Red-light jumping
View Full Version : Red-light jumping
Drove out from London this morning. Saw three people go straight through red lights. This is not
just-snuck-through RAC-type 'doesn't matter if less than 3 seconds' type, this is right through the
middle of teh phase. One of them was a pelican and a woman with push-chair was just reaching
half-way across when the chap coming the other way blasted through the lights and straight across
the crossing without even slowing.
Only one of the three was riding a bicycle.
Anyway, what I was wondering is, does this now qualify me to go over to uk.tosspot and post about
how all motorists always go through red lights?
regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|
"Ian Smith" <ian@astounding.org.uk> wrote in message news:slrnbt6d06.13v.ian@phlegethon.smithnet...
> Drove out from London this morning. Saw three people go straight through red lights. This is not
> just-snuck-through RAC-type 'doesn't matter if less than 3 seconds' type, this is right through
> the middle of teh phase. One of them was a pelican and a woman with push-chair was just reaching
> half-way across when the chap coming the other way blasted through the lights and straight across
> the crossing without even slowing.
>
> Only one of the three was riding a bicycle.
>
> Anyway, what I was wondering is, does this now qualify me to go over to uk.tosspot and post about
> how all motorists always go through red lights?
>
From personal observation, in London at least, I'd say it's undisputable that a higher percentage of
cyclists jump red lights than drivers, but there's plenty of drivers that do. More significantly
perhaps, the nature is different - motorists are more likely to go through at speed 'just after'
they've turned red - since they were accelerating to get to the lights before they did. Cyclists,
OTOH are more likely to stop on the light but move off early after conflicting traffic has cleared
the intersection - and however they do it, they go through much slower! Neither are saints but I
know which I prefer...
Rich
"Ian Smith" <ian@astounding.org.uk> wrote in message news:slrnbt6d06.13v.ian@phlegethon.smithnet...
> Drove out from London this morning. Saw three people go straight through red lights.
Red light jumping by motor vehicles is endemic in Leicester. So much so I can't count them fast
enough unlike the motorists who can count unlit bicycles they can't even see. BTW I'm posting this
as a motorist more so than as a cyclist. (I rarely cycle in Leicester city but commute there by car
every day).
Pete
> Drove out from London this morning. Saw three people go straight through red lights..........
............
> Only one of the three was riding a bicycle.
>
Interesting statistic there, 2 morotists, and 1 cyclist. There are far, far more motorists on the
roads than cyclists, so your little survey clearly shows that a higher proportion of cyclists ignore
red lights, than motorists do. Well done.
> Anyway, what I was wondering is, does this now qualify me to go over to uk.tosspot and post about
> how all motorists always go through red lights?
>
Not really, no.
"SimonJ" <me@mine.net> wrote in message news:bqvlrl$m87$1@sparta.btinternet.com...
> Interesting statistic there, 2 morotists, and 1 cyclist. There are far, far more motorists on the
> roads than cyclists, so your
little
> survey clearly shows that a higher proportion of cyclists ignore red
lights,
> than motorists do.
Alternatively it shows that the danger per jump is higher for motorists, because there is lower
incidence but most fatalities at junctions are caused by motorists.
Alternatively the sample size is too small to show anything.
Alternatively Ian has a sense of humour and you don't ;-)
--
Guy
===
WARNING: may contain traces of irony. Contents may settle after posting.
http://chapmancentral.demon.co.uk (http://chapmancentral.demon.co.uk/)
On 8/12/03 9:51 am, in article br1hie$j1u$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk, "Just zis Guy, you know?"
<outlook.bugs@microsoft.com> wrote:
> "SimonJ" <me@mine.net> wrote in message news:bqvlrl$m87$1@sparta.btinternet.com...
>> Interesting statistic there, 2 morotists, and 1 cyclist. There are far, far more motorists on the
>> roads than cyclists, so your
> little
>> survey clearly shows that a higher proportion of cyclists ignore red
> lights,
>> than motorists do.
> Alternatively it shows that the danger per jump is higher for motorists, because there is lower
> incidence but most fatalities at junctions are caused by motorists.
> Alternatively the sample size is too small to show anything.
> Alternatively Ian has a sense of humour and you don't ;-)
Don't forget that any cyclist who arrives at a red light is in a position to jump it. Only the first
motorist in line is.
If 25% of the time one in four cyclists jumps a red light and the lead motorist goes through a red,
that is the same proportion, even though a larger number of red lights will be jumped by cyclists.
..d
small distinction b/n car and bike - when 1-ton car run red could hit pedestrian and pedestrian die.
Ian Smith wrote:
> Anyway, what I was wondering is, does this now qualify me to go over to uk.tosspot and post about
> how all motorists always go through red lights?
Not only that, but you can state without fear of contradiction, that /ALL/ motorists routinely
exceed sixty miles per hour outside primary schools on wet days at chucking-out time while:
o high on a "cocktail of drink and drugs" o untaxed o uninsured o un-MOT'd o on four bald tyres
Or something.
--
Dave Larrington - http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
http://www.bhpc.org.uk/
===========================================================
In article <BBF9FD98.7026%d.m.a.martin@dundee.ac.uk>, David Martin wrote:
>
>Don't forget that any cyclist who arrives at a red light is in a position to jump it. Only the
>first motorist in line is.
Three motorists in a row considering the light "only just" red so not really counting isn't unusual
round here.
