BIKE: How to break the law?

[Stuart Werbner]

Actually, I thought the Idaho law allowed cyclists to treat a stop light as 
a combination of a stop sign and a yield sign. Hence, you first are supposed 
to come to a full stop at the intersection, then you could go after yielding 
to any other traffic having the green light.

If this is the correct interpretation of their law, then I am guilty on some 
occasions of acting like an Idahoan who has completely forgotten he is now 
living in Texas.

Are there any Idahoans around?? Or people familiar with the state website?

    __o
_`\<,_
(*)/ (*)
~~~~~~~~~
Stuart Werbner
Annuit Coeptis

"Time for another regime change."





>From: Michael Bluejay <bikes>
>To: Mike Dahmus <mdahmus>
>CC: forum
>Subject: Re: BIKE: How to break the law?
>Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2004 12:34:46 -0500
>MIME-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v613)
>Received: from mc1-f14.hotmail.com ([64.4.50.21]) by mc1-s20.hotmail.com 
>with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6824); Wed, 21 Apr 2004 10:32:50 -0700
>Received: from che.dreamhost.com ([66.33.216.23]) by mc1-f14.hotmail.com 
>with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6824); Wed, 21 Apr 2004 10:30:03 -0700
>Received: from che.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])by 
>che.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPid B750B98748; Wed, 21 Apr 2004 
>10:30:00 -0700 (PDT)
>Received: from sack.dreamhost.com (sack.dreamhost.com [66.33.213.6])by 
>che.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBF9E986BCfor 
><forum>;Wed, 21 Apr 2004 10:29:58 -0700 (PDT)
>Received: from ms-smtp-01-eri0.texas.rr.com 
>(ms-smtp-01.texas.rr.com[24.93.47.40])by sack.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with 
>ESMTP id D7BDB909E8for <forum>; Wed, 21 Apr 2004 
>10:29:58 -0700 (PDT)
>Received: from [192.168.0.101] (cs6625163-5.austin.rr.com [66.25.163.5])by 
>ms-smtp-01-eri0.texas.rr.com (8.12.10/8.12.7) with ESMTP idi3LHTklK017438; 
>Wed, 21 Apr 2004 12:29:46 -0500 (CDT)
>X-Message-Info: LGjzam7y+LtwvwSfiEri0lhuvRhQUslfqwvUk7hVfSQ=
>Delivered-To: forum-bicycleaustin.info
>In-Reply-To: <408674CA.1020501>
>References: 
><6F7CA334-92AA-11D8-AD7A-00039312C130>	<40851D0F.2050700><F29E7E97-9376-11D8-AD7A-00039312C130><408674CA.1020501>
>Message-Id: <2E9B7D0E-93BA-11D8-AD7A-00039312C130>
>X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.613)
>X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine
>X-BeenThere: forum-bicycleaustin.info
>X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4
>Precedence: list
>List-Id: forum-bicycleaustin.info.lists.bicycleaustin.info
>List-Help: 
><mailto:forum-bicycleaustin.info-request?subject=help>
>List-Post: <mailto:forum-bicycleaustin.info>
>List-Subscribe: 
><http://lists.bicycleaustin.info/listinfo.cgi/forum-bicycleaustin.info>,<mailto:forum-bicycleaustin.info-request?subject=subscribe>
>List-Archive: 
><http://lists.bicycleaustin.info/private.cgi/forum-bicycleaustin.info>
>List-Unsubscribe: 
><http://lists.bicycleaustin.info/listinfo.cgi/forum-bicycleaustin.info>,<mailto:forum-bicycleaustin.info-request?subject=unsubscribe>
>Errors-To: forum-bicycleaustin.info-bounces
>Return-Path: forum-bicycleaustin.info-bounces
>X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Apr 2004 17:30:05.0252 (UTC) 
>FILETIME=[48DAC040:01C427C6]
>
>>I have a real problem with punks ... you're not very intelligent.
>
>Umm....
>
>
>>and calling me by my last name in a conversation I'm involved in is not 
>>helping matters.
>
>I apologize, I didn't know this was your preference.  People have called me 
>by my last name all my life and I've never thought twice about it.
>
>
>>>This is probably the biggest straw man argument I've ever seen in my 
>>>life.  Who exactly is it who's advocating that cyclists run stop signs 
>>>when it's not safe to do so?
>>
>>It's never safe to do so. But since you disagree, then I trust you'll be 
>>with Patrick in pushing for removing the legal requirement to stop at all 
>>stop signs in the city for motorists as well as cyclists. Ready to put 
>>your body where your mouth is? Ready to assume that the motorist coming up 
>>to the stop sign at the cross street is going to see you and decide to 
>>stop this time?
>
>Well then, I assert that this is proof positive that you don't understand 
>what Patrick and I are talking about.  You simply don't run the sign when 
>there's a motorist coming up to the sign at a cross street.  THAT'S what we 
>mean about only running a sign when it's safe to do so.
>
>As far as putting my body where my mouth is by running stop signs, hello, I 
>do this every day.  And I never have close calls because I only do it when 
>it's safe to do so.  On the other hand, I've nearly been hit several times 
>by motorists running red lights, and I've actually been hit several times 
>by motorists running stop signs.  I've never been hit by a bicyclist.
>
>The idea that it is *never* safe to run stop signs is ridiculous.  How 
>exactly do you propose that I will be hit by a nonexistent car?
>
>By the way, someone here referred to Idaho's law allowing cyclists to treat 
>red lights as stop signs.  Actually that's not quite right, the law allows 
>cyclists to treat stop signs as yield signs.  This brings up an interesting 
>question, Mike:  Is Idaho's law unsafe, or is it magically safe because 
>it's not against the law?
>
>Love,
>
>-MBJ-
>
>_______________________________________________
>Get on or off this list here:  
>http://lists.bicycleaustin.info/listinfo.cgi/forum-bicycleaustin.info

_________________________________________________________________
Watch LIVE baseball games on your computer with MLB.TV, included with MSN 
Premium! 
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/mlb&pgmarket=en-us/go/onm00200439ave/direct/01/