Riding a push-bike through red lights

[rachelmonday1]

AIBU for calling out to a woman and politely telling her that riding her push-bike through a red light is not only illegal but also very dangerous. She very impolitely told be where to go, but being a motorist who is always trying to second-guess cyclists actions I felt it only right to make my point. I also cycle, so am not a selfish motorist or anything, just someone that knows that a cyclist will get physically hurt far more than the motorist, but the motorist will still suffer with having been involved in an accident. Views......

eastpoint
"A disproportionate number of pedestrian injuries/deaths are caused by cyclists"
^ ^
I put a link and a precise figure on an earlier thread about 2 weeks ago and am too lazy to retrieve it from memory it was that there were 0.5 deaths of pedestrians a year from cyclists in 2011 and 2012 and about 230 deaths of pedestrians by cars/vans. I would not say that your statement has any basis in fact.

Is it simple misunderstandings of the relative risks that makes many aggressive towards cyclists? Cyclists kill 5 people a decade, motorists kill thousands over that same period (remember that as well as killing 220 pedestrians a year, they also kill cyclists and other motorists).

OP yes it is interesting that you felt the need to call out to the cyclist and yet not to litter droppers. IME, you are by no means alone. I am really interested where that comes from.

OF course If I were to spend my time "calling out" drivers and pedestrians whilst riding that would be a massive regular distraction!

Attitude eg - when it was really windy this week I got off my bike and walked a bit - too dangerous. A lorry driver, from across the road whilst driving in the opposite direction from where I was walking, chose to hang out his cab window and welcome me with a shower of verbal abuse. I wasn't even on the road nor anywhere near him. And this from a "professional" driver. So, no. Some bike riders 'jumping' red lights doesn't really register. I negotiate a v large m/way roundabout, and rely on cars stopping when the lights for them show red on the roundabout so I can safely set off. Approx 50% of the time one car/lorry drives through on red.

Agree with Confused Pixie

derailler are you seriously suggesting that the pedestrian is at fault if they cross on a green light and get hit by a cyclist going through a red?! Or have I misunderstood you?

I can just about see the argument for anticipating lights changing, but get angered by cyclists who just carry on and go straight through a red light. Apart from anything, they give cyclist haters an excuse to have a go at the majority of good cyclists.

I have to agree with you about cars going into the bike box at lights though - thus happens at virtually every light round here. I don't know why they don't install cameras and fine drivers. Ker-ching!!

Profplum. I have asked for my post to be deleted and apologized for it. See above. I am not sure what more I can do.

eastpoint no worries . It's a common misconception.

When I am being a pedestrian I HATE cyclists doing this. A friend's DS was run over and badly cut and bruised by a cyclist - a female cyclist- going through a red light on a pedestrian crossing.

When I am driving I always observe the cyclist box on junctions to allow cyclists to get ahead of the traffic. And lean out of the window and shout obscenities at minicab and white van drivers who hoot at me for not moving forward and blocking the cyclists box and the pedestrian crossing

Eastpoint, in that Times article there is this comment:

"Research by the City of Westminster Council last year found that, in collisions between pedestrians and cyclists, 60 per cent of the crashes were caused by the pedestrian."

Aberdeen police have just "educated" 30 cyclists about riding through red lights and not wearing proper safety equipment in the city centre.

They've been doing that in London, too - along with giving drivers tickets for being in the Cycle box. This is in response to the spate of cyclist fatalities in London a few months ago.

They have also introduced new signs at roadworks, where 2 lanes go down to one. They say 'cyclists please use the middle of the lane' or 'no overtaking cyclists'.

I think this is all good.

What I don't think is good is cyclists saying 'we risk death by driver every day so we have a right to break the law of the road and in turn, endanger pedestrians'.

Binky it isn't a question of fault in a legal/responsible sense.
When drivingI wouldn't make an assumption about a driver that they will turn right just because they are indicating that is the intent. I'd see what actually happens. When riding I keep my fingers on the brake levers until a car has slowed down etc when passing an exit with a car approaching the stop lines etc.
It's highly risky to make assumptions about other people's behaviour and in this instant iirc it was about stepping off a kerb on the basis that a light was on green.
Would people step across at lights without first ensuring cars/bikes were actually going to stop??

You are still not in the wrong and the cyclist who ran the red light is. End of story.

derailleurondebike defensive driving courses drum into you that you never assume someone is going to turn just because they are indicating - you always wait until they have committed to the turn.

This is fucking ridiculous.
It's highly risky to make assumptions about other people's behaviour and in this instant iirc it was about stepping off a kerb on the basis that a light was on green.
Would people step across at lights without first ensuring cars/bikes were actually going to stop??

