RLJ, why do I bother...

[magnatom]

I'm with Chuffy on this one.
I must admit I don't see many RLJ's on my commute so when I do I say something. On a couple of occasions it has made them think although as others have said most of the time they just swear back at you. However, if we all moaned at RLJ's we might just pee them off enough that they would either:

a) stop it
stop cycling altogether
c) get so annoyed that they forget themselves and cycle under a bus

I think a and b would be a result. I wouldn't want c but it might just be Darwin at work.....

 

[Cab]

I would quite willingly 'live and let live' if only the numpties in cars would stop banging on about 'you lot jump red lights and ride on the pavement etc'.

As long as it poisons the attitude of others towards me, who doesn't jump reds, I feel I have the right to say 'stop making trouble for me'

Got it in one. I don't condone those motorists who believe that it is reasonable to have a go at all of us because of this, not for a moment, but I see no reason to give them extra ammo either.

 

[Cab]

is this RLJ thing a London problem?

I'm in Cambridge, where we have a greater proportion of cyclists than those jonny-come-latelys in London Its an issue here.

 

[Arch]

is this RLJ thing a London problem?

I see plenty of yobs, and the occasional 'proper' cyclist (hi vis, lights, that sort of thing) jumping reds here in York. Actually, with the yobs, they often have a littler yob balanced on the rack or handlebars, so it's double darwinism.

I've pretty much given up saying anything, I try to tut and shake my head for the benefit of anyone else watching, so as to show we don't all do it.

 

[Commuter]

I always RLJ if I believe it is safe to do so . I've not been hit or caused an accident yet so I reckon I'm a good judge of the situation.

For those of you who feel it necessary to confront RLJ ers, do you ever , ever break the law ??

ie, 31mph in a 30 zone, 71mph on the motorway ? Do you always ensure that your wheels come to a stop when at a stop sign even if it's 3am and not anothe car on the road ??

I suspect not.

If you have a bee in you bonnet about RLJ ers, keep it to yourself.

 

[domtyler]

I always RLJ if I believe it is safe to do so . I've not been hit or caused an accident yet so I reckon I'm a good judge of the situation.

For those of you who feel it necessary to confront RLJ ers, do you ever , ever break the law ??

ie, 31mph in a 30 zone, 71mph on the motorway ? Do you always ensure that your wheels come to a stop when at a stop sign even if it's 3am and not anothe car on the road ??

I suspect not.

If you have a bee in you bonnet about RLJ ers, keep it to yourself.

Well said, unfortunately you may as well politely ask a dog to stop barking.

 

[Arch]

Interesting, commuter. So I take it you would never ever suggest to anyone that they should stop doing anything illegal, because you know you're not perfect?

Of course none of us are perfect - generally out of carelessness rather than deliberate act, but it's true, we all make errors and carelessness is no excuse. Does that mean none of us have any right to uphold the law when we see it being ignored and we care?

 

[Commuter]

Interesting, commuter. So I take it you would never ever suggest to anyone that they should stop doing anything illegal, because you know you're not perfect?

If it was damaging to someone's health / property etc then I would probably intervene.

If it was something that I had an irrational dislike about that wasn't hurting / damaging anyone then I'd try to keep my thoughts to myself.

 

[Tetedelacourse]

RLJing only directly affects the safety of the RLJer. Their choice. The only way it might affect another cyclist as I see it, is if you as a cyclist feel it damages the image of cycling and you would like others to see you as part of that image.

Personally, that image is not that important to me so I don't mind it when I see RLJers, and I don't feel that anyone who gets on a bike in this country has the ability to damage my reputation or safety while I'm cycling, simply by doing something that may be perceived as dangerous to another. A parallel would be as in Commuter's example, if every time you see someone speeding in a car, you feel that your image as a motorist is being tarnished by that behaviour.

That said, my feelings are probably the result of what I think is generally good motoring behaviour on my commute plus the fact that I meet very few cyclists on my route. And if you are someone who these things are important to, then fair enough you're perfectly entitled to get annoyed by it.

 

[magnatom]

Tetedelacourse,

What happens if they do get hit and maybe killed by a car? Is it still just the RLJer that is the victim? What about the driver of the car? The people who run to the RLJers aid, their family etc?

Yes I know there are those who say I can RLJ safely, but that is exactly the same argument as those that say they can speed safely in a car. The same argument young lads make every day after just passing their test just before they crash (look at the road fatality statistics).

Maybe just maybe that is true but lines have to be drawn to ensure that those that can't speed/RLJ etc safely don't do it. Thus, there is a law and that law applies to all. We can't go making exemptions about what laws apply to us can we?

 

[Arch]

A parallel would be as in Commuter's example, if every time you see someone speeding in a car, you feel that your image as a motorist is being tarnished by that behaviour.

