Do we challenge red light jumpers/green man means cyclist

FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:

Jimbonic wrote:

I've read and re-read this and have come to the conclusion that, actually, there are two arguments there:
In one, "cyclists", "women", "old people", whoever are quite within their rights to feel that they should be treated fairly by "road users", "society", "nursing home staff", etc.
In the other, people / cyclists / whomever cannot expect to be allowed to break the law without some sort of legal retribution.

I don't think it is bigotted, just two separate arguments.

Bigotted was too strong, I take that back. But _as worded_, the comment just seemed to display an attitude I don't agree with in general - that there is a 'collective' entity called 'cyclists' that has some sort of shared responsibility for every bad thing done by a cyclist.

It comes up with all sorts of groups, and I never agree with it. I don't think, for example, you can say that "Muslims" can't ask for respect or to not be discriminated against until there isn't a single Islamist terrorist anywhere in the world (and Muslims probably form a more coherent group than do 'people who use a bike'). Ditto black people as a group.

Yes, I most definitely agree with you.

The original sentence was a bit ambiguous. But, I totally agree that cyclists as a collective (if, indeed, there is such a thing) should be persecuted because there are those that don't obey the law. That would be crazy!

FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:

hampstead_bandit wrote:

cyclists want to be treated fairly by other road users, but also want to choose when they obey the law, it does not work like that?

What?

Try the above sentence with "cyclists" replaced by "older people" or "pedestrians" or "white people" or "black people" or "men" or "women" and "road users" replaced with the appropriate wider group.

Are you seriously arguing that nobody can expect fair treatment in society till everyone else who has anything at all in common with them behaves totally perfectly at all times?

Where does this odd 'logic' come from? Its becuase people tend to think in this bigotted way that soceity is such a mess.

Just absolutely spot on!

TomvanHalen wrote:

By all means call out people who jump red lights dangerously. Plenty of people blow through crossings while peds are in the road or speed through junctions with barely a look. And they're going to hurt themselves or others.

But remember, traffic laws are designed with cars in mind. 2 tonne, unwieldy death machines. Bikes are small, nimble, and not generally a hazard to others. There are many junctions around me that are genuinely safer for me if I roll ahead and jump the light while it's clear, rather than be squeezed out by an impatient car. And if there's no one near a pedestrian crossing, why should I lose all my momentum just because vehicles need to obey big flashy lights to stop them running people over?

As someone said above, all this "bad rep" bollocks is because people hate cyclists, full stop. If we all waited patiently at red lights, that would still be true in this country. So think twice before dishing out abuse or snarky comments to cyclists who RLJ in a safe and aware fashion. Kthx

I am with you TVH. I am afraid that at 6.45 in the morning I am not going to stop at a red light covering a small side road junction when no one is travelling in any direction in any vehicle; nor do I stop at pedestrian crossings where there are no pedestrians crossing. On these occasions I always slow to a roll and keep any eye out for anyone wanting to cross especially if there's a car sitting at the light as you might not see a small person crossing or a dog.

Something that really gives cyclists a bad name is when riders fly through pedestrian crossings when there ARE people crossing , barely missing them and if the pesdestrians are "lucky" they get a wave of the hand as if to say " thanks for letting me through" not that they had any choice at all.

Respect for all road users should be the mantra, whether they are pedestrians crossing or cars, or other vehicles. If we all had a little more respect for others we would promote better behaviour.

I would be tempted to ignore it if there are no pedestrians in sight. The problem is the people who jump the red lights when there ARE pedestrians trying to cross at the 'green person'. My son was sent bowling into the gutter by one when he was on his way home from school. The cyclist didn't go over to help him, or ask if he was OK. He just stood over him and yelled abuse. I have several times nearly been hit by cyclists jumping red lights when the pedestrian light is green.

SForeman wrote:

The problem is the people who jump the red lights when there ARE pedestrians trying to cross at the 'green person'. My son was sent bowling into the gutter by one when he was on his way home from school. The cyclist didn't go over to help him, or ask if he was OK. He just stood over him and yelled abuse. I have several times nearly been hit by cyclists jumping red lights when the pedestrian light is green.

True, though I've only ever seen this happen once, myself. And there is always the option for quick-witted pedestrians of thumping the offending cyclist as he whizzes through a crossing!

FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:

SForeman wrote:

The problem is the people who jump the red lights when there ARE pedestrians trying to cross at the 'green person'. My son was sent bowling into the gutter by one when he was on his way home from school. The cyclist didn't go over to help him, or ask if he was OK. He just stood over him and yelled abuse. I have several times nearly been hit by cyclists jumping red lights when the pedestrian light is green.

True, though I've only ever seen this happen once, myself. And there is always the option for quick-witted pedestrians of thumping the offending cyclist as he whizzes through a crossing!

So you are essentially condoning assault for which you will be arrested guaranteed, i guess you don't value your freedom much.

*Waits for climb down*

northstar wrote:

FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:

SForeman wrote:

The problem is the people who jump the red lights when there ARE pedestrians trying to cross at the 'green person'. My son was sent bowling into the gutter by one when he was on his way home from school. The cyclist didn't go over to help him, or ask if he was OK. He just stood over him and yelled abuse. I have several times nearly been hit by cyclists jumping red lights when the pedestrian light is green.

True, though I've only ever seen this happen once, myself. And there is always the option for quick-witted pedestrians of thumping the offending cyclist as he whizzes through a crossing!

So you are essentially condoning assault for which you will be arrested guaranteed, i guess you don't value your freedom much.

