In Stanley Roberts’ latest “People Behaving Badly” segment (KRON-4), an officer from the Richmond District station pulls over cyclists on Arguello at Washington. He gives them warnings about running the stop sign. No tickets were issued.
Sarah B.
48 Comments
Comments are closed.
“I’ll never do it again”
“I was thinking about it also. I know I should stop”
Bullcrap.
As a driver, Yea, they have their rights, but come on, they run the stop sign, end up being in front of you, and swerve outside the bike lane to the car lane and back, preventing cars to pass them.
“I didn’t even know you could get cited for this (running a stop sign in a bicycle).”
What a simpleton.
Good. I live on Lake Street and can’t count how many times I have been nearly run over by bicyclists who ignore stop signs. My children, my pregnant wife, myself with a baby on the arm in the crosswalk- nothing will stop a bicyclist from running a stop sign. In particular the ones on their $10,000 bikes in Lance Armstrong type outfits…
Thanks for that bit of anecdotal nonsense Jim. I could go on to say that I live in SF, and I can’t count how many times I’ve nearly been run over in the crosswalk by cars that run several feet past the limit line. I can’t count how many times I’ve nearly been run over by some distracted driver who couldn’t put their cell phone down while they are behind the wheel. I can’t count how many times I’ve nearly been run over by some driver who can’t remember that they need to signal every lane change and turn. I can’t count how many times I’ve nearly been doored by some fool who doesn’t know they they will always be at fault if they hit me.
However, the 40,000 people a year who die from automobile collisions in this country alone want to know when we are going to get rid of cars and give our streets over to bicycles. (Bicycles having such a low mortality rate that it’s nigh impossible to find statistics.)
whether on bike or in a vehicle it’s the same scofflaw jerk selfish careless me first attitudes on display. LOLZ @ “I’m less of a d-bag because I ran you over on my bike instead of with my SUV” lolz LOLZ
I live on Arguello, nobody cars or bikes pays much attention to the stops signs or the crosswalks on the street. Glad to see SFPD out enforcing what should be an obvious thing for all traffic.
I am happy for the enforcement as a cyclist, pedestrian and motorist. It is important to hold all road users to the same standard. That the city increased moving violations 62% last year is a good small step forward; given the abysmal enforcement previously, it is easy to have a major increase like this. The focus here was on education, which along with efforts from the SF Bicycle Coalition like this video: http://www.sfbike.org/news/video-top-10-rules-of-the-road/ and their free bicycling safety classes go a ways toward making our streets safer and more predictable for all users. The third leg that still needs help is in re-engineering our streets to make it safer, particularly for vulnerable road users.
What about the cars running stop signs!!!! The idea that it’s okay for cars to do this (you know they do it all the time), but if a cyclists does it’s the end of the world is illogical. Cyclists need to be careful and slow down and often stop. But cyclists are not a 1-2 ton rolling death machine. Seems we should focus on the cars first. They statistically cause more harm then bicycles. Focusing on cars will make us much more safe than the bicycles. We need to prioritize properly. And yes, educate the cyclists too, but when is the last time a car got pulled over for running a stop sign and it made the news?
I disagree. I bike to work all the time, and have thought a lot about how this affects me…
I have made the decision to not stop for stop signs and to merely slow down of there are no cars coming in either direction or if there are no pedestrians about to cross.
I won’t deny it; I purposefully break the law every time I do not stop at a stop sign and only slow down. I have made that decision for myself, and I understand if other bikers want to stop at every stop sign if there are no cars coming out in the Richmond, because that is the law. I am choosing to break it.
The reasons for this are many.
1) It is virtually impossible to get anywhere out in the Richmond stopping at every stop sign; the amount of energy you spend actually stopping and restarting at every stop sign is significant.
I challenge everyone reading this board who thinks cyclists should be stopping at every stop sign to actually bike from one end of Anza to the beach, stopping at every stop sign even if there are no cars coming. You will quickly realize that, despite all of the arguments that you should stop at every stop sign, it’s impractical to get anywhere. Try it. You will see. Seriously.
