls for it. There is
absolutely no value in me stopping at a stop sign (as opposed to
yielding) except that by not stopping I might make a driver envious.
There's actually no value in motor vehicles stopping instead of
yielding at the vast majority of posted intersections. The only
reason we have so many stop signs is because motor vehicle
drivers don't yield very well.
Grant
On May 17, 2012 1:02 PM, "STRAWSER, Charles"
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I think the tangent we are on is interesting, but deserves a
new subject line.
------------
Arthur wrote: "Watch motorists approaching a stop sign.
Watch their wheels. Do their wheels completely cease moving
if they are not forced to stop by a flow of traffic..."
-------------
Long ago I heard a law enforcement officer say that even if a
motorist's wheels were stopped, it could be argued that
"motion had not ceased" if the driver only stopped long
enough for the car's body to rock forward (over the stopped
wheels), then backward (still over stopped wheels), then took
their foot off the brake and allowed the car's wheels to
start rolling forward before the oscillation of the car's
body over the stopped wheels had ceased, i.e. COMPLETE
cessation of motion (nothing in the statute Arthur cites
mention that the motion that has to cease only includes
"forward" motion).
I personally think that is perhaps too rigid a view of what
constitutes a legal stop for a motorist (or a track standing
cyclist), but I'd be fine with an individual law enforcement
officer taking that view as long as s/he consistently applied
such an extremely narrow view of "stop" to both motorists and
bicyclists.
That is, after all, all we are asking for: equal
consideration under the law that is due bicyclists by
Wisconsin state statutes.
Chuck Strawser
Pedestrian & Bicycle Transportation Planner
Commuter Solutions
Transportation Services
UW-Madison
Room 124 WARF
610 Walnut St
Madison WI 53726
608-263-2969
www.wisc.edu/trans <http://www.wisc.edu/trans>
*From:*Ross, Arthur
*CHAPTER 340 VEHICLES --- GENERAL PROVISIONS*
*340.01 Words and phrases defined. *In s. 23.33 and chs. 340
to 349 and 351, the following words and phrases have the
designated meanings unless a different meaning is expressly
provided or the context clearly indicates a different meaning:
*(62) *"Stop" when required means complete cessation from
movement.
Reasonable people can disagree as to just what this means
with respect to what behavior by a bicyclist constitutes a
legal stop. Reasonable people can include a bicyclist, a
police officer, a judge, and/or a jury :- )
Watch motorists approaching a stop sign. Watch their wheels.
Do their wheels completely cease moving if they are not
forced to stop by a flow of traffic on the intersecting
street? This not an argument for bicyclists not stopping,
just an interesting study in behavior.
_______________________________________________
Bikies mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
_______________________________________________
Bikies mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
_______________________________________________
Bikies mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
_______________________________________________
Bikies mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
