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.





















105 thoughts on “Is it ever acceptable to ride through a red light? One London cyclist explains why he thinks it is (+ video)”
Hmm. In as much as I concede
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.
STiG911 wrote:
No car driver
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
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.
DominicC wrote:Yeah my
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.
STiG911 wrote:the main thing
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.
STiG911 wrote:he main thing
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.
“In those circumstances it
“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.
Carlton Reid
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.
Carlton Reid
Jaywalking is an offence in Northern Ireland (still part of the UK)
http://www.psni.police.uk/fixed_penalty_offence_codes
noizebox wrote:Carlton Reid
That I didn’t know. Gulp.
Carlton Reid wrote:noizebox
That I didn’t know. Gulp.— Carlton Reid
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’
As a rule, I don’t go through
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.
Is operation Safeway just
Is operation Safeway just targeting cyclists or does it target those breaking the advanced stop line rules as well?
atgni wrote:Is operation
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.
atgni wrote:Is operation
Lots of trucks have been pulled over and checked in previous stages of Safeway, and other drivers fined for using mobiles.
What are you supposed to do
What are you supposed to do when you arrive at a set of lights that don’t react to the existence of a bike?
There is usually another
There is usually another option to either sitting on the left of the left lane or between the lanes, and that is to take a lane as if you were a car, the downside to that is of course being stuck in the traffic and not able to filter.
Get off, shoulder the bike
Get off, shoulder the bike and run around the corner and over the log obstacle…oh sorry wrong discipline.
Get off, shoulder the bike
Get off, shoulder the bike and run around the corner and over the log obstacle…oh sorry wrong discipline.
The last time I jumped a red
The last time I jumped a red was for my own safety: an HGV had overshot and was, wrongly, in the bike box. I waited in front but realised that the driver couldn’t see me at all and I risked getting flattened when the lights changed. For this reason I waited until the cross traffic had cleared and I went. It would have been extremely dangerous for me to wait in front of the HGV.
I’ve watched the video twice
I’ve watched the video twice and I can’t spot him running a red light…. he just seems to go with (and be in) the flow of traffic.
More to the point what horrible conditions to cycle in! I gues you get used to it but that just looks terrifying. How the hell is a bike box going to help in those circumstances!
P3t3 wrote:I’ve watched the
The cyclist with the camera isn’t the one who got ticketed (you can see him with the police officer to the right, just by McDonald’s)
And there I was hoping that
And there I was hoping that the video would give me some insight into the kind of situations where some cyclists believe it’s safer to jump a red light. But it doesn’t, because the footage isn’t from a rider who runs a red light.
I’m still yet to be persuaded that the safest option isn’t to wait behind the bus, taking the lane, in the situation described. This also happens to be legal. If it isn’t safe to filter, don’t filter, surely?
Does it come down to “if I want to get to my destination as quickly as possible, I have to run red lights to avoid dangerous situations?” Honestly, I would like to understand why this isn’t the case if it isn’t.
Edit: note – I don’t ride in London so perhaps the psychology of negotiating the nasty conditions in the video is important to grasp to “get” this?
DaveE128 wrote:I’m still yet
How do you know it isn’t safe to filter? Often (especially in heavy traffic) you can only ever find out the bike box is blocked AFTER you’ve filtered to it. Build proper infrastructure and the situation disappears.
teaboy wrote:DaveE128
How do you know it isn’t safe to filter? Often (especially in heavy traffic) you can only ever find out the bike box is blocked AFTER you’ve filtered to it. Build proper infrastructure and the situation disappears.— DaveE128
If you build good infrastructure you have the tools to beat the problem. It doesn’t disappear. We’ll still, in lots of situations, be on roads with imperfect driving and imperfect lines of sight.
But what I don’t buy is the idea that just because someone is in the bike box, you have to cross the junction. I either pull in front of the vehicle blocking the box (making a point of being in front of them) or I wait behind them and in front of the vehicle behind. In both cases I take the lane. If there’s a big lorry in the box who wont be able to see me in front of them, I wait behind. It’s not hard. If you really can’t see whether it’s safe to filter, assume it isn’t and don’t. It just isn’t that hard.
step-hent wrote:
But what I
Crossing the line is what’s illegal, it’s no more or less legal to cross the junction once you’ve crossed that line. It might not be ‘hard’ to lake the lane on a road bike, but try it on a loaded utility bike, then try moving off with traffic behind you and see how you feel. Now imagine you need to be in the middle lane at a junction to go straight on, rather than turning left or right. If ALL motor traffic is stopped, and you give way to pedestrians, it will be safer to move through on a red light.
teaboy wrote:step-hent
Sometimes crossing the line is safer.
