View Full Version : I think this is justified
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bristol/5179058.stm
Too many cyclists think there's one law for them and another for everyone else.
the_runt69
15-07-06, 01:37 PM
Pity they dont do this in London, might stop some of the sensless accidents where cyclists just plow through red lights.
H
Jelster
15-07-06, 01:42 PM
Don't get me started on cyclists.....
.
'bout fuggin' time too :D
I have stuck them on before for it and i get nothing but abuse and the standard "haven't you got anything better to do" line.
Taxi drivers on mobile when they have a fare on board they get a ticket each and every time. fools.
Ch00
What a pr*t! How could he think it was ok to do that?!
Toss*r! :toss:
Gives all riders a bad name :evil:
Spiderman
15-07-06, 02:36 PM
More needs to be done about the ones in London tho. They are a dnager to us and themselves.
Jeez. Cyclists will have to have some form of insurance to be on the road next!
:wink:
Well - I can dream can't I.
Road tax dodging, red light running, accident causing, uninsured freeloaders. :evil:
Spiderman
15-07-06, 02:45 PM
Jeez. Cyclists will have to have some form of insurance to be on the road next!
:wink:
Well - I can dream can't I.
Road tax dodging, red light running, accident causing, uninsured freeloaders. :evil:
I dont see why they shouldnt need insurance if they use the piblic highway... but then again if i'd heard myself say that when i was a kid and could just about afford my puncture repair kit, i'd hate me.
Road tax tho? No way, non poluting and non destructive to the roads in any way.
Road tax tho? No way, non poluting and non destructive to the roads in any way.
What about paying for the upkeep of the bus lanes and the hundreds of miles of cycle lanes that TFL pay for?
Ch00
Peter Henry
15-07-06, 03:57 PM
Mr.Adams appears to be no more than an anal, arrogant twot,I would have fined him more and let his tyres down and nobbled his bell.! :wink:
fizzwheel
15-07-06, 04:03 PM
Road tax tho? No way, non poluting and non destructive to the roads in any way.
What about paying for the upkeep of the bus lanes and the hundreds of miles of cycle lanes that TFL pay for?
Ch00
I've got two motorbikes that need taxing. Why should I have to pay road tax on my push bike as well ?
As for insurance its probably a good idea. IMHO though it just makes more work for an already over stretched police force as it would be the police that have to enforce it.
Spiderman
15-07-06, 04:44 PM
Road tax tho? No way, non poluting and non destructive to the roads in any way.
What about paying for the upkeep of the bus lanes and the hundreds of miles of cycle lanes that TFL pay for?
Ch00
I'd scrap all the cycle lanes tbh, theyre pretty pointless IMHO.
And i would not allow cyclists to use the bus lanes. My commute to work takes me thru some of the "test" lanes for buses/taxis/cycles/m-bikes.
The taxis are total :toss: most days and i dont see why those who can afford them get the best of both worlds that they can be in bus lanes and other lanes too? I'd ban em from the bus lanes when they have passengers.
The cyclists make the buses travel at their speed cos buses find it difficult to overtake them... and the ones that do dont do it too safely either. So i'd get them out the bus lanes too. Dunno where they would go but when i used to cycle all over London there were no cycle lanes and i got to where i was going and i'm still here to tell the tales too.
Then it'd just be m-bikes and buses and thats about right to me. Oh and the deisel the buses drip everywhere :twisted:
So he was the only traffic on the road at 5:55am, but he's so blind he couldn't spot the copper?
It's not like there was anything else to look at. Sounds more like it's a habitual thing at that time of the morning for him to jump the lights if they're red. He should have paid the fine instead of wasting tax payers money.
Do the crime, do the time. Just another symptom of the "not my fault" culture, where very few folk take any responsibilty for their own actions.
Justified still a red light
What a pr*t! How could he think it was ok to do that?!
Toss*r! :toss:
Gives all riders a bad name :evil:
devils advocate mode on, as usual
the same perception is had of bikers who install loud exhausts, speed, and generally behave in an anti-social and dangerous manner on the public highway :)
Saint Matt
15-07-06, 05:47 PM
Cyclists are fun to scare lol. That guy's an idiot though
One of mates was crossing a set of traffic lights last month - he was on foot & the green man was on. A cyclist crashes into him & the cyclist was a copper who then tried to charge him with assault! Luckily there were other witnesses that said the copper was in the wrong but my mate had to fill out various forms & speak to a bobby dealing with the case etc. He was quite distressed at the arrogance of the lycra-clad fetishist!
