http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Topic: Daily Politics on cycling en Mon, 18 May 2026 22:20:35 +0000 http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=11739#post-134911 Thu, 28 Nov 2013 08:58:22 +0000 chdot 134911@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"That assumption was based on observing driving in Edinburgh."</p> <p>And many other places!</p> <p>There is an inevitability about this while there is seen to be an advantage over waiting for the next cycle of lights - <em>or</em> the chance of enforcement/penalties. </p> <p>This is also, perhaps, a consequence of bowing to the great 'god' "traffic flow". </p> <p>Whether traffic engineers have instilled this behaviour or are responding to "public demand" is unclear (to me at least).</p> <p>As with the (other threads) discussions on shared use and pavement cycling, it's all about what the roads are for. For many it's merely the way of getting between two points as quickly as possible. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=11739#post-134909 Thu, 28 Nov 2013 08:38:54 +0000 Darkerside 134909@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Hang on, we're saying it's <strong>not</strong> OK to click up a few gears and hoon wildly for the line?</p> <p>:p </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=11739#post-134908 Thu, 28 Nov 2013 08:25:38 +0000 gibbo 134908@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>"If the amber light appears you may go on only if you have already crossed the stop line or are so close to it that to stop might cause a collision."</em></p> <p>I didn't know that. </p> <p>My understanding was that you could go through if you could get past the line before the light turned red. </p> <p>That assumption was based on observing driving in Edinburgh. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=11739#post-134895 Wed, 27 Nov 2013 22:47:50 +0000 Snowy 134895@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>He had time to stop. However, I see worse examples daily in Edinburgh. I doubt the Met would ever consider that to be stop-worthy.</p> <p>Awareness campaign material? "Amber means stop, same as red." Instead of trying to stop red light jumpers, inform that it's illegal to jump <em>amber</em> if you could have stopped safely. It would probably have more of the desired overall effect. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=11739#post-134883 Wed, 27 Nov 2013 20:54:22 +0000 custard 134883@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>The 1st van went through when the lights were already amber<br /> so the 2nd van should have had space to stop </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=11739#post-134879 Wed, 27 Nov 2013 20:47:09 +0000 Wilmington's Cow 134879@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Not 'quite' as absolute as that Dave:</p> <p>"If the amber light appears you may go on only if you have already crossed the stop line or are so close to it that to stop might cause a collision." </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=11739#post-134869 Wed, 27 Nov 2013 20:07:18 +0000 Dave 134869@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>But I don't think it's 100% clear it went through a red light, so I think the police couldn't have done anything based on human observation.</em></p> <p>Well, it's also an offence to go through on amber...</p> <p>However, no doubt they had spotted a cyclist without hi-viz and had to prioritise. After all, cyclists need protected from themselves while van drivers just about <em>have to</em> go through red lights due to traffic / job pressures / insert excuse here... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=11739#post-134866 Wed, 27 Nov 2013 18:43:39 +0000 custard 134866@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>well given they were pulling law abiding cyclists over<br /> I would have thought a van pulling an ambler gambler at best,would merit a word<br /> especially given the recent coverage and mass of high viz Met officers at the junction</p> <p>Eg Whats this all about?</p> <p><a href="https://twitter.com/metpoliceuk/status/404894323701186560/photo/1" rel="nofollow">https://twitter.com/metpoliceuk/status/404894323701186560/photo/1</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=11739#post-134859 Wed, 27 Nov 2013 18:02:05 +0000 gibbo 134859@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I stopped the video the moment I saw the lights turn to red. The van was about a foot past the line at that point.</p> <p>Of course, we have to factor in my reaction time, so it may have been just behind the line.</p> <p>But I don't think it's 100% clear it went through a red light, so I think the police couldn't have done anything based on human observation. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=11739#post-134840 Wed, 27 Nov 2013 16:35:51 +0000 DaveC 134840@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>David Crampton ‏@DaveCrampton 3m</p> <p>"Police Det Ch Sup Glyn Jones' officers ingore van running redlight during cycle safety crackdown? pic.twitter.com/DyXfp4nFYy "</p> <p>David Crampton ‏@DaveCrampton 37s</p> <p>"@DaveCrampton seen around 34:15 in BBC Daily Politics show <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/mobile/iplayer/episode/b03kkgmr/Daily_Politics_26_11_2013" rel="nofollow">http://www.bbc.co.uk/mobile/iplayer/episode/b03kkgmr/Daily_Politics_26_11_2013</a> … "</p> <p>Does this show officers only concentrating on cyclists and ignoring other road users 'red light jumping'? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=11739#post-134822 Wed, 27 Nov 2013 14:44:54 +0000 custard 134822@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b03kkgmr/Daily_Politics_26_11_2013/" rel="nofollow">http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b03kkgmr/Daily_Politics_26_11_2013/</a></p> <p>Starts about 33 minutes,watch out for the Police watching the van go through a red lights at 34.15 or so </p>