At the A23/A3 junction at Oval at the end of Brixton Road, it is much safer if you’re on a bike to go way ahead of the ASL and right up to the junction. Yes it’s an offence, but it’s safer for you as you can clear the crossing when the lights change before any motor vehicles come thundering up behind two abreast and try to jam into a single lane due to the bus lane/bus stop.
I went that way home last night from training and pointed this out to the bloke I was with (we were in a motor vehicle). One cyclist had done just that and gone way ahead of the ASL, nearly to the junction. And yes, he was safely across and through the busy bus stop by the time all the cars caught up with him. The cyclists that had waited in the ASL meanwhile had to be careful because of buses pulling out from the stop and the risk of vehicles two abreast at the lights now trying to jam into one lane.
Yes the bloke on the bike broke the law and a cop could’ve fined him for it. But that’s rather ridiculous seeing as how he was increasing his own safety and also reducing any effect he might have of slowing motor traffic at a busy junction. He did exactly as I used to when I commuted that way.
teaboy wrote:step-hent
I’ve spoken to a few road traffic police in London and they seem relaxed about moving in front of big vehicles if it is unsafe because of encroachment. So do it if you feel unsafe. They’re not so cool if you just RLJ. Most are not doing it to make themselves safe. I do love repeatedly overtaking them on my way to work. Usually I bet them to my destination in any event.
While some people decry the ‘us versus them’ attitude, you won’t get rid of it. But you do make things a bit better if you appear to adhering to the same set of rules that mire the rest of the road users at an average of 12 mph. You are also less likely to run over a pedestrian if you don’t RLJ.
I was pretty annoyed the other day when a cyclist casually swung across my path as I cycled home myself. And I suppose the point is (rightly or wrongly) other road users see the rules there as being for the good of everyone and so when they are abused you do get people tutting ‘well they’re their own worst enemy’….in same way idiots who speed in cars or cut into traffic piss off other car users.
teaboy wrote:DaveE128
How do you know it isn’t safe to filter? Often (especially in heavy traffic) you can only ever find out the bike box is blocked AFTER you’ve filtered to it. Build proper infrastructure and the situation disappears.— DaveE128
How do you know it isn’t safe to filter? Would any of us seriously think it was OK for a driver to blindly head for a gap that he didn’t know was there until he arrived?
Surely when riding or driving knowing what you are heading into is crucial. Can’t see if the box is clear; then why would you go there?
I ride mainly around Manchester and a fair bit in London over the last few years, I do filter, I overtake, I take the lane. I don’t end to jump red lights unless I’ve got something wrong on the approach.
Last week I passed one cyclist seven times on the way to work, each time after he’d continued through red lights. I can’t be bothered challenging him because I’d get either excuses or abuse and I can happily live without it.
DaveE128 wrote:And there I
Good post Dave. I do cycle in London and I don’t break red lights. Quite often I could with impunity, but the point of traffic signals is to allow the free and safe passage of traffic. Waiting at a red light and giving consideration to all traffic never gets you in any harm – as you say, taking the lane or waiting behind large vehicles because it is not safe to pass (actually I always overtake, as undertaking is generally asking for trouble) does not put you in harms way. The people I see who are at risk are those that blindly and rigidly stick to the left and never look over there shoulder.
While I will admit that there are times when you may find that once at the front of a queue you end up in a dangerous position and it is therefore safer to pull forward or just move on from the junction, this is rare and usually about as much a case of bad judgement by the cyclist as it is the lorry/truck/bus driver who is sitting in the ASL – you can always sit and wait and in most cases in London the traffic does not move much faster than the cyclists anyway.
RLJ sets a bad example, and if you (and everyone else) follows the rules accidents would be fewer. The problem with the bad example is that novices sees this behaviour and emulate it without the same sense of road awareness. It’s the push for the ASL at junctions which sees them trying to undertake lorries, buses and tipper trucks with disastrous consequences not realising what they are tangling with, because they see the mad dash for the box.
DaveE128 wrote:
I’m still yet
I’ve some sympathy with this, often justifications for RLJing sound like they’re basically saying “After I’d forced my way to the front rather than taking the lane a few cars back, I found I was in a sticky spot so then I had to go on red.” I certainly see plenty of people putting themselves in situations where they’ve really no option but to go before the lights change, and it’s usually to effectively save a few seconds.
So I think it’s sometimes a bit disingenuous to suggest that these situations are totally outside the control of the cyclist- see also going to sit directly in front of a truck cab in an ASL.
I suspect a lot of people on here would think an excuse along the lines of “once I’d done X I had to do Y” was pretty flimsy if we heard it from a driver, and would have a rather obvious retort.
