glenn forger
Guest
I'm not twelve.
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
blazed
220lb+
[QUOTE 3314382, member: 45"]
No it's not impossible. If you are at a small country junction or pedestrian crossing and there is nobody in sight, it is not dangerous to jump the light. That is a fact.
Legally there may be differences, both can be dangerous. however my point was why cyclists tend to shout and swear at everybody yet when the same cyclist is on foot or driving he keeps quiet.
- That's impossible.
- It's not just about being safe. It's about playing your part in a society where there are rules in place so that everyone can get around without fear. Take a look at some of the pedestrians trying to cross roads in London and you'll see what effect antisocial cycling has on people.
No it's not impossible. If you are at a small country junction or pedestrian crossing and there is nobody in sight, it is not dangerous to jump the light. That is a fact.
Legally there may be differences, both can be dangerous. however my point was why cyclists tend to shout and swear at everybody yet when the same cyclist is on foot or driving he keeps quiet.
Dogtrousers
Kilometre nibbler
In Helsinki if you do this, they do something far worse than shout. They stare at you with a mixture of contempt and pity. You won't do it twice.
GrumpyGregry
Here for rides.
Show us the maps, provide us with the pictures and we will judge for ourselves...
69mph is roughly 100 feet per second so I hope you've got really excellent sight lines to show us.
The local nobber-driver record speed on a small country road with a small country junction and NSL is 116mph.
blazed
220lb+
I jump lights where I feel it is safe to do so. Please explain to me if there is nobody within eyesight how jumping the light below could be dangerous. I cycle mainly in Hertfordshire through villages and I come accross lights like these all the time and I personally don't feel I am putting anyone at risk in doing so.
GrumpyGregry
Here for rides.
That's not a small country junction though is it?I jump lights where I feel it is safe to do so. Please explain to me if there is nobody within eyesight how jumping the light below could be dangerous. I cycle mainly in Hertfordshire through villages and I come accross lights like these all the time and I personally don't feel I am putting anyone at risk in doing so.
"I drive exceeding the speed limit mainly in Hertfordshire through villages and I come across speed limits like these all the time and I personally don't feel I am putting anyone at risk in doing so."
Like our mythical speeding driver; your actions disqualify you from assessing the risk
outlash
also available in orange
- Location
- ice station zebra
I jump lights where I feel it is safe to do so. Please explain to me if there is nobody within eyesight how jumping the light below could be dangerous. I cycle mainly in Hertfordshire through villages and I come accross lights like these all the time and I personally don't feel I am putting anyone at risk in doing so.
The simple mistake you're making is that you see yourself as a 'cyclist' rather than a road user. You wouldn't jump that light if you was in a car or on a motorbike so why do you think it's ok on a bike? You have some special powers that make you immune to the laws of the road?
Tony.
Maybe because physics.
It's obvious that it's quite possible to jump reds safely. Not 100% safe, because nothing is.
I think you could make a very strong case for a change in the law to make red lights equivalent to give way lines for cyclists.
To clarify: I'm not saying it's OK for people to break the law; I'm saying the law should be changed.
(& all the people going on about how the law is the law: I hope your pedals have orange reflectors)
It's obvious that it's quite possible to jump reds safely. Not 100% safe, because nothing is.
I think you could make a very strong case for a change in the law to make red lights equivalent to give way lines for cyclists.
To clarify: I'm not saying it's OK for people to break the law; I'm saying the law should be changed.
(& all the people going on about how the law is the law: I hope your pedals have orange reflectors)
Scotchlovingcylist
Formerly known as Speedfreak
There is a set of lights on a road I use which do not change for me. At 6:00am when there's no traffic and I can see there is no danger I will jump them. At peak times there are usually enough cars to trigger them.
I personally feel I have enough common sense to make that decision. Some of the people I see jumping red lights at busy times I think are stupid but that is my opinion and I don't care enough to chase them down and interrogate them.
I personally feel I have enough common sense to make that decision. Some of the people I see jumping red lights at busy times I think are stupid but that is my opinion and I don't care enough to chase them down and interrogate them.
Conversely I'd have no qualms at all about reasonably-safely jumping red lights if I were on foot, and be fairly blase about if if I were on a pogo stick or a skateboard. Using any of those three modes of transport I'd be deemed a "road user" - so why is it not OK on a bike?
blazed
220lb+
So you're comparing exceeding the speed limit in a car through villages and jumping a red light on bicycle at an empty pedestrian crossing? Scraping the barrel.
GrumpyGregry
Here for rides.
Show us a picture of the small country junction that YOU cited, unbidden by me, in YOUR post... put up or shut up?
GrumpyGregry
Here for rides.
Because in doing so you would not be defined in law as a vehicle?
Bot nobody mentioned "vehicle" up until this point: the phrase was "road user". The PP made the implication that "road user" is just shorthand for "vehicle operator" and it's not it's not it's not, a thousand times not. If we always centre everything on "vehicles" (which when we look deeper usually means "private cars") it's not suprising if we end up with road rules and conventions that prioritise that class of road user.
Or put another way, if (and note I say "if", this is one of those conditional logic things, not an assertion) the only reason that RLJ is wrong for a cyclist is that it's illegal for a cyclist, perhaps we should get the fricking law changed. But even if we don't get the law changed I'm not about to condemn someone for being on the wrong side of it if (note that "if" word again) they haven't done anything else wrong, just because the law wasn't written with their interests in mind.
(For the avoidance of doubt, I am entirely happy and indeed eager to condemn the cyclist in the original anecdote, assuming the facts were as described)
