Red Light Jumping

[Angelfishsolo]

I think Mr Apollo only starts threads like this to spout rubbish. He only has 1 other post out of General Cycling of over 700 - I smell a dirty big...

TROLL ! :troll:

Yep. I have long suspected this.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

Logical conclusion though that is, I think we should give Zeus' boy the benefit of the doubt here. I suspect that he is entirely genuine in his campaign to get RLJing recognized for the perfectly reasonable practice he feels it to be, when undertaken by sensible people that is.

Who defines who sensible people are?

 

[twobiker]

OR to carry a rolled up newspaper and a pink carnation and they have to say the code:

"The seagull is eating a barmcake"

Or print their phone number and address on their jacket so that a law abiding person could report them.

 

[martint235]

Logical conclusion though that is, I think we should give Zeus' boy the benefit of the doubt here. I suspect that he is entirely genuine in his campaign to get RLJing recognized for the perfectly reasonable practice he feels it to be, when undertaken by sensible people that is.

You have to remember though that at the start of the last thread he claimed to genuinely not know that red lights applied to cyclists.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

You have to remember though that at the start of the last thread he claimed to genuinely not know that red lights applied to cyclists.

Even though he/she was a driver.

 

[twobiker]

Who defines who sensible people are?

I am the only sensible person here as I am the only one who's jacket does up at the back with straps and buckles.

 

[Nigel-YZ1]

Ok, here goes :-Where there's a red light showing everyone stops.
This is a law.
If you are an emergency vehicle you can go through. Everyone seems to accept this, and we move aside and stop to allow it to happen.

I would prefer the situation to stay like this.

Why do I think this?:
1. It means everyone acts in a uniform and predictable manner.
2. No-one has to sit and work out from what vehicles or pedestrians are present whether there is a reason to expect a different behaviour.
3. No-one has to decide whether there is a risk that they believe is worth taking if they proceed.
4. If someone goes past that light, believing the risk is their own, and minimal, and is sadly mistaken, then gets squished under 44 tons of Scania:
a. The driver of the Scania has to suffer,
b. The emergency services have to suffer, having to use rubber gloves and plastic bags to retrieve the pieces,
c. The cyclists family have to find meaning.
5. I will never be convinced that a cycle journey is so urgent that they require the same priority as an ambulance.
6. I believe RLJ is like speeding or tailgating, it's a selfish, ignorant practice.

Please feel free to raise a petition to have the law changed. I won't sign it.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

Ok, here goes :-Where there's a red light showing everyone stops.
This is a law.
If you are an emergency vehicle you can go through. Everyone seems to accept this, and we move aside and stop to allow it to happen.

I would prefer the situation to stay like this.

Why do I think this?:
1. It means everyone acts in a uniform and predictable manner.
2. No-one has to sit and work out from what vehicles or pedestrians are present whether there is a reason to expect a different behaviour.
3. No-one has to decide whether there is a risk that they believe is worth taking if they proceed.
4. If someone goes past that light, believing the risk is their own, and minimal, and is sadly mistaken, then gets squished under 44 tons of Scania:
a. The driver of the Scania has to suffer,
b. The emergency services have to suffer, having to use rubber gloves and plastic bags to retrieve the pieces,
c. The cyclists family have to find meaning.
6. I will never be convinced that a cycle journey is so urgent that they require the same priority as an ambulance.
7. I believe RLJ is like speeding or tailgating, it's a selfish, ignorant practice.

Please feel free to raise a petition to have the law changed. I won't sign it.

Enough said

 

[twobiker]

Ok, here goes :-Where there's a red light showing everyone stops.
This is a law.
If you are an emergency vehicle you can go through. Everyone seems to accept this, and we move aside and stop to allow it to happen.

I would prefer the situation to stay like this.

Why do I think this?:
1. It means everyone acts in a uniform and predictable manner.
2. No-one has to sit and work out from what vehicles or pedestrians are present whether there is a reason to expect a different behaviour.
3. No-one has to decide whether there is a risk that they believe is worth taking if they proceed.
4. If someone goes past that light, believing the risk is their own, and minimal, and is sadly mistaken, then gets squished under 44 tons of Scania:
a. The driver of the Scania has to suffer,
b. The emergency services have to suffer, having to use rubber gloves and plastic bags to retrieve the pieces,
c. The cyclists family have to find meaning.
6. I will never be convinced that a cycle journey is so urgent that they require the same priority as an ambulance.
7. I believe RLJ is like speeding or tailgating, it's a selfish, ignorant practice.

Please feel free to raise a petition to have the law changed. I won't sign it.

You've stirred up a bloody hornets nest now!

 

[Mad at urage]

Ok, here goes :-Where there's a red light showing everyone stops.
This is a law.
If you are an emergency vehicle you can go through. Everyone seems to accept this, and we move aside and stop to allow it to happen.

