PDA
















Hoey's source

View Full Version : Hoey's source




Pages : [1] 2 3

Andy B
  
Her reference to a survey by the RAC Foundation is actually a press release she read; here's
the details.

Not before

00.01am

June 20 2003

Red Mist

The RAC Foundation today (20) called on the Government and police to target more financial resources
on traffic light cameras and physical enforcement rather than concentrating solely on speed cameras.

The Foundation's demand was prompted by new evidence suggesting that both motorists and cyclists
have a growing disregard for red traffic lights.

According to the Foundation, police should also start to actively enforce laws designed to improve
the safety of cyclists, including careless and dangerous cycling - which can carry a fine of up to
£2,500. This could arise from a biker ignoring a red traffic light and endangering other road users.

A snapshot survey of driver behaviour in London and Glasgow* found that a surprising number of
motorists and cyclists failed to stop at red traffic signals completely or attempted to scramble
through on amber. One in ten car drivers risked a serious accident or injury to themselves, other
road users and pedestrians by driving through a traffic light when it had clearly been red for over
three seconds while a further two in ten took a chance on a last minute amber signal.

Bus drivers too were observed to frequently disobey traffic lights. In London, as many as one in
five bus drivers were found to ride through traffic signals - making them worse offenders than car
drivers and putting their passengers at risk of serious injury.

Cyclists were found to have the least regard for traffic lights, most notably in central London. In
Glasgow up to one in four cyclists seemed to have no regard for the existence of traffic lights. In
central London this figure rose to as high as fifty per cent of all people on a bike.

Government accident statistics do not break down their records for road traffic accidents to include
people killed or injured by disobeying traffic signals. A regional break down for the West Midlands
region**, however, shows that as many as 131 people were killed or seriously injured in 2001 in
crashes resulting from failure to comply with a traffic signal.

The RAC Foundation has today written to the Secretary of State encouraging him to review the
emphasis on remote enforcement - away from increasing the speed cameras and focusing instead on red
light cameras. Local safety camera partnerships have been established throughout the UK, allowing
some of the revenue from tickets to be re-invested in future camera activity.

Kevin Delaney, Traffic and Road Safety Manager for the RAC Foundation, said: "This growing disregard
for red lights by a growing minority of road users is alarming.

"Growing congestion is frustrating for all road users. It makes them late, often so late that their
journey is wasted and they don't get to their destination.

This may increase the temptation to ignore red traffic lights, but it is dangerous and a foolish way
to beat the clock. However, it seems that an increasing number of drivers and cyclists are putting
their safety and that of other road users, especially pedestrians, in jeopardy by risking it at
traffic lights.

"We hope that Government and the Police will give greater priority to tackling the red mist which
descends over this anti-social minority by putting the same level of effort into detecting red light
running and prosecuting offenders, be they motorists or cyclists, as they presently do for speeding.

Conrad King, the RAC Foundation's consultant psychologist, said: "Both motorists and cyclists have
their own flexible moral code when it comes to traffic lights. If they are in a hurry, it might be
ok to go through a light which has just turned red. If they are not, then they may well still go
through a light on amber.

"Sneaking through a light gives someone an illusion of power and freedom, albeit for a brief few
seconds. In congestion rife modern cities even that illusion is hard to come by when you are stuck
behind the wheel.

"The lack of any adequate policing of cyclists has meant that some of them see themselves as beyond
the law. If they can get away with it, they will do it. This may include running through red lights
and pedestrian crossings as well as riding on the pavement."

ENDS

Notes to Editors:

*Researchers for the RAC Foundation took recordings between 9.30am and noon and between 4pm and 6pm
at three separate sites last week in both Central London and Glasgow for a snapshot survey.

** West Midlands Road Accident Review 2001.

The RAC Foundation for Motoring is an independent body established to protect and promote the
interests of UK motorists. Motoring organisation RAC supports its six million customers with
breakdown cover and a wide range of other motoring solutions. The views of each organisation should
not be attributed to the other

Personally, I think everyone in London has a disregard for red lights. When i'm passing through as a
pedestrian i take it as red (sorry) that at least three vehicles will shunt through on a red. Any
cyclist that does the same is a nutter - i should know, i went through a red on the way home from a
pub when i was 17 and ran into a mini. Still got the scar to prove it.

Colin Blackburn
  
On 21 Oct 2003 02:34:30 -0700, Andy B <coastalrocket@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> Her reference to a survey by the RAC Foundation is actually a press release she read; here's the
> details.

I think the report of this was posted back here in June, but...

