Red light jumping.

[Martin Dann]

Yesterday I went out for a ride for about one hour. On the
ride back up from the city center I saw two cars drive
through different red lights within a few minutes.

The first driver then did a u-turn at the next set of
lights which has a no U-turn sign.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wARm0ObytD8
(It is very difficult to see the u-turn on film).

The second driver crossed a red light on a pedestrian
crossing whilst the person was still crossing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0SJqwjt_9k

In both cases the lights were red long before the driver
crossed the line.
My only explanation is that the drivers were confused and
frightened stuck in a cage, as opposed to usually being on
a bike.

Also I caught a taxi driver opening his door as I passed
his taxi (me in the center of my lane).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hvc7QlonmCE

 

[Paul Boyd]

On 12/06/2007 18:54, Martin Dann said,
> Yesterday I went out for a ride for about one hour. On the ride back up
> from the city center I saw two cars drive through different red lights
> within a few minutes.

Seems fairly normal standards for driving in Bristol :-(

The camera must be lying though, because it's only cyclists that jump
red lights. That must be true because the likes of the Daily Wail keep
telling us so.

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

 

[Ian Smith]

On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 17:54:58 GMT, Martin Dann <[email protected]> wrote:

> Yesterday I went out for a ride for about one hour. On the
> ride back up from the city center I saw two cars drive
> through different red lights within a few minutes.

I had thought I had perceived a worsening of motorist's response to
red lights. The two recent incidents (witnessed in teh space of one
week) that seemed to confirm it for me were:

1: Pelican. Traffic lights go red, pedestrian crosses. As soon as
the pedestrian was past the front of the car stopped at the lights
(ie, pedestrian is in the middle of the road, traffic lights still
red, green man still on, crossing still beeping) the car drove through
the lights and off. I caught the car up in the queue at the
roundabout about a quarter mile further on and since the driver's
window was open, stopped and told him that "a red light means stop".
He just gaped at me - no sign of any thought processes at all. My
fish look more sentient.

2: Also pelican (but a different one). Queue of cars along the road,
but the one at the pelican has stopped at the stop line, leaving the
crossing clear (which is relatively unusual). Young teenager was
waiting at the crossing, which switched just as I approached. So,
traffic lights red, green man, beeping, and teen starts to cross.
She'd done one step out from the kerb when the queue on the other side
of the crossing started moving - so the car set off, forcing the girl
to leap backwards out of the way. I didn't catch up with the driver
in that case.

And both of these are, of course, completely ignoring the systematic
red light jumping done by motorists who seem to think braking when the
lights change ahead might kill them.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

 

[Matt B]

Martin Dann wrote:
> Yesterday I went out for a ride for about one hour. On the ride back up
> from the city center I saw two cars drive through different red lights
> within a few minutes.

What's all this got to do with cycling?

> The first driver then did a u-turn at the next set of lights which has a
> no U-turn sign.
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wARm0ObytD8
> (It is very difficult to see the u-turn on film).

Isn't there a green left filter arrow on in this one?

--
Matt B

 

[Daniel Barlow]

Matt B wrote:
> Martin Dann wrote:
>> Yesterday I went out for a ride for about one hour. On the ride back
>> up from the city center I saw two cars drive through different red
>> lights within a few minutes.
>
> What's all this got to do with cycling?

At least as much as most of your posts, Matt



-dan

 

[Matt B]

Daniel Barlow wrote:
> Matt B wrote:
>> Martin Dann wrote:
>>> Yesterday I went out for a ride for about one hour. On the ride back
>>> up from the city center I saw two cars drive through different red
>>> lights within a few minutes.
>>
>> What's all this got to do with cycling?
>
> At least as much as most of your posts, Matt

That makes it excusable does it - am I your archetypal poster?

Once a thread has already strayed OT it is fair enough to reply to
developing arguments. However, although I rarely start posts, if I did
start one that was so widely OT, I would flag it as OT.

--
Matt B

 

[Martin Dann]

Daniel Barlow wrote:
> Matt B wrote:
>> Martin Dann wrote:
>>> Yesterday I went out for a ride for about one hour. On the ride back
>>> up from the city center I saw two cars drive through different red
>>> lights within a few minutes.
>>
>> What's all this got to do with cycling?

The first sentence was
"Yesterday I went out for a ride for about one hour."
i.e. I was cycling when I filmed this.

This is exactly the behaviour that elements of the press
complain that we (cyclists) do all the time, and motorists
never do.

<fx:checks google groups.>

The arrow on the traffic lights is a blue left turn only sign.
When the light turns green, a green left turn filter comes
on. (You can't turn left until this turns on).
Also in the background you can see the pedestrian crossing
has turned green allowing people to cross the road, hence
no right turn.

Now get back into my kill file.

> At least as much as most of your posts, Matt

I did not see TB had commented until you replied to him.


Martin.

 

[Matt B]

Martin Dann wrote:
> Daniel Barlow wrote:
>> Matt B wrote:
>>> Martin Dann wrote:
>>>> Yesterday I went out for a ride for about one hour. On the ride back
>>>> up from the city center I saw two cars drive through different red
>>>> lights within a few minutes.
>>>
>>> What's all this got to do with cycling?
>
> The first sentence was
> "Yesterday I went out for a ride for about one hour."
> i.e. I was cycling when I filmed this.

