• sugar_in_your_tea
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Maybe?

    Research shows that stop as yield doesn’t increase cycling incidents (see states in the US where it’s the law). The law only impacts those who follow it, and the harder/more annoying it is to follow the law (starting is hard on a bicycle), the less likely people are to follow it. For example, I see people jaywalking all the time in my area because crosswalks are rare, and jaywalking is rare downtown where there are plenty of crosswalks. So I think stop as yield has a very good chance of being a net positive.

    At least I’m my area, drivers don’t seem to be aware of the stop as yield law despite it being the law here, so I don’t think we should expect much change in driving behavior.

    • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Well I’m not arguing it’ll be worse. The opposite. I’m speculating on the mechanism. Personally I’d argue in favour of replacing the damn stop signs with yield. Then you leave less to the road users’interpretation. Every car driver passing through the yield sign will also be aware it’s a yield for the next time they drive on the orthogonal street.

      • sugar_in_your_tea
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Maybe. I just imagine that there are a lot of streets where a yield sign isn’t appropriate, such as an intersection where one direction is high speed and the other has poor visibility. Bicycles can stop much more quickly than cars, so perhaps it’s less safe to make more intersections into yields.

        Then again, we could probably use a lot more yields than stop signs in general.