Q: As a cyclist, I find that some drivers try to be nice and stop to wave bicyclists across the road, even when the driver doesn’t have a stop sign and the cyclist does. I don’t want to upset someone by rejecting their generosity, but I also don’t want to break the law or put myself in danger. What’s the correct thing to do?
A: Just yesterday I came to a stop at a stop sign in my car. Cross traffic was backed up, and a driver waiting in the line waved for me to make a right turn in front of her, which I gratefully accepted. But if I had been intending to cross the lane rather than join it, I might not have been so willing to take that offer, and even less so if I’d been on my bike.
Before I get to your question, I’d like to address the drivers who yield the right-of-way when the rest of the people on the road don’t expect it, especially when you’re yielding to a cyclist. You can promise the cyclist that you’re going to allow them to cross the street, but you can’t make that promise on behalf of any other driver on the road. The danger for the cyclist is when you stop but other cars, not anticipating a cyclist crossing the road, don’t stop. I know you’re doing it to be kind, but when you do this, you put the cyclist in the position of having to make an unexpected and important decision. (More on that in a minute).
As for the cyclist, let’s consider both your safety and the law. I appreciate that you respect the driver’s feelings. We need more of that in the world. However, their feelings are not a higher priority than your safety. This is a strange thing about humans; we’re willing to expose ourselves to risk to avoid injuring the feelings of a stranger that we’ll never see again. Why?
At risk of getting too psychosocial, there are a few factors at play here. Reciprocity: When someone does something nice for us (like waving us across) we feel compelled to reciprocate, even if it’s not in our best interest. Momentary decision-making: It can be hard to quickly assess a situation and make the safest choice, especially when someone is waiting for you. Misplaced trust: If someone is signaling to us, we assume it must be safe, but they may not have full awareness either. Optimism bias: We underestimate danger. Notice how those pop up in your mind next time you’re in a similar situation. Don’t let these biases get in the way of a safe decision.
What about the law? For the cyclists, it’s probably sort of not illegal to go. That’s some clarity there, isn’t it? Once you’ve stopped and yielded to cross-traffic, if a driver stops for you, you could go without violating the law. Except . . .
Like I mentioned earlier, just because one driver stops doesn’t mean all the rest of them will. What about a car coming from the other direction? What about a driver behind the stopped car that decides to pass? Despite the invitation from that one driver who stops for the cyclist at a stop sign, the cyclist still has to yield to all the other cross traffic. Unless the cyclist and the stopped car are the only two vehicles on the road, waiting is the safe and legal choice.
And drivers, if you want to be kind to cyclists, give them three feet when passing and drive the speed limit.
You stop on the road to wavy bicycle go through car hits you in the in the rear in ,you are the cause of accident, and more if a another vehicle goes around you and hit the bicycle or more, and maybe kills one or more, you are the cause. Bicycle s also obay the laws too.
Yielding when not expected is a bigger problem than just that instance described. When a car’s driver doesn’t do what is expected of them all sorts of issues can develop. And when done for courtesy it’s often being rude to the cars behind. One of the worst I saw recently was a car yielding inside a roundabout for no reason whatsoever. The car entering the roundabout had already stopped long before.
As a bicyclist and a driver I appreciate courtesy, but I also want to minimize risk in any situation.
Bicyclists generally have legal status of a motor vehicle driver, unless riding on a sidewalk or in a crosswalk, where they also gain pedestrian status. What makes it more complicated is that not all crosswalks are marked, because “… every intersection is legally defined as a crosswalk regardless of whether a crosswalk marking is present.”
So, as soon as an intersection is recognized, I assume the bicyclist has to be given the right of way in the sense of WDG page 3-24.
Washington driver guide https://dol.wa.gov/driver-licenses-and-permits/driver-training-and-testing/driver-guides
page 4-33, first paragraph: “All bicyclists have the same rights, duties, and responsibilities of a motor vehicle driver.”
However, WDG, 4-33, second bullet: “Bicyclists riding on a sidewalk or in a crosswalk have the same rights and duties as a pedestrian.”
So, the issue here probably should be WDG, 3-10, second bullet: “Not all crosswalks are marked (sic) every intersection is legally defined as a crosswalk regardless of whether a crosswalk marking is present.”
See also WDG, 3-23, third paragraph: “A pedestrian crossing a roadway at any point other than in a marked crosswalk or within an unmarked crosswalk at an intersection must yield the right of way to all vehicles on the roadway.”