Red Light Jumping

[martint235]

Hmm. I could make that argument against pretty much all cyclists when I'm driving. I overtake them, then when we get to the next lights they get to the front of the queue, by using bike lanes, bus lanes or filtering, and thus they force me to overtake them again.

True I suppose. I'd like to think that if a driver is stuck behind me (rare in London as once I'm past a driver, chances are I'll stay in front while he/she is caught in traffic) I'll do my best to help them overtake me safely. Rljers don't tend to have that level of consideration for other road users ime.

 

[Dan B]

[QUOTE 1526179"]
And, what do you think are the benefits of ignoring red lights?
[/quote]
The one that comes immediately to mind is that You get to your destination faster and using less energy. Same as the benefits of using a light bicycle instead of a barclays hire bike, or indeed the benefits of cycling to work instead of running, walking, or crawling on hands and knees. That could be considered "selfish" in the sense that the benefit accrues entirely to the RLJing cyclist and not to anybody else,but it seems to me that that particular pejorative is only legitimately applied when the RLJ causes disbenefit to someone else. Which in your classic 3am-deserted-road or empty-pedestrian-crossing-with-nobody-waiting situations is not the case.

 

[martint235]

The one that comes immediately to mind is that You get to your destination faster and using less energy. Same as the benefits of using a light bicycle instead of a barclays hire bike, or indeed the benefits of cycling to work instead of running, walking, or crawling on hands and knees. That could be considered "selfish" in the sense that the benefit accrues entirely to the RLJing cyclist and not to anybody else,but it seems to me that that particular pejorative is only legitimately applied when the RLJ causes disbenefit to someone else. Which in your classic 3am-deserted-road or empty-pedestrian-crossing-with-nobody-waiting situations is not the case.

As said though the majority of rljers that I see on my commute would get to work quicker by pedalling faster. They would then have time to stop at the red light. Probably have time for a coffee some of them.

 

[Dan B]

As said though the majority of rljers that I see on my commute would get to work quicker by pedalling faster. They would then have time to stop at the red light. Probably have time for a coffee some of them.

And they'd get to work even quicker yet by pedalling faster and jumping red lights (a point which I think has already been made somewhere in the last three volumes), so while you are correct that there are many ways to achieve that objective, it doesn't contradict the point that RLJ can be one of them

Personally having just returned from a weekend in Holland I'm not sure that an inability or unwillingness to pedal quickly should be treated as a character failing - there's an interesting discussion to be had about the relationship between speed and vehicular cycling which Dellzeqq touched on somewhere else today.

 

[dellzeqq]

[QUOTE 1526213"]
Because, in his transparent way, Apollo is hoping that I'll claim that he's admitted to light jumping so that he can divert off onto another path of distraction.
[/quote]that would be it.

 

[apollo179]

[QUOTE 1526213"]
Because, in his transparent way, Apollo is hoping that I'll claim that he's admitted to light jumping so that he can divert off onto another path of distraction.
[/quote]

You are deluded.

 

[apollo179]

if it isn't it should be. Along with reincarnation

If i understand correctly - Dellegg is saying that because i hold an opinion different from his own then i must be the reincarnation of a some previous forum member (presumably one he disagreed with).

According to a recent poll about 30% of forum members who voted rlj .
For Delegg to suggest that just because i hold a different opinion from him on an issue is grounds for saying that i am a reincarnation of some previous person is the most senseless of arguements and reflects an alarming degree of narrow mindedness on his part..
I could just as well say that dellegg is the reincarnation of some previous narrow minded individual.
But i woudnt because i fully realise that there is an endless supply of people just as narrow minded and senseless as dellegg himself.

 

[apollo179]

Here's 3 which work for me....


1, Managing ones pollution intake. I much prefer to have vehicles pass me when they are up to speed and cruising rather then when they are accelerating up through the gears belching out loads of crap. With the number of filthy diesels on the road, for me this is number 1, it makes my journeys so much more pleasant.

2, Minimisation of wasted time.

3, Minimisation of wasted energy.

All 3 are of course subject to the aforementioned considerations regarding: not getting hurt, not hurting anyone else, and not getting caught.

I would add
4. Lack of awareness that it is illegal
5. Lack of awareness that there is anything wrong in it.
6. Lack of awareness that anyone would be so anal as to get agravated by it.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

I would add
4. Lack of awareness that it is illegal
5. Lack of awareness that there is anything wrong in it.
6. Lack of awareness that anyone would be so anal as to get agravated by it.

If 4 and 5 were true I would say that those people have serious learning disabilities.
6 is just a copout for doing something you know to be wrong.

 

[Dan B]

Why would you add those? I wouldn't add any of those, because they're not benefits of jumping red lights.

I continue to hope for a minimum of intellectual rigour from either side in this "discussion", and I continue to be regularly (though not continuously) disappointed. Oh well

 

[apollo179]

Often treated quite leniently on the first offence.

I am no reincarnation be assured.
The forum dinosaur mob just feel it necessary to stoop to any level to discredit someone who has the affrontery to suggest an opinion other than there own.

 

[dellzeqq]

qq - not gg

 

[apollo179]

Why would you add those? I wouldn't add any of those, because they're not benefits of jumping red lights.

I continue to hope for a minimum of intellectual rigour from either side in this "discussion", and I continue to be regularly (though not continuously) disappointed. Oh well

I thought we were giving reasons - as in explanations for the behaviour.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

I thought we were giving reasons - as in explanations for the behaviour.

Er no. You were asked for benefits.

 

[apollo179]

Er no. You were asked for benefits.

What benefits can be found in ignoring Red Lights? (General question not aimed at you.)
Oh yes - i got it into my head that we were after explanations.
Ignore my three then.
Sorry.