I have lived here almost 20 years and I have never ever seen a cyclist come to a complete stop at an intersection when there’s no cars coming or pedestrians at the crosswalk. Ever.
2) The auto laws in this state include bikes as a vehicle with virtually no distinction between them and cars. But a car is not a bike. I can stop on a dime. A car cannot. I can easy swerve to avoid hitting something; a car cannot. If I do collide with another car, I will be hurt and the auto driver most likely won’t. I have a higher view than a car but a number of feet, so I can look to the right or left and see vehicles from much further away. I am generally moving slower than a car.
So when I come to a stop sign, the only reason for me to stop is a law that was designed for autos and not for bikes. Instead, I follow the Idaho rule, which treats stop signs as yield signs, and red lights as red lights. I’ve made my choice, and If I get pulled over I’ll accept my ticket, and continue to not stop at stop signs when there’s no one around.
I ALWAYS stop for red lights, and I understand many cyclists don’t, and they may use the same logic I use, or none at all. And most cyclists don’t understand that a vehicle to the right has the right of way when both come to an intersection at the same time, for example. And most cyclists don’t understand that the key to traffic safety is predictabilty; drivers need to be able to predict what you are going to do; that you will come to a stop at a stop light if they have the green light. I stop at stop lights primarily because other vehicles having the green light have the right of way, and pedestrians, especially downtown, can enter the crosswalk from anywhere at any time.
Stop signs in the Richmond? Not so much. So I understand some people’s glee at cyclists being ticketed for not stopping; this is misplaced, because I can guarantee that you will never ever ever ever get cyclists to stop at all stop signs out in the Richmond when there are no cars coming at 10:00pm on a weekday; it just isn’t going to happen, no matter how many laws they pass. The laws will eventually change to reflect reality, which is that it is generally safe to treat a stop sign as a yield sign for a bike if there are no cars or pedestrians at the intersection.
That said, cyclists need to slow down and MUST yield to pedestrians, no matter how annoying it is, when a pedestrian is about to cross the crosswalk or int he crosswalk, and MUST come to a stop when there’s a car that has come to the intersection at the same time and is to the right; that driver has the right-of-way.
So yes, I am breaking the law by not stopping when there are no cars coming and no pedestrains, and will continue to do so.
I agree with the commentator above, but only in regards to no pedestrians or stopped cars at intersections, and red lights are mandatory stops. That being said, I’ve never been hit by a car in any intersection, and the pedestrian accidents I have seen were from speeding cars running standing red lights, or quick-whip turns at corners. Those were definitely the fault of the drivers.
Now on the bike side, being able to avoid and swerve to prevent hitting someone doesn’t absolve a cyclist from the legal responsibility of following the rules of the road. I agree a balance need to be made in regards to stop sign enforcement, but having to nearly yank my son out of the way of speeding bicyclists on Lake, California and Arguello, makes me less sympathetic to the plight of said cyclists.
When I read all that has been said, what remains is, how are pedestrians accountable for their actions. Well being on foot and unprotected has some major vulnerability factors. What I have been witness to as driver, a skater (I don’t have a bike) and a stroller, I have seen a sever lack of reality in some people as they cross the street or enter crosswalks. The most violated sensibility is to look both ways, or look into traffic before they enter the road. The worse are the parents who let their kids scooter down the street and into crosswalks when the light is red. I’ve seen many cars slam their brakes to avoid killing child and other oblivious pedestrians, who seem to carry some sort of imaginary shield of legality, that will somehow protect them from getting hit. It’s even more ludicrous that if you get hit and die, how will that ‘shield’ have helped you at all.
Again, these are my observations and opinions based on such. I teach my kids the same rules that have been passed down from the 4 other generations before us as SF/Richmond Distict dwellers.
1. Look both ways before you enter the road.
2. Wait at least 3-5 seconds before you enter Geary when your light turns green, and still look at both directions of traffic to see if some maniac isn’t paying attention.
3. Walk your bike/skateboard across the street especially on Anza, Geary, California and Fulton. Keep looking at traffic.
