Are rules always Black and White? Is RLJing always wrong?

GEPC

So, my cycle into work this morning from Clapham to the west end was a little busier than usual despite the early hour because Westminster bridge was shut. I had heard this on the BBC before I left and I knew it was true by the time I got to Vauxhall bridge because the traffic was a lot heavier than usual.

When I got to the south side of Westminster bridge there were Police blocking off the road but i happened to arrive just as the lights that usually allow southbound traffic off the bridge, turned red. Now, given that the bridge was shut and traffic backing up on the other bridges as a result I thought is was a bit dumb that the police were not waving our traffic over these lights, thus using their brains and reacting to what was in front of them rather than simply abiding by the rules. I therefore carried on cycling over the lights and was predictably bellowed at by a female police woman who told me red meant stop whatever the curcumstances.

I didn't want to aggravate the situation so I stopped, made my point that the bridge was shut so the lights were serving no purpose than making the traffic worse then kept my mouth shut. My question is though, who was more in the wrong? Me for RLJing or the police for not engaging their brains a bit? Shouldn't common sense prevail over black and white abiding to the law. History shows that blind obedience to rules doesn't always do us any favours (please note I am not comparing enforcement of traffic law to some of the more severe lessons from history) but what happened to a bit of common sense?

gtvlusso

Nope! Not always! Depends on traffic/busyness of junction and layout of junction.....normally, a couple of places I do it, just to get ahead of the scramble for lanes by the cars (usually in the wrong lane). It is simply against the law (and I totally understand the values of those that abide by the law), but sometimes I think it is safer to jump it and get ahead of the scrum/scramble.

always_tyred

gtvlusso wrote:

Nope! Not always! Depends on traffic/busyness of junction and layout of junction.....normally, a couple of places I do it, just to get ahead of the scramble for lanes by the cars (usually in the wrong lane). It is simply against the law (and I totally understand the values of those that abide by the law), but sometimes I think it is safer to jump it and get ahead of the scrum/scramble.

Ah, the RLJ campaigner speaks!!

Its always wrong.

Okay, it isn't always wrong, but the occasions where it is okay are diminishingly rare and when you encounter them, with the "RLJ is wrong" mindset, it ought to be fairly obvious that you have little choice.

Christophe3967

The same on the other side, two plods standing there whilst we all waited at red lights for no real purpose. In the circumstances you describe, the police should be using some common sense, but not sure that this is something the Met have in great supply. Last night along Vic Embankment for the same protest, there was a sqad car with blues and twos - full blast going the wrong way, scattering traffic and scaring people to death. They then stopped at Horseguards and joined some more plods who were stopping the traffic ( I guess the cyclists that were sneaking past). My point is: what was the huge emergency that called for such a dramatic response? They could easily have sent a bobby on a bike or on foot to provide reinforcements. I really thought there must be an armed siege going on. :evil:

gtvlusso

Ultimately - I see allot of people that will hop onto the pavement at a red light and cycle across the ped crossing - which, personally, I think is far worse!

Each to their own - 17 years of this and still alive, with the same tactics. In essence, yes, it is always wrong.....but, sometimes, I believe it can be safer in certain circumstances, where I live and on the roads I use (I am not in a busy built up area, bear in mind!). When I was living in London, I was far more diligent on the ol' red lights.

Couple of massive round-a-bouts that I have to use have lights on them - I often jump these as loads of people use the left lane and then turn right (it is laned and there are big signs too!) - causes all sorts of chaos, I would rather be out of the way than forced out of lane into another busy lane by an ignorant driver on my left.

Some places, I have to stop as it would be suicidal to jump the light.....only 2 proper junctions on my commute though.....

Beeblebrox

In that situation it sounds daft - although, is there a pedestrian crossing on that junction? That may have prevented a blanket wave through on all red lights.

Generally though, red light jumping is bad habit forming and unsafe, not to mention illegal.

bigmat

I still think that RLJ can be OK - its often the common sense approach, however I've seen some appalling examples the last couple of days (numpties weaving at speed through pedestrian crossings / contra flows of traffic). I'm also tempted to renounce it myself, but for every example of bad RLJ, you get a pedestrian crossing at red with no peds in sight, or a red light with a left turn where you can safely proceed without doing anyone any harm at all. I think it is ultimately common sense, but if in any doubt, don't. And in front of the police? That's a bit cheeky isn't it - I'm glad they are taking a strict line (at least on the face of it - they don't appear to have actually done anything!)

DonDaddyD

Its always wrong

I will still do it when nescessity and/or my safety demands. Though, as my skill and experience levels increase the frequency of my RLJing does decrease.

