A friend alerted me to this article, and I thought it might be of interest.
http://www.vox.com/2014/5/9/5691098/why-cyclists-should-be-able-to-roll-through-stop-signs-and-ride
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!
"Why cyclists should be able to...ride through red lights"
(39 posts)-
Posted 11 years ago #
-
Cars on my route do that anyway!
Posted 11 years ago # -
Literally the only reason I don't ride through red lights is for PR: to avoid giiving numpty drivers cause to moan about us. But I've never thought it was necessary or logical - if I can share a pavement like a pedestrian on a shared-use path, why can't I cross a road junction like one?
Posted 11 years ago # -
Completely agree with calmac. I don't jump lights for the same reason, but there are many times when it is very tempting and perfectly safe to do so.
Posted 11 years ago # -
calmac:
From my experience today the police don't necessarily care but other cyclists do!
Posted 11 years ago # -
other cyclists do!
Perhaps because those of us who do wait at red lights for PR reasons feel that those minutes are wasted if other cyclists ignore the lights and undermine our PR efforts?
I should add that I do completely agree that often there's no reason to stop other than 'not giving cyclists a bad name'.
Posted 11 years ago # -
I never dismount for pelican/toucan crossings unless I'm likely to come into conflict with a pedestrian. That's just a stupid rule.
In fact, so much of the red light moaning is about slavish adherence to stupid rules. It's against the rules to cycle through a red, so your are a Very Bad Person if you cycle through a red.
Never mind that there's nothing coming in any direction, that you're not inconveniencing anyone in any way at all, that it's the green man and your route takes you nowehere near the one pedestrian crossing at the time; it's against the rules and rules is rules.
It bothers some cyclists and drivers so for the Greater Good I won't to it. But it really is silly.
Same goes for riding on pavements. It's all about time and place.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Gosh, all these hyper fit people who never need a breather when cycling around town, and pedal at 100% efficiency all the time. I love red lights, especially on my cycle home (up Leith Walk etc). Pause for breath at the top of Leith Street is particularly welcome. My GPS counts lapsed time; my trip computer counts wheels turning time. Usually a couple of minutes difference, but so what?
When i worked for a bike courier firm 20 odd years ago, we did a race between two couriers over a reasonable distance; one indulged in every cliche under the sun (through red, on and off apvements etc), and the other stopped everywhere. Both fit cycle couriers when there were plenty of them. Difference between them at the end was not more than 30 seconds and wholly down to the last red light stopped at.
My commute time is pretty constant whether I get stopped at lots of lights or not over 20 odd minutes, but I do know I regularly overtake RLJs on North Bridge etc
Posted 11 years ago # -
I like getting a wee rest at the lights.
Posted 11 years ago # -
I'd be lost with out the lights at Gillespie Crossroads.
Posted 11 years ago # -
I don't run red lights, partly because of perception and partly because I'm one of those people that tends to follow the rules, seeing that's how society works.
Just recently, I've also taken to not bothering to filter to the front of a queue at traffic lights if I'm a few cars back from the lights. Instead I would sit in primary position in the queue. It was enlightening how much more relaxed my journey became as I was able to look around at the architecture on the Bridges, for instance, or look at the sky for a bit. I think it cost me all of 20 seconds in journey time.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Like PS, I am now more conservative on the filtering, especially if I am near the front anyway. It's good to relax.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Nice article. That Idaho Law sounds brilliant.
I don't run reds normally because I am scared of run-ins with the law. The perception/group punishment thing seems weird to me, not sure it's even real, other than among a small minority of angry shouties parroting their newscomics, an unwinnable situation for sure.
Posted 11 years ago # -
It's not speed for me, it's just impatience really. And I'm not exactly fit so keeping a nice, smooth rhythm is a high priority.
It's more to do with "why am I stopped here when there's no reason for it?" kind of thinking. But there really does have to be no reason - and being nice out there is a reason for stopping at reds while things are as they are.
I'm not a glass half-full guy, I'm not a glass half-empty guy. I'm a "where's the rest of my bl**dy drink" kind of guy.
Posted 11 years ago # -
I'm with calmac -
"why am I stopped here when there's no reason for it?"
Not all but many traffic lights are only there because of and for the benefit of those in motor vehicles.
Posted 11 years ago # -
@gkgk - it's real alright. There was Scottish Government research a few years ago into it, talking to real drivers, taxi and bus ones too. See http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2001/05/9069/File-1
@Pintail - but that applies to all road users. Drivers are just as used to stopping on quiet roads late at night at a red light when they cant see anything around that could have priority. If bikes can choose to ignore a red, why not a driver? And the answer is to do with predictability and observation, I'd have thought. People are used to wheeled road users stopping at a red, so they act as if they will stop.(which is why examples from other cultures are not that relevant). So for example today, driving through the meadows taking my two girls to the dentist, I stopped at the toucan near the bowling green as the light was red, even though no one was crossing. while I was stopped, a pedestrian ran across from behind my right shoulder (I was first in queue). He presumably trusted me to stay still while the light was red even though it was pretty unlikely that I'd have seen him.
Posted 11 years ago # -
I recall reading that TFL research found 12 times as many cyclists are killed who waited at red, compared to those killed who went through red.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/male-cyclists-who-jump-red-lights-are-safer-7181197.htmlPosted 11 years ago # -
"Drivers are just as used to stopping on quiet roads late at night at a red light when they cant see anything around that could have priority. If bikes can choose to ignore a red, why not a driver?"