Ah, so long as you are cycling when you do it, you could film, say, the
changing of the guard at Buckingham Palace, and then justify a post
about that. A bit of a weak excuse really.

> This is exactly the behaviour that elements of the press complain that
> we (cyclists) do all the time, and motorists never do.

Do cyclists do it or not? This is a cycling group. You should be
encouraging cyclists to do it less, not justifying it because some
other, non-cyclists, may also do it. This is the sort of denial and
excuse that has brought cycling into disrepute in the press.

> The arrow on the traffic lights is a blue left turn only sign.

Fair enough.

--
Matt B

 

[Adam Lea]

"Matt B" <"matt.bourke"@nospam.london.com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Isn't there a green left filter arrow on in this one?
>

Yes but the leftmost arrow is a left turn only arrow, the green left filter
arrow is just to the right of this and illuminates after the car goes
through the lights.

 

[Marc Brett]

On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 23:10:16 +0100, Matt B
<"matt.bourke"@nospam.london.com> wrote:
>Martin Dann wrote:
>> This is exactly the behaviour that elements of the press complain that
>> we (cyclists) do all the time, and motorists never do.
>
>Do cyclists do it or not? This is a cycling group. You should be
>encouraging cyclists to do it less, not justifying it because some
>other, non-cyclists, may also do it. This is the sort of denial and
>excuse that has brought cycling into disrepute in the press.

The press complain about cyclists' behaviour (real or imgined) and the
danger (real or imagined) that cyclists represent, not their denial of
these facts. If you have evidence to prove me wrong, I'd be happy to
see it.

 

[Matt B]

Marc Brett wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 23:10:16 +0100, Matt B
> <"matt.bourke"@nospam.london.com> wrote:
>> Martin Dann wrote:
>>> This is exactly the behaviour that elements of the press complain that
>>> we (cyclists) do all the time, and motorists never do.
>> Do cyclists do it or not? This is a cycling group. You should be
>> encouraging cyclists to do it less, not justifying it because some
>> other, non-cyclists, may also do it. This is the sort of denial and
>> excuse that has brought cycling into disrepute in the press.
>
> The press complain about cyclists' behaviour (real or imgined) and the
> danger (real or imagined) that cyclists represent,

Yes.

> not their denial of
> these facts. If you have evidence to prove me wrong, I'd be happy to
> see it.

Yes, "denial" was a bad choice of word. What I meant was, perhaps, more
like "trivialisation". The tendency to brush aside any criticism, to
even treat the anti-social actions as acceptable, because others do it
too. Condemnation is what is required, then when it has been eradicated
others can be condemned from the moral high ground. Hypocrisy
guarantees a bad press.

--
Matt B

 

[Roger Merriman]

Matt B <"matt.bourke"@nospam.london.com> wrote:

big snips

Pot kettle matt, pot kettle.

roger

 

[POHB]

On 12 Jun, 18:54, Martin Dann <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yesterday I went out for a ride for about one hour. On the
> ride back up from the city center I saw two cars drive
> through different red lights within a few minutes.

Not sure what you're trying to prove here. On my commute this morning
I'd guess I saw about 1 in 5 cyclists bothering to stop for red lights
when the way ahead was clear. I played leap-frog with a pack of about
8 who would get ahead of me at each red and then I would overtake them
again on the next stretch. This happens every day, would you like to
come and film it?

 

[Marc Brett]

On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 07:32:09 +0100, Matt B
<"matt.bourke"@nospam.london.com> wrote:

>Yes, "denial" was a bad choice of word. What I meant was, perhaps, more
>like "trivialisation". The tendency to brush aside any criticism, to
>even treat the anti-social actions as acceptable, because others do it
>too. Condemnation is what is required, then when it has been eradicated
>others can be condemned from the moral high ground.

Eradication of anti-social behaviour is impossible. To ask that anybody
wait for it to happen before they can criticise anyone else is to
guarantee their silence forever. Is this really productive? Is this
your aim?

>Hypocrisy guarantees a bad press.

Hardly. Motorised RLJs are happy to criticise non-motorised RLJs, and
nobody in the press sees the irony.

 

[Dave]

"Martin Dann" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Yesterday I went out for a ride for about one hour. On the ride back up
> from the city center I saw two cars drive through different red lights
> within a few minutes.
>
> The first driver then did a u-turn at the next set of lights which has a
> no U-turn sign.
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wARm0ObytD8
> (It is very difficult to see the u-turn on film).
>
snip

Don't want to defend him - but I couldn't tell from the video whether the
green filter arrow was on for him to left turn as it was when you got there.

If it was red then he was wrong - but it happens all the time here as does
driving wrong way up one way streets etc.

Police never around.

