Educating fellow cyclists - what do you reckon?

[halfer]

Hi all

Let me preface this by saying I've been happily doing 20-30 miles/week on my Juicy Sport for seven months, and been car-free for five. I'm a road user, not an off-roader, and I try to improve my cycling regularly, so as to reflect positively on the cycling community if possible. Though, like most cyclists, I get things wrong occasionally!

This morning, whilst cycling on a busy Birmingham B-road, I noticed a male cyclist in his fifties cycle through a red light and cross over the green-lighted carriageway, where no cars were waiting. To be fair, he was careful whilst crossing, but I can't imagine it being acceptable for a car to run a red light just because there is no traffic coming the other way! He saved himself five seconds by not waiting for the lights to change.

I've seen a few cyclists do this, and I think it can incrementally damage the fragile reputation of cyclists, who tend to get the pointy end of the Clarkson-type stick at every opportunity in mainstream media. So, this time I decided I'd tell the cyclist off - and it went badly. I think I might have made my criticisms more gently - my initial criticism was a drive-by complaint, but I cycled back to him, since he started raging instantly. Nevertheless, I wasn't abusive at any stage, and yet I was met with rudeness and vehement anger. He started foaming a bit - so I road off to more shouting. Thankfully I could double his speed

I'd be interested in the input of the community here. If you see poor cycling, do you tackle it? I didn't put myself in any danger - and that is of course a primary consideration. What is the best way to make reasonable criticism that stands a good chance of being heeded? Are people these days - in the UK or elsewhere - resistant even to the most diplomatic of rebukes? Can bad cycling behaviour be modified, or can you not teach an old dog new tricks?

 

[mike killay]

Unfortunately, we now live in a country where an individuals 'rights' are considered far more important than the rights of the community.
His rage was caused by his certain knowledge that he was in the wrong.

 

[thunderblue]

Hi Halfer

I'm not sure that I would feel very safe trying to do what you did. It is interesting though, that when I see this kind of behaviour from cyclists, it seems to be from those whose appearance suggests that they are regular commuter cyclists. You would think they would know better, or maybe familiarity breeds contempt. The slower, more relaxed cyclists seem quite happy to wait for lights to change.

I have to admit though, that I sometimes go when the pedestrian green man shows at one junction - simply because for any cyclist this is the safest time to cross this junction (watching out for pedestrians of course!). I also have one junction where the lights aren't triggered unless a car comes along, so you have no choice there but to go when it is clear, even if the lights are on red.

 

[eddieo]

I dont see it as bad behaviour though no pedestrians, why the hell not carry on slowly in a safe manner for heavens sake....... How about minding your own business?

 

[lectureral]

simply because for any cyclist this is the safest time to cross this junction (watching out for pedestrians of course!).

I'm with Thunderblue on this one - often crossing on red is the safest way - gets you out in clear road ahead of cars. I don't have a problem with a cyclist crossing on red if he does it in a safe and considerate way. If I was told off by another cyclist I would not rage but would have "mind your own business" in my mind somewhere.

 

[halfer]

Aha, interesting - a split of opinion!

On "minding my own business", isn't the reputation of the cycling community all of our business? In any case, if I were to see a more serious wrong-doing (say, a child being beaten up by other children) should I just ignore it? On that basis, "mind your own business" sounds like the antithesis of community to me.

In any case, non-abusive criticism should be acceptable between adults in any walk of life; unfortunately, most of us are societally predisposed to taking it personally. Perhaps they should teach conflict management at school

I'm currently of the view that I always wait for green on crossroad junctions on Birmingham A-roads - any roads, in fact - even when there's no traffic. But if there is a solid camp of "go on red" cyclists here, I am all ears, and most interested to hear about it.

 

[tillson]

There is a growing sense amongst the public at large that no matter what they do, they are always right. No one is allowed to say no to them or, the ultimate offence, to say no to their wretched spawn. This attitude has been gaining momentum for many years and has been nurtured by successive governments representing all parities.

On the other hand, I think that there exists within the British an eagerness to point out perceived bad behaviour within others. Rather than just suffering fools with a quiet reserve, we actually go out of our way in order to seek out fools so that we can suffer them in a very public and vocal style. Perhaps in so doing, this provides an opportunity to look down on others, to elevate our own behaviour.

