Cyclists - Please stop at red lights

[subaqua]

Only another 20 million of them left to convert. Go, subaqua, go!

still gotta work on the peanut cyclists though . the ones too dumb to understand the reasons and consequences for/of doing/notdoing things.

 

[CopperBrompton]

Perhaps you could wag your finger and tut-tut for him instead.

Steady on, old chap! An Englishman reserves tutting for the most serious offences, like getting marmalade on the butter.

 

[BentMikey]

I'm assuming from south of the river, the lights before the underpass leads to a right hander which takes you onto the bridge. That's the way I came back over today. Had no problem with the lights though, waited at em like all the others!

Oh, I tend not to go that way, I normally use the gyratory. I don't have a problem with any of the lights either - even if I go via the underpass. I wait just like you.

 

[BentMikey]

Did I?

And you've never felt that your cycling experience makes you a better driver?

 

[Red Light]

And you've never felt that your cycling experience makes you a better driver?

You are using "driver education" in a much wider sense than most people would expect. But if "driver education" just means what you learn from just driving around I don't think that generally works for motorists in respect of cyclists either. If it did we wouldn't be having the problems we have with HGVs Nor does cycling around do much judging by the close passes I get from cars with bikes on the back.

 

[BentMikey]

Well, some people learn more easily than others, for any number of different reasons. The point remains that driver education is the most important thing to change. Education doesn't come from just a driving test and a few lessons, it comes from all sorts of things, in life not just in driving.

The best effect on cyclist safety, safety in numbers, comes in part because drivers are used to cyclists and tend to be more likely to cycle themselves.

 

[Cal44]

Wow -The whole RLJ thing causes quite a debate I see and brings up quite a few others since I last read this thread.....

 

[Noodley]

you do realise you are all nobbers, don't you?

 

[Red Light]

you do realise you are all nobbers, don't you?

Really?

 

[Noodley]

[QUOTE 1846274, member: 45"]...what am I?[/quote]

a nobber

 

[Red Light]

[QUOTE 1846279, member: 45"]In contradicting yourself here you've done what I asked and started using appropriate language. You've gone from saying that it's not dangerous to safer. You've added measure. Thanks and well done.[/quote]

Sigh. By your criteria sitting here at my laptop typing is dangerous. "Not dangerous" is referenced against cultural norms of things that are not considered dangerous. But I accept at the end of the day in your world me sitting here typing could be considered dangerous because you never know when a meteorite might crash through the roof and kill me. But lets put your pedantry to one side can we and go back to the world most people inhabit where by any objective measure cyclist RLJing is not dangerous.

However, your following comment does not evidence that it's safer, any more than claiming that russian roulette is safer than walking to school because more people die from the latter.

Pity you are unable to assimilate information from the thread without being spoon-fed. If you bother to look back you will find both the accident numbers and the relative exposure numbers. You'll even find me saying that red light jumping is ten times not forty five times safer than cycling in general. Can you work out where that number comes from?

You need to explain how allowing those who can't manage junctions safely in the current restrictions would be any safer being released across the path of oncoming traffic. It's a simple question, and a simple problem to understand.

No, please, no!!! You're back to claiming RLJers rush into the path of oncoming traffic. Having first said it then denied you said it you are now saying it again. And I repeat nobody is suggesting that but you. RLJers typically treat the junction in just the same way as pedestrians do, not rushing out in front of vehicles but waiting for a gap. A concept you seem to have difficulty grasping.

 

[Red Light]

you do realise you are all nobbers, don't you?

And you do realise you are an anagram of "de loony" don't you?

 

[Red Light]

[QUOTE 1846303, member: 45"][/quote]


Tell you what. When you have something evidenced to say rather than just another load of evidence free assertions come back and we can carry on. Until then its a waste of time responding.

 

[Dan B]

[QUOTE 1846332, member: 45"]Unless you can show that RLJing is safer than obeying traffic lights [/quote]
It's safer than obeying traffic lights when you're being pursued by a homicidal (but otherwise law-abiding) maniac who intends to run you over. There may be other similar situations. In the general case, not so much - but in the general case it's not significantly more dangerous either. We survive "give way" junctions, why should treating red lights as "give way"s be so much harder?

 

[Gooner Mad Dog]

General rules I follow are as below, I have had more near misses with pedestrians jay walking slow / stationary through traffic whilst texting/phoning and stepping in front of me blindly as you whiz up to traffic lights.

Hard red lights - stop ( busy crossroads, busy roundabouts, traffic filtering lanes etc )
Soft red lights - proceed with caution ( resedential pedestrian crossing, quiet left turns etc )

Rules are followed by fools, but are used by wise men as guidlines!