I have to confess that, if I'm driving and I'm stopped at a red light in the middle of the night, I'm not near any houses or anything and I can be completely sure there are no other cars around and that it would definitely be safe to drive through the red, I go through.
In parts of the US you can make a right turn through a red if there's nothing coming - you treat it as a Stop sign, and in France they have flashing reds that do the same.
We seem to be very petty about rules in Britain. In Linlithgow I can cycle along the canal, which is pretty narrow in places, and round the loch, and on any paths that aren't near roads. But cycle at walking speed with one foot off the pedals on a very wide pavement with no pedestrians near you, and people will take the struntz.
Posted 11 years ago # -
@mgj Good link, interesting too, thanks, but I'm not persuaded by the work. If anything though, it suggests that those who would stop at reds just to keep wonky-thinking drivers happy (and who would not stop otherwise) ought to consider buying a car tax disc for their bike for the same reason, and find a test of some sort to sit, and get the insurance sorted. Why should anyone who doesn't agree with stopping at reds single it out as the one thing to conform to? Maybe this isn't about drivers at all, but about cyclist group conformation. Intriguing topic, anyway.
Posted 11 years ago # -
"If anything though, it suggests that those who would stop at reds just to keep wonky-thinking drivers happy (and who would not stop otherwise) ought to consider buying a car tax disc for their bike for the same reason, and find a test of some sort to sit, and get the insurance sorted."
Eh? It's illegal to cycle through a red light, is it not? Some people also think it is inconsiderate.
But it's not a legal requirement to have a tax disc for a bike, or pass a test, or have insurance, nor does anyone think it is inconsiderate not to do those things.
So I think your point is a wee bit wonky.
Posted 11 years ago # -
It is clearly stupid that cyclists can't turn left through a red light, when safe to do so. In most situations, the ped lights will be on red as cars may be turning into the road. The only reason for the red light is to ration road space between motor vehicles. This can be in situations, such as the end of Chambers Street into the Bridges, where the cyclist can turn left into a bus lane, not even having to join the flow of other trafic.
Drivers are angry because cyclists can travel faster in town than they do, and look healthier and fitter while they do it. The pretexts given for the anger, such as RLJing, are just that. Pretty much all motorists drive through lights changing to red. You only have to observe the difference in behaviour where there are red light cameras to appreciate the universality of this law being broken elsewhere. Pretty much all motorists drive significantly over 30mph in town. You only have to try driving at the speed limit to see how rare this is. There is nothing in the least unusal about people breaking laws as they travel around roads.
(Disclaimer: Nothing in this post should be taken to infer that I have ever broken any law, ever)
Posted 11 years ago # -
mgj I stopped at the toucan near the bowling green as the light was red, even though no one was crossing.
Have people noticed a higher compliance with actual pedestrian crossings on a road as opposed to ones that are at junctions? I reckon it's because drivers face each other so to run through a pedestrian crossing on red - even when no-one is there - is more 'noticeable' or blatant.
Also a pedestrian crossing delays you for a minute amount of time whereas some junctions take 'for ever'. I also accept that the Argyle Place crossing / junction is habitually ignored by traffic in Melville Drive but that is partly due to the poor design. Time they had another go ;-)
My observation might be 'wonky' (main word in this thread)
Posted 11 years ago # -
Drivers are angry because cyclists can travel faster in town than they do, and look healthier and fitter while they do it.
No, they're angry because people are deliberately breaking the law right in front of them.
Posted 11 years ago # -
But it's not impacting on them in any way, or anyone else, when a cyclist carefully RLJs... so I think their ire is mostly manufactured. Their anger is misplaced.
I just don't think it helps any of us if we give the car people ammunition to whine, so I don't do it.
Posted 11 years ago # -
@cc
But as I pointed out, virtually ever driver breaks the law on every trip in town. That is just a fact. Are they equally angry with themselves and each other? No.
Posted 11 years ago # -
@cc
In fact, most drivers are angry with other drivers who don't break the law. Try driving at 29mph or stopping on Amber. 90% of the time there will be some angry twat getting angry behind you.
It is not the fact of breaking the law that winds them up.
Posted 11 years ago # -
@cc
try driving at 19mph through the 20 mph limit zone in Holyrood park, or the 20mph streets around South Edinburgh, and tell me that drivers get angry because they see someone "deliberately breaking the law in front of them".
Posted 11 years ago # -
No, they're angry because people are deliberately breaking the law right in front of them.
and they can't get away with itPosted 11 years ago # -
@paul.mag
That's odd, beacuse every single day I see drivers getting away with driving significantly over 30mph where it is the speed limit. Every single day, I see drivers getting away with jumping a light that has turned red. Every day I see drivers ignoring no right turn signs, undertaking, not stopping at stop lines, failing to signal before moving off from the kerb using their hazard lights inappropriately, using their horns inapprpropriately, etc, etc, all the time getting away with it.
It is the rare enforcement of the law against drivers that is the exception.
Posted 11 years ago # -
@Charlethepar
I've ridden through Holyrood Park almost 500 times and have seen two cars observing the speed limit. It's a very odd sight. I've seen more drivers breaking 40 than under 20.Posted 11 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
