What do you do when a traffic light turns red?

mpie

I wonder if there is a correlation between RLJers and non-drivers. Driving tends to reinforce the 'don't go through red lights' instinct which I find very hard to resist. Perhaps RLJers tend not to be drivers? As an example, to day I got stopped by a red light on a ped crossing on the exit of a busy, congested roundabout. The ped ( kid on a bike) was over in a flash, but the light stayed on red for quite a while longer. There were no other peds around. I thought; "Why am I sitting here, blocking the roundabout" when it's obvious there no risk in moving on. The other car in the second lane also stayed put. Eventually the lights turned green and we off we went. I really found it hard to contemplate going through the red. Too many years of driving and red=stop.

asprilla

mpie wrote:

I wonder if there is a correlation between RLJers and non-drivers. Driving tends to reinforce the 'hammer it through the amber because stopping would be dangerous' instinct which I find very hard to resist.

Fixed that for you

Stevo_666

Slowbike wrote:

To enlarge on this - RLJers may feel they are safer or morally ok to do this - but one effect it can have is to annoy (to the point of enragement) other road users and make ALL cyclists a target.

This.

It's RLJ'ing t1ts that contribute towards me being a target when I'm on my bike.

dav1

For those that think RLJing on a bike is OK go take a look at the highway code.

You are obliged to obey the same rules as card UNLESS there is a specific mention of cycles. Generally speaking this is where there are cycle lanes and/or ASLs which you have the option to use.

Red lights exist in two places. Either a junction where jumping puts you and/or other road users at risk of a collision, especially as under a filter light people don't look for the rogue cyclist that doesn't think a red light applies to them.

The other is a pedestrian crossing. The idea of "weight" does not apply as the speed of a cycle is more then sufficient to injure a pedestrian. If the light is red you wait, regardless of whether people are crossing or not.

IMO it is not safer to get a head start on traffic. The safe thing to do is check whether you can filter without running out of room and position yourself on the road correctly. If there isn't enough room for you and a car/bus/truck don't filer and wait behind. If you are approaching a narrow road section where there isn't enough room check behind and take the primary road position in advance when its safe to do so.

The ONLY acceptable time to RLJ is when a light is not responding to a cyclist. In these cases you proceed either with extreme caution or dismount and use a crossing where proceeding is too risky.

STOP MAKING PITIFUL EXCUSES FOR IGNORING THE RULES OF THE ROAD! I for one am sick and tired of having to defend cyclists from daily-mail reading idiots that think all cyclists are RLJing menaces that don't pay road tax. This view does not need reinforcing by those that should know better.

[/rant]

Mikey41

Red? I stop.

Unless I'm too close to the light to stop when it goes amber, in which case I'll be doing my best Mark Cavendish impression across the junction. (except slower and with less impressive thighs)

tootsie323

I'm rather tempted to start a thread with the title 'What would you do, as a pedestrian, when you need to cross a road?' Based on some of the responses of those who appear not to have too much in the way of prudence to afford I suspect that it will not take too many posts before I read one condoning the closing of the eyes and ears, and running at full speed directly across.

N0bodyOfTheGoat

I stop.

However, there are two sets of lights on my way to work that tend to skip giving my direction a green light, if I am waiting with no vehicles behind... They really do my head in (especially when they turn green for a direction with nobody waiting)! If I'm running fine about getting to work on time, I get off my bike and cross the junctions on foot, but the odd time I will do this at slow speed while still on my bike.

DM222

tootsie323 wrote:

Stop. Wait for green. Go.

Not every cyclist (and even the odd motorist) seems to manage to grasp this concept though.

+1

Mikey23

1) tosh
2) tosh
3) tosh

Klarion

Those cyclists who believe that they must always stop at a red light, whatever the circumstances, should be free to follow & put into practice their belief, and I would not question their right to do so.

However, there are situations where it is quite safe to pass a red light (taking appropriate care etc) when cycling. Eg, junctions where neither vehicles nor pedestrians are coming across nor likely to do so.