Bloody cyclists. Complete menace & in city centers should be regulated.
A CBT style certificate would do to prove they have the ability to be on the road.
Couriers should have to take a test.
um [/End Rant]
gudster
15-07-06, 06:11 PM
have to disagree here.
if im out on my bicycle when there is no traffic around, i too would go thru a red.
sometimes there are sets of lights that just stay on red, until a car eventually approaches to trigger the change.
so now i dont bother hanging around for god knows how long.
that said, i always check over my shoulder to see if any cops are in the vicinity... so this guy was a **** on that count.
What a pr*t! How could he think it was ok to do that?!
Toss*r! :toss:
Gives all riders a bad name :evil:
devils advocate mode on, as usual
the same perception is had of bikers who install loud exhausts, speed, and generally behave in an anti-social and dangerous manner on the public highway :)
Most bikers then! :wink: *awaits barrage of abuse*
Kidding!
Point taken.
Jelster
15-07-06, 11:03 PM
A while ago I watched in horror as a cyclist jumped a red and piled into a woman crossing the road, knocking here for six. A 2nd cyclist then followed the first and went are over tit on the bike of the first one.....
If they had stopped at the red light none of it would have happened. It's a red light, it means STOP somebody else has priority. Anyone breaking that rule is a fool and a menace on the road, whether on foot, on push bike or on/in a motor vehicle.
They guy's an arrogant ****......
.
northwind
16-07-06, 02:01 AM
Well, I'm generally in favour of punishing cyclists for breaking the law, they do get away with too much. But I'm not sure this is warranted, if it was as he says and going through the red presented no risk to traffic. It's sort of like (to pluck an entirely random example from the air) giving a biker a ticket for driving with undue care and attention for getting their knee down on a quiet roundabout with no other cars present. It'd be completely inappropriate behaviour on a busy street, but if there's nobody else around it does no harm.
Put it this way. if he'd been an SV owner doing 50 on a deserted 40 limit at 5.55am, we'd all be up in arms about it. I don't see that this is any different.
Wee aside, smart-switching traffic lights are becoming way more common, and they're a disaster for cyclists. Most of them work off a loop under the road that detects large ferrous objects- ie, not cyclists. So UK road policy is actually designed to land cyclists at red lights indefinately. Same thing happens to bikes sometimes, particularily ones with low ferric content like an SV- there's a road near mine where you either wait for a car or go through the red. Not saying that happened here, but it's a pain in the **** so I'm going off topic :)
philipMac
17-07-06, 05:07 AM
depends on the circumstances.
I feel that this lad could probably have been left alone, and no harm would have been done. To be fair, cyclists more or less get the brunt of everything, all the time.
Obviously they are not saints, obviously there are some tossers out there, but, wheeling through a red light on a bike at 12 mph or something where next to no-one is around seems to be not too bad.
I break lights all the time in the US. Since, a lot of them clearly have nothing to do with cycling traffic. Its just the way the roads are designed here. I stop at the ones that its appropriate, and not at the others. Its a judgement call. If there are pedestrians involved, I always give way.
I never broke the lights in Copenhagen or Germany. Not at all, since it was never appropriate. And in Irealnd and the UK, i broke them some of the time.
I dunno... the hating of the cyclist thing is wierd to me. I rode for years, raced for years, still ride every day now. Its tough, a lot tougher than a motorbike in lots of ways. Yeah there are ****s. Most of them (us) are alright though.
So he was the only traffic on the road at 5:55am, but he's so blind he couldn't spot the copper?
It's not like there was anything else to look at. Sounds more like it's a habitual thing at that time of the morning for him to jump the lights if they're red. He should have paid the fine instead of wasting tax payers money.
Do the crime, do the time. Just another symptom of the "not my fault" culture, where very few folk take any responsibilty for their own actions.
=D> Too right Razor...
Cyclists should have priority over all other traffic rather like in the Netherlands.
At the moment they are lowest of the low, beneath even peds!
Always find it pathetic when bikers diss bicyclists.
