• manxu@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Alright, I hear you, but I think the point is that a cyclist running a red light mostly endangers themselves, while a car running a red light endangers others. Here in Colorado, we changed the laws such that a red light is a stop sign for bicycles, and a stop sign a yield, in recognition of the differences in risk. (Edit: cars -> bicycles)

    • Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      10 hours ago

      In my experience cyclists are more likely to run red-lights in pedestrian crossings than in junctions and intersections, so they’re not endangering themselves, they’re endangering pedestrians.

      • NarrativeBear@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 day ago

        I would argue a stop sign is car infrastructure.

        Did we have stop signs before cars started to fill up our city streets?

        • Hawke@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 day ago

          I would agree but the parent is talking about how the rules for driving apply to bicycles differently from cars.

    • Auli@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      19 hours ago

      Cool except for the person who hits the cyclist and surfers emotional damage.

    • JustinTheGM@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      That’s assuming that an oncoming car wouldn’t swerve at all if a cyclist entered their path. Dangerous or unpredictable behavior by anyone on a road puts everyone in the area at risk.

      • manxu@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 day ago

        Yes, and nobody disputes that some bicyclists put everyone at risk. The point of the article, though, is that drivers are handed a fine, while bicyclists are handed criminal charges. Pointing out that bicyclists are given harsher treatment for a less dangerous offense is, I think, fair in this case.