RLJ's in Bristol

[LLB]

Another one here.. I *loathe* RLJ-ing cyclists. There is no excuse. So I have no problem with plod stopping RLJ cyclists other than they should be stopping *all* RLJ-ers, with emphasis on the ones causing the biggest danger to others as police resources are limited. Those limited resources should be targetted primarily at the road users causing the biggest danger to others. The biggest danger to others is not cyclists, it's motorists. It isn't cyclists killing over 3000 people a year on the roads and injuring tens of thousands more. That's those of us using motor transport causing the biggest danger. So it's those of us in charge of motor vehicles that should be targetted in such plod swoops. As a motorist, I have no problem with that at all.

Is there any stats on how many RLJing cyclists die on the roads due to their own actions ?

 

[summerdays]

Yeah, I saw two polis stopping cyclists who had RLjed the lights by the Prince of Wales on my way in but wasn't aware that it was a city-wide operation.

Two - either you arrived at work very late or very early ... I suspect the first

"Zetland Junction has seen 25 accidents involving cyclists over the past two years"

That is a lot - however I do wish they would state the cause of the majority of those accidents as it could be that RLJ is only a factor in a small portion. In fact on re-reading it, I'm sure that it's probably not a major factor otherwise they'd state that it was a road safety issue.

That set of lights seems to be red for quite some time (particularly bad going north - as the timing between that set and the previous set means I aways hit both red lights so it seems) I bet that encourages some of the RLJ'ing at those lights.

I bet if you were to look at the stats for that junction the major problem would be created by cars going north up the Gloucester road turning right just before the traffic lights - up along side Maplin. Several friends have had near misses there when they were going down the Gloucester Road.

My opinion is that they should be stopping all RLJ's (cars and bikes) but can't they find a way to do it without shouting about it. You have to be stupid to RLJ when there was 15 Hi-Viz vests hanging around, whereas if they weren't so obvious they may actually manage to see more bad behaviour going on.

 

[mickle]

I've seen plenty of near misses involving RLJing POBs going through the lights at the Prince of Wales and cars coming out of Zetland road heading up the side of Maplins. Candidates for the Darwin awards.

 

[GrahamG]

The police seriously need some lessons in PR - regardless of motive they should have just said it was a safety concern so they were 'raising awareness'. The older I get, the dumber police seem to be.

 

[hackbike 666]

.....and younger.

 

[mr_cellophane]

Which will cause the most damage to your precious car?

1) An RLJing cyclist.
2) An RLJing motorist.

Take your time.

Well obviously (2), which is why I am careful when TL are changing to keep a good watch for cars which may RLJ. However, I am sure that cars jump red lights just after they have turned red. On the other hand, from looking a youtube, cyclist RLJ at any time through the light sequence and therefore present the greater danger to cars and pedestrians.

 

[mickle]

Well obviously (2), which is why I am careful when TL are changing to keep a good watch for cars which may RLJ. However, I am sure that cars jump red lights just after they have turned red. On the other hand, from looking a youtube, cyclist RLJ at any time through the light sequence and therefore present the greater danger to cars and pedestrians.

So you look out for cars jumping red lights but not cyclists?

Cyclists pose a danger to cars? Excuse me whilst I go and look up danger in the dictionary.

 

[Joseph]

So you look out for cars jumping red lights but not cyclists?

Cyclists pose a danger to cars? Excuse me whilst I go and look up danger in the dictionary.

RLJ cyclists certainly make the road more dangerous. Drivers who have a green light have to pay more attention to the illegal cyclist, and given they shouldn't be there may well have to slow down. They'll be playing less attention to other hazards. If they come to be of the mind that the cyclist hasn't even noticed the red light (or the oncoming traffic) and is about to cycle in front of them, you'd certainly hope a motorist would (if stuck in a difficult situation) pick damaging their car (and perhaps even a minor injury to themselves due to the crash) as preferable to hitting the cyclist.

Sounds like a danger to me

 

[mr_cellophane]

So you look out for cars jumping red lights but not cyclists?

Cyclists pose a danger to cars? Excuse me whilst I go and look up danger in the dictionary.

No - I look carefully for all vehicles jumping red lights when the lights have just changed. I am less/not likely to look when I am doing 30 though a light that has been green for over a minute. It is very unlikely that a car will RLJ at this point, but possible that a cyclist or pedestrian will. A pedestrian I can see and will not be powering through a red light at 20-30 mph.

 

[mickle]

My point;

Cars pose a much greater danger on the roads than cyclists.
Police action to reduce danger on the roads should be directed towards those causing the greatest danger.

 

[mr_cellophane]

Police action should be directed evenly against all who break the law. I am surprised at the low numbers of red light camera's compared to the number of speed camera's.

 

[Joseph]

My point;

Cars pose a much greater danger on the roads than cyclists.
Police action to reduce danger on the roads should be directed towards those causing the greatest danger.

I don't think anyone would argue other than that *most* of the police action should go on the greatest danger, but I would have to disagree if there was a suggestion that no police action at all should go on the lower dangers.

 

[mickle]

Righto, some agreement then. Since the danger posed by cars is about 3000 times greater than the danger posed by cyclists lets hope Bristol polis now spend 3000 days in highly publicised special operations to target motorists who break the law.

Glad we got that sorted.

 

[BentMikey]

Well said Mickle. Your point was obvious to me from the start.

 

[GrahamG]

Police action should be directed evenly against all who break the law. I am surprised at the low numbers of red light camera's compared to the number of speed camera's.

They don't bother in places with high levels of cycling - the cameras would constantly be set off by cyclists