One good reason for coming to at least an almost dead stop at a stop sign or stop light is that it is VERY difficult to break even a stop and go habit when there does happen to be a car, truck, bike, or pedestrian coming across your projected path across the intersection. I know this from my own years of experience of not coming to a complete stop, and I would guess it is the same for virtually everyone.
When coasting through an intersection has become habit even though one consciously says, ³I will stop if anything is coming,² it¹s the habit that is in control and has to be overridden. One¹s reflexes of responding to danger at the intersection are less safe than if one had the real habit of stopping. The same is true for drivers. I think that¹s why there are these laws. On the other hand, when the biker is going uphill to a stop sign, I think there¹s a lot less danger in not stopping because the hill will help the bike too. Personally, it gripes me when bikers run through red lights and stop signs and ride on the wrong side of the road. I¹m an everyday biker, and I feel like such folks are ruining the cause of bicyclists in general. I do not agree that the stop sign laws are ³designed as political symbols.² Mary On 5/18/12 3:04 PM, "rick" <[email protected]> wrote: > This sounds like an undocumented plank from a particular political parties > platform .... > > > > On 5/18/2012 2:03 PM, Darryl Jordan wrote: >> >> >> Narcissistic anarchists such as yourself solely ragard that laws are for >> other people and not thyself. Be careful that stop sign doesn't kick you in >> the butt, or worse. >> >> >> >> >> >> From: Mike <[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]> >> To: Michael Chronister <[email protected]> >> <mailto:[email protected]> >> Cc: "[email protected]" <mailto:[email protected]> >> <[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]> >> Sent: Fri, May 18, 2012 11:41:24 AM >> Subject: Re: [Bikies] "stop" legally defined >> >> >> many laws are designed to hinder and hurt people. follow them if you want, be >> a victim if you please when the law fails you. the courts laugh, and will >> charge you, when you follow stupid laws they were mostly designed as >> political symbols. >> >> >> >> >> >> On May 18, 2012, at 11:33, Michael Chronister <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> >> >>> >>> 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]> 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]> >>>> To: "STRAWSER, Charles" <[email protected]> >>>> Cc: [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]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I think the tangent we are on is interesting, but deserves a new subject >>>>> line. >>>>> >>>>> ------------ >>>>> >>>>> Arthur wrote: ³Watch 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 traffic² >>>>> >>>>> ------------- >>>>> >>>>> Long ago I heard a law enforcement officer say that even if a motorist¹s >>>>> wheels were stopped, it could be argued that ³motion had not ceased² if >>>>> the driver only stopped long enough for the car¹s body to rock forward >>>>> (over the stopped wheels), then backward (still over stopped wheels), then >>>>> took their foot off the brake and allowed the car¹s wheels to start >>>>> rolling forward before the oscillation of the car¹s 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 ³forward² 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 I¹d be fine >>>>> with an individual law enforcement officer taking that view as long as >>>>> s/he consistently applied such an extremely narrow view of ³stop² 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) ³Stop² 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] >>>>> http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Bikies mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Bikies mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Bikies mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Bikies mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Bikies mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
_______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
