I understand that’s the law. I just think it doesn’t make sense. Like much of traffic infrastructure and rules, they are designed for the smooth flow and convenience of car traffic and don’t consider safety or convenience of bike traffic at all. The reason the Idaho stop was first implemented was due to safety issues when a bike did follow stop sign rules.
A pedestrian and a bike don’t require rules for flow control. Unlike cars and pedestrians, bikes and pedestrians are pretty compatible in the same spaces. It’s trivial to roll through a stop sign and go around a pedestrian crossing the street.
I understand that’s the law. I just think it doesn’t make sense. Like much of traffic infrastructure and rules, they are designed for the smooth flow and convenience of car traffic and don’t consider safety or convenience of bike traffic at all. The reason the Idaho stop was first implemented was due to safety issues when a bike did follow stop sign rules.
It’s for pedestrian safety not car safety. A car hitting a bike doesn’t destroy the car.
A pedestrian and a bike don’t require rules for flow control. Unlike cars and pedestrians, bikes and pedestrians are pretty compatible in the same spaces. It’s trivial to roll through a stop sign and go around a pedestrian crossing the street.