That said, like DaveE128 I don’t ride in London and I’m happy to concede that there might be lots of places where there’s not much other option.
DaveE128 wrote:
Agreed, I can’t understand why he didn’t just wait behind the bus either. I don’t cycle in London either but to me it seems that the speed and impatience of life is the problem especially in the cities.
Cycling through Leeds I have
Cycling through Leeds I have caught up with many RLJ’ers and not one of them RLJ for their health, it was for speed and convenience, some don’t even check for oncoming traffic and I often pull them once I catch up with them.
It bloody annoys me when it gets to the stage that Peds and drivers say “Them lot give you lot a bad name”… What do you say to that.
Leodis wrote:Cycling through
I tell the motorists that the 21000 deaths and serious injurys caused by drivers give them a bad name.
the downside to that is of
No, you are traffic.
It’s never OK to jump a red
It’s never OK to jump a red light. You should be reading the traffic situation ahead. If it’s safe to filter into the ASB, then do it. Otherwise take the lane and wait like other traffic. It’ll cost you a maximum of 10 extra seconds.
And, in my experience around London, 99% of RLJers are NOT doing it to be safe.
MikeOnABike wrote:in my
Yup, mine too.
MikeOnABike wrote:It’s never
WRONG
If jumping the light is the safest option then that is what you should do. That junction cycled through at the start of the video is not the place to get stuck in an awkward position, it is a dangerous junction and I would put my life 1st and the law 2nd every time.
If you feel you life is at risk then f*** the law, get yourself somewhere safe.
Quote:It’s never OK to jump a
The red light opposite my place of work will not operate when a bicycle rides up to it, so I would have to wait for a car to come along. I can see for a minimum of 2 km in all three directions.
It’s OK…
Crikey, if you reported this
Crikey, if you reported this to the local highways authority I’d like to know what the response was.
crikey wrote:Quote:It’s never
There’s a junction I have to use if I want to head South from my house where the lights won’t switch for a cyclist. I frequently jump it because otherwise I’d be waiting all day for a car to appear behind me or across from me. I read something somewhere that said if the lights are triggered by the presence of a car then as far as a cyclist is concerned the lights can be treated as not working, and it then falls to you to use your common sense to determine when to enter the junction.
crikey wrote:Quote:It’s never
Have you tried glueing a small neodynium magnet to either the sole of your shoe, or your bb shell? That should sort it. I’ve yet to find a light I can’t trigger.
I haven’t and am unlikely to;
I haven’t and am unlikely to; I ride the junction at about 6:50 am and am more than happy to run the light given the visibility. I do think that casual red light running is a bad thing, but there are occasions when it’s ok.
Came through this junction
Came through this junction this evening and the police seem to have taken up a different position. Rather than waiting around the corner in a ‘poaching’ position to pull cyclists. Tonight two officers were right at the ASL itself. No doubt ready to issue FPN’s to any vehicle entering the ASL in an illegal fashion.
This had the effect that when I fitered up to the lights the ASL was clear for cyclists to enter and safely await a green light.
Evo Lucas wrote:Came through
Funny how that has an effect doesn’t it! Complete lack of enforcement is the real issue. I cycle through Lewisham a lot and they quite often have plastic police there. This morning… no cops…motorist ignores me and actually drives at me whilst I’m dead central in the ASL box.
It still confuses me why cyclist only green lights are never mentioned. I was in Cambridge a couple of months ago and saw them in use there at a couple of the major junctions. They could have a transformative effect in the very heavy traffic central London junctions giving cyclists that crucial extra 10 seconds to get out and away ahead of the traffic or to make the right hand turn. Probably pretty cheap to retro fit to existing infrastructure.
Evo Lucas wrote:Tonight two
That seems to be happening on the Farringdon Road – Clerkenwell Road junction at the moment. There have been cops on it the last few mornings and it’s about the only clear ASL I pass through.
Ha!- That happened to me the other day on the junction of York Way and Copenhagen Street. I was sat on the top tube* waiting for the lights and the cnut behind me started creaping forward and ran straight into me.
* Don’t worry, it’s not a carbon bike. 😉
catfordrichard wrote:
It
They can’t be retro-fitted to certain types of lights (or possibly not at all – not clear). You need modern controllers, or so is my understanding. The ones in Cambridge were installed when the traffic lights were completely replaced, and a couple of days ago another set went in on Castle St on same basis.
But it’s also important to remember that advance greens do nothing for you if lights are already green: you will still have difficulty getting into a right-turn position, and you will still have the problem of left-hooks. Also possible that where there are many cyclists, the advance green isn’t long enough for everyone to clear the junction.
