Legislators ​in Colorado have approved a bill which will allow cyclists to ride through red traffic lights, with the new law aimed at increasing the safety of people on bikes by reducing the number of interactions with motorists at junctions.

The Safety Stop Bill was this week passed by both houses of the state legislature and is now due to be signed into law by Democratic Party Governor Jared Polis, reports Jalopnik.com (link is external).

The law which besides cyclists applies to anyone using what is termed a “low-speed conveyance,” such as electric scooters, skateboards and wheelchairs.

The new legislation – already adopted by some cities within the state, including Aspen – means that cyclists and other road users within that definition can approach stop signs as though they were yield signs, and red lights as stop signs, with different rules applying depending on which it is.

At a stop sign, cyclists are required to “slow to a reasonable speed” and give way to any motor traffic or pedestrians at the junction before proceeding.

By contrast, on encountering a red traffic light, they have to stop at the junction and give way to any vehicles or pedestrians there before continuing on their way – even if the lights haven’t changed.

Bicycle Colorado, which has campaigned for the introduction of the new law, has highlighted that almost three in four reported road traffic collisions between a cyclist and a motorist – 72.2 per cent – happen at, or are related to, junctions.

The group's director of communications and policy Jack Todd said: “Intersections are by far the most dangerous places for cyclists, people walking, people using wheelchairs, and so this legislation would allow them to get out of the intersection faster and avoid that conflict.

It says that research shows that by reducing the number of potential interactions between drivers and cyclists at junctions, the Safety Stop Bill will in turn lead to a drop in the number of such collisions, not only because cyclists will spend less time waiting there, but also because their visibility will be increased.

During the bill’s passage through the state legislature, Representative Matt Gray said: “We wouldn't be doing this if it wasn't going to make people safer.

“We're not inventing something new, and not a single state that's implemented this has reported higher accident rates. In fact, they've all reported lower accident rates.”

Representative Edie Hooton added: “We have inconsistent laws, from county to county, on how to treat intersections. What this bill does is it creates uniformity around the state on how a cyclist may proceed through an intersection.”

The concept of allowing cyclists and other vulnerable road users to be allowed to treat stop signs and red traffic lights differently to drivers is popularly known as the “Idaho Stop,” after the state that was the first to enact such a law, back in 1982, although it is only in the past five years that other states have begun to follow suit.

Arkansas, in 2019, and Oklahoma, last year have introduced similar legislation, while a more limited form of the law, which does not permit cyclists to treat red lights as a stop sign but does allow them to view a stop sign as a yield sign, was introduced in Delaware in 2017 and subsequently in Oregon, Washington state, Utah and North Dakota.

https://road.cc/content/news/colorado-approves-bill-let-cyclists-run-red-lights-291781

On 08/04/2022 11:11 am, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:

> Legislators ​in Colorado have approved a bill which will allow fairy-cyclists to ride through red traffic lights, with the new law aimed at increasing the safety of people on fairy-bikes by reducing the number of interactions with motorists at junctions.
> The Safety Stop Bill was this week passed by both houses of the state legislature and is now due to be signed into law by Democratic Party Governor Jared Polis, reports Jalopnik.com (link is external).
> The law which besides fairy-cyclists applies to anyone using what is termed a “low-speed conveyance,” such as electric scooters, skateboards and wheelchairs.
> The new legislation – already adopted by some cities within the state, including Aspen – means that fairy-cyclists and other road users within that definition can approach stop signs as though they were yield signs, and red lights as stop signs, with different rules applying depending on which it is.
> At a stop sign, fairy-cyclists are required to “slow to a reasonable speed” and *give* *way* *to* any *motor* *traffic* *or* *pedestrians* at the junction before proceeding.
> By contrast, on encountering a red traffic light, they have to stop at the junction and give way to any vehicles or pedestrians there before continuing on their way – even if the lights haven’t changed.
> Fairy-Bicycle Colorado, which has campaigned for the introduction of the new law, has highlighted that almost three in four reported road traffic collisions between a fairy-cyclist and a motorist – 72.2 per cent – happen at, or are related to, junctions.