Being a cyclist, as well as a biker and driver, I do think they get given a hard time - there are good and bad people with everything.
But why don't cyclist just get off and walk via the pavement when it's a red light - that's what I do, and I can never understand those who just ride through?
Flamin_Squirrel
17-07-06, 08:10 AM
Well, I'm generally in favour of punishing cyclists for breaking the law, they do get away with too much. But I'm not sure this is warranted, if it was as he says and going through the red presented no risk to traffic. It's sort of like (to pluck an entirely random example from the air) giving a biker a ticket for driving with undue care and attention for getting their knee down on a quiet roundabout with no other cars present. It'd be completely inappropriate behaviour on a busy street, but if there's nobody else around it does no harm.
Put it this way. if he'd been an SV owner doing 50 on a deserted 40 limit at 5.55am, we'd all be up in arms about it. I don't see that this is any different.
Wee aside, smart-switching traffic lights are becoming way more common, and they're a disaster for cyclists. Most of them work off a loop under the road that detects large ferrous objects- ie, not cyclists. So UK road policy is actually designed to land cyclists at red lights indefinately. Same thing happens to bikes sometimes, particularily ones with low ferric content like an SV- there's a road near mine where you either wait for a car or go through the red. Not saying that happened here, but it's a pain in the @rse so I'm going off topic :)
Hmm. I'm not sure Northy. I think a better example would be a biker riding without a helmet.
Speeding, and getting your knee down, those are (for arguments sake) open to opinion on whether they constitute a risk. Going though a red light or riding without a lid are not.
There is no good reason why the cyclist couldn't have waited 20 seconds for the lights to change. If there was an induction loop in the road, well theres nothing to stop him from dismounting and pushing the bike over the pedestrian crossing.
timwilky
17-07-06, 09:02 AM
A good few years ago I was unfortunate enough to hit a cyclist who ran a red light without lights at 11:30PM.
It was a kid about 16yrs old. Thank god I had not had a drink and had hit my brakes to knock off most of my speed but I still got him.
He landed on my bonnet and caused about £400 of damage. After checking he was alright I got his name and address, threw his bike in the back, him in the passenger seat and took the little sh1te home.
His parents were not interested. I remonstrated with them for allowing him out on his bike at that time of night without lights. When I took them the estimate for repair I was told to F.Off. My only option was to take them to the small claims court to recover my damages and as it was obvious from where and how they lived that they would even then fail to pay I had to write it down to experience.
What did I learn.
1) Don't brake when one runs the red light. Kill them like the rats that they are.
2) Some scum don't believe they have a responsibility to control their kids
3) Insurance for all road users should be compulsory. Gordon Brown would make a fortune on his inurance tax.
greeno76
17-07-06, 09:32 AM
I'm a cyclist. I commute to central London daily and I don't really have sympathy for the guy who got nicked running a red. It's against the law full stop.
Having said that, I would love some drivers/bikers to do my journey from Twickenham to Soho for a week and see if they change their view on cyclists & cycle lanes etc. It's treacherous out there. People bitterly resent the progress you can make through town on a bicycle. People don't give cyclists nearly enough room either.
As has been said, cyclists are the lowest of the low on the roads. I often move ahead of red lights and or jump them either to make progress when it doesn't inconvenience or endanger anyone - or just to get well clear of the traffic light GP which is extremely initimidating on a bicycle, especially when you're joined by all manner of scooters, bikes and cars in the cycle lanes and advance stop zones.
Not nice and bloody dangerous by people racing to get into the next jam 100yds up the road.
I agree that there are plenty of morons out there on bicycles and they're destroying the reputation of cyclists in the same way that loud cans, inappropriate/poor riding taint motorcyclists in the eyes of the general population (ie cagers). Hitting peds on crossings is totally unacceptable and people who don't give way at zebras drive me mental too. By the way, cars and bike do this too and I suspect are responsible for many times the number of accidents.
Well, just my thoughts. You're welcome to give me a gentle slap if you see me jumping a red, of course!
- Jason
northwind
17-07-06, 09:35 AM
Speeding, and getting your knee down, those are (for arguments sake) open to opinion on whether they constitute a risk. Going though a red light or riding without a lid are not.
Well, no, can't agree with that. Going through a red isn't automatically unsafe any more than speeding is, good observation can make it perfectly safe.
