Breaking Red Traffic Light

McSpud

I feel this has been getting gradually worse over the years in Dublin. I find it very noticable it I go through on amber & then see 3-4 cars follow me through. Everyone might be on the edge of amber/red from time to time but some drivers seem to see red as the new amber i.e. accelerate when see red.

Coming out of a side lane onto Clanbrassil street (by FastFit) yesterday & I usually delay for a second or two as cars always breaking that light. I paused yesterday only for bicycle to wander through just as I moved. If I hadn't paused he would have been over my bonnet. Chances are I would be blamed due to no fault of my own.

Any one seen a serious accident caused by going through red light?

mikedragon32

It's annoying alright the amount of cars coming through amber/red lights. It would seem that the process is Amber = accelerate through junction, red = one or two more cars through junction.

As for this comment:

Chances are I would be blamed due to no fault of my own.

, of course this would be your fault, as well as his for breaking the light. You are supposed to ensure there is no oncoming traffic before proceeding through the junction. If you don't see him and he goes over your bonnet, you weren't looking properly!

John_Mc

mikedragon32 wrote: »

It's annoying alright the amount of cars coming through amber/red lights. It would seem that the process is Amber = accelerate through junction, red = one or two more cars through junction.

As for this comment: , of course this would be your fault, as well as his for breaking the light. You are supposed to ensure there is no oncoming traffic before proceeding through the junction. If you don't see him and he goes over your bonnet, you weren't looking properly!

I think the OP knows he'd get blamed but his point was that the cyclist has ignored the red light and it'd still be his fault.

I hate cyclists that do this!

BrianD3

It might be my imagination but I've also noticed a slippage when it comes to obeying traffic signals. In the last few years, people have gotten used to ignoring temporary traffic lights at roadworks. It has become the norm for at least 5 cars to go through a red light at a roadworks. Increasingly its becoming the norm to treat permanent traffic lights the same as temp ones

It's particularly bad in Dublin anyhow. Drivers behind expect those in front to go through on amber and the first few seconds of red and if you don't - well lets just say that I've gotten into a couple of shouting incidents for having the nerve to stop at RED signals.

Of course for cyclists it's not just the first few seconds of red that most of them break. The light could be red for the previous minute and if a cyclist comes up to it, chances are he'll try to go through. See it all the time. One good one was a few months ago I was waiting at a red light and a cyclist came up my inside and berated me for being too close to the kerb. First of all, I wasn't too close - it was a two lane road and I was properly positioned in the left hand lane. So he struggles through the gap between me and the kerb, clips my wing mirror and starts shouting at me for being too close - then cycles merrily through the red light. Brilliant :rolleyes:

Omcd

There are more than a few cyclists who it would appear actually believe red lights dont apply to them.

Big Nasty

Nothing worse then when you see a light go amber and gun it then the fecker in front of you decides to jam on!

mika27

See it all the time in Galway as well. Particularly at the headford road roundabout (which is a traffic light controlled roundabout). This is a very dangerous junction at the best of times and there are frequent accidents here but I always see 2 or 3 cars running the red lights in the middle of the roundabout.

Jokesetal

McSpud wrote: »

Coming out of a side lane onto Clanbrassil street (by FastFit) yesterday & I usually delay for a second or two as cars always breaking that light. I paused yesterday only for bicycle to wander through just as I moved. If I hadn't paused he would have been over my bonnet. Chances are I would be blamed due to no fault of my own.

Any one seen a serious accident caused by going through red light?

I've seen a cyclist knocked down at this junction about this time last year and it wasn't pretty. The cycle lane is all downhill here to St. Patricks Cathedral and cyclists can go too fast (Being a city cyclist in the past, I've been hit three times by passenger doors being opened without a care in the world - once with the driver driving away at speed in case I spotted his number)

OldmanMondeo

Ever since I got 2 pp and lost €80 for going through an amber, I will ensure I stop once I see an amber light, even if it means the poor fecker behind runs into the back of me, hopefully the Guard who gave me the ticket... ;D

I usually let the car start to slow down itself, preparing to stop. As pointed out all it tales is a kid to run as soon as they see the green man. How many times have you seen a car braking very heavly to stop for lights cause they were going to fast, most driver are going to fast anyway to stop at traffic lights.

