Educating fellow cyclists - what do you reckon?
- Thread starter halfer
- Start date
I am sorry but I do not believe that road traffic law was ever put in place so we can then debate what is legally right and morally right about it.
If that was the case then everybody would be turning up in court with all types of excuses.
The laws are written literally in black and white so we all know where we stand. They are written clearly and mostly without ambiguity and are not subject to an individuals interpretation.
I have been at lights on my bike where they are on red and I am stopped waiting to move off when another cyclist just rides through the lights while they are on red. That is their choice but I must admit the word "TOS&ER" is almost always muttered under my breath. Funnily enough a motorbiker has never done that to me.
My personal opinion is that if cyclists want to be taken seriously by other road users then they have to abide by the rules like everyone else.
Steve
If that was the case then everybody would be turning up in court with all types of excuses.
The laws are written literally in black and white so we all know where we stand. They are written clearly and mostly without ambiguity and are not subject to an individuals interpretation.
I have been at lights on my bike where they are on red and I am stopped waiting to move off when another cyclist just rides through the lights while they are on red. That is their choice but I must admit the word "TOS&ER" is almost always muttered under my breath. Funnily enough a motorbiker has never done that to me.
My personal opinion is that if cyclists want to be taken seriously by other road users then they have to abide by the rules like everyone else.
Steve
Law's in themselves are full of grey area's with exceptions to the rules.
If you believe they are black and white you'd be wrong.
Also Individual circumstances / pressures and situations are all different.
Nothing is ever black and white. I never make any logical decision without knowing the full storey.
Point is alot of people here go through red lights if its deemed safer to do so. This is the generaly consensus. I also think when you say red lights it maybe that most have stopped and actually continuing to ride when safe on amber.
I don't think anyone given the situation would bolt through a read light half way though unless there on some kind of death wish.
Sometimes when laws and administrations are at fault, it is legitimate to actively challenge them by disobedience, something that many Syrians and Libyans currently understand.
As I pointed out before, parliament has added provision for the vulnerable pedestrians at traffic lights with phases to suit, but have failed to provide for the equally vulnerable cyclists who have nothing in common with motor traffic in traffic light conditions. Active challenges to the rules draw attention to that problem and might help to get the necessary provision. Strict obedience won't.
That you mention motorbikers never crossing on red emphasises the point I make, since they have so much more in common with other motor traffic than cyclists.
.
When you want the law to be black and white, it thinks in shades of grey and when you need a little bit of leeway the law is back and white. This is because the law is created, enforced and interpreted by people who are influenced and affected by all sorts of things.
As for cyclists shooting through red lights, over the past few months I've seen cyclists pushing out into a busy junction a car length or more past the white line, ready to make a break for it at the first gap, sometimes riding on regardless (usually where the junction traffic is stationary due to traffic but occasionally on a empty junction which makes me wince at the prospect of a car racing to make the green light). It's usually young blokes, occasionally kids and once, a stubborn old git... hardly ever women, though the percentage of women riding bikes on my route to and from work is pretty low.
I agree that there are grey areas in law but failing to stop at a traffic light is pretty much an absolute law unless we want to go into the realms of fantasy.
This proceeding carefully across red lights and ending up in court trying to plead your case will not change the law in any way but more probably antagonise other motorists towards cyclists.
We could go down the line of Critical Mass rallies in an attempt to change laws but I am against them as well.
This is where you are brick walled in the UK. There needs to be a way where the government is willing to stand up for the rights of cyclists, but they just will not do that.
The situation in Denmark is totally different. The government listens to the cycling lobby. This is why 40% of Danish households don`t own a car.
I really must video a ride out and post it on Youtube so UK riders can see how we are looked after over here.
Steve
This proceeding carefully across red lights and ending up in court trying to plead your case will not change the law in any way but more probably antagonise other motorists towards cyclists.
We could go down the line of Critical Mass rallies in an attempt to change laws but I am against them as well.
This is where you are brick walled in the UK. There needs to be a way where the government is willing to stand up for the rights of cyclists, but they just will not do that.
The situation in Denmark is totally different. The government listens to the cycling lobby. This is why 40% of Danish households don`t own a car.
I really must video a ride out and post it on Youtube so UK riders can see how we are looked after over here.
Steve
While I virtually always stop on a red I would say "mind your own business" on this issue. A traffic light's primary function is to regulate and manage traffic flow - people always assume that it is for safety and I would say that is a dubious secondary function. Traffic lights were never invented for bicycles and I am with Flecc on this issue - they do not take bicycles into consideration at all. As for the stupid councils (islington springs to mind) who put in cycle traffic lights - they really make me dispair for missing the point!
The drivers fuming at red lights because cyclists go through on red, are not angry for any safety reason (though they always claim they are) - they are angry because they are mean spirited about somebody else enjoying a bit of freedom when they are highly regulated. Then they have the nerve to get even more angry about the piles of cyclist in the ASL area in front of them as they haven't scooted through the red! Britain does have more that its fair share of mean spirited people.
