Should the laws be amended to allow cyclists to run red lights? Ignoring the question of whether or not cyclists should or should not break the law by running red lights, should the law be changed such that cyclists are somehow exempt from stopping and waiting? For example, the Idaho Stop Law provides that cyclists may effectively treat stop signs as yields and red lights as stop signs.

Has this question been discussed before?  Has there been evidence presented that suggests that this is a good or bad idea?

Is this sort of legal change in cyclists' favor? Is it something we should fight for, or will it cause more harm than good? What are the arguments in favor and against such a change?
Maybe (or not), at some stop signs: but not at stop lights

This sounds like an opinion question so I'll answer it that way.

I think it would be okay to allow bicycles to roll through stop signs on residential side streets.  After all, a slowly rolling cyclist is likely more aware of their surroundings than a fully stopped motorist.

Busy multi-way stop intersections?  Probably not a good idea.  Here in Ohio at least, motorists have no idea how 4-way stops work.  We cyclists would be killed within a week.

Stop lights, no way.  Stop lights are usually reserved for higher volume roads and treating them as a stop sign would be dangerous.

That's all from a safety standpoint.  From a public image standpoint, I think cyclists should obey all traffic regulations to the letter.  I have seen far too many kamikaze cyclists cutting in front of cars, riding on sidewalks and not signalling turns.  That kind of behavior just fuels anti-cycling sentiment.

Cyclists should share the road, not expect special treatment that could promote motorist backlash.