red lights

Headhuunter

Jim Will Fixie It wrote:

Headhuunter wrote:

Taking my licence would be a minor inconvenience in filling in paperwork to get it back at some point...

You'd has have to do a bit more than fill out some paperwork. If you lose your licence you have to repass your theory and do an extended practical driving test...

Surely in 99.9% of situations, RLJing should not, under any circumstances, be practiced. However, there are going to be situations that, 0.01% of the time, warrant it - although this would be in extreme circumstances; circumstances that no-one has planned for.

Ultimately, it's against the law for both cars and bikes. Saying that, in Leicester I see more cars jump reds than cyclists!

Oh well in that case I can live without my drivers licence, as I said I haven't sat behind the wheel since 1996 and have never owned a car in my life. No great loss. As you say though, cars are always jumping reds, see it all the time in London...

spen666

Jim Will Fixie It wrote:

Headhuunter wrote:

Taking my licence would be a minor inconvenience in filling in paperwork to get it back at some point...

You'd has have to do a bit more than fill out some paperwork. If you lose your licence you have to repass your theory and do an extended practical driving test...

Surely in 99.9% of situations, RLJing should not, under any circumstances, be practiced. However, there are going to be situations that, 0.01% of the time, warrant it - although this would be in extreme circumstances; circumstances that no-one has planned for.

Ultimately, it's against the law for both cars and bikes. Saying that, in Leicester I see more cars jump reds than cyclists!

Only if your are ordered by a court to sit an extended test
for most disqualifications, it is simply a case of applying i=on relevant form for return of your licence after disquakification is up.

99.9% of driving bans do not require banned driver to sit any test before getting their licence back

Jim Will Fixie It

Oh right, my mistake. Still, it's not worth skipping reds, be it on a car or a bike.

Frag75

Even when I'm at a pedestrian crossing with no pedestrians in sight I always stop at red lights. I expect to be treated as a valid road user when on my bike, so I obey the rules and add a few extra seconds to my journey. I wouldn't go through a red light if I thought it was safe in a car, so why would I on a bike!

As for RLJing being safer, I just don't believe it. I drive and cycle around London and I frequently see people sailing through red lights and nearly getting knocked off. What really surprises me is the number of black cabs RLJing!

Headhuunter

Frag75 wrote:

Even when I'm at a pedestrian crossing with no pedestrians in sight I always stop at red lights. I expect to be treated as a valid road user when on my bike, so I obey the rules and add a few extra seconds to my journey. I wouldn't go through a red light if I thought it was safe in a car, so why would I on a bike!

As for RLJing being safer, I just don't believe it. I drive and cycle around London and I frequently see people sailing through red lights and nearly getting knocked off. What really surprises me is the number of black cabs RLJing!

But I'm not talking about "sailing" through red lights, I'm talking about crossing as though you're a pedestrian, looking both ways and proceeding with caution... AFAIC it's no different to when I cross a traffic lit junc on foot when the red man is showing, if it's clear I go (after looking carefully), if it's not clear I wait... It really isn't rocket science...

Teddy Westside

Frag75 wrote:

Even when I'm at a pedestrian crossing with no pedestrians in sight I always stop at red lights. I expect to be treated as a valid road user when on my bike, so I obey the rules and add a few extra seconds to my journey. I wouldn't go through a red light if I thought it was safe in a car, so why would I on a bike! /quote]


+1

What really surprises me is the number of black cabs RLJing!

It surprises you that cab drivers disregard the rules of the road? :shock:

Frag75

Headhuunter wrote:

But I'm not talking about "sailing" through red lights, I'm talking about crossing as though you're a pedestrian, looking both ways and proceeding with caution... AFAIC it's no different to when I cross a traffic lit junc on foot when the red man is showing, if it's clear I go (after looking carefully), if it's not clear I wait... It really isn't rocket science...

