Red light running

Dellsinho

Also, if it makes you feel a little less hard done by, I have to negotiate 36 sets of traffic lights on my commute.

But I still never feel the need to jump a RL.

Bustacapp

Dellsinho wrote:

964Cup; You can't break the law simply because you're inconvenienced.

He can. That's the whole point. He may get fined but his driving licence will remain clean!

964cup

You know what? I don't believe you. I don't believe you all stop at pelican crossings when you can see there's no one in sight and never turn left on red (which more enlightened countries even allow cars to do, after all). I don't believe you never break the speed limit when you're driving, either, or accelerate to catch an amber light. I don't believe you never pay cash-in-hand to your cleaner or a friendly builder. Or did I mysteriously find a forum full of upright country vicars?

Let's be clear: I'm not suggesting you all barrel across red lights at a road junction head down at TT speeds; I certainly don't. I'm suggesting that when you can see it's clear (actually clear, not "there's a car just around the corner which I can't see" clear) and there are no pedestrians even suggesting they might try to cross, you probably carry on rolling and subsequently pretend to yourself that it was green all along.

Or perhaps you're the ones doing 65mph in lane 2, scowling at anyone who passes you?

diy

I must admit I have never tried to negotiate with a traffic light. I had assumed, perhaps wrongly that they were computer controlled and changed based on sensors and pre-programmed sequences. I will try negotiating with them next time I am stuck on a red

any tips?

EDIT:

964Cup wrote:

I don't believe you never break the speed limit when you're driving, either, or accelerate to catch an amber light. I don't believe you never pay cash-in-hand to your cleaner or a friendly builder. Or did I mysteriously find a forum full of upright country vicars?

its up to the cleaner or builder to declare their income. You are not normally their employer. but the thing you seemed to have missed is that jumping red lights is socially unacceptable and triggers consequences in other peoples behavior. Consequences that may impact you or may impact someone else. Speeding (as in exceeding the limit), despite years of propaganda, is not socially unacceptable and does not cause consequences.

Bustacapp

964Cup wrote:

You know what? I don't believe you. I don't believe you all stop at pelican crossings when you can see there's no one in sight and never turn left on red (which more enlightened countries even allow cars to do, after all). I don't believe you never break the speed limit when you're driving, either, or accelerate to catch an amber light. I don't believe you never pay cash-in-hand to your cleaner or a friendly builder. Or did I mysteriously find a forum full of upright country vicars?

Let's be clear: I'm not suggesting you all barrel across red lights at a road junction head down at TT speeds; I certainly don't. I'm suggesting that when you can see it's clear (actually clear, not "there's a car just around the corner which I can't see" clear) and there are no pedestrians even suggesting they might try to cross, you probably carry on rolling and subsequently pretend to yourself that it was green all along.

Or perhaps you're the ones doing 65mph in lane 2, scowling at anyone who passes you?

If it's clear I go through red lights and ride no hands down the pavement if I see fit.

Mikey23

Nope, I don't do any of the above. Neither am I a paragon of virtue. And I don't really give a fig whether you believe me or not... My last word on the subject

Dellsinho

diy wrote:

I must admit I have never tried to negotiate with a traffic light. I had assumed, perhaps wrongly that they were computer controlled and changed based on sensors and pre-programmed sequences. I will try negotiating with them next time I am stuck on a red

any tips?

Not that meaning of negotiate! :P

Although has anyone ever attempted? Some traffic light systems do have an acoustic override in them...
If you can perfect an ambulance siren with your vocal chords we might be in luck :idea:

MrSweary

964Cup wrote:

Lame justifications...

Ahhhh, so you're special...

p.s. I have a 13 mile each way commute through central London. It really isn't a hardship to stop at the red lights. Pretending otherwise just makes you look like a bit of a numpty.

NITR8s

Just to add to this rules relating to zebra crossings imply to cyclists too. I had to jump out the way of a cyclist in bristol the other day who decieded not to think what the traffic was stopped at the zebra crossing for.

LegendLust

964Cup wrote:

LegendLust wrote:

964Cup wrote:

Hark at all the angels! There's 18 sets of lights on my 9.4k commute; about one every 500 metres. Do I stop at every red, even when I can see it's clear? What would you do?

9.4k commute. Why not go a longer route to avoid the lights?

