Typical Cyclist

[SteveandLois]

A rider, just like a pedestrian, can see and hear clearly what's happening around them. .

With MANY cyclists having their hoods up on their hoodies,and also while wearing earphones with music blasting into their eardrums,or speaking to someone on their mobile phones,then these cyclists will be oblivious to what is happening around them.........You spurt more crap from your mouth than a Hippo does with diarrhea....

[justbecause]

A rider, just like a pedestrian, can see and hear clearly what's happening around them. A motorists senses however, sealed inside a glass and steel box, are significantly more limited.
1) Acoustically, due the sound-insulating properties of a car. 2) Visually, by windscreen column and door column, etc.

Absolutely none of that warrants running a red light. At the end of the day RED means STOP, no ifs, no buts, even in your little world where you only adhere to the rules and regulations, when it suits you.

[gsgsgs]

Surely the green light applies to all road users and it’s not just car and van drivers “who have to wait for a green”

Sorry I forgot, cyclists have no requirement to obey traffic lights and can simply do as they please.

.
Coe Lane Tarleton traffic lights with the A59. The last photo shows an electric Amazon Delivery van almost taking one of them out, I wonder who’s fault that would have been ?. Fortunately for the van driver I would have had the whole incident on video.


.

A) Agree.....I'm not condoning riders who don't wait for a green light. I'm saying riders who don't wait, will be using their eyes and ears to ensure they can do it safely.

B) First rider slots in behind the silver estate. Second rider wants to follow, looks to the right checking for traffic (in second pic) and can see the Amazon van, so slows enough to let it pass - aiming to slot in behind it.

It's a move that's perfectly legal at any junction in the U.S. Also legal in some EU States, where a plate on the lights-pole permits it. All it amounts to (where permitted) is riders then treat the junction as a give-way, which really is no big deal....I would happily support the same rule if it were introduced here in the UK.

I've previously commented that in the US that junction would likely be treated as a give way when turning left (right in the US) but we aren't in the US, it makes no difference how carefully the cyclists filter in or look to see what is coming the light is red and in this country it means stop, simple as that.

[Kippax]

A) Agree.....I'm not condoning riders who don't wait for a green light. I'm saying riders who don't wait, will be using their eyes and ears to ensure they can do it safely.

So you are saying it’s ok to run a red light as long as they use their eyes and ears.

B) First rider slots in behind the silver estate. Second rider wants to follow, looks to the right checking for traffic (in second pic) and can see the Amazon van, so slows enough to let it pass - aiming to slot in behind it.

The point of the photos is to show that the cyclists are blatantly ignoring the red light, once again you are condoning cyclists breaking road traffic rules by suggesting they can filter in safely.

It's a move that's perfectly legal at any junction in the U.S. Also legal in some EU States, where a plate on the lights-pole permits it. All it amounts to (where permitted) is riders then treat the junction as a give-way, which really is no big deal....I would happily support the same rule if it were introduced here in the UK.

It’s also legal to carry a loaded gun in some US States but last time I checked it isn’t legal in the UK.
Just because it’s legal elsewhere doesn’t make it right here.

.

[The PNP]

With MANY cyclists having their hoods up on their hoodies,and also while wearing earphones with music blasting into their eardrums,or speaking to someone on their mobile phones,then these cyclists will be oblivious to what is happening around them.........You spurt more crap from your mouth than a Hippo does with diarrhea....

And motorists don't have powerful in-car soundsystems booming out whilst driving? Or use mobiles on the move, etc? I'd hazard a guess that there's way more tech/distractions in the average car than there ever is on the average bike - talk about oblivious!

[The PNP]

Absolutely none of that warrants running a red light. At the end of the day RED means STOP, no ifs, no buts.

Entirely agree...Read my posts, I've never said any different.

[The PNP]

I've previously commented that in the US that junction would likely be treated as a give way when turning left (right in the US) but we aren't in the US, it makes no difference how carefully the cyclists filter in or look to see what is coming the light is red and in this country it means stop, simple as that.

I'm quite sure those riders knew that perfectly well.....Lucky you weren't the Police, or they'd have been in trouble. Just a pity it sometimes comes to that. The Police have to uphold the law, even if it could do with a tweaking to allow left-filtering for bikes at lights.