If we're getting down to basics, how about: "If the light's green; go. If it's red; stop." Now that "really isn't rocket science".

weadmire

Frag 75, the OP and most of the other contributors to this thread: your comments ooze with sanctimony. It has been well established that it is safer to look for traffic rather than lights. Go to this link http://weadmire.net/tshirt/traffic-lights-t-shirt/ and you will be able to download two pdfs: a report from the road transport laboratory concerning women being massively over represented among cycling fatalities in London. Currently circa 80% of fatalities are women though they only represent circa 30% of the cycling population. The conclusion speculated they were over represented because they were more likely to obey traffic lights than men. And a pdf concerning the frequency with which cyclists in south London jump lights at a number of junctions on and around the A23. They were filmed for extended periods and the sites were carefully selected to be representative. From memory the best junction had 76% of cyclists jumping. In sum the anti jumping set are wrong and in the minority. So best to shut up. I don't know whether Spen's firm gets much in the way of PI work among cyclists as part of his never ending contribution to these forums, but for sure he knows these arguments.

Frag75

weadmire wrote:

In sum the anti jumping set are wrong and in the minority. So best to shut up.

A rather unnecessarily rude end to a well made point.

I've had a quick look through the PDF you recommended and one point in particular stood out for me. It is mentioned that the majority of accidents occur when both the cyclist and HGV have been stationary at a junction. Personally I don't ride along the curb and up to the front of a traffic que unless there's space for bikes to get slightly ahead of the cars (and so be clearly seen) and I certainly would not pull up next to a stationary HGV, as seems to be suggested in the PDF.

I'm well aware that many people run all red lights, not just at dangerous junctions, and wont see that that there's anything wrong with that, so there's very little point in arguing about it. I shall, however, continue to be annoyed by fellow cyclists who nearly hit me when I'm crossing pedestrian crossings and I shall continue to catch up with people who have jumped a light I was stopped at, just to make my commute a little more interesting.

weadmire

Frag75, "Rude end"? It's set to get worse. Being sanctimonious and presumptive is being rude. The truth now - are you one of those who routinely go off on one speculating about women cyclists going up the inside of trucks and buses without having read that they waited patiently and were most often mowed down from behind as the truck (Circa 60% chance of being unfit to be on the road ) continued in an orderly manner?

Whatever the answer, as well as being well advanced on the sanctimony curve and probably someone with "primary" as in "primary position" and "bike handling skills" in their vocabulary there is no doubt your verbal is rehashed and worn out. No one gives a damn about you being annoyed, I'm sure you have noticed this, and stop telling porkies about catching jumpers. I am sure you have seen these claims before. What people who say this are reaching for is the self aggrandising claim that real cyclists, competent cyclist, hardened cyclists, (like them) don't jump light's. Oh yes they do. Let us know how fast you really are. What's your best for a 10 mile TT, a 25, 50 , 100. Tell us about the size of your big ring. Share your real prowess with us. And in the matter of showing out does your other half - your mother most likely - insist you always wear a helmet? Or do you know someone who knows someone who had a near death experience but was saved by their .....?

People who encourage cyclists not to jump lights through half baked peer pressure have blood on their hands. Traffic lights are a stupid waste of time, money and lives. They cause accidents rather than preventing them. Look for traffic not lights, if there is nothing coming, proceed. Frag, "it's not rocket science..."

Frag75

weadmire, you're simply not reading what I write. It's clear from your previously linked website re. the abolition of traffic lights that you're not a driver. The way you have conducted yourself in your last few posts would lead me to assume that you can't drive because you're not old enough. The kind of rudeness which you exhibit whilst hidden behind a computer smacks of one who has not had enough practise at communicating with other people in real life.

weadmire

Frag nice try at being superior but no cigar. Have you ever competed in a time trial or road race? Have you had an off on your bike? Do you live with your parents? Do you always wear a helmet? Are you happy with your rocket science now you can see peer pressure brought to bear on the ignorant concerning traffic lights can lead to them being injured often fatally for the sake of feeding your addiction to sanctimony?

Otherwise:

Age: it is likely I am old enough to be your father, and it is likely I am faster on a bike than you are.

