RLJ (Red Light Jumping). (The definitive bikeradar thread)

I believe that in order to promote cycling, gain respect and attract new cyclists, it is vital (certainly for campaign groups) to consider and sometimes take action to demonstrate that law breaking (even if we don't always agree with the law/Highway Code) is not OK.

I believe the children are our future...

I'm not missing the point I'm denying it. You have failed to counter my argument by at any point trying to show how different defences for different actions can be treated differently. ie You can defend RLJ by cyclists without having to worry about justifying those who defend speeding by motorists.

I'm not trying to counter your argument as its pointless and self serving.

You may feel comfortable defending your own actions by comparing them to something completely different, and I commend you for your faith in yourself, but I suggest that the "look over there- that's worse!" approach to justification is a precarious one to rely on.

I'm not trying to counter your argument as its pointless and self serving.

You may feel comfortable defending your own actions by comparing them to something completely different, and I commend you for your faith in yourself, but I suggest that the "look over there- that's worse!" approach to justification is a precarious one to rely on.

What actions do you suppose I get up to?

And failing to connect with my argument is simply admitting yours is wrong. I havn't really made any direct statement about what cycling behave we should expect to see. I am only saying that trying to assert a moral equivalence between speeding motorists and RLJ cyclists is falacious.

At the very start I stated I wasn't acting in defence of RLJ cyclists, my own take on it is that picking and choosing which laws we abide by is a dodgy way to go about things. However cycling and driving a car are fundamentally different acts with regards to dangers to society and as such breaches of the law by the two parties can be treated differently without condoning either.

What actions do you suppose I get up to?

Throwing stones from the security of your glass house.

Throwing stones from the security of your glass house.

What glass house? I don't run red lights, I think it's wrong. Are you going to at any point justify equating RLJ cyclists with speeding motorists?

someone start a thread called
"Institute of Advanced cyclists finds most motorists use mobile phones whilst driving"

rearrange the frame

What glass house? I don't run red lights, I think it's wrong. Are you going to at any point justify equating RLJ cyclists with speeding motorists?

I did- you denied it.

The view that I expressed is that both parties view their own actions as justifiable -using the views that you hold, on both sides somewhat ironically- and that the actions of the other party are dangerous.

I did {counter your argument}- you denied it.

.

I'm not trying to counter your argument

Right I'm confused now.

I agree that cyclists jumping lights is a bad thing, but I don't think it's a very bad thing. And not something than can be used as a stick to beat cyclists with or 'we' need to be particularly repentant about. The stuff about speeding mototrists is so different in consequence that it really doesn't even fit into this argument.

This would only make sense if morally speaking car speeding = cycle RLJing.

This isn't to defend RLJ, rather to point out speeding motorists kill and maim every single day, RLJ cyclists injure peds on a yearly frequency and never harm motorists. The two offences are not equivalent and hence efforts to defend one or the other are also not equivalent.

A cyclist going through a windshield at 30 mph when the car bonnet takes the bike out from under them is going to harm everyone involved. Let alone the possibility of vehicles veering off the road or into other road users while avoiding the obstacle.

Yes, empirically it's clear more harm is done by motorists than cyclists but that's not going to change anyone's attitude. The risk of injury is similar. Cyclists RLJ blatantly. Drivers will give no quarter.

A cyclist going through a windshield at 30 mph when the car bonnet takes the bike out from under them is going to harm everyone involved. Let alone the possibility of vehicles veering off the road or into other road users while avoiding the obstacle.

Yes, empirically it's clear more harm is done by motorists than cyclists but that's not going to change anyone's attitude. The risk of injury is similar. Cyclists RLJ blatantly. Drivers will give no quarter.

As I said RLJ is a bad thing.

Anf then you excused cyclists by saying "but look at motorists, what they do is worse"

A cyclist going through a windshield at 30 mph when the car bonnet takes the bike out from under them is going to harm everyone involved. Let alone the possibility of vehicles veering off the road or into other road users while avoiding the obstacle.

Yes, empirically it's clear more harm is done by motorists than cyclists but that's not going to change anyone's attitude. The risk of injury is similar. Cyclists RLJ blatantly. Drivers will give no quarter.

Do significant numbers people actually RLJ across traffic then? I thought it was mostly through T-junctions/turning left/empty ped crossings ie. when there is little chance of any sort of collision/obstruction.

