> Can someone explain? This, to me, says that bikes can enter a road with ongoing traffic. Yes, it says "when an intersection is clear", which could mean anything ore, more than likely, used irresponsibly. And treating red lights like stop signs also makes no sense. It all sounds like a formula for carnage.
By clear, they probably mean clear of existing or oncoming traffic. Basically, no one is around, which happens a lot. Cyclists aren't trying to get killed, in fact quite the opposite. Allowing them to assess the situation and continue without stopping means they can spend less time in the intersection, which is a dangerous place to be. They still have judgement they need to use.
> What problem is this solving? Were cyclists getting killed waiting at stop signs and red lights? If so, the law now allows them to potential ride right in front of moving vehicles? Is that better? How?
Yes they were and are being killed in intersections. They are still not permitted to simply ride in front of moving vehicles, they have to treat stops and red lights as yields, similar to yields when driving. Blame can still be placed on the person that was supposed to yield if they cause a crash.
I think you need to actually read up on the law and the reasons for its existence, because it sounds like you're coming at this from a worst case scenario where there aren't rules. There are still rules and parties can still be at fault. This isn't some "anything goes and we'll see what happens" type of law, not at all.
By clear, they probably mean clear of existing or oncoming traffic. Basically, no one is around, which happens a lot. Cyclists aren't trying to get killed, in fact quite the opposite. Allowing them to assess the situation and continue without stopping means they can spend less time in the intersection, which is a dangerous place to be. They still have judgement they need to use.
> What problem is this solving? Were cyclists getting killed waiting at stop signs and red lights? If so, the law now allows them to potential ride right in front of moving vehicles? Is that better? How?
Yes they were and are being killed in intersections. They are still not permitted to simply ride in front of moving vehicles, they have to treat stops and red lights as yields, similar to yields when driving. Blame can still be placed on the person that was supposed to yield if they cause a crash.
I think you need to actually read up on the law and the reasons for its existence, because it sounds like you're coming at this from a worst case scenario where there aren't rules. There are still rules and parties can still be at fault. This isn't some "anything goes and we'll see what happens" type of law, not at all.