Traffic lights can be a menace, particularly when they are phased to give priority to a side road. I have three sets of lights en-route to work that will display a red light to me on the main A Road, whilst displaying green to the side roads. They actually change from green to red as I approach! This happens at any time of day when there is not another vehicle in sight, anywhere.

There is an enormous temptation to go straight through the lights described above, because I am usually travelling at around 20 mph when I reach them. To stop converts my hard earned valuable momentum into heat. I then have to expend energy accelerating again.

I have written to the council regarding this issue and received a reply from a woman whom I assume wears red trousers and hollowed out potatoes for shoes. She informs me that it is something to do with saving children. Apparently they have a tendency throw themselves under speeding cars, and the red light phasing means that they can only dive underneath slower moving, but accelerating machinery.

I am therefore proud to announce that I am a committed practitioner of red light jumping whilst cycling. I even go onto the pavement to get around a red light if there are no pedestrians in the vicinity.

Occasionally someone yawps at me. But this is only if they haven’t got a prison van to run along side whilst banging on it and making known their displeasure to the miscreant within.

 

[eddieo]

not on major car junctions, but on pedestrian crossings with no pedestrians around I carry on slowly and safely.....I live in London so these things are every 50 yards or so

Unless someone is behaving dangerously I see it as no ones business......If I had a step through I could get of, cross on red as a pedestrian, mount and carry on quite legally? I see what I do as little different....

 

[Scottyf]

I currently ride through Birmingham City center towards Solihull and use mostly A roads with a couple of B road's.
I actually feel safer on the dual carrigeways than the B roads if I'm completly honest.

Anyway, the normal commute has alot of traffic lights on route.
If there on red and I feel its safe I go through them on Red. This is how I make my journey time up by not having to stop every 50 meters.

 

[flecc]

We are all subject to what can seem an excess of regulation in our modern world, and it's enforcement can be irksome, even when done by those officially authorised to do it.

It follows that when there is a suggestion of enforcement by someone not authorised, it can be a step too far for someone's patience. Freedom is important and that includes the freedom to do wrong, just as long as we are prepared to accept the consequences.

National characteristics are relevant too. At one extreme, Germany has a highly regulated society in which many do not hestitate to criticise those who transgress, and that criticism from anyone is accepted as the norm. Italy by contrast has a population who tend to feel laws are optional guidance mainly intended for others, and it's highly unlikely that any Italian would even notice most individual transgressions, let alone attempt to police them.

Unfortunately we in Britain are sitting on the fence in the middle of these extremes as usual, so it's never clear what is acceptable interaction in these circumstances.

My best advice is to always practice tolerance.
.

 

[halfer]

@tillson, thanks. Thus far, the red light camp is winning - I'll be a touch surprised if a consensus emerges around that, but it is most interesting.

I'd hate to think I might be motivated by a desire to 'seek out fools', and of course I'd deny it; but then we all live in our own experimental bell jars, metaphorically speaking, and so it is hard for any of us to comment without bias upon our own behaviour. I raise this with the community because I'm open to changing my mind, which might suggest I'm not entirely incorrigible!

With that uncertainty in mind, I can say with some confidence that I'm not of the "prison van banging" mentality - not my part of the political spectrum at all.

I've not heard the perspective before that traffic lights might cause a danger - I'm a recent convert to the view that if something saves lives on the roads, then it is generally worth having. I am sometimes suspicious of the motives of speed camera installations, but if the worst a traffic light does is inconvenience a road user, I'd say that wasn't a high price if the risk of injury is reduced.

Have you looked at accident statistics at the road location you mention? I would have thought the red-trousered and potato-shoed council () would have installed lights - or changed their priority calculations - in order to reduce unusually high accident levels at that junction.

 

[halfer]

It follows that when there is a suggestion of enforcement by someone not authorised, it can be a step too far for someone's patience. Freedom is important and that includes the freedom to do wrong, just as long as we are prepared to accept the consequences.

<joke>The dilemma of untrammelled libertarianism is the individual's freedom to accept negative consequences for other people</joke>.

 

[flecc]

It is undoubtedly sometimes safer for a cyclist to cross at red shortly before the change in favour, since it can and often does avoid car/bicycle interaction danger.

I always do it at one particular set of lights where I can demonstrate to anyone that it is not only by far the safest option, it's almost the only option to avoid real danger due to very bad junction design.
.

