This whole RLJ thing

maybrick · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">dondare

London
United Kingdom
932 Posts
Posted - 10/06/2007 : 16:35:32

quote:

Originally posted by dondare

Maybrick, your posts and your sig both say the same thing.
"No rules, no laws, no protocols, no conventions; I'll do just what I want."
That isn't society; that's anarchy; and you only think it can work because you're still a child. If there was real anarchy, and people like me started making the rules, flakey kids like you would be the first casualties.
When you're grown up you'll know what I mean.

You're not the boss of me.

This, of course, is not correct: anarchy is not when people like me make the laws
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

i didn't say it was, i was ignoring your stupid statement that rlj-ing makes me an anarchist, and merely saying that if that means i'm not lke you then i'll call myself that.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">(which you might be guessing is the case anyway) but when there effectively are no laws at all. There are countries where the laws governing behaviour on the road are neither observed or enforced and the death rate is very high indeed. You say that you take responsibility for yourself but the reality is that the it's the laws that protect you, and other people's observance of those laws that keeps you alive. You can ride fearlessly on the roads in Britain not because of your own judgement, bravery and skill .[/
quote]

who mentioned bravery and skill? although i do have those atributes by the truckload, i merely said that i rlj when it's safe. and that as i ride a bike not a motorised vehicle i'm almost certainly never going to kill or even injure someone.

What places you beneath contempt is the way that you excuse your own antisocial ignorance of the law

what places you beneath contempt is the moronic assumtions you make. i'm not ignorant of the law.

but flare up at the suggestion (the point of which you misunderstood entirely) that other people might also ignore the laws and exercise their own judgement at red lights. If you're not prepared to obey the law yourself, what ever gives you the right to say that someone riding a moped has to obey it? quote]

motorised vehicles kill people, when i;m in or on one i assume another level of responsibilty. this is correct, if you can't tell the difference then as i said earlier you shouldn't be on the road.

As for my sig, I'm not going to bother explaining it but your analysis is wrong.[/<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

well indeed, again just to illustrate you own pathetic games, parlour psychology. but i bet my guess was closer than yours!

_______________

i'm not bound by your earthling rules.

dondare · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by maybrick

dondare

i'm not bound by your earthling rules.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

What planet are you on?

funkyrayman · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by tstegers

Dondare
Is there any evidence in your career to date that anyone has trusted you to make significant decisions and rules? If they have what would you say is the best rule/piece of policy you have come up with?

I am guessing that you do not have a job with any real authority, something has always held you back. Like Harold Pinter's caretaker you could have "ruled the world but the paperwork was in Sidcup." Ridicule me, prove me wrong.

Among many other things in earlier posts you claim slack hacks were responsible for the notion that women were massively over represented in fatal accidents at traffic light controlled junctions in London because they were more law abiding and less likely to jump lights. They weren't, according to TfL, via Jenny Jone's office, the speculation came from the Road Transport Laboratory.

I don't recall having your rationale for the 130 killed complying vs the zero or two killed jumping. (Jan 1999 to May 2004) Clearly these numbers suggest it is safer to jump lights. Somewhere between infinity and sixty five times safer based on the numbers. Here's your chance to impress everyone and detail why, everything else being equal, so many more people are killed complying with lights than otherwise? Please don't bang on about primary position and training. These things might clearly help cyclists to avoid being killed and maimed but they clearly did not in all the recorded cases to date. Any speculation about training and how lights are safely and legally negotiated is less valid - there being little evidence this is so, at least five of the six or so killed this year have been declared to be experienced and safety conscious cyclists - than the observation that not waiting and jumping them is a safer way to negotiate them.

Theo Stegers
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

What the hell has what dondare does for a living got to do with RLJing?

Why do you feel the need to be so condescending? Is someone a little insecure? Maybe when someone puts accross a persuasive argument that's hard to counter (unreliable statistics aside) maybe it's easier to insult them than face reality?

funkyrayman · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by jashburnham

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by maybrick

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Hackbike 6 Posted - 09/06/2007 : 21:48:08

Sometimes you may make a mistake and go through when it isn't safe for you?

