Should cyclists be allowed to run red lights?

[chriswoody]

Sounds like a great idea to me. A lot of the counter arguments I've read seem more emotive than sensible. Over here in Germany we have separate traffic lights for bikes as well as times where you are allowed to 'jump' red lights. It works really well and everyone rubs along well.

You also have the slightly crazy situation whereby all traffic, be it motorised or bikes, turns into a road to be confronted by pedestrians crossing the road. The pedestrian lights are synced to be green at the same time as the traffic lights. Sounds like it should be carnage but in fact in works really well. Ultimately you have to be aware as a driver or cyclist, that when turning into a road you must look out for and give way to any pedestrians or bikes crossing it. Likewise bikes commonly use the pavements here, mostly because that's were the cycle tracks are and they will shoot across smaller side roads that aren't covered by pedestrian crossings. Again any cars turning into them, must and do give way to them. It means you have to be super attentive driving in German towns.

Ultimately the rules are clear here that pedestrians come first, followed by bikes, then motorised traffic and you must yield. The Germanic mindset of always following the rules also helps along with strict penalties if you knock over someone when you should have given way.

 

[Fab Foodie]

No.

YES

 

[vernon]

I wouldn't have much problem with a general turn left on red rule for all classes of vehicle.

Turn right on red took some getting used to in America. I had some buttock clenching moments when I was a passenger in a car there during the first week in Washington state this summer.

 

[vernon]

Pelican crossings are useless devices, designed to stop people who wish to cross the road from holding up the traffic. The fact that on so many occasions the lights change long after the pedestrian has crossed and is out of sight is testament to that uselessness.

Introduce fines for walking on red....

 

[vernon]

Ultimately the rules are clear here that pedestrians come first, followed by bikes, then motorised traffic and you must yield. The Germanic mindset of always following the rules also helps along with strict penalties if you knock over someone when you should have given way.

My first cycling experiences in Germany were unnerving. Articulated lorries, in fact all motorised traffic applying their brakes heavily to cede right of way to me - it wasn't what I was used to and there were a few early stand offs where the motorised traffic and I were gesticulating to each other to procede.

I liked the German attitude to cyclists/cycling.

 

[slowmotion]

My first cycling experiences in Germany were unnerving. Articulated lorries, in fact all motorised traffic applying their brakes heavily to cede right of way to me - it wasn't what I was used to and there were a few early stand offs where the motorised traffic and I were gesticulating to each other to procede.

I liked the German attitude to cyclists/cycling.

I've been in similar stand-offs on roundabouts in Holland. They looked at me as though I was a madman not to sail straight across their paths without hesitation.

 

[vernon]

Tinkering with lights is not sufficient or radical enough for improving pedestrian mobility and numbers, Greg. You actually want more pedestrian zones and car-free developments - that will limit the need to cross motor traffic, breathe in fumes, less noise pollution etc and make the urban environment more conducive for walking.

Last week in Barcelona I witnessed vehicles, pedestrians and cyclists co-exist on the narrow streets of the gothic quarter. A large proportion of the vehicles, taxis and municipal vehicles, were hybrids. Cyclists and pedestrians used the pavement and the road. No-one lost their tempers. No collisions were observed. No-one competed for primacy of right to be there. No-one expected unimpeded travel.

It all went swimmingly well.

 

[vernon]

When we ride our bikes on a public road we become part of the traffic , our bikes are a mode of transport , half a dozen bikes in a pack take up as much road space as a car. I'm not a "halo wearer" by anyones stretch of the imagination but if I were to go for a ride and have a few beers along the way then become responsible for causing an incident due to be being (even mildly) intoxicated, I would expect to be held accountable to the courts and would also expect the injured party to make a claim against myself / my insurers. To suggest it is "ok" to go out and drink and then ride your bike is totally irresponsible in my opinion. Unless of course you mean to drink and then ride (for instance) along the canal towpath, then it is your own fault if you end up in the canal.

Section 30 Road Traffic Act 1988 says: "It is an offence for a person to ride a cycle on a road or other public place when unfit to ride through drink or drugs - that is to say - is under the influence of a drink or a drug to such an extent as to be incapable of having proper control of the cycle.

In Scotland a PC may arrest without warrant a person committing an offence under this section. There is no obligation for a cyclist to submit to a blood or urine alcohol test.

'Road' in the above bit of legislation includes a bridleway so don't think you can get blotto at a country pub and ride home 'off road' without risk.

And here's the rub. If you ride drunk you risk endangering yourself and possibly others by your actions. Would you ride home blindfolded? Beer-googles and bicycles do not mix. And, as stated above, cycling 'dangerously' can be fined by up to £2500.
http://www.bikehub.co.uk/featured-articles/cycling-and-the-law/

I wonder what the frequency of intoxicated cyclists colliding with and damaging pedestrians/fellow cyclists/other vehicles is compared with intoxicated motorists colliding with pedestrians/cyclists/fellow cyclists.

Sweat the big stuff before dwelling on the 'froth'.

 

[vernon]

Tolerance by the police for a start - there are plenty of threads which include people being told to cross on red at 2am because they are not being picked up by sensors.

There's a big difference between 'tolerated by' and 'instructed to'.....

 

[Milkfloat]

There's a big difference between 'tolerated by' and 'instructed to'.....

Agreed - that is why I think it makes so much sense to instruct cyclists and other road users to treat a red light as a give way in certain circumstances.

 

[Dogtrousers]

Agreed - that is why I think it makes so much sense to instruct cyclists and other road users to treat a red light as a give way in certain circumstances.

But people will always push the "certain circumstances". The end result would be that more red lights that really do mean "stop" would end up being run.

Similarly, it may make sense to raise the speed limit to 80mph on motorways, as it would probably be no less safe and a lot of people already drive at 80, but the end result would simply be that more people would drive at 90.

Keep it simple is my view. Stop at reds. Don't introduce a load of ifs and buts for different classes of road user that will just confuse the feeble minded British road user. If you want to jump a red on a left, get off your bike and wheel it round the corner. I see no pressing need for change, there are much more important things to worry about.

 

[uclown2002]

Has @steve50 flounced?

 

[martint235]

But people will always push the "certain circumstances". The end result would be that more red lights that really do mean "stop" would end up being run.

Similarly, it may make sense to raise the speed limit to 80mph on motorways, as it would probably be no less safe and a lot of people already drive at 80, but the end result would simply be that more people would drive at 90.

Keep it simple is my view. Stop at reds. Don't introduce a load of ifs and buts for different classes of road user that will just confuse the feeble minded British road user. If you want to jump a red on a left, get off your bike and wheel it round the corner. I see no pressing need for change, there are much more important things to worry about.

Steady on. You're in danger of spouting good, common sense.

 

[Dan B]

But people will always push the "certain circumstances".

I wonder why that is so certain to be the case here in the UK, whereas the USA, Copenhagen, Germany, Holland and Barcelona (to name five other places cited on this page of the thread alone) seem to have no such problems

 

[Ian H]

One difference between the places mentioned where road users co-exist peacefully and the apparently adversarial system here is 'presumed liability'. I suspect that 'knowing your place' removes a lot of confrontational behaviour.