Driving: I have driven long enough to have been banned twice for speeding - I jump lights, whether cycling or driving, regularly. If there is nothing coming why wait? I have about 15yrs no claims on my car insurance. I have been badly smashed up, broken bones and hospital stays smashed up, on several occasions when trusting my safety to green lights on a bicycle. 4 days ICU and the near loss of the bottom half of my right leg was the most serious with 20mins plus unconscious and broken facial bones hard on its heels. Not long ago I used to ride about 12,000 miles a year, Sussex and Kent Weald mainly.
.
Hiding: You know where I am from the address on my website and it would not be hard to find out who I am. Drop in, you will like the shirts. Certainly the widest available choice of cycling related topics and probably the world's widest choice of t shirt designs full stop. No corny jokes on any of them. WeAdmire supply most of the shirts made available through The Cycling Weekly magazine and their website btw.

In sum Frag, I do not believe you know of what you speak. Best try again or better, think again.

Frag75

You would appear to be exactly as you're attempting to portray me, albeit from the opposite view point. 'I jump lights, whether cycling or driving, regularly. If there is nothing coming why wait?' excellent. Well, if there's no one watching next time I'm in a shop, why not just take the items rather than pay? As for your repeated questioning of my wearing a helmet or not; what would you say if I said yes? Something sanctimonious I suspect. Do I need to be doing a 10 mile TT in 20 mins, have had multiple large crashes and never wear a helmet to be able to voice my opinion on this forum? I doubt it.

It is almost always the case that a person's opinion will be shaped by their own experiences. It was quite obvious, even before you mentioned your terrible injuries, that you don't just run red lights for the fun of it. I, however, have been fortunate enough not to experience that and so will continue to stop at red lights and consider where exactly I stop in a traffic que.

Perhaps I was wrong to attempt to voice my view that one should always stop at a red light and as was mentioned earlier by, I believe headhunter, there is a difference between proceeding carefully when clear and just sailing through. That said, my opinion is formed by my experiences. 99% of people I see RLJing go across pedestrian crossings when pedestrians are using them or fly through cross roads without slowing or looking. This includes the rider I saw when I was driving one evening who went through 4 sets of red lights at consecutive crossroads, dressed in dark clothing with no lights on, without slowing at all. Each time I came to overtake, I could only see them from a couple of meters away.

In short, you will continue to run red lights and I will continue to stop at red lights. Really it's of no consequence to me what you do. It's the type of riders mentioned above, who are a danger to themselves and others, that my original comments were aimed at.

weadmire

Frag, I will try and unpick the code:

You think there is an equivalence between theft and jumping red lights when otherwise there is no one at the junction. I think you are trying for the rules are the rules is saying this.

You don't catch everyone up, you probably don't catch anyone up, in fact you are rather slow. I'm thinking 30 mins for a ten - probably the next one will be your first one - which is more like a coincidence than a time.

You always wear a helmet because you are given to anxiety and don't know better.

You might live with your mother but there's nothing wrong with that if you are under 18 or in full time education if under 22.

You are indeed sanctimonious.

You work hard to make sure you never fall off and probably never have but you feel free to express opinions about things you know nothing about. Even if the expressions of such opinions might cost the ignorant/feeble minded their arms and legs. This you seem to think is OK and somehow related to rocket science.

I don't care how annoyed you get and neither does anyone else who knows you. The thing that annoys is that you ask us to pay attention to your opinions. Best to go down periscope...

weadmire

OP, Frag's drowning not waving. Help him out.

Frag75

:roll:

JD_76

tarquin_foxglove wrote:

Headhuunter wrote:

I had a police officer tell me once that if I jumped red lights, he could add points to my driving licence... What utter b0ll0x....

You're correct, you couldn't get say a FPN & 3 penalty points on your driving licence for jumping a red on your bike; but I believe you could lose your driving licence for any offence, including offences committed on a bicycle. (Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 s.146(1))

But it seems an unlikely punishment, as you could jump a red, knock down a ped, get arrested for Wanton & Furious, go to court and you lose your driving licence. The next day, you're back on your bike jumping reds again.

Agreed, I cant see the point of the courts taking your driving licence away from you for any cycling offences as you dont need a licence to ride a bike, the point being unless you put me in jail you cant stop me riding my bike.

Can someone explan the logic of that thought to me??
Has anyone ever lost their licence for cycling offences?

