152
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 01 Sep 2026
152 points (92.2% liked)
Fuck Cars
16550 readers
1239 users here now
A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!
Rules
1. Be Civil
You may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.
2. No hate speech
Don't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.
3. Don't harass people
Don't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.
4. Stay on topic
This community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.
5. No reposts
Do not repost content that has already been posted in this community.
Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.
Posting Guidelines
In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:
- [meta] for discussions/suggestions about this community itself
- [article] for news articles
- [blog] for any blog-style content
- [video] for video resources
- [academic] for academic studies and sources
- [discussion] for text post questions, rants, and/or discussions
- [meme] for memes
- [image] for any non-meme images
- [misc] for anything that doesn’t fall cleanly into any of the other categories
Recommended communities:
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
The above post states this occurred at a stop sign and not at a light. They used the words "in my neighborhood" implying that this is also a residential area where there would be less traffic.
Stop signs are no different. Traffic or no traffic, you heed the sign. Only losers blow past the stop sign without stopping. I also use my turn signal when no one is around. It's just what a good and safe driver does. Because muscle memory and good habits save lives in the end. At least they prevent accidents.
I think the main difference is, in places like the Netherlands especially in low-traffic neighborhoods, they would build yield signage rather than stop signs. America has a lot more of the latter, primarily because of the abundance of speed-demon cars.
Makes sense. 👍 I live in a bike city. We don't really have stop or yield signs for bike roads. Those roads kind of just merge smoothly with each other. They try to avoid intersections at all. But people manage just the same. People do what makes sense. It's less dangerous because the cars are on completely separate roads.
I think you missed the point about cyclists having different traffic laws. In fact the reason why the have it is for safety. A bike can't speed up quickly like a motor vehicle can so it's safer to maintain speed when possible.
Source? Moving is dangerous, not moving at a stop sign the only danger is from behind, so logically what you’re saying doesn’t even make sense. And i doubt there’s any study to support that.
They changed the law probably mainly so they wouldn’t have to waste time ticketing, it’s very rarely ever about safety.
Also, my old civic can’t accelerate fast, most bikes accelerate faster, so… that can’t be the reasoning. Lots of cars accelerate slowly and e-bikes accelerate faster than fast cars.
You can't move quickly at first and if a speeding car comes by you can't get out of the way. When I was 15 I experienced a driver blowing through the stop sign and hitting my back tire. It was super scary. If I hadn't stopped first I still would have been going fast and wouldn't of gotten hit by the car. That's why if I see that no one is coming I just go through.
This isn’t a source, it’s an anecdote.
I didn't miss it.
In the EU we have sensible rules where predictability trumps bullshit like that. Predictability is an extremely important factor for safety. Speeding up isn't an important factor lol, I've never heard such a silly rationale for allowing a certain vehicle to break the rules. What the actual fuck. 'Murica though, right? 😂
This is in Minnesota which is literally a mini Canada and the law was signed in by Tim Walz in 2023. Also bicycles are literally pedestrians and not vehicles.
Apologies, I don't know who Tim Walz is or why it's relevant. Also don't know what it means for the sake of argumentation that a state is a "mini Canada". 🤷♂️ No clue what the significance is there. 😅
🤨 That's weird. According to whom? Not Wikipedia anyway.
— https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle
Bikes traveling on a road should adhere to the rules of that road, just like any other vehicle traveling on that road.
Walz is the guy who ran with Harris against the diarrhea doo doo fecal man. I don't expect anyone outside the US to know who he is.
My point is that bicycles should never be grouped with cars because of how different they are. Bicycles should probably have their own rules but if they were to be grouped with anything, it's definitely pedestrians and not vehicles.
There's a guy in my town who gets around on a motorized wheelchair which technically means he's operating a motor vehicle but it would be pretty insane to expect him to follow the same rules as a car driver, so it makes much more sense, for simplicity's sake, to classify him as a pedestrian even though he technically isn't.
I think it's sensible they have similar rules to cars, because bikes are much, much faster than pedestrians. Ride on right side of road, the "right-hand yield rule", following signs that are in place, etc. I don't understand why it's better to have them treated as pedestrians, when they behave so differently from pedestrians.
But different roads have different rules. Ride on car road, follow car rules. Ride on pedestrian road, follow those rules. It's about context and predictability, again.
In Washington, cyclists treating stop signs as yield signs was added to the state code in 2020, despite the fact that bicycles are broadly defined as vehicles.
Yeah the "bicycles are vehicles" thing I've always found weird cause like, 5 year olds ride bikes, and it's very weird to call them a driver or a vehicular operator cause they are literally 5 years old. This is why bikes should be grouped separately from cars, since they are very different things.
5 year olds don't ride alone on a large road though. They are usually/should always be accompanied by an adult when riding on a road with other trafficants. Also their vehicles won't be as deadly as one necessarily operated by an older person, e.g. a car.
I feel like your view of "vehicle" is a bit black and white. 😬 There are nuances to this, of course.
I guess all this is exacerbated by the fact that America is a terrible bike country. It's a car country. So bikes are often forced to ride with cars, which is not good. But it makes sense that they should follow the same rules, because consistency is important.
It was said that "for some reason people don't know these special rules for bikes". Yeah, no kidding. Special rules are hard. Consistency is simple and predictable and the most important for safety IMO. 👍
Yet there they are, operating a vehicle (at least in my backwoods state).