4. If you are on your bike, and no one is around at an intersection, slow down and look before you roll that stop sign.
Simple.
They must’ve been wearing the LIESTRONG wristbands.
@j If losing energy or you are too tired to ride a bike, then maybe riding a bike isnt for you. Just because you are tired or slow doesn’t give you the right to break laws. Just take the bus.
Classic Richmond SF cars vs. bikes comments. “OMG YOU MUST OBEY THE LAW AT ALL TIMES” hysteria without regard for any practical considerations.
Sit and watch an intersection in the Richmond district with stop signs some time. I sat at Chomp-n-Swig for 15 minutes once and counted the number of cars that came to a complete stop at the intersection of 17th and California. Shocking to say, out of about 30 cars that I saw drive through, only one of them came to a complete stop, and five barely even slowed down for the intersection. I’d challenge you to find a single driver in this city who regularly comes to a complete stop at stop signs, and they’re piloting 2000lb cars where the kinetic energy is significantly higher.
Change traffic laws to allow cyclists to treat stop signs like YIELD signs. Then have police enforce cyclists giving RIGHT OF WAY to pedestrians at all crosswalks and at all the other times they should. And cars as well, of course. This seems like the right setup to me.
There are a few places in the Richmond where we probably don’t even need stop signs and there are a few where there aren’t any where we should have them. But regardless, common sense and awareness are almost always usually enough regardless of the signage.
It really is time to slap this entitled bicyclists with some real tickets for breaking the law- just like car drivers have been forever. Mostly because of people like this clown above who chooses to ignore rules and proudly tells everyone about it. What an idiot.
Right on. I drive a big fat SUV and I am not stopping for bicyclists who run stop signs. In fact, I may step on the gas a little bit…
+1 to Bob Tobb for his counterpoint on cars actually obeying Stop signs; and
+1 Kayvaan for a constructive comment.
Adding to Kayvaan’s point, Idaho has a Stop-As-Yield law for bicyclists, which was passed in 1982 (red light means full stop and proceed if clear). “the Idaho experience has been positive according to Mark McNeese, Bicycle/Pedestrian coordinator for the Idaho Transportation Department… Idaho bicycle-collision statistics confirm that the Idaho law has resulted in no discernible increase in injuries or fatalities to bicyclists.” (bicyclelaw.com/articles/a.cfm/legally-speaking-stop-as-yield1).Some Colorado towns/cities also have similar versions of the law (e.g., Breckenridge).
It’s easier to push a gas pedal than a bicycle pedal, and getting more people on bikes is important as it decreases accidents and improves people’s health. We should be encouraging biking as a way to keep our families safer and healthier.
Jimbo, cars and bikes aren’t the same. Your car is much more dangerous than my bike. The law for stop signs makes no distinction. But I do, and I both bike and drive, and I will treat stop signs like yield signs. It’s not an issue of being proud or not; it’s just the reality and the practicality of getting anywhere on a bike. I am pretty sure you don’t bike, but if you did you would quickly understand.
I’ve heard from people that even cops have told them they think it’s stupid for bikes to have to stop at stop signs when there’s no one around, but they occasionally occasionally engage in enforcement actions where they go after cyclists running stop signs. But cyclists will continue to tread stop signs as yield signs, and someday the laws will catch up to that reality. There’s certain places, especially along the Wiggle, where they really should conduct more enforcement because cyclists often cut off pedestrians there; the Richmond has nothing on the amount of bike traffic that occurs on that route.
Also, fyi, I drive, about as much as I bike, and do my best to obey traffic laws.
The speed limit on most streets is 25 mph, and people frequently go a lot faster than that. It doesn’t help that all the avenues are wide and straight, inviting people to go a lot faster than they should on residential streets. Stop signs and other traffic control devices are installed with that in mind– the need to tame 30 mph traffic, which can (and does) cause bad accidents.