Red lights IMO have to be judged on a case by case basis, busy town = always stop, quiet country road = use own judgement.

weadmire

Frag, One more problem I think you have: you see things that are not there. You do not see cyclists flying through light controlled junctions you see them proceeding carefully through light controlled junctions which is why cyclists who jump red lights are never hit by cars while those who obey them are regularly flattened. The stats in the PDF bear this out. Nor do you see cyclists intimidating pedestrians, Sure you see them on pavements but anyone who has been unseated by a pedestrian will know hitting them is best avoided - cyclists invariably come of worst. I know this.[/code]

Frag75

Weadmire, your problem appears to be that you don't realise when you're being boring. A quick flick through your posting history shows that you've only ever posted in threads relating to RLJing. Coincidentally I didn't notice many people commenting that you sounded like rather a nice chap and backing you up. Funny that.

Incidentally, you continually attempt to back up your view with 'statistical evidence' and yet have just made a ludicrously sweeping statement: "...cyclists who jump red lights are never hit by cars while those who obey them are regularly flattened."

I suggest you continue to concentrate on looking when you RLJ, rather than worrying about whether or not I live with my parents, wear a helmet, have ever fallen off or can average 50mph on a 10 mile TT. Stay safe.

weadmire

Frag, Better, but still not quite there. This thread was entirely populated with perhaps a few exceptions, by sanctimonious posters, OP fellow travelers and bores. You want to claim I am boring? (Look at the hits this thread has had since I started posting to it.) You had the misfortune to be one the most smug and one of the last to comment. Do I care about the majority opinion as expressed on this kind of thread? You know the answer. And in any case the clear balance of probability (around 3:1 if the 76% who jump round the A23 are representative) is that the majority of them are lying hypocrites. I am completely underwhelmed by their opinions. Like you very few have any real experience to talk of, most have never been hit and have never fallen off to the degree of some breakage of bones and yet they do bang on. Topics: Red lights and helmets are things that interest the pretentious and the sanctimonious, their interest begets mine. I have tried to kill these topics a number of times but there are people like you and the OP who will not let it happen.

The author Cormac McCarthy was asked in an interview why he only wrote about life and death. He thought for a moment and replied what else is there to write about? I'm not much interested in gear ratios and bike reviews. From time to time I am interested in debunking the tosh of helmets and traffic lights, my version of Cormac's life and death. If you post in support of this kind of thread you are overdue a slap.

Regarding stats it is a matter of record that no cyclist was killed jumping red lights in London between Jan 1999 and October 2006. I haven't looked at what has happened since October 2006 but if you make a public information request to TFL they will send you a PDF like the one I provided the link for at http://weadmire.net/tshirt/traffic-lights-t-shirt/ This is not to confuse cyclists not killed jumping with cyclists killed by jumpers, quite a different proposition. And of course the rest who went down obeying the lights. Something that so alarmed TFL they ordered a report into things that you have read, I have quoted and they tried to hide and hush up. There is not much wrong with my sweeping generality.

Frag75

weadmire wrote:

...most have never been hit and have never fallen off to the degree of some breakage of bones...

Have you ever stopped to wonder why?

You were quite correct earlier to assume that I have never had a serious off. You also correctly assumed that I "work quite hard to avoid falling off" and this, unsurprisingly, includes not RLJing and not undertaking large vehicles.

I would like to draw you attention to the pdf which you keep brandishing as 'evidence', especially pages 6-3 and 6-4. In particular I'm interested in the reasons given for the incidents recorded. I'm sure many of your (assumed to be) fans will be surprised to see that the majority of those incidents were caused by cyclist behaviour, ie "Cyclist
crossed oncoming traffic (ignoring red signal)"

Now, all your much vaunted pdf seems to confirm is that yes, many people run red lights and yes, this does cause dangerous incidents. What it does not say is that cyclists should feel free to make up their own rules and use this document as 'proof' that they're taking the safest option.