Spiderman
17-07-06, 09:50 AM
.... I often move ahead of red lights and or jump them either to make progress when it doesn't inconvenience or endanger anyone - or just to get well clear of the traffic light GP which is extremely initimidating on a bicycle, especially when you're joined by all manner of scooters, bikes and cars in the cycle lanes and advance stop zones.
Not nice and bloody dangerous by people racing to get into the next jam 100yds up the road.
- Jason
See, i never understand why cyclists want to be in front of the traffic when they know its like this. When i used to cycle everywhere (and i gave up my car for a year or so to do it) i was always happy to be behind the madness that was the the front of the lights.
the stupidity of allowing the slowest and most vulnerable on the road to be at the front of the pack astounds me.
I had some fool in yellow lycar top and shorts cross the stop line and stop directly in front of me 20 feet ahead at a very busy junction near Baker Street. Me the only m-bike on the road too. Naturaly i passed him without much dificulty but due to his iPod in his ears he didnt hear me coming and swerved right in front of me and i clipped him. He had the bloody nerve to tell me that me passing so close to him was dangerous when he caught up at the next lights.
So him having no round noise to go by, having no mirrors, making no checks over his shoulder... all of that is irrelevant in his eyes but me moving at the speed that a bike moves at is dangerous.
I felt like ****ting him one tbh and told his as much. :evil:
Jester666
17-07-06, 09:56 AM
1) Don't brake when one runs the red light. Kill them like the rats that they are.
2) Some scum don't believe they have a responsibility to control their kids
3) Insurance for all road users should be compulsory. Gordon Brown would make a fortune on his inurance tax.
As a courier in London I agree. The amount of times that I have bashed my kna***s on the tank or, once only, have had to drop the bike to avoid said :toss: in lycra! I know I'm a target for abuse as a courier as I'm apparently no better than pond life but at least the one road law I obey is RED means stop!! I have no sympathy for 'em!! One of the worst places for said offence is the Junction just south of Hammersmith Bridge. One occasion ended in a bit of :smt021 until another cyclist stopped us and verbally laid into lycra clad :toss: as he had witnessed the whole incident.
PS why do people think they are going to be able to hurt a fully armoured biker? Its like hitting a tank with a stick!! :lol:
greeno76
17-07-06, 10:13 AM
Yeah, it can be frustrating when people are ignorant like that.
I would say that cyclists move to the front of the traffic for the same reasons that we do it on a motorcycle - in the name of progress and visibility/safety.
Unfortunately, it's not really solvable because many people are so damn ignorant and /or aggressive. The road is a shared space that has to accomodate too many sizes, styles, and speeds of vehicles. There simply shouldn't be an order of precedence since who's to say their journey is more important?
Dunno what the answer is, really. I guess the road war will continue!
- Jason
I have run the odd red lights when on a cycle - usually crossings if its clear. Intersections I dont have the balls. Knowing the potential to get cleaned up by the white van man stops me all the time so I have little sympathy for any road users that get hit running red lights.
Flamin_Squirrel
17-07-06, 10:13 AM
Speeding, and getting your knee down, those are (for arguments sake) open to opinion on whether they constitute a risk. Going though a red light or riding without a lid are not.
Well, no, can't agree with that. Going through a red isn't automatically unsafe any more than speeding is, good observation can make it perfectly safe.
Well nor is riding without a lid, but we dont ride without them. For the same reason we dont ride though red lights, even if we did consider it safe.
Speed is a requirement of travel, going though red lights is not.
I've just returned to cycling to work after a couple of years of using trains and an SV. My perception of cyclists changed completely during that time as a pedestrian / motorbike user, i now feel that they are a distinct liability on the road, and many have an air of self - righteousness about them that I cannot stand.
I used to go through red lights if things were clear etc., but now will not out of principle, knowing how much it wrankles me when others do it, and I'm frankly embarrassed when my fellow London cyclists go whizzing across zebra crossings, red lights, on pavements and so on.
Nick762
17-07-06, 10:19 AM
Don't get me started on cyclists either...
But...
...putting my cycling helmet on I can see why cyclists push the envelope at stopping at red lights, you have just got a decent bit of speed up and the the bluddy light goes red, do you waste all that effort and hit the brakes or do you trust to anonymity and just jump the light confident that no one will I.D. you? Personally I hate it when that happens but I invariably stop at reds (OK I admit I amber gamble but if the light is red I stop).