[carliol]

With MANY cyclists having their hoods up on their hoodies,and also while wearing earphones with music blasting into their eardrums,or speaking to someone on their mobile phones,then these cyclists will be oblivious to what is happening around them.........You spurt more crap from your mouth than a Hippo does with diarrhea....

Some, not many, cyclists do behave in this way. Your description is almost entirely confined to young males, a group predisposed to taking risks. Some of these persons will also drive vehicles. They are not going to go away, they are a fact of life, and they probably will not read this thread.

As a cyclist, I would be too concerned for my safety to use a mobile phone etc. I believe I am more typical than the one mentioned in the initial post.

[Kippax]

I'm quite sure those riders knew that perfectly well.....Lucky you weren't the Police, or they'd have been in trouble. Just a pity it sometimes comes to that. The Police have to uphold the law, even if it could do with a tweaking to allow left-filtering for bikes at lights.

Firstly the current law doesn’t allow for “left filtering” however much you keep banging on about it, a Red light means STOP ? including cyclists.

Secondly if the police had seen them and subsequently stopped them, what would have happened, points on their license, driving ban, increased insurance premiums.

No, probably a slap on the wrist and possibly a small fine.

[The PNP]

Firstly the current law doesn’t allow for “left filtering” however much you keep banging on about it, a Red light means STOP ? including cyclists.

Secondly if the police had seen them and subsequently stopped them, what would have happened, points on their license, driving ban, increased insurance premiums.

No, probably a slap on the wrist and possibly a small fine.

What they would have got if caught, I don't know. But a £50 to £60 fine sounds about right.

Laws are not set permanently in stone, particularly not traffic laws....The Highway Code is periodically updated to account for law changes from time to time. It would be a simple matter to introduce a left-filter for bikes rule at lights, in the next update.

But I can see a lot of motorists objecting, ostensibly citing safety concerns - whereas in reality, many simply don't want bikes to be granted privileges that cars don't enjoy. Remember Chapel St, when the same motorists who wanted to scrap pedestrianisation and drive through again, turned round and objected to people being allowed to merely cycle through.

Fact is, when you've shelled out a pile of dough for that big car, it's so very galling to see some clown on a pushbike getting ahead - while you have to sit and wait.

[Kippax]

What they would have got if caught, I don't know. But a £50 to £60 fine sounds about right.

Yet a motorist would probably get points on their license as well as a fine and possibly their insurance premiums increased, hardly parity for the same offence.

Laws are not set permanently in stone, particularly not traffic laws....The Highway Code is periodically updated to account for law changes from time to time. It would be a simple matter to introduce a left-filter for bikes rule at lights, in the next update. But I can see a lot of motorists objecting and citing safety concerns - whereas in reality, many simply don't want bikes to be granted privileges that cars don't enjoy.

But the “left filter” doesn’t exist in law / Highway Code so is completely irrelevant, yet you insist on quoting it at every opportunity.

.

[The PNP]

Kippax]. ^Motorists are in charge of a very powerful, fast and heavy piece of machinery, far more deadly than any bike could ever be. I's no surprise that penalties reflect that. Btw, where's your link that states cyclists with driving licenses, don't receive endorsements for offences committed whilst on their bike?

The 'legal' left-filter does exist in law elsewhere. I get the distinct impression you wouldn't want to see that brought in here to the UK....If so, what would be your objection?

[Steed]

.

[Desert Region]

Motorists are in charge of a very powerful, fast and heavy piece of machinery, far more deadly than any bike could ever be. I's no surprise that penalties reflect that.

If cyclists are allowed to run red lights there'd likely be an increase in cyclists hitting crossing pedestrians.

[Little Londoner]

If cyclists are allowed to run red lights there'd likely be an increase in cyclists hitting crossing pedestrians.

Letter in this weeks Champion about being hit by a bike on a pelican crossing on Lord St when rider came through red light and also being clipped by a bike on Chapel St. There are just as many morons riding bikes as there are driving motor vehicles but hitting someone on a crossing after ignoring the Red light and carrying on riding takes it up a few notches.
I think we should have cycle wardens armed with baseball bats to whack such dangerous cyclists