....because fairy-cyclists will not obey the law.

> The group's director of communications and policy Jack Todd said: “Intersections are by far the most dangerous places for fairy-cyclists, people walking, people using wheelchairs, and so this legislation would allow them to get out of the intersection faster and avoid that conflict.
> It says that research shows that by reducing the number of potential interactions between drivers and fairy-cyclists at junctions, the Safety Stop Bill will in turn lead to a drop in the number of such collisions, not only because fairy-cyclists will spend less time waiting there, but also because their visibility will be increased.
> During the bill’s passage through the state legislature, Representative Matt Gray said: “We wouldn't be doing this if it wasn't going to make people safer.
> “We're not inventing something new, and not a single state that's implemented this has reported higher accident rates. In fact, they've all reported lower accident rates.”
> Representative Edie Hooton added: “We have inconsistent laws, from county to county, on how to treat intersections. What this bill does is it creates uniformity around the state on how a fairy-cyclist may proceed through an intersection.”
> The concept of allowing fairy-cyclists and other vulnerable road users to be allowed to treat stop signs and red traffic lights differently to drivers is popularly known as the “Idaho Stop,” after the state that was the first to enact such a law, back in 1982, although it is only in the past five years that other states have begun to follow suit.
> Arkansas, in 2019, and Oklahoma, last year have introduced similar legislation, while a more limited form of the law, which does not permit fairy-cyclists to treat red lights as a stop sign but does allow them to view a stop sign as a yield sign, was introduced in Delaware in 2017 and subsequently in Oregon, Washington state, Utah and North Dakota.

> https://road.cc/content/news/colorado-approves-bill-let-cyclists-run-red-lights-291781

<sigh>

A Stop sign IS also a Yield sign.

Perhaps the illiterate idiots at road.cc "think" that once having
stopped at a Stop sign, a fairy-cyclist is then permitted to immediately
carry on, straight across the path of traffic with priority? That'd be
at least consonant with the observable behaviour of most fairy-cyclists
in the UK (and regrettably, in some parts of the USA).

FWIW, most of the USA already has a very sensible rule at traffic
lights, which is that all travellers may turn right (having once
STOPPED) if there is no traffic with priority at the junction which will
conflict with that movement. It doesn't apply in most of the City of New
York or at junctions specifically marked by a sign saying "No Right Turn
On Red".

Here, the word "right" would have to be replaced by "left" but the
principle would be the same: stop - check for traffic - *if* *no*
*conflict*, turn left, giving way (of course) to any pedestrians
crossing the road into which one is turning. Fairy-cyclists in the UK,
however, have obvious great difficulty with the idea of ceding priority
to pedestrians.

Left Turn On Red would be very useful in places like London. But the
authorities there are concerned to increase congestion, not to ease it.

On Friday, April 8, 2022 at 11:11:40 AM UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> Legislators ​in Colorado have approved a bill which will allow cyclists to ride through red traffic lights, with the new law aimed at increasing the safety of people on bikes by reducing the number of interactions with motorists at junctions.
>

QUOTE:
Despite driver complaints, Colorado cyclists will be rolling through stop signs due to new bill ENDS

NOW RED LIGHTS AS WELL. THE UK WILL BE CLOSE BEHIND.

https://www.denverpost.com/2022/04/05/colorado-cycling-rolling-stops-bill/

On 08/04/2022 14:19, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, April 8, 2022 at 11:11:40 AM UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com wrote

>> Legislators ​in Colorado have approved a bill which will allow cyclists to ride through red traffic lights, with the new law aimed at increasing the safety of people on bikes by reducing the number of interactions with motorists at junctions.

> QUOTE:
> Despite driver complaints, Colorado cyclists will be rolling through stop signs due to new bill ENDS

> NOW RED LIGHTS AS WELL. THE UK WILL BE CLOSE BEHIND.

ONLY ONE SNAG

HOW WOULD A CYCLIST RECOGNISE A RED LIGHT?

THEY DON'T SEEM TO ATM.