Sod the rest. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

we all make mistakes, but i feel you're reaching with this example.
i'm responsible for my own fate.

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">



And for the fate of the car/cyclist/ped you hit one day? I've had several near misses with RLJing idiots in the past, just because a junction looks clear doesn't mean it is, you aint infallible.



My Best Bike
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

jashburnham you are absolutely spot on

Roastie · June 2007

This is a very interesting topic. I find the attitude of most of the anti-RLJers quiet disturbing. It seems to be completely black and white with no interest in giving the topic any consideration.

As I mentioned upfront, I hardly jump lights, but I had, and probably will still come across places where blind obedience of the (car biased) law doesn't make sense to me.

I find it interesting how the anti crowd like to use a single generalisation for anyone who makes the decision to jump a light. Yeah, I often get passed by light jumpers, but sometimes I can see a rationale from their point of view, and sometimes I just think they're idiots.

I also find it rather amusing how some guys reckon positioning is the final answer for all cycling-on-the-road problems. Before I even read all the recommended tomes like Cyclecraft (which should be compulsory reading), I used to apply most of the techniques (although we called the primary "taking the lane"). That said, again I don't think that the book can be used as the be all and end all - at some point we just have to take responsibilty ourselves to use our own brains to ensure our own safety.

So, I'll obey the law where it doesn't compromise my safety. As I said before, I'll stop at red as long as it doesn't indirectly put me in the line of fire. If that occasionally makes me an "idiot RLJer", that's fine by me. At least I'll be alive.

funkyrayman · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by maybrick

who mentioned bravery and skill? although i do have those atributes by the truckload, i merely said that i rlj when it's safe. and that as i ride a bike not a motorised vehicle i'm almost certainly never going to kill or even injure someone.

motorised vehicles kill people, when i;m in or on one i assume another level of responsibilty. this is correct, if you can't tell the difference then as i said earlier you shouldn't be on the road
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

You say you are almost certainly never going to kill or injure someone on a bike, how is that so? You don't think it's possible to seriously injure someone on a bike in a cycle/pedestrian accident? Or possibly you think you have such a high skill set that you will never be involved in an accident?

It's nothing to do with "being able to tell the difference". Do you know how illogical that (repetitive) arguement is? Just because one form of transport has a smaller chance of injuring someone than another doesn't give that form the right ignore a safety measure because the potential consequences MIGHT not be as serious.

Fab Foodie · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Hackbike 6

Why do people jump red lights now when this didn't happen before?...Well at least not for the first twenty years of my cycling career.

Hackbike 8 Commuting Debut 09/09/2006Dawes Audax 2006 New 20/09/2006 

 Cycle Commuting since 1981 

Cycling Proficiency Test 24 May 1977 (30 years ago)

 Ride to work part 1 of 8 http://tinyurl.com/ypjapc
Ride to work part 2 of 8 http://tinyurl.com/2jfagu
Ride to work part 3 of 8 http://tinyurl.com/2jcldv 

How not to lock a bike. http://i14.tinypic.com/52355zr.jpg
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

RLJ'ing was not uncommon in London in the early 1980's, I know this to be true because I was a regular perpetrator.
Why?
Because we could.
Because we were being "smart"
Becauuse I was a Student and it was mildly rebelious
Because I thought I was indestructible
Because everybody else were just bit-part players in my world

Because it was safer? B0ll0cxs! We'd have hardly have bothered if it was safer.
Fortunately I have lived long enough to remember why I did it.

The pessimists of this world are rarely disappointed....
Fab's TCR1

maybrick · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">funkyrayman

89 Posts
Posted -
You say you are almost certainly never going to kill or injure someone on a bike, how is that so? You don't think it's possible to seriously injure someone on a bike in a cycle/pedestrian accident?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

yes it's possible.
several dozen orders of magnitude less than the chance of doing it by any other means of transport other than walking. but then, it's possible to cause a serious accident as a pedestrian isn't it?
how do you feel about people rlj-ing on foot?
what about broken red light that is fixed on, at night, with no peds or cars in sight? do you just sit there like a dick until someone gives you permission to cross? because after all it wouldn't technically be safe to cross would it?

