Widow of Brian Dorling urges cyclists not to jump red lights, for their family's sake

ckk wrote:

ILeft turns: I am not sure about this but I think I have read somewhere that it is legally a grey area. I jump most red lights on left turns unless there are pedestrians crossing.

No it's not. Who told you that? You can do the equivalent in some US states but if you do it here (and you admit that you do), you are breaking the law. Do please stop it!

ckk wrote:

Cyclist boxes at traffic lights are mostly ignored by drivers. Whatever you do, you end up standing between two vehicles. ... But I never feel confident when I start on green next to cars, goods vehicles etc.

So, don't split the lane, stay in the lane, taking primary. Don't move in-between motor vehicles at lights. If you can't see the ASL being clear, just stay behind in the middle of the lane. Is, and feels, much safer.

ckk wrote:

Left turns: I am not sure about this but I think I have read somewhere that it is legally a grey area.

No, it isn't. There is no "turn left on red" rule in the UK. At all.

ckk wrote:

The fundamental mistake, both from authorities and pedestrians, as well as some part of cyclists, is to consider cyclists in the city as "vehicles" and expect from them to work in the same framework as motorized vehicles.

Totally agree. The "Idaho Stop" rule should apply to bicycles, as should left turn on red. But today they don't.

Colin Peyresourde wrote:

The problem comes if you are saying 'it's OK, it's only me!' Because if everyone does that you have no rules at all.

You should really look at it as there are rule breakers and rule keepers. And whether they are a motorist or a cyclist the rule breaking is not without consequence.

It probably leads to the traffic jams that make motorists pull their hair out, causing some to break the rules because they are tired of being stuck in traffic....which causes an accident.....

The point being that the rules are meant to help the system work and it makes more sense to work with it than against it......doesn't mean you can't change it if it doesn't work for you.

But cyclists will be taken more seriously if they work with the rules than against them.....I'm not saying I've never jumped a red. But it's the exception, not the rule and you cannot say that about some....

I'm sorry but thats bullshit feed to us by the mass media motoring lobby. I don't have to stop my fellow cyclist from braking the rules to be taken "seriously". Why don't you apply the same collective responsibility to motorists, their the ones killing people in their thousands. Dealing with the misdemeanors of cyclists is like shuffling deck chairs on the titanic.

Housecathst wrote:

Colin Peyresourde wrote:

The problem comes if you are saying 'it's OK, it's only me!' Because if everyone does that you have no rules at all.

You should really look at it as there are rule breakers and rule keepers. And whether they are a motorist or a cyclist the rule breaking is not without consequence.

It probably leads to the traffic jams that make motorists pull their hair out, causing some to break the rules because they are tired of being stuck in traffic....which causes an accident.....

The point being that the rules are meant to help the system work and it makes more sense to work with it than against it......doesn't mean you can't change it if it doesn't work for you.

But cyclists will be taken more seriously if they work with the rules than against them.....I'm not saying I've never jumped a red. But it's the exception, not the rule and you cannot say that about some....

I'm sorry but thats bullshit feed to us by the mass media motoring lobby. I don't have to stop my fellow cyclist from braking the rules to be taken "seriously". Why don't you apply the same collective responsibility to motorists, their the ones killing people in their thousands. Dealing with the misdemeanors of cyclists is like shuffling deck chairs on the titanic.

I apply it equally to anyone using the road. You should too.

Colin Peyresourde wrote:

Housecathst wrote:

Colin Peyresourde wrote:

The problem comes if you are saying 'it's OK, it's only me!' Because if everyone does that you have no rules at all.

You should really look at it as there are rule breakers and rule keepers. And whether they are a motorist or a cyclist the rule breaking is not without consequence.

It probably leads to the traffic jams that make motorists pull their hair out, causing some to break the rules because they are tired of being stuck in traffic....which causes an accident.....

The point being that the rules are meant to help the system work and it makes more sense to work with it than against it......doesn't mean you can't change it if it doesn't work for you.