To apply all the same rules to traffic which rarely exceeds 15 mph is a bit silly, and silly laws are frequently disobeyed. If we could somehow limit all vehicles to 15 mph, down to 8 at intersections, we’d eliminate the need for most stop signs and traffic lights entirely, without affecting overall speed much (since what you’d lose in top speed you’d make up in not having to stop unnecessarily). Unfortunately, we don’t have that ability, so we’re forced to make do with the blunt instrument of planting stop signs at every single intersection.
Get those damn entitled bicyclists out of this city. Enough is enough. Let’s go after them
As someone who forfeited the privilege of either driving or riding a bicycle when I was seven years old, my feeling is that everyone who feels that traffic laws are optional should be invited to be run over by cars and bicycles while they are on the sidewalk. I have never been hit or run over while crossing a street, but I have been hit and run over by both cars and bicycles while walking on San Francisco sidewalks. I have also been hit by a bicyclist who felt they had the right to pass a Muni bus loading and unloading passengers at a Muni bus stop.
Until one has endured being a Muni captive for more than 50 years, has had to rely on the pathetic taxi service west of Van Ness, has had to walk or beg rides from friends and neighbors, one has no idea of the severity of career and lifestyle limitations they are permanently imposing on another human due to their own selfishness, self-centeredness, inattentiveness and ignorance.
I recommend increased enforcement and painting of traffic signs within all bike lanes with the words “no exceptions” below.
It is my belief that if cyclists want to share the road with cars and pedestrians they must obey the same laws as cars and pedestrians. Cars shouldn’t roll through stops, either should cyclists and pedestrians need to be responsible too. I see too many cyclists taking risks. They deserve tickets just as drivers do for violations. I’m sorry if there are “too many stop signs”. They are there be because these residential streets are not highways. For anyone on wheels.
http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/bicycle-crash-kills-another-pedestrian-central-park
Screw those stop signs. They just don’t apply to bikes. Bicyclists have the right of way everywhere. We don’t pollute, occupy space, or cause traffic jams. If a pedestrian gets hit here and there, who cares.
This intersection is a great candidate for an Idaho stop. I never fully stop at this one, even under the watchfull eye of the Presidio Terrace rent-a-cops.
I am one of those rare drivers who comes to a complete stop at every stop sign and I am one of those cyclists who yields at stop signs. I’ve ridden, literally, thousands of miles on my bikes, mostly in Manhattan and SF.
The motorists here are really the most self-entitled crappy drivers I’ve ever come across anywhere in the world who drive with impunity. They don’t use turn signals properly. They refuse to recognize that left-hand lanes are for passing. They come barreling out into traffic against the light from side streets without stopping or stick the nose of their cars out into traffic and create hazardous conditions for other motorists. Add to that, self-entitled, selfish pedestrians who slow down in crosswalks when they see a car approaching …if they even look and refuse to give an inch to anyone on a bike. Just very unfriendly.
But then, this is considered the most unfriendly place in the country. http://open.salon.com/blog/the_new_number_two/2010/04/08/is_san_francisco_the_least_friendly_town_in_the_union As a transplanted New Yorker, I have to agree.
Over all, the cyclists are far less of a hazard or blight than motorists and pedestrians even though they’ve been demonized.
Last night I rode from downtown around 11:30 out to the outer Richmond where I live. Going from 8th avenue out to 24th on Cabrillo, I saw no cars at all on Cabrillo or on any of the side streets driving, except for the crossing at Park Presidio. There’s a stop sign at virtually every corner on Cabrillo, though. The idea that I should be legally required to come to a complete stop in this situation at every single stop sign is just not realistic. It’s Idaho stops all the way.
@24: Lydia- it’s all those tech people and hipsters who moved here over the past decade. This would be a much better place without them
@26 Actually, Billy, that is not my experience, at all. It appears to be long-time residents with that attitude who are some of the worst offenders. The young hipsters who’ve been attracted to SF’s tech boom bring a friendly attitude that I’ve found missing in the eight years I’ve lived here since moving from friendly New York.
