I think this is justified

[Spiderman]

Originally Posted by greeno76

.... 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.

Originally Posted by timwilky

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 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 until another cyclist stopped us and verbally laid into lycra clad 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!!

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.

Originally Posted by northwind

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.

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.

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]

Originally Posted by Flamin_Squirrel

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.