But cyclists will be taken more seriously if they work with the rules than against them.....I'm not saying I've never jumped a red. But it's the exception, not the rule and you cannot say that about some....

I'm sorry but thats bullshit feed to us by the mass media motoring lobby. I don't have to stop my fellow cyclist from braking the rules to be taken "seriously". Why don't you apply the same collective responsibility to motorists, their the ones killing people in their thousands. Dealing with the misdemeanors of cyclists is like shuffling deck chairs on the titanic.

I apply it equally to anyone using the road. You should too.

In a perfect world I would totally agree, but we're not, we should be forcing on the people who cause the most harm, and that's motorists

Colin Peyresourde wrote:

The idiots that keep jumping the lights at Theobalds Road keep finding themselves dealing with the on-coming traffic that is going over on amber. Some day I will see one come a cropper.

Most of them don't seem to understand that lane selection will also help them.

Fundamentally if their understanding of the infrastructure and the rules were better they would probably not put themselves at as much risk. Fact.

The lights where the Boris biker was crushed by the left turning lorry? I imagine if they had jumped the lights then they'd have been safe. But that's just one case, and proves nothing I suppose.

Lights don't keep me safe in any respect, so I ignore them. I do the safest thing, which is more likely to keep me alive than dutifully waiting at the lights when nothing's coming.

Bikebikebike wrote:

Colin Peyresourde wrote:

The idiots that keep jumping the lights at Theobalds Road keep finding themselves dealing with the on-coming traffic that is going over on amber. Some day I will see one come a cropper.

Most of them don't seem to understand that lane selection will also help them.

Fundamentally if their understanding of the infrastructure and the rules were better they would probably not put themselves at as much risk. Fact.

The lights where the Boris biker was crushed by the left turning lorry? I imagine if they had jumped the lights then they'd have been safe. But that's just one case, and proves nothing I suppose.

Lights don't keep me safe in any respect, so I ignore them. I do the safest thing, which is more likely to keep me alive than dutifully waiting at the lights when nothing's coming.

No. You do what you like and expect everyone else to suck it up. But if everyone applied that logic (which is pretty much how it goes down in the third world) you'd be asking for rules.

You'd have to know what the circumstances were for that left turning lorry. But what I can say is that there are a hell of a lot of cyclists in the ASL who park themselves in the wrong lane there. They show themselves up as not knowing what they are doing on the road. If you fail to look over your shoulder on a track cycling test you fail. And pretty much everyone of the cyclists I see each day would fail on that count alone - and a track is a far simpler set of rules than the road.

My point is twofold: 1) the standard of road cycling is poor in London, and 2) if you know what you are doing you can be safe and within the rules. Simple.

Colin Peyresourde wrote:

No. You do what you like and expect everyone else to suck it up. But if everyone applied that logic (which is pretty much how it goes down in the third world) you'd be asking for rules.

Having lived in Africa for many years, I hope you realise how true this comment is. The majority of people there have this 'it doesn't apply to me' attitude and the place is a complete **** up on every level. If the system can be screwed, it will be and it is so badly screwed nothing works properly.

Having now moved back to the UK, I am loving being back in an environment where a majority of people have some degree of self discipline. Maybe that's why I get so upset about these idiots who have this attitude: I have seen what it leads to...

Colin Peyresourde wrote:

2) if you know what you are doing you can be safe and within the rules. Simple.

*marginally safer* maybe. It sort of assumes everyone else is following the rules, else it has little impact.

The Westminster stats showed only 12% of incidents was the cyclist's fault, 67% entirely the driver's, and the rest split / not determinable.

So, it *may* help with 12% of incidents.

Me following the rules of the road is not going to keep me safe from others breaking it.

Colin Peyresourde wrote:

My point is twofold: 1) the standard of road cycling is poor in London, and 2) if you know what you are doing you can be safe and within the rules. Simple.

Plenty of cyclists who 'knew what they were doing' ended up dead. Of course, every time it happens their fellow 'l33t experts' always seem, with the benefit of hindsight and a bit of creative thinking, to be able to find some evidence that they didn't know what they were doing after all, and thus the rule you cite remains untarnished.

