Is it ever okay to ride through a red traffic light? While it is definitely against the law, one London cyclist fined during the Metropolitan Police’s Operation Safeway for doing just that, believes it is if there is no other way of negotiating a junction safely.
Helmet camera user Evo Lucas, who regularly uploads footage to YouTube, was passing the location close to the junction with Procter Street and Holborn where the rider had been stopped, and spoke to him, uploading the footage to the video sharing site afterwards.
The start of the video gives an idea of some of the hazards facing cyclists at that specfic junction - note how Lucas himself, with a car to his right, slows down as a lorry moves across him to take the right hand lane.
The RLJ debate
The rider in question is 30-year-old journalist and author Jack Shenker, who lives in north east London. In an email, he told road.cc that while he didn’t condone reckless jumping of red lights, he did believe ignoring traffic signals was warranted at times on the grounds of safety.
I think the debate over cyclist behaviour in general, and jumping red lights in particular, is a fascinating and important one. For what it's worth, I have seen cyclists jump red lights recklessly, sending pedestrians scattering as they go, just as I've seen road users of every type drive without consideration for others.
But on the whole, my impression is that most cyclists who jump red lights do so because they find themselves at junctions with little provision for cyclists, or where the provisions that have been made for cyclists (bike lanes, bike boxes) have been encroached upon by vehicles, and sometimes – not always, it depends of course on the specific location and circumstances – it feels safer in that situation to get out in front of the traffic, especially when there are no pedestrians or other vehicles moving through the junction, and move off before the lights turn green and everyone gets going.
This is particularly true at junctions where there are several lanes of traffic and vehicles potentially trying to cross over one another as they move off on green (especially when there is another junction ahead, forcing everybody to filter themselves into the correct lanes) – cyclists can easily get caught in the middle of all that tangling if they haven't already got themselves out in front – and at junctions where vehicles are making sharp turns as they move off from the traffic lights.
Cyclist explains why he rode through a red light
Describing yesterday’s incident, he said:
The notorious Holborn junction where I received my ticket yesterday ticks both of those boxes. In my case, as I tried to turn right from Procter Street into High Holborn, I found myself caught on the left hand side behind a bus that was already half-turned at a tight angle and encroaching upon the bike box as it came to a stop at the traffic lights.
I could have waited to the side of the bus, stuck between lines of traffic to my left and right and invisible to the bus's mirrors, and then tried to thread my way across a couple of lanes of heavy traffic on the turn once the lights went green (the left-hand lane at the subsequent High Holborn / Kingsway junction is for turning left onto Kingsway, but I needed to go straight ahead).
Instead, I did what felt safer, and manoeuvred in front of the bus, which put me ahead of the bike box and into the pedestrian crossing area. There were no pedestrians, and no other traffic moving on the junction ahead of me, so before the lights went green I moved off onto High Holborn, and was immediately pulled over by a policeman.
No appeal against fixed penalty notice
He acknowledges that many cyclists would not approve of riding through red lights in any circumstances, and outlined his reasons not to challenge the £50 fixed penalty notice.
I'm sure there will be plenty of people, including some other cyclists, who disagree with that sort of action, and I respect their views – I don't know what the definitive answer is to staying safe in these kind of situations, and I suspect that ultimately each cyclist has to reach their own conclusions several times every day about how best to protect themselves and show courtesy and consideration to others when they're riding through the city.
I won't appeal the penalty, partly because I don't have the time or money, and partly because I've seen far more clear-cut cases where cyclists have technically broken the road rules but were patently in the right and it's those cases we should be concentrating on to win public support and a change in the status quo.
What I do know is that these kinds of dilemmas will crop up for cyclists time and time again as long as we have a road system that fails in so many respects to accommodate different users, including cyclists, and throws them all together at dangerous junctions in the hope that everyone will just sort themselves out.
In those circumstances it always the most vulnerable – cyclists – who end up being harassed, injured or killed; when the system is rigged against you, there will be times when you subvert it to stay alive.
Is Operation Safeway missing its target?
The fine was issued as part of the Metropolitan Police’s Operation Safeway, but Shenker feels that targeting bike riders who are breaking the law as a result of putting their own safety first is missing the point.
The police told me they were blitzing the junction to protect cyclists' safety, but on the whole cyclists who break the rules in a minor way after taking thoughtful action to protect themselves are not a threat to anyone's safety; the merging of heavy goods vehicles on narrow roads with cyclists, crap road and junction design, and politicians who lack the political will to improve the situation – those are the things threatening cyclists' safety, but the police are rarely blitzing them.
What do you think? Should it be allowed for cyclists to ride through red lights in some circumstances? Or does doing so, irrespective of the excuse, simply give people ammunition to use against bike riders? Let us know in the comments.
