cyclist on Jeremy Vine again!
Re: cyclist on Jeremy Vine again!
Some of those are illegal - but 2 is a special case of 1 and 4
12 is just amusing on a bike.
12 is just amusing on a bike.
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.
Re: cyclist on Jeremy Vine again!
2Tubs wrote:Is number 2 even possible? Unless number 1 applies it just means waiting at each set of lights on red until they turn green.
Anyhow, some of those would be illegal, wouldn't they?
'Am I bovvered?'
Road laws are widely flouted by all road users. Such is life.
Re: cyclist on Jeremy Vine again!
[XAP]Bob wrote:Should I care?
Well, personally I think so because the principle of protection under the law is both important and vulnerable. This is a much bigger issue so maybe not for now. But what I would say is that cyclists often run a very close line with the law and to be able to assert their rights or indeed just to have a reasonable interpretation of the law applied is very important. So many issues (like cycling on the pavement) require a common sense response from the police anyway but there are also those where we have to stand our ground, such as in the Telford case.
When the pestilence strikes from the East, go far and breathe the cold air deeply. Ignore the sage, stay not indoors. Ho Ri Zon 12th Century Chinese philosopher
Re: cyclist on Jeremy Vine again!
thelawnet wrote:2Tubs wrote:Is number 2 even possible? Unless number 1 applies it just means waiting at each set of lights on red until they turn green.
Anyhow, some of those would be illegal, wouldn't they?
'Am I bovvered?'
Road laws are widely flouted by all road users. Such is life.
Yup, such is life. In the grand scheme of things, I couldn't care less.
But if that's genuinely how you feel. When a motorist runs a red light, talks on a mobile, drinks and drives or speeds an the result is a dead cyclist, would we excuse their behaviour and utter the words "such is life".
Gazza
Why not Look at Sheila's Wheelers E2E Journal
Or My Personal Site
Or My Tweets
Whatever you do, buy fair trade.
And smile.
Or My Personal Site
Or My Tweets
Whatever you do, buy fair trade.
And smile.
Re: cyclist on Jeremy Vine again!
2Tubs wrote:thelawnet wrote:2Tubs wrote:Is number 2 even possible? Unless number 1 applies it just means waiting at each set of lights on red until they turn green.
Anyhow, some of those would be illegal, wouldn't they?
'Am I bovvered?'
Road laws are widely flouted by all road users. Such is life.
Yup, such is life. In the grand scheme of things, I couldn't care less.
But if that's genuinely how you feel. When a motorist runs a red light, talks on a mobile, drinks and drives or speeds an the result is a dead cyclist, would we excuse their behaviour and utter the words "such is life".
Eh?
You might as well say that my response
'Am I bovvered?' to the illegal (and it is) use of fairy liquid to kill greenfly means that I can't get upset about (also illegal) acts of rape and murder.
Lots of laws out there, we all break some of them. Some are worth getting upset about, some not. Don't sweat the small stuff, as they say. Drinking and driving is hardly comparable to a cyclist going through a red light.
Re: cyclist on Jeremy Vine again!
Going through a red light is not a dangerous act in plenty of cases.
The obvious one is where a minor road joins a major road. Often you just have a stop line and no traffic light. You wait for a gap and enter the road, we do that many times every day.
If they decide to stick a traffic light on it to make sure that the minor road gets a period of priority for joining the major road, how does that make the junction suddenly dangerous when the main road has its priority stated by a green light rather than a stop line??
The obvious one is where a minor road joins a major road. Often you just have a stop line and no traffic light. You wait for a gap and enter the road, we do that many times every day.
If they decide to stick a traffic light on it to make sure that the minor road gets a period of priority for joining the major road, how does that make the junction suddenly dangerous when the main road has its priority stated by a green light rather than a stop line??
Yma o Hyd
-
- Posts: 36778
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
Re: cyclist on Jeremy Vine again!
Historically, the problem has been that when road users have been left to their own judgment, there has been a tendency among some to exercise it in their own favour, especially when the risks of doing so have been more likely to be at somebody else's expense.
Re: cyclist on Jeremy Vine again!
Yes, I can think of many junctions where car drivers ignore the fact that I have priority. I guess that this is considered more serious where a traffic light is involved as they only stick up the expensive traffic lights in important places.
I can think of at least one set of traffic lights where my green light counts for nothing as they keep following each other past the red light.
I can think of at least one set of traffic lights where my green light counts for nothing as they keep following each other past the red light.
Yma o Hyd
Re: cyclist on Jeremy Vine again!
thelawnet wrote:2Tubs wrote:thelawnet wrote:
'Am I bovvered?'
Road laws are widely flouted by all road users. Such is life.
Yup, such is life. In the grand scheme of things, I couldn't care less.
But if that's genuinely how you feel. When a motorist runs a red light, talks on a mobile, drinks and drives or speeds an the result is a dead cyclist, would we excuse their behaviour and utter the words "such is life".
Eh?
You might as well say that my response
'Am I bovvered?' to the illegal (and it is) use of fairy liquid to kill greenfly means that I can't get upset about (also illegal) acts of rape and murder.
Lots of laws out there, we all break some of them. Some are worth getting upset about, some not. Don't sweat the small stuff, as they say. Drinking and driving is hardly comparable to a cyclist going through a red light.
I agree.