--
Spike

awkinspeter | 8582 posts | 5 hours ago
4 likes

I'm becoming more convinced that red light jumping cyclists are just a symptom of poor junction/crossing design. (Note that drivers jumping red lights are almost always due to impatience and likely a symptom of too much congestion).

What I'd like to see is pedestrian crossings designed with small 'zebra' sections at the ends so that cyclists can go through legally when there's no foot traffic (often due to the design of mandatory delays for the 'beg' buttons). So many junctions could be improved by having separate traffic lights for cyclists that allow them to go through when there's no crossing traffic (e.g. cyclists can usually turn left safely even when it isn't safe for drivers to do so).

reply quote

Avatar
chrisonatrike replied to hawkinspeter | 2009 posts | 4 hours ago
4 likes

hawkinspeter wrote:

I'm becoming more convinced that red light jumping cyclists are just a symptom of poor junction/crossing design. [ ... ]

Traffic lights are there for motor vehicles so it's almost axiomic that these junctions will not work well for others. (Obviously if we have grade-separated crossings - or with the best junction designs (link is external) - cyclists and pedestrians don't wait at all). Motor vehicles are "fast" but take up plenty space and so throughput at junctions is limited. So yeah, design. Obviously no-one likes to wait a long time regardless of mode of transport. The reason for the length of wait is still motor vehicles though.

There are some other Dutch ideas for avoiding long waits at lights for cyclists. Nice problem to have!

On 08/04/2022 17:17, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> awkinspeter | 8582 posts | 5 hours ago
> 4 likes

> I'm becoming more convinced that red light jumping cyclists are just a symptom of poor junction/crossing design.

I'm becoming more convinced that red light jumping cyclists are just a
symptom of poor training and an overwhelming sense of entitlement.

--
Spike

I like bikes | 22 posts | 7 hours ago
5 likes
What's the word for when everyone else finally comes round to what you've been doing for years, and you've been vilified for?

reply quote

Avatar
John Stevenson replied to I like bikes | 22 posts | 7 hours ago
6 likes
I like bikes wrote:

What's the word for when everyone else finally comes round to what you've been doing for years, and you've been vilified for?

I think the term we red-light-jumpers are looking for is 'vindication'.

On 08/04/2022 18:34, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:

> I like bikes | 22 posts | 7 hours ago
> 5 likes

> What's the word for when everyone else finally comes round to what you've been doing for years, and you've been vilified for?
Criminal behaviour?

--
Spike

chrisonatrike wrote:

Interesting idea. Does the "having to go through at the edges" bit merit more examination? This is where "unexpected" pedestrians (e.g. you didn't spot them) are most likely to appear. Also if you were in primary approaching it you're having to go left then right again.

I suspect the idea will be derided not because it's necessarily not workable but because people will say "why not cars then?" and "not safe for the blind" and shut down discussion. Or it may be too fiddly given the arcane law (lore?) of pedestrian crossings. I can hear kerb-nerds thumbing rule-books and sketching paint schemes as i type.

My thinking is that if you're filtering on the inside of traffic, then the edges make most sense. If the zebra bit (which only really needs to be a bit of paint) goes elsewhere then it can easily be blocked by cars. I reckon we should just change the laws, but the UK seems to have a lot of difficulty doing anything other than just appeasing drivers (and big oil companies).

On Friday, 8 April 2022 at 18:15:59 UTC+1, Spike wrote:
> On 08/04/2022 14:19, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Friday, April 8, 2022 at 11:11:40 AM UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com wrote
>
> >> Legislators ​in Colorado have approved a bill which will allow cyclists to ride through red traffic lights, with the new law aimed at increasing the safety of people on bikes by reducing the number of interactions with motorists at junctions.
>
> > QUOTE:
> > Despite driver complaints, Colorado cyclists will be rolling through stop signs due to new bill ENDS
>
> > NOW RED LIGHTS AS WELL. THE UK WILL BE CLOSE BEHIND.
> ONLY ONE SNAG
>
> HOW WOULD A CYCLIST RECOGNISE A RED LIGHT?
>
> THEY DON'T SEEM TO ATM.
>
Then there can be no objection to introducing such a law in the UK.
If, as you say, no cyclist in history has ever stopped for a red light why do we not see daily carnage on the streets of London where cyclists outnumber motorists?

