right turn for buses (and bikes?)

jds_1981

Currently fine-tuning my new commute route to work. This morning I turned right here.
http://maps.google.co.uk/?ll=51.527169, ... 39,,0,3.82
Says buses only so are bikes allowed to too, or was I being naughty? I think a few more bikes turned behind me as well.

rjsterry

Probably shouldn't but not very clear as no other signage. Instead, take the previous turning , Drysdale St. Then left onto Hoxton St., and right at the end back onto Old St.

jds_1981

rjsterry wrote:

Probably shouldn't but not very clear as no other signage. Instead, take the previous turning , Drysdale St. Then left onto Hoxton St., and right at the end back onto Old St.

That'd work, but looks like it'd put me into conflict with pedestrians. Might try it out tomorrow.

kelsen

Personally, I would just keep using the junction unless told otherwise.

jonny_trousers

kelsen wrote:

Personally, I would just keep using the junction unless told otherwise.

+1

veronese68

Jonny_Trousers wrote:

kelsen wrote:

Personally, I would just keep using the junction unless told otherwise.

+1

I'd agree with this. Whilst it may be technically wrong, I think you'd only get stopped if the policeman had previously dragged you off his grandmother.

rebs

They have ninja police here quite often stopping RLJ'ers. Loads of people turn right at this location without drama.

I normally from from Hackney road right across into Old Street.

greg66_tri_v2.0

jds_1981 wrote:

Currently fine-tuning my new commute route to work. This morning I turned right here.
http://maps.google.co.uk/?ll=51.527169, ... 39,,0,3.82
Says buses only so are bikes allowed to too, or was I being naughty? I think a few more bikes turned behind me as well.

If you backtrack, there is an ahead only arrow painted on the road in the r/hand land, with the words "Except Buses" painted next to it. And there is "Buses Only" plus a turn right arrow painted on the road in the middle of the junction. Although the sign on the traffic lights that's under the No Right Turn sign is blurred out, it looks as if it says "Except Buses".

So on what basis would a bike be allowed?

bompington

You'd be happier if you just moved to the North ;-)

jds_1981

Heh, also noticed the ASL Box hasn't got a feeder lane..

spen666

interesting logic from some on here - its apparently ok because" police are unlikely to do anything"

Now police rarely do anything about careless driving, so does that make it ok for motorists to drive illegally in this manner?

jds_1981

spen666 wrote:

interesting logic from some on here - its apparently ok because" police are unlikely to do anything"

Now police rarely do anything about careless driving, so does that make it ok for motorists to drive illegally in this manner?

Most people entered ASL boxes from right because police were unlikely to do anything and often safer? Did you ever use this reasoning?

veronese68

I'm more concerned about safety, common sense and morality than the letter of the law. Thankfully many others seem to also see it this way.

spen666

Veronese68 wrote:

I'm more concerned about safety, common sense and morality than the letter of the law. Thankfully many others seem to also see it this way.

The motorist may well use the same argument, will you be happy then?

It is a tad hypocritical to justify cyclists; law breaking but condone others who use same logic to law break

veronese68

spen666 wrote:

Veronese68 wrote:

I'm more concerned about safety, common sense and morality than the letter of the law. Thankfully many others seem to also see it this way.

The motorist may well use the same argument, will you be happy then?

Yes, that would be fine. So long as they didn't endanger anyone.
As you like extreme examples: a little old lady is driving along in her car on a 2 lane road, but the left hand lane is a bus lane. An ambulance approaches with sirens going. The cars behind her move into the(empty) bus lane. She does the same. After the ambulance has passed she cannot move back into the right lane as the car behind her has accelerated behind the ambulance. So she stays in the bus lane for another couple of seconds. By the time the car has passed the bus lane has finished, so she stays in that lane so she can turn left ahead.
She gets a ticket for driving in the bus lane. Her appeal is rejected because she didn't move straight back out. Even though the pictures used to illustrate this clearly show the other car blocking the normal lane.
So, she endangered no one, what she did is morally correct but she broke the law. Is she evil for driving a car? No. She did the right thing, the letter of the law is wrong.

spen666 wrote:

It is a tad hypocritical to justify cyclists; law breaking but condone others who use same logic to law break

Eh?

The Rookie

With Spen on this........we shouldn't break the law, doing so helps to justify the anti-cycling mororists 'reasoning', how often do they trot out the 'but you all jump red lights' argument after all.

Simon

veronese68

The Beginner wrote:

With Spen on this........we shouldn't break the law, doing so helps to justify the anti-cycling mororists 'reasoning', how often do they trot out the 'but you all jump red lights' argument after all.

Simon

Whilst this will sound contradictory to what I wrote above I agree with you on red lights because, as you say, that is a stick used to beat us. I don't worry about red lights because of the law. more because of other people's perception.
In this instance I don't think it's an issue. The vast majority of people would assume bikes are allowed as buses are. There is a bus only right turn coming off Kingston bridge, I often see bikes turning right there. I cannot recall if bikes are allowed to turn or not, even though I pass it every day.