*Waits for climb down*

Oh don't be ridiculous. How about reading what people actually write in future before responding? Please show me where this 'condoning' occurs, if you can (you can't because there isn't any).

The option exists, in a way that it doesn't when the offender is in a car. That's a simple fact. It has happened, I know of several cases where it has (a couple reported by the thumper on web sites*, in once case I knew the thumped). So how can you deny it can happen? (Also if you think people are 'guaranteed' to be arrested if they assault someone you live in a different country to me).

Its another reason for people NOT to race across crossings when pedestrians are crossing, and the point is its one reason why cyclists are less of a threat than motorists - who tend to be immune from the risk of such direct retaliation.

*actually it might have been a third-party witness who mentioned it, can't remember.

northstar wrote:

FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:

SForeman wrote:

The problem is the people who jump the red lights when there ARE pedestrians trying to cross at the 'green person'. My son was sent bowling into the gutter by one when he was on his way home from school. The cyclist didn't go over to help him, or ask if he was OK. He just stood over him and yelled abuse. I have several times nearly been hit by cyclists jumping red lights when the pedestrian light is green.

True, though I've only ever seen this happen once, myself. And there is always the option for quick-witted pedestrians of thumping the offending cyclist as he whizzes through a crossing!

So you are essentially condoning assault for which you will be arrested guaranteed, i guess you don't value your freedom much.

*Waits for climb down*

I got punched by a ped last week for no good reason, didn't see him get arrested...

giff77 wrote:

I find the disparaging put down works wonders. Once asked a jumper if he would like me to adjust his brakes for him as he seemed to have problems stopping. He mumbled something about sorting it when he got home.

Yep, same sort of thing I do. If you sound friendly and keep it low key, it takes a while for it to sink in and then it seems to work the best.

Red light jumpers get us all a bad name so I've no problem in saying something.

No need to involve the police.

BikeBud wrote:

Yep, RLJ's give us a bad name. If "cyclists" don't respect the rules of the road, why should drivers? We've all "experienced" drivers who don't respect the rules of the road!

I would turn that around. Why should cyclists obey the rules of the road, since car/van/lorry/bus drivers don't?

I'm being slightly obtuse. But, the number of cycling RLJs is no more than other vehicles in my opinion. I will admit that cyclists more often do it in a more obvious, the lights changed about half-hour ago way. But, that doesn't make the "other road users" any less dangerous. Also, do you really think that if no cyclists jumped red lights, all the other road users would suddenly decide they're not going to do it either?

Back on topic though, it does annoy me and I do mention it to other cyclists - sometimes. But, I always come away feeling that it's really up to them. There are laws that we all have to obey and, if they decide they don't want to, what role do I have in their enforcement? Apparently, vigilante-ism (is that a word?) is illegal. And, foolish. So, I will continue with randomness. Since, on the counter to that argument is the one that states that we should report crime. So, really, we should report all the RLJs to the police...

Neil753 wrote:

It's not illegal to film people in a public place, so why not set up a website (or maybe a Youtube channel) where people can upload footage of RLJs, and then split the reward money (for a successful proscecution) between the person who posts the video and the person who identifies the miscreant. A fixed £90 fine could be split three ways (poster, spotter, admin).

The concept could obviously be applied to drivers too and, with money involved, could become very effective at reducing all manner of bad behaviour on the road. But a pilot scheme for red light jumpers is ideal, because of the objective nature of the offence.

I have often thought there should be something like this for illegal parking (an offense which is almost ubiquitous). RLJing would work also....but....

(a) would not drivers try to argue that they weren't driving the vehicle at the time ("it was stolen then mysteriously returned, guv, honest!").

(b) is it not possibly a worrying precedent, maybe a step too far towards a surveillence society? (not really sure about that one, especially as we are almost there already, but still...).

vbvb wrote:

In every city where cycling is popular and safe, on a par with walking - and I'm thinking of Amsterdam, Bordeaux, Copenhagen etc - there's no such thing as "our reputation" with drivers. If you are worrying about "our reputation" with drivers, then the problem is that cycling is not popular enough to have outgrown this idea of having a reputation. The goal is to make cycling safer and more enjoyable by making it more popular, making it bigger than being the activity of an outsider "other" group like skateboarders or goths or whatever. Shouting at people does not help. Shouting at them is not about safety, as every study shows.

http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2009/dec/15/cycling-bike-acciden...

I think it has out grown the reputation of an outsider sport. It is hugely popular, both as a sport and a means of transport. The problem is that people pick it up without any sense of responsibility and legality. It becomes safer when people are aware of the law and cycle craft/etiquette.

Going around claiming that people do you wrong by having the wrong perception really doesn't deal with the issues out there. People curse football fans, but most of them don't worry about that, most people who like football do it in a reasonable and polite manner.....people will always have a tendency to pigeon hole you. Anyway, if you are right about that, cycling will grow if its reputation is better with non-cyclists. I don't dispute that there are some issues with bigoted characterisations, but you can't stop them, and you can't rework time and decide that it is the chicken that came before the egg.

The problem with RLJ is that it is contagious. If two cyclists are at a red light and one doesn't stop the other can be tempted to do likewise. And then it becomes endemic. I realised this when I started riding in London. I was tempted to jump every light because people kept jumping them too. I talked with a friend about it soon afterwards, and they put me straight, and he was right. Now I stop at all the lights, and actually I think (purely anecdotal) that other cyclists seem to stop if I stop too.