I’ve seen a lot of discussion lately about the Idaho law. Basically, it allows human-powered vehicles to treat stop signs like yield signs and red lights like stop signs. Same Roads, Same Rights, Different Rules… sorta like how a lot of cyclists behave now.
I can see pros and cons.
It is true that a cyclist can see if an intersection is clear better than a motorist. And if a cyclist makes a mistake, he’s more likely to hurt himself than anyone else. Sometimes, when I’m at a red light and there is no traffic, I think, “if this was my own private Idaho…” (nevermind). Frankly, I hate gratuitous “traffic calming” stop signs as much as anyone else, and wouldn’t mind not having to stop at them when I clearly had the right-of-way. I also know I would not abuse it, because I stop at stop signs now.
On the other side. What might be the perception of cyclists getting special privileges, especially when so many don’t follow the rules now? Will this increase animosity toward us? And what about cyclist behavior? So many already act as though they are exempt from the law, will this make them less cautious? Will they be more inclined to violate right-of-way? I’m beginning to believe American’s don’t know the meaning of “yield” anymore. It seems only to mean, “I don’t have to stop.” This is evident in how the right-turn-on-red is abused… everyone knows they can turn right on red, most of them forgot the rest of the sentence.
Or, wait! Could this be a nefarious plot to undermine our rights by giving us different rules? You decide.
Seriously, I’m curious how YOU feel about it. You don’t have to be registered to vote in the poll. If you want to elaborate on your opinion, please do so in the comments section.