Rolling out the arguments for the rolling stop

Jason Meggs might be viewed by motorists as an anarchist. Meggs, you see, believes that cyclists have the right to roll through stop signs.

The so-called "Idaho stop" -- where a moving cyclist treats a stop sign like a yield sign and proceeds when the way is clear -- is not just a good idea, says, Meggs, it is the way North America's roads were meant to be.

Meggs rolled out his arguments on Tuesday at the Cycling in the Law session at Velo-city Global 2012 here in Vancouver.

His arguments really did roll out faster than many of us could digest, partly because it appeared that he had prepared for a longer time slot, and partly because he expected an audience that might have included more statisticians. He promises that the complete presentation will be posted online soon at his blog, The Meggs Report, although it was not posted at this writing.

Some highlights:

-- Stop signs were developed for motorcars, decades after the bicycle boom had filled the streets with bicycles. While the streets were filled only with pedestrians, bicycles and horse-drawn transport, there was no need for stop signs;

-- Under most highway traffic regulations, none of these groups are required to stop at stop signs: runners, skateboarders, inline skaters, segway riders or wheelchair users. Why then, should cyclists?;

-- Under the letter of the law, a cyclist can get off a bike and walk it through a stop sign, remount and continue on; and

-- One Florida report found that more motorist accidents occurred after a full stop than after a yield (often due to communication errors among those at four-way stops). Stop signs, clearly, are more dangerous than yields.

Meggs argued that Idaho stop is a part of a trend to "cycling liberty," which includes counterflow riding and the permission of cyclists to ride in car-free zones.

And, he noted, stops signs are themselves generally over-used, often for neighbourhood traffic calming (think of your favourite Toronto neighbourhood) when other methods, such as traffic circles or other traffic calming road structures would do the same job.

And Meggs struck home when he observed that cyclists have to overcome the bicycle inferiority complex that says "we have to behave like a car when we ride a bicycle."

 

 

Comments

[Evan Rosamond]

The Idaho stop is a good idea. Entering an intersection while rolling reduces the time spent in the danger zone (where your bike's path intersects with another road user's). This increases your safety margin a little bit and saves you a bit of work. Of course you need to slow down enough so that you can stop if it's necessary.

[Steve A]

So why not apply the Idaho Stop Rule to motor vehicles as well as bicycles? I hadn't heard that about motorists having more accidents at stop signs before, but that makes the question even MORE obvious.

[Ryan]

From videos I've seen -- Vancouver has done quite well with traffic calming by adding traffic circles and the sort.
See some of Alex's older videos on residential streets (http://www.youtube.com/alexwarrior1)

I think most people (whether on bike or in a car) treat most stop signs like an Idaho stop (in St. Catharines at least).

I'll admit the only time I come to a complete stop (at stop signs) is when there are no other cars or pedestrians around, if it's clear then I do a rolling stop.

[Carl Jansen]

Please, apply the Idaho Stop Rule and with any luck Darwin's Theory will kick in shortly after and we won't have to put up with stupid idiots who are too lazy to stop at stop signs.

[Jason Meggs]

Thank you for the article, the presentation was posted the very next day (June 28). An earlier write-up with links, including a very helpful video, appear in the previous article.

http://meggsreport.com/

Sincerely,
Jason Meggs