Red Light Jumping

[david k]

If you offered it as an alternative to waiting futilely in the middle of the night, yes I would agree. But it is still not the subject under discussion here.

but this sensible suggestion would disable the need for the topic under discussion

 

[david k]

I feel honour-bound to cap this thread. I believe the OP asks a trick question.

The RLJ that causes offence to no-one does not exist.

The question cannot therefore be answered.

Even if the offence was in Ankara and the offended party in Anchorage, offence may be caused merely by the jumping of red lights.

Every RLJ offends someone, even if they weren't present.

cannot hear yyooooooooouuuuuuuuuuuuuu

 

[fossyant]

[QUOTE 1526449"]
Good idea. RLJing is one of those topics when reading that brings on the same thoughts and feelings of someone about to launch themself off a building into a vat of concentrated HCI - one of utter despair.
[/quote]

Lee I agree. It's one of those hot topics that does not really contribute anything, and in a General forum just distracts and may make potential members run away - this is one big argument - more Pub/P&L style than General - a sub forum might help.

Helmet's sub-forum just keeps itself entertained...ho ho !!

 

[david k]

Lee I agree. It's one of those hot topics that does not really contribute anything, and in a General forum just distracts and may make potential members run away - this is one big argument - more Pub/P&L style than General - a sub forum might help.

Helmet's sub-forum just keeps itself entertained...ho ho !!

How dare you

 

[Ian 74]

Lee I agree. It's one of those hot topics that does not really contribute anything, and in a General forum just distracts and may make potential members run away - this is one big argument - more Pub/P&L style than General - a sub forum might help.

Helmet's sub-forum just keeps itself entertained...ho ho !!

As a new member I agree +1 and such,where is this helmet?

 

[Ian 74]

Hold on you on about helmets compulsion and wot not..... Arrrrghhhhhh. I thought you where referring to a happy satirical place. Humph.

 

[apollo179]

I feel honour-bound to cap this thread. I believe the OP asks a trick question.

The RLJ that causes offence to no-one does not exist.

The question cannot therefore be answered.

Even if the offence was in Ankara and the offended party in Anchorage, offence may be caused merely by the jumping of red lights.

Every RLJ offends someone, even if they weren't present.

I knew i could rely on an ex motorbike courier to come up with some insightful perspective.
I did not wittingly ask a trick question.
As you point out and as Adrian pointed out on the first page of this topic it seems that rljing offends some in its very existence - even without being present.
However i do not recognise the quality of being offending as something that can direct legislation.
In the same way ;
The sale of pig meat offends some.
The exposure of womens bodies in public offends some.
Smoking offends some.
Pornography offends some.
Alcohol offends some.
All legal despite being offensive.
To warrant legislation imho some substantive harm is necessary.

The only valid reason i can comprehend is ; the concept of maintaining the integrity of the "red light means stop" ideal.
This is fundamental to traffic control and should not be undermined.
Consequently i would not advocate rljing being legalised in any circumstances.
But the proliferation of (in both perception and reality) unnecessary traffic lights fuels the undermining of the "red light means stop" ideal (witness rljing) and i would suggest this undermining be remedied by measures like what david k suggests - turning lights of at peak times etc etc anything to alleviate the burden of unnecessary waiting.

 

[david k]

But the proliferation of (in both perception and reality) unnecessary traffic lights fuels the undermining of the "red light means stop" ideal (witness rljing) and i would suggest this undermining be remedied by measures like what david k suggests - turning lights of at peak times etc etc anything to alleviate the burden of unnecessary waiting.

but we were told that suggestion has no place here

 

[apollo179]

[QUOTE 1526482"]
You're saying that you don't understand the other reasons why cyclists shouldn't jump red lights. Is this true?
[/quote]
Obviously depends on the specific reason in question.
But i mean - the only reason that stacks up as being valid in my understanding is the reason of maintaining the integrity of the red light.
I will take another look at mad@rages list of reasons but i looked before - i looked to find reasons , i did not look with a precondition to dismiss reasons. I found 1 .

 

[2Loose]

1 that was missed: Jumping Reds encourages others to jump reds. They not be as safe as you seem to think you are.

 

[lukesdad]

1 that was missed: Jumping Reds encourages others to jump reds. They not be as safe as you seem to think you are.

Do you have concrete evidence for this outrageous claim ?

 

[fossyant]

How dare you

Gloves down.

Fancy a hill climb challenge like the old days - we'll forget the pistols.

 

[apollo179]

1 that was missed: Jumping Reds encourages others to jump reds. They not be as safe as you seem to think you are.

Encouraging others is not sufficient in itself to imho be a valid reason why rljing is wrong.

Its like arguing watching pornography should be wrong wrong because it encourages others to do it. The encouragement aspect is largely a red herring. There needs to be some objective substantial quantative harm.

Where encouragement (on its own) is an issue that needs to be dealt with you have specific laws to deal with it - laws against incitement (terrorism etc etc)

My criteria for validity are legalistic because if you allow any reason then picking your nose would be illegal because it is offensive.

 

[apollo179]

[QUOTE 1526490"]
I've occasions where timid-looking cyclists have been waiting at junctions and then followed confident RLJers. Anecdotal, and possibly other explanations, but it looked that way to me.
[/quote]

Rljing isnt wrong because it encourages others to do it.
Rljing is wrong for other reasons.
In the same way speeding is wrong because its going to fast and dangerous , not because it encourages others to speed.

 

[2Loose]

Do you have concrete evidence for this outrageous claim ?

Not exactly concrete, but even Apollo admitted to originally RLJing because it was common and seemingly not enforced, therefore he knew no better, just followed the herd. An occasional cyclist at work admits to doing it because 'everyone else does'.

Incitement to rlj? lol.