But I think you can't compare the examples of cyclists and drivers, thanks to the enormously biased car culture in this country. All of us on here are cyclists, which already makes us odd in a lot of folks eyes. We know that there are good and bad cyclists, like there are good and bad drivers. But there are a huge number of unthinking people out there who only see what they want to see because it reinforces their mindless stereotypes and sense of superiority. They are drivers, and so immersed in the necessity of thier crs that they will ignore the transgressions of other drivers and pick on (verbally, or sadly, in some cases physically) a group they don't belong to... It's true, without rljing, they'd no doubt find some other thing to moan about - maybe pavement cycling, which is also something that could be done safely, but has to be legislated against for the greater good, because of the eejits who don't take care. And without that, they'd be forced back on the roadtax thing -which is where they fall down because it's a false idea.

When you've worked in a job trying to encourage more people to cycle, and you know that every time you do an event someone will come up and start on all the rljing and pavement cycling stuff, you tend to get annoyed, because it takes you away from the useful job of helping people find the right bike, or the right route or whatever, defending yourself against a false accusation. That's my reason for getting annoyed.

 

[Chuffy]

RLJing only directly affects the safety of the RLJer. Their choice. The only way it might affect another cyclist as I see it, is if you as a cyclist feel it damages the image of cycling and you would like others to see you as part of that image.

Personally, that image is not that important to me so I don't mind it when I see RLJers, and I don't feel that anyone who gets on a bike in this country has the ability to damage my reputation or safety while I'm cycling, simply by doing something that may be perceived as dangerous to another. A parallel would be as in Commuter's example, if every time you see someone speeding in a car, you feel that your image as a motorist is being tarnished by that behaviour.

It's not about how I want to be seen, it's how I (as a cyclist) am seen. The moaners in the local rag don't distinguish between the idiot brigade and someone who signals, doesn't RLJ, doesn't ride on the pavement and is lit up like a Christmas tree at night. To them, we're all one single mass.

Incidentally, for me it's not the danger of RLJing that is the main issue, it's the perceived arrogance and lack of respect for other road users.

 

[Tetedelacourse]

Tetedelacourse,

What happens if they do get hit and maybe killed by a car? Is it still just the RLJer that is the victim? What about the driver of the car? The people who run to the RLJers aid, their family etc?

Yes I know there are those who say I can RLJ safely, but that is exactly the same argument as those that say they can speed safely in a car. The same argument young lads make every day after just passing their test just before they crash (look at the road fatality statistics).

Maybe just maybe that is true but lines have to be drawn to ensure that those that can't speed/RLJ etc safely don't do it. Thus, there is a law and that law applies to all. We can't go making exemptions about what laws apply to us can we?

All fair points Magna. I hadn't thought about the act of RLJing in terms of causing damage to a motorist. I guess it boils down to whether you think you can do it safely or not though, and the likelihood of this behaviour causing accidents, as the same could be said of getting on a bike in the first place.

Of course it is indisputably against the law, and I fully appreciate that the law exists to protect road users. In my experience though not a day goes by when I don't see someone breaking the law on the road and I don't feel less safe as a result. I'm in grave danger of slipping into aimless rambling mode (it's possible I already have!) but my view is that I don't feel threatened by RLJing, I don't feel my image as a cyclist is damaged by it, and I don't feel the need to complain about it just because it's against the law. And I'm not convinced it's actually that dangerous.

 

[Keith Oates]

Quite agree with that Chuffy, and it could lead to a situation where some goverment committee or what ever, makes even more rules to restrict the use of bikes on the roads, such as enforcing cycle paths to be used!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Tetedelacourse]

But I think you can't compare the examples of cyclists and drivers, thanks to the enormously biased car culture in this country. All of us on here are cyclists, which already makes us odd in a lot of folks eyes. We know that there are good and bad cyclists, like there are good and bad drivers. But there are a huge number of unthinking people out there who only see what they want to see because it reinforces their mindless stereotypes and sense of superiority. They are drivers, and so immersed in the necessity of thier crs that they will ignore the transgressions of other drivers and pick on (verbally, or sadly, in some cases physically) a group they don't belong to... It's true, without rljing, they'd no doubt find some other thing to moan about - maybe pavement cycling, which is also something that could be done safely, but has to be legislated against for the greater good, because of the eejits who don't take care. And without that, they'd be forced back on the roadtax thing -which is where they fall down because it's a false idea.

When you've worked in a job trying to encourage more people to cycle, and you know that every time you do an event someone will come up and start on all the rljing and pavement cycling stuff, you tend to get annoyed, because it takes you away from the useful job of helping people find the right bike, or the right route or whatever, defending yourself against a false accusation. That's my reason for getting annoyed.

Fair enough Arch, sounds reasonable. The parts I highlighted above are the parts I have absolutely no experience of. I simply haven't either experienced that attitude, or seen or sensed it from fellow road users up here in Scotland. I think if I felt I was being tarred with the same brush as someone who was behaving dangerously or irresponsibly then I would certainly be annoyed. But personally, I haven't felt that way...yet.