One other thing, the t-shirt link seems to support the complete removal off ALL traffic lights for all vehicles. I'm really interested to know if that is indeed the meaning of the text, and if so, quite how you propose this might work in the real world?

weadmire

Why do people with little experience post to forums spouting complete bo**ocks? Let's see: There's a lot of people who like to spout bo**ocks. Forums are largely anonymous so they feel they can get away with it. They can go along with the apparent consensus and feel as if their opinions are important. They can fantasize about being hardened cyclists and old hands because they have a post count on a cycling forum. It's all a bit virtual and sort of nice to have pen pals who would otherwise probably ignore them if they ever met. How's that? Or are you asking why they do not fall off/get hit? Er They don't get out much, they don't take any risks, they are like creative critics or eunuchs in a harem - they have seen it done, they know when it's done well but they can't quite pull it off themselves. ??

You know you will feel better if you fess up properly so now you have started let's go the whole way. Let's have the admission that you have never seen a cyclist jumping a red light without looking, never mind the "99%" you claimed to have witnessed doing so. That the shocking example of a man in black jumping four sets of lights with no lights who was invisible from more than 2 meters was you having a Martin Luther King moment - you had a dream. A school friend of mine - he pulls no end of women, he's a classic Johnny Guitar Watson "gangasta of love" figure who hasn't done a proper day's work in his life - might be described as a dream weaver. He reckons this description of a man in black defying death is you imagining yourself taking such risks and feeling liberated and empowered. He thinks you have the potential to be what he calls a "true believer" and wants your contact details. Take care not to reveal them. You will end up giving him all your money and he will steal your GF, if you have one, and your mother if you don't. On the matter of women he wants to know if you have any sisters down there in Clapham. Back to fessing your claim you always catch the jumpers was an attempt to sound old school hard when in fact you are really newbie soft and live with your mum, have a compact chainset are thinking about a triple, like to have at least one hand on the brakes, always wear a helmet and don't like to be too close to the chap in front. And you like to have rules, they are a comfort, and you get satisfaction from obeying them, you like approbation...My friend asks do you want to be a "professional" do you want "letters after your name"? He asks if you have posted your CV on the internet or sent it to any recruitment companies who might have posted it to their website. My advice would be do not answer these questions, he is a dangerous f'ker and it gets worse if you give him any personal details.

How big a real world example would you accept as real world? A town of circa 60,000 population with no traffic lights, low accident rates, faster traffic flows, less pollution, a population accustomed to taking responsibility, settling minor disputes quickly with the minimum of cost and fuss who appreciate a lack of stupid traffic lights and petty rules benefits social cohesion in every way. Where men are men, women are women and sheep are not nervous? Take care before you say yes because I will give you the name of the place. It's not far away.

Running red lights dangerously can cause dangerous incidents but cyclists tend not to run lights dangerously because the danger is pretty much all theirs. Look for traffic not lights.

Frag, it looks as if you have been abandoned, where's the OP and your don't jump them mates? With this stimulation should we expect the OP to breeze back in with a gosh I've been away, look at the views! Look at the number of replies to my post, 3 pages! Or will he slither away?

Frag75

Since you're so obsessed with proving that you're a hardened cyclist, why don't you share your TT times so you can be judged by your own standards?

weadmire

Frag, aren'T you interested in the "real world" after all? Shame on you. The place is Drachten in Holland.

on the road

Of all the cyclists I've seen jump red lights, I've never seen anyone just sail through. I seen some sail through on amber or as it's just changing from amber to red but never while it was already on red.

tarquin_foxglove

weadmire wrote:

...or eunuchs in a harem - they have seen it done, they know when it's done well but they can't quite pull it off themselves.

I understand that eunuchs could still get erections, have sex etc but obviously they couldn't get anyone pregnant. So they would be able to keep the unfavoured wives entertained in the harem & the King/Sultan/Emperor would know all the children his wives had were his.

tarquin_foxglove

Interesting that the Met have handed out around 3000-3500 fpn's for rlj to motorists in each of the last three years but the numbers of cyclists receiving them have risen from 1000 to 3500 in the same period.

In addition the City Police have issued 12 fpn's for ASL offences to motorists in the last three years while dishing out 6000 fpn to rlj cyclists.
Source: the ever interesting UK Cycle Rules

spen666

some very misleading conclusions drawn from the data on that website.

An interesting website none the less.