Hate to jump a light, hate
Hate to jump a light, hate people who do so..that was my initial comment, then I thought about that junction and realised I too have jumped a bit early on that one. Teacher, rule follower, still alive cyclist!
Got pulled for jumping a
Got pulled for jumping a light last week but managed to reason with the officer, my logic was sound so I got off without being ticketed
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25NBwqoB478
there is clear differences
there is clear differences between
Bad – Riding though a red light and across opposing streams of traffic that have the green. Don’t do it
OK(ish) – carefully jumping a red when the sensors do not detect you. I have a handful of these and try to avoid. If I cannot I try to judge the sequence and ride carefully across and be ready to stop/sprint as necessary
Ok – Stopping slightly ahead of the line to give a “better” position when the lights change. This is what ASLs do and what it sounds like the guy in the article did. Vehicles do this ALL the time. Not strictly legal but can be a good defensive technique
OK – riding across a red pedestrian/cycle signal on a crossing with no traffic. Everybody does this on foot or on wheels. anyone who says they don’t is a fibber
The key to all of these is that the risk is with the rider, not with any driver in the event of a collision – They just get inconvenienced and some scratched paint. I’d much rather see attention to amber-gambling motorists as they are a much bigger source of danger to every road user
stopping ahead of the line is
stopping ahead of the line is something I always do as to give the car/lorry etc behind the max chance of seeing you.
But I have stood in London and watched many cyclists and I have to say many simply ignore the road rules which is why some many motorists down there get angry and in many cases rightly so.
I have cycled in London for
I have cycled in London for many years. Very frequently between 1995 to 2008, when I commuted to work every day, much less often since then, as we moved out to the country.
I must confess, for the first part of the time living in London, if the roads were quiet I would often run red lights. I basically approached junctions in a pedestrian, not motorist mindset. If it was safe to go, I’d go.
Whereas, in a car, if the light was red, I would never go.
Certainly, at that time, I think that was a prevalent attitude amongst cyclists.
I now believe, very strongly, that it was very very, and dangerously, wrong. Not dangerous to me, when I jumped the reds, as I only did so when it was safe, but dangerous to others because it provokes the hate response in non-cycling motorists.
A key element- probably the key element- in safety for cyclists is having all road users feel they belong to a single tribe of road users, rather than a tribal war between cyclists and motorists. (For the same reason, I fear that many of the YouTube-ing cyclists may be damaging rather than helping the cause.)
If the law applies to you, therefore, you have to follow it.
It is bloody frustrating, in a way, but I now resolutely sit at the red light when there is nothing in sight in any direction.
If I feel there is any danger at a junction, I get off and become a pedestrian for that junction. (Similarly, if the sensors don’t detect you, become a pedestrian.)
Should I have to do that? No, of course not. The infrastructure should be improved, and drivers should be more considerate.
But, we are where we are, the world is at it is, etc. Jumping red lights on “safety” grounds will make the city less safe for cyclists generally, because it will piss drivers off. And I don’t want to be near the pissed off driver of a 1 to 2 tonne killing machine if he is pissed off with the whole cycling tribe.
if people in vehicles are
if people in vehicles are annoyed with cyclists as a group, theyll be annoyed whether we all stop at red lights or not, theyll just pick the next excuse for disliking us off their irrational list of things they dont like, some motorists moan when cyclists are filtering because they see it are queue jumping for gawd sake. its not a rational debate so its false to believe that attitude will change.
if the lights are already red, absolutely dont jump them, but if the lights are changing, I dont think its always the safe option to stop,even if I know Ill only be at best only halfway across some of the big junctions with them now at red, do motorists consider that cycling RLJ,almost certainly.
but if drop the anchors and stop, Ive got to be pretty sure the vehicle behind me will also stop,because Ive had it happen several times where the lights have changed, Ive been able to stop quite quickly, but the car following closely behind,no doubt complaining behind the wheel I was getting in there way, chose not to stop, and ends up close pass overtaking and scaring the hell out of all concerned, or panics madly to do an emergency stop, and then moans at me for stopping instead.
I have several times had cars either bump into my back wheel when Ive been in prime, or nuzzle my leg as I like to call it when Im not, because I had clearly unreasonably chosen to follow the rules of the road and stop when Im supposed to.
so whilst appeasing the irrational cyclist dislikers by not red light jumping and technically following the rules, so that I can instead be wiped out by the vehicular amber gamblers or those whose only driving style around cyclists is always must overtake, seems abit like hobsons choice to me.
10 metre ASLs enforced by
10 metre ASLs enforced by cameras or a separate signal phase for cyclists at any junction over a certain traffic level or allow cyclists to treat red lights as give way.
Fining cyclists for running red lights and pavement cycling sends the wrong message to police, casual and potential cyclists and more importantly to drivers.