Also I feel that its correct to think but stupid to expect bicycles to always act the same as motorised vehicles when the attitude towards bicycles on the road is still very much a hostile one.

Headhuunter

gtvlusso wrote:

Ultimately - I see allot of people that will hop onto the pavement at a red light and cycle across the ped crossing - which, personally, I think is far worse!

Each to their own - 17 years of this and still alive, with the same tactics. In essence, yes, it is always wrong.....but, sometimes, I believe it can be safer in certain circumstances, where I live and on the roads I use (I am not in a busy built up area, bear in mind!). When I was living in London, I was far more diligent on the ol' red lights.

Couple of massive round-a-bouts that I have to use have lights on them - I often jump these as loads of people use the left lane and then turn right (it is laned and there are big signs too!) - causes all sorts of chaos, I would rather be out of the way than forced out of lane into another busy lane by an ignorant driver on my left.

Some places, I have to stop as it would be suicidal to jump the light.....only 2 proper junctions on my commute though.....

I agree that RLJ-ing is fine in some situations. It's not as if cyclists are the only ones who do it, there are several crossroads/junctions along my morning route at which cars ALWAYS jump reds. Literally every morning.

As a cyclist I consider myself a pedestrian with wheels rather than a car without a motor. No one ever questions pedestrians' rights to cross when the red man is showing. I am certain that RLJ-ing to escape the melee of traffic away from lights has made my commute safer many times, it certainly hasn't ever caused any near misses or accidents. The few near misses and crashes I have had have generally been with motorists suddenly cutting me up, pulling out or turning left in front of me, or pedestrians walking of the curb under my wheels etc.

Having said that, it's still illegal and I wouldn't be so blatant to RLJ in fron tof the plods, no matter how brainless they were being.

IMO it's about time that ASL boxes were enforced in London and that filter lights were installed at major junctions to allow cyclists to set off before the mass of motor traffic.

jamesco

I'm with gtv on this one: in general it should be avoided but in a busy city there're places where it's the least bad choice. We should have a new abbreviation - RLR for red-light-runners - for the pricks who ride through pedestrians crossing with the green man, etc. But sneaking a start at the traffic-light grand prix ain't always bad..

prj45

If you want to jump a red light, get off and walk, it's not hard!

bigmat

prj45 wrote:

If you want to jump a red light, get off and walk, it's not hard!

Its not hard, just completely pointless! I mean seriously, what is the point in that? I see people do it regularly - cycle up to junction, unsaddle, sprint round on pavement barging peds out of the way, then remount and on their way. In the alternative they could have checked it was safe to proceed, maybe slowed down to make sure there was no risk of interfering with peds / traffic and then carried on (through the red light - woo hoo!)

Its the most blatant example of people letting rules totally overtake common sense.

Eau Rouge

Headhuunter wrote:

As a cyclist I consider myself a pedestrian with wheels rather than a car without a motor.

Burn him! Burn him! he's even worse than a witch!
I can't tell you how much I want to change your mindset, for everyones sake. The single biggest problem facing cycling in this country is the idea that somehow cyclists aren't part of the traffic, but instead pedestrains. Everything else seems to stem from that mistake.

cee

sounds very much to me like the should have had traffic wardens (you know the proper somewhat useful ones...not those snarling private sector parking attendants) directing traffic to ignore the lights and use common sense that the bridge was shut.

bluesacs

As to jumping red lights in front of plod, there are only two plods who will ticket you; cycle plod because it's about the only thing they do and red faced fat motorcycle plod who ticket you because they know they're so fat they'll never get out those leathers ever again and have to do something to relieve their angst that they've turned into some sort of fat cyber man. In my experience you can jump red lights in front of squad cars full of police, vans full of police, standing policemen and they will all generally look the other way, unless their piles are playing up, of course. Armed plod are especially not interested in red light jumping, if that helps.

Remember this advice is not absolute and if you get nabbed by the plod don't come back here squealing.

gtvlusso

bluesacs wrote:

As to jumping red lights in front of plod, there are only two plods who will ticket you; cycle plod because it's about the only thing they do and red faced fat motorcycle plod who ticket you because they know they're so fat they'll never get out those leathers ever again and have to do something to relieve their angst that they've turned into some sort of fat cyber man. In my experience you can jump red lights in front of squad cars full of police, vans full of police, standing policemen and they will all generally look the other way, unless their piles are playing up, of course. Armed police are especially not interested in red light jumping, if that helps.

Remember this advice is not absolute and if you get nabbed by the plod don't come back here squealing.