_______________

i'm not bound by your earthling rules.

maybrick · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">dondare

London
United Kingdom
935 Posts
Posted -Originally posted by maybrick

i'm not bound by your earthling rules.

What planet are you on?

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

....sadly, it seems the same one as you.

_______________

i'm not bound by your earthling rules.

dondare · June 2007

Asd long as you're here, then you are bound by the rules.
The only assumption I've made about you is that you've been truthful in your posts (sig aside, earthling) in that you RLJ and genuinely don't see anything wrong with it.

You may have made some incorrect assumptions about me, as Stegers has.

Anyway I'm not going to bother with you any more right now, but tomorrow when I'm less tired and have more time I shall taunt you some more.

A pox on both your houses.

BentMikey · June 2007

I had a lot of fun taunting a RLJer this morning on the way to work. He was on a hybrid, and I was on the new 'bent. He tried so hard to beat me, and I easily reeled him in every time, hehehehe. Didn't take too kindly to my parting comment that if he didn't jump the lights he mightn't be so slow because of better quality of training.

My bikes
My skates

If I had a baby elephant, I'd teach it to skate.

maybrick · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">dondare Posted - 10/06/2007 : 22:35:40

Asd long as you're here, then you are bound by the rules.
The only assumption I've made about you is that you've been truthful in your posts (sig aside, earthling) in that you RLJ and genuinely don't see anything wrong with it.

You may have made some incorrect assumptions about me, as Stegers has.

Anyway I'm not going to bother with you any more right now, but tomorrow when I'm less tired and have more time I shall taunt you some more.

A pox on both your houses. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

....bless...

_______________

i'm not bound by your earthling rules.

dondare · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by tstegers
[

I don't recall having your rationale for the 130 killed complying vs the zero or two killed jumping. (Jan 1999 to May 2004) Clearly these numbers suggest it is safer to jump lights. Somewhere between infinity and sixty five times safer based on the numbers. Here's your chance to impress everyone and detail why, everything else being equal, so many more people are killed complying with lights than otherwise? Please don't bang on about primary position and training. These things might clearly help cyclists to avoid being killed and maimed but they clearly did not in all the recorded cases to date. Any speculation about training and how lights are safely and legally negotiated is less valid - there being little evidence this is so, at least five of the six or so killed this year have been declared to be experienced and safety conscious cyclists - than the observation that not waiting and jumping them is a safer way to negotiate them.

Theo Stegers
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Lights are mainly at junctions.

Accidents are more likely to occur at junctions.

Accidents do not occur when the traffic is stationary.

Traffic is stationary at red lights.

Accidents do not occur at red lights.

Accidents can occur when the traffic is moving.

Traffic is moving when the light is green.

Are you keeping up?

Accidents therefore occur when the light is green, but not when the light is red.

This explains your figures.

Accidents can be avoided by ignoring the lights, but there are good reasons for not doing this.

Accidents can also be avoided by not riding on the inside of lorries at junction where they might be turning. For instance.

You can be safer by stopping at reds and positioning yourself correctly than by illegally jumping the red. This also has the advantages of not being illegal (so no risk of a fine) and not antagonizing everybody else.

RLJing increases hostility that cyclists face from motorists.

And lots of other stuff I've already said and you already know.

A pox on both your houses.

Jacomus-rides-Gen · June 2007

Hear hear.

_________________________
Quote: "25mph is pretty fast when you aren't wearing a car..."

Hackbike 6 · June 2007

Had a discussion with a motorist today and his biggest gripe was.

Cyclists who jump traffic lights and cyclists who cycle the wrong way up one way streets.

I got this talking to a total stranger through interest of what he thought and he had a real chip on his shoulder about cyclists.
He even had the hump with me being a cyclist.

