New York City has sent over 6000 cyclists to criminal court. Some say they are being treated unfairly.
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/33503408
https://bronx.news12.com/citywide-crackdown-on-cyclists-causes-divide-on-accountabilityOpen linkView original on lemmy.world
So uh, if you break the law a ticket seems pretty appropriate. I ride an E-bike to work. I stop at stop signs and red lights, I don't ride on the sidewalk.
If you make the same violation in a car, you get a traffic ticket. In a bicycle, you go to criminal court. This is why this is considered unfair.
I missed that, yeah that does suck.
Not to mention in a car you're putting pedestrians, drivers and other road users in danger. On a bike you're pretty much just putting yourself in danger.
Yes I know its possible for a cyclist to injure/kill a pedestrian, but its very very rare compared to cars killing people.
I’m pretty sure you’d get a bit more than a traffic ticket if you drove a car on the sidewalk.
That is correct. Good job.
Maybe they shouldn't be running red lights?
Like, it seems the major complaint is now that they're being held accountable for running red lights, it's inconvient to go to traffic court.
They point out cars are different, but do it too many times in a car and you don't have a license. When regulating something that anyone can do without a license, fines are just a tax that poor people can't afford
Like, if anything they should be arguing for everyone who runs red lights to need to be inconvienced and spend a day in court
Instead they're arguing no one should have to do that
Which kind of runs against their narrative, but even reading it twice I still don't understand how running a red lights on a bicycle makes anything safer... Especially for the cyclist.
Bicycles are not cars, and should not be treated identically to cars. Your post sounds like you've never ridden a bicycle in a city before. Bicycles stopped at traffic lights are kinda in an impossible situation. Coming to a 100% complete stop means dismounting and putting your feet on the pavement. Briefly becoming a pedestrian in the road. Basically asking people to rear end you, because they don't expect a 100% complete stop either. Red lights become "yield" signs. "Stop as yield" or an "Idaho stop" are known to be safer for everyone.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idaho_stop
No, a red light is a red light.
The fact that bikes are not cars should lead you to a different conclusion. Running a red light on a bike is much closer to jaywalking a red light as a pedestrian.
Read the link people! It's legal in 6 states! Why am I still getting replies saying the same thing?
That may be a law in a few states, but New York is not one of those.
But the author isn't advocating for this law, she's arguing that cyclists should be treated the same as cars...
Which is what you're apparently mad at me about?
Did you mean to reply to the main post and you're arguing with the article's author? I don't think she'll read these comments.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idaho_stop#Safety
It's safer dude. You asked how it was safer, here are numbers of how it's safer.
The Idaho Stop is not the same as running a red. I've been riding all my life and riding on the road since I was 12. You shouldn't run red lights; it's unpredictable and just downright dangerous if you do it at the wrong intersection.
Except for the 6 states where it's legal. Like in the link I posted. Because it is safer than not. But IDK why I expected people to read the link.
Oh ok, that's what you were doing.
Sorry, I got confused when you were accusing me of agreeing with the author.
And now you've clarified that a single study has shown a correlation:
I actually downloaded the PDF to read what was going:
To get that 14.5% decrease, they're counting the "physical strain" of having to start from a stop. But if they're supposed to be coming to a full stop anyways, they have the same amount of starts...
Still doesn't make any logical sense to me how it's safer, but it lead me time more info in the end, so thanks!
https://web.archive.org/web/20160723102129/http://www.arch.ksu.edu/seamon/fajans.htm
These Berkeley Professors bring up an interesting idea. Not so much mentioning safety directly. But they mention 2 different possible routes, one with more stop signs and one with more traffic and fewer stops.
So perhaps adding "stop as yield" changes the calculation for what is the fastest route by bicycle. Which leads bicycles to take safer routes with more stop signs and fewer cars. That could explain some of the decrease in accidents when states/cities pass these laws. Change in bicyclist behavior.