Help us to fund our site
We’ve noticed you’re using an ad blocker. If you like road.cc, but you don’t like ads, please consider subscribing to the site to support us directly. As a subscriber you can read road.cc ad-free, from as little as £1.99.
If you don’t want to subscribe, please turn your ad blocker off. The revenue from adverts helps to fund our site.
If you’ve enjoyed this article, then please consider subscribing to road.cc from as little as £1.99. Our mission is to bring you all the news that’s relevant to you as a cyclist, independent reviews, impartial buying advice and more. Your subscription will help us to do more.
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
Is operation Safeway just targeting cyclists or does it target those breaking the advanced stop line rules as well?
Well the nice officer I saw yesterday outside Southwark tube station yesterday spoke to the nice young man parked in the green ASL box at the red lights and explained that he should treat it as a box junction and only enter if clear to transit.
No ticket was issued even when a panic ensued as the nice young man in the ASL decided to try and reverse his audi and ignore the cyclists lawfully in the ASL behind him. None of this was worthy of a fine apparently.
But then I don't cycle in London either. I find the points raised by the cyclist valid and worthy of discussion. Whilst I don't like RLJers - I do think that for many of them, its a reaction because they feel threatened by the traffic around them.
If it feels like a war on the roads, then the cyclists will look after themselves - and in some specific situations, I can see that jumping a red light can be safer for them.
Also, I honestly see more cars jump red light than cyclists.
"In those circumstances it always the most vulnerable – cyclists – who end up being harassed, injured or killed; when the system is rigged against you, there will be times when you subvert it to stay alive."
Most vulnerable would be pedestrians, not cyclists.
Pedestrians, of course, run red lights all the time – the little red-man ones, that is. That seems to be accepted socially, and in law. Thankfully, we have no "jay-walking" law in the UK.
Pedestrians, of course, run red lights all the time.
I think if it's perfectly legal (which it is as you point out) then it's a little disingenuous to call it "running" a red light.
STiG911 wrote:
No car driver would ever get away with it...so I don't see why we should.
My response would be that the red lights are only there because of the motorised traffic. Pedestrians would never have traffic lights where two footpaths cross, and the same is true of dedicated cycleways. Cyclists get dumped onto infrastructure which is nowadays very much designed around the requirements of drivers and motor vehicles, and then, to add insult to injury, it means cyclists are legally compelled to act like they're drivers too, judged by the same standards.
Pedestrians, of course, run red lights all the time – the little red-man ones, that is. That seems to be accepted socially, and in law. Thankfully, we have no "jay-walking" law in the UK.
Jaywalking is an offence in Northern Ireland (still part of the UK)
Pedestrians, of course, run red lights all the time – the little red-man ones, that is. That seems to be accepted socially, and in law. Thankfully, we have no "jay-walking" law in the UK.
Jaywalking is an offence in Northern Ireland (still part of the UK)
Pedestrians, of course, run red lights all the time – the little red-man ones, that is. That seems to be accepted socially, and in law. Thankfully, we have no "jay-walking" law in the UK.
Jaywalking is an offence in Northern Ireland (still part of the UK)
It's very rare that someone will get a ticket though for this offense Carlton. Most officers I know - exRUC and current PSNI have never charged/ticketed individuals and know of no other officers who have done so. For some reason govt introduced this way way back before Stormont was dissolved in the 70s. The current setup hasn't even written that particular part of the NI Highways Act out. One friend did have a fellah charged for jaywalking instead of rioting back in the 80s as he knew the guys solicitor would claim he was out 'walking the dog'
Hmm. In as much as I concede that in some circumstances it's better to be safe than risk your life, the main thing for me is that all we're doing is angering and giving more ammunition to the anti-cyclist lobby or car driver (After all, we're all our own worst enemy, deserving to die, right?) by suggesting that we have the right to go through red lights if we feel justified in doing so.
No car driver would ever get away with it (in an ideal world anyway) so I don't see why we should.
It's a toughie.
No car driver would ever get away with it (in an ideal world anyway) so I don't see why we should.
It's a toughie.
Drivers get away with law-breaking all the time, including red-light violations. When they do, they often cause danger to others. When people on bikes do they rarely cause danger to others, whereas there are many situations where obeying the law can cause danger to the rider.
People on bikes should never have to choose between what is legal and what is safe.
Yeah my sentiments exactly.
The bike vs car debate is fueled by intolerance. It is scary at times. The worst a car can experience is a dent and some blood on its paintwork.
It is better to try and keep tolerance and understanding on the road and this is better served by cyclist obeying the rules.
Yeah my sentiments exactly.
The bike vs car debate is fueled by intolerance. It is scary at times. The worst a car can experience is a dent and some blood on its paintwork.
It is better to try and keep tolerance and understanding on the road and this is better served by cyclist obeying the rules.
