Should Seattle cyclists have to follow common traffic laws?

As San Francisco ponders whether or not to allow bicyclists to roll through stop signs as if they were yield signs, Evan Bush at The Seattle Times wonders if we should allow for the same thing in Seattle.

Uhm, we already do.

Sure, it’s illegal, but it’s hardly enforced. And when bicyclists are ticketed for breaking the law, bicycle activists get apoplectic because they see what they do (using a mode of transportation invented in the early 1800s) as evolved.

Related: Seattle cyclists complain they get ticketed when they break the law

Now, to be fair, I actually am OK with changing the law to allow for this kind of behavior. As someone who generally walks as a mode of transportation, I jaywalk when it’s safe. If I’m in a car, I sometimes do rolling stops when it’s safe. And if it’s safe, bicyclists should be able to treat stop signs as yields.

The problem is that too many bicyclists in Seattle don’t account for what’s safe. They do what they want &#8212 damn the consequences &#8212 which can cause drivers to swerve out of the way. Bicyclists in Seattle don’t want to share the roads, they want the roads. However, they don’t want to pay for using the roads the way drivers are forced to. Imagine how much funding we’d get if bicyclists had to pay the annual fees drivers do.

This change in law, however reasonable, will just empower the militant bike activists to continue their dangerous behavior. Would changing the law result in worse behavior?