red light jumping endemic in London.

[beanzontoast]

I don't consider myself a goody-goody but I don't RLJ and neither my wife nor I break speed limits. I long ago learned to relax about what other road users choose to do. It's their choice to obey or break the law, but the one thing they can't do is to think they know better than the law and then complain when they are caught breaking it.

 

[User482]

In some circumstances I'm sure that cyclists can jump the lights without endangering other road users. But it doesn't matter - if we expect other road users to behave, then we must do the same.

 

[tdr1nka]

RLJ'ing is wrong, period. It is that simple if you just don't do it.
And presume away as I don't hold a licence or drive, so can't be caught out there!

 

[bryce]

How often does this debate come round? Once a month?

Anyway my tuppence is that I RLJ through 'pelican crossing' traffic lights when I am certain there are no peds about to cross. Occasionally I'll go through others but will slow right down to check.

I've seen cyclists go through red lights at full speed before without a line of sight onto the moving traffic. I'm happy to admit I wouldn't be overly compassionate if they got mashed by an oncoming car.

 

[tdr1nka]

I've seen cyclists go through red lights at full speed before without a line of sight onto the moving traffic. I'm happy to admit I wouldn't be overly compassionate if they got mashed by an oncoming car.

Ah, Black hearts in Battersea!

 

[Tynan]

The same could be said for drink driving and speeding, doesn't mean it's the right thing to do.

I've seen two near misses involving RLJers in the past week, one with a cyclists and another with a car, both could easily have been avoided if they had just waited at the lights for another minute.

RLJing is just impatience, if you're in a hurry leave earlier or arrive late.

Good

'Sensibly' is rather important in my statement

you can't compare sensible rljing on a bike with drink driving in a car, if you were, the two things don't compare

I don't rlj but at least half the lights I stop for are meaningless to a cyclist, I don't partly to encourage drivers to think cyclists are responsible road users (fat chance) and because I think once you start jumping lights it's going to slowly get more reckless, I used to jump almost anything I though I could get away with mind, and don't remember anything untoward

that's likely what drivers that do it think too mind, and I've seen hundreds of reckless cars jumping lights that relied on other drivers anticipating them to prevent an accident

 

[domtyler]

In some circumstances I'm sure that cyclists can jump the lights without endangering other road users. But it doesn't matter - if we expect other road users to behave, then we must do the same.

When you say we, who is the we you are speaking on behalf of?

 

[bonj2]

I mostly rlj, but then I don't live in london. I probably would stop a lot more if I lived in london, what with all the umpteen-exit weird-shaped junctions, always-busy traffic and what not.

 

[mootaineer]

I don't rlj but at least half the lights I stop for are meaningless to a cyclist, I don't partly to encourage drivers to think cyclists are responsible road users (fat chance) and because I think once you start jumping lights it's going to slowly get more reckless, I used to jump almost anything I though I could get away with mind, and don't remember anything untoward

that's likely what drivers that do it think too mind, and I've seen hundreds of reckless cars jumping lights that relied on other drivers anticipating them to prevent an accident

I agree with you there.
I used to be a "safe RLJer" but found that (after a while) I started racing myself and became reckless. The recklessness still happens now and again when frustration builds up but a lot less often!

Once I stopped RLJing I found that I'm calmer...make better decisions and don't actually lose much time anyway!

 

[Fab Foodie]

My Take.
RLJing by Cyclist is dangerous, most cyclists have a pretty strong awareness of their own mortality. We can argue the grey area about how dangerous, impact on Peds etc.
BUT.
The biggest issue I now have against RLJ'ers is that they are simply the #1 fuel on the fire of the anti-cyclist/Lycra-lout brigade. The impact is that it gives shoot journo's and commentators easy targets for their ill thought-out bile and spreads the anti-cyclist propoganda far and wide. The effect? Were all tarred with the same brush. Wear Lycra? Ride a bike? Then you're just another antisocial road-tax dodging baby stealing saddo-self-gratification artist fit only to pedal your decrepit eco-wheeler on the designated cycle path.
Thanks for that.

 

[MERV]

I feel that cyclists should always try to stop at the lights when practicable.

...and thats why we all love you dom.

Seriously it just seems like impatience to me.

 

[swee'pea99]

My Take.
The biggest issue I now have against RLJ'ers is that they are simply the #1 fuel on the fire of the anti-cyclist/Lycra-lout brigade.

Sorry, but is that not on a par with blaming immigrants for 'throwing fuel on the fire' of racists?

 

[tdr1nka]

[quote name='swee'pea99']Sorry, but is that not on a par with blaming immigrants for 'throwing fuel on the fire' of racists?[/quote]

Only if you are blaming illegal immigrants.
Otherwise no.

It is really easy to stop at red lights, it is expected and the law.

There are really very few, if any, excuses for cyclists to RLJ apart from a need to parade some ill founded and selfish belligerence that is usually reserved for a few idiot car drivers.

It is hard enough to get respect from frustrated and impatient drivers in London without RLJ'ing cyclists giving them something to beat all cyclists with.

 

[bonj2]

I personally have an issue with the expectation to comply with a law SIMPLY BECAUSE it is the law and for no other reason. If at any given light you think it's safer to stop, then that's a more than valid reason to stop. Just as if on any given light that's on green you think it's unsafe to proceed, then that alone is a more than valid reason to stop.
But I have a problem with non-acceptance of the practice of evaluating the reasoning based on safety to both yourself and others on an individual basis and using this as the sole deciding factor in whether to stop.
Hence, I have no problem whatsoever if an individual wants to obey the law for the law's sake themselves, but I have a problem with an individual who holds the attitude that simply because they think that the law should be obeyed simply for the law's sake then I should do that too. In exactly the same way that I personally choose to wear a helmet, but I would not be able to reconcile thinking that other people should do this simply because I personally think it's a good thing to do.

 

[MERV]

Thanks for that.