Personally, I couldn't care less if a cyclist RLJ's their socks off. For the most part, it's their risk and have themselves to blame when a motorist puts a few tyre tracks up their backs.
But, these are the comments we hear from motorists, the "you don't respect the law" kind of rubbish as an excuse for left hooking us or attemptng to mow us down. I've even been told that an attempt to run my down is all my fault because I "should be wearing a helmet"
Just saying, that if we take the position where we chose which laws to abide, we have lost any moral postition to ask motorists to abide by the laws that they might break (the ones which change the internal colour of our cycling shorts)
Gazza
Why not Look at Sheila's Wheelers E2E Journal
Or My Personal Site
Or My Tweets
Whatever you do, buy fair trade.
And smile.
Or My Personal Site
Or My Tweets
Whatever you do, buy fair trade.
And smile.
Re: cyclist on Jeremy Vine again!
2Tubs wrote:Just saying, that if we take the position where we chose which laws to abide, we have lost any moral postition to ask motorists to abide by the laws that they might break (the ones which change the internal colour of our cycling shorts)
Hardly.
Again, just because I don't, for instance, get upset at someone downloading movies off the internet, doesn't mean I'm not entitled to get angry at mass-murder and rape.
Re: cyclist on Jeremy Vine again!
thelawnet wrote:2Tubs wrote:Just saying, that if we take the position where we chose which laws to abide, we have lost any moral postition to ask motorists to abide by the laws that they might break (the ones which change the internal colour of our cycling shorts)
Hardly.
Again, just because I don't, for instance, get upset at someone downloading movies off the internet, doesn't mean I'm not entitled to get angry at mass-murder and rape.
No I get it. It's a good point and agreed.
But we're talking on a personal level. On a personal level some motorists think it's fine to use mobiles, drive above the speed limit, run red lights, even have a beer before getting in their cars. After all, they've done it before and it doesn't hurt anybody. Speed limits are seen by a sizeable number of motorists as a restriction on their freedom.
The minute I tell someone who is on their mobile that if they were concentrating on their driving they probably wouldn't have forced me off the road, I'm told that cyclists ride on the pavement and run red lights.
Don't get me wrong, I'm a motorist and motorcyclist as well as a cyclist and come the revolution and I take my rightful place as president of a United Republic of Great Britain the first act I would make is that road traffic laws would not apply to cyclists and pedestrians (on the road).
Motorists would have to expect cycles to be running red lights, cutting up their insides/outsides and everywhere. Motorists would have to expect cyclists to be kamakazee in their manner of riding and consider the sole objective of cyclists is to throw themselves under the wheels of cars.
Any motorist caught out by one of these "nutters" would get an automatic life sentence in a prison that pumps Spice Girls, Abba and Westlife through speakers 24 hours a day. Yes, a living hell.
Until then, cyclists running red lights etc is unlikey to foster the co-operation we would like from our motorist friends.
Gazza
Why not Look at Sheila's Wheelers E2E Journal
Or My Personal Site
Or My Tweets
Whatever you do, buy fair trade.
And smile.
Or My Personal Site
Or My Tweets
Whatever you do, buy fair trade.
And smile.
Re: cyclist on Jeremy Vine again!
Hang on Gazza, what have got against the Spice Girls?
Damned fine group and good music too.
Mind you, I wouldn't want to listen to them 24/7!
Damned fine group and good music too.
Mind you, I wouldn't want to listen to them 24/7!
Mick F. Cornwall
Re: cyclist on Jeremy Vine again!
Mick F wrote:Hang on Gazza, what have got against the Spice Girls?
Damned fine group and good music too.
Mind you, I wouldn't want to listen to them 24/7!
You need help!
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
Re: cyclist on Jeremy Vine again!
Why is there such strong support from some posters for the idea that rlj-ing only puts the cyclist at risk? If someone jumps a red light and I hit them in my car then I may be physically unharmed but suffer severe psychological damage, my car will probably be damaged with (in many cases) no realistic chance of claiming on insurance or from the person responsible. Even worse the instinctive reactions when seeing a cyclist appear in front of me may result in my taking avoiding action that puts other people at risk (by swerving, braking suddenly so the cyclist behind me hits me etc).
(puts on tin hat and dives under table)
(puts on tin hat and dives under table)
Re: cyclist on Jeremy Vine again!
You are talking of a scenario where a cyclist jumps a red light into the path of fast traffic, which I dont think they are doing.
All the RLJing that I see is done well out of the path of fast moving cars, as I said in my earlier example just like joining a main road by crossing a stop line without the benefit of a traffic light..
Wait for a gap in the traffic and slip into or through it.
I dont see how the one case is more dangerous than the other but I do see how it is illegal.
Now if somebody is daft enough to cross a stop line in the face of oncoming traffic then they are probably daft enough to do it at a traffic light too.
Of course in your case they wouldnt see you coming.
All the RLJing that I see is done well out of the path of fast moving cars, as I said in my earlier example just like joining a main road by crossing a stop line without the benefit of a traffic light..
Wait for a gap in the traffic and slip into or through it.
I dont see how the one case is more dangerous than the other but I do see how it is illegal.
Now if somebody is daft enough to cross a stop line in the face of oncoming traffic then they are probably daft enough to do it at a traffic light too.
Of course in your case they wouldnt see you coming.
Last edited by meic on 21 Jan 2012, 12:43am, edited 1 time in total.
Yma o Hyd