Red means stop, dickhead - Page 2

In aus.bicycle on 2 Aug 2006 15:03:37 -0700
blah <p_o_y2000@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
> mfhor@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>> Zebee Johnstone wrote:
>
>> I run reds regularly. I call it civil disobedience. Call me a dickhead.
>
> Dickhead.

please remove my name from that next time....

<mfhor@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1154519776.391864.270420@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>
> I run reds regularly. I call it civil disobedience. Call me a dickhead.
> If I get cleaned up, it's my fault, pure and simple. If I want less
> risk, I'll be more cautious, and only run a few simple ones.
>

Firstly, there are enough cyclists out there who clearly need traffic lights
to avoid being cleaned up that not running reds as a law should make sense
right there. The point of laws is that you don't ignore them based of your
personal evaluation of when it's reasonable to do so. If it was otherwise
then the people who most badly need those laws are the ones who'd never
observe them. I'm rather tempted to suggest that that's the case with
bicycles running red lights at the moment. The notion that it's your risk
and not anyone else's just doesn't wash. How about the person on another
bike or motorbike who goes down hitting or avoiding you? How about the
person who winds up injured and/or traumatised and/or well out of pocket
when you bounce off their front guard and into their wind screen? How about
the cost to the community in both dollars and physical resources with
regards to the emergency services who scrape you off the road and cart you
off to hospital? And finally, as has been mentioned in this group a huge
number of times, how about the dozen people who watch you blow through that
red light each time and mentally reinforce their pre-conceived notion that
cyclists are dangerous idiots. Don't even think about saying that they won't
apply it to all cyclists because not all cyclists are the same. When you're
not part of a minority, there's a tendency to treat that minority as a
homogenous group. Non-cyclists aren't interested in making the mental effort
to give us the benefit of the doubt, especially when being mentally lazy
lets them see another data point to reinforce their fondly held prejudices.

Oh, and before I forget:

Dickhead.

Zebee Johnstone wrote:

> In aus.bicycle on 2 Aug 2006 15:03:37 -0700
> blah <p_o_y2000@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> >
> > mfhor@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> >> Zebee Johnstone wrote:
> >
> >> I run reds regularly. I call it civil disobedience. Call me a dickhead.
> >
> > Dickhead.
>
> please remove my name from that next time....

sorry...

Red means stop, Dickhead! Yes, I'm talking to YOU!

I sincerely hope you do NOT get cleaned up.

I sincerely hope you DO get caught and separated from your wallet.

well said.

And what do those idiots gain from running reds - probably spend a little bit longer waiting at next major intersection or maybe get to work a few minutes faster. Hardly a good enough return for the risk and impact on others.

I was on my way to Goat one nigh, got to an intersection and stopped on the line at the red light. Another cyclist comes along and blows the red quite blatently. Driver in car next to me winds down window and hurls abuse at me.

``It might of escaped your attention mate, but I'm stoped wating for the green same as you.'' Pfffft.

Anyway, 60 secons later I'm overtaking said cyclist.

``I just copped a bucket full of abuse back there because you ran a red light. Thanks a lot mate.''

Stomp stomp on pedals and off to Goat :-)

It used to be a " if a tree falls in the forest" thing for me, but nowadays it looks like I would be keeping pretty daggy company if I entertain running these things, so I'm as good boy now.

It's just that the new vouge thing with these red light runners is that they're cutting way too fine in just about every case I've watched. Maybe the thinking here is that: " If I pedal hard enough the oncoming car will see how committed I am & brake/swerve to avoid me " . Sort of doesn't make sence regardless how you would want to phrase it though.

I think it's important to now express your opinion to these riders when the opportunity presents itself.

mfhor@yahoo.co.uk wrote:

> I run reds regularly. I call it civil disobedience. Call me a dickhead.

Dickhead.

What happens to the hapless person who runs you down 'cos you went
through a red? It's not something they're likely to forget.

And you seem to forget about the cars that see you and figure, "oh
well, no point me obeying the law when I see a cyclist."

On 2006-08-02, cfsmtb (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
>
> BrettS Wrote:
>>
>> So I'm assuming that you get off and walk across at the pedestrian
>> crossings then?
>>
>
> Actually there's been chatter about that law (in Vic) to be changed.
> Although, when crossing on a busy x-ing, ie: with lots of peds, it's
> probably just as fast to dismount and walk across. Looks good for PR
> too, and given the way some peds walk, it's probably safer!

Some of us are safer on 2 wheels than two feet, particularly with
cleats on!

I'll ride in such situations, but walking pace with one foot clipped
out.

--
TimC
"And Rob convinced me to learn perl. But now that I'm
sober, I'm having second thoughts." -- Alan J Rosenthal

That's another damn fine rebuttal to that pile of self-moralising. Have talk to anyone who works in emergency services. Going to extremes here, but one thing you *never* want to see or experience, is maximum blunt trauma to a human body. Can't walk it off, difficult to stitch back together and truly awful to deal with even in a professional capacity. Life is full of risk, but don't consciously make yourself a Darwin Award nominee.

Dickhead.

In aus.bicycle on Thu, 03 Aug 2006 03:48:08 GMT
TimC <tconnors@no.spam.accepted.here-astro.swin.edu.au> wrote:
>
> Some of us are safer on 2 wheels than two feet, particularly with
> cleats on!
>
> I'll ride in such situations, but walking pace with one foot clipped
> out.

I tend to ride, but sometimes it's better to duckwalk the bent till I
can get back up to speed.

Trouble is that duckwalking's slower than normal walking!