Dave

 

[Matt B]

Marc Brett wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 07:32:09 +0100, Matt B
> <"matt.bourke"@nospam.london.com> wrote:
>
>> Yes, "denial" was a bad choice of word. What I meant was, perhaps, more
>> like "trivialisation". The tendency to brush aside any criticism, to
>> even treat the anti-social actions as acceptable, because others do it
>> too. Condemnation is what is required, then when it has been eradicated
>> others can be condemned from the moral high ground.
>
> Eradication of anti-social behaviour is impossible. To ask that anybody
> wait for it to happen before they can criticise anyone else is to
> guarantee their silence forever. Is this really productive? Is this
> your aim?

No, I'd rather see a cycling group concentrate on cleaning up its own
act. By all means discuss other aspects of road safety, such as the
risks taken at traffic lights, but do not attempt to use the antics of
non-cyclists to bat away criticism of anti-social cyclists.

--
Matt B

 

[Dead Paul]

On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 00:31:53 -0700, POHB wrote:

> On 12 Jun, 18:54, Martin Dann <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Yesterday I went out for a ride for about one hour. On the ride back up
>> from the city center I saw two cars drive through different red lights
>> within a few minutes.
>
> Not sure what you're trying to prove here. On my commute this morning I'd
> guess I saw about 1 in 5 cyclists bothering to stop for red lights when
> the way ahead was clear. I played leap-frog with a pack of about 8 who
> would get ahead of me at each red and then I would overtake them again on
> the next stretch. This happens every day, would you like to come and film
> it?


Perhaps he should. People like you should be prosecuted if you jump red
lights or contravene any other road traffic law. You might have thought
the way was clear and hence safe to jump the lights but you may have
missed an approaching vehicle or bike. If their lights were on red the
chances are they would stop and you'd be safe but if theirs were on green
they would have no expectation that you would choose that moment to
venture out on your suicide mission. It was a gamble and you chose to
gamble with others lives as well as your own. You should stick to rock
climbing or whatever sport will satisfy your death wish and not endanger
the lives of others.


--
___ _______ ___ ___ ___ __ ____
/ _ \/ __/ _ | / _ \ / _ \/ _ |/ / / / /
/ // / _// __ |/ // / / ___/ __ / /_/ / /__
/____/___/_/ |_/____/ /_/ /_/ |_\____/____/

 

[Marc Brett]

On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 09:42:46 +0100, Matt B
<"matt.bourke"@nospam.london.com> wrote:

>Marc Brett wrote:
>> On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 07:32:09 +0100, Matt B
>> <"matt.bourke"@nospam.london.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, "denial" was a bad choice of word. What I meant was, perhaps, more
>>> like "trivialisation". The tendency to brush aside any criticism, to
>>> even treat the anti-social actions as acceptable, because others do it
>>> too. Condemnation is what is required, then when it has been eradicated
>>> others can be condemned from the moral high ground.
>>
>> Eradication of anti-social behaviour is impossible. To ask that anybody
>> wait for it to happen before they can criticise anyone else is to
>> guarantee their silence forever. Is this really productive? Is this
>> your aim?
>
>No, I'd rather see a cycling group concentrate on cleaning up its own
>act. By all means discuss other aspects of road safety, such as the
>risks taken at traffic lights, but do not attempt to use the antics of
>non-cyclists to bat away criticism of anti-social cyclists.

That is pandering to the wails of the "lycra louts are a menace"
brigade. There's nothing wrong in pointing out the
hysteria-to-actual_danger ratio to get things in perspective. Then the
true picture would emerge that cyclists actually represent very little
danger to anyone. Then, one might reasonably conclude, there is very
little to clean up. Trivial matters deserve trivialisation.

BTW, I saw /loads/ of RLJing cyclists this morning. They were /all/
courteously letting peds go first or giving them a very wide berth, and
watching carefully for cross traffic, before enjoying their tiny time
slice of traffic-free road. Oddly enough, my face didn't turn red and I
wasn't foaming at the mouth. Isn't that strange?

 

[Dave Larrington]

In news:[email protected],
Dead Paul <[email protected]> tweaked the Babbage-Engine to tell us:

> Perhaps he should. People like you should be prosecuted if you jump
> red lights or contravene any other road traffic law. You might have
> thought the way was clear and hence safe to jump the lights but you
> may have missed an approaching vehicle or bike. If their lights were
> on red the chances are they would stop and you'd be safe but if
> theirs were on green they would have no expectation that you would
> choose that moment to venture out on your suicide mission. It was a
> gamble and you chose to gamble with others lives as well as your own.
> You should stick to rock climbing or whatever sport will satisfy your
> death wish and not endanger the lives of others.

I've re-read POHB's post half a dozen times now, and nowhere does s/he say
s/he jumped a red light.

Back in your box, laddie.


--
Dave Larrington
<http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk>
And I begged, "Angel of the Lord, what are these tortured
screams?" And the angel said unto me, "These are the cries of
the carrots, the cries of the carrots! You see, Reverend Maynard,
tomorrow is harvest day and to them it is the holocaust."

 

[Paul Boyd]

Dead Paul said the following on 13/06/2007 10:36:

> Perhaps he should. People like you should be prosecuted if you jump red
> lights or contravene any other road traffic law.
<snip>

Try reading the post you're replying to properly, then an apology to
POHB might be accepted.

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/