On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 6:54:55 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
Why do we not see daily carnage on the streets of London where cyclists outnumber motorists?

QUOTE: The Government considers that the costs of a formal registration system for cycle ownership would outweigh the benefits. The safety case for such a system is not as strong as that for drivers since, by contrast with motorised vehicles, cycles involved in collisions on the highway are ***highly unlikely*** to cause serious injury to other road users. ENDS

From the "elected" House of Lords - the Brextards' dream team.

On Monday, 11 April 2022 at 19:03:19 UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 6:54:55 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
> Why do we not see daily carnage on the streets of London where cyclists outnumber motorists?
>
> QUOTE: The Government considers that the costs of a formal registration system for cycle ownership would outweigh the benefits. The safety case for such a system is not as strong as that for drivers since, by contrast with motorised vehicles, cycles involved in collisions on the highway are ***highly unlikely*** to cause serious injury to other road users. ENDS
>
> From the "elected" House of Lords - the Brextards' dream team.

How many innocent road users were KSI last year by law abiding speeding and red light jumping motorists?
Obviously you will need to subtract those who were forced to speed or jump the lights to avoid an unlit cyclist.

On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 7:24:58 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:

> How many innocent road users were KSI last year by law abiding speeding and red light jumping motorists?

About 22000 people.

QUOTE:
The number of road deaths in the UK plateaued from 2012 to 2019 at around 1,850 deaths a year, or the equivalent of five a day, on average.

The trend relating to serious injuries is more difficult to analyse, as the method the police use to record severity has changed in recent years. When accounting for the changes in reporting the estimated number of serious injuries since 2010 has declined slightly, albeit at a slower rate than before 2010. However, the total figure is still in excess of 22,000 serious injuries a year, or the equivalent of around 60 a day, on average. ENDS

https://www.brake.org.uk/get-involved/take-action/mybrake/knowledge-centre/uk-road-safety

On Monday, 11 April 2022 at 19:31:14 UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 7:24:58 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
>
> > How many innocent road users were KSI last year by law abiding speeding and red light jumping motorists?
> About 22000 people.
>
> QUOTE:
> The number of road deaths in the UK plateaued from 2012 to 2019 at around 1,850 deaths a year, or the equivalent of five a day, on average.
>
> The trend relating to serious injuries is more difficult to analyse, as the method the police use to record severity has changed in recent years. When accounting for the changes in reporting the estimated number of serious injuries since 2010 has declined slightly, albeit at a slower rate than before 2010. However, the total figure is still in excess of 22,000 serious injuries a year, or the equivalent of around 60 a day, on average. ENDS
>
> https://www.brake.org.uk/get-involved/take-action/mybrake/knowledge-centre/uk-road-safety

22 000 innocent people KSI by motorists swerving to avoid unlit cyclists. There can be no other explanation as motorists always obey the Highway Code.

On 11/04/2022 19:31, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 7:24:58 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
>
>> How many innocent road users were KSI last year by law abiding
>> speeding and red light jumping motorists?
>
> About 22000 people.
>
> QUOTE: The number of road deaths in the UK plateaued from 2012 to
> 2019 at around 1,850 deaths a year, or the equivalent of five a day,
> on average.

There was a steady improvement from 1970 to 2000, when the levelling
started to develop. A curious coincidence with the time when cars
commonly reached NCAP5.

On 11/04/2022 17:54, Mike Collins wrote:
> On Friday, 8 April 2022 at 18:15:59 UTC+1, Spike wrote:
>> On 08/04/2022 14:19, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:

>>> QUOTE:
>>> Despite driver complaints, Colorado cyclists will be rolling through stop signs due to new bill ENDS

>>> NOW RED LIGHTS AS WELL. THE UK WILL BE CLOSE BEHIND.

>> ONLY ONE SNAG

>> HOW WOULD A CYCLIST RECOGNISE A RED LIGHT?

>> THEY DON'T SEEM TO ATM.

> Then there can be no objection to introducing such a law in the UK.

