***Official Political Discussion Thread***

10,462
27,118
Joined
Aug 31, 2012
18ED8965-1C48-4ED4-808E-B64B609C1EFE.jpeg
 
2,725
8,785
Joined
Aug 23, 2019
Bless Manchin's heart. Willing to eliminate that carried interest loophole

I guess there are no hedge funds in WV

Probably the part Sinema will cut

Weird carry for an Arizona senator :smh:

I guess she wants to decamp to a private equity fund

That she thinks a private equity fund would hire her is sort of comical but whatever
 
16,353
13,287
Joined
Jul 12, 2013
Has there been any real discussion as to why pelosi decided it was necessary to travel to Taiwan?
 
16,395
7,518
Joined
Oct 8, 2003
Glad he isn't hurt. I ride my bike and can't tell you how many close calls I've had. One thing to note is that it looked like his light was red when he got hit. Colorado recently passed legislation allowing cyclists to run stop signs and red lights. When I'm out riding I always follow traffic rules as if I were I'm a car. This is in no way absolving the councilwoman but I don't think laws that allow cyclists to run red lights or stop signs are a good idea.
As a cyclist I like that law and hope California adapts something similar. When I ride downtown and there is a stop or red light in a low traffic area its annoying having to clip out and wait. I usually slow down, check for traffic and roll through stop signs if they're a four way stop, as well as red lights. In areas with high traffic I definitely wait at lights though because that's just too dangerous. Those laws aren't meant for cyclist to just ride through them but treat them as yields.
 

TooOlfForThisIsh

Supporter
670
1,554
Joined
Sep 28, 2020
As a cyclist I like that law and hope California adapts something similar. When I ride downtown and there is a stop or red light in a low traffic area its annoying having to clip out and wait. I usually slow down, check for traffic and roll through stop signs if they're a four way stop, as well as red lights. In areas with high traffic I definitely wait at lights though because that's just too dangerous. Those laws aren't meant for cyclist to just ride through them but treat them as yields.

I also hate waiting at a red light when there's clearly no traffic in the opposing direction, but few people would support a law that allowed a driver to similarly treat red lights as yields. This despite the fact that I'll definitely beat you across the intersection and I am way more visible to traffic.
 
16,395
7,518
Joined
Oct 8, 2003
I also hate waiting at a red light when there's clearly no traffic in the opposing direction, but few people would support a law that allowed a driver to similarly treat red lights as yields. This despite the fact that I'll definitely beat you across the intersection and I am way more visible to traffic.
You're not comparing a pedestrian on a bike to an automobile are you?

This proposed law has support from both Democrats and Republicans so you're wrong.

Bike safety law has bipartisan support
 
Last edited:

TooOlfForThisIsh

Supporter
670
1,554
Joined
Sep 28, 2020
This proposed law has support from both Democrats and Republicans so you're wrong.
This is not a good argument…

There's no risk the bike running a red light is going to kill a pedestrian.

That's the asymmetry. We shouldn't project car laws onto everything else.

…But this is better

Ok, I agree that it’s asymmetric, but my point was that just because someone wants a law and it avoids some dumb situations for them, it doesn’t make it a good law.

I’m not sure if it’s still the case, but when I lived in Houston, some of the traffic signals would actually switch to blinking red after a certain time. I’d be more supportive of a law that allowed for rolling stops for cyclists if there was some tie to the actual traffic patterns and, preferably, actual real time traffic.

You’re absolutely correct that there’s a tremendous amount of asymmetry, but that doesn’t absolve the moral hazard of a reckless cyclist. And a system that introduces more discretion will introduce a lot more ambiguity. Traffic laws, to some extent, exist to remove ambiguity from real driving situations.
 
12,392
30,404
Joined
Jan 16, 2011
There's no risk the bike running a red light is going to kill a pedestrian.

That's the asymmetry. We shouldn't project car laws onto everything else.
Allowing bikes to run red lights is extremely stupid. If I have the green light, as a car driver, I'm 99.99% going to slow down if a pedestrian crosses the street, but a faster bicycle will test my reaction time.

Red lights are also there to allow traffic to flow as fast as legally possible and facilitate travel for all
 
18,109
33,000
Joined
Mar 27, 2004
Allowing bikes to run red lights is extremely stupid. If I have the green light, as a car driver, I'm 99.99% going to slow down if a pedestrian crosses the street, but a faster bicycle will test my reaction time.

Red lights are also there to allow traffic to flow as fast as legally possible and facilitate travel for all
I think we're imagining different scenarios. I'm thing of NYC or many of the blocks on my bike route where I cross on red. These are one lane side roads, nobody is driving that fast down them, and I slow down and check if I can cross first. I'm not talking about the giant roads that are actually just highways with red lights. Those will never be safe for bikers and they shouldn't exist in populated cities to begin with.
 
18,109
33,000
Joined
Mar 27, 2004
This is not a good argument…



…But this is better

Ok, I agree that it’s asymmetric, but my point was that just because someone wants a law and it avoids some dumb situations for them, it doesn’t make it a good law.

I’m not sure if it’s still the case, but when I lived in Houston, some of the traffic signals would actually switch to blinking red after a certain time. I’d be more supportive of a law that allowed for rolling stops for cyclists if there was some tie to the actual traffic patterns and, preferably, actual real time traffic.

You’re absolutely correct that there’s a tremendous amount of asymmetry, but that doesn’t absolve the moral hazard of a reckless cyclist. And a system that introduces more discretion will introduce a lot more ambiguity. Traffic laws, to some extent, exist to remove ambiguity from real driving situations.
The realization I've come to is that bikes simply cannot safely coexist on roads built primarily for the convenience of cars.

America lost that battle to Ford and Moses long ago.

This law may or may not make a small difference but until we're willing to reduce car lanes and put concrete barriers for bikers and pedestrians on every road, I'll never feel fully safe biking alongside cars.
 
Top Bottom