> small distinction b/n car and bike - when 1-ton car run red could hit pedestrian and
> pedestrian die.
>
typical cyclist excuse for breaking the law.
Originally posted by SimonJ
> small distinction b/n car and bike - when 1-ton car run red could hit pedestrian and
> pedestrian die.
>
typical cyclist excuse for breaking the law.
well, what do you expect - all cyclists are law breaking anarchists. now get lost and move on to some other forum
On Sun, 7 Dec 2003 16:52:05 +0000 (UTC), SimonJ <me@mine.net> wrote:
>
> > Drove out from London this morning. Saw three people go straight through red lights..........
>
> ............
> > Only one of the three was riding a bicycle.
> >
> Interesting statistic there, 2 morotists, and 1 cyclist. There are far, far more motorists on the
> roads than cyclists, so your little survey clearly shows that a higher proportion of cyclists
> ignore red lights, than motorists do.
Maybe it shows that infinitely more motorists go through red lights with a risk of hitting
mother & child?
Maybe it shows the sample size was so small as to be useless?
Maybe it wasn't supposed to say anythiung at all about those that go through red lights, but rather
about those that make statements about those that go through red lights? Hmm, I wonder if that could
be the case?
regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|
> get lost and move on to some other forum
>
But I'm having such fun here
"waffle" <usenet-forum@cyclingforums.com> wrote in message news:3fd506e4$1_2@news.chariot.net.au...
> well, what do you expect - all cyclists are law breaking anarchists. now get lost and move on to
> some other forum
Sad to report that on my 2 mile ride home last night (at about 10 pm) I saw only one cyclist cycling
legally and 5 or 6 unlit pavement cyclists.
This is unusual -- normally I would estimate a slight majority of legals over illegals.
T
Reply to waffle
> well, what do you expect - all cyclists are law breaking anarchists. now get lost and move on to
> some other forum
>
>
Is he still at it? I k/filed him a while ago; after all, anyone who still gets excited at the idea
that a group of road users might contain lawbreakers can't be over-bright, surely? ;-)
--
Mark, UK. If you give me six lines written by the most honest man, I will find something in them to
hang him. - Richelieu
Tony W scribed with passion and wit:
>
> "waffle" <usenet-forum@cyclingforums.com> wrote in message
> news:3fd506e4$1_2@news.chariot.net.au...
>
>> well, what do you expect - all cyclists are law breaking anarchists. now get lost and move on to
>> some other forum
>
> Sad to report that on my 2 mile ride home last night (at about 10 pm) I saw only one cyclist
> cycling legally and 5 or 6 unlit pavement cyclists.
>
> This is unusual -- normally I would estimate a slight majority of legals over illegals.
>
> T
>
>
Sadly round here I expect the ratio to give majority to illegal riders.
--
Ian
http://www.catrike.co.uk (http://www.catrike.co.uk/)
The real problem is that, as ever, far more fuss is made over a few cyclists risking only their own
necks then drivers who kill innocent third parties. It seems not even the courts feel that a
motorist who kills due to going through a red light has committed much of an offence. See
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/coventry_warwickshire/3290665.stm
(£500 fine for a driver who went over a pedestrian crossing against a red light, so killing
a cyclist).
In any cse, who is posing the greatest danger? A driver gouing through a few seconds after a light
has gone red, so potentially colliding with all those setting off on amber as part of the 'Traffic
Light Grand Prix', or a cyclist going through red on an empty junction, so enabling themselves to
avoid being caught up in the aforesaid race away from the lights? It would also be nice if all
traffic lights actually detected that a cyclist was waiting -I know of plenty that don't! (Not that
I condone jumping red lights by anyone).
Ultimately, this sort of argument centres about what constitutes 'the rules of the road'. Lets not
kid ourselves that the 'real' rules of the road have much to do with the law. What is the case is
that 'the rules' are totally car centred and motorists expect other road users to abide by 'their'
rules even when these rules are in contravention of traffic law. Examples,
'One may exceed the legal speed limit, one is also justified in complaining and claiming ones 'human
rights' are being violated if one gets caught doing so.'
'A red light is not red until at least 3 cars have gone through it'.
'Going though an empty junction against a red light IS against the rules.'
'As drivers cannot be bothered to take adequate observations, cyclists must all dress like something
from outer space.'
'It IS against the rules for a cyclist to cross over a stop line in order to be first away from the
lights so as to avoid being caught up in 'The Traffic Light Grand Prix' or being cut up by drivers
turning left'.
'It is NOT against the rules for taxis, BMW owners and motorcylists to pass a stop line, as long as
this stop line marks out a cyclist advanced stop line waiting area.'
'It IS within the rules to overtake a cyclists by inches, regardless of the illustration shown in
the 'Highway Code' and the advice to leave a cyclist as much room as a car.'
'It is AGAINST the rules for a cyclist to cause a driver to need to slow down for even a couple of
seconds, as when meeting a cyclist on a narrow country road.'
'It is NOT, however, against the rules for a driver to impede the passage of a cyclist. For example,
by deliberately stopping thier vehicle when in a traffic queue so there is insufficient space for a
cyclist to pass. (Creating such an obstruction is still 'legally' an offence under legislation laid
down under the 1835 Highways Act).
etc.
Automatic Translations (Powered by
):
vBulletin, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by
vBSEO 3.3.0
