Cyclists who never stop for red lights

But Crazy-legs, you’re
But Crazy-legs, you’re talking sense and haven’t you noticed that’s not allowed in this black & white holier-than-thou thread?

RLJ is not as cut and dried
RLJ is not as cut and dried as some on here are making it out to be.

There’s a massive difference between slipping carefully through a quiet set of lights just as they turn amber or “anticipating” a green light by 3 seconds to blasting through a 4-lane junction in heavy traffic.

There are a number of reasons why someone might jump a set of lights. One reason is undoubtedly impatience (a feeling of “I’m on a bike, I can get away with it) but then you get that with pedestrians running across a road on a red man as well and I bet no-one ever points at them and says they’re “giving all pedestrians a bad name” or that they’re not paying road tax or any of the other shit people come out with…

One reason is safety. There are a number of junctions on my commute where I will “anticipate” my green light or where I might not stop as they go to amber because I know that the 4 cars behind me are all going to run it too – for me to stop would result in me being mown down by drivers also RLJing.

I deal with each road situation in terms of a priority list:
1) my safety
2) the law
Where it is safer for me to RLJ (in it’s more “minor” forms of anticipating, I never blast through regardless) or riding for a brief stretch on a pavement, I will do that. There’s one section on my commute where I use the pavement for about 10m to avoid a very nasty pinch point/turn; otherwise I almost never pavement ride.

To be honest, I see so much illegal, irresponsible driving every single day that I’ve given up caring. Every commute, I reckon on probably 25% of drivers using their phones. Plenty of speeding, RLJing, lack of indicators, misted windows (especially at this time of year), not using lights, blocking ASLs and yellow box junctions…

Frankly, my minor indiscretions pale into insignificance against that and as I said, I ride for my safety first.

RLJers: The answer is
RLJers: The answer is blindingly obvious – leave ’em to it; they’ll invariably suffer most in a collision and evolution will see to it that those who do not learn their lesson no longer contribute to the Gene Pool…quod erat demonstrandum.

notfastenough wrote:I don’t

notfastenough wrote:

I don’t just blast through red lights, but there is one junction (actually it’s a big super-junction of three sets of lights – Parrswood in Didsbury, Manchester) where I pre-empt the green if I’m going north because the aggression of drivers there can be crazy. They want to race because they think they’ll get through the other lights, but they can’t, they’re timed to prevent that, but if I wait I get close passes all over the shop. If I go as soon as the other direction has turned red, it works out better.

The only other time I do this is for the single-lane two-way controls that you get at roadworks – if I wait then I end up getting beeped for only travelling at 20mph through the roadworks.

[waits to be called ar*ehole]

You are a disgrace, dragging the name of all cyclists through the mud. Road-rage from drivers toward cyclists is totally, completely, all your fault!….LOL.

Mate, I respect your honesty, in the midst of all these do-gooder comments. I too jump the odd light / wait at junction well forward of the stop line. I do it for my own safety. At the end of the day I have a responsibility to come home to my wife and kids alive.

A little anecdote : on a
A little anecdote : on a French cyclists’ forum, someone posted a video to prove one could bike in Paris without jumping red lights and still go fast from one point to another. He keeps on claiming not to jump red lights, and that those who do so give cyclists a bad image. He posted that video specifically on that topic.

Believe it or not : 5 minutes in the video, we could see him jumping a pedestrian red light at full speed – when the bicycle lane follows the zebra to cross the street, obviously if it’s red, it’s red for pedestrians as well as for cyclists – the fine for the cyclist in such a case is actually the same as for a jumping a trafic light in the French law. His explanation : he saw the colours of the trafic lights, and there was no way a car could have cut his path, and still to this day he still thinks it doesn’t really count as “jumping a red light”.

Then, 15 minutes later, he accelerates when a trafic light ahead turns orange, and then jumps this orange light that was most probably 1 second from being red. He admits it, but he says it’s a problem far less serious than jumping a red light. The fine is still the same in the law though !

So if someone who strongly claims not to jump lights keeps on actually jumping them, even when he films himself and shares the result, then, maybe it’s quite a strong tendency to fight against… Isn’t the solution to simply allow cyclists to jump then and let them judge if they can ? Right now, more and more in Paris, cyclists can “jump” red lights that have some special signs : you can turn on the right, or go ahead if there is no road on the right (ie : you can continue as long as it doesn’t cross the cars’ path). The zones where these signs are put are getting wider, wider, and the long-term plans are to put them almost everywhere except for the fast and wide streets within Paris.

RLJ is just something the
RLJ is just something the cagers latch onto to divert from their own shortcomings as road users.

Jumping lights is often stupid, and may annoy people.

However, making a possible annoyance somehow equivalent to dangerous driving isn’t helping anything.

A safety orientation necessitates dealing with the causes of injuries, and RLJ is very far down the list.

And you’re right, just because something is illegal doesn’t make it wrong. It’s illegal to criticise the king in Thailand, or drink alcohol in Saudi Arabia. These are arbitrary decisions that have more to do with individuals opinions than any harm. We have quite a number of laws like that here too, such as the illegality of marijuana (I don’t smoke… makes me feel horrible).

If you’re going to discuss laws, it’s very important to understand why they exist to begin with. And “because it’s there” is a weak argument.

HalfWheeler wrote:jacknorell

HalfWheeler wrote:

jacknorell wrote:

HalfWheeler wrote:

RLJs are as clueless and reckless as the worst obnoxious, antisocial drivers on the road.

Both are c**ts; one is of the two wheeled variety, the other is on 4 wheels.

I see you fail to appreciate the distinction between putting oneself at risk, and chosing to put others at risk.

No, I’m recognising that both are parts of the problem not the solution. We can’t insist on driver’s obeying the law but then openly flout the law ourselves (or at the very least condone it) without looking like hypocrites.

With the deaths being entirely one-sided, that moral relativity argument is flawed.

In fact, this isn’t about morals at all, it’s about creating an environment where road users can get to their destination in safety.

HalfWheeler wrote:RLJs are as

HalfWheeler wrote:

RLJs are as clueless and reckless as the worst obnoxious, antisocial drivers on the road.

Both are c**ts; one is of the two wheeled variety, the other is on 4 wheels.

I see you fail to appreciate the distinction between putting oneself at risk, and chosing to put others at risk.