> If, as you say, no cyclist in history has ever stopped for a red light why do we not see daily carnage on the streets of London where cyclists outnumber motorists?

That's even sillier than you normally manage.

--
Spike

On 11/04/2022 18:03, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 6:54:55 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:

> Why do we not see daily carnage on the streets of London where cyclists outnumber motorists?

> QUOTE: The Government considers that the costs of a formal registration system for cycle ownership would outweigh the benefits. The safety case for such a system is not as strong as that for drivers since, by contrast with motorised vehicles, cycles involved in collisions on the highway are ***highly unlikely*** to cause serious injury to other road users. ENDS

> From the "elected" House of Lords - the Brextards' dream team.

You don't seem to be able to recognise when you're being fobbed off.

--
Spike

On 11/04/2022 20:12, Mike Collins wrote:

> 22 000 innocent people KSI by motorists swerving to avoid unlit cyclists. There can be no other explanation as motorists always obey the Highway Code.

Perhaps they saw the cavalier behaviour of cyclists, and decided if it
was good enough for them...

--
Spike

On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 10:12:20 PM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:
> On 11/04/2022 19:31, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 7:24:58 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
> >
> >> How many innocent road users were KSI last year by law abiding
> >> speeding and red light jumping motorists?
> >
> > About 22000 people.
> >
> > QUOTE: The number of road deaths in the UK plateaued from 2012 to
> > 2019 at around 1,850 deaths a year, or the equivalent of five a day,
> > on average.
> There was a steady improvement from 1970 to 2000, when the levelling
> started to develop. A curious coincidence with the time when cars
> commonly reached NCAP5.

Well spotted - if only innocent pedestrians mown down and killed by cars had crumple zones.

On 12/04/2022 09:36, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:

> Well spotted - if only innocent pedestrians mown down and killed by cars had crumple zones.

They are known as 'bones'.

--
Spike

On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 9:12:39 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
>There can be no other explanation as motorists always obey the Highway Code.

Including giving cyclists 1.5m of room when overtaking and giving way to pedestrians at junctions?

On Tuesday, 12 April 2022 at 16:11:07 UTC+1, Spike wrote:
> On 12/04/2022 09:36, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > Well spotted - if only innocent pedestrians mown down and killed by cars had crumple zones.
> They are known as 'bones'.
>
> --
> Spike

Emily Deschanel?

On 12/04/2022 04:11 pm, Spike wrote:

> On 12/04/2022 09:36, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> Well spotted - if only innocent pedestrians mown down and killed by fairy-cycles had crumple zones.
>
> They are known as 'bones'.

And "skulls".

On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 10:12:20 PM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:
> On 11/04/2022 19:31, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 7:24:58 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
> >
> >> How many innocent road users were KSI last year by law abiding
> >> speeding and red light jumping motorists?
> >
> > About 22000 people.
> >
> > QUOTE: The number of road deaths in the UK plateaued from 2012 to
> > 2019 at around 1,850 deaths a year, or the equivalent of five a day,
> > on average.
> There was a steady improvement from 1970 to 2000, when the levelling
> started to develop. A curious coincidence with the time when cars
> commonly reached NCAP5.

Sadly innocent pedestrians are still killed and maimed by drivers to the tune of 60 a day.

On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 11:00:40 UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 10:12:20 PM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:
> > On 11/04/2022 19:31, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 7:24:58 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
> > >
> > >> How many innocent road users were KSI last year by law abiding
> > >> speeding and red light jumping motorists?
> > >
> > > About 22000 people.
> > >
> > > QUOTE: The number of road deaths in the UK plateaued from 2012 to
> > > 2019 at around 1,850 deaths a year, or the equivalent of five a day,
> > > on average.
> > There was a steady improvement from 1970 to 2000, when the levelling
> > started to develop. A curious coincidence with the time when cars
> > commonly reached NCAP5.
> Sadly innocent pedestrians are still killed and maimed by drivers to the tune of 60 a day.

"Saying the roads are getting safer is like saying a shark infested river is safe because people chose not to swim in it", Mayer Hillman.