Will This Make Cycling Safer?

It is the self-same mindset that says "You need hi-viz to ride a bike" that leads to the front light laser wars.

Riding a bike on the road should be an entirely normal activity, not needing any form of PPE. Some modes of riding like commuting put you in extended contact with heavy traffic, so adding to visibility is sensible, some modes mean that you sweat so lycra becomes sensible, some modes mean that you need to see where you are going, so powerful well adjusted lights become sensible. Here's a fact: not everyone is sensible, whether they're on a bike or in a car. Live with it, it isn't going to change.
 
Last edited:
boliston said:
i have never really understood the need to 'call out' another road use
Click to expand...
Sometimes it’s because they’ve given you a fright by their unpredictable and careless actions :(.
 
Ham said:
Live with it, it isn't going to change.
Click to expand...
Ahhh, but some people just feel they need to make their point, even when they know it will be ignored :naughty:

No peeing sign Mayerhofen Austria R1_00952.jpg
 
boliston said:
my old commute route used to have a very aggressive cyclist who seemed to share the same route as me who would get really funny if i went through a light with no traffic coming from any direction
Click to expand...

So, you are one of the "Red Light Brigade". And you expect others to take you seriously? Red means stop, nothing else, just stop.
 
Jelster said:
So, you are one of the "Red Light Brigade". And you expect others to take you seriously? Red means stop, nothing else, just stop.
Click to expand...
in some situations stopping can be more dangerous than doing an 'idaho stop' - my morning commute has a turning onto a busy 4 lane uphill road where there will always be a pedestrian light on red for about 20 seconds as it syncs with the junction i have just come out of - as very few pedestrians ever cross here it is safer to keep going that be stuck between 2 lanes of queueing traffic doing a hill start - i need to turn right just after the lights so there would be the added danger of having vehicles block me from moving into the right hand lane to safely turn
 
Fuji Dave said:
That should be a 100% YES imo.
Click to expand...
It is always best to wear clothing that makes you stand out from you surroundings.

In certain circumstances hiviz does not work. For example riding through a countryside filled with rapeseed flowers.

If my ride was to include such areas I ‘d likely wear predominantly red clothing, for example, depending on the rest of the route.

At the end of the day any colours, including hiviz, is only any good if the driver is actually looking at you. I’ve been lit up like a Christmas tree on steroids. with lights and reflectives, and still taken out by an unobserving driver.
 
Last edited:
Jelster said:
So, you are one of the "Red Light Brigade". And you expect others to take you seriously? Red means stop, nothing else, just stop.
Click to expand...
I’ve had routes where the traffic light road sensors do not detect a bicycle…

I’ve reported them, but that doesn’t deal with the here and now.
 
SydZ said:
It is always best to wear clothing that makes you stand out from you surroundings.

In certain circumstances hiviz does not work. For example riding through a countryside filled with rapeseed flowers.

If my ride was to include such areas I ‘d likely wear predominantly red clothing, for example, depending on the rest of the route.

At the end of the day any colours, including hiviz, is only any good if the driver is actually looking at you. I’ve been lit up like a Christmas tree on steroids. with lights and reflectives, and still taken out by an unobserving driver.
Click to expand...


I have high viz orange, yellow and bright red.
 
cambsno said:
Do you stop past every field to change into the most appropriate one?
Click to expand...
You could do that with LED lights, maybe automatically :LOL:
 
cambsno said:
I doubt anyone on a bike with clipless pedals is legal then as those do not have the amber reflective strips.
Click to expand...
Same with my mountain bike, you can't get reflectors on a set of (decent) platform pedals, nor do I have front or rear reflectors. But I only ride in daylight and off road so it's a bit of a non issue for me.

There is also the question of enforcement. There are much more pressing matters that the police are already far too stretched to deal with.
 
bass_junkie83 said:
Same with my mountain bike, you can't get reflectors on a set of (decent) platform pedals, nor do I have front or rear reflectors. But I only ride in daylight and off road so it's a bit of a non issue for me.

There is also the question of enforcement. There are much more pressing matters that the police are already far too stretched to deal with.
Click to expand...
No reflectors on mine either, supposed to have them on the wheels as well aren't you.
I avoid roads at all costs if I can, only been stopped one by one of those community officers.
 
bass_junkie83 said:
Same with my mountain bike, you can't get reflectors on a set of (decent) platform pedals, nor do I have front or rear reflectors. But I only ride in daylight and off road so it's a bit of a non issue for me.

There is also the question of enforcement. There are much more pressing matters that the police are already far too stretched to deal with.
Click to expand...

Well I live near Cambridge which must have 100k + bikes in the city alone! No chance of them doing anything
 
AndrewFlannigan said:
The "the law doesn't apply to me" defence? :tumbleweed:
Click to expand...
I must admit I have come across instances where not stopping for red lights could be argued as unnecessary or even safer, for example approaching a traffic light controlled crossing on a long straight clear road. It is not a junction so no risk of coming into contact with another vehicle, and if I can see on the approach to a red light with 100% certainty that the person who activated the lights has crossed and moved on and there is no other pedestrians around that could still cross the road, then going through that red light would be of no risk to me or anyone else. If anything it could be considered courteous to any vehicles behind as it at least maintains a constant speed rather than them having to wait behind me while I get back up to speed from a standing start.