As for San Francisco being a much better place without the tech boom, what exactly would you propose to support the economy of San Francisco and the surrounding area? Maybe you’re just dealing with a generational bias exacerbated by the pervasive provincialism in this city.
Please move back to New York. We don’t like your kind here. People like you who move here and then bitch around have truly poisoned the atmosphere here. Go back.
@28 Lovely, just lovely.
You’ve just confirmed everything I said.
Do people save all their hostility for the internet? Because I never see this much animosity or hostility between neighbors when I’m actually out in the street in the Richmond.
See, that is the problem- these misfits move here and then nobody wants them back where they came from and we are stuck with them. Otherwise she would have gone back to her “friendly” New York a long time ago
Yeah, I love this city and everything about it. Wouldn’t want to live anywhere else. Must be her. Too bad for her.
@J at 8:
right now, you’re only ignoring stop signs. Next comes deciding you can run a red light since nobody’s coming. Next: “Oh I can beat that car.” Next: you won’t even bother to look and will hit a pedestrian, like that man who killed somebody at Castro and Market a while back.
I’ve been run into and knocked down twice by bicyclists who ran red lights when I, a pedestrian, was crossing IN a crosswalk WITH a green light. One biker stopped, and cursed at me for getting in his way; when a bystander pointed out that the biker had run the light, he said he had too much momentum built up to stop. He then got on his bike and rode away without even asking if I was hurt. The other one did not even bother to stop. I guess he had too much momentum built up.
If you want a law more like the Idaho yield law, go talk to our Board of Supervisors who are eager to kneel down and kiss the hems of bikers’ garment. Until then the law applies to you as it does to pedestrians and drivers of cars.
Anniecat, this is known as the slippery slope argument.
“My God, if we allow people to do X, then the next thing you know they will be doing Y and, holy smokes, then Z, and the world will come to an end! So let’s ban X!” It’s a logical fallacy.,..I already mentioned I stop at stop lights, and I always stop for pedestrians. The man who killed someone at Castro and Market was barreling down Castro trying to beat a specific time on a route, so he was literally going as fast as he could possibly go. Meandering down Cabrillo at 11:30 at night and going through stop signs at 5mph is hardly a fair comparison.
I do agree that cyclists should stop at all stop lights, and should be ticketed for going through them. You’ll find no argument from me there.
Laws get changed often because people break them enough so that those in power finally realize it’s pointless to have the law, and eventually change them to catch up to reality. Cyclists aren’t going to stop at all stop signs out in the Richmond until the Board of Supervisors gets it’s act together.
Finally, I have to say, I’m pretty tired of the hate towards techies and hipsters and such. I’ve been here 20 years and am a techie and would be considered a hipster if I wasn’t so old; it’s my understanding a hipster can really only be defined as someone younger than you who doesn’t wear a suit. All types of people make up this city, including people who are (to you) a wierdo.
The only constant about this city is it’s constantly changing, which is what I love about it. Pert of that change is the massive amount of cyclists now on the street, and there’s only going to be more of us.
Well, it’s Friday…the Giants just won, and HSB is this weekend (a “hipster” paradise, smack in the middle of the park!) And it’s time to bike home from work. See ya.
You must be a proto-hipster then
Bicycles insist on sharing lanes with cars, but do not want to held to the same standards. How about mandatory helmets if you are on the street. How about following some kind of rule of the road, and make it standard, and make it stick! I think even a license is a good idea, with a driving test. And, most important, is insurance. You want to share the road with me, you play the game.
Every time sfgate — or this blog — runs an article about bicycles v pedestrians v cars, there are a huge number of angry posts from all sides, each blaming the other for all the problems on the street. each constituency can rightfully take its pound of flesh (and has!). One big way to immediately lose credibility is to sound self-righteous. No stakeholder here has the exclusive moral high ground (although each seems to believe it does).
The Richmond only recently (within the past 5-10 years) began adding more stop signs (and, when they weren’t enough to stop traffic, stop signs were switched to traffic lights). As the economy improves, the transplant population has significantly ballooned. More people=more cars, more pedestrians, more bicyclists, more problems.
