...I take the freeway exit and see that if I step it up I can make the light at the bottom the exit ramp. Just as I whip around the corner, with the green, out of nowwhere a bicycle cuts across in front of me from right to left. As my headlights hit the fool I absolutely panic and slam on the brakes, scaring to death I'm sure, the guy behind me.

Mr. Traffic-rules-don't-apply-to-m­e, slides his bike sideways and bites pavement. I'm stunned I haven't squashed this idiot. He grabs his bike, jumps on and pedals off into the dark while I'm screaming obsceneties out the window at his fading shadow.

This is why traffic rules apply to bikes. Because cars are big, and heavy, and dangerous and I don't want to kill anyone even if it's not my fault.

Agreed, I have had too many close encounters with bikers that thought most elementry rules were for someone else. Bicyclists making left turns from the far right lane, cutting across moving traffic, going the wrong way on a narrow one-way street. Give them tickets!

"Not [your] fault"?

Maybe you shouldn't have been speeding to make a light, and then whipping your car around a turn.

I agree 100%. Think of it this way. If there are no cars at a 4-way stop, and I'm driving in a car, why should I be required to stop? Because it keeps me in the habit of following the rules. What I've noticed with cyclists (at least in San Francisco) is that because they are so used to running stops signs, they'll do to even when cars are at the intersection.

trickybeck:

"Not [your] fault"?

Maybe you shouldn't have been speeding to make a light, and then whipping your car around a turn.

Agreed! The motorist and cyclist were both in the wrong. How about this: everybody pay attention and be cautious no matter what the vehicle, and we'll all get along famously.

Fantastic, and lots of other people have posted similar stories. What I want to know is, how is that relevant? Under the propopsed changes allowing bicycles to do a rolling stop when no other traffic is present, what you describe would be just as illegal as it is now.

Where I am, the thing that many cyclists do that pisses me off the most, is when cars are backed up at a stop light, the cyclists will squeeze past the right lane of traffic next to the curb and pass them, proceeding all the way up to the stoplight.

"Where I am, the thing that many cyclists do that pisses me off the most, is when cars are backed up at a stop light, the cyclists will squeeze past the right lane of traffic next to the curb and pass them, proceeding all the way up to the stoplight."

Why would that piss you off? I've seen motorcyclists do the same and worse. Bicyclists move a lot slower and, as long as they don't run that light, what is the problem. Passing on the right is legal in my state, as is turning right on red.

You know, there's always some malcontent who doesn't read a post and then makes an absolutel fool of themselves when they respond.

Please point out in my post where I said I was speeding. I said I stepped it up and whipped around the corner. I did not say I was speeding...in fact I wasn't. Pretty hard to speed around a corner.

It would make no difference if I were speeding. I had the right of way, the bicyclist was not at a crosswalk or a corner when he cut across the street. I would never have been cited if I hit him.

Idiot.

Again, I was not speeding. I simply said I whipped around the corner, that just means I wasn't going as slow as I normally do. Why do people insist on reading into posts?

I did pay attention. I didn't squash the biker.

I'm not sure I understand your first question. How is my story relevant? It would have been very relevant if the biker had died.

We have bike lanes where I live. Use them, but bikes must obey all traffic laws. They cannot "jaywalk" as the man I described did. The are no match for a car.

The relevancy is I don't want to kill someone because they felt they could cross a street, in the dark, in the middle of the block, without looking.