I Guess This Blog has Joined the War on Cars
Last week on a three-person group ride, we rolled up slowly to a busy 4-way stop, ride leader in front, me in back, each of us about 4-5 feet apart. When it was our turn, we all sped up to go through the intersection together. A guy to our left in a pickup truck rolled down his window to shout at us as he sped through the intersection, narrowly avoiding hitting me: “It’s called a stop sign for a reason!”
I have some thoughts I wish I could have shared with him:
- Yes, and it's because it has “STOP” written on it. If it said “YIELD” it’d be called something different.
- Did you really want us all to come to a complete stop and then, because we stopped, slowly get back up to speed? Maybe do it individually to really slow things down?
- The average speed of a driver “stopping” at a stop sign in the US is 7MPH. For cops it’s 12. If you want me to come to a complete stop: you first.
- Why do we even have stop signs?
No, really. Why?
Roads have existed for thousands of years, but the first stop sign was invented in 1914. You think that was for horses? Wagons? Bicycles? Friend: it was for car drivers. Traffic controls were invented because cars are fucking deadly and drivers uniformly suck at operating them. Even professional drivers get into collisions all the time. If there were no cars, there’d be no stop signs, no traffic lights, no speed limits, and no cross-walks.
Stop signs are for car drivers, and they’re called “stop signs” so that DRIVERS of CARS will stop. We can revisit the issue when you see a cyclist mow down a family of five, killing each and every family member, young and old alike, in a fiery crash before walking away unscathed. Until then, shut the fuck up.
But I couldn’t tell him, because he drove away. Speeding.
Of course, there's a good reason for cyclists not to stop completely at stop signs, and it isn't just because that slows down drivers and makes them just as angry as not stopping. It isn't even because it makes cycling on roads faster and easier and encourages more people to ride their bikes. It's for safety.
One of the deadliest places for a cyclist to be is stopped in a traffic lane. Drivers will roll into you while you wait at a stop sign. Drivers who are speeding through an intersection that has just turned green will run you over as you slowly get back up to speed. Being in traffic at speeds closer to the speed of cars is dangerous enough, but being at a complete stop is much, much worse.
Luckily, a growing number of states have been legalizing the Idaho Stop to make things safer for cyclists. The law makes it legal for cyclists to treat stop signs like yield signs and – in some states – traffic lights like stop signs. The basic reasoning is that:
- Cyclists are more invested in their own safety than drivers, given that they have literally nothing between them and a two-ton sedan to protect them in a collision. A helmet doesn't provide anywhere near as much protection as airbags, to say nothing of all the steel, glass and plastic surrounding a driver. As much as a driver might not want to kill anyone, cyclists really, truly don't want to die. That means they're always going to look for cars - just the opposite of drivers who are almost never looking for cyclists.
- Stopping completely slows down cyclists much more than cars. My legs are pretty strong, and I can accelerate awfully fast, but nothing like even the cheapest car - and with a lot more effort. Starting from a complete stop uses a lot more energy, a major concern for commuters because it means you're going to arrive at your destination sweatier. A lot of road cyclists use clipless pedals, which means that putting a foot down slows things down even more for them.
- Making a driver slow down makes them unreasonably angry. The number of times I have been yelled at, honked at, or close-passed by drivers who didn't even have to slow down to pass me would blow your mind. Some drivers will stop the car to threaten you for slowing them down. Others will just hit you. (I would link to a bunch of depressing stories about cyclists murdered by drivers, but I don't want to.) Finding a way to reduce aggressive behavior is a good thing, right? And not having cyclists in front of you slowly making their way through intersections will help, right?
The data for states that have followed Idaho's lead shows that the Idaho Stop increases safety and decreases overall collisions and deaths. Drivers, of course, hate it. Just the thought that somebody else gets to do something they can't infuriates them. Mind you, a lot of drivers already drive like this themselves! Be honest with yourself: when you drive up to a stop sign and nobody's there, do you come to a complete stop? How often? And why not? Is it because you think you can be trusted to check the intersection without stopping? Well, imagine how much you could see if you were on a bike with no A-pillars or blind spots while rolling up at a much lower speed - and knowing that your life is literally on the line.
I don't have a flashy way to end this post. There's a problem with a proven solution that makes things safer for everyone and reduces driver annoyance at slow cyclists. But it won't make drivers any happier, so the fact that it saves lives won't convince nearly anyone who doesn't ride a bike. All I can do is ask you to write to your elected officials.
[A shorter version of this post originated as a post on Mastodon. Follow me there for more screeds, I guess?]