When I cross the main road to get to my house I use the pedestrian crossing. Wait till the road users get red light and the green man indicates I should cross. It's a wide road and I have about 6 seconds to get to the other side.
There are often buses waiting at the lights and I cannot see if a cyclist (motor or pedal) is coming "behind" the bus. I try to peer around but am limited for time.

Several times bikes have shot out from the side of a bus and zoomed over the Pedestrian crossing narrowly missing me. They ran the red light and THEY had no idea whether a pedestrian was crosiing or not.

So, what the flying fuck am I supposed to do to be even MORE careful that I don't get run over???

Shall I invest in a mirror mounted on a long pole so when I cross I can peer around buses to see if a cyclist is coming? I'll have to ask the council to extend the crossing time of course, but hey, cyclists are sooooo much worthier than any one else aren't they.

FFS

Of course I wouldn't step into path of speeding bike I could see but as posters above have said, you can't always see them.

Regardless, it would still be the cyclist at fault. I think you're wrong not to admit that straight out. EXACTLY the sort of thing that stirs up differences which in turn leads to unfair abuse of cyclists.

I occasionally cycle through read lights if it makes things safer for me and and does not make anyone else less safe. I'll admit to doing it sometimes just because it gets me where I'm going quicker. I treat them more like a 'give way' sign and if I'm confident the road is clear I will proceed even if the light is red. Mostly I can't be confident the road is (and will stay) clear so I will stop.

For example I will cycle through pedestrian crossings on red if there is no-one crossing and no other pedestrians in vicinity who might suddenly decide to nip across the road.

I do still get angry at the 'Lycra lout' types who sail through red lights with impunity. But I think it's pretty easy to tell the difference between idiots and people who are cycling safely but not obeying the letter of the law.

if someone stepped out at a green man and a car went through a red and ploughed into them it would be the driver's fault. It should be exactly the same for cyclists.

Some cyclists are a right nuisance, but most definitely aren't. I did an experiment on the way into work recently (I walk by the way). Out of eight cyclists, three were cycling on the pavement. Strangely, the pavement cyclists were on the pavement in areas where there were cycle lanes. The ones who weren't pavement cyclists were all cycling on the road (where there were no cycle lanes) in areas full of busy traffic.

A few months back there was a period where I noticed a HUGE amount of stupid cyclists:

1 - went through a zebra crossing outside a school, as young kids were crossing. Just went straight through, cutting a neat line between the kids.

2 - about to leave a shop with my 3-month-old son (at the time) and a cyclists is bombing it along on the pavement right in front of the shop doors. Had I stepped out a second earlier (the shop has a step so I would have gone first, backing out) it would have bowled me over.

3 - a cyclist hit my son's pushchair. Yep, actually hit it. He was coming up behind me on a crossing (using the crossing as a pedestrian) and didn't realise I had a pushchair, and cut right in front of me to get to the next bit of the crossing, hitting the pushchair. Fortunately no damage done and he clearly didn't think enough of it to stop and apologise, as he carried on oblivious even after I shouted after him.

As I say, there are some idiots about. There are probably even more good cyclists than idiots (as my experiment proved) but the idiots seem a lot more prevalent.

"if someone stepped out at a green man and a car went through a red and ploughed into them it would be the driver's fault. It should be exactly the same for cyclists."

It is. I'm not quite sure what derailleur was trying to get at. If I was being charitable, I would assume they were meaning that you've got to watch out when you're on the roads, and even if it's a green light you should be aware of what's going on. That doesn't mean whoever has gone through a red isn't at fault though.

Yes the overall point was to say that as a road user of any type it's always best to ensure that the other people are actually doing what they indicate, or should be doing. To do otherwise is to invite incidents in which harm is caused. Which is where the 'competency' question comes in.

cyclists are sooooo much worthier than any one else aren't they., yeah one gets that a lot. Though to be fair there is something better about making your way somewhere under your own steam, not messing up the environment even more, not costing the country in road repairs, reducing congestion on the roads, not taking up further parking spaces, keeping the costs to health services reduced, staying fit and healthy, and providing good role-modeling to younger people. Apart from those things, no cycling isn't any more worthy than sitting in a car in a traffic queue.

Well yes of course it makes sense to look. But it's still the cyclists fault if they run a red light and hit you. Weird that you find it so hard to admit that.

I didn't say I don't see that at all. I'd prefaced the comment with that caveat. Of course legally it is the fault of the rider, and like I said I never ride through lights willy-nilly. But we even teach children to 'look left, look right, and look left again' for good reason. Don't assume all is okay on a first looking.

Nope! We teach children to 'look right, look left and look right again'!