Once we have 95% of all casual motorists and 100% of all commercial motorists driving without any at fault incidents then we should start looking at improving the behaviour of cyclists and other vulnerable users – let he who is without sin cast the first stone!
I have thought about that,
I have thought about that, and I’m not sure if I would get the same issue with a steel or alloy bike, but it’s not enough of an issue to make me bother about it.
Like I said, I don’t agree with jumping reds as a general rule but there are the odd occasions with good visibility and very quiet roads when I do it.
(Edit; a glance on the net suggests that magnets don’t work?)
Looks like the Metropolitan
Looks like the Metropolitan police have changed their positions at this junction http://youtu.be/Xhlp3WoZM3A
The analysis is fine as to
The analysis is fine as to why it might be safer to do it than not, but I have heard drivers say similar things about some speed limits and speed when overtaking and why they thought it was safet to encroach on a lined area.
I don’t agree with the conclusion. If you can’t take up the bike box position because it has been encroached by someone breaking the rules that doesn’t entitle you then to brak another one
The simplest and safest way is to join the queue of traffic in the lane. That enables you to do everthing a bike box did. You move off in the lane of traffic and keep your position until the opportunity to move safely to secondary arises.
It is pretty simple to follow.
Now having said that the police ought to have bigger fish to fry and my observation is that there are plenty of things that get the Nelson treatment that are far more serious.
How many Londoners were
How many Londoners were killed because they jumped a red light?
How many were crushed to death by constructions vehicles because they didn’t jump a red light.
Jumping red lights can save lives.
kie7077 wrote:How many
How many of those were riding up the inside of a large vehicle that is about to turn left?
I saw a very close one at 7.30 this morning at the Kingsway/High Holborn junction where a tipper truck was indicating left and had a pretty loud “stay clear this vehicle is turning left” audible warning but a cyclist wearing earphones shot straight up the left side of the lorry to go straight on at the junction. Today he got away with it, tomorrow he might not.
AC wrote:kie7077 wrote:How
How many of those were riding up the inside of a large vehicle that is about to turn left?
I saw a very close one at 7.30 this morning at the Kingsway/High Holborn junction where a tipper truck was indicating left and had a pretty loud “stay clear this vehicle is turning left” audible warning but a cyclist wearing earphones shot straight up the left side of the lorry to go straight on at the junction. Today he got away with it, tomorrow he might not.— kie7077
So your point is that if he hadn’t gone through the red light after he had done inside the lorry (quite legally, probably on a cycle lane leading to a ASZ), then he would have been in danger? So in this situation it’s fine to RLJ?
might be quite legal to go up
might be quite legal to go up the cycle lane to the advances stop box, but if you are not certain of making the asl before the lights change then wait behind.
Still no need to go through red though because if I am in the ASZ when the lights change, no way will the tipper truck match my acceleration
but really what we need is simultaneous green for all cyclist in all directions while all motor vehicle lights are red at all these dangerous junctions
wycombewheeler wrote:
Still
Until your chain comes off as you shift down gears coming up to the light, and don’t notice until you try to pull away. Squish.
Bikebikebike
So why put yourself there? Why not stay behind the truck?
wycombewheeler wrote:might be
But what about when you are certain that you can reach the ASL before the lights change, in plenty of time, in fact, and do so, but when you get there its full of motor vehicles who couldn’t get across the junction on the last cycle (no pun intended) and there’s no room for you there?
wycombewheeler
[[[[[ Wow! That’s hilarious—and perhaps followed by simultaneous green lights for all motor vehicles in all directions YouTube heaven! I can’t wait.
P.R.
PhilRuss wrote:wycombewheeler
[[[[[ Wow! That’s hilarious—and perhaps followed by simultaneous green lights for all motor vehicles in all directions YouTube heaven! I can’t wait.
P.R.— wycombewheeler
They exist already. A couple of relatively new crossings on my commute are simultaneous green across all legs. for cyclists and pedestrians. Works well.
PhilRuss wrote:wycombewheeler
[[[[[ Wow! That’s hilarious—and perhaps followed by simultaneous green lights for all motor vehicles in all directions YouTube heaven! I can’t wait.
P.R.— wycombewheeler
Standard in netherlands. Also not uncommon for lights to allow all pedestrians to go at once. Only motor vehicles really need to take turns as they are not good and sharing.
wycombewheeler wrote:PhilRuss
[[[[[ Wow! That’s hilarious—and perhaps followed by simultaneous green lights for all motor vehicles in all directions YouTube heaven! I can’t wait.
