Red Lights? What Do They Mean

[mjr]

This wins the Cyclechat prize for legal info that is obscure and practically useless, yet fascinating in a weird way.

Obscure certainly, but practically very useful: people cannot cycle at more than walking speed (or walk at more than hopping speed) through some junctions if they don't realise that stopping at red toucans and puffins is not compulsory. There's plenty of time in each cycle of many lights where no motor vehicle will realistically reach the crossing, yet they still show red to non-motoring humans because the designer was a lazy shoot who wanted to only put 6 stages in the traffic lights program, not 12 or 16 or more if they designed them properly like in the Netherlands, and his bosses condoned that or didn't realise or something.

Happily, the increasingly common puffin lights face away from approaching motorists, so they cannot see whether people crossing their path passed a red light.

 

[mjr]

Taken from
https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...cle-and-equestrian-crossings#puffin-crossings

I did check the legal situation before replying,

Sorry you don't seem to. It looks like you've checked some waffle on gov.uk that is their advice but not the law.

not having made any pretence at saying "I know the law". You wish to say that, fine. Just don't mislead people into thinking that you "know the law" any better than anyone else.
"Press and wait for the green figure to show, another way of saying stop?

That's just their advice. I know the law on this one. Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 SCHEDULE 14 PART 1 Paragraph 9 "(3) The significance of a red symbol when illuminated is that, in the interests of safety, pedestrian, equestrian or cyclist traffic (as the case may be) should not use the crossing" and there is currently no offence of using it, or of passing the toucan or puffin red symbol, or more generally of "jaywalking" (jayriding?).

It's probably slightly safer to wait patiently minutes for the green symbol (due to a slightly higher probability of misjudging an approaching vehicle's speed or direction than of being hit by a pavement driver while you wait, or a red light jumper when you cross) but it would be a farking irritating life spending so long each trip giving way to empty space mainly because whoever programmed the lights gave more green time to motorists than humans.

So, if we want to get somewhere faster than that, riding on the carriageway would be faster because it's more likely to get green at some of these stupid lights and is perfectly legal and also fits with all official advice, but that means merging onto the carriageway before the lights (one of the top ten most hazardous moves for cyclists) and riding amongst high-speed motorists whose attention is on their lights, not you, with many of them behind you where you can't see them easily.

So I think that's less safe than treating puffin reds as give-ways, which is perfectly legal but ignores some advice. In the vanishingly unlikely case that I get splatted on a junction in a way that I would not if I'd been on the carriageway, you can say "I told you so". I'm still not going to waste my all-too-limited remaining time on this planet giving way to fresh air because British traffic lights are crap, any more than legally required!

 

[Alex321]

I regularly attend iBike London supported Kidical Mass rides in London supporting them as a marshal. The middle of the mass passes through red lights, after we, as marshalls, have corked junctions. I help facilitate children cycling safely with their friends on occasional Saturdays. Technically illegal. On the other hand we've had Will Normal (London Walking and Cycling comissioner) give us a speech at the start of last year's kidical mass ride, knowing full well how we operate such rides.

I had some woman at a speed dating event a few weeks ago heavily imply that Kidical Mass was unenthical (and thus so was I) because it breaks the law. I think it's unethical to build a world in which children can't get around safely by bicycle for the benefit of drivers

Actually, AIUI, it isn't illegal.

With that type of ride (we were told by the police before the first Cardiff WNBR I went on), the whole group count as a single vehicle, so once the first bike has crossed the lights (on green), the rest should follow even if the lights change.

 

[Boopop]

Actually, AIUI, it isn't illegal.

With that type of ride (we were told by the police before the first Cardiff WNBR I went on), the whole group count as a single vehicle, so once the first bike has crossed the lights (on green), the rest should follow even if the lights change.

Does anyone know of any documentation anywhere that actually proves this? I haven't came across such information yet, and I'd love to see it.

I just asked the admittedly not 100% reliable ChatGPT, and it seems to think it's not technically legal, but then goes on to talk about corking. It doesn't make much difference to how I behave on such rides either way but for the moment I'm inclined to believe it's technically illegal.

 

[lazybloke]

As a general rule, a red light spells danger ...


View: https://youtu.be/dW66keO8Iew?si=jjRpZaGKl0o3d9SH

There's another Billy Ocean song that comes to mind when I hear drivers whining about cyclists: Go and get stuffed.

 

[Dogtrousers]

Actually, AIUI, it isn't illegal.

With that type of ride (we were told by the police before the first Cardiff WNBR I went on), the whole group count as a single vehicle, so once the first bike has crossed the lights (on green), the rest should follow even if the lights change.

Back when I rode with a club we had a call of "rolling" for just that circumstance. If the lights changed with a group half way through the rear rider could end up jumping the red. That was the theory anyway, I was briefed on it when I joined but I don't recall actually ever being involved in its use.

 

[Alex321]

Does anyone know of any documentation anywhere that actually proves this? I haven't came across such information yet, and I'd love to see it.

I just asked the admittedly not 100% reliable ChatGPT, and it seems to think it's not technically legal, but then goes on to talk about corking. It doesn't make much difference to how I behave on such rides either way but for the moment I'm inclined to believe it's technically illegal.

I've never been able to find any either. But the first few rides, and one a couple of years ago have had police cycle escorts, and that is what they told us, and how we acted during the rides, including the rides that haven't had police escorts.

 

[mjr]

I've never been able to find any either. But the first few rides, and one a couple of years ago have had police cycle escorts, and that is what they told us, and how we acted during the rides, including the rides that haven't had police escorts.

Interestingly, some sets of lights with cycle detectors (for a "bike box" ASL, early start cycle signal or similar) now condone/reward/encourage this behaviour by holding other lights red until the junction is empty.

I think directions given by a police officer trump most rules, anyway.

 

[captain nemo1701]

Red lights don't exist in the escooter universe.

 

[Sheffield_Tiger]

Not sure about lack of police being a problem here. There were 2 of them happily proceeding (not with urgency, not with blues and twos) from.the road on the left noticeably after the red this morning.