To counter all that I would add that any cyclist that removes anybody elses right of way by going through a red light should have their bicycle confiscated and crushed - I have seen it plenty of times with pedestrians - saw a cyclist run over sombody's dog and then ride off! Not sure what happened to the dog but I think he was more concerned about his buckled front wheel and not being able to get away quick enough.
The drivers fuming at red lights because cyclists go through on red, are not angry for any safety reason (though they always claim they are) - they are angry because they are mean spirited about somebody else enjoying a bit of freedom when they are highly regulated. Then they have the nerve to get even more angry about the piles of cyclist in the ASL area in front of them as they haven't scooted through the red! Britain does have more that its fair share of mean spirited people.
To counter all that I would add that any cyclist that removes anybody elses right of way by going through a red light should have their bicycle confiscated and crushed - I have seen it plenty of times with pedestrians - saw a cyclist run over sombody's dog and then ride off! Not sure what happened to the dog but I think he was more concerned about his buckled front wheel and not being able to get away quick enough.
As you point out most of your roads are laid out for cyclists and so it is pretty easy for you to say you are happy to stop at red lights. I doubt you are confronted by 50 of the ruddy things on your way to work though are you? At each light there are swarms of drivers behind you ready to overtake at any cost to gain 10 meters of road space before the next red light. I don't think that will be familiar to you or am I wrong?
No you are not wrong Harry and I must admit that does put a different tilt on it.
I live out in the sticks and don`t encouter red lights unless I go into town. Most of the time we are not on the same road as the traffic or if we are we have a segregated area to ride in. The traffic keeps out of our area on the whole for 2 reasons. The penalties are severe but most importantly the car drivers are also cycle riders.
I found this video about Copenhagen cyclists and this is pretty much the same in all big towns and cities.
YouTube - Bicycle Rush Hour in Copenhagen
The guy at the lights at 1.13 got a bit of a flyer, must have an el bike because we do not have law breakers in Denmark...Honest.
You will see some riders put their hand up. It is to indicate that they are slowing down or stopping.
Road users and people in Denmark are generally more law abiding than the UK as they are very laid back to begin with. I have been here 8 years and always feel happy about going around the towns and cities at night. I wouldn`t do it in the UK anymore.
Steve
Last edited:
Red lights mean stop, eBikes are assist limited by law. I understand why people break these laws but to somehow claim that it is justified or different for ME is a little immature.
If you are going to do it, do it, but in the unlikely case that you are caught, it would be wise not to put the ME argument to the court. It doesn't apply to ME strikes me as a very poor defence
I use red lights to suit myself in London but I also recognise that I am breaking the law in doing so. And if I were to soup up(!) my Kalkhoff, I would accept that I was avoiding road tax, insurance and the helmet laws in doing so and in neither case feel my rights were being compromised or any sense of unfairness if I were caught.
I'm no better (or I hope worse) than anyone else but I don't think contempt for the law is very attractive and we shouldn't encourage it - though given the complete lack of enforcement, I accept my thinking is probably very outmoded.
Riders without lights at night, zooming up the pavement etc are commonplace in my part of London. It annoys me but if Mr Lemmy jumping lights is OK, for example, I suppose that is too. Sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander.
Or maybe we need a cycling ombudsman to adjudicate on the laws which are too silly for us cyclists to obey
If you are going to do it, do it, but in the unlikely case that you are caught, it would be wise not to put the ME argument to the court. It doesn't apply to ME strikes me as a very poor defence
I use red lights to suit myself in London but I also recognise that I am breaking the law in doing so. And if I were to soup up(!) my Kalkhoff, I would accept that I was avoiding road tax, insurance and the helmet laws in doing so and in neither case feel my rights were being compromised or any sense of unfairness if I were caught.
I'm no better (or I hope worse) than anyone else but I don't think contempt for the law is very attractive and we shouldn't encourage it - though given the complete lack of enforcement, I accept my thinking is probably very outmoded.
Riders without lights at night, zooming up the pavement etc are commonplace in my part of London. It annoys me but if Mr Lemmy jumping lights is OK, for example, I suppose that is too. Sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander.
Or maybe we need a cycling ombudsman to adjudicate on the laws which are too silly for us cyclists to obey
I don't think many on this forum would disagree with the sentiment, Lemmy, but it's not quite as simplistic as you describe.
Driving a car along a deserted motorway at 2 in the morning, and doing 85mph is 'breaking the law'. Level of endangerment to others? About zero.
Driving a car through a busy shopping street at 2 in the afternoon, and doing 30mph, is not breaking the law. Level of potential endangerment to others? Possibly 7 out of 10, depending on the skill and experience of the driver.
It would be easy to cite similar examples for cyclists.
Being a responsible citizen is not just a question of keeping to society's rules.
A
I think that you have voiced exactly what I was going to say. cyclist have much more in common with pedestrians than they do with cars or motorcycles and yet have to conform to the laws of the latter.
I think you were fairly brave to tackle the man.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?
I do at times cross a junction on red. & a lot of the time I find this to be the safest time to go carefully.
I think that as cyclists we suffer sufficient heckling and rage from drivers without the need to be on the receiving end from fellow cyclists.