This attitude doesn't surprise me in the slightest.Also I was tarred with the same brush.[:(]

Hackbike 8 Commuting Debut 09/09/2006Dawes Audax 2006 New 20/09/2006 

 Cycle Commuting since 1981 

Cycling Proficiency Test 24 May 1977 (30 years ago)

 Ride to work part 1 of 8 http://tinyurl.com/ypjapc
Ride to work part 2 of 8 http://tinyurl.com/2jfagu
Ride to work part 3 of 8 http://tinyurl.com/2jcldv 

How not to lock a bike. http://i14.tinypic.com/52355zr.jpg

Mister Paul · June 2007

Theo

All you keep hanging on is your precious 130:0 which as you can see above can be dismissed very easily.

You need a reminder (your post mentioning me getting excited shows you've forgotten). It was actually you who 'got excited' about that TfL report, before you actually saw it. You kept going on about how vindicated you would be when it turned up. Then it did. And you were that vindicated by it that you would only allow those who agreed with you to see it. So a copy was obtained by someone else and distributed to those on here who asked for it, regardless of their own view.

And what the information showed clearly is that all this 'RLJing is safer' is a complete red herring, and a crass attempt by some to use the emotion of road deaths to shore up an argument for jumping reds. What the information showed is that there are several issues with junctions that need to be addressed to reduce accidents. And none of the measures required need make any mention of RLJing.

I'll say it again. If you want to RLJ then it's up to you. Everyone knows the arguments for and against, and we're all adults. It's your choice and your responsibility. But arguing it from a safety point of view is unjustifiable, dangerous and really very silly.

__________________________________________________________
What we need is a new, national White Bicycle Plan

Hackbike 6 · June 2007

I'll say it again. If you want to RLJ then it's up to you. Everyone knows the arguments for and against, and we're all adults. It's your choice and your responsibility. But arguing it from a safety point of view is unjustifiable, dangerous and really very silly.

Should only be used in the event of an emergency where your life is in danger seems acceptable to me.

Hackbike 8 Commuting Debut 09/09/2006Dawes Audax 2006 New 20/09/2006 

 Cycle Commuting since 1981 

Cycling Proficiency Test 24 May 1977 (30 years ago)

 Ride to work part 1 of 8 http://tinyurl.com/ypjapc
Ride to work part 2 of 8 http://tinyurl.com/2jfagu
Ride to work part 3 of 8 http://tinyurl.com/2jcldv 

How not to lock a bike. http://i14.tinypic.com/52355zr.jpg

maybrick · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Hackbike 6

Leyton-2-Waterloo
2920 Posts
Posted - 10/06/2007 : 23:38:06

Had a discussion with a motorist today and his biggest gripe was.

Cyclists who jump traffic lights and cyclists who cycle the wrong way up one way streets.

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

because of course, a car driver would never do such a thing. they don't hate us because some cyclists do these things, they hate us anyway, perhaps because we're free. being in a car makes a person hateful.
there's nothing you can do, except stop needing to be liked by these hateful car drivers.

_______________

i'm not bound by your earthling rules.

Origamist · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Origamist

quote:

Would you be willing to time your commute riding in the normal fashion one day, and then the next day time it again but obey traffic lights? I would be interested to see what kind of difference it makes to a cyclist I assume to be fit and fast, as so far I can virtually count on one hand the number of times I haven't overhauled an RLJer between lights. Also how you felt during the ride, more stressed, less frustrated etc etc.

Indubitably, jumping the red lights will make your journey time shorter. The more lights you jump (and particularly those with longer phases) the quicker you will get to your destination - assuming you don't come a cropper...

Folders

Dondare
Driving at 55 mh in a 30 zone can make your journey shorter, and if there's no Gatsos to snap you and you're careful and skilful enough not to have an accident then it's a victimless crime. So Mr. Blankety Blank is right, just as theostegers &c. is right and the law is just an ass that we can all ignore.

You're not the boss of me.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
If you choose to break the law (or adhere to it), that is your prerogative. It is mine (and many others') contention that most RLJers do it for reasons of expediency. Do you this disagree with this?