> A snapshot survey of driver behaviour in London and Glasgow* found that a surprising number of
> motorists and cyclists failed to stop at red traffic signals completely or attempted to scramble
> through on amber. One in ten car drivers risked a serious accident or injury to themselves, other
> road users and pedestrians by driving through a traffic light when it had clearly been red for
> over three seconds

That's one in ten pass a red after it has been red for three seconds.

> while a further two in ten took a chance on a last minute amber signal.

Not sure what the timing is here (last minute isn't very accurate when talking about split second
timing) but I assume these are drivers passing through an amber when it would have been safe to
stop. They might thus be seen to pass a red just as it lights, say within one second.

What I want to know is how many drivers go through a red that has not been red for three seconds but
is clearly not just gone red. Surely that fraction is much more likely to be higher than the three
second light jumpers.

Colin

Stephen \
  
--snip
>
> Personally, I think everyone in London has a disregard for red lights. When i'm passing through as
> a pedestrian i take it as red (sorry) that at least three vehicles will shunt through on a red.
> Any cyclist that does the same is a nutter - i should know, i went through a red on the way home
> from a pub when i was 17 and ran into a mini. Still got the scar to prove it.

I think you're right. Everyone just wants to get home as quickly as possible (so why they drive is
beyond me). No one cares whether they end up in a yellow box blocking other traffic as long as they
can get across and save a precious few seconds (I'm not sure they do). You notice this more if the
traffic has hardly moved anyway on green - it changes to red but the drivers who somehow feel hard
done by as they haven't moved are more likely to then go forward on red. I notice this more on rainy
days - of course I want to get home early as I'm getting wet but it seems car drivers do too -
driving is far worse on rainy days. I think cyclists are more likely to go through on red as the
physical act of stopping and starting again is a strenuous one - not so stopping and starting a car.

Belfast Biker
  
On 21 Oct 2003 02:34:30 -0700, coastalrocket@yahoo.co.uk (Andy B) wrote:

>The RAC Foundation today (20) called on the Government and police to target more financial
>resources on traffic light cameras and physical enforcement rather than concentrating solely on
>speed cameras.

Personally I see more near misses at *roundabouts* than red lights. I've never seen a near miss at a
red light in fact.

On one particular roundabout on my way to work, I will see at least a dozen drivers I would regard
as driving stupidly - either they've got a mobile phone attached and aren't concentrating, they are
in completely the wrong lane on entry or exit, they either don't indicate or indicate misleadingly,
they take the roundabout WAY too fast, or they enter the roundabout at entirely the wrong time and
get too damned close to someone already on the roundabout.

Last week they had to extra a car from under a truck at it, and you see near misses ALL the time.

When I'm on my bike instead of walking, I use the footpath at that point instead. Theres almost
always no pedestrians at that point. They know better. :)
--
------- o ----- <#\, --- ()/() Belfast Biker "When Religion And Politics Ride In The Same
Cart.....The Whirlwind Follows"

Trevor Barton
  
On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 10:41:58 +0100, Colin Blackburn wrote:
> On 21 Oct 2003 02:34:30 -0700, Andy B <coastalrocket@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Her reference to a survey by the RAC Foundation is actually a press release she read; here's the
>> details.
>
> I think the report of this was posted back here in June, but...
>
>> A snapshot survey of driver behaviour in London and Glasgow* found that a surprising number of
>> motorists and cyclists failed to stop at red traffic signals completely or attempted to scramble
>> through on amber. One in ten car drivers risked a serious accident or injury to themselves, other
>> road users and pedestrians by driving through a traffic light when it had clearly been red for
>> over three seconds
>
> That's one in ten pass a red after it has been red for three seconds.
>
>> while a further two in ten took a chance on a last minute amber signal.
>
> Not sure what the timing is here (last minute isn't very accurate when talking about split second
> timing) but I assume these are drivers passing through an amber when it would have been safe to
> stop. They might thus be seen to pass a red just as it lights, say within one second.
>
> What I want to know is how many drivers go through a red that has not been red for three seconds
> but is clearly not just gone red. Surely that fraction is much more likely to be higher than the
> three second light jumpers.

Perhaps "last minute" amber passers are those that are not out of the junction by the time the light
turns red.

--
Trevor Barton

Colin Blackburn
  
On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 10:05:26 GMT, Trevor Barton <tmb@Xisotek.co.uk> wrote:

> Perhaps "last minute" amber passers are those that are not out of the junction by the time the
> light turns red.

Possibly. What worries me is that the RAC have decided that a car which passes through a red which
has been on less than three seconds is a "last minute amber" rather than, in some cases, a clear red
light jumper. I may email the RAC to see if the original data is published in any form.

Colin

John Hearns
  
On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 02:34:30 -0700, Andy B wrote:

>
> Bus drivers too were observed to frequently disobey traffic lights. In London, as many as one in
> five bus drivers were found to ride through traffic signals - making them worse offenders than car
> drivers and putting their passengers at risk of serious injury.