Danbo!

Omcd wrote: »

There are more than a few cyclists who it would appear actually believe red lights dont apply to them.

I cycle myself and from what I see on a daily basis, I'd guess maybe 85% of cyclists break red lights, and about half of them do it without looking what's coming at all. Im not trying to be high-horsish here, but I havent cut a light while cycling since I started driving.

McSpud wrote:

Any one seen a serious accident caused by going through red light?

One serious, One Funny.

Serious.. I was sitting at lights on the canal waiting for my green. Perpendicular traffic get an amber and the cyclist in front of me pedals away into the junction, only to be taken out by a bmw heading through the amber (who had made the amber, and would have been through the windscreen if he had of tried to stop for it). The cyclist was ok, very shook up, but the wierdest thing was, about 4-5 people got out of cars and sided with the 'poor' cyclist. And me, the only cyclist about, sided with the driver.

Funny.. Driving this time, sitting at the crossroads between rathgar and rathmines. I noticed in my mirror a cyclist belting towards the junction with no sign of slowing. The pedestrian lights are green across all 4 crosssings, so the cyclist assumes no peds, and flies through. Low and behold, anther dope of a cyclist has the exact same idea but travelling perpendicular. Smash. It was the slowest awkwardest fall I've ever seen, laughed about it for hours.

John_Mc wrote: »

I hate cyclists that do this!

Well phrased, better than the usual 'I hate all cyclists because of this'

Saab Ed

John_Mc wrote: »

I think the OP knows he'd get blamed but his point was that the cyclist has ignored the red light and it'd still be his fault.

I hate cyclists that do this!

As my posts are not exactly known for their political correctness Im not gonna hold back on this one.

I hate cyclists full stop. Most dont understand road rules and the ones that do dont care anyway and just do what they want , up a path here, through a red light there. My personal favorite is when they all dress up as Lucozade bottles and in their alter egos pretend to be Stephen Roache.....10 abreast in the middle of the fu**ing road. I find a very close drive by whilst on the horn for long periods adjusts this attitude quick pronto. Really hate cyclists.

Omcd

OldmanMondeo wrote: »

Ever since I got 2 pp and lost €80 for going through an amber, I will ensure I stop once I see an amber light, even if it means the poor fecker behind runs into the back of me, hopefully the Guard who gave me the ticket...

Onto confusing territory there. The amber AFAIK means stop unless to do so would cause an accident, but then the driver behind in most cases is responsible for a rear end. Who would win ??

Danbo!

Saab Ed wrote: »

As my posts are not exactly known for their political correctness Im not gonna hold back on this one.

I hate cyclists full stop. Most dont understand road rules and the ones that do dont care anyway and just do what they want , up a path here, through a red light there. My personal favorite is when they all dress up as Lucozade bottles and in their alter egos pretend to be Stephen Roache.....10 abreast in the middle of the fu**ing road. I find a very close drive by whilst on the horn for long periods adjusts this attitude quick pronto. Really hate cyclists.

I hate motorists full stop. Most dont understand road rules and the ones that do dont care anyway and just do what they want, driving in cycle lanes here, not checking mirrors there. My personal favorite is when they all want to get home fast and duck into bus lanes without looking. I find a very close cycle by whilst rubbing the steel end of my handle bars off their car adjusts this attitude quick pronto. Really hate motorists.

Easy to tar em all with one brush isnt it? I dont wanna start a cyclist vs. motorist fight here, as I am both, but people have to understand that there is bad motorists and bad cyclists. Having a bad attitude towards one or another is just dangerous, especially when you "drive close by" as a defence method

Saab Ed

:rolleyes: Thats horsesh*t and you know it

Danbo!

