RLJ'ers

[Howard]

RLJers - why should I have to overtake you again and again and again and again and aga....

 

[GrasB]

Wonderful example of why you don't RLJ this morning. The cyclist checks there's nothing coming from down the road which has the green light before proceeding across... straight into the path of a motorist who's pulling out of their drive into the junction. The motorist pips their horn (not a blaring horn held for many seconds but a quick tap maybe half a second long) which results in a torrent of abuse from the rider towards the motorist.

 

[martint235]

Wonderful example of why you don't RLJ this morning. The cyclist checks there's nothing coming from down the road which has the green light before proceeding across... straight into the path of a motorist who's pulling out of their drive into the junction. The motorist pips their horn (not a blaring horn held for many seconds but a quick tap maybe half a second long) which results in a torrent of abuse from the rider towards the motorist.

That's part of what gets to me. They are obviously in the wrong but will scream abuse at anyone who questions their behaviour. This morning I politely asked one (he'd RLJ'd 3 consecutive red lights, passing me each time) why, if he was in such a rush, he didn't just pedal faster? Got told to f off. I unclipped at the next lights but he stayed well back. Maybe he's cured.

 

[CharlieB]

I had a little contretemps this very morning with an RLJ'er, 'cos it does make me CROSS.

Crossroads into Kilburn High Road (under the big iron bridge for anyone that knows it) - I'm waiting to turn right into the High Road. Guy passes me across the RLs and into the traffic.
Lights change - I turn right to see him scatter a couple of pedestrians at the next RL on a pelican X-ing. At this point I decide, wisely or unwisely, that I'm going to have a word.
So I'm stopped at the X-ing, watching him to see where he's going, the lights change, and I move off to see him jump the next set of lights at another X-roads.
Dag nabbit, I'm thus caught again. A-ha - in a bit, he's turning left, exactly where I'm going anyway. I put the hammer down to catch him, get alongside, slow down and say 'Please don't jump red lights - it makes us all look like tw@ts'
He responds with 'Oh fcuk off, you to$$er'

'Whatever, but you know I'm right', and I'm gone before he can commit murder.

GRRRR.

 

[SquareDaff]

As a cyclist and a pedestrian if one of these idiots tried to filter past me whilst I was crossing I'd clothesline them! Maybe then they'd learn some patience!

 

[benb]

As a cyclist and a pedestrian if one of these idiots tried to filter past me whilst I was crossing I'd clothesline them! Maybe then they'd learn some patience!

Or if not, they would at least be patients.

 

[User482]

As a cyclist and a pedestrian if one of these idiots tried to filter past me whilst I was crossing I'd clothesline them! Maybe then they'd learn some patience!

Yes, because committing an assault gives you the moral high ground.

 

[Raa]

Wow, what a lot of narrow mindedness here!

Basically we have a lamentable situation where our urban areas were completely re-engineered from the 1950's to the 80's for the convenience of motorised traffic. Now we are suffering the consequences in the form of towns and cities which are downright stressful and unhealthy, and where cycle commuting often requires nerves of steel.

Traffic lights (no, I don't mean pedestrian crossings) exist solely to manage the congestion caused by motor vehicles, the same can be said of one-way streets and gyratory systems.

Neither of these features were constructed with bicyclists in mind, so for me it begs the question: why don't more cyclists treat them as discretionary?

It seems to me that those who advocate absolute obedience to outdated traffic laws are giving implicit support to the status quo prioritizing motor vehicles.

More than once it has been suggested that our image in the eyes of motorists should dictate how we ride (as if always stopping at red would improve anything?). Why be so concerned about what they think? Most are making short urban journeys which are morally indefensible; polluting our urban centers with cancerous filth through sheer laziness, but hey unlike RLJ'ers, at least they're not breaking the law...

 

[martint235]

why don't more cyclists treat them as discretionary?

outdated traffic laws are giving implicit support to the status quo prioritizing motor vehicles.

To the first point, errrmmmm because they aren't.

To the second point because they're aren't outdated, they are still on the statute books and will be until further primary legislation is brought in to over-rule them.

There's a lot of laws I don't like. There's some I can see the point of. There's some I positively like such as it's illegal for someone to stab me. I think we're all on very dangerous ground once we allow people to pick and choose which laws we obey.

Now start a campaign for cyclists to go the opposite direction down a one way street, or turn left at red, or treat red lights as give way signs and I'm first in the queue to sign up because I believe the rules do need to be changed. But while they are in force, they should be obeyed. It's one of the cornerstones of what passes for civilisation.

 

[Raa]

To the second point because they're aren't outdated, they are still on the statute books and will be until further primary legislation is brought in to over-rule them.