P.R.— PhilRuss
Standard in netherlands. Also not uncommon for lights to allow all pedestrians to go at once. Only motor vehicles really need to take turns as they are not good and sharing.— wycombewheeler
[[[[[ In the Netherlands (capital “N”, innit?), 90% of urban riders situpandbeg at about 7mph and cooperate with each other, rather than zoom about like we do here in GB. But you’re right about pedestrians—2mph really is scary stuff.
P.R.
Bikebikebike wrote:AC
How many of those were riding up the inside of a large vehicle that is about to turn left?
I saw a very close one at 7.30 this morning at the Kingsway/High Holborn junction where a tipper truck was indicating left and had a pretty loud “stay clear this vehicle is turning left” audible warning but a cyclist wearing earphones shot straight up the left side of the lorry to go straight on at the junction. Today he got away with it, tomorrow he might not.— AC
So your point is that if he hadn’t gone through the red light after he had done inside the lorry (quite legally, probably on a cycle lane leading to a ASZ), then he would have been in danger? So in this situation it’s fine to RLJ?— kie7077
Apologies, I didn’t mean to imply that he jumped the red, he went up the inside of a left turning tipper and went straight ahead thus putting himself in very real danger. There’s no cycle lane there.
@AC
True enough, I don’t
@AC
True enough, I don’t habitually jump red lights like some, I just object to the idea that we should all strictly follow rules that were put in place to control motor vehicles and the strange philosophy that legal = moral and illegal = immoral.
The real key to less deaths is of course better equipment and education of both drivers and cyclists. But as the video shows, what the police are doing is a waste of time and sometimes counter-productive to cyclists safety.
@kie7077
on that specific
@kie7077
on that specific junction I completely agree that the police being there is mostly pointless especially as they seem to target cyclists yet ignore cars/vans/buses/lorries that block the various bits of the junction beyond the lights.
AC wrote:How many of those
Here’s a video from yesterday of someone doing just that at the exact same junction where a rider was killed last week.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmAVycQX1lE&feature=youtu.be
Note that the cyclist squeezes up the left of the lorry, which is indicating left, but later on you see that at the junction she was actually turning right. Dangerous as hell, and she probably had no idea.
Having once been just behind a rider who almost ended up under a skip lorry in exactly those circumstances – the driver saw her at the very last second and slammed the brakes on – you do wonder just how to get the messsage across.
Simon_MacMichael wrote:AC
Scary stuff. No helmet either. Not that it would have made a great deal of difference if the truck had hit her.
Simon_MacMichael wrote:AC
through social media etc and people like that rider trying to warn them. That is just stupid at the extreme and is simply down to common sense nothing else.
The person I feel sorry for there is the truck driver who would have no idea they did that until he saw them pass him.
ianrobo
through social media etc and people like that rider trying to warn them. That is just stupid at the extreme and is simply down to common sense nothing else.
The person I feel sorry for there is the truck driver who would have no idea they did that until he saw them pass him.— AC
OK it’s daft to do this.
But… it’s the driver’s responsibility not to run you over if he’s turning left. If he pulls off and turns left without looking properly in his mirrors then it’s his fault. Obviously the cyclist wouldn’t have been there if they hadn’t come up on the inside. But it’s still the driver’s responsibility to look.
The comments on here seem to imply it’s your own fault if you go up the inside of a stationary lorry, and then it turns left and kills you. Which it isn’t: it’s the driver’s fault for not looking. Please remember that.
The point should be that infrastructure should be protecting people from situations like this. Having a moment of poor judgement should not mean you end up dead.
Bikebikebike wrote:But…
Anecdote warning: this morning I was cycling in to work through Clifton in Bristol, having come over the Suspension Bridge. Nice wide(-ish) road, daylight, clear views/visibility. I approach the junction with Observatory Road, which is on my left. Woman approaches said junction in small hatchback to come out onto the road I’m on. She stops. Looks both ways (I saw her). Then she pulls out in front of me and turns right, so close that I had to actually stop rather than ride into her door.
Sometimes people just don’t look. And sometimes people don’t see what they are looking at.
Bikebikebike wrote:
The point
correct the infrastructure should be in place but where it is not then common sense should prevail surely ? Surely your own life is more valuable than cutting off a couple of seconds ?
Simple rule expect people not to look and do not chance it, the bloke on the bike was spot o with his comments about those idiots.
Bikebikebike wrote:…The
I’ve quoted this out of context, obvious why.
Bikebikebike wrote:
The
Also the drivers fault if the fail to stop at zebra crossing or pedestrian crossing showing red light/green man. Do you just step out when the green man appears or do you look and make sure the car is actually stopping?
Their fault, but your life. Assume there are 29million idiots sharing the roads with you and act accordingly.
Bikebikebike wrote:OK it’s
I don’t think anyone is saying may be the cyclist’s fault; but going up the inside of a large vehicle that is clearly indicating to turn left is putting yourself in a position of danger you wouldn’t be in if you held back.
