Ran a Red Light > I'll be hearing from the courts!

[thirdcrank]

sesme

I can appreciate how worrying this has been but I'm pretty sure that you've heard the last of this. It woudn't be the first time somebody couldn't be bothered to write a report or they realised too late that they'd overlooked a vital bit of info. OTOH there are all sorts of other reasons why things grind to a halt. In 1975 several defendants facing quite serious charges got a surprise 'get out of jail free' card when Stephen Tibble was not available to give evidence.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/date ... 515789.stm

[rootes]

well got to say a red light is a red light... they are there for a reason - it is th eone thing taht annoys me more than the red light itself is some cyclists disregard for traffic lights..

now if rules are changed to allow cyclist to perform some manoeuvres under red then fine, but no such at the moment so it is tough..

and if you are going to run a red light don't do it in front of a copper

The irony being of course that if the rules ever do get changed it'll be thanks to all those that ran red lights...

too true!

[sesme]

That particular bike got stolen and the justice system seems to be far less effective at catching and punishing bike thieves as it is at punishing RLJers, so I'd like to think the Karma is already taken care of!

[ed_o_brain]

I'll bet not all of them are experienced enough to where to look for traffic or how to judge it's speed on approach.

I think I'd question if bike riding were really for me if I couldn't look for traffic or judge it's speed...

Regardless of the rights and wrongs of RLJing, traffic lights are to control congestion (not safety) something bicycles generally don't contribute too. Without lights it's just a junction and I cycle across dozens of them (junctions) every day.

Being pedantic for a second, traffic lights are their to control priorities at junctions. They affect traffic flow, but generally there is little they can do about congestion.

As for your first comment, I still occasionally discover new hazards even though I have been cycling for years. Not only that, but you don't have to go far to spot cyclists putting themselves into vulnerable positions.

[kwackers]

Being pedantic for a second, traffic lights are their to control priorities at junctions. They affect traffic flow, but generally there is little they can do about congestion.

I don't follow. Why do you need to control priorities at junctions if not to reduce congestion? Surely the point is to give everyone a bite at the cherry rather than have the low priority road backed up for miles (or the poor saps waiting half an hour for a gap) - that constitutes congestion yes?

As for your first comment, I still occasionally discover new hazards even though I have been cycling for years. Not only that, but you don't have to go far to spot cyclists putting themselves into vulnerable positions.

I agree, but I doubt that anyone who's been driving, riding or whatever for any amount of time couldn't successfully negotiate a junction with lights on it - even if the lights are against them. If they can't then they can't handle junctions either.
There are of course exceptions to this - (single lane hump backed bridges for example) where it wouldn't be safe to run the light, but you don't really need to be too bright to figure that out, and of course for anyone stupid enough that's why the Darwin awards exist.

[thirdcrank]

sesme now seems to be rejoicing in the protection of the law which is intended to prevent cases being bought past their 'sell by date'. While recycling old stuff is generally better than a throwaway culture, surely this particular RLJ thread is now due for landfill (after a quick verse of happy birthday to you.)