I too live in Birmingham. & 2 weeks ago I was out cycling in my local park, I decided not to wear my helmet
The park is divided by the Pershore Road South. I dismounted my bike & pressed the pedestrian lights to cross to the other side of the park. The motorists happily stopped to allow me to cross then up road 'Lycra Man' on his razer blade on wheels, who decided to stop & give me a dressing down for not wearing a helmet. He held up the traffic for a good 15 seconds or more by doing this. I was totally lost for words & motorists were well annoyed.
Educate via other means & not face to face on the road side
That is outrageous and a bit bizarre. I never wear a helmet. If someone (other than my wife) were to take me to task for it I would be cross. I'd also point out that there is research which suggests that traffic gives an unhelmeted bicyclist more room and so an argument can be made that you are less likely to get hit if you do not wear a helmet. Not that I want to start the great debate here again.
At the risk of sounding sanctimonious, I believe that all cyclists should adhere to the law regardless. It would be in all our interests if cyclists were seen as, and known to be, knights of the road.
Unfortunately, cyclists are not exactly a fraternal bunch; indeed, they are a somewhat fractious tribe in many ways just as bad as motorists.
We can't pick and choose which laws we wish to observe, (in law) so there's no good people explaining in this forum how it may be reasonable to do this or that because of....whatever.
When regulations with regard to fishing tackle, baits, hooks, lead shot, etc were introduced, there weren't enough wardens to enforce the new rules. The interesting feature to emerge from the legislation was that the real hobby fishermen as well as the sporting and competition guys all supported the new situation and those who ignored the rules were duly ostracised, reported and in some cases, subjected to physical violence.
Those who fish our inland waterways are, perhaps curiously, conservationists and many give of their own time to clear and maintain some of our lakes, rivers and canals. Some have lost their lives in freezing waters after capsizing their craft while clearing weed during winter. Most probably, some forum members will be coarse fishermen as well as cyclists.
I don't see any exact parallel between the fishing legislation and the RTA as applied to cyclists but I do believe we, as cyclists and forum members, ought to have a consensual view which has to be that we support the laws to which we are currently subject. It follows therefore that we should challenge the illegal riding habits of those who flagrantly break the law as their deeds give us all a bad name. Moreover, we really ought to condemn those forum members who loudly praise and glorify their super-fast and overtly illegal electric bikes. If they really need to go so fast, then they can buy properly legal mopeds, scooters or motorcycles with all that goes with faster two-wheeled machinery.
Clearly there is a place and a need for ebikes as we understand them but to boast that "bike X", one's latest toy, can do 35MPH on the flat without pedalling is just plain stupid. CBT, helmet, tax, insurance, etc is where that person needs to be....not on an ebike!
It's pretty simple really; if you're happy to be restricted to 15mph, an ebike will suit. If you want to go faster; either pedal harder or do the CBT, etc.
I think that's enough sanctimonionium....approximately!...for this evening.
Indalo
Unfortunately, cyclists are not exactly a fraternal bunch; indeed, they are a somewhat fractious tribe in many ways just as bad as motorists.
We can't pick and choose which laws we wish to observe, (in law) so there's no good people explaining in this forum how it may be reasonable to do this or that because of....whatever.
When regulations with regard to fishing tackle, baits, hooks, lead shot, etc were introduced, there weren't enough wardens to enforce the new rules. The interesting feature to emerge from the legislation was that the real hobby fishermen as well as the sporting and competition guys all supported the new situation and those who ignored the rules were duly ostracised, reported and in some cases, subjected to physical violence.
Those who fish our inland waterways are, perhaps curiously, conservationists and many give of their own time to clear and maintain some of our lakes, rivers and canals. Some have lost their lives in freezing waters after capsizing their craft while clearing weed during winter. Most probably, some forum members will be coarse fishermen as well as cyclists.
I don't see any exact parallel between the fishing legislation and the RTA as applied to cyclists but I do believe we, as cyclists and forum members, ought to have a consensual view which has to be that we support the laws to which we are currently subject. It follows therefore that we should challenge the illegal riding habits of those who flagrantly break the law as their deeds give us all a bad name. Moreover, we really ought to condemn those forum members who loudly praise and glorify their super-fast and overtly illegal electric bikes. If they really need to go so fast, then they can buy properly legal mopeds, scooters or motorcycles with all that goes with faster two-wheeled machinery.
Clearly there is a place and a need for ebikes as we understand them but to boast that "bike X", one's latest toy, can do 35MPH on the flat without pedalling is just plain stupid. CBT, helmet, tax, insurance, etc is where that person needs to be....not on an ebike!
It's pretty simple really; if you're happy to be restricted to 15mph, an ebike will suit. If you want to go faster; either pedal harder or do the CBT, etc.
I think that's enough sanctimonionium....approximately!...for this evening.
Indalo
Related Articles
-
MTF Enterprises announces acquisition of EMU Electric Bikes- Started by: Pedelecs
-
Wisper 806T folding bike wins Which? ‘Best Buy’- Started by: Pedelecs
-
Sustrans calls for protected cycle lanes- Started by: Pedelecs
-
Amazon launch their first UK e-cargo micromobility hub- Started by: Pedelecs
