http://www.examiner.com/a-530243~Crash_spotlights_Octavia_and_Market_intersection.html

A truck driver makes an illegal right turn, hits a cyclist, puts her in the hospital with serious injuries, and he gets cited for nothing more than making an illegal right turn – $120 fine. It’s not in this particular article, but the truck driver dragged her bike for several miles after hitting her.

That’s why, as a cyclist, you want to go through red lights if you judge it to be safe to do so. So you can get ahead of the drivers who don’t know and don’t care the you’re there. And then they can’t put you in the hospital.

You want me to read every last word of your misguided post and parse everything you wrote? Those are some high expectations.

Yes, it is better for cyclists to run red lights. It’s safer for cyclists in general to get ahead of cars in urban areas. And if motorists have the expectation that bicycles are always going to run red lights and stop signs, they will ultimately not expect them to.

Our court system could very easily find that requiring cyclists to stop at stop signs is incorrect. There is no reason that mass disobedience of the law wouldn’t achieve this outcome. Do New York City cops routinely give out tickets for jaywalking? San Francisco cops for panhandling?

There are definitely ways to improve safety for cyclists that cost basically zero dollars:

1) Ban right turns on red. Aside from informing the public of the new requirement and a political fight, the cost is zero. There are no signs forbidding right turns on red in New York, but people know the law.

2) Increase traffic fines. Again, no up-front cost other than the political fight. In the long-run, this could fund enforcement and infrastructure improvement.

3) Refuse to enforce the law as respects bicycles. If cities can stop enforcing laws pertaining to small-time drug trafficking, then they can stop ticketing cyclists for disobeying stop sign and red light laws.

Show some imagination. A “courteous” cyclist is just as likely to get hit by a car. Otherwise we wouldn’t need any bike infrastructure.

Cyclists zooming through a red light at 18 mph is a different issue entirely.

“There are other ways (better infrastructure, better enforcement) but they all cost a lot of money, and can not be implemented tonight on your ride home.”

There is no magic here…and this was largely an argument against running red lights (in our current system with our current laws), do you disagree and instead feel it is good for everyone if cyclists run red lights? I would be interested in hearing your argument.

It is very unlikely that an Idaho stop style law is going to be passed any time soon in Boston.

Do you propose treating red lights like stop signs until the law falls under the pressure of the collective law breaking? Or would that be a mis-characterization of your argument?

Please enlighten.

The rules need to be changed – as they have in Idaho and Portland – to create a safe environment for cyclists. The law, as it stands, was designed in the 1950s to maximize car flow. For example, right turns on red are horribly dangerous for pedestrians, but they sure are great for drivers.

You really need to question why things are the way they are, instead of accepting a situation that’s dangerous for you as a rider.

I think this scares us away from being in our communities and public spaces and it also distracts attention from solving the actual problems, the things that really do cause danger, and instead gets a lot of people trying to change behaviors which really aren’t dangerous, or wouldn’t be if the actual cause of the danger were removed, just to partly mitigate the danger and make themselves feel a little better about it.

I think bicycle helmets and neon or reflective clothing both fit in this category. Sure, there is some small mitigation of danger by wearing a helmet or bright clothing. However, in general, riding a bicycle is not inherently dangerous, what makes it dangerous (largely) is the automobiles they share space with. But people get so caught up on the helmet issue particularly, that they all forget that the real problem here is high traffic speeds and irresponsible drivers/riders, not helmets (or lack thereof). Very nearly every single death on a bicycle in the U.S. is in a collision with an automobile, and helmets and bright clothing don’t change that fact.

So, let’s stop being so alarmist, look at danger where it actually exists and is worth doing something about, see it for what it is, and work at solving real problems instead of just trying to put a million band-aids on things.