Thus those 'who know what they are doing' never come to harm... because its an entirely circular self-sustaining concept!

Those who _truly_ know what they are doing get a car, of course (as Clarkson might say).

I can't be bothered arguing about red lights (don't jump them myself, though last week I nearly got knocked down as a pedestrian by a driver jumping them, despite my being a really elite expert pedestrian) but I can't say I care for the general implication of your comment here.

Colin Peyresourde wrote:

My point is twofold: 1) the standard of road cycling is poor in London, and 2) if you know what you are doing you can be safe and within the rules. Simple.

As for (1) - the attitude that you need to be an 'expert' to dare cycle in London, and that if you are less than highly-skilled at dangerous sports it will be your fault if you die, is precisely why so few do it.
The real problem is that the standards of road design, driving, and road-policing are all rather poor in London.

ianrobo wrote:

you two are responsible like myself for our own actions and will you actually admit that jumping red lights is dangerous and wrong and should be condemned (unless in a rare occasion about saving an injury) ?

I don't jump red lights, mainly because of the advise media coverage I'm afraid. But in terms of overall road safety cyclists jump red lights is such a small issue. It's the proverbial "dead cat on the table" let's deal with the 5 deaths a day caused by motorist, then I join you with a pitch fork going after cyclists jumping red lights.

Housecathst wrote:

ianrobo wrote:

you two are responsible like myself for our own actions and will you actually admit that jumping red lights is dangerous and wrong and should be condemned (unless in a rare occasion about saving an injury) ?

I don't jump red lights, mainly because of the advise media coverage I'm afraid. But in terms of overall road safety cyclists jump red lights is such a small issue. It's the proverbial "dead cat on the table" let's deal with the 5 deaths a day caused by motorist, then I join you with a pitch fork going after cyclists jumping red lights.

no pitchfork at all, just pointing out no good saying motorists do it but we are OK to do it ?

It is about sharing and learning to live alongside each other which when I have rode in France is a totally different feeling.

ianrobo wrote:

except I posted on here about watching it twice in two days over last weekend. Of course the usual apologists said could not be bothered to wait etc and totally forget they are breaking the law.

If we cyclists wish to see car drivers and others extend common decency to us on the road, then it is the responsibility of every cyclist to do the same and obey the law of the road.

Really, I extend common decency to motorists despite the fact that they are responsible for 21,000 deaths and serious injuries on the roads every year.

And how about the endless motorist exceeding the speed limit and spending more time on facetwat rather than having there eyes on the road.

I'm not responsible for the actions of other cyclists. The same way I don't hold every motorist responsible for the HGV driver that killed all those people in Bristol a couple of weeks ago.

ianrobo wrote:

except I posted on here about watching it twice in two days over last weekend. Of course the usual apologists said could not be bothered to wait etc and totally forget they are breaking the law.

If we cyclists wish to see car drivers and others extend common decency to us on the road, then it is the responsibility of every cyclist to do the same and obey the law of the road.

It will change nothing, RLJing, paying road tax etc, just sticks to beat cyclists with. I am not for a moment condoning idiots jumping lights, but even if every cyclist was a saint you would still get abuse.

If the law was the issue, don't you think motorists might look at themselves first? Find me a motorist who doesn't break the law everytime they drive and i will show you a liar.

I drive. I cycle. I don't break the law.

efail wrote:

I drive. I cycle. I don't break the law.

you might be the exception that breaks the rule, someone who has never driven at 31mph in a 30? never seen your speed creep up when on the motorway? never stopped on a yellow line just to load something into the car???

mrmo wrote:

efail wrote:

I drive. I cycle. I don't break the law.

never stopped on a yellow line just to load something into the car???

That's legal. Even on a double.

kwi wrote:

mrmo wrote:

efail wrote:

I drive. I cycle. I don't break the law.

never stopped on a yellow line just to load something into the car???

That's legal. Even on a double.

from experience not very often, read the accompanying signs and study the kerb.

and some people idea of stopping to load something....