RLJ 'er

[Markymark]

Agree that busy traffic lights with pedestrians etc, you slow down more. But a bog standard crossroads, if I go through at 20, I'm going to struggle to stop in the event I see a RLJ out of the corner of my eye. I suspect for that to actually work you have to be slower still. I wonder, at a practical level, what proportion of drivers slow to that extent? I bet it's tiny...I certainly don't

Your calcs are close, it's 2 2/3 seconds. I; assume your error is down to being a Londoner where everything seems faster than here in the provinces

Yeah, I did it for cash, no VAT!!

20mph is much better than 30. Quicker to stop and less likely to kill if collision occurs. I am not talking about crawling to 10. My initial point on p1 was that the OP said they ONLY slowed due to oncoming cars (ie would have been travelling at 30mph without) and I called them out on it. As it turns out they answered that they would slow which is all good.

 

[nickyboy]

Anybody else see a teeny weeny contradiction here?

You'll have to explain, I'm not onto my second coffee of the morning yet. You do know that "rugby bloke" isn't my alter ego don't you?

 

[doog]

Really? Care to provide a link to the statute or case law establishing that duty of care?

My understanding is that under Common Law all road users have a duty of care to try an avoid injuring each other. Its been many years since I studied Law and its once of those things that was buried in the back of my head, hence the quote.

Additionally S28/29 of the RTA 1988 by its very nature would put that same duty of care on a cyclist even if the actual words I used dont form part of the definitions. Stated cases involving RLJ'ers are probably more easy to find but of course you know all this as you claim to be a Solicitor..

If its a play on words your'e after Im not interested, however most people would understand the basic principal.

 

[Lonestar]

The funny (almost) thing is I almost saw a jogger almost get run down yesterday because he crossed against the lights plus he forgot the cars also came from another direction.After that he still insisted on crossing anyway.It was a close thing with him just about jumping out the way in time after the motorists tooted him.Glad he didn't get knocked down even if he was a tit.I think I'd call it impatient Londoners.

 

[Absinthe Minded]

Think he's referring to your irritating habit of a pale font. It's harder to read when scanning quickly as the contrast is reduced so I usually ignore your posts.

It's not a habit, I do it on purpose.

 

[Markymark]

It's not a habit, I do it on purpose.

Makes no difference to me whether you do it or not.

 

[doog]

In other words, you're talking bollocks again...

No more than you sat there demanding your little answers...go and google it and stop wasting my time.

 

[Cuchilo]

In other words, you're talking bollocks again...

That thread is here https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/shorts-question-warning-contains-some-ick-content.202299/

 

[mjr]

I don't dispute that. Cyclists should always stop at red. Drivers should slow and be more aware.

No! Drivers should also stop at red!

Agree that busy traffic lights with pedestrians etc, you slow down more. But a bog standard crossroads, if I go through at 20, I'm going to struggle to stop in the event I see a RLJ out of the corner of my eye. I suspect for that to actually work you have to be slower still. I wonder, at a practical level, what proportion of drivers slow to that extent? I bet it's tiny...I certainly don't

Not that high a proportion. That's why stuff like http://www.hackneygazette.co.uk/new...at_notorious_stamford_hill_junction_1_4462106 happens far more often than they should (not saying that was the case in that incident, but it's easy to see how it could be).

The funny (almost) thing is I almost saw a jogger almost get run down yesterday because he crossed against the lights plus he forgot the cars also came from another direction.After that he still insisted on crossing anyway.It was a close thing with him just about jumping out the way in time after the motorists tooted him.

Surely Rule 170 applies once he starts crossing, even if he was unwise to do so? Not that many motorists follow the Highway Code!

 

[Lonestar]

Surely Rule 170 applies once he starts crossing, even if he was unwise to do so? Not that many motorists follow the Highway Code!

Jogger stepped straight in front while looking the other way.Still dodgy anyway.Think I'd way...there are two lanes plus the cyclist junction thingy on the embankment so you'd need eyes in the back of your head.

 

[Ajax Bay]

It's not a habit, I do it on purpose.

Please ditch this habit and conform. I suggest the vast majority would appreciate it and the rest don't care.

 

[Markymark]

Please ditch this habit and conform. I suggest the vast majority would appreciate it and the rest don't care.

Actually it cuts longer threads down when I skip past them so I find it helps.

 

[Absinthe Minded]

Why?

For private matters that I am not willing to divulge. And who are you, the Font Police?

 

[Absinthe Minded]

Please ditch this habit and conform. I suggest the vast majority would appreciate it and the rest don't care.

I suggest you mind your own business and stop making spurious assumptions about what everybody else thinks.

 

[Tim Hall]

For private matters that I am not willing to divulge. And who are you, the Font Police?

No, the Font Police would reply in Comic Sans. Just because they can.