The Rules

[DismalScientist]

@lordofthemark 83036 wrote:

I think the reason for the difference is pretty clear, eh? A reckless driver does not stop at all, and a safe driver stops and does not go once its clear. A reckless cyclist also does not stop, but lots of cyclists who are far from reckless do stop and proceed once its clear, because of the differences between a bike and a car (lesser danger to others, greater visibility) that we have often discussed.

I don’t think the majority of drivers who stop at red lights, and stay stopped, are doing so because of optics or their belief in the rule of law (most such drivers still violate the speed limit for example) but because they make the reasoned judgement that A. their visibility is not enough to avoid an accident and B. The consequences of an accident could be severe while many cyclists (often of course, the same people who in their cars will stop at stop lights) make a different judgement about visibility and consequences.

I’m going to call BS on this. If I am a driver who stop at a red light, I know perfectly well when I could proceed where it would be perfectly safe. The reason that cyclists do it is that it is viewed as sufficiently acceptable behavior that no one is going to call them out. As you stated, 2/3rds of cyclists on the 15th street cycletrack think that normal traffic light laws don’t apply to them. This is why I don’t get my panties in a wad when reading anti-cyclist screeds. Your casual empiricism suggests that most cyclist don’t believe the laws apply to them.

[lordofthemark]

@DismalScientist 83041 wrote:

I’m going to call BS on this. If I am a driver who stop at a red light, I know perfectly well when I could proceed where it would be perfectly safe. The reason that cyclists do it is that it is viewed as sufficiently acceptable behavior that no one is going to call them out. As you stated, 2/3rds of cyclists on the 15th street cycletrack think that normal traffic light laws don’t apply to them. This is why I don’t get my panties in a wad when reading anti-cyclist screeds. Your casual empiricism suggests that most cyclist don’t believe the laws apply to them.

Clearly as many drivers believe that the law does not apply to them, judging by speeds most especially, but also failure to signal, making turns on reds without stopping, failure to yield to peds at crosswalks (the number who do so yield at the intersection of Hummer and Championship Drive is FAR lower than one third)

I am glad you find my casual empiricism useful, since it did show that the few cyclists actually blow through reds. Yes, most stop and proceed at reds, but I think its clearly they do so with concern for safety. Of course as you point out its also driven by culture, but in this case its a culture that is essentially correct about safety.

Unfortunately what’s considered acceptable behavior by motorists is in fact quite dangerous. As someone who not only rides in Fairfax but WALKS in Fairfax, I do get rather upset by the windshield perspective, which endangers my life (and regularly takes life.)

I will get upset at cyclists and their assumptions about acceptable behavior, when drivers around here not only stop running reds and stop driving 15MPH over the speed limit and stop changing lanes recklessly, but also cease from turning on reds without stopping, also learn that yes, they need to yield to a ped who has entered a crosswalk (not just one in the middle of the street, and yes, even when there is no signal, and even on an unmarked crosswalk) and yes, learn that they need to signal ALL their turns, and yes, they need to not stop their cars ON the crosswalk at lights, and … well you get the picture.

Feh.

[lordofthemark]

and you are correct that red light running by cyclists is almost unknown in my part of Fairfax. There simply arent that many signalized intersections, and the ones that exist always have vehicles crossing, at virtually all hours. All the lycra clad cyclists stop at the lights and wait, whille the hispanic riders (who mostly ride the sidewalk, sans helmet) never do a vehicular style crossing. Its very rare to see someone riding in casual clothes WITH a helmet around here.

that is to say, the conditions in Annandale are most unlike those on 15th street – esp on a Sunday.

BTW, unlike Fairfax (or ArlCo?) its now legal for cyclists to cross on when the ped light is “go” and that happens at most intersections while the general signal is still red. I think that was a good move. Do you think the raging anticyclists will support that? I don’t. Again, their problem is not that cyclists disobey the law – its that cyclists get in their way.

And take “their” parking spaces.

[Bilsko]

@dasgeh 83027 wrote:

I’m talking stop and go once it’s clear. Cars do a lot of dumb things, but they don’t do that.

Just to add one more kink – in some places cars actually do stop at a red, verify, then proceed.
I lived in Brazil for 5 years and late-night carjackings/hold-ups are common enough that drivers will very often proceed through a red at night if it’s clear.

Doesn’t apply here, but its certainly practiced frequently elsewhere – and I’m sure there are plenty of other driving habits around the world that would surprise us here.

[ShawnoftheDread]

@Bilsko 83050 wrote:

Just to add one more kink – in some places cars actually do stop at a red, verify, then proceed.
I lived in Brazil for 5 years and late-night carjackings/hold-ups are common enough that drivers will very often proceed through a red at night if it’s clear.

Doesn’t apply here, but its certainly practiced frequently elsewhere – and I’m sure there are plenty of other driving habits around the world that would surprise us here.

I’ve noticed a similar practice the few times I’ve been to Philadelphia .

[DismalScientist]

@lordofthemark 83043 wrote:

I will get upset at cyclists and their assumptions about acceptable behavior, when …

Well… I’ll give up my drinking to excess when we achieve world peace.

