Police fining cyclist for breaking the law..

[Dan B]

You have totaly avoided the question. If a bicycle can run a red light "when safe to do so" then why not other road users?

Good question. I would say that in an ideal world cyclists should be able to run red lights provided they do so safely, courteously, while giving way to other road users, and without putting anyone in fear of danger (i.e. no weaving through pedestrians) and I would further say that the same should apply to other road users. The difference is, of course, that any vehicle bigger than a bike has fewer opportunities to jump lights safely (because it is larger it must take the lane instead of merging into the traffic flow it joins) and any vehicle faster/heavier than a bicycle is viewed as intrinsically more dangerous so has fewer opportunities to jump lights without putting the wind up someone. So, on balance, if the law were changed along these lines for all road users it probably wouldn't still make much difference to anyone driving something bigger/uglier than a bike - and it'd not be very practical to enforce because it would require subjective judgement of every potential infringement.

 

[apollo179]

Good question. I would say that in an ideal world cyclists should be able to run red lights provided they do so safely, courteously, while giving way to other road users, and without putting anyone in fear of danger (i.e. no weaving through pedestrians) and I would further say that the same should apply to other road users. The difference is, of course, that any vehicle bigger than a bike has fewer opportunities to jump lights safely (because it is larger it must take the lane instead of merging into the traffic flow it joins) and any vehicle faster/heavier than a bicycle is viewed as intrinsically more dangerous so has fewer opportunities to jump lights without putting the wind up someone. So, on balance, if the law were changed along these lines for all road users it probably wouldn't still make much difference to anyone driving something bigger/uglier than a bike - and it'd not be very practical to enforce because it would require subjective judgement of every potential infringement.

Thats a very well reasoned opinion Dan.
Its the difficulty of enforcing that swings the tide in favour of absolute , clear cut laws.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

Good question. I would say that in an ideal world cyclists should be able to run red lights provided they do so safely, courteously, while giving way to other road users, and without putting anyone in fear of danger (i.e. no weaving through pedestrians) and I would further say that the same should apply to other road users. The difference is, of course, that any vehicle bigger than a bike has fewer opportunities to jump lights safely (because it is larger it must take the lane instead of merging into the traffic flow it joins) and any vehicle faster/heavier than a bicycle is viewed as intrinsically more dangerous so has fewer opportunities to jump lights without putting the wind up someone. So, on balance, if the law were changed along these lines for all road users it probably wouldn't still make much difference to anyone driving something bigger/uglier than a bike - and it'd not be very practical to enforce because it would require subjective judgement of every potential infringement.

So lets take the example of 3am given by Vikeonabike. Empty roads et al. Why not let everyone RLJ?

 

[Dan B]

In what way do you think they are different?

The key difference is that when you're on a bike you can get off and push, and at that point the law and the social norms treat you as a pedestrian. This is rarely seen on a motorbike and (Mr Bean aside) never seen in anything bigger.


Now I can't see a difference in risk between pushing your bike across a red light at 3mph and riding your bike at the same speed (unless you're going to fall off it, but let's assume you're reasonably competent). So the only reason for allowing the former and not the latter is predictability -it's very unlikely that you will break into a run and ram your bike into a pedestrian while wheeling it: it's perhaps more likely that you would accelerate without warning when riding it, and this is perhaps why people feel threatened by RLJ. I don't have a good answer that's better than the current situation, to be honest.

 

[Dan B]

So lets take the example of 3am given by Vikeonabike. Empty roads et al. Why not let everyone RLJ?

Why not indeed? For that matter, why not set the lights onto flashing amber in all directions and let them work it out for themselves? Traffic lights are added to junctions to manage traffic flow and give everyone a fair chance at having their "turn" eventually - if they're not doing that you may as well turn them off.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

The key difference is that when you're on a bike you can get off and push, and at that point the law and the social norms treat you as a pedestrian. This is rarely seen on a motorbike and (Mr Bean aside) never seen in anything bigger.