In such situations, a few cyclists hop off their bikes and push them over the junction- different legally, but identical safety-wise to cycling over at walking speed.

BTW, as a driver and motorcyclist as well as a cyclist, I personally (when in motorised mode) find that 'RLJ-ing' is very far from being the worst habit exhibited by cyclists. In fact, it is often the case that those cyclists who have gone on ahead of the change of lights are doing the motorised traffic a favour, as they are not in the way & holding up the cars and vans when the lights go green.

asprilla

Walking through lights is fine, I have no objection to that. I don't do it because I don't want to damage my cleats.

Also, I rarely hold up traffic. If I do then it's certainly less than the next set of lights would anyway. Very rarely do I see a queue if traffic behind a cyclist and if I do then it dissipates within 30s.

shortcuts

Klarion wrote:

Those cyclists who believe that they must always stop at a red light, whatever the circumstances, should be free to follow & put into practice their belief, and I would not question their right to do so.

For "belief" insert "law".
So we all should be allowed to disregard ANY law we feel it's okay to disregard should it just happen to be 'inconvenient' to our 'lifestyle? I think that is what you are saying?

Klarion

shortcuts wrote:

So we all should be allowed to disregard ANY law we feel it's okay to disregard should it just happen to be 'inconvenient' to our 'lifestyle? I think that is what you are saying?

The vast majority of road users take (in practice) a fairly pragmatic & variable approach to obeying road laws. When opting to follow or disregard aspects of the law and highway code at any point they no doubt take into account factors including perceived safety, the likelihood of getting caught, the level of 'taboo' involved in breaking whichever regulation, and so on.

Thus car drivers & motorcyclists don't so often jump red lights, but it's perfectly routine and normal for them to, eg, go faster than local and national speed limits (depending on road conditions and presence of speed cameras).

I've a question for those who are also drivers or (motor) bikers, and think its a shockingly bad thing when some other cyclists 'RLJ' now and again. When you are driving or riding your motorised vehicle, do you always religiously adhere to the speed limit?

shortcuts

Klarion wrote:

shortcuts wrote:

So we all should be allowed to disregard ANY law we feel it's okay to disregard should it just happen to be 'inconvenient' to our 'lifestyle? I think that is what you are saying?

The vast majority of road users take (in practice) a fairly pragmatic & variable approach to obeying road laws. When opting to follow or disregard aspects of the law and highway code at any point they no doubt take into account factors including perceived safety, the likelihood of getting caught, the level of 'taboo' involved in breaking whichever regulation, and so on.

Thus car drivers & motorcyclists don't so often jump red lights, but it's perfectly routine and normal for them to, eg, go faster than local and national speed limits (depending on road conditions and presence of speed cameras).

I've a question for those who are also drivers or (motor) bikers, and think its a shockingly bad thing when some other cyclists 'RLJ' now and again. When you are driving or riding your motorised vehicle, do you always religiously adhere to the speed limit?

That is quite pointless and eroneous.

Mikey23

I've said this before and I'll probably say it again. Why don't some of you guys make a list of the laws you are happy to keep and the ones you are prepared to break when it suits you. Then pop down to your nearest cop shop and apply for your exemption certificate. Moral relativism might be the fashion but it ain't how society works...

DM222

CanalRider wrote:

On seeing a light turn red I find a good place to stop. Ideally move to the front and lean on something so I don't have to unclip. In summer I look at ladies ' legs.

I'm definitely guilty of checking out the ladies legs!!!

Klarion

Mikey23 wrote:

Why don't some of you guys make a list of the laws you are happy to keep and the ones you are prepared to break when it suits you. Then pop down to your nearest cop shop and apply for your exemption certificate.

Why not? For one reason, I rather doubt that our hard-pressed police officers would really appreciate such a visit.

chris_bass

I wish they would just get rid of all red lights, yeah there would be more crashes, more people would die but at l;east threads like this wouldn't be churned out every week! I think the death toll would be worth it!

Klarion

Chris Bass wrote:

I wish they would just get rid of all red lights [...] I think the death toll would be worth it!