This has been discussed here before, if I'm not wrong. I think someone said bus drivers are allowed
to go through on amber/early red if slamming on the brakes would endanger their passengers. Opposite
sene of this paragraph really.

Andy Koppe
  
John Hearns wrote:

> I think someone said bus drivers are allowed to go through on amber/early red if slamming on the
> brakes would endanger their passengers.

Passenger safety/comfort a concern to bus drivers? Many Edinburgh bus drivers seem to take delight
in throwing their passengers around as much as possible.

Andy

Just Zis Guy
  
"Andy B" <coastalrocket@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:f1523bf.0310210134.687df4a@posting.google.com...

> Her reference to a survey by the RAC Foundation is actually a press release she read; here's the
> details.

Translated into Mailspeak as follows:

mumble NO MORE SPEED CAMERAS mumble mumble CYCLISTS mumble RED LIGHTS mumble BUSES mumble RED
LIGHTS mumble.

--
Guy
===

WARNING: may contain traces of irony. Contents may settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.com (http://www.chapmancentral.com/)

Dave Larrington
  
belfast biker wrote:

> Personally I see more near misses at *roundabouts* than red lights. I've never seen a near miss at
> a red light in fact.

Roundabouts are pretty horrible, especially when they've been laid out by idiots, but I've seen
plenty of near misses and at least three direct hits at traffic lights:

o Saab 9000 Turbo and 911 both clobber a small Japanese Thing which has missed the lights changing
by at least half an ice age o Cavalier t-bones an ambulance - with lights and siren going all-out -
when the latter goes through a red light o cyclist going fast downhill runs red light and torpedoes
car turning right. This did him a power of no good.

Dave Larrington - http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
http://www.bhpc.org.uk/
===========================================================

Trevor Barton
  
On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 11:19:24 +0100, John Hearns wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 02:34:30 -0700, Andy B wrote:
>
>>
>> Bus drivers too were observed to frequently disobey traffic lights. In London, as many as one in
>> five bus drivers were found to ride through traffic signals - making them worse offenders than
>> car drivers and putting their passengers at risk of serious injury.
>
> This has been discussed here before, if I'm not wrong. I think someone said bus drivers are
> allowed to go through on amber/early red if slamming on the brakes would endanger their
> passengers. Opposite sene of this paragraph really.

It's unlikely to be a separate rule for bus drivers, but an application of the "stop if safe to do
so" rule about amber lights. It may be that the "safe" band is smaller for busses with standing
passengers resulting in more of them running amber lights, but there is still no excuse for red.

--
Trevor Barton

Trevor Barton
  
On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 11:11:00 +0100, Colin Blackburn wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 10:05:26 GMT, Trevor Barton <tmb@Xisotek.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Perhaps "last minute" amber passers are those that are not out of the junction by the time the
>> light turns red.
>
> Possibly. What worries me is that the RAC have decided that a car which passes through a red which
> has been on less than three seconds is a "last minute amber" rather than, in some cases, a clear
> red light jumper. I may email the RAC to see if the original data is published in any form.

Yes. Perhaps the three second rule was based on some assumption they made, for example that no
crossing car will be in the junction before 3 seconds after the opposing light turns red. Or,
perhaps it's an arbitrary figure to separate out deliberate and considered light jumping (ie,
deciding to go through on red) from less deliberate (trying to get through before red but
failing)... I'm trying to choose my words carefully because I have no tolerance of either proactice
but as far as intent goes, the first is more wrong than the other (in the sense that murder is more
wrong than robbery, perhaps).

Trev

--
Trevor Barton

Tim S
  
"Stephen (aka steford)" <R_e_M_o_V_Esteford.usenetS_p_A_M@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:bn30as$rhjtg$1@ID-62064.news.uni-berlin.de...
> --snip
> >
> > Personally, I think everyone in London has a disregard for red lights. When i'm passing through
> > as a pedestrian i take it as red (sorry) that at least three vehicles will shunt through on a
> > red. Any cyclist that does the same is a nutter - i should know, i went through a red on the way
> > home from a pub when i was 17 and ran into a mini. Still got the scar to prove it.
>
> I think you're right. Everyone just wants to get home as quickly as
possible
> (so why they drive is beyond me). No one cares whether they end up in a yellow box blocking other
> traffic as long as they can get across and save
a
> precious few seconds (I'm not sure they do). You notice this more if the traffic has hardly moved
> anyway on green - it changes to red but the
drivers
> who somehow feel hard done by as they haven't moved are more likely to
then
> go forward on red. I notice this more on rainy days - of course I want to get home early as I'm
> getting wet but it seems car drivers do too -
driving
> is far worse on rainy days. I think cyclists are more likely to go through on red as the physical
> act of stopping and starting again is a strenuous one - not so stopping and starting a car.
>
>

Well, coming out of London yesterday I was approaching the 3 way lights near Q gardens in
free-flowing traffic (rare I know) and saw the three cars infront of me go straight through on red -
I stopped (motorbike). Maybe part of it is that everyone knows there is a slight delay before the
opposing lights go green. I was recently in america & it was noticable there that the lights had
little if any delay, when one set turned red, the cross-set turned green within 1/2 a second or
less, nobidy jumped the reds there.

