I don't agree with you. Jumping reds and riding on the path are what brings cyclists into disrepute with hoi polloi. Cyclists should be vocal in condemning law-breaking cyclists, just as fair-minded passers-by might challenge some scrote with his hand in granny's shopping bag.
This laissez faire world you advocate leads us to people not getting involved in society, walking past, looking the other way.
Not really the same though is it. I don't see jumping a red light as equivalent to robbing a granny, do you? Should we criticise every person who walks illogically or potentially hazardously on the pavement? Should we rant about every pedestrian we see with their head immersed in their iphone, oblivious to their surroundings? Should we condemn our fellow pedestrians as stupid, and feel a collective shame, and in doing so discourage perambulation as a means of transport?
Or accept that people aren't always sensible, or logical and we're not qualified, or responsible to judge or criticise others.
It's not about laissez faire, it's about doing something constructive, rather than contributing to the anti cyclist vitriol.
The ranting does nothing for anybody, it could be argued that venting is a positive, but it could equally be argued that focussing on negatives, and condemning others, could be bad for our blood pressure.
In a way, in cycling communities, I see elements of the 'cult' phenomena, which you see in for example veganism. It's a polar point of view, which allows either that you are a 'proper' cyclist, vegan, or __________, or you're a nobber, who doesn't do it properly. It fails to see that for example kids who may have a lot to learn, may be valid cyclists, despite their failings, or that newbies, who may exhibit illogical, even potentially dangerous behaviours, may over time, become better cyclists who may qualify for approval as 'proper'.
It's a point of view which doesn't allow for middle ground, such as eating less meat should be positive to vegans, but will often invite condemnation as a pathetic half measure, and cyclists who don't meet the standards of the self appointed judges, 'shouldn't be on the road'. It is a very arrogant, and I think rather sad point of view, since I would rather see people welcomed to the roads, even if they have a lot to learn (which to be fair, most people do when they start).
