http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b03kkgmr/Daily_Politics_26_11_2013/
Starts about 33 minutes,watch out for the Police watching the van go through a red lights at 34.15 or so
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Cycling News
Daily Politics on cycling
(11 posts)-
Posted 11 years ago #
-
David Crampton @DaveCrampton 3m
"Police Det Ch Sup Glyn Jones' officers ingore van running redlight during cycle safety crackdown? pic.twitter.com/DyXfp4nFYy "
David Crampton @DaveCrampton 37s
"@DaveCrampton seen around 34:15 in BBC Daily Politics show http://www.bbc.co.uk/mobile/iplayer/episode/b03kkgmr/Daily_Politics_26_11_2013 … "
Does this show officers only concentrating on cyclists and ignoring other road users 'red light jumping'?
Posted 11 years ago # -
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.
Of course, we have to factor in my reaction time, so it may have been just behind the line.
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.
Posted 11 years ago # -
well given they were pulling law abiding cyclists over
I would have thought a van pulling an ambler gambler at best,would merit a word
especially given the recent coverage and mass of high viz Met officers at the junctionEg Whats this all about?
https://twitter.com/metpoliceuk/status/404894323701186560/photo/1
Posted 11 years ago # -
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.
Well, it's also an offence to go through on amber...
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 have to go through red lights due to traffic / job pressures / insert excuse here...
Posted 11 years ago # -
Not 'quite' as absolute as that Dave:
"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."
Posted 11 years ago # -
The 1st van went through when the lights were already amber
so the 2nd van should have had space to stopPosted 11 years ago # -
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.
Awareness campaign material? "Amber means stop, same as red." Instead of trying to stop red light jumpers, inform that it's illegal to jump amber if you could have stopped safely. It would probably have more of the desired overall effect.
Posted 11 years ago # -
"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."
I didn't know that.
My understanding was that you could go through if you could get past the line before the light turned red.
That assumption was based on observing driving in Edinburgh.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Hang on, we're saying it's not OK to click up a few gears and hoon wildly for the line?
:p
Posted 11 years ago # -
"That assumption was based on observing driving in Edinburgh."
And many other places!
There is an inevitability about this while there is seen to be an advantage over waiting for the next cycle of lights - or the chance of enforcement/penalties.
This is also, perhaps, a consequence of bowing to the great 'god' "traffic flow".
Whether traffic engineers have instilled this behaviour or are responding to "public demand" is unclear (to me at least).
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.
Posted 11 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
posts