Saab Ed wrote: »

:rolleyes: Thats horsesh*t and you know it

What part of it is horsesh*t?

duffarama

I cycle, and there are a lot of bad cyclists out on the roads.
It seems those of us who obey the rules of the road are well in the minority. It's particularly annoying for me in the morning, swiftly passing by every cyclist along the canal only to have to pass them all by again after I'm the only one stopping for the red...

I had problems at the weekend as a cyclist with drivers turning right across my junction when they didn't have the filter light. I was pegging it through a green light and was nearly taken out of it by a guy who had no interest in stopping. Happened again later in the day with a taxi, who once he saw me at least waved to say sorry.

OldmanMondeo

Omcd wrote: »

Onto confusing territory there. The amber AFAIK means stop unless to do so would cause an accident, but then the driver behind in most cases is responsible for a rear end. Who would win ??

With all accidents nobody wins, well except the insurance companies, panel beaters and funeral directors. But, yeah the guy behind would be at fault for driving to close.

I should have mentioned common sense, I usually drive with a 1 year old and 3 year old in the back, I will take points anyday over hurting them or anyone else.

Heroditas

Omcd wrote: »

Who would win ??

The person in front would win.
you're supposed to leave enough distance between you and the car in fornt so you can stop - even if it means slamming on the brakes you should still not plough intothe back of them.

Saab Ed

Stee wrote: »

What part of it is horsesh*t?

When do you ever see car drivers dressing up as Eddie Irvine ( complete with helmut ) and driving slowly side by side by side by side by side by side by side up the middle of a road at 12mph ( resulting in hairy over taking ) or drive from a road up a foot path just because the traffic light is red or squeez up the inside of a car/truck/bus at a junction ( one foot on the kerb ) and kill themselves as the driver pulls away totally unaware that some ejit has placed himself under his wheels and has left him with a trauma he'll never forget. You need some lessons and qualifacation to get on the road in a car giving some sort of understanding and respect for other users. You only need a Christmas present to get on the road with a bike.

dcRoadie

As a motorist, I have been rear-ended by a White Van Man trying to break a red light. His defence was that I stopped too fast. He was happy to try and break a red light - I wasn't. He was to blame and he paid up for the repairs to my motor.

As for the cyclist v motorist debate - well as far as I'm concerned all road users be they cyclists are motorists are the enemy.

Amber = green as far as Im concerned.

OldmanMondeo

Lucas Obnoxious Wool wrote: »

Amber = green as far as Im concerned.

Quite wrong. Get off the until you learn the rule of the road..... Amber means stop.

OldmanMondeo

OldmanMondeo wrote: »

Quite wrong. Get off the until you learn the rule of the road..... Amber means stop.

I said as far as I'm concerned. I dont think in 7 years if driving I ever stopped for an amber light, why would I stop the traffic going the other way still has a red light. I was living in London last year You should try stopping for or not moving off on an amber light there, you would be attacked instantly

stealthyspeeder

OldmanMondeo wrote: »

Quite wrong. Get off the until you learn the rule of the road..... Amber means stop.

Quite wrong yourself! amber means stop only if its safe to do so. maybe you should reread the rules of the road?;)

OldmanMondeo

Lucas Obnoxious Wool wrote: »

I said as far as I'm concerned. I dont think in 7 years if driving I ever stopped for an amber light, why would I stop the traffic going the other way still has a red light. I was living in London last year You should try stopping for or not moving off on an amber light there, you would be attacked instantly

Your not in London now. Drive as per the IRISH RULES OF THE ROAD.

McSpud

Jokesetal wrote: »

I've seen a cyclist knocked down at this junction about this time last year and it wasn't pretty. The cycle lane is all downhill here to St. Patricks Cathedral and cyclists can go too fast (Being a city cyclist in the past, I've been hit three times by passenger doors being opened without a care in the world - once with the driver driving away at speed in case I spotted his number)

I was on the opposite side of that junction so cyclist would not be able to see me stopped at the lights. I would probbaly only have to move maybe 5 feet to hit the cyclist & as I can see his red light it was probably red for a few seconds before I moved.