Because I live in London, where there are lights every 500 metres. Everywhere. And constant nose-to-tail traffic to wiggle round. And &^$£*%"!*£$ buses with their complete inability to leave space on the inside and their filthy exhaust farting out black toxins on the outside. And spacktards on ill-tuned two stroke pizza bikes filling my lungs with yet more crap every time they pull away. And drivers with no idea what their mirrors are for who've not heard that driving while on the phone, eating a McDonalds and smoking all at the same time may not be strictly legal. And pedestrians who never look before they walk straight out into traffic even though there's a pedestrian crossing 20 metres further up the road, mobile glued to one ear and stupid oversize DJ-wannabe headphones blocking the other. And bimbling wobbly commuters with many many gears but no idea how they work and no clue that they might be sharing what little space is left with someone who's trying to make progress. And cycle couriers on brakeless fixies who absolutely positively cannot ever be overtaken by anyone, especially a mamil in a hi-vis jacket on a hybrid. And blinkin' Strava to tell me I was 30 seconds quicker in to work yesterday.

And you want me to make my route longer?

One word: hypocrite

clickrumble

964Cup wrote:

Hark at all the angels! There's 18 sets of lights on my 9.4k commute; about one every 500 metres. Do I stop at every red, even when I can see it's clear? What would you do?

Err, get up a bit earlier?

kela66

Question for all the non RLJ in this thread, you are riding home very late say 2.30 in the morning, the roads are dead no pedestrians and the very very occasional taxi, do you still stop?

Dellsinho

kela66 wrote:

Question for all the non RLJ in this thread, you are riding home very late say 2.30 in the morning, the roads are dead no pedestrians and the very very occasional taxi, do you still stop?

Yup.

If I was in a car I'd stop, so no different on a bike.

bigmat

diy wrote:

Speeding (as in exceeding the limit), despite years of propaganda, is not socially unacceptable and does not cause consequences.

WTF?!

stueyboy

BigMat wrote:

diy wrote:

Speeding (as in exceeding the limit), despite years of propaganda, is not socially unacceptable and does not cause consequences.

WTF?!

+1

chrisaonabike

stueyboy wrote:

BigMat wrote:

diy wrote:

Speeding (as in exceeding the limit), despite years of propaganda, is not socially unacceptable and does not cause consequences.

WTF?!

+1

I think the point is that doing 32 in a 30mph zone, or 75 on the motorway, is not socially unacceptable.

Causing an accident by driving too fast for the conditions clearly is socially unacceptable, but it's perfectly easy to do that while not exceeding the speed limit.

In either case, it's not the speeding that causes the accident, it's the inappropriate speed for the conditions.

Doing 50 in a 30 zone *is* socially unacceptable, but only because it's then virtually guaranteed that it will also be inappropriate for the conditions.

So I can see diy's point, not that I'm advocating breaking the law.

bigmat

Not much to add to this debate, but just to add another voice of dissent to the self-righteous masses. Running a red light on a bike can be completely harmless. There are certain red lights where its just pointless to stop as there is clearly no risk of inconveniencing anybody else. Interesting that you guys are all the rare (as in never seen) exceptions who will stop, as opposed to the countless bikes that cruise by me when I occasionally make a point of stopping at every light just to say how much longer it takes me. I'm generally not keen on pointless laws, although I'd hardly class myself as an anarchist. Interesting that the poster above seemed to suggest that jumping red lights on a bike was less socially acceptable than speeding in a car - may I suggest that this is a totally f****d up state of affairs if true, and perhaps cyclists would be better spending their time worrying about that than other cyclists harmlessly going about their business.

lotus49

964Cup wrote:

Hark at all the angels! There's 18 sets of lights on my 9.4k commute; about one every 500 metres. Do I stop at every red, even when I can see it's clear? What would you do?

kela66 wrote:

Question for all the non RLJ in this thread, you are riding home very late say 2.30 in the morning, the roads are dead no pedestrians and the very very occasional taxi, do you still stop?

I would always stop at every red light under all circumstances or get off my bike and walk round them. I'm not an angel but the reason the UK has such a good road safety record is that people generally do stick to the law and I believe that they are right to do so.

Is it all right if I am unfaithful to my wife as long as she doesn't find out? What harm would there be blah blah blah?

Everyone would like the rules/law to apply to everyone else but not to them. It doesn't work like that.

diy

BigMat wrote:

jumping red lights on a bike was less socially acceptable than speeding in a car.

That is exactly what I am saying. Other road users get really peed off at cyclists who jump reds. Nobody gives a poo at a driver who does 33 in a 30 or 45 in a 40, that used to be 50, that used to be 60 that used to be a 70.