As far as the argument "there was no other traffic so I thought it was safe" is concerned, the point of a red light is that you stop, it relieves you of yet another onerous bit of decision making when driving/riding/cyling i.e. the light ahead is red, I now have to decide if it is safe for me to proceed in addition to all the other info you are processing at the time. If the idea that it is safe to pass red in some circumstances becomes accepted, it would open a whole new can of worms especially with regard to proving responsibility in accidents. There may be some argument for the system whereby traffic lights at junctions flash continuous amber at night as a warning but I'm in favour of keeping the sanctity of the red.
IMO the guy had it coming. I enjoy cycling, I object to the way cyclists are treated but people like that give cyclists a bad name. There's a long way to go before the roads can be said to be truly cycle friendly but part of that journey involves cyclists accepting that they are subject to same rules and stop acting like they are some sort of special case.
rpwoodman
17-07-06, 11:28 AM
I think if all cyclists spent a year at Huntingdon life sciences (not as an employee, but as a participant) before they were allowed on the road, the world would be a better place.
northwind
17-07-06, 11:43 AM
Speed is a requirement of travel, going though red lights is not.
Yes, but speeding isn't a requirement of travel, and we do it all the time when we think it's safe. I can't see any difference, other than the fact that as a bike forum we mostly accept speeding.
Interesting debate. Most of us, if we were caught jumping a red light we would expect a summons. I don't see why cyclists should be in a privileged position TBH. A red light isn't open to interpretation of whether it's safe. As re what a bad deal cyclists get, well so what, I don't see that it makes any difference. Hard cases make bad law.
Flamin_Squirrel
17-07-06, 12:00 PM
Speed is a requirement of travel, going though red lights is not.
Yes, but speeding isn't a requirement of travel, and we do it all the time when we think it's safe. I can't see any difference, other than the fact that as a bike forum we mostly accept speeding.
Speed isn't an absolute (yes yes, I know technically in law it is, in practice it isnt). You can reasonably argue that doing a few mph over the limit is acceptable, you cant reasonably argue that violating a right of way is.
I'm in favour of cyclists paying 3rd party insurance, if under age the parents should pay. Not sure how this could be enforced though unless it was a single payment on new cycles.
There are a set of lights near my home that won't recognise my presence thus no change. If a car comes behind me they still won't change, as I'm on the detector strip. I have to cross the white line onto the pedestrian walkway. One day I'll be there with plod behind, then what?
wyrdness
17-07-06, 12:14 PM
There are a set of lights near my home that won't recognise my presence thus no change. If a car comes behind me they still won't change, as I'm on the detector strip. I have to cross the white line onto the pedestrian walkway. One day I'll be there with plod behind, then what?
I've heard that you can often trigger the detectors by stopping and starting your bike. The starter motor produces an electromagnetic pulse (or summat) that the detector picks up. Haven't tried it myself, but have been told that it works.
Flamin_Squirrel
17-07-06, 12:20 PM
I'm in favour of cyclists paying 3rd party insurance, if under age the parents should pay. Not sure how this could be enforced though unless it was a single payment on new cycles.
This, along with the congestion charge, banning of various things, high tax on 4x4s etc, would be just another way for intollerant people to attack groups of people they don't like, and I find it reprehensible. Especially as bikers, we ought to be vigilant against such persicution.
I don't cycle.
There are a set of lights near my home that won't recognise my presence thus no change. If a car comes behind me they still won't change, as I'm on the detector strip. I have to cross the white line onto the pedestrian walkway. One day I'll be there with plod behind, then what?
Push your bike?
northwind
17-07-06, 12:20 PM
Speed isn't an absolute (yes yes, I know technically in law it is, in practice it isnt). You can reasonably argue that doing a few mph over the limit is acceptable, you cant reasonably argue that violating a right of way is.
You say. I see no difference. You say "technically in law it is", what's a red light if not "technically in law"? They're both parts of the road traffic acts, there for the same reasons.
Flamin_Squirrel
17-07-06, 12:26 PM
I see no difference.
