RLJ'ing - are we all guilty really?
secretsam
Posts: 4,948
It's occurred to me that although there's rightly a large volume of bile and general fury directed at RLJ'ers, we actually all do it, after a fashion...
Why so? Because we all cross the road when the little red man is showing - in other European countries (e.g. Sweden, Germany) they don't do this and frown upon foreigners who do - but here it's OK. I've lost count of people I've nearly clattered into in London who run the red - warning, sexist statement ahead - and a large proportion seem to be the laydeez.
So is RLJ'ing on a bike really just an extension of pedestrian behaviour? And with the increasing ignorance of pedestrian right of way on pelican crossings, are drivers only one step behind?
Your two penn'worth would be appreciated.
Why so? Because we all cross the road when the little red man is showing - in other European countries (e.g. Sweden, Germany) they don't do this and frown upon foreigners who do - but here it's OK. I've lost count of people I've nearly clattered into in London who run the red - warning, sexist statement ahead - and a large proportion seem to be the laydeez.
So is RLJ'ing on a bike really just an extension of pedestrian behaviour? And with the increasing ignorance of pedestrian right of way on pelican crossings, are drivers only one step behind?
Your two penn'worth would be appreciated.
It's just a hill. Get over it.
0
Posts
Pedestrians don't have right on way on pelican crossings though. At least, not until the man is green/lights are red.
Pedestrians have right of way on zebra crossings though; but I recall being told that right of way only comes into play once the pedestrian has a foot on the crossing.
we do?
It's OK because it is legal here to cross when the little red man is showing (don't think it is in some other countries) - RLJing is illegal hence two different things.
Pedestrians might not have the right of way, I don't know, but I always yield to them if safe and possible. Seems to me that the most vulnerable should get right of way before others.
So I would give priority in this order, peds, cyclists, motorbikes and then 4 wheel vehicles if I drafted the law.
Joseph Gallivan
No we don't ALL jump red lights. Are you seeking to justify your wrong doing? You and your ilk get cyclists a bad image. Simply because you see others doing it you think it is ok for you to do so is ridicalous.
Think how stupid the average person is.......
half of them are even more stupid than you first thought.
In other news, I think I may have RLJed last night - if the light is amber when you enter the junction, but red as you leave it, is that RLJing?
Viner Maxima, Tifosi CK7, Giant Bowery, Old commuter.
I read somewhere (on the internet so it must be true) that the reason the symbol is a man is that they can't use a red disc because that would imply it was illegal to cross (which it isn't). By using another symbol (ie the little man), it means that the symbols are advisory.
I noticed abroad, particularly in Denmark, that people do stop when the little man is red even if there isn't a moving car visible for miles.
I think it's one of the few things we've got right - and other countries have got wrong. Countless Brits have ended up being stopped/ fined/ arrested for jaywalking in the US - and my wife tells me it's very similar in Poland. Sounds oppressive to me - a sure fire way to ensure that cars rule and pedestrians are permanently sidelined.
Unfortunately they only became necessary because other road users (cars, lorries, bikes etc) do not always respect the pedestrian right of way. In my experience only a tiny number do. when I drive I try to as often as possible - unfortunately incurring the wrath of other car drivers when I do - and when I give way to cyclists, which I always do - usually getting beeped - shouted at - called alsorts. Just makes me more determined though. 8)
Really? Well in that case I suppose they do have right of way on pelican crossings, whether the main road traffic lights are indicating. Still, as you suggest, it's pretty risky to assert that right of way when there's vehicular traffic around.
Naaah. When you see amber you're supposed stop if you can do so safely given your speed - not to screech to a halt all over the middle of the junction.
Plus, there's a real difference between "jumping" a red light - i.e. turning on the burners in an attempt to get through before it goes red from amber, but just failing - and blithely sailing through it as if it wasn't there with no attempt or intention to stop, even though you easily could. The first one doesn't bother me. The second one drives me mad.
In fact, it really irks me when I see peds waiting beside a crossing where there is clearly no traffic coming, just because the little green man isn't lit up. Sometimes, you just have to take responsibility for your own safety ! Look and see if there's any traffic coming, and if there isn't, cross the frickin' road !!!!!
The corrolary is the ped who waits at a traffic-light controlled crossing, peering to see if the little green man is going to light up, in spite of the fact that the lights are red, the traffic stopped, and if they went now they'd get across fine. They hesitate, they dither, then they finally crack and lurch into the crossing just as the lights finally go green. Grr.....
Me, I'm perfect. Obviously.
Red - stop.
Amber - stop if safe to do so
Green - proceed with caution (if junction clear)
Err...no, I think you'll find I'm not an RLJ'er. Read first line of my post. And then wash your mouth out :evil:
I'm in no way condoning the behaviour, I'm just noting that a number of us do something similar on crossings; it was an original thought that occurred to me as I was daydreaming on the A40 the other day... :shock:
It's just a hill. Get over it.
I agree - unless my kids are with me. If I'm with my kids, I wait for the man to go green because it makes it more likely they'll wait for the green man when I'm not with them. Or, at least, it'll reinforce the point that crossing on the red man is more risky.
Ahem. Driving without due care and attention. Now that *is* illegal.
:twisted:
Technically, riding without due care and attention.
Illegal and frankly, daft given the road in question...
It's just a hill. Get over it.
Not me. I'd rather stay in one piece, avoid the hassle of trying to dodge vehicles and avoid annoying people who are cycling or driving legally. When cycling, I also get annoyed by pedestrians who cross in front of me when the lights are green for me, red for them.
People need to be told what to do so badly they'll listen to anyone
No. Pedestrians are allowed to cross anywhere provided they exercise care. Usually, they don't exercise care, and then eff and blind about the cyclists (and sometimes motorists) legally riding through green lights who almost run into them.
People need to be told what to do so badly they'll listen to anyone
Or alternatively, the vast majority cross in a perfectly reasonable fashion and have neither the need or inclination to engage in a slanging match with other road users.
You don't walk or cycle in Central London, then? Most ped crossings are full of lemming hordes whether the little man is red or green, especially outside tube stations.
People need to be told what to do so badly they'll listen to anyone
So not representative of the majority of pedestrians around the UK then. O_o
I lived and cycled in London for 10 years and oh London is not the centre of the earth, nor is it the 'norm'. I just find it irritating - and dont take that personally - how quick we - as in we cyclists, commuters - are to characterise/stereotype every other road user in a negative fashion.
Firstly I try not to endager others.
Secondly my level of resposnsibility increases with the potential amount of damage I could cause.
I.e.
I don't follow the rules as a pedestrian, I cross when the road is clear.
I sometimes follow the rules on a bike. I may pass crossings if clear but red light is on, I won't pass junctions with roads on my left and right.
I follow the rules always and absolutely when in a car.
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game
True that. I often catch myself out characterising people and situations with reference to the worst possible individuals and instances encountered.
Tends to be like that on here a lot (see!). Such distortions of reality can however be justified as being of therapeutic value.