This is not an argument about safety or even my opinion - its an argument about societies attitude. It can be perfectly safe to jump a red - of course it can, if there is nothing coming or even if the layout of the road allows with out conflict.. Just as it can be entirely safe to exceed the limit.

My point is that there is a perception that jumping reds is a bigger deal than speeding. You only have to look at the prosecution statistics. Many, many more speeding convictions than red light convictions. You also can't say X is fine because people do Y.

bigmat

diy wrote:

BigMat wrote:

jumping red lights on a bike was less socially acceptable than speeding in a car.

That is exactly what I am saying. Other road users get really peed off at cyclists who jump reds. Nobody gives a poo at a driver who does 33 in a 30 or 45 in a 40, that used to be 50, that used to be 60 that used to be a 70.

This is not an argument about safety or even my opinion - its an argument about societies attitude. It can be perfectly safe to jump a red - of course it can, if there is nothing coming or even if the layout of the road allows with out conflict.. Just as it can be entirely safe to exceed the limit.

My point is that there is a perception that jumping reds is a bigger deal than speeding. You only have to look at the prosecution statistics. Many, many more speeding convictions than red light convictions. You also can't say X is fine because people do Y.

I think its a more nuanced argument than you suggest. I'm not convinced people are as concerned about cyclists jumping red lights as you seem to think. There is a dislike for cyclists that is justified with all sorts of lame reasons - jumping red lights, cycling on the pavement, riding two abreast, riding in the middle of the lane (how dare we?!), wearing lycra, wearing hi-viz, not wearing hi-viz, not wearing helmets, wearing helmets - you get the idea?! I'm not going to buy into the whole " we mustn't jump red lights because society hates us for it" argument because its just one of many sticks to beat us with and i don't believe it has the causal impact that you suggest.

Speeding is a FAR more significant contributor to accidents and injuries on the road and the only reason society might appear to accept it is because we're generally a self interested bunch - most people drive, and most people don't like to be delayed. We probably need a campaign pointing out 1) how much safer the roads would be for only a limited decrease in speed; and 2) how little impact that decrease would actually have on your journey time.

I don't get your point re speeding convictions by the way.

jonomc4

Whilst I get personally annoyed at cyclist going through red lights. I stop at red lights even if there is no traffic. But I do take a left on a red if there is no traffic coming from the other direction, I am aware that this is contrary to my first sentence and it sounds like I am choosing which rules I will and will not follow personally.

I sincerely believe that cyclists should be able to turn left on a red provided they are close into the curb. I would be grateful if someone could explain logic behind why this is not allowed by law - what is the reasoning behind it?

(as a side note I think the % of people going through red lights is about 20-30% her in London)

MattyyP

Am I the only cyclists who takes every red light as a chance to practice my track-stand? If you see somebody in the Derby area falling off his bike attempting the track-stand - it's probably me!

nolight

kela66 wrote:

Question for all the non RLJ in this thread, you are riding home very late say 2.30 in the morning, the roads are dead no pedestrians and the very very occasional taxi, do you still stop?

Yes if it is a junction for cars. No if it is a redlight for pedestrian crossing only, which I treat as a zebra crossing, if no pedestrians then I go.

964cup

This is all very po-faced. I don't personally find any great hatred of cyclists amongst drivers, or any evidence that sensible flexibility about traffic regulations designed and primarily intended for motor vehicles is met with rage and scorn on the part of the general public. Is this really all about some kind of "we're all in this together" PR campaign for cycling? I must have missed the memo. Or is it that cycling in the capital has become so prevalent that attitudes here are different? Certainly a part of my commute is spent in cycle jams these days; perhaps cyclists are more of a novelty out there where the car still makes sense as daily transport.

You do know that this is *the* classic thought experiment for act vs rule Utilitarianism, don't you? It goes like this:

You are driving/cycling down into a bowl-shaped depression. At the centre of the bowl is a traffic-light controlled crossroads. Because of the shape of the bowl, you can see for at least two miles up each of the roads which meet at the crossroads. There is no traffic (nor any pedestrians) in sight. The traffic light is red against you. Do you stop?

NB: There is no red light camera, and no policeman lurking behind a hedge. No-one will know - except you - whether you stopped or not.

Froomes Edgar

964Cup wrote:

LegendLust wrote:

964Cup wrote:

Hark at all the angels! There's 18 sets of lights on my 9.4k commute; about one every 500 metres. Do I stop at every red, even when I can see it's clear? What would you do?

9.4k commute. Why not go a longer route to avoid the lights?

