One for the RLJers amongst us!

[Globalti]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yiu1uLgwF1E

 

[glasgowcyclist]

Quite an old one that.
Not terribly funny or original.

Edit to add: responding as a non-RLJer, obvs.

 

[mjr]

Interestingly, "Top Gear" was both the show title and the main thing consumed by the writers.

(Whether or not I'm a RLJer depends on whether riding perfectly legally between cycleways across Toucans and Puffins on red is RLJing to you.)

 

[Drago]

I got as far as the words "Top Gear" and immediately noticed a cobweb in the corner that was much more interesting.

 

[Brandane]

RLJ'ing debate again?
Done with common sense on a bike, it's perfectly safe and harmless. Obviously you London commuters would be foolhardy to RLJ your way around the Elephant and Castle during rush hour, but us more rural people might not face the same dangers when turning left on red in sleepy hollow high street at 3am..

As for the legal position, there's much worse going on. And to pre-empt those who feel it gives cyclists a bad name - it doesn't. It might give some people an excuse to dislike cyclists but it's just that, an excuse. What car drivers get up to doesn't affect peoples view of drivers in general, so why do cyclists think differently?

 

[mustang1]

RLJ'ing debate again?
Stuff deleted.

As for the legal position, there's much worse going on. And to pre-empt those who feel it gives cyclists a bad name - it doesn't. It just that, an stuff deleted differently?

This.

 

[winjim]

I remember that segment on TG. It was obviously taking the piss but did actually contain some useful information just under the surface about how to drive around cyclists.

I also remember discussing it on this forum at the time.

 

[beany_bot]

RLJ'ing debate again?
Done with common sense on a bike, it's perfectly safe and harmless. Obviously you London commuters would be foolhardy to RLJ your way around the Elephant and Castle during rush hour, but us more rural people might not face the same dangers when turning left on red in sleepy hollow high street at 3am..

As for the legal position, there's much worse going on. And to pre-empt those who feel it gives cyclists a bad name - it doesn't. It might give some people an excuse to dislike cyclists but it's just that, an excuse. What car drivers get up to doesn't affect peoples view of drivers in general, so why do cyclists think differently?

There is no debate about it. RLJ'ing is ILLEGAL. End of. It has killed people and is breaking the law. dont do it.

 

[beany_bot]

This.

No, not "this". RLJ'ing DOES give cyclists a bad name, it annoys drivers and pedestrians and just further reinforces the triabalist "us and them" attitude. further segmenting cyclists and drivers and driving hostility between groups of road users.
Be quite assured if you RLJ in front of my when I'm on my bike I will call you out on it.

 

[beany_bot]

Starting my long rides, at stupid o'clock on a Saturday there are a couple of lights that I pretty much always jump if they are against me. So sue me.

I probably cause consternation to the occasional early morning white van man who may witness this, and thus Give Us All A Bad Name. Sorry bout that.

Yeah and so you should apologise. That white van man that saw you could very well think "well if that peanut isn't going to play by the rules then why should I give him the space he wants"?
So next time you get a clipped by a white vans wing mirror just ask if your RLJ'ing is worth it.

 

[Brandane]

There is no debate about it. RLJ'ing is ILLEGAL. End of. It has killed people and is breaking the law. dont do it.

There is a debate about it. Please point me to the relevant legislation regarding this, because as a retired Police Officer I can't find it. FYI it's covered by section 36 of the Road Traffic Act 1988. The debate is whether or not a bicycle is a "vehicle", and that is usually defined as a motor vehicle.
But carry on stopping your bike at red lights in sleepy hollow main street at 3am if that's what floats your boat. Personally, I will take my chance, the rebel that I am...

 

[beany_bot]

There is a debate about it. Please point me to the relevant legislation regarding this, because as a retired Police Officer I can't find it. FYI it's covered by section 36 of the Road Traffic Act 1988. The debate is whether or not a bicycle is a "vehicle", and that is usually defined as a motor vehicle.
But carry on stopping your bike at red lights in sleepy hollow main street at 3am if that's what floats your boat. Personally, I will take my chance, the rebel that I am...

"Under the Road Traffic Act 1988 s.36 and the Traffic Signs Regulations and Directions and Directions 2002 regulations 10 and 36(1), road users must not cross the stop line when the traffic lights are red. This offence, also known as ‘red light jumping’, applies to cyclists as well as motorists. The maximum penalty for red light jumping is a £1,000 fine and six penalty points endorsed on the driver’s licence however, in most cases, a driver will get a Fixed Penalty Notice (On-the-Spot Fine) of £30. whilst the maximum would only ever be imposed if the Fixed Penalty Notice is contested and taken to court. The punishment is also applicable to cyclists who, if caught, can be issued a Fixed Penalty Notice of £30.

However, there can be more serious consequences as was seen in December 2013 when a cyclist was jailed for twelve months after jumping a red light, knocking down a nine year old girl and leaving the scene. The cyclist collided with the girl at, what eyewitnesses estimated to be, 30mph after he failed to stop at the red light and she stepped out onto the pedestrian crossing. The judge told the cyclist that he was the only one to blame for the “incredibly selfish criminal act” after the cyclist admitted to a charge of causing grievous bodily harm. Despite the potentially serious consequences, only 4% of all pedestrian injuries as a result of red light jumping have been caused by cyclists with the remaining 96% involving motor vehicles." http://www.cyclelaw.co.uk/cycling-offences-jumping-red-lights

A bicycle is a "road user". Probably just as well you are retired now as you don't seem to know the law very well. Please continue risking children's lives as you jump red lights. 4,000 cyclists were issued Fixed Penalty Notices after being caught jumping red lights or ignoring other road signs in 2013 Hopefully one of your ex-collegues will prosecute you. you "rebel".

 

[mjr]

Won't somebody please think of the children, eh?

The RLJ in the cited case seems incidental because he still shouldn't hit a child at 30mph even not on a crossing.

I'm in favour of changing the law like in Paris and it's a bit far to say that red lights are for pedestrian protection. If they were, we wouldn't suffer so many placebo pushbuttons. Traffic lights ate primarily to stop motorists colliding

 

[beany_bot]

Won't somebody please think of the children, eh?

The RLJ in the cited case seems incidental because he still shouldn't hit a child at 30mph even not on a crossing.

I'm in favour of changing the law like in Paris and it's a bit far to say that red lights are for pedestrian protection. If they were, we wouldn't suffer so many placebo pushbuttons. Traffic lights ate primarily to stop motorists colliding

Pedestrian crossings are primarily to stop vehicles colliding....? huh?

 

[winjim]

RLJ'ing is ILLEGAL.

Meh.