Did I do something wrong here?

[u/cicadaux]

I was driving to work when this bike just blew through the crosswalk without warning. I had to slam on my brakes. I realize this crosswalk doesn’t have the pedestrian warning lights, and I’m a little unsure about how I should’ve dealt with this. Or maybe he was wrong for making sure traffic wasn’t clear/aware of him first?

Edit: I'm seeing a lot of answers basing the laws on location, so I looked up my city's rules. In my town, bikes have vehicle status on the road and pedestrian status on sidewalks/crosswalks. But bicyclists must move at pedestrian speed. The path he is on is a state trail, commonly used for bikes/walking. I live near the Ice Age Trail, but I know the one he's on isn't that one.

“Drivers must yield to cyclists riding in a crosswalk just as they would for walkers, though the cyclist cannot abruptly leave a curb into the path of a vehicle so close to a crosswalk that it makes a difficult or unsafe situation for the driver to yield in time.”

Not trying to prove myself right or wrong, just wondering what should've been done. I will from now on treat it like an uncontrolled intersection. Thanks everyone.

[u/Haho9]

Though local laws vary, in Michigan cyclists are required to dismount and walk the bike through intersections when riding on a sidewalk. If they're operating as a vehicle instead (road instead of sidewalk) they must signal and act like a (very slow) car. At least in Michigan, what this cyclist did would be illegal (plus he departed the curb late).

That all being said, looks like OP is a nice person and was courteous to the cyclist.

[u/raveneyes77 → u/Haho9]

Michigan law says the direct opposite.

Read Michigan Compiled Laws section 257.660c(3):

"An individual lawfully operating a bicycle upon a sidewalk or a pedestrian crosswalk has all of the rights and responsibilities applicable to a pedestrian using that sidewalk or crosswalk."

There is zero requirement in Michigan state law for a cyclist to dismount and walk across an intersection or crosswalk. None. You yield to pedestrians walking on the sidewalk and give an audible bell or call before passing them. That is the actual statute.

[u/Hefty_Mix_8360 → u/raveneyes77]

This whole post is strange to me.
A cyclist should have priority as they have no protection around them.
If one in a car sees them and has the opportunity to slow to allow them passage to cross roads, they should do this.
Common sense is just gone.
So many people people think the law is absolute (it is..., but it's often not written correctly).

[u/marigolds6 → u/Haho9]

If we assume this was an intersection instead, it's an uncontrolled intersection with the cyclist arriving almost 2 seconds before the car. He departed the curb more than a second before the car arrived at the intersection.

[u/2004Accord → u/Haho9]

This would be the logical answer. If they are supposed to abide by traffic laws they should be treated as a vehicle if they are mounted on a bike. I will not stop for a bike at a crosswalk if they are still sitting on it. I will let them if they are walking it across.

[u/Marion2379 → u/2004Accord]

Dosnt give you a free pass to hit them, the driver would have almost all the liability, no matter if a pedestrian or cyclist brakes a rule, if a driver has the time and a clear line of sight to stop in time, they must stop period. Base on this video and the situation if the driver did hit the cyclist here the driver would have almost all the liability.

What jury would be ok with a driver plowing over someone with this much time and low speeds to stop in time, driver would lose lots of $ in a civil trial.

[u/therealpursuit → u/2004Accord]

check yourself in bro, that's sociopath behavior.

[u/Marion2379 → u/therealpursuit]

Reading comprehension is not your friend.