Whatever the rights and wrongs are – we have had a cyclist/HGV driver on here before saying how difficult it is to check eight sets of mirrors – it seems clear that we really have to get the point across for people on bikes not to put themselves in a position where they are relying on whether or not they have been spotted.
30 or 40 years ago, when we had a couple of TV channels, a public information film between BBC programmes would have done the trick.
Nowadays, in a much more fragmented media landscape (and one in which the cyclists who may be most in need in having this pointed out to them are not people who will be visiting cycling-specific websites) it is far more difficult to reach them.
ianrobo
through social media etc and people like that rider trying to warn them. That is just stupid at the extreme and is simply down to common sense nothing else.
The person I feel sorry for there is the truck driver who would have no idea they did that until he saw them pass him.— AC
Let’s agree it was silly riding, and that given the current design of truck it would have been horrible for the driver. But it really cannot be that hard to design tipper trucks without blind spots. Surely this has to be the correct solution.
oldstrath wrote:ianrobo
— ianrobo
Let’s agree it was silly riding, and that given the current design of truck it would have been horrible for the driver. But it really cannot be that hard to design tipper trucks without blind spots. Surely this has to be the correct solution.— Simon_MacMichael
I’m not going to disagree for a moment that the two cyclists were stupid to go up the inside of that truck, but I don’t think the driver is necessarily blameless here. The truck passed these two cyclists while approaching a junction on a red light, and then inevitably blocked their way. It had barely passed them before it needed to brake, pull left and stop. Sure, that doesn’t justify them doing what they did to get to the front, but if HGV drivers are actually serious about stopping killing cyclists then they need to cut out this sort of MGIF rubbish and actually hang back and not pass cyclists when coming up to a junction or obstruction.
Oh. My. God.
Oh. My. God. ~X(
I don’t cycle in London very
I don’t cycle in London very often but I do use the Holborn area as a pedestrian pretty much every day and the Procter St/HH junction is one that I loathe.
The junction is awful at the best of times but ever since the powers that be removed the traffic light pole on the far side of it (outside Itsu) it has become even worse because traffic coming down Procter St no longer has a set of lights directly ahead of it and this, coupled with the large amount of scaffolding on the corner of Procter St mostly blocking the lights on that side it’s no wonder that it’s become a bit of a free for all.
Traffic coming down Procter St passes the lights, realises too late that they’re changing, daren’t block the box junction so just stops either in the ASL or across the pedestrian crossing. This leads to cyclists weaving (sometimes slowly, sometimes not) through the stationary traffic to get ahead of it and pedestrians weaving between the vehicles to get across the road. The whole junction is a bloody menace and could do with a major rethink.
Do I think it’s ok for cyclists to jump red lights? Yes, if there is no other traffic around, good visibility and it’s safe for everyone then why not. On a busy road at peak times of the day? Absolutely not.
As for me, I’ll be back on a bike after surgery has fixed the damage sustained to my knee when I was hit by a cyclist jumping Procter Street reds at full speed…
AC wrote:
Do I think it’s ok
So it is OK to take the risks and break the law, does this apply to any road user then and their own judgement ?
on your last comment, you
on your last comment, you have any evidence to support that ?
Motorists get annoyed by
Motorists get annoyed by cyclists “weaving in and out of traffic” just as much as RJLing. So I hope those piously waiting at the red lights also don’t do any filtering, as that also annoys car drivers, who are then more likely to run cyclists over. Also I hope they don’t wear lycra, as that also seems to annoy motorists. Or ride two abreast. Or ride in primary. Or have flashing lights. Or not wear hi-viz plus helmet. Or wear a helmet cam. Or not use a cycle lane if it’s there. Or be on the road at all.
Do any of those things, and you’re effectively killing other cyclists. You bastards.
Tool. I hope the FPN was
Tool. I hope the FPN was large. You can’t say I did it cos they do it as well or others are doing worse things or it makes me safe. If he don’t like the rules then don’t use the roads. Rules are for everyones’ safety.
At the start the head cammer Evo Lucas nearly went up the side of the lorry that had started to move to the right just in front of him. OMG! He would have been crushed. He needs to be more patient.
I don’t need to jump red
I don’t need to jump red lights.
I enjoy the training effect of constant stop/start whilst I commute, it provides another type of workout compared to a steady road ride!
If I find myself at a dangerous junction, and I feel unsafe whilst the lights are red? It takes less than a second to dismount, and walk the bike across the junction, or push it up onto the pavement and walk along the pavement then through the junction. Its a great way to safely clear a large complex junction whilst the pedestrian lights are all showing green.