Zebee

On 2006-08-03, Resound (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
>
> <mfhor@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:1154519776.391864.270420@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> I run reds regularly. I call it civil disobedience. Call me a dickhead.
>> If I get cleaned up, it's my fault, pure and simple. If I want less
>> risk, I'll be more cautious, and only run a few simple ones.
>>
>
> Firstly, there are enough cyclists out there who clearly need traffic lights
> to avoid being cleaned up that not running reds as a law should make sense
> right there. The point of laws is that you don't ignore them based of your
> personal evaluation of when it's reasonable to do so. If it was otherwise
> then the people who most badly need those laws are the ones who'd never
> observe them. I'm rather tempted to suggest that that's the case with
> bicycles running red lights at the moment. The notion that it's your risk
> and not anyone else's just doesn't wash. How about the person on another
> bike or motorbike who goes down hitting or avoiding you?

Whilst I agree partially with mfhor ("in an ideal world, there
wouldn't be cars, and hence we wouldn't need traffic lights with
rediculously long cycles ala Camberwell Junction, High St Rd/Warrigal
Rd, etc), this one's a biggy.

Even if you know you are not placing someone else in risk, they don't
know that. Taking evasive action is a risky process. Forcing someone
to take evasive action, because they don't know you are going to stop
in time is stupid.

The other day, I damn well came close to headbutting the ground again.
New salmon koolstop pads, and a taxi driver who decided to do a U-turn
in front of me. OK, so they had seen me, and intended to stop in time
before completing the U-turn in front of me. I didn't know that, and
decided it would be wise to take evasive action -- jam on my brakes to
the point where I am used to them stopping me in time. Instead the
back wheel lifted up quite a distance. Even if they knew that they
weren't going to hit me, from my point of view, it wasn't even
apparent I had been seen, so the only thing I could do to gaurantee I
wasn't going to go headfirst into the side of a taxi, was to perform
an evasive maneuvour that almost became my downfall.

--
TimC
A mathematician is a device for turning coffee into theorems.

Bleve wrote:
>
> mfhor@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> > Zebee Johnstone wrote:
> >
> > > I stop at red lights because of expectations. The expectation of
> > > someone at a green light or one about to turn green is that the bods
> > > who have the red will stay put. I don't think it is sensible to ruin
> > > that expectation.
> > >
> > > When the coast seems clear I stay put anyway. That way I don't have
> > > to think, or place a bet.
> > >
> > > Zebee
> >
> > I run reds regularly. I call it civil disobedience. Call me a dickhead.
>
> Dickhead.

Damn straight. Dickhead.

You might only be risking your own life, but if you end up in hospital,
our money is paying for your treatment! (Well, not mine, at the moment,
ahhh tax free reserve money...)

Tam

sinus wrote:
>
> Resound Wrote:
> > <mfhor@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:1154519776.391864.270420@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
> > >
> > > I run reds regularly. I call it civil disobedience. Call me a
> > dickhead.
> > > If I get cleaned up, it's my fault, pure and simple. If I want less
> > > risk, I'll be more cautious, and only run a few simple ones.
> > >
> >
> > Firstly, there are enough cyclists out there who clearly need traffic
> > lights
> > to avoid being cleaned up that not running reds as a law should make
> > sense
> > right there. The point of laws is that you don't ignore them based of
> > your
> > personal evaluation of when it's reasonable to do so. If it was
> > otherwise
> > then the people who most badly need those laws are the ones who'd never
> > observe them. I'm rather tempted to suggest that that's the case with
> > bicycles running red lights at the moment. The notion that it's your
> > risk
> > and not anyone else's just doesn't wash. How about the person on
> > another
> > bike or motorbike who goes down hitting or avoiding you? How about the
> > person who winds up injured and/or traumatised and/or well out of
> > pocket
> > when you bounce off their front guard and into their wind screen? How
> > about
> > the cost to the community in both dollars and physical resources with
> > regards to the emergency services who scrape you off the road and cart
> > you
> > off to hospital? And finally, as has been mentioned in this group a
> > huge
> > number of times, how about the dozen people who watch you blow through
> > that
> > red light each time and mentally reinforce their pre-conceived notion
> > that
> > cyclists are dangerous idiots. Don't even think about saying that they
> > won't
> > apply it to all cyclists because not all cyclists are the same. When
> > you're
> > not part of a minority, there's a tendency to treat that minority as a
> > homogenous group. Non-cyclists aren't interested in making the mental
> > effort
> > to give us the benefit of the doubt, especially when being mentally
> > lazy
> > lets them see another data point to reinforce their fondly held
> > prejudices.
> >
> > Oh, and before I forget:
> >
> > Dickhead.
> well said.
>
> And what do those idiots gain from running reds - probably spend a
> little bit longer waiting at next major intersection or maybe get to
> work a few minutes faster. Hardly a good enough return for the risk and
> impact on others.
>
> --
> sinus

When I see people doing that sh1t I think, "Unnecessary risks only make
up for a lack of fitness until you get cleaned up. Get fit you lazy
fscker, instead of running reds."

T

TimC wrote:
<snip>
> The other day, I damn well came close to headbutting the ground again.
> New salmon koolstop pads, and a taxi driver who decided to do a U-turn
> in front of me. OK, so they had seen me, and intended to stop in time
> before completing the U-turn in front of me. I didn't know that, and
> decided it would be wise to take evasive action -- jam on my brakes to
> the point where I am used to them stopping me in time. Instead the
> back wheel lifted up quite a distance. Even if they knew that they
> weren't going to hit me, from my point of view, it wasn't even
> apparent I had been seen, so the only thing I could do to gaurantee I
> wasn't going to go headfirst into the side of a taxi, was to perform
> an evasive maneuvour that almost became my downfall.

I almost got nailed by that car trick today, fortunately the driver's
window was down and he heard me screaming at him as I braked.

T