It’s literally the last paragraph quoted on OP post.

So you’re just posting an irrelevant tangent on car accidents?

It’s important to note that the goal of the Idaho stop rule is not to legalize chaos on the roads. Cyclists must still yield to cars ahead of them at stop signs, as well as to pedestrians at all times, and may only enter the intersection when it is clear.

This was a dumb title OP.

Literally everyone in this thread didn’t read the article, didn’t comprehend what the Idaho stop rules are, and is just in here nonsensically bitching about cyclists getting run over thinking this rule will allow them to blow through all intersections willy nilly.

Read the article before posting. If you can’t be bothered then don’t comment on what you presume the content to be.

There are different rules for transport truck drivers, and there are different rules for pedestrians. Treating people who decided to go to the store in their 2 ton portable living room, that’s 3ft off the ground, with four reclining seats, and separated completely from the outside world by a bubble, the exact same as the guy walking or on a 30 lb bike is fucking asinine.

Read the fucking article before posting.

With Idaho stop rules, a stop sign becomes a yield sign, meaning that cyclists are still required to slow down and make sure it’s safe before proceeding.

Read the article before posting.

Congrats, your personal preferences for fitness are not valid arguments for policy changes.

What the fuck are you talking about?

How is treating a stop sign like a yield sign no predictable? You do realize that we have yield signs and people predictably follow them every single day right?

It absolutely is not BS. All you’ve done is highlighted the fact that you evidently don’t cycle anywhere. If you did, you would immediately understand what they meant about coming to a full stop, vs a slow crawl.

Because heres the thing that’s different about a bicycle vs walk ing vs a car: bicycles stop balancing and tip over when they stop moving. There’s also an enormous amount of starting torque required for any wheeled vehicle starting from a full stop compared to a slow crawl, which is not the case for walking, and obviously cars (and ebikes) have a motor to get them through that torque so it is literally nothing to the driver.

Read the article before posting.

As a Canadian citizen,read the article before posting irrelevant nonsense.

Also, make a substantive point, you being Dutch is not a substantive point.

That is literally what the Idaho stop rule change is.

Did you read the article?

It does not allow cyclists to blow through stop signs. It requires them to treat them as yield signs, which means slowing down and yielding the right of way is someone else is going the other way.

Read the article.

The rule change has nothing to do with making cyclists safer. It makes the cyclists’ current behaviour legal and predictable to everyone.

The Dutch, the Finn’s, and the Danes absolutely did not cover every single possible street with bike lanes. There are still numerous places where you have to bike on the road. Don’t be daft.

Read the article before posting.

There is no entitlement, and it’s not edge cases. The Idaho stop rules make sense in all cases.

The solution is what’s in the article, the Idaho stop rules.