My fantasy goes like this: Some local non-profits like, say, youth after-school programs–get kickstarter money to buy lots of bicycles. Then, every car driver who speeds through red lights and/or stops signs, endangering other people for no good reason other than they are selfish, impatient jerks, has their car confiscated and is mandated to buy a bicycle from one of the designated non-profits. Win-win: safer streets, happier kids and parents, better community. If the jerks can’t live w/o a car, too bad. Maybe the pedestrian or bicyclist you hit, or were about to hit, needed their leg or spine or some other body part that you were about to take away from them (or did) by your recklessness.
It is a fact that the vast — VAST — majority of bicyclist I see blow through ALL stop signs I stop at, without even slowing down. I’m not talking about ignoring stop signs when no one is around (who would know anyway???). I am referring to middle-of-the-day, high traffic conditions. Is it any wonder that a car with a right turn signal blinking away might not see or expect a bicyclist to roar through the stop sign on a flat street (the hell with the idiotic momentum excuse; if you want exercise, you’ll get a little more by starting up again after coming to a STOP at stop signs–and you might save your life). Absolutely, car drivers should be prepared for the unexpected, but that doesn’t excuse reckless, lazy bicyclists who apparently think traffic signs are for everyone but them. Think again. You’re so much more physically vulnerable than a driver in a 2,000 lb car, why would you leave your life in their hands?
And pedestrians, you’re the most vulnerable of all. I have, on many occasions, watched a pedesteian approach a corner, pause to look at the red light, look at me in my car, crossing the intersection on the green, and then walk slooooooly into the intersection. If I honk, I’ll often get a middle finger or they will walk even slower. I know what my fantasy is in those circumstances, but I’ll keep it to myself.
Finally, to @Lydia from New York: you sound like the stereotype from wence you come. If you love “friendly”, oh-so-cosmopolitan New York, and decry the “provincial”, unfriendly backwater that is the San Francisco you have for some reason found yourself in, why not move away? Or stop the odious comparisons already. The waters did not part for you when you arrived, the city will not shed tears when you leave. I disagree with many of the opinions @J posts here, but he clearly loves the city and its many offerings. He loves some of the recent changes that I do not, but hey, to each his own. It’s people who move here and then ooze an air of superiority about themselves in relation to the place they have chosen–yes, @lydia, chosen–to live that I personally wish would move along and give their precious place to someone else who will appreciate this still-wonderful, beautiful city.
I spent 3 years on the Richmond District Citizens Police Advisory Board. We went over this issue to death time and time again.
My personal view was, and is, that the ignoring of the vehicle code by all participant be it a motorist, a bicyclist, or a pedestrian is just wrong.
In New Your City starting 25 years ago they developed a concept that a bunch of little nuisance crimes tends to breed an atmosphere in which the next rung up of crimes/regulations are then perceived to be not important either. Most of this was directed in and on their subway system. Their experience, the evidence has shown, proved to be correct. By making folks hold the line on little things, larger things got better.
What we have here in the Richmond District is just such an thing going on with this issue of traffic in the public space.
When one group ignores the law, no matter what the reason or justification, then the folks in the other modes of transport begin to feel that the laws should not apply to them.
People hate laws that restrict their freedom as a rule no matter how small a law is but they put up with it for the common good. People really hate an area of laws if they feel that they are singled out for enforcement and others are not.
So when a pedestrian or a bicyclist ignores the vehicle code they are helping to breed the exact attitude among drivers that they consistently condemn. Only by everyone having equal enforcement of the traffic regulations do we breed respect for the law.
If someone, or a group, does not like a law then go and change it. The problem with that is it takes hard work and time and money. Most people would rather rant and or break the law than do hard work to change it.
Since that is the case, bicyclists and pedestrians will continue to ignore the rules and drivers will get mad. From time to time a auto driver will ignore what they perceive is a stupid rule, and why not as everyone else is doing it, and someone will die.
Even though the law will ascribe the driver to be the person of guilt in the death, do not think for one minute that the driver alone is the root cause.