I'd love to have a tank so would not have to yield to people breaking their red light. Would have to be a fast tank to move off the lights though

KTRIC

OldmanMondeo wrote: »

Quite wrong. Get off the until you learn the rule of the road..... Amber means stop.

You're preaching to someone about the rules of the road that you don't know yourself.

Amber = slow down, prepare to stop / proceed with caution.

Danbo!

I didnt say anything about cars on footpaths or cars in groups at 12mph. What i was saying is there are bad drivers and bad cyclists. Acting the muppet on the road, be it a cyclist purposly slowing you down because you pissed him off or driving close by a cyclist is only going aggravate the situation and make things worse. Its when people in cars treat all cyclists with no care or respect, that cyclists start dishing it back at them and vice versa. I've seen muppetry from both sides many times and it never ends well.

Voodoomelon

A set of lights actually made me look like a right twat recently.

They were temporary road work lights setup around the Marshes shopping centre in Dundalk, as only one lane of traffic was open. I sat at the red light for a minute or so, it turned green and I proceeded down the single lane (it was about 250 metres long).
Half way down it I see 2 cars coming towards me and then a third, I was ripping, assumed they'd broken their red light and had headed on regardless. I started flashing at them, threw my arm up etc and all 3 cars started driving up onto the 8" kerb and onto the footpath. I drove by shaking my head at them only to reach the other set of lights, which weren't turned on...

OldmanMondeo

KTRIC wrote: »

You're preaching to someone about the rules of the road that you don't know yourself.

Amber = slow down, prepare to stop / proceed with caution.

Wrong, it means stop. Green means proceed with caution.

Pedro K

Sometimes bad road planning causes situations with traffic lights.

For example

There is a set of traffic lights very near to my home.
The junction is a cross junction, with one road being significantly busier than the other, particularly at peak hours. (all roads are two way traffic)

----| |----
----| |----


Say this is the junction. (Shoddy diagram I know)
The road going left-right is going in and out of the two adjacent estates, whereas the road going up-down is a much busier road.
There are filter lights on this junction, however, the filter lights are on the minor roads, leading onto the major one, and there are no filter lights for turning from the main road into the estate roads.

As a result, in peak traffic, going on the main road going, the cars split into two lanes, one going right, and the rest going left or straight through. However, because there is such a high volume of oncoming traffic, it is near impossible to get your right turn in on green. Most cars have to wait until the light goes amber (and in some cases red) so the oncoming traffic then slows and stops and then a handful of cars come through!

I don't know personally of any accidents caused by it, but I have seen the aftermath of accidents at the scene before and can only assume it was due to somebody breaking the red.

Anybody else know of anything similar?

stealthyspeeder

OldmanMondeo wrote: »

Wrong, it means stop. Green means proceed with caution.

Again, Amber = stop---- ONLY IF ITS SAFE TO DO SO! not stop, thats the red light mate!

Pedro K

KTRIC wrote: »

You're preaching to someone about the rules of the road that you don't know yourself.

Amber = slow down, prepare to stop / proceed with caution.

Eh, No.

Amber = Stop, unless it is not safe to do so.

Alun

What it really says ...

A red light means ‘stop’. If the light is red as you approach it, you must not go
beyond the stop line at that light or, if there is no stop line, beyond the light.

A green light means you may go on if the way is clear. Take special care if you
intend to turn left or right and give way to pedestrians who are crossing. A
green light is not a right of way, it is a licence to proceed with caution.

An amber light means that you must not go beyond the stop line or, if there is
no stop line, beyond the light. However, you may go on if you are so close to the
line or the light when the amber light first appears that stopping would be
dangerous.

OldmanMondeo

Alun wrote: »

What it really says ...

