Safer to jump red lights? - Times article

[400bhp]

As I said we don't record near misses. We haven't recorded the fact 1 or 2 times a week the only reason I'm not wiped out by a cyclist or a motorist jumping a red light is because I've avoided them. I'm not the only person who has to regularly avoid people jumping red lights. The fact that no collisions occur has more to do with the fact that people are actually aware of what is going on around them them & can compensate for the actions of others than the safety of jumping a red light.

The ones you have avoided are the ones where they have been irresponsible/selfish/stupid.

From your post it appears you are inferring the people who are "aware" are not the RLJ's. However, if proceeding through a red light is done with caution then doesn't the awareness fall more on the cyclists/car than the other road users around them?

So, for the occasions that rlj is done "safely" is there a real issue?

 

[benb]

So what objectively are the criteria for what laws we ignore or adhere to? Clearly not having pedal reflectors is illegal and it potentially has safety implications but many of us break that law routinely. Similarly as pointed out above many of us used LED lights long before they were legal because they were more reliable and visible. Most of us still use lights that are not legal on our bikes - for example sole use of any of the high brightness LED front lights. The evidence seems to be that RLJing is not a particularly dangerous thing to do as a cyclist - its more like a pedestrian crossing the junction than a motor vehicle - and the French trials have not found any increase in accidents from allowing it. So the issue clearly cannot be a legal imperative to comply (vide pedal reflectors and lights) and it cannot be a safety imperative. So on exactly what grounds should we not do it? The only thing seems to be it might annoy someone but then so does wearing lycra and not having a bell it would seem.

I don't think, objectively, there's an answer to that.

Clearly RLJ has the potential to be more dangerous than filtering into an ASZ or not having pedal reflectors, but whether it actually is dangerous will depend on the situation. It also appears to put other people in danger rather than just the cyclist (in practise, it's overwhelmingly only the cyclist in danger), unlike the pedal reflector example.

I guess it's because it's more obviously illegal, than the other examples. I doubt whether anyone who is otherwise well lit has ever been fined for not having pedal reflectors, and I also doubt whether many people even know it's illegal. Plus it's not as obvious when someone is not complying. Whereas, when a cyclist goes through a red light, everyone around sees it, and it looks dangerous, whether or not it is.

I honestly don't know what the answer is, except my preferred approach is to comply with traffic laws, except when doing so will actually endanger me (filtering into ASZ for example). So I don't actually have much of a problem with someone going over the stop line, but not into the junction, to create their own ASZ (although I would personally hold back a few cars).

Sorry, I'm rambling, but it's clearly not as black and white as "it's illegal, therefore it's wrong"

 

[Red Light]

Common sense.

Now, what you wrap up in common sense is the crux.

I'm with Einstein who said "Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by the age of eighteen"

 

[ferret fur]

Clearly not having pedal reflectors is illegal and it potentially has safety implications but many of us break that law routinely

The day the average motorist starts complaining about "****** cyclists not having pedal reflectors!" & for that reason starts treating us with a lack of respect on the road is the one on which I will seriously consider pedal reflectors (as opposed to other reflective materials on my shoes)

 

[ferret fur]

I'm with Einstein who said "Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by the age of eighteen"

Ah that's Ok then. Einstein supported RLJ

 

[dellzeqq]

So what objectively are the criteria for what laws we ignore or adhere to? Clearly not having pedal reflectors is illegal and it potentially has safety implications but many of us break that law routinely. Similarly as pointed out above many of us used LED lights long before they were legal because they were more reliable and visible. Most of us still use lights that are not legal on our bikes - for example sole use of any of the high brightness LED front lights. The evidence seems to be that RLJing is not a particularly dangerous thing to do as a cyclist - its more like a pedestrian crossing the junction than a motor vehicle - and the French trials have not found any increase in accidents from allowing it. So the issue clearly cannot be a legal imperative to comply (vide pedal reflectors and lights) and it cannot be a safety imperative. So on exactly what grounds should we not do it? The only thing seems to be it might annoy someone but then so does wearing lycra and not having a bell it would seem.

yes, sort of, maybe, possibly. By which I mean that you are correct, but while rlj-ing is not a particularly dangerous thing for cyclists, cycling as a whole is not a particularly dangerous thing, and rlj-ing is adding one small risk. And, to be honest, there's the question of example - if you or I jump a red light does that make it more normal, and, in doing so, encourage others, less calculating than ourselves, to take that incremental risk?

It has to be said, though, that most of the red lights in my part of the world are ones that you wouldn't jump without the aid of booze or drugs. I can see the temptation is greater when you're at a crossroads that sees very little traffic.

I suppose what I'm saying is that any code has shortcomings, but, overall sometimes it's best to stick with it,

 

[Red Light]

The day the average motorist starts complaining about "****** cyclists not having pedal reflectors!" & for that reason starts treating us with a lack of respect on the road is the one on which I will seriously consider pedal reflectors (as opposed to other reflective materials on my shoes)

So are you going to stop cycling on the road because the average motorist thinks cyclists are lycra wearing red light jumping hooligans who shouldn't be on the road in the first place? If what we do as cyclists is determined by a popularity vote by motorists then cycling is doomed IMHO.

