I am quite surprised that people think it is ok to ride through a red light, even if it is "Carefully".

 

I can ride my Moto Guzzi through red lights carefully but I bet all hell would let loose if I got caught doing it.

 

If you cannot slow down on the approach to a red light and judge it for when it turns to green then get off the bike and walk it across the road.

 

Where anyone is going that is so urgent that they cannot wait for a light to change, alludes me.

 

Maybe there is a new road traffic law that I have not heard of which excludes cyclists.

 

I think if you have the courage to point out to someone what they are doing wrong then do it.

 

Steve

I fail to see how you can say that.

I should have known better than to open that particular can of worms, if only to avoid going seriously off-topic

 

But in answer to your question, I suspect it was this chap's fault and probably this article in particular. His point about either side of the debate putting forward a peer-reviewed analysis is spot on, in my view.

I am quite surprised that people think it is ok to ride through a red light, even if it is "Carefully".

I don't mean to offend anyone here when I say I'm surprised as well. On another thread, I think a majority of community members were opposed to people removing the speed limiters from their bikes, on the basis that a perceived lawlessness would damage the reputation of (electric bike) cyclists.

 

Which would sort of bring me back to my original point, if one assumes that jumping a red light would cause a car driver to think less of cyclists in general. Of course, that assumption may be in doubt here, though I think I would generally subscribe to it.

 

I am quite surprised that people think it is ok to ride through a red light, even if it is "Carefully".

 

Not all red lights are equal Steve.

 

What many cyclists are doing is crossing when the pedestrian phase is in favour of their direction, i.e. no motor traffic is crossing in either direction.

 

That actually makes some sense, since cyclists and pedestrians have much more in common in terms of vulnerability and speed then either do with cars.

 

The failing is that of parliament. Having made provision in traffic lights for pedestrians by adding phases to suit, they have failed to make provision for the equally vulnerable cyclists. Many cyclists are merely trying to make up for that failing by sharing the pedestrian facility. As long as they do it sensibly I see no problem, and I'd like to see parliament make this facility a feature of law with lights phasing to suit.

.

Maybe there is a new road traffic law that I have not heard of which excludes cyclists.

 

I think if you have the courage to point out to someone what they are doing wrong then do it.

 

Steve

 

No, there has been no suggestion that going through a red light on a bike is not against traffic law. I think I would draw a distinction between "doing wrong" in a moral sense and a legal sense. There are many things which I might consider morally wrong which are not illegal (e.g. adultery) - equally there are unlawful activities which I do not consider morally wrong. Going safely and courteously through a red light seems to me to fall into the latter category. There are so many laws now that observance of all is near impossible - making the adage "Rules are made for the guidance of wise men and the strict observance of fools" more and more relevant. It would be interesting to know what the average number of laws each person breaks per day - I am betting it would be greater than 1.

@lectureral - I agree entirely about the division of morality and legality. I'm not in favour of adherence to the law from an authoritarian perspective - I'm solidly anti-authoritarian, in fact. But I am worried about a perception of lawlessness around cycling - whether it is justified or not - that might be exacerbated by cyclists breaking the law.

 

But in answer to your question, I suspect it was this chap's fault and probably this article in particular. His point about either side of the debate putting forward a peer-reviewed analysis is spot on, in my view.

 

Point taken, but I take no notice of pundits in general. I prefer to deal in non-human facts like those I mentioned. Of course I could have mounted a cogent argument that those facts demonstrated that speed cameras caused deaths.

 

Obviously the case for their being no correlation is a more sensible conclusion.

.

There are probably some pundits that are best ignored, but I find Monbiot's pieces to be thoroughly researched and considered - even if I don't like the conclusion. One might be able to mount a cogent argument about the dangers of speed cameras, but has such a claim been rigorously reviewed?

 

Back on topic - anyone want to own up to generally stopping on red*? It's early days yet, the poll could go the other way!

 

* excluding at 2am when there are no cars around for ten square miles.

I always stop on red. I'm just not in that much of a rush. Plus it gives me a chance to merge in to the centre of the lane and claim my space ready for the off.

 

I've given up on trying to change attitudes of other drivers. For all the perceived good of making a stand, one day it could kill you. Save you stand for more important matters.

Back on topic - anyone want to own up to generally stopping on red*? It's early days yet, the poll could go the other way!

 

* excluding at 2am when there are no cars around for ten square miles.

 

Yes, but I'm old and staid.

 

There is one place round here where lights control one-way traffic across a narrow bridge and you can see 500 yards up the road opposite, and if it's clear for that distance I will 'jump' the red light.

 

And I sometimes, although rarely, cross a particular pedestrian-controlled crossing on red, when I can see there are no pedestrians within 20+ yards of the crossing.

 

I suppose my criteria are (a) not to endanger others, (b) not to endanger myself, and possibly © mostly to set a good example.

 

 

A.

I've given up on trying to change attitudes of other drivers.

How about changing the attitudes of other cyclists, as per the original post?

 

Back on topic - anyone want to own up to generally stopping on red*? It's early days yet, the poll could go the other way!

 

You'll be surprised to know, I do! The single exception is the one I mentioned above, but that's only a two second anticipation of the change to green after the pedestrians have been stopped crossing and when all directions are red to everyone.

 

I always stop on red at all traffic lights, and remain stationary until the change on all but that one set where a special danger exists for cyclists.

 

This doesn't stop me seeing the argument for a different view though.

.

You'll be surprised to know, I do! The single exception is the one I mentioned above, but that's only a two second anticipation of the change to green after the pedestrians have been stopped crossing and when all directions are red to everyone.

Heh - after all that! And I thought I was a troublemaker

Heh - after all that! And I thought I was a troublemaker

 

There's room for more than one devil's advocate!

 

Better than a dead or half-asleep forum.

.

Good point flecc!.......in much the same way as it's fair to ask, "Why is there only one monopolies commission?"

 

Regards,

Indalo

 

ps hope you're healing well and getting some exercise, albeit of the peripatetic variety.

Good point flecc!.......in much the same way as it's fair to ask, "Why is there only one monopolies commission?"

 

Regards,

Indalo

 

ps hope you're healing well and getting some exercise, albeit of the peripatetic variety.

 

. Yes, getting on fine with no complications and really enjoying the weather.

.

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

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

Funnily enough a motorbiker has never done that to me.

 

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.

.

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.

 

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

Steve:

 

How DO cyclists behave in Denmark? Do they tend to be more law-abiding, or just as anarchic as the Brits?

 

And what is the attitude of Danish traffic police to law-breaking by cyclists there - over here, blind-eyes are usually turned.

 

 

A.

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.

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

 

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?

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.

 

 

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

Edited April 27, 201114 yr by steveindenmark