Thats quite funny - I outran 2 bicycle rozza's last month.....They turned onto the A38 in Brizzle as I was passing (at speed down the outside of the traffic) - summit must have pee'd them off as they gave chase and were shouting for me to stop "you with the camo bag!"....could see them pedalling like crazy behind me in the rear screens of the cars I passed.....Fully laden mountain bike Vs lightweight roadie......I just did little MTFU and dissapeared, did not see them again.....Wonder if they wanted me for some other infringelment....I don't know all the rules, so I don't know. Quite proud of myself at the time though.

nation

Put me in the "It's always wrong" camp.

There are situations where it's sensible or necessary to RLJ, but they're vanishingly rare. About the only time I've done it is a set of lights on a side road back home that work off a sensor of some kind.Whatever it is, it isn't sensitive enough to pick up a bike.

spen666

DonDaddyD wrote:

Its always wrong

I will still do it when nescessity and/or my safety demands. Though, as my skill and experience levels increase the frequency of my RLJing does decrease.

Also I feel that its correct to think but stupid to expect bicycles to always act the same as motorised vehicles when the attitude towards bicycles on the road is still very much a hostile one.

This post is very telling

I wonder if others are as honest

always_tyred

Headhuunter wrote:

As a cyclist I consider myself a pedestrian with wheels rather than a car without a motor.

I see myself as a super-intelligent Atlas of a man with movie star good looks. It does not mean its true.

You are on the roads. You are traffic.

sarajoy

Always "wrong" but sometimes safer.

Similarly on busy junctions where cars like to get out FAST, I'll occasionally go early.

One is a junction off a busy main street, and I want to turn right from the side-road. In the sequence before the side road gets the green light, the pedestrian crossing bells always go. I let all the peds cross, and then set off on my right turn so that I get comfortably onto the now nicely empty main road /just/ before the lights change and a load of cars from the side road come tearing past me.

Very occasionally I'll take a left turn when lights are red. And only if no cars/pedestrians are allowed into that lane at the same time.

Eau Rouge

cee wrote:

sounds very much to me like the should have had traffic wardens (you know the proper somewhat useful ones...not those snarling private sector parking attendants) directing traffic to ignore the lights and use common sense that the bridge was shut.

They won't because I'd be amazed if central London doesn't have some sort of traffic control center, and the people in that traffic control center will tell you that the red light holding up the traffic here isn't just doing it to let (today, nonexistent) traffic over the bridge, but more about holding back the traffic from pouring into other junctions further along and causing more problems. They view traffic as little blocks of cars that they use the lights to move aroudn the city. They say it's faster overall this way. It's far too boring a topic for anyone to be able to stay awake long enough to argue with them.

The shouting police officer knows full well there is no harm in GEPC jumping this particular light this morning, but wishes to reinforce the idea that cyclists shouldn't jump red lights in principle, which clearly is something that is needed for too many of London's cyclists. Common Sense gives way to a bit of on-the-spot cycling training, I guess.

always_tyred

spen666 wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Its always wrong

I will still do it when nescessity and/or my safety demands. Though, as my skill and experience levels increase the frequency of my RLJing does decrease.

Also I feel that its correct to think but stupid to expect bicycles to always act the same as motorised vehicles when the attitude towards bicycles on the road is still very much a hostile one.

This post is very telling

I wonder if others are as honest

Who is not being honest?

jonginge

Eau Rouge wrote:

cee wrote:

sounds very much to me like the should have had traffic wardens (you know the proper somewhat useful ones...not those snarling private sector parking attendants) directing traffic to ignore the lights and use common sense that the bridge was shut.

They won't because I'd be amazed if central London doesn't have some sort of traffic control center, and the people in that traffic control center will tell you that the red light holding up the traffic here isn't just doing it to let (today, nonexistent) traffic over the bridge, but more about holding back the traffic from pouring into other junctions further along and causing more problems. They view traffic as little blocks of cars that they use the lights to move aroudn the city. They say it's faster overall this way. It's far too boring a topic for anyone to be able to stay awake long enough to argue with them.

The shouting police officer knows full well there is no harm in GEPC jumping this particular light this morning, but wishes to reinforce the idea that cyclists shouldn't jump red lights in principle, which clearly is something that is needed for too many of London's cyclists. Common Sense gives way to a bit of on-the-spot cycling training, I guess.

Not at the moment. A 2012 contractor's tunnel borer knocked out a load of the control systems at the weekend.... BT are having to replace a load of fibre and copper :roll:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/04/06 ... ic_lights/

prj45

MatHammond wrote:

prj45 wrote:

If you want to jump a red light, get off and walk, it's not hard!