HOWEVER, despite being confident that it is a fairly watertight argument, it is still against the law and I don't do it. The main reason to that is that I am very aware of how a lot of drivers view cyclists and I would rather put on a more elaborate performance of compliance with the law/highway code than do anything to perpetuate the myth that all cyclists are law breaking maniacs with no consideration for anyone else.
 
Last edited:
bass_junkie83 said:
I must admit I have come across instances where not stopping for red lights could be argued as unnecessary or even safer, for example approaching a traffic light controlled crossing on a long straight clear road. It is not a junction so no risk of coming into contact with another vehicle, and if I can see on the approach to a red light with 100% certainty that the person who activated the lights has crossed and moved on and there is no other pedestrians around that could still cross the road, then going through that red light would be of no risk to me or anyone else. If anything it could be considered courteous to any vehicles behind as it at least maintains a constant speed rather than them having to wait behind me while I get back up to speed from a standing start.

HOWEVER, despite being confident that it is a fairly watertight argument, it is still against the law and I don't do it. The main reason to that is that I am very aware of how a lot of drivers view cyclists and I would rather put on a more elaborate performance of compliance with the law/highway code than do anything to perpetuate the myth that all cyclists are law breaking maniacs with no consideration for anyone else.
Click to expand...

Well strictly speaking there is nothing to stop you getting off bike and walking it across the red lights. Two separate actions but both achieving the same result. just one is deemed legal the other isn't. Or, maybe skirting round the light and over the 'crossing' bit (if at x roads) which achieves the same thing.
 
AndrewFlannigan said:
Yes there is. Traffic lights apply to everyone. See rules 21, 22 and 23 of the Highway Code as well as general advice to cyclists.

The insurance company Admiral reported on some statistics, here: https://www.admiral.com/sites/admiral-drupal-site/files/2018-11/Pedestrian Crossings.pdf
Click to expand...
New one on me (thinking the main time I see this is after Cambridge games when we leave stadium) - lights right outside ground but loads of people use the road due to crowds and no-one has stopped at a red light car/bike style). Can happen quite a way down the road too.
 
If you step off your bike you become a pedestrian. A knob head pedestrian, but one none the less for the purposes of the law.

So of course, all those casualties on crossings, they'll be cyclists killing and injuring people.... no, wait, that's cars that do that.

Could someone who bangs on about "The Red Light Brigade" or some such, please explain why they think it refers to cyclists, in the face of that evidence? Around here (east London) drivers treat red lights as advisory as a matter of course, and cars are so much more dangerous, so why the cyclist directed angst?
 
Last edited:
Ham said:
Could someone who bangs on about "The Red Light Brigade" or some such,
Click to expand...
You appear to be the only person "banging on" about it. :tumbleweed:
 
Ham said:
If you step off your bike you become a pedestrian. A knob head pedestrian, but one none the less for the purposes of the law.

So of course, all those casualties on crossings, they'll be cyclists killing and injuring people.... no, wait, that's cars that do that.

Could someone who bangs on about "The Red Light Brigade" or some such, please explain why they think it refers to cyclists, in the face of that evidence? Around here (east London) drivers treat red lights as advisory as a matter of course, and cars are so much more dangerous, so why the cyclist directed angst?
Click to expand...



AndrewFlannigan said:
You appear to be the only person "banging on" about it. :tumbleweed:
Click to expand...

That would be me. Jumping red lights is dangerous, whether you're in an articulated truck, or on a pushbike. As I said, red means stop. It doesn't mean "only motor vehicles". I have seen the devastation it causes when a cyclist, thinking he was OK to keep going, didn't see the lady about to step off of the pavement at the lights. They came together, she hit her head on the kerb when she went down. The cyclist just wanted to get back on his bike and ride off. I prevented that from happening. Secondly, when we lived in London, a guy on a bike jumped the red at a crossing, making me step backwards. That was a karma moment, as the car at the front of the lights was a fully painted up patrol car (yes, he missed that too). They stopped him up the road and I think they gave him a ticket of some sort. I can honestly say, that in 40 plus years of driving, I have never knowingly jumped a red light.

Most lights in central London have jump cameras on them, or at least they did on my route to work which was M4/A4, down past the Palace and onto the embankment, around to Aldgate. People who jump red lights in registered vehicles are generally the 4rseholes of society, as the vehicle is generally stolen or cloned. Is that the same for cyclists?
 
AndrewFlannigan said:
Yes there is. Traffic lights apply to everyone. See rules 21, 22 and 23 of the Highway Code as well as general advice to cyclists.