[mstone]

@DismalScientist 83056 wrote:

Well… I’ll give up my drinking to excess when we achieve world peace.

I’ll drink to that

[lordofthemark]

@DismalScientist 83056 wrote:

Well… I’ll give up my drinking to excess when we achieve world peace.

I mean if you think not getting upset at cyclists who stop and then proceed through reds (note well, I do not do that myself) is similar to drinking to excess, sure.

But yeah, we will probably get to world peace before we see drivers all obeying the law. But I do note that their disobedience of the law endangers me almost every day. That is the context for getting upset with windshield perspective screeds. Kudos to the folks on ArlNow who proved information that corrects such screeds.

But seriously, someone who thinks that CaBi is a privately owned business using public space? He didn’t get that because some fred ran a red light – he got it (probably) from the BS that was in the Alexandria papers back when CaBi expanded to Old Town – and his concern is one third about being able to park in Old Town and two thirds resentment that this isn’t the good old Alexandria of his childhood.

[83b]

While we’re once again on the subject of red lights…

I’m a bit of a stickler and obey all traffic control signals/signs.¹ My biggest complaint with red light running cyclists is that their action always results in one of three outcomes that brings them into conflict with me. These range from merely annoying to genuinely dangerous. Responses to each scenario should be guided by a simple principle: if you fail to abide by the social contract then you don’t deserve its protections.²

(1) Most commonly they will shoal me and then run the light. The light will change in far less than a minute and I’ll have to pass them within a block or two. This is aggravating, as there are likely cars on my left in the travel lane that also just finished waiting at the light. In this situation, I will usually pass (without using my bell) at whatever distance I’m comfortable with.

(2) Second most common is the rider shoaling me while looking for a chance to run the light but not finding one before the green. Again, I’ll pass with a minimum clearance, usually overtaking the offending rider before they’ve cleared the intersection.

(3) Least common is having the light change right as the rider is shoaling. This leads to us trying to clear the intersection at the same time. If they were trying to shoal me on the left, I’m not moving into the door zone to give them room and they can get forced into the travel lane. If they were trying to shoal me on the right, same result, except they’re pushed into the door zone or first of the parked cars. The worst case scenario is someone getting forced into the Penn Ave bollards³ (which happened once, causing me to behave in a most un-Dirt-like manner).

In summary, I think that cyclists should always obey red lights when another cyclist has arrived at the intersection before them. Shoaling should be punishable by SuperSoaker^TM. Abiding by the social contract keeps us all safe. And I can be kind of a jerk about it.

¹Somewhat related, I’m no fun at parties.
²For example, while traveling this weekend a guy tried to push past from a later row when mine hadn’t deplaned. He was not abiding by the social contract.
³I also cannot for the life of me understand why anyone would pass the stop line on Penn ave and wait by the light pole and bollards. Have you seen how many of those bollards have been taken out by cars? Up and down that road like a third of them are bent or missing completely!

[cyclingfool]

@Mikey 82840 wrote:

They are all good. Should we make our own set of “rules”. I can think of a few locally specific rules.

1. Call your passes, and only pass when safe
2. Acknowledge that tourists, while annoying, unawhare, and unsafe, generally pay the bills in this town. Don’t be a D!CK.
3. Leapfrogging is acceptable on the E.B. Custis Trail until you reach the Lee highway overpass over I-66. At this point you finish under the Caution Flag. Stay in order, don’t overlap wheels, and enjoy the drop.
4. Don’t Shoal, especially on Pennsylvania Ave.
5. Say Hello, Good afternoon, Nice Weather. . .

What would you add?

6. No thread hijacking on the BikeArlington forum.

[dasgeh]

@cyclingfool 83136 wrote:

6. No thread hijacking on the BikeArlington forum.

Then you really don’t want to see this thread, or this thread, or this thread

[cyclingfool]

@dasgeh 83142 wrote:

Then you really don’t want to see this thread, or this thread, or this thread

Touché. Guilty as charged, although those were so epically hijacked by the time I became a regular here, I was just piling on…

[dkel]

@cyclingfool 83136 wrote:

6. No thread hijacking on the BikeArlington forum.

I typically enjoy the digressions, though I’m hardly ever the person who started a thread, so I have no ownership.

Hey! Think we’ll go metric?

[ejwillis62]

I had to log in to post this quick rule, “Do not wear bike shorts that are so small for you that everyone you pass gets a view of your butt crack.” I am seeing way way to much of this on the mount vernon trail. Just horrible. Get bigger pants. So far I have only seen men doing this but I am sure with the warmer weather it will even out but please people spare those of us behind you.

[TwoWheelsDC]

@ejwillis62 83160 wrote:

I had to log in to post this quick rule, “Do not wear bike shorts that are so small for you that everyone you pass gets a view of your butt crack.” I am seeing way way to much of this on the mount vernon trail. Just horrible. Get bigger pants. So far I have only seen men doing this but I am sure with the warmer weather it will even out but please people spare those of us behind you.

Bibs. Problem solved.

[Author]

Posts