Its not hard, just completely pointless! I mean seriously, what is the point in that? I see people do it regularly - cycle up to junction, unsaddle, sprint round on pavement barging peds out of the way, then remount and on their way. In the alternative they could have checked it was safe to proceed, maybe slowed down to make sure there was no risk of interfering with peds / traffic and then carried on (through the red light - woo hoo!)

Its the most blatant example of people letting rules totally overtake common sense.

Well, the alternative, if you don't want to break the law, is to wait until the light goes green.

thekickingmule

Headhuunter wrote:

I agree that RLJ-ing is fine in some situations. It's not as if cyclists are the only ones who do it, there are several crossroads/junctions along my morning route at which cars ALWAYS jump reds. Literally every morning.

That's a ridiculous thing to say, loads of people go out robbing every day, that doesn't make it ok for someone else to do it.
I don't think people should ever RLJ, it's a good place to get some breath back, practise track standing and view the traffic around you. I do think though that in this situation, the police should have been signalling the cars through. They were there to stop the protesters getting on the bridge (for them to jump off it :roll: ), they should have realised that they could have helped ease the traffic

tuxpoo

thekickingmule wrote:

Headhuunter wrote:

I agree that RLJ-ing is fine in some situations. It's not as if cyclists are the only ones who do it, there are several crossroads/junctions along my morning route at which cars ALWAYS jump reds. Literally every morning.

That's a ridiculous thing to say, loads of people go out robbing every day, that doesn't make it ok for someone else to do it.
I don't think people should ever RLJ, it's a good place to get some breath back, practise track standing and view the traffic around you. I do think though that in this situation, the police should have been signalling the cars through. They were there to stop the protesters getting on the bridge (for them to jump off it :roll: ), they should have realised that they could have helped ease the traffic

I leave home at 5:30 in leafy berkshire. I rarely see a car for the first 20 mins of my ride but have to go through 3 sets of lights. all of which i dont trigger.

How do I stay legal?

Tux

jonginge

tuxpoo wrote:

thekickingmule wrote:

Headhuunter wrote:

I agree that RLJ-ing is fine in some situations. It's not as if cyclists are the only ones who do it, there are several crossroads/junctions along my morning route at which cars ALWAYS jump reds. Literally every morning.

That's a ridiculous thing to say, loads of people go out robbing every day, that doesn't make it ok for someone else to do it.
I don't think people should ever RLJ, it's a good place to get some breath back, practise track standing and view the traffic around you. I do think though that in this situation, the police should have been signalling the cars through. They were there to stop the protesters getting on the bridge (for them to jump off it :roll: ), they should have realised that they could have helped ease the traffic

I leave home at 5:30 in leafy berkshire. I rarely see a car for the first 20 mins of my ride but have to go through 3 sets of lights. all of which i dont trigger.Tricky

How do I stay legal?

Tux

Tricky indeed. But have you contacted your council about these light triggers which are not fit for purpose?

bluesacs

Tux said, "I leave home at 5:30 in leafy Berkshire. I rarely see a car for the first 20 mins of my ride but have to go through 3 sets of lights; all of which I don't trigger.

How do I stay legal?

Doughnuts for breakfast and kebabs for supper.

_Brun_

bluesacs wrote:

Tux said, "I leave home at 5:30 in leafy Berkshire. I rarely see a car for the first 20 mins of my ride but have to go through 3 sets of lights; all of which I don't trigger.

How do I stay legal?

Doughnuts for breakfast and kebabs for supper.

http://auto.howstuffworks.com/question234.htm

Christophe3967

So, the consensus seems to be:

1. It's black and white.
2. Bikes are traffic.
3. It would be good if the police enforced the law.
4. It would be good if the police used common sense.
5. It would be good if everyone smiled more.
6. It would be good if everybody washed daily.

bigmat

prj45 wrote:

MatHammond wrote:

prj45 wrote:

If you want to jump a red light, get off and walk, it's not hard!

Its not hard, just completely pointless! I mean seriously, what is the point in that? I see people do it regularly - cycle up to junction, unsaddle, sprint round on pavement barging peds out of the way, then remount and on their way. In the alternative they could have checked it was safe to proceed, maybe slowed down to make sure there was no risk of interfering with peds / traffic and then carried on (through the red light - woo hoo!)

Its the most blatant example of people letting rules totally overtake common sense.

Well, the alternative, if you don't want to break the law, is to wait until the light goes green.

I agree that would be preferable.