The police do.
northwind
17-07-06, 12:53 PM
That's right, I've been given the OK to ride through a red but I've never been given the OK to speed.
rpwoodman
17-07-06, 12:56 PM
About 6 months ago, I was in the car, going to work and stuck in traffic. I started putting my tie on, so took both hands off the steering wheel. The traffic in front started to move, but (and the police agreed with this) at a slower than walking pace. My hands were off the steering wheel for 4-5 seconds I guess.
A policeman who was hiding in someones drive (they sometims check road tax disks etc on that stretch of road) saw me, pulled me over, anf gave me a £60 fine.
Now, I was totally p*ssed off about it - I thought he was being ery overzealous (visibility was good, roads were dry, there was never any real danger), but the bottom line is I broke the law and so had to pay up. You may not agree with the law, but it is law so if you break it, you have to pay.
The speed a cyclist goes, having to stop for a few mins isn't going to cause them a huge delay, and when I set off, I make allowances for traffic etc.
How much more simple can it be?
Sid Squid
17-07-06, 07:17 PM
you cant reasonably argue that violating a right of way is.
There's the point isn't it, early morning no other traffic* - no-ones right of way was compromised.
Why don't we have traffic lights that flash yellow at off peak times, (as many foreign countries do), this turns the junction into a 'no-one has right of way - all give way', then the junction can be used as needed.
This cyclist: May or may not have been a resonable thing to do in the circumstances, we can't judge at a distance, but if there truly was no other traffic and visibility allows the junction to be crossed then why not? This is the sort of issue that requires discretion and reason to be applied, sadly as the body responsible for that is the Police it's never going to happen though.
*If that's true of course.
Spiderman
17-07-06, 07:26 PM
Why don't we have traffic lights that flash yellow at off peak times, (as many foreign countries do), this turns the junction into a 'no-one has right of way - all give way', then the junction can be used as needed.
Cos we live in a nanny state that gives us no room to use our brains and prefers us to act like automatons, sadly.
Sid Squid
17-07-06, 07:33 PM
Cos we live in a nanny state that gives us no room to use our brains and prefers us to act like automatons, sadly.
No, really! Well knock me down with a feather - I'd never have guessed.
Dicky Ticker
17-07-06, 07:59 PM
The HIGHWAY CODE is for the benefit of motorised,pedal and pedestrian and where applicable is used with the appropriate law THIS IS FOR THE SAFETY OF ALL so why differenciate one from another The guy jumped the lights and you and I plus he deserve to be nicked if we breach the law
What do we want? one law for cyclist which could endanger other road users,or one law that applies to all road users
philipMac
17-07-06, 08:20 PM
The HIGHWAY CODE is for the benefit of motorised,pedal and pedestrian and where applicable is used with the appropriate law THIS IS FOR THE SAFETY OF ALL so why differenciate one from another The guy jumped the lights and you and I plus he deserve to be nicked if we breach the law
What do we want? one law for cyclist which could endanger other road users,or one law that applies to all road users
Come on man.
A cyclist is not posing the same risk as a car is. Or anywhere close to.
Bikes are traveling at ~ 15 mph, and weigh about 15 kilos + rider say, with a very small profile. Cars weigh more, and have a huge profile.
You can not, in any way, say the risks to third parties are similar. They are not.
Dicky Ticker
18-07-06, 08:45 PM
Agreed just tell him/her not to do it infront of my truck when I have to swerve and hit an kid because of impatience,lack of consideration
Broaden the senario---what if a motorbike had been coming the other way at 100mph,they didn't see it, who is in the wrong?
I have nothing against cyclists but the things they do and get away with astound me
Example-City Rd this morning,lycra clad racing cyclist riding down the middle of the outside lane at 20-25mph holding up the traffic flow and puts his brakes on and slows when a car toots at him and then crosses to the inside and goes round a left hand turn at the lights ON RED
carelesschucca
18-07-06, 10:37 PM
Why don't we have traffic lights that flash yellow at off peak times, (as many foreign countries do), this turns the junction into a 'no-one has right of way - all give way', then the junction can be used as needed.
Try Lisbon, its just mental and they run this system, its Lunacy to be honest it just ends up that no one gives way and they all just gun it... Portugal has the highest death rates in Europe on the roads and After my experiences of Lisbon I can understand why!!!
vBulletin® , Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.