I doubt that your viewpoint is accurately targeted. Ie, the likely casualties from the abolition of red lights at junctions would not necessarily be the same people who start threads about obesiance or otherwise to traffic lights.

junglist_matty

shortcuts wrote:

Klarion wrote:

Those cyclists who believe that they must always stop at a red light, whatever the circumstances, should be free to follow & put into practice their belief, and I would not question their right to do so.

For "belief" insert "law".
So we all should be allowed to disregard ANY law we feel it's okay to disregard should it just happen to be 'inconvenient' to our 'lifestyle? I think that is what you are saying?

How did that 'rage against the machine' song go again?

Headlamp

I saw two cyclists this morning jump red lights. The first one, a stupid fat woman on Kentish Town Road, nearly got mown down by a car but managed to stop her sorry arse before she got squashed. The second tosser near York Way weren't so lucky and got clipped by a car and sent sprawling. He did survive although had grazes. He then gets on his bike and scampers off...leaving a shocked driver. If he had been squashed (and probably deserved to be) we would have seen the usual headlines about how unsafe London is for cyclists...blah blah blah..and Andrew Gilligan calling for lower speed limits...bollocks. What we need are more police stopping and fining cyclists (like they did for a while at Grays Inn Road) for jumping red lights & cyclists being made to take out insurance.

So the answer to the question What do you do when a traffic light turns red is - Hope not to die!

asprilla

Headlamp wrote:

What we need are more police stopping and fining cyclists (like they did for a while at Grays Inn Road) for jumping red lights.

Agreed. And also fining those that intrude on ASLs so that cyclists do have proper safe haven in which to wait.

However, the police already run regular clamp-down's on cyclists jumping red lights and various locations around the city so you'd need an expansion of manpower to support it.

What as insurance got to do with this? Most cyclists are insured under their home and contents cover for personal liability. We keep hearing that 10% of drivers are uninsured, I wonder what the real level for cyclists is.

junglist_matty

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvJiYrRcfQo

chris_bass

Klarion wrote:

Chris Bass wrote:

I wish they would just get rid of all red lights [...] I think the death toll would be worth it!

I doubt that your viewpoint is accurately targeted. Ie, the likely casualties from the abolition of red lights at junctions would not necessarily be the same people who start threads about obesiance or otherwise to traffic lights.

I was more suggesting without traffic lights there would be no traffic light threads rather than people specifically mowing the opening posters down!

Klarion

Headlamp wrote:

What we need are more police stopping and fining cyclists

Why cyclists in particular- rather than, eg, motorcyclists?

Klarion

Headlamp wrote:

a stupid fat woman on Kentish Town Road [...] her sorry ars* [...] tosser near York Way [...] If he had been squashed (and probably deserved to be) [...] etc etc etc

Hmmmm. This is purely a hypothesis, but one should take into account that you are perhaps not the most objective observer of the commuter cycling scene in NW5.

ballysmate

arran77 wrote:

Run out into the road and ask if I can wash their windscreen :P

I suppose that is better than sashaying up to the driver of the first car to stop and offering 'to love him long time'

Klarion

Chris Bass wrote:

I was more suggesting without traffic lights there would be no traffic light threads rather than people specifically mowing the opening posters down!

Of course

But, while there may or may not (depending on this, that & the other etc) be risk to life & limb involved in ignoring traffic lights- there is definitely no such risk involved in ignoring traffic light threads.

Juddlinski

Thing is, if you get into the habit of ignoring traffic lights, before you know it you're ignoring railway level crossing barriers... And what could possibly go wrong in that situation?

Klarion

Juddlinski wrote:

if you get into the habit of ignoring traffic lights, before you know it you're ignoring railway level crossing barriers

Ah yes, the 'slippery slope' argument.

Apparently some people regard drinking coffee or even tea as an anathema, because it is the start of a continuum which ends up with crack and heroin.

Btw, I don't think anyone here has been advocating 'ignoring' traffic lights. Cyclists who decide not to obey a red signal should at least take note and if they proceed, do so with due caution.