RLJ - London commuters especially

homercles

A subject that I know is close to all of your hearts, and I'm sure NONE of you have ever nipped through a red light :? , but thought it was worth a reminder that the police in Westminster (and The City, I believe) are getting very hot on this. One of the girls here was pulled over this morning (turning left off Embankment heading up past Temple) after coasting through a RL - net result: £30 fine.

So, STOP!

iainment

No.

:twisted:

secretsam

I've seen a plastic plod pull someone over for a right turning where they shouldn't (in fairness, there was an island and no traffic, a bit harsh).

I was amazed she stopped.

I selectively RLJ: if the pedestrians can cross to my left, then I figure I can safely go straight on if there's no-one in my way.

Other than that, I'm a good boy :roll:

WyS

if a copper tries to stop you go faster, test his sprinting abilities and yours!

damo_d_b

I'm actually quite in favour of the police clamping down a bit on errant cyclists. Might remind a few that the laws of the road do apply to them and aren't 'selective' or up to the cyclists' individual judgement.

At times it feels as though 90% of cyclists don't abide by any discernable rules of the road - this is based on my commute through London and hopefully isn't proportionate to all cyclists. But I have my suspicions that it is.

I'd be interested to hear from someone who is willing to justify why they don't believe red lights apply to them. I'd also love to hear from one of those cyclists who thought it was a good idea to avoid the red lights on High St Kensington yesterday morning by jumping onto the pavement for a stretch, sprinting along and then jumping back off the curb on the other side of the red light.

There was a letter in the LCC magazine (I think) this month about a cyclist who jumped a red light and hit a blind woman's guide dog as a result. How would all those pro-RLJers feel if something similar happened to them? Or maybe they feel it couldn't possibly because they're 'vigilant' and 'experienced' or whatever other justification they use for their irresponsible behaviour?

toontra

The only time people most people will stop RLJing is when they have, or cause, a serious accident.

Telling people to obey rules doesn't seem to work. It's only when they suffer as a consequence that it may finally sink in. If a fine helps in that process then I'm all for it.

hamboman

When automated traffic lights were first introduced in England in the 20s no one paid them any attention. They had to get a policeman to sit by them constantly pulling people over to get compliance. Eventually people got the message.

Similarly, drink-driving, while illegal for many years, wasn't enforced for a long time and there was no education telling people it was wrong.

The same thing applies to bikes and rlj. The attitude from cyclists, and the police in fact, is it's not a big deal. Until that changes it will always go on.

cee

<devilsadvocate>
what about pedestrians crossing on the red man?
</devilsadvocate>

WyS

i do it cos i can, cos it saves time and i dont want to stop when there is no need. i dont like being at the front of the queue fighting mopeds for the asl, cars up my arsé beeping and swearing at me to hurry up.

i dont cut through peds crossing or ride pavements. i do it when it is clear and safe all round to do so.

iainment

WyS wrote:

i do it cos i can, cos it saves time and i dont want to stop when there is no need. i dont like being at the front of the queue fighting mopeds for the asl, cars up my arsé beeping and swearing at me to hurry up.

i dont cut through peds crossing or ride pavements. i do it when it is clear and safe all round to do so.

Same here.

:twisted:

hamboman

likewise

WyS

and tbh these coppers should be catching bike thieves. it is ridiculous at the moment and would do far more good than £30 fines for people trying to get home.

For the nutters that have no regard for others fair enough.. but come on. do something useful.

cupofteacp

Sitting at junctions is dangerous, but so is blindly cycling through.

If you get juiced up, drink, take drug, don't pay attention, then your best bet is to sit at the lights and hope someone doesn't drive over you.

Oddballcp

WyS wrote:

and tbh these coppers should be catching bike thieves. it is ridiculous at the moment and would do far more good than £30 fines for people trying to get home.

For the nutters that have no regard for others fair enough.. but come on. do something useful.

If you all stopped cycling through red lights then they wouldn't feel the need to police them, and could go away and do something useful instead, such as catching bike thieves.

PhilTheFish

I always stop at main junctions where the traffic goes straight across in front of you. I generally always go through lights which are on the bottom (or top) of a T - Junction i.e cars will join your road after turning into it. I stay left and take it easy when doing this.

Pedestrian crossings I will RLJ provided all peds are clear of it. If I can't be sure that the road ahead is safe for me/pedestrians/other motorists, then I sit at the RL's like a good boy.

If I get stopped by the plod then I'll take it on the chin and accept the fine or whatever as what I'm doing IS illegal.

toontra

Oddballcp wrote:

WyS wrote:

and tbh these coppers should be catching bike thieves. it is ridiculous at the moment and would do far more good than £30 fines for people trying to get home.

For the nutters that have no regard for others fair enough.. but come on. do something useful.

If you all stopped cycling through red lights then they wouldn't feel the need to police them, and could go away and do something useful instead, such as catching bike thieves.

Exactly. By breaking certain laws you are being totally hypocritical if you then want the police to help you enforce others.

Oh, and by the way, it's not up to you and your mum which ones are enforced and which aren't.