He who knows when he can fight and when he cannot, will be victorious.
Sun Tzu
ie Obey the rules, play the game, use a camera, stay calm.
the main thing for me is that all we're doing is angering and giving more ammunition to the anti-cyclist lobby or car driver
There is nothing cyclists can do, RLJing is not the problem, if no cyclists did, it would be tax, or filtering, or existing.
The only time i will jump a red is where the light will not change for cyclists, and there are a few lights that simply do not pick up bikes. But this is simply the law says, therefore i can't be arsed with picking and choosing which bits are applicable. I may be odd but i try not to speed even on motorways, try and avoid parking on double yellows etc.
Add new comment
105 comments
Is operation Safeway just targeting cyclists or does it target those breaking the advanced stop line rules as well?
Well the nice officer I saw yesterday outside Southwark tube station yesterday spoke to the nice young man parked in the green ASL box at the red lights and explained that he should treat it as a box junction and only enter if clear to transit.
No ticket was issued even when a panic ensued as the nice young man in the ASL decided to try and reverse his audi and ignore the cyclists lawfully in the ASL behind him. None of this was worthy of a fine apparently.
Lots of trucks have been pulled over and checked in previous stages of Safeway, and other drivers fined for using mobiles.
As a rule, I don't go through red lights (ever)
But then I don't cycle in London either. I find the points raised by the cyclist valid and worthy of discussion. Whilst I don't like RLJers - I do think that for many of them, its a reaction because they feel threatened by the traffic around them.
If it feels like a war on the roads, then the cyclists will look after themselves - and in some specific situations, I can see that jumping a red light can be safer for them.
Also, I honestly see more cars jump red light than cyclists.
"In those circumstances it always the most vulnerable – cyclists – who end up being harassed, injured or killed; when the system is rigged against you, there will be times when you subvert it to stay alive."
Most vulnerable would be pedestrians, not cyclists.
Pedestrians, of course, run red lights all the time – the little red-man ones, that is. That seems to be accepted socially, and in law. Thankfully, we have no "jay-walking" law in the UK.
I think if it's perfectly legal (which it is as you point out) then it's a little disingenuous to call it "running" a red light.
My response would be that the red lights are only there because of the motorised traffic. Pedestrians would never have traffic lights where two footpaths cross, and the same is true of dedicated cycleways. Cyclists get dumped onto infrastructure which is nowadays very much designed around the requirements of drivers and motor vehicles, and then, to add insult to injury, it means cyclists are legally compelled to act like they're drivers too, judged by the same standards.
Jaywalking is an offence in Northern Ireland (still part of the UK)
http://www.psni.police.uk/fixed_penalty_offence_codes
That I didn't know. Gulp.
It's very rare that someone will get a ticket though for this offense Carlton. Most officers I know - exRUC and current PSNI have never charged/ticketed individuals and know of no other officers who have done so. For some reason govt introduced this way way back before Stormont was dissolved in the 70s. The current setup hasn't even written that particular part of the NI Highways Act out. One friend did have a fellah charged for jaywalking instead of rioting back in the 80s as he knew the guys solicitor would claim he was out 'walking the dog'
Hmm. In as much as I concede that in some circumstances it's better to be safe than risk your life, the main thing for me is that all we're doing is angering and giving more ammunition to the anti-cyclist lobby or car driver (After all, we're all our own worst enemy, deserving to die, right?) by suggesting that we have the right to go through red lights if we feel justified in doing so.
No car driver would ever get away with it (in an ideal world anyway) so I don't see why we should.
It's a toughie.
Drivers get away with law-breaking all the time, including red-light violations. When they do, they often cause danger to others. When people on bikes do they rarely cause danger to others, whereas there are many situations where obeying the law can cause danger to the rider.
People on bikes should never have to choose between what is legal and what is safe.
Yeah my sentiments exactly.
The bike vs car debate is fueled by intolerance. It is scary at times. The worst a car can experience is a dent and some blood on its paintwork.
It is better to try and keep tolerance and understanding on the road and this is better served by cyclist obeying the rules.
He who knows when he can fight and when he cannot, will be victorious.
Sun Tzu
ie Obey the rules, play the game, use a camera, stay calm.
There is nothing cyclists can do, RLJing is not the problem, if no cyclists did, it would be tax, or filtering, or existing.
The only time i will jump a red is where the light will not change for cyclists, and there are a few lights that simply do not pick up bikes. But this is simply the law says, therefore i can't be arsed with picking and choosing which bits are applicable. I may be odd but i try not to speed even on motorways, try and avoid parking on double yellows etc.
Completely disagree with this. Even if all cyclists behaved perfectly according to the rules there would still be someone hating them for some reason.
I real feel this collective responsibility meme should be finished off.
Pages