 

[flecc]

<joke>The dilemma of untrammelled libertarianism is the individual's freedom to accept negative consequences for other people</joke>.

. Indeed, but I did say "as long as we are prepared to accept the consequences", ensuring I was included.

I'd rather the Italian than the German way prevailed here.
.

 

[tillson]

With that uncertainty in mind, I can say with some confidence that I'm not of the "prison van banging" mentality - not my part of the political spectrum at all.

I'm pleased to hear that halfer As I'm sure you know, some are and I was just having a go at them.

I've not heard the perspective before that traffic lights might cause a danger - I'm a recent convert to the view that if something saves lives on the roads, then it is generally worth having. I am sometimes suspicious of the motives of speed camera installations, but if the worst a traffic light does is inconvenience a road user, I'd say that wasn't a high price if the risk of injury is reduced.

Have you looked at accident statistics at the road location you mention? I would have thought the red-trousered and potato-shoed council () would have installed lights - or changed their priority calculations - in order to reduce unusually high accident levels at that junction.

I agree, measures which reduce the probability of road death or injury are a good thing. But these measures must be contrasted against how much death and injury they are likely to prevent, and what impact they will have on the usability of the roads. My potato shod contact and others like her seem to be on a crusade to make sure that no one is ever killed or injured on a road again and any measurer, no matter how small its contribution to road safety, must be a good one.

I haven’t looked into accident statistics on the sections of road that I mention, perhaps I should. However, I do know that Potato Shoe Woman and her disciples will rely on anecdotal evidence when deciding that a stretch of road is likely to kill all of our children. Anyone can denounce a road as a potential child killer and if enough do, it will become lore, thus empowering Potato Shoes to kill off the road.

 

[z0mb13e]

I wasn't going to comment as it seems I am in the minority here... but...

I stop at every red light when on the bike with one minor exception and that is when I am travelling too fast to safely slow down or stop in time for a traffic light changing to red. In fact I did this this morning. If I remember correctly this is rule from the highway code.

I consider myself bound by the same rules as if I was driving a car (with the few exceptions for bikes of course).

I did try to educate a fellow cyclist the other day. As he shot through the red lights I was sitting at I shouted "The red light applies to you too". He didn't appear to hear, understand or care, either about the lights or the possibility of cars pulling out in front of him.

As I am usually reading the lights (watching the other lights as a que to when the lights I am sitting at are about to change) I can usually get away before the cars (a lot of drivers seem to wait for the lights to change before frantically trying to find a gear and take off the handbrake or just take a long time to react) and so I only feel that sitting at traffic lights is a prone position when I am waiting next to a bus or truck.

 

[Trevor Holloway]

See if you can spot the sarcasm .....

"My potato shod contact and others like her seem to be on a crusade to make sure that no one is ever killed or injured on a road again and any measurer, no matter how small its contribution to road safety, must be a good one."


All roads should be constructed of memory foam and all vehicles should be carefully constructed from cardboard, so that if there is an accident there are no injuries.
If this just saves one life it will be worth it !

 

[lectureral]

I consider myself bound by the same rules as if I was driving a car (with the few exceptions for bikes of course).

I have to admit that I take the same view of red lights in a car - if it is safe for me to proceed (eg on temporary lights where I can see behind and ahead for a long way that all is clear or at 2 a.m. at a wide open junction) I will. It's just that it is much more common that it is safe to proceed on a bike (the presence of an unseen police car is factored into the decision more when I am driving).

Maybe it's a London/country thing. Sometimes, it just seems silly to sit in the middle of nowhere waiting because a machine tells you to (in RSA they are called "robots", which I quite like).

 

[halfer]

@z0mb13e - thanks, good to know I'm not in a minority of one!

 

[halfer]

As I popped out to lunch today, I pondered another thing that I think underscores a communitarian aspect of criticising another person's perceived poor behaviour. Directly making a criticism of another adult is, in effect, by-passing the law, and allowing differences of opinion to be resolved in a non-violent and non-legalistic manner. (If there is a likelihood of violence, of course the risks should be weighed up differently).

The alternative is to leave an individual's behaviour unchallenged - in this case resulting in the possibility that the individual eventually gets caught by the police, damages the reputation of the cycling community, or causes a road accident. Individualists and small-statists might consider that any of these are less desirable than dealing with well-motivated criticism from an ordinary member of the public