who are pavements for?

[John the Monkey]

There are none so blind as those who don't want to see.
<sarcasm>Pavement cycling is fine as it is of benefit to cyclists </sarcasm>

Interestingly, in a discussion on the bike show about the ethics of red light jumping, that was pretty much the conclusion, iirc.

Tangentially related, I saw a chap who jumps one of the lights I wait at again today. Last time I saw him, he said it was because his bike didn't trigger the sensor. (Mine does, but then it's a big, steel tourer). Today, the same chap jumped the same light, even though there was a car ahead (which the sensor would undoubtedly have picked up). f you want a link to this topic, he jumped the light by going around the car ahead on the pavement.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

Yes, but how often does that happen to RLJing cyclists? You must have information that lots of cyclists get killed that way to describe doing it as having a death wish, so I was interested in your evidence. I'm not condoning it, just asking for the evidence that doing it is having a death wish.

It is all about probable outcome. A bike v a car will lose. I have no stats and my statement does not need them. (I would need stats if I said "they will almost certainly die")

 

[apollo179]

In fact they tend to treat the junction just like a pedestrian would. I've never heard pedestrians crossing a junction being described as having a death wish. I don't condone cyclists doing it but I don't condone wildly exaggerating the dangers of cycling either.

+1
agreed.

 

[gaz]

It is all about probable outcome. A bike v a car will lose. I have no stats and my statement does not need them. (I would need stats if I said "they will almost certainly die")

As I said, 98% of them don't cycle through without looking, they treat it like a give way line. So the risks you suggest aren't their as they only go if it's clear.
Obviously a few don't do that.

You can say that in any situation a bicycle vs car, the bicycle will loose, so why bother cycling? Just buy a car.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

In fact they tend to treat the junction just like a pedestrian would. I've never heard pedestrians crossing a junction being described as having a death wish. I don't condone cyclists doing it but I don't condone wildly exaggerating the dangers of cycling either.

I am not wilding exaggerating the dangers of cycling. I am highlighing the dangers of running a red-light. Would you tell you children that it's statistically safe to do so (whilst not condoning it)?

 

[Angelfishsolo]

As I said, 98% of them don't cycle through without looking, they treat it like a give way line. So the risks you suggest aren't their as they only go if it's clear.
Obviously a few don't do that.

You can say that in any situation a bicycle vs car, the bicycle will loose, so why bother cycling? Just buy a car.

A car can travel so much faster than a bike that a quick look at relights means nothing. Yes the bike will lose every time; this is why cyclists should make themselves as safe as possible through correct road craft and observation of traffic regulations and road signs.

 

[apollo179]

I am not wilding exaggerating the dangers of cycling. I am highlighing the dangers of running a red-light. Would you tell you children that it's statistically safe to do so (whilst not condoning it)?

To be fair the comparison with children is not valid because this discussion is not about children. If it were about children then you would win the arguement hands down and everyone would agree with you. But it isnt. Its about adult cyclists using there road sense to cross the road as expeditiously as possible - just as adult pedestrians do.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

To be fair the comparison with children is not valid because this discussion is not about children. If it were about children then you would win the arguement hands down and everyone would agree with you. But it isnt. Its about adult cyclists using there road sense to cross the road as expeditiously as possible - just as adult pedestrians do.

Ok. If it is a matter of expedience why can cyclists ignore red lights and cars can't?

 

[gaz]

A car can travel so much faster than a bike that a quick look at relights means nothing. Yes the bike will lose every time; this is why cyclists should make themselves as safe as possible through correct road craft and observation of traffic regulations and road signs.

As we all know, using give way lines is incredibly dangerous because cars can travel soooo fast.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

As we all know, using give way lines is incredibly dangerous because cars can travel soooo fast.

Hence "as safe as possible".

 

[apollo179]

Ok. If it is a matter of expedience why can cyclists ignore red lights and cars can't?

In the real world because cyclists cant get caught by enforcement cameras and cars can. Take enforcement out of the equation and you get cars and bikes and pedestrians all obeying and disobeying red lights to various degrees as they want. Just look at countries where they dont have enforcement cameras - its each man for himself. Im not saying its good , its bad but thats why "can cyclists ignore red lights and cars can't".

 

[Angelfishsolo]

In the real world because cyclists cant get caught by enforcement cameras and cars can. Take enforcement out of the equation and you get cars and bikes and pedestrians all obeying and disobeying red lights to various degrees as they want. Just look at countries where they dont have enforcement cameras - its each man for himself. Im not saying its good , its bad but thats why "can cyclists ignore red lights and cars can't".

and we wonder why there is so much anti-cycling feeling around.

 

[gaz]

Hence "as safe as possible".

You make out that rljing is very dangerous and anyone that does it is going to die. Which is not the case.

Your as safe as possible was in reference to general road use not rljing

 

[apollo179]

and we wonder why there is so much anti-cycling feeling around.

I dont see how that follows. I applaud anyone i see bending the rules when the rules are ridiculous.
Just as you would encourage cyclists to command their road space (ie - not cycle in the gutter) i dont see why you dont back cyclists who take the initiative at junctions / lights.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

You make out that rljing is very dangerous and anyone that does it is going to die. Which is not the case.

Your as safe as possible was in reference to general road use not rljing

I did not say "going to die" I said a death wish. Look up the meaning of the phrase you will see it means "an (unconscious) urge die". The two are not the same thing at all. You can turn on a light swith with wet hands and 999 times out of a 1000 you will be OK. You still have a death wish.