I wrote:

However cycling and driving a car are fundamentally different acts with regards to dangers to society and as such breaches of the law by the two parties can be treated differently without condoning either.

To emphasise: "without condoning either", I have not sought to excuse cyclists by comparing their actions with drivers, you have sought to condemn apologists by comparing them to driver apologists. This is still your argument not mine.

Saying that cyclists law breaking is morally different than drivers law breaking does sound rather like you are putting their offence in a better light, no?

Do significant numbers people actually RLJ across traffic then? I thought it was mostly through T-junctions/turning left/empty ped crossings ie. when there is little chance of any sort of collision/obstruction.
Oh it mostly is. But then drivers would say they only run red lights by a split second, two at the most, hardly ever three and they make sure to do it really fast so there's no chance of getting collected by accellerating cross traffic. Totes safe. Likewise driving 15 mph over the limit. Modern cars, ABS, traction control war on motorists etc. Point being both parties will justify their own behavior and condemn the other and resist all movement and measures to improve safety long term. Referring to your earlier post hairnetic, car speeding does equal cyclist RLJ if we're discussing bad road user habits and grievances.

if we stopped defending cyclists who rlj we might gain a bit of credibility.

At the moment we sound like motorists defending speeding.

all of this.

:-|

57% seems about right to me.

Do significant numbers people actually RLJ across traffic then? I thought it was mostly through T-junctions/turning left/empty ped crossings ie. when there is little chance of any sort of collision/obstruction.

You haven't ridden in London's Ease of East End, then? I haz no science but that has to be the highest number that I see. Fuck I've even had a cycle instructor have a go at me for waiting!

<><<<<<>><<<>>

its nothing to with red lights itself… if it wasnt red lights, it'd be filtering, or parking or riding 2 abreats… oh wait…
anyway if 2000 people are killed each year by people on bikes I'd disagree… the elephant in the room is the domination, intimidation and bullying by people as soon as they get in a car…a hundred or so people are killed each year whilst on the pavement, not even crossing the road, just walking along the pavement FFS

A cyclist is more likely to be killed by a motor vehicle rljing than kill anyone by rljing:

Figures from the London Accident Analysis Unit over the five-year period 2001-05, show that there were:

2 cyclists who died while jumping red lights:
7 motorbikers died jumping red lights (one of these collisions also killed a car driver);
3 cyclists were killed by drivers jumping red lights;
7 pedestrians were killed by drivers jumping red lights;
7 people (drivers or passengers) were killed in collisions between two motor vehicles (excluding motorbikes), at least one of which was jumping a red light.

http://www.ralphsmyth.me.uk/citycyclists/policeclampdown.html

It's not only daft to pretend cyclists rljing is the same as drivers speeding, it's not very sensible to compare cyclings rljing with drivers doing the same.

It's just really tiresome that a stupid survey will reinforce prejudice against cyclists, if someone published a survey that "proved" that 57% of Jewish people shoplift they'd be in trouble.

It doesn't matter what the real statistical equivalence is. The perception is what you're dealing with - it's the only thing you've got to work with if you want to change attitudes. Throwing our hands in the air and saying nothing will happen until drivers change their ways is head-in-the-sand stuff.

<><<<<<>><<<>>

Haha :)

An graphic that shows just how stupid the article and its conclusions are:

I think people answering this were being very reserved, yet it still shows that more than half cyclists admit to jumping red lights. I jump less red lights than any cyclist I know, whenever I ride with others I am always a little shocked at just how many lights get jumped. Takes me right out of my comfort zone, so I tend to get left behind where I am not confident enough to jump lights. But I still jump at all pedestrian crossings if there is no one on them. I also jump lights at cross shaped junctions to get a headstart and avoid being stranded in the centre. I am sure that even the most prudish cyclists do this, as it makes no sense not to.

I think the actual figure was 57% never heard of mudguards.

How very apt that I also posted this then:

Your point is what? I know the survey is weak. But I feel the actual number of frequent RLJ'ers is higher than the survey suggests. Not many cyclists would even end up at the IAM website and even less who choose to fill out the form, and honestly too.

Yes this is my own observation. But what point are you trying to make?

75% of riders at one junction this evening jumped the red light. Poised waiting for green I thought up a witty cuss for when I caught and passed them. So the lights turned green, I gave it some beans and....

.... my chain snapped. #epicfail