Now I can't see a difference in risk between pushing your bike across a red light at 3mph and riding your bike at the same speed (unless you're going to fall off it, but let's assume you're reasonably competent). So the only reason for allowing the former and not the latter is predictability -it's very unlikely that you will break into a run and ram your bike into a pedestrian while wheeling it: it's perhaps more likely that you would accelerate without warning when riding it, and this is perhaps why people feel threatened by RLJ. I don't have a good answer that's better than the current situation, to be honest.

Sorry but when did pushing enter the eqn? How many times have you seen a person intend on rlj'ing get off and push?

 

[Scilly Suffolk]

Why not indeed? For that matter, why not set the lights onto flashing amber in all directions and let them work it out for themselves? Traffic lights are added to junctions to manage traffic flow and give everyone a fair chance at having their "turn" eventually - if they're not doing that you may as well turn them off.

+1

"The Law" is necessarily "black & white" if it is to be enforceable.

To introduce subjective judgements into its application would render it useless.

In whose opinion would it be "safe" to breach certain regulations? One man's "reasonable" is another's "foolhardy".

As one of the more vulnerable roadusers, I err on the side of caution.

I may (or may not) be a sensible, calculating, considerate rider but that will be no consolation to the mourners at my funeral: "Sorry mate, I didn't see you."

 

[Angelfishsolo]

+1

"The Law" is necessarily "black & white" if it is to be enforceable.

To introduce subjective judgements into its application would render it useless.

In whose opinion would it be "safe" to breach certain regulations? One man's "reasonable" is another's "foolhardy".

As one of the more vulnerable roadusers, I err on the side of caution.

I may (or may not) be a sensible, calculating, considerate rider but that will be no consolation to the mourners at my funeral: "Sorry mate, I didn't see you."

Great post.

 

[apollo179]

+1

"The Law" is necessarily "black & white" if it is to be enforceable.

To introduce subjective judgements into its application would render it useless.

In whose opinion would it be "safe" to breach certain regulations? One man's "reasonable" is another's "foolhardy".

As one of the more vulnerable roadusers, I err on the side of caution.

I may (or may not) be a sensible, calculating, considerate rider but that will be no consolation to the mourners at my funeral: "Sorry mate, I didn't see you."

Also a well argued opinion.
I would say that there are subjective laws like "driving without due care" so subjective laws are not totally out of the question.
But black and white is easier to implement if not entirely satisfactory.

 

[Norm]

Many lights in Germany switch to flashing amber at night, which I think is a good thing.

And an equivalent question from a US colleague was "Why can't you turn left on a red?"

 

[Dan B]

Sorry but when did pushing enter the eqn? How many times have you seen a person intend on rlj'ing get off and push?

Someone "intent" on RLJing is going to RLJ, but an ordinary cyclist with the options of waiting, jumping the lights, or walking across the junction might well choose to dismount - and in doing so would be perfectly legal. I've done it myself, though usually only near the end of a journey where I probably wouldn't remount. Clipless pedals make it less convenient, otherwise

 

[Angelfishsolo]

Someone "intent" on RLJing is going to RLJ, but an ordinary cyclist with the options of waiting, jumping the lights, or walking across the junction might well choose to dismount - and in doing so would be perfectly legal. I've done it myself, though usually only near the end of a journey where I probably wouldn't remount. Clipless pedals make it less convenient, otherwise

Nothing wrong with that at all.

 

[MissTillyFlop]

TBH, I have never seen what the issue that people have with waiting at a red light.

You are on a road, you should follow the rules of the road. It might cost you 30 seconds, big frigging deal.

To me this is like saying shoplifting is okay under certain circumstances. It's not.
It's not a safety issue, it's about showing respect and responsibility to society and I do get annoyed at other cyclists who jump the lights as I immediately assume they are either an arrogant prick or a mentally subnormal person.

Sorry, got a bit angry there but it makes me angry.

 

[lukesdad]

Arrogant pr*ck or mentally subnormal I ll have to give that one some thought

 

[MissTillyFlop]

Sorry, didn't mean to get so..er..well you know.

I'm just a bit old fashioned when it comes to this particular issue.