 

[GrasB]

The ones you have avoided are the ones where they have been irresponsible/selfish/stupid.

From your post it appears you are inferring the people who are "aware" are not the RLJ's. However, if proceeding through a red light is done with caution then doesn't the awareness fall more on the cyclists/car than the other road users around them?

So, for the occasions that rlj is done "safely" is there a real issue?

If on the vast majority of occasions it's 'safe' then we have to ask why are the lights there in the first place. Which is a completely different subject.

 

[400bhp]

I'm with Einstein who said "Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by the age of eighteen"

Good answer

 

[Red Light]

If on the vast majority of occasions it's 'safe' then we have to ask why are the lights there in the first place. Which is a completely different subject.

The lights are there to control motor traffic, nothing more and cyclists got caught up by it. If there were no motor vehicles on the road traffic lights would not be needed. The question is should cyclists be controlled like motor vehicles or like pedestrians (who can choose to cross a junction irrespective of the the lights without anyone throwing their hands up in horror)

 

[benb]

The lights are there to control motor traffic, nothing more and cyclists got caught up by it. If there were no motor vehicles on the road traffic lights would not be needed. The question is should cyclists be controlled like motor vehicles or like pedestrians (who can choose to cross a junction irrespective of the the lights without anyone throwing their hands up in horror)

I think the answer to that is "it depends". Which I admit isn't very helpful.

 

[benb]

To be honest, RLJ cyclists only annoy me when they are being dangerous, selfish, impatient, or some combination thereof. It's obvious that it's possible to RLJ safely, and the vast majority of cyclists who RLJ only put themselves in danger.

It's simply not that high up my list of things to be concerned about. Let's get it in some sense of perspective.

I get very annoyed when, within seconds of finding out I'm a cyclist, someone launches into a tirade of condemnation against RLJ cyclists. As if it's up to me to take responsibility for what other cyclists do. I see many more drivers RLJ than cyclists, and far more dangerously, but I don't go around criticising every driver I meet for it and expecting them to take responsibility for other road user's transgressions.

 

[Bicycle]

To be honest, RLJ cyclists only annoy me when they are being dangerous, selfish, impatient, or some combination thereof. It's obvious that it's possible to RLJ safely, and the vast majority of cyclists who RLJ only put themselves in danger.

It's simply not that high up my list of things to be concerned about. Let's get it in some sense of perspective.

I get very annoyed when, within seconds of finding out I'm a cyclist, someone launches into a tirade of condemnation against RLJ cyclists. As if it's up to me to take responsibility for what other cyclists do. I see many more drivers RLJ than cyclists, and far more dangerously, but I don't go around criticising every driver I meet for it and expecting them to take responsibility for other road user's transgressions.

An interesting post. On your first paragraph about "dangerous, selfish, impatient": That's pretty much every RLJ isn't it? Whenever I RLJ it's for one of those three reasons.

Your second para: Not on mine either. Partly because I'm a largely reformed transgressor.

Your 'tirade' point: That tirade thing has never happened to me. I get ticked off for not wearing a helmet fairly frequently, but rarely in a tirade-type fashion. This will sound a little faux naif, but do many drivers really fire tirades of generalised condemnation at cyclists? I get the impression from these foerums that they do, but I never hear them.

On RLJ drivers: I absolutely agree that it is more dangerous in a car or lorry, but I see far, far fewer in London and in the sticks than I do cyclist RLJs. I've read data saying that an enormous number of motorists in the UK are RLJ offenders, but I rarely see it. With bicycles, I expect to see it; and I do.

 

[benb]

An interesting post. On your first paragraph about "dangerous, selfish, impatient": That's pretty much every RLJ isn't it? Whenever I RLJ it's for one of those three reasons.

Your second para: Not on mine either. Partly because I'm a largely reformed transgressor.

Your 'tirade' point: That tirade thing has never happened to me. I get ticked off for not wearing a helmet fairly frequently, but rarely in a tirade-type fashion. This will sound a little faux naif, but do many drivers really fire tirades of generalised condemnation at cyclists? I get the impression from these foerums that they do, but I never hear them.

On RLJ drivers: I absolutely agree that it is more dangerous in a car or lorry, but I see far, far fewer in London and in the sticks than I do cyclist RLJs. I've read data saying that an enormous number of motorists in the UK are RLJ offenders, but I rarely see it. With bicycles, I expect to see it; and I do.

I didn't mean drivers leaning out of windows to launch into a tirade about RLJ, but people frequently bring it up in conversation almost as soon as I have mentioned I enjoy cycling.

I would say I see a motorist RLJ at least once a day. A cyclist perhaps once or twice a month. I'm sure it's higher in London, but I expect it's higher across both groups.

 

[Bicycle]

I didn't mean drivers leaning out of windows to launch into a tirade about RLJ, but people frequently bring it up in conversation almost as soon as I have mentioned I enjoy cycling.

I would say I see a motorist RLJ at least once a day. A cyclist perhaps once or twice a month. I'm sure it's higher in London, but I expect it's higher across both groups.

Yes, that's what I thought you meant. I just don't hear it myself, although it's clear that it happens.

I guess it helps that I rarely talk about cycling unless I'm with cycling folk - who wouldn't say that anyway...