As cities across the nation realize the benefits of the "Idaho Stop" bicycle laws, the safety and efficiency of cycling as a mode of transportation becomes more relevant. Cyclists are much more safe when they can be seen and clear themselves through traffic quickly. They have the benefit of a wider range of sight and more nimble maneuverability, these attributes are hampered by the placement of traffic flow controls like stop signs. Several studies have shown that using stop signs to control speeding does not bring about the desired results; when stop signs are used to slow speeding, drivers tend to increase their speed between signs or intersections to compensate for the time lost due to stopping at stop signs. Studies also indicate that some drivers will accelerate rapidly after a stop, which exacerbates an already unsafe condition. This is exactly why it's safer for cyclist to move quicker through areas with many stops: car drivers tend to become more unsafe as their speed is hampered.

Joseph Stromberg at Vox explains bicycle-automobile interaction as follows:

For drivers, the idea of cyclists rolling through an intersection without fully stopping might sound dangerous — but because of their slower speed and wider field of vision (compared to cars), cyclists are generally able to assess whether there's oncoming traffic and make the right decision. Even law-abiding urban bikers already do this all the time: because of the worry that cars might not see a bike, cyclists habitually scan for oncoming traffic even at intersections where they don't have a stop sign so they can brake at the last second just in case.

There are even a few reasons why the Idaho stop might even make the roads safer than the status quo. In many cities, the low-traffic routes that are safer for bikes are the kinds of roads with many stop signs. Currently, some cyclists avoid these routes and take faster, higher-traffic streets. If the Idaho stop were legalized, it'd get cyclists off these faster streets and funnel the bikes on to safer, slower roads.

The Idaho stop, if legalized and widely adopted, would also make bikes more predictable. Currently, when a bike and a car both pull up to a four-way stop, an awkward dance often ensues. Even when cars get there first, drivers often try to give bikers the right-of-way, perhaps because they think the cyclist is going to ride through anyway.

If the cyclist logically waits, both parties end up sitting there, urging the other to go on. In the opposite (and rarer) scenario, both people assume the other will wait, leading to a totally unnecessary accident.

The city and county of Denver should become a leader and example of how cycling laws, properly implemented, can help all commuters. I propose we implement an ordinance in the same vein as Summit County Ordinance 2012-09, found here http://www.co.summit.co.us/DocumentCenter/View/1332 as a city and county ordinance in order to speed cyclist travel, make cyclist more visible, clear intersections quicker for automobile traffic, and generally make our roads a safer commuting medium for everyone.

For more information see the following presentation to the Fort Collins City Council:

Stop as Yield: Considerations for Fort Collins Bicycle Advisory Committee

Also see this presentation by Jason Meggs who studied the effects of the Idaho Law while a researcher at the UC Berkeley School of Public Health:

Jason Meggs: Idaho Law Inquiry