On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 10:47 PM, grant <[email protected]> wrote: > It doesn't make sense in NYC which is why it's the Idaho Stop. When > traffic is thick, the drivers are mean, and you're expected to stop, > you better stop.
The point about the Idaho Stop is the cyclist still has to yield at stop signs. *If there is no one waiting to go the other direction,* the cyclist doesn't have to stop, but can continue after making sure it's safe. But in Manhattan, at most times of the day, most intersections aren't empty. That is, the cyclist won't come to a stop sign and discover there is no traffic the other way. So, if the Idaho Stop were the law in New York City wouldn't matter, because it would almost never apply. -- -- Anne Paulson My hovercraft is full of eels -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