Operation Safeway or whatever its called? Yesterday morning I saw groups of 3-4 Police at some of the key junctions on my cycle commute, in each instance as I passed they were busy talking to each other with their backs or sides to the road, not even facing the road or paying attention.
Outside Kings Cross station, 5 Police officers were talking to a tourist who had an I-Pad and paper map. Behind them was extremely heavy traffic with buses and HGV mixed with cars and cyclists, and motorists wilfully driving into the bicycle box of the ASL whilst the Police were talking to the tourist. How many Police are needed to talk to 1 person?
The only Police officer I saw paying attention was a guy sitting on his motorbike next to Aldgate tube station, watching the traffic.
On the other side of the road from him, were 3 Police officers with their backs to the road (facing a billboard), having a nice conversation about something! Waste of time/money…
hampstead_bandit wrote:The
Need more PCs on motorbikes, and pedal bikes… they get it.
So I take it that it is OK to
So I take it that it is OK to go through a red light if you are in a car, in a van, bus, lorry or on a motorcycle. The rider could easily have avoided it if he had been thinking ahead.
It works to go through on red in France and the USA where you are allowed to do so to turn right IF SAFE, but here it is still illegal and he deserved the punishment.
Just because we cycle doesn’t mean we have to all agree to break the law.
Yeah, you don’t just “find
Yeah, you don’t just “find yourself” in a position where you have to jump the lights.
You can not design everything
You can not design everything out and yes in ideal world it would be. However until then then plain common sense works ?
ianrobo wrote:You can not
You cannot, but the usual principle is to design out as much aspossible, andif this isn’t possible I’d be amazed.
I am sure it is but comes
I am sure it is but comes down to cost. However we are where we are now and surely it is inherent on a cyclist to take note of that and mitigate against the risks ?
Well the last two days I have
Well the last two days I have seen one cyclist jump the lights whilst driving and today on my ride the group in front did at the very start of the ride.
I have informed both clubs of this on twitter and for Stourbridge and Stafford who I have enjoyed riding with it is a shame cyclists do this and frankly I am pissed off at them as they give us all a bad name.
THE ORIGINAL SIN.
THE ORIGINAL SIN.
was requiring cyclist to pretend they are motor vehicles,and adhere to motor traffic signs and regulations.This mindlesness continues to to fraustrate traffic
with tragic conseqencies.After thousends of miles cycling here, their, and everywhere, it dawned on me that the only appropriate regulation for the bicycle is that it -should be ridden at all times with due care and attention-.
THE ORIGINAL SIN.
THE ORIGINAL SIN.
was requiring cyclist to pretend they are motor vehicles,and adhere to motor traffic signs and regulations.This mindlesness continues to to fraustrate traffic
with tragic conseqencies.After thousends of miles cycling here, their, and everywhere, it dawned on me that the only appropriate regulation for the bicycle is that it -should be ridden at all times with due care and attention-.
THE ORIGINAL SIN.
THE ORIGINAL SIN.
was requiring cyclist to pretend they are motor vehicles,and adhere to motor traffic signs and regulations.This mindlesness continues to to fraustrate traffic
with tragic conseqencies.After thousends of miles cycling here, their, and everywhere, it dawned on me that the only appropriate regulation for the bicycle is that it -should be ridden at all times with due care and attention-.
if we use the road we should
if we use the road we should be subject to the same rules, what makes us special on early sunday morning that means some of you think u can jump red lights ?
Quote:if we use the road we
Um, because if I don’t, I have to wait 5 minutes for a car to come along to activate the lights, yet I can see for 2 kilometres in all three directions.
I’ll be jumping that red, thanks.
so what is wrong with
so what is wrong with waiting, why the rush, you are breaking the law and hope you get caught.
People like you cause the resentment some of us have had from motorists and rightly so.
actually the lights in my example changed within 20 seconds of those going through …
ianrobo wrote:so what is
Really? wait an indeterminate time because the road infrastructure will only detect cars or larger? Waiting one to two minutes for a normal cycle of the lights is one thing, but if the lights are not going to change without a car happening along that is something else? what if the lights are broken? should everyone wait there until they are fixed?
Quote:People like you cause
Don’t be a dick; would you suggest all motorists should be labelled because some of them run cyclists over?
If the transport system isn’t geared up to detect cyclists it isn’t working, I’m part of that transport system, and if it’s not working for me, I’ll make it work by ignoring the faulty bits.
I’ve already said that the casual disregard for red lights by cyclists is wrong, but there are occasions when it is ok; this is one.
so this was OK when life was
so this was OK when life was not in danger ?
Crikey it makes no sense we want everyone on the road to obey the rules surely, so OK for cars to go when it is ‘clear’ on red then ?