RLJ'ers

[Dan B]

How many people on here have grumbled because a pedestrian has still used the crossing even though the red man has shown and we've had to wait as a result.

Rarely: if I don't have much momentum to lose I will almost always gladly cede priority to pedestrians - they were here first.


But I don't think that's what Raa is talking about. I think he is talking about treating red lights as if they were "give way" markings: you still have to give way if there;s anyone to give way to ...

 

[SquareDaff]

[QUOTE 1399788"]
Pedestrian crossings were created to force traffic to stop, not to limit when a pedestrian can cross.
[/quote]
But aren't some of us on here saying that we're not going to and plow through anyway?!?!?

 

[Dan B]

But aren't some of us on here saying that we're not going to and plow through anyway?!?!?

I'm not going to reread the whole thread to check, but I don't think anyone has spoken in favour of ploughing through pedestrians. I'd have been pretty shocked if anyone had

 

[SquareDaff]

But if red lights become "advisory" that is precisely what you'll end up with (you just have to watch some of the videos on here to realise that WILL happen) - resulting in more accidents for cyclist and pedestrian alike. We all like to think that we wouldn't make a mistake in judgement but in reality we all do. Why increase your risks, and from a non-selfish point of view, the risks to others, in an attempt to save yourself a couple of seconds? Try obeying the same laws you expect others adhere to.

 

[SquareDaff]

Try obeying the same laws you expect others adhere to.

As someone else has said on here - you can't pick and chose which ones you want to obey - everyone has different opinions as indicated by this thread - you'd end up with chaos!

 

[I like Skol]

I'm not going to reread the whole thread to check, but I don't think anyone has spoken in favour of ploughing through pedestrians. I'd have been pretty shocked if anyone had

Nail on the head there Dan. Some people just want to conveniently label and box all RLJ'rs as "smashing through pedestrians like they are skittles and dashing in front of oncoming traffic regardless" so they can justify their argument. Ok some cyclists (and other road users) do behave like that but, as in all areas of humanity, there are always some complete nobs that are entirely selfish while the majority of folk that pass red lights (myself included) will do so meekly and completely giving way to anyone that would rightly expect them to stop. Some of the individuals putting forward arguements in this thread are stubbornly refusing to accept the difference. These people must be so sure that their view of right and wrong is the only view that I hope I never have the misfortune to meet them on the road, they are likely to plough me down just because 'they are in the right'!!!

 

[I like Skol]

As someone else has said on here - you can't pick and chose which ones you want to obey - everyone has different opinions as indicated by this thread - you'd end up with chaos!

Yes but. One of the most vitriolic debaters in this thread claims the law is the law and must be obeyed, then openly admits to choosing to 'ignore one of the silly unimportant' laws because there is no example of it ever being enforced. You can't have it both ways.

 

[Dan B]

But if red lights become "advisory" that is precisely what you'll end up with (you just have to watch some of the videos on here to realise that WILL happen) - resulting in more accidents for cyclist and pedestrian alike.

Really not sure about this. Do we have carnage at "give way" signs? Or where lanes merge? Or on roundabouts? Or at driveways where people need to pull out onto the road? Most people, most of the time, seem to be able to successfully negotiate their use of the road with everyone else on it, and mass chaos has not ensued.

 

[SquareDaff]

[QUOTE 1399794"]
I'm with you. What I was suggesting is that, as with speed apologists, RLJers always put themselves across as safe and experienced and never putting anyone else out when what we see on the roads every day is different.
[/quote]
I don't RLJ - I stop at them and will do no matter how safe and experienced I think I am - so I think we agree.

 

[SquareDaff]

Yes but. One of the most vitriolic debaters in this thread claims the law is the law and must be obeyed, then openly admits to choosing to 'ignore one of the silly unimportant' laws because there is no example of it ever being enforced. You can't have it both ways.

I'm not he/she.
But based on that - apparently you need laws to help bring order to the chaos of everyone arriving at different conclusions/decisions based on the same inputs.

 

[SquareDaff]

Really not sure about this. Do we have carnage at "give way" signs? Or where lanes merge? Or on roundabouts? Or at driveways where people need to pull out onto the road? Most people, most of the time, seem to be able to successfully negotiate their use of the road with everyone else on it, and mass chaos has not ensued.

You're describing situations here where people are looking for "dangers" (for want of a better word). If I'm going through a set of green lights in my car then I'm not going to be looking for a cyclist wandering into my path (maybe due to an error in judgement about how far away I am/speed I'm travelling - any other reason - we've all made mistakes for various reasons) when he/she should have been stopped at a red light!

I've been stopped at enough lights where nothing has come through from the other junction to be able to appreciate your point of view. However I don't agree that choosing to ignore a law just because you don't happen to agree with it is the way forward. The laws are there as much for our protection as they are for the protection of other road users!

 

[I like Skol]

I'm not he/she.

Quite right, you are not he/she. The person I refer to is exceedingly confrontational and seems to spend the majority of their time while cycling looking for fault and criticising the actions of other road users while they proclaim to the world how excellent, skillful and reasonable they are as a road user. I am just glad I am not such a capable cyclist because if I had that many near misses and incidents while cycling I don't think I would get on a cycle again.

Peace and love, peace and love.

Edit: speeling!

 

[subaqua]

Quite right, you are not he/she. The person I refer to is exceedingly confrontational and seems to spend the majority of their time while cycling looking for fault and criticising the actions of other road users while they proclaim to the world how excellent, skillful and reasonable they are as a road user. I am just glad I am not such a capable cyclist because if I had that many near misses and incidents while cycling I don't think I would get on a cycle again.

Peace and love, peace and love.

Edit: speeling!

do they have a blog in East London

 

[Dan B]

Give me one example of people ignoring laws resulting in it being changed? Mass protesting maybe, but ignoring...I await you example.

Cannabis was reclassified from B to C in 2004, removing the threat of arrest for possession. This change in the law would almost certainly would not have happened if nobody was smoking it.

 

[SquareDaff]

Quite right, you are not he/she. The person I refer to is exceedingly confrontational and seems to spend the majority of their time while cycling looking for fault and criticising the actions of other road users while they proclaim to the world how excellent, skillful and reasonable they are as a road user. I am just glad I am not such a capable cyclist because if I had that many near misses and incidents while cycling I don't think I would get on a cycle again.

Peace and love, peace and love.

Edit: speeling!

There are a couple of people like that on these forums. There are also a few "tongue in cheek" comedy merchants and a few that just like to sh1t stir and step back and watch the fallout. Just enjoy your cycling safely. That's what my aim is!