Riders who flout the law can still take responsibility for their conduct. I used to ride through an intersection every morning that had a restriction against straight through traffic, and it often had cops on the other side enforcing the rule. Every time I whizzed through they watched and did nothing.
It was easy to deduce that the purpose of the restriction is to prevent traffic from using the residential street next to a school to get around a congested 6-lane main artery that runs parallel. The traffic engineers simply didn't consider cyclists when they put up the restriction, as it would make no sense to force bicycles onto that parallel arterial road.
I don't know if the cops thought it through to that extent or just went with their guts and decided it didn't make sense to fine me, but if they had I would have dealt with it responsibly. I DID break the law, but I would have tried to explain to the cop that the rule didn't take cyclists into consideration, and if they ticketed me anyways (fine, that's their job) I would have tried to get my local councillor to recognise that the lack of an exception for cyclists was an oversight and fought it in court. And if I lost, I would have paid and went done a longer route around that corner if I saw the cops next time.
There are other instances where cyclists may in fact break the law but that doesn't mean they're necessarily creating a hazard. The 'Idaho stop' reflects that for example.
Yes, of course many cyclists are entitled and add risk to the roadways. We see it every day. All I'm saying is to look at it from a cyclist's point of view, and sometimes what you see as stupid and reckless will make more sense.