PrettyBoyTim

cee wrote:

<devilsadvocate>
what about pedestrians crossing on the red man?
</devilsadvocate>

Lights are only advisory for pedestrians.

WyS

toontra wrote:

Exactly. By breaking certain laws you are being totally hypocritical if you then want the police to help you enforce others.

Oh, and by the way, it's not up to you and your mum which ones are enforced and which aren't.

BS. I think weed should be legalised, does that mean i think rape should be as well?

Its up to me which laws i break and which i abide by. I am happy to suffer the concequences, if they can catch me.

Your mum says hi btw.

el_presidente

Hi

I like to steal bikes, but that's OK as it's up to me which laws I break and which I abide by. I am happy to suffer the concequences, if they can catch me.

spen666

PrettyBoyTim wrote:

Lights are only advisory for pedestrians.

i've rarely seen a pedestrian with a decent set of front and rear lights. do cateye make them for pedestrians?

toontra

WyS wrote:

BS. I think weed should be legalised, does that mean i think rape should be as well?

The operative word there is "think" - try it out sometime. It's not up to you which laws are enforced and which aren't

Although, as RLJ and dope smoking (whilst driving) endanger other people's lives, they could be seen as being more serious than bike theft.

el_presidente

Yes, I was just using it as an example which might focus attention here

I think WyS's assertion that he can decide which laws to abide by or not is breathtakingly arrogant. If even a significant minority thought that was the case society would be in meltdown

WyS

el_presidente wrote:

Hi

I like to steal bikes, but that's OK as it's up to me which laws I break and which I abide by. I am happy to suffer the concequences, if they can catch me.

:roll:

Who said anything about law breaking being OK? I didnt condone breaking laws, or that because its up to me it is ok to do so. but it is up to the individual which laws they break, and if caught it is up to them to deal with what they are dealt.

el_presidente

GOD

I swore to myself I would never get into an RLJ or helmet argument on here yet here I am in the middle of one.

So for that reason I'm out.

toontra

WyS wrote:

Who said anything about law breaking being OK? ...

it is up to the individual which laws they break, and if caught it is up to them to deal with what they are dealt.

Anyone spot the contradiction here?

WyS

toontra wrote:

The operative word there is "think" - try it out sometime. It's not up to you which laws are enforced and which aren't

Although, as RLJ and dope smoking (whilst driving) endanger other people's lives, they could be seen as being more serious than bike theft.

And when did i say it up to me whats enforced and whats not? Quote me.

I said was instead of fining people for running reds, it would do more good IMO to catch bike thieves.

The nutters that hit peds, cause cars to crash etc are wrong. but like car drivers saying all cyclists ride on the pavement, you are saying all rljers are dangerous.

Empty crossing on a straight road, no peds and a red light. i go through.. what harm is caused?

Gussio

If the police are cracking down on RLJing, I hope that they also twirl their trucheons in the direction of:

1) Motorbikes and scooters in the green box

2) Dangerous driving that endangers other road users

3) Drivers using mobile phones while on the move

4) Drivers eating while on the move

5) Cars and lorries disregarding rules surrounding box junctions

6) Drivers who have no registration or insurance (i.e. you have no come back on them if they knock you off

7) People parking in cycle lanes or other inappropriate places

8) Drivers speeding in built up areas

9) Drivers turning without indicating

10) Aggressive and threatening behaviour towards cyclists

I wish that there was a law which forbids driving up to junctions really quickly and only breaking at the last minute, leaving your bumper out in the traffic and other road users with no idea of whether you intend to stop or not. The punishment could be having your headlights kicked in.

That is all.

WyS

toontra wrote:

WyS wrote:

Who said anything about law breaking being OK? ...

it is up to the individual which laws they break, and if caught it is up to them to deal with what they are dealt.

Anyone spot the contradiction here?

i dont see any contradiction.

There is a law. I break it. I chose to break it. It doesnt make it ok. But it was my choice to break it.

Dont think i can make it any simpler.

How have i contradicted my self?

toontra

WyS wrote:

toontra wrote:

WyS wrote:

Who said anything about law breaking being OK? ...

it is up to the individual which laws they break, and if caught it is up to them to deal with what they are dealt.

Anyone spot the contradiction here?

i dont see any contradiction.

There is a law. I break it. I chose to break it. It doesnt make it ok. But it was my choice to break it.

Dont think i can make it any simpler.

How have i contradicted my self?

I'm also out (before I loose the will to live).

WyS

Yawn.

spen666

WyS wrote:

toontra wrote:

The operative word there is "think" - try it out sometime. It's not up to you which laws are enforced and which aren't

Although, as RLJ and dope smoking (whilst driving) endanger other people's lives, they could be seen as being more serious than bike theft.

And when did i say it up to me whats enforced and whats not? Quote me.

I said was instead of fining people for running reds, it would do more good IMO to catch bike thieves.

The nutters that hit peds, cause cars to crash etc are wrong. but like car drivers saying all cyclists ride on the pavement, you are saying all rljers are dangerous.

Empty crossing on a straight road, no peds and a red light. i go through.. what harm is caused?

No, what is being said is red light jumping is illegal. That is why it is wrong.