Folders

Eat My Dust · June 2007

God, I don't come on the forum all weekend. Only to find that this thread has made it to 18 pages!!! It was sunny outside this weekend guys!!!

SNAPS

Cab · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Roastie

This is a very interesting topic. I find the attitude of most of the anti-RLJers quiet disturbing. It seems to be completely black and white with no interest in giving the topic any consideration.

As I mentioned upfront, I hardly jump lights, but I had, and probably will still come across places where blind obedience of the (car biased) law doesn't make sense to me.

I find it interesting how the anti crowd like to use a single generalisation for anyone who makes the decision to jump a light. Yeah, I often get passed by light jumpers, but sometimes I can see a rationale from their point of view, and sometimes I just think they're idiots.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I don't have one generalisation for RLJers.

Most of them know that what they're doing is illegal, but they do so because they can't be bothered to stop, or they don't want to be inconvenienced.

Some few don't realise its illegal.

A vanishingly small number might do so because they falsely believe they're safer doing so.

So thats three generalisations, not one.

I've not encountered anything here that challenges those three; there are those who stupidly believe they're safer (when good road positioning would be a better option), there are those who don't give a fig. Don't think anyone here thinks its not illegal, but it wouldn't surprise me.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">I also find it rather amusing how some guys reckon positioning is the final answer for all cycling-on-the-road problems. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

No, its not the be all and end all. You also need good techique (getting going in a timely fashion), good observation skills, to be visible yourself, a sound knowledge of the highway code, and a capacity to communicate with other road users. Road positioning, visibility and observation are (I'd say) key at junctions.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Before I even read all the recommended tomes like Cyclecraft (which should be compulsory reading), I used to apply most of the techniques (although we called the primary "taking the lane"). That said, again I don't think that the book can be used as the be all and end all - at some point we just have to take responsibilty ourselves to use our own brains to ensure our own safety.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I agree.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
So, I'll obey the law where it doesn't compromise my safety. As I said before, I'll stop at red as long as it doesn't indirectly put me in the line of fire. If that occasionally makes me an "idiot RLJer", that's fine by me. At least I'll be alive.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

And thats where your analysis falls down. There may be really rare occasions where the combination of lights and other road users put you at risk (e.g. you get to the ASL and its got a lorry in it), but that really isn't a justification for any of the RLJ'ing that you'll typically see.

Free baby elephants for every citizen
Vote Arch for Prime Minister

Cab · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Roastie
Put away the textbook and engage brain. This isn't p1ssy London traffic, this is Swindon. With vans and lorries and other potentially harmful vehicles driven by hard working people early in the morning on their way to work at 35-40mph - I'm really not about to force my positioning in the primary, because it will result in conflict, bad tempers and all the rest.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

You're swapping safest road position for not irritating other road users; fine, be passive, if that suits you. But you'd be safer adoppting a primary road position, you wouldn't upset the vast mjority of motorists, and you wouldn't really delay anyone if the traffic is sufficient for it to occasionally bunch up anyway. And you'd be more visible and less prone to dangerous overtaking.

If your instinct tells you to keep passively out of the way then your instinct is wrong, like many 'experienced' gutter crawlers.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Here's a question, when last did a motorist point vitriol in your direction? And when last did a motorist thank you for your actions? Be honest now.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Vitriol? This morning, I got into an ASL in front of a taxi driver. Thanked? This morning, a lass couldn't see where she wanted to pull out 'cos of two illegally parked cars, lots of bikes going in the other direction, I waved her out when there was a gap and she thanked me.

Before that... previous thanks was yesterday, when I slowed up to let a car pass on the wrong side of the road (I hadn't really accelerated out of the corner yet, so I may as well slow a little and signal the other guy through). Vitriol before that... errm... last week some time when a bunck of guys in a Latvian registered car had a yell at me at a junction for not having stopped to let them out at a previous side road. Normal stuff on the roads here in Cambridge.

