Discussion in 'Commuting' started by patheticshark, 8 Jan 2008.
I don't have a problem with this.
The "Motorists do it" argument cuts no Ice as far as I'm concerned, cycling must get it's own house in order.
We're an easy target because we are a nminority and we give them the ammunition to fire at us.
C'est la vie.
The police should do every red light jumper, and not focus on one particular type. I suspect they would then get a lot of bus drivers, some car drivers, and lots of cyclists.
Haven't read the full article but ... Yes of course they should. Obviously, they should also swoop on ALL road users who ignore red lights.
Yet the focus seems to be so heavily on cyclists, which is what I dislike. I can stop at any junction I choose and see plenty of cars blatantly go through at red, yet there never seems to be any fuss about that at all.
Given the question - Should police swoop on cyclists who ignore red lights? You have to ask, What for?
Assuming a perspective of road safety the only answer available is no.
If you want to crack down on things that simply annoy road users in general then you can answer yes.
I have a problem with this too. Given limited resources the police should be tackling the biggest threats to life, safety and quality of life for the general public. Cycling/cyclists should simply not be on their radar. There are two million uninsured drivers out there, my suggestion would be to get these off the roads first and then start looking at the next big problem.
Yep - bring the force of the law down on every offending group, be they cyclists or motorised transport drivers. I'm always stunned sitting at light-controlled cycle and pedestrian crossings to see the crossing lights on green but a steady stream of cars, vans and buses continuing to go past as they follow each other through red lights. If I was blind or partially sighted and crossed by relying on the sound of the green man, I'd be dead by now.
I stop at red lights, just makes sense to me not to put myself in potential danger and/or p*ss off motorists and other road users.
Without getting into a bun fight there are a lot of riders in London who think their primary position to be far more important than that of a fellow cyclist. I end up stuck behind these riders having got up good speed from the line and then have to pull back.
Fed up with arrogant cyclists who can't wait and want to barge past me and saunter on thru.
What is that all about?
I think that's happening - I've certainly heard of the ANPR systems being used in conjunction with the insured vehicles database to do so.
Edit: In fact, there's an article in the Standard about it, here.
So how many uninsured drivers are left on the roads now then?
You could ask the Met, or the Home Office. I regret that I am unable to provide figures myself.
Is your point that so long as drivers/owners of motor vehicles break the law, cyclists should not be punished for doing so?
Surely that's about their own safety? If you want to overtake someone in primary, then you ought to wait until it's safe to do so, rather than wanting them to compromise that so you can just squeeze past? Your point seems no different to a car driver complaining about the same.
(Speaking as someone who has squeezed past other cyclists in the past myself, when I shouldn't have).
No, I made my point above which was:
"Given limited resources the police should be tackling the biggest threats to life, safety and quality of life for the general public. Cycling/cyclists should simply not be on their radar."
Or do you think that the police should be going after cyclists heavily even though they make an infinitesimally small contribution to road deaths, injuries and adverse quality of life/anti-social behaviour?
Separate names with a comma.