this post was submitted on 03 Jun 2026
24 points (100.0% liked)

Toronto

2209 readers
1 users here now

Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Friends:
Support lemmy.ca

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] JillyB@beehaw.org 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I would argue the ticket wasn't justified either. Many places have implemented the "Idaho stop" where cyclists can treat a stop sign like a yield which makes a lot of sense. In illinois, a law just went into effect that did that and let cyclists treat red lights like stop signs, and go the wrong way down a one way. I think the law isn't justified.

[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Not Ontario, it's the same as any other vehicle on the road.

[–] JillyB@beehaw.org 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I understand that's the law. I just think it doesn't make sense. Like much of traffic infrastructure and rules, they are designed for the smooth flow and convenience of car traffic and don't consider safety or convenience of bike traffic at all. The reason the Idaho stop was first implemented was due to safety issues when a bike did follow stop sign rules.

[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It's for pedestrian safety not car safety. A car hitting a bike doesn't destroy the car.

[–] JillyB@beehaw.org 1 points 1 week ago

A pedestrian and a bike don't require rules for flow control. Unlike cars and pedestrians, bikes and pedestrians are pretty compatible in the same spaces. It's trivial to roll through a stop sign and go around a pedestrian crossing the street.