Free baby elephants for every citizen
Vote Arch for Prime Minister

Mosschops2 · June 2007

I think you've hit the nail on the head Cab. The typical RLJing is when people sail through a pelican crossing on red, even though the cyclist is in an empty bus lane (ie sans buses).

There is no safety-based reason not to stop - no left turn in sight etc etc, and it is merely laziness / slight inconvenience that a cyclist can't be ar$ed to slow to a stop, then start up again.

I am not disputing that there are "dangerous" junctions, rather agreeing that in my daily commute, 100% of the RLJs I saw last week were due to laziness, not personal safety....

Have you ever tried pressing Alt+F4 ??

WyS · June 2007

http://photos-260.ll.facebook.com/photo ... 8_1087.jpg

Went riding with a mate all weekend. Use them wisely!

Wasnt sunny though, but warm enough. even found a tiny path that led to some tea rooms. Wicked weekend.

Cab · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mosschops2

I think you've hit the nail on the head Cab. The typical RLJing is when people sail through a pelican crossing on red, even though the cyclist is in an empty bus lane (ie sans buses).<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Indeed. And the argument that its done for safety is complete bunkum; most RLJers will jump red lights when they subjectively feel it is safe to do so, but not because it is unsafe not to do so.

And, frankly, the arguments put forward here in favour of RLJing (that the law doesn't suit cyclists entirely, that there are garbled stats that can be intentionally misinterpreted by a self admitted nutter on the roads, that you're more visible and less likely to be rear ended, etc.) have all been shown to be bunkum. The correct response would then be to either reassess that position or to refute the counter arguments put forward, but instead all we get in return is vile insults and vitriol.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
There is no safety-based reason not to stop - no left turn in sight etc etc, and it is merely laziness / slight inconvenience that a cyclist can't be ar$ed to slow to a stop, then start up again.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I could almost respect someone honest about why they jump red lights, like I can almost respect someone who boasts that they average 90 on a motorway when they subjectively believe that is not unsafe to do so. I could respect the person while disagreeing with the argument. But we just don't get that level of honesty out of RLJ'ers, which is sad.

Come on guys. Come clean. Admit you're just antisocial people who are keen on shaving a few moments and a little effort off your journy, quit this tired pretense that what you're doing has any safety benefits or is in any way morally or legally acceptable, because such is demonstrably not the case.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
I am not disputing that there are "dangerous" junctions, rather agreeing that in my daily commute, 100% of the RLJs I saw last week were due to laziness, not personal safety....
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

No, no-one has disputed that. Of course there are hazardous junctions. The solution isn't to jump red lights, though, the solution is to negotiate those junctions appropriately and within the law while campaigning for them to be changed.

Free baby elephants for every citizen
Vote Arch for Prime Minister

dondare · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by maybrick

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Hackbike 6

Leyton-2-Waterloo
2920 Posts
Posted - 10/06/2007 : 23:38:06

Had a discussion with a motorist today and his biggest gripe was.

Cyclists who jump traffic lights and cyclists who cycle the wrong way up one way streets.

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

because of course, a car driver would never do such a thing. they don't hate us because some cyclists do these things, they hate us anyway, perhaps because we're free. being in a car makes a person hateful.
there's nothing you can do, except stop needing to be liked by these hateful car drivers.

_______________

i'm not bound by your earthling rules.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Earth to planet Maybrick.

Cyclists hate rljers.
Rljing antagonizes motorists and makes them more hostile to cyclists. This hostility can make cycling in traffic more unpleasant and more dangerous than it needs to be.
Of course motorists break the laws; they do so in greater numbers and at greater risk with worse consequences but they justify their actions the same as you justify yours.

Did you look at the link I posted showing how RLJing might have scuppered our chances of getting the proposed changes to the Highway Code re-written? Annoying people can have much wider repercussions than you'd ever guess.

A pox on both your houses.

Hackbike 6 · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by maybrick

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Hackbike 6

Leyton-2-Waterloo
2920 Posts
Posted - 10/06/2007 : 23:38:06

Had a discussion with a motorist today and his biggest gripe was.