The insurance company Admiral reported on some statistics, here: https://www.admiral.com/sites/admiral-drupal-site/files/2018-11/Pedestrian Crossings.pdf
Click to expand...
I can vouch for the Admiral warnings. Someone I knew used to launch herself onto Zebra crossings without hesitation because “they have to stop!”. While true, drivers can’t or don’t stop if there is insufficient ‘warning’. Yes, I know they should always be alert but it does you no good as a pedestrian in an argument with a car. Inevitably, she was later knocked down on a crossing — broken arm only, so lucky.
 
Jelster said:
That would be me. Jumping red lights is dangerous, whether you're in an articulated truck, or on a pushbike. As I said, red means stop. It doesn't mean "only motor vehicles". I have seen the devastation it causes when a cyclist, thinking he was OK to keep going, didn't see the lady about to step off of the pavement at the lights. They came together, she hit her head on the kerb when she went down. The cyclist just wanted to get back on his bike and ride off. I prevented that from happening. Secondly, when we lived in London, a guy on a bike jumped the red at a crossing, making me step backwards. That was a karma moment, as the car at the front of the lights was a fully painted up patrol car (yes, he missed that too). They stopped him up the road and I think they gave him a ticket of some sort. I can honestly say, that in 40 plus years of driving, I have never knowingly jumped a red light.

Most lights in central London have jump cameras on them, or at least they did on my route to work which was M4/A4, down past the Palace and onto the embankment, around to Aldgate. People who jump red lights in registered vehicles are generally the 4rseholes of society, as the vehicle is generally stolen or cloned. Is that the same for cyclists?
Click to expand...

I understand your point, and at the risk of being pedantic, it doesn't need to be dangerous. If I come home late at night there is a junction I cross. Sometimes you can get to the lights and there is nothing ahead of you, nothing to the side and nothing behind. If I was to keep going, there is zero risk to me or anyone else. Or, in the next village there is a cross roads which at quiet times can have nothing in any direction. Not that I have measured it but you would probably need to have a car coming silently at 200mph to be hit if you were to jump it.

But that's why we have lights, to control traffic flow, but at times there is little traffic to flow.
 
I don’t how many people here have this problem but being somewhat red-green colour blind I can see a red light under certain bright conditions! I always stop if no lights are showing obviously just as I do at a failed traffic light so there’s little danger.
 
Interestingly (or not!) railway "traffic" lights are green above red. This is so the red light is not obscured if/when snow settles on the shade above the lower light.
 
boliston said:
i guess you have never gone at 75 or 80 on a motorway in your life then
Click to expand...

I'll happily put my hand up and say that I've driven over the speed limit. Empty motorways with a modern car, it's more than safe. The limit in Europe is about 85mph in good weather, the cars are no different, and our motorways are better than most. Do I moan if I get caught? Nope, I take the 3 points and pay the fine.

Would I put others at risk? Certainly not.
 
Jelster said:
I'll happily put my hand up and say that I've driven over the speed limit. Empty motorways with a modern car, it's more than safe. The limit in Europe is about 85mph in good weather, the cars are no different, and our motorways are better than most. Do I moan if I get caught? Nope, I take the 3 points and pay the fine.

Would I put others at risk? Certainly not.
Click to expand...
Me too, not more than around 80-85 when I used to go to a fairly regular meeting (club, not work) early on Sunday morning about 100 miles down the M-way.
 
bass_junkie83 said:
....

HOWEVER, despite being confident that it is a fairly watertight argument, it is still against the law and I don't do it. The main reason to that is that I am very aware of how a lot of drivers view cyclists and I would rather put on a more elaborate performance of compliance with the law/highway code than do anything to perpetuate the myth that all cyclists are law breaking maniacs with no consideration for anyone else.
Click to expand...
the main reason many motorists appear to hate cyclists is that they 'don't pay road tax'
 
boliston said:
i have never really understood the need to 'call out' another road user unless they are actually putting you in danger - my old commute route used to have a very aggressive cyclist who seemed to share the same route as me who would get really funny if i went through a light with no traffic coming from any direction - it's like a motorist who tries to 'police' the speed limit by driving at exactly 70 in the fast lane to stop anyone going faster - ironically this cyclist would 'hug' the curb when cycling and pass parked cars within inches so is hardly a safety evangelist
Click to expand...
Well when your sat on your bike at a T junction and some div cycles through a red right next to you, I think calling them out on it is the right thing to do. Just the same as I'll say to myself in the car "what a ****" when I see a div in a car jump a red...
 
Last edited:
Adamcski said:
Well when your sat on your bike at a T junction and some div cycles through a red right next to you, I think calling them out on it is the right thing to do. Just the same as I'll say to myself in the car "what a ****" when I see a div in a car jump a red...
Click to expand...
while 99% will probably ignore you, there will be that 1% who will stop and punch you - is it worth it?
 
boliston said:
the main reason many motorists appear to hate cyclists is that they 'don't pay road tax'
Click to expand...
Motorists don't pay road tax either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top