There's a lot of laws I don't like. There's some I can see the point of. There's some I positively like such as it's illegal for someone to stab me. I think we're all on very dangerous ground once we allow people to pick and choose which laws we obey.

Now start a campaign for cyclists to go the opposite direction down a one way street, or turn left at red, or treat red lights as give way signs and I'm first in the queue to sign up because I believe the rules do need to be changed. But while they are in force, they should be obeyed. It's one of the cornerstones of what passes for civilisation.

I see your point but I just don't see it that way. It seems the most effective way to get silly laws changed is simply for a significant number of people to ignore them without causing problems. There is little benefit to society in criminalizing people's everyday activities if they are not to the detriment of others.

Actually with RLJing I like the present situation where it remains illegal but there is little enforcement. I think I read somewhere that the UK has more laws than any other country but we are very selective as to which ones are enforced.

As an aside, I had a situation back along when approaching a traffic light light controled roundabout. The approach road was gridlocked with cars as was the roundabout itself. Having filtered to the head of the queue, I of course used my discression and did not wait for green to continue filtering through the gridlock. Would others on here honestly have sat there for minutes in the fumes waiting for a green light under these circumstances?

 

[2Loose]

I see your point but I just don't see it that way. It seems the most effective way to get silly laws changed is simply for a significant number of people to ignore them without causing problems. There is little benefit to society in criminalizing people's everyday activities if they are not to the detriment of others.
...
As an aside, I had a situation back along when approaching a traffic light light controled roundabout. The approach road was gridlocked with cars as was the roundabout itself. Having filtered to the head of the queue, I of course used my discression and did not wait for green to continue filtering through the gridlock. Would others on here honestly have sat there for minutes in the fumes waiting for a green light under these circumstances?

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


Your example, yes I would stop.

Red means stop to me, but a motorcycle or another cyclist on another part of the RAB would have green. The gridlocked cars would make it difficult for me to see them filtering in my direction. Gridlock would mean limited space for them to avoid me. You aren't the only two wheeler on the road you know! Those cars would be still be there to breeze past in a minutes time when the lights change, what is the rush.

As for narrow mindedness, riding for 'me, me, me' rather than considering everyone else's welfare and safety shows a surprising amount of it.

 

[martint235]

I see your point but I just don't see it that way. It seems the most effective way to get silly laws changed is simply for a significant number of people to ignore them without causing problems. There is little benefit to society in criminalizing people's everyday activities if they are not to the detriment of others.

This is the problem. You get through the red light, no harm done. Every single day at work, I hear "I was nearly knocked over by a cyclist going through red light x" or "I had to slam on my brakes to avoid hitting a cyclist who had gone through a red light". It is causing problems for other people. It is also now so widespread that many people feel they can't use pedestrian crossings in the way they were intended to be used because they really have no idea if that cyclist is going to stop.

The law should be enforced and heavily. If the fine is high enough, it could effectively pay for itself to be enforced.

 

[PBancroft]

This is the problem. You get through the red light, no harm done. Every single day at work, I hear "I was nearly knocked over by a cyclist going through red light x" or "I had to slam on my brakes to avoid hitting a cyclist who had gone through a red light". It is causing problems for other people. It is also now so widespread that many people feel they can't use pedestrian crossings in the way they were intended to be used because they really have no idea if that cyclist is going to stop.

The law should be enforced and heavily. If the fine is high enough, it could effectively pay for itself to be enforced.

I was almost run down by a car running a red light the other day. You know what? It's not unusual. A couple of months back I was on a pedestrian crossing when THREE cars ran the red light very nearly knocking me over.

It's not a bicycle problem, it's a people problem. Some people just don't seem to give a $h1t about others.

 

[SquareDaff]

Yes, because committing an assault gives you the moral high ground.

And if they hit me at speed because they couldn't be @rsed to stop whilst I was legitimately crossing as a pedestrian then that would be OK then?!?!?! Would it still be OK if it was your kids/elderly parents crossing?

 

[SquareDaff]

This is the problem. You get through the red light, no harm done. Every single day at work, I hear "I was nearly knocked over by a cyclist going through red light x" or "I had to slam on my brakes to avoid hitting a cyclist who had gone through a red light". It is causing problems for other people. It is also now so widespread that many people feel they can't use pedestrian crossings in the way they were intended to be used because they really have no idea if that cyclist is going to stop.

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. And we'd all soon start complaining if they decided to use said crossing because it was ONLY a cyclist heading towards them and we had to slam on the brakes!!

It's the same thing if a cyclist decides not to bother stopping on a red light and others have to wait. Pure selfishness!