So, so true, JD. Thank you for the thoughtful post. Wish people would take it to heart. Why can’t we learn from others’ mistakes??
Don’t lose sight of where the most significant problems lie: with cars:
Pedestrian struck by car near Golden Gate Park in SF
http://www.sfexaminer.com/sanfrancisco/pedestrian-struck-by-car-near-golden-gate-park-in-sf/
I could post 100’s of such headlines in our neighborhood for any given headline of a bicycle hitting someone and causing injury.
This doesn’t absolve rude cyclists who violate the right of way in any way, but, it reminds one that the rude behavior of some cyclists is a nuisance, while the rude behavior of drivers is a real danger.
I would like to see everybody just follow the rules/laws.
Happy to see the laws enforced on everyone at the intersections.
Renne – when you get run over and die from the pedestrian you’re fantasizing about…you may have a point, until then you sound as self-righteous as anyone else your finger pointing at in this blog.
Thank you for running this article and thanks to police for assisting in EVERYONE’S safety.
Well, for the cyclists posting who think it makes sense to pick and choose when you want to follow the rules, you may be riding on borrowed time. First, I am an avid cyclist; I ride long distances with charity events and think everyone should bike if they can. Second, about 2 years ago I hit a cyclist at 26th and Anza because the cyclist was “used to going through the stop sign”. He thought, but never checked, that it was a 4-way stop, but it wasn’t. I had no stop sign, was not speeding, and experienced the horror of having a human being slam up and over the hood of my car. He was conscious (though just sitting and not moving on the ground) after the accident. His lucidity was fortunate for us both, as he told the police (and apologized to me) that it was his fault. He was going to physically recover, but it was close.
Hitting a person is emotionally traumatizing; sometimes the victim *is* at fault. Had he died or been more seriously injured, *many* innocent lives could have been damaged because he was casual about the rules. I have no appreciation for cyclists who think this is just about them. If you get hit and it is YOUR fault, you are putting other people’s happiness, freedom, emotional health, and financial future on the line because, god forbid, you can’t be bothered to follow the law.
Thank you Kelly.
In the “accident” where I was run over at 7 years old while on the sidewalk, my two classmates were not so fortunate. They were sisters, the only girls in a family, and both were DOA. One dripped blood on me while in the stretcher above me in the ambulance to hospital. I had to tell the hospital personnel their names and home address so they could contact family while being besieged by reporters with flash cameras and microphones.
It was both a circus and a horror, one that I have lived with daily for over half a century.
Bicyclists seem to want all the privileges but none of the responsibilities associated with sharing the road.
I have walked, cycled and on rare occasions driven a car in the City for many years. Clearly everyone traveling the streets of our City, in all three modes are violating the CVC nearly all the the time! For me driving was the scariest, walking next, cycling the least but still alarming. Most drivers try hard not to collide with me and I with them. Since there appears to be no law enforcing solution to this, I have an idea: let’s all agree not to collide with each other, get to where we are going and be blessed with another day alive and uninjured with the ones we love.
It’s worked for me for years :
Signal your intentions.
Yield to pedestrians.
Stop at red lights.
Treat stop signs as yields.
2 persons arriving to a stop sign at the same time, person on right has right-of-way.
Use the bike map if possible to increase safety margin.
http://www.sfbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/SF_Bike_Map_and_Walking_Guide_2014.pdf
Give respect, acknowledge drivers, get respect, live to be old.
1) This was not “enforcement”. No one was cited, only warned. I classify this along with the “faux enforcement” the SFPD occasionally performs in “pedestrian stings”. They could stop and cite serious violations all day long (Arguello and Geary, California and Commonwealth, Fulton and Arguello, etc.) that would make a difference, but that would require concentrated and continual effort and would not generate the same “bang for the buck”. Instead, one day spent warning stop sign cycling scofflaws because some rich local complained generated significant media exposure.
2) The comments regarding treating STOP SIGNS as YIELD SIGNS for cyclists may make sense and should be discussed. I am not 100% convinced, but it is a suggestion that should be debated.