Cyclists who jump traffic lights and cyclists who cycle the wrong way up one way streets.

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

because of course, a car driver would never do such a thing. they don't hate us because some cyclists do these things, they hate us anyway, perhaps because we're free. being in a car makes a person hateful.
there's nothing you can do, except stop needing to be liked by these hateful car drivers.

_______________

i'm not bound by your earthling rules.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

No I don't agree with that.There is a real bias there but that is not the reason.I've seen that written on this message board so many times.

Hackbike 8 Commuting Debut 09/09/2006Dawes Audax 2006 New 20/09/2006 

 Cycle Commuting since 1981 

Cycling Proficiency Test 24 May 1977 (30 years ago)

 Ride to work part 1 of 8 http://tinyurl.com/ypjapc
Ride to work part 2 of 8 http://tinyurl.com/2jfagu
Ride to work part 3 of 8 http://tinyurl.com/2jcldv 

How not to lock a bike. http://i14.tinypic.com/52355zr.jpg

Hackbike 6 · June 2007

You're swapping safest road position for not irritating other road users; fine, be passive, if that suits you. But you'd be safer adoppting a primary road position, you wouldn't upset the vast mjority of motorists, and you wouldn't really delay anyone if the traffic is sufficient for it to occasionally bunch up anyway. And you'd be more visible and less prone to dangerous overtaking.

If your instinct tells you to keep passively out of the way then your instinct is wrong, like many 'experienced' gutter crawlers.

Im trying to vary it now.I have been commuting for a long time and haven't really had too many problems though.Do I need to change the way I commute if it doesn't suit people on here?

So long as it isn't illegal I mean.

 except stop needing to be liked by these hateful car drivers.

In my humble opinion I need to be liked and respected by these hateful car drivers as my life may depend on it.If I collide with them I will get injured they wont.If they collide with me worse could happen.

Hackbike 8 Commuting Debut 09/09/2006Dawes Audax 2006 New 20/09/2006 

 Cycle Commuting since 1981 

Cycling Proficiency Test 24 May 1977 (30 years ago)

 Ride to work part 1 of 8 http://tinyurl.com/ypjapc
Ride to work part 2 of 8 http://tinyurl.com/2jfagu
Ride to work part 3 of 8 http://tinyurl.com/2jcldv 

How not to lock a bike. http://i14.tinypic.com/52355zr.jpg

Cab · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Hackbike 6
Im trying to vary it now.I have been commuting for a long time and haven't really had too many problems though.Do I need to change the way I commute if it doesn't suit people on here?

So long as it isn't illegal I mean.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I think my comments were directed at Roastie rather than you.

As for your road position (or anyone elses), within the law do what you're going to do. Just 'cos people might criticise you for it (or point out valid safety issues concerning it) that doesn't mean you can't do it.

Free baby elephants for every citizen
Vote Arch for Prime Minister

Hackbike 6 · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Cab

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Hackbike 6
Im trying to vary it now.I have been commuting for a long time and haven't really had too many problems though.Do I need to change the way I commute if it doesn't suit people on here?

So long as it isn't illegal I mean.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I think my comments were directed at Roastie rather than you.

As for your road position (or anyone elses), within the law do what you're going to do. Just 'cos people might criticise you for it (or point out valid safety issues concerning it) that doesn't mean you can't do it.

Free baby elephants for every citizen
Vote Arch for Prime Minister
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I know it wasn't directed at me but I almost feel guilty because I tend to cycle in a defensive? position and perhaps too much in the door zone.

Hackbike 8 Commuting Debut 09/09/2006Dawes Audax 2006 New 20/09/2006 

 Cycle Commuting since 1981 

Cycling Proficiency Test 24 May 1977 (30 years ago)

 Ride to work part 1 of 8 http://tinyurl.com/ypjapc
Ride to work part 2 of 8 http://tinyurl.com/2jfagu
Ride to work part 3 of 8 http://tinyurl.com/2jcldv 

How not to lock a bike. http://i14.tinypic.com/52355zr.jpg

This whole RLJ thing

Comments

Categories