Because I live in London, where there are lights every 500 metres. Everywhere. And constant nose-to-tail traffic to wiggle round. And &^$£*%"!*£$ buses with their complete inability to leave space on the inside and their filthy exhaust farting out black toxins on the outside. And spacktards on ill-tuned two stroke pizza bikes filling my lungs with yet more crap every time they pull away. And drivers with no idea what their mirrors are for who've not heard that driving while on the phone, eating a McDonalds and smoking all at the same time may not be strictly legal. And pedestrians who never look before they walk straight out into traffic even though there's a pedestrian crossing 20 metres further up the road, mobile glued to one ear and stupid oversize DJ-wannabe headphones blocking the other. And bimbling wobbly commuters with many many gears but no idea how they work and no clue that they might be sharing what little space is left with someone who's trying to make progress. And cycle couriers on brakeless fixies who absolutely positively cannot ever be overtaken by anyone, especially a mamil in a hi-vis jacket on a hybrid. And blinkin' Strava to tell me I was 30 seconds quicker in to work yesterday.

And you want me to make my route longer?

Superb rant. You have my full support - after all, jumping red lights is a victimless crime - like punching someone in the dark

Froomes Edgar

964Cup wrote:

LegendLust wrote:

964Cup wrote:

Hark at all the angels! There's 18 sets of lights on my 9.4k commute; about one every 500 metres. Do I stop at every red, even when I can see it's clear? What would you do?

9.4k commute. Why not go a longer route to avoid the lights?

Because I live in London, where there are lights every 500 metres. Everywhere. And constant nose-to-tail traffic to wiggle round. And &^$£*%"!*£$ buses with their complete inability to leave space on the inside and their filthy exhaust farting out black toxins on the outside. And spacktards on ill-tuned two stroke pizza bikes filling my lungs with yet more crap every time they pull away. And drivers with no idea what their mirrors are for who've not heard that driving while on the phone, eating a McDonalds and smoking all at the same time may not be strictly legal. And pedestrians who never look before they walk straight out into traffic even though there's a pedestrian crossing 20 metres further up the road, mobile glued to one ear and stupid oversize DJ-wannabe headphones blocking the other. And bimbling wobbly commuters with many many gears but no idea how they work and no clue that they might be sharing what little space is left with someone who's trying to make progress. And cycle couriers on brakeless fixies who absolutely positively cannot ever be overtaken by anyone, especially a mamil in a hi-vis jacket on a hybrid. And blinkin' Strava to tell me I was 30 seconds quicker in to work yesterday.

And you want me to make my route longer?

Superb rant. You have my full support - after all, jumping red lights is a victimless crime - like punching someone in the dark

nolight

964Cup wrote:

This is all very po-faced. I don't personally find any great hatred of cyclists amongst drivers, or any evidence that sensible flexibility about traffic regulations designed and primarily intended for motor vehicles is met with rage and scorn on the part of the general public. Is this really all about some kind of "we're all in this together" PR campaign for cycling? I must have missed the memo. Or is it that cycling in the capital has become so prevalent that attitudes here are different? Certainly a part of my commute is spent in cycle jams these days; perhaps cyclists are more of a novelty out there where the car still makes sense as daily transport.

You do know that this is *the* classic thought experiment for act vs rule Utilitarianism, don't you? It goes like this:

You are driving/cycling down into a bowl-shaped depression. At the centre of the bowl is a traffic-light controlled crossroads. Because of the shape of the bowl, you can see for at least two miles up each of the roads which meet at the crossroads. There is no traffic (nor any pedestrians) in sight. The traffic light is red against you. Do you stop?

NB: There is no red light camera, and no policeman lurking behind a hedge. No-one will know - except you - whether you stopped or not.

No but only because I am given this information and know I am part of the safe experiment, so not gonna happen. Yes if there is any unknown information.

Froomes Edgar

Jesus. How do you convince yourself to leave the house every day?

lotus49

964Cup wrote:

You are driving/cycling down into a bowl-shaped depression. At the centre of the bowl is a traffic-light controlled crossroads. Because of the shape of the bowl, you can see for at least two miles up each of the roads which meet at the crossroads. There is no traffic (nor any pedestrians) in sight. The traffic light is red against you. Do you stop?

I would stop for two reasons. Firstly, because I genuinely believe that road users should try to stick to the rules unless it is dangerous to do so but secondly because not stopping would rob me of the pleasure of being sanctimonious on Bike Radar .

964cup

Froomes Edgar wrote:

Jesus. How do you convince yourself to leave the house every day?

Rule 5.