Tim S

Stephen \
  
--snip
>
> Well, coming out of London yesterday I was approaching the 3 way lights near Q gardens in
> free-flowing traffic (rare I know) and saw the three cars infront of me go straight through on red
> - I stopped (motorbike). Maybe part of it is that everyone knows there is a slight delay before
> the opposing lights go green. I was recently in america & it was noticable there that the lights
> had little if any delay, when one set turned red, the cross-set turned green within 1/2 a second
> or less, nobidy jumped the reds there.
>
Absolutely. That delay is there though to let traffic clear though surely. It's now become almost a
de facto "green" for most drivers especially those turning right.

Arthur Clune
  
"Stephen \(aka steford\)" <R_e_M_o_V_Esteford.usenetS_p_A_M@ntlworld.com> wrote:
: --snip
:>
:> Well, coming out of London yesterday I was approaching the 3 way lights near Q gardens in
:> free-flowing traffic (rare I know) and saw the three cars infront of me go straight through on
:> red - I stopped (motorbike). Maybe part of it is that everyone knows there is a slight delay
:> before the opposing lights go green.
:>
: Absolutely. That delay is there though to let traffic clear though surely. It's now become almost
: a de facto "green" for most drivers especially those turning right.

It's called the "interphase gap" in traffic light parlance. I used to design traffic light signal
settings. Sad but true.

It's there as a safety gap - lets slow traffic get out the way etc.

Once everyone starts jumping it then it becomes useless.

Arthur

--
Arthur Clune http://www.clune.org (http://www.clune.org/) "Technolibertarians make a philosophy out of a personality defect"
- Paulina Borsook

Zog The Undenia
  
Andy B wrote:
> Her reference to a survey by the RAC Foundation is actually a press release she read; here's the
> details.

So don't join the RAC or the AA as you will be funding this sort of crap. Join Direct Line or ETA.

James Hodson
  
On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 12:24:09 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you know?" <outlook.bugs@microsoft.com> wrote:

>Translated into Mailspeak as follows:
>
>mumble NO MORE SPEED CAMERAS mumble mumble CYCLISTS mumble RED LIGHTS mumble BUSES mumble RED
>LIGHTS mumble.

Translated into Gruniad: zhzoyr AB ZBER FCRRQ PNZRENF zhzoyr zhzoyr PLPYVFGF zhzoyr ERQ YVTUGF
zhzoyr aOHFRF zhzoyr ERQ YVTUGF zhzoyr.

Thl, va yrnthr jvgu gur Ubrl ;-) James

--
"Sorry mate, I didn't see you" is not a satisfactory excuse.

Zog The Undenia
  
Dave Larrington wrote:

> o cyclist going fast downhill runs red light and torpedoes car turning right.

I like that mental image!

James Hodson
  
On 21 Oct 2003 17:55:37 GMT, wafflycathcs@aol.comcomcom (dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers) wrote:

>>ranslated into Gruniad: zhzoyr AB ZBER FCRRQ PNZRENF zhzoyr zhzoyr PLPYVFGF zhzoyr ERQ YVTUGF
>>zhzoyr aOHFRF zhzoyr ERQ YVTUGF zhzoyr.
>>
>>Thl, va yrnthr jvgu gur Ubrl
>
>That'll be the Klingon edition then?
>

May you ROT13 in Norfolk, Ma'am. Worf

--
"Sorry mate, I didn't see you" is not a satisfactory excuse.

Helen Deborah V
  
wafflycathcs@aol.comcomcom (dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers)typed

> >ranslated into Gruniad: mumble NO MORE SPEED CAMERAS mumble mumble CYCLISTS mumble RED LIGHTS
> >mumble nBUSES mumble RED LIGHTS mumble.
> >
> >Guy, in league with the Hoey

> That'll be the Klingon edition then?

Just ROT13, what I've unrotted for you...

--
Helen D. Vecht: helenvecht@zetnet.co.uk Edgware.

Bulgarian Croatian Czech Danish Dutch English Finnish French German Italian Japanese Korean Norwegian Polish Portuguese Spanish Swedish