I would prefer the situation to stay like this.

Why do I think this?:
1. It means everyone acts in a uniform and predictable manner.
2. No-one has to sit and work out from what vehicles or pedestrians are present whether there is a reason to expect a different behaviour.
3. No-one has to decide whether there is a risk that they believe is worth taking if they proceed.
4. If someone goes past that light, believing the risk is their own, and minimal, and is sadly mistaken, then gets squished under 44 tons of Scania:
a. The driver of the Scania has to suffer,
b. The emergency services have to suffer, having to use rubber gloves and plastic bags to retrieve the pieces,
c. The cyclists family have to find meaning.
5. I will never be convinced that a cycle journey is so urgent that they require the same priority as an ambulance.
6. I believe RLJ is like speeding or tailgating, it's a selfish, ignorant practice.

Please feel free to raise a petition to have the law changed. I won't sign it.

That's just anti-rlj hatred! You're an rlj-ist, I can tell!
















And anyway .... aside from all that, are there any good reasons not to rlj?


No, thought not. Glad we all agree on that then!


(Apart from the rlj-ists of course, but they don't count 'cos they're nasty ).

 

[apollo179]

Ok, here goes :-Where there's a red light showing everyone stops.
This is a law.
If you are an emergency vehicle you can go through. Everyone seems to accept this, and we move aside and stop to allow it to happen.

I would prefer the situation to stay like this.

Why do I think this?:
1. It means everyone acts in a uniform and predictable manner.
2. No-one has to sit and work out from what vehicles or pedestrians are present whether there is a reason to expect a different behaviour.
3. No-one has to decide whether there is a risk that they believe is worth taking if they proceed.
4. If someone goes past that light, believing the risk is their own, and minimal, and is sadly mistaken, then gets squished under 44 tons of Scania:
a. The driver of the Scania has to suffer,
b. The emergency services have to suffer, having to use rubber gloves and plastic bags to retrieve the pieces,
c. The cyclists family have to find meaning.
5. I will never be convinced that a cycle journey is so urgent that they require the same priority as an ambulance.
6. I believe RLJ is like speeding or tailgating, it's a selfish, ignorant practice.

Please feel free to raise a petition to have the law changed. I won't sign it.

Good reason .
I agree a red light should represent a uniform and predictable command that everyone obeys.
However the high rate of rljing reflects that this is sadly not true on the ground.
If we tweaked the road traffic control a bit to accomodate circumstances that justify modification we would end up with an overall better traffic control situation and increased overall obeyance / respect of lights.
To cite an extreme example for the purpose of illustration - Unnecessary traffic lights could be turned off on deserted streets late at night. Thereby erradicating rlj and the associated disrepute to traffic light obeyance.
Respect for lights does appear to have been slightly eroded and this might in some way be retreived by re-thinking our overall traffic control strategy and specifically the utilisation and application of traffic lights in varying situations.

 

[twobiker]

I don't use lights at night, I never see anybody.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

Good reason .
I agree a red light should represent a uniform and predictable command that everyone obeys.
However the high rate of rljing reflects that this is sadly not true on the ground.
If we tweaked the road traffic control a bit to accomodate circumstances that justify modification we would end up with an overall better traffic control situation and increased overall obeyance / respect of lights.
To cite an extreme example for the purpose of illustration - Unnecessary traffic lights could be turned off on deserted streets late at night. Thereby erradicating rlj and the associated disrepute to traffic light obeyance.
Respect for lights does appear to have been slightly eroded and this might in some way be retreived by re-thinking our overall traffic control strategy and specifically the utilisation and application of traffic lights in varying situations.

Then you have moved the goalposts radically. If lights are turned off then on one can run them.

 

[apollo179]

Then you have moved the goalposts radically. If lights are turned off then on one can run them.

The original question is just a stepping off point.

"Beyond the mantra "its against the law therefore its wrong" does anyone have a compelling arguement why rljing is wrong in circumstances where it is safe to cyclist and others and causes offence to no-one. "

If the answer to the question is that there is no compelling arguement then that logically leads us to re-evaluate traffic control policy - traffic lights , the law etc etc.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

The original question is just a stepping off point.

"Beyond the mantra "its against the law therefore its wrong" does anyone have a compelling arguement why rljing is wrong in circumstances where it is safe to cyclist and others and causes offence to no-one. "

If the answer to the question is that there is no compelling arguement then that logically leads us to re-evaluate traffic control policy - traffic lights , the law etc etc.

There are many compelling argument and they have been put forward. You deny there existence. Another is "Define safe" because you can be sure what one person feels is safe another will not. Look at it from the perspective of a driver. The light controlled junction appears safe, there is a cyclist in front, the driver assumes the cyclist will go through the lights. The cyclist stops, the car crashes into the cyclist. Who is to blame and more importantly who is hurt?