So what it breaks down is, stop, unless your gona get smacked or smack someone.

kona

Saab Ed wrote: »

As my posts are not exactly known for their political correctness Im not gonna hold back on this one.

I hate cyclists full stop. Most dont understand road rules and the ones that do dont care anyway and just do what they want , up a path here, through a red light there. My personal favorite is when they all dress up as Lucozade bottles and in their alter egos pretend to be Stephen Roache.....10 abreast in the middle of the fu**ing road. I find a very close drive by whilst on the horn for long periods adjusts this attitude quick pronto. Really hate cyclists.

muppet:eek:

back on topic, how hard is it to understand??

RED means STOP, AMBER means prepare to stop, IE BRAKE, GREEN means GO.

Ive known this since 5 years old.

OldmanMondeo

stealthyspeeder wrote: »

Again, Amber = stop---- ONLY IF ITS SAFE TO DO SO! not stop, thats the red light mate!

Did you quote the wrong post there? Possibly meant to quote KITRIC?

OldmanMondeo

kona wrote: »

muppet:eek:

back on topic, how hard is it to understand??

RED means STOP, AMBER means to stop, IE BRAKE, GREEN means GO.

I know it sounds bad but the soooner one of these muppets gets T-boned by a artic the better, no injuries just a writeen off car. A 30k loss should waken em up.

Corrected for you.... AMBER MEAN STOP, NOT PREPARE NOT SLOW DOWN, BUT STOP... See Alun's quote above.

kona

OldmanMondeo wrote: »

Corrected for you.... AMBER MEAN STOP, NOT PREPARE NOT SLOW DOWN, BUT STOP... See Alun's quote above.

Flashing amber means proceed with caution?? A steady amber means prepare to stop, either way im stopped at red.

OldmanMondeo

kona wrote: »

Flashing amber means proceed with caution?? A steady amber means prepare to stop, either way im stopped at red.

Full amber means stop.

Flashing Amber means proceed with caution. i.e. wait until crossing / junction is clear.

Green means proceed with caution.

Alun

OldmanMondeo wrote: »

So what it breaks down is, stop, unless your gona get smacked or smack someone.

Not really ... I mean, mathematically speaking if you're never, ever going to drive through an amber light under any circumstances, the only safe way to approach any traffic light is for you to reduce your speed asymptotically to zero as you approach the light, regardless of it's current status. In other words, the closer you get to the light, the slower you'd have to go to be able to stop in time if it changed to amber, until you were so close you'd be going at walking pace and then a complete stop. Not really a viable solution, I think you'll agree.

That's why the amber light phase is there .. to allow you to drive through if you're so close that it would be dangerous, or more relevantly virtually impossible for you to stop in time. If it was actually illegal to drive through an amber light under any circumstances, then their whole raison d'etre would have to be called into question.

OldmanMondeo

Alun wrote: »

Not really ... I mean, mathematically speaking if you're never, ever going to drive through an amber light under any circumstances, the only safe way to approach any traffic light is for you to reduce your speed asymptotically to zero as you approach the light, regardless of it's current status. In other words, the closer you get to the light, the slower you'd have to go to be able to stop in time if it changed to amber, until you were so close you'd be going at walking pace and then a complete stop. Not really a viable solution, I think you'll agree.

That's why the amber light phase is there .. to allow you to drive through if you're so close that it would be dangerous, or more relevantly virtually impossible for you to stop in time. If it was actually illegal to drive through an amber light under any circumstances, then their whole raison d'etre would have to be called into question.

Thats how I got my points, went through an amber light because I felt I was to close to stop safely. Guard felt differently and I got done.

As I said eariler I will let the car slow for lights so I don't get done again.

droginexile

also cyclists, going against a one way system, so dangerous

Alun

OldmanMondeo wrote: »

Thats how I got my points, went through an amber light because I felt I was to close to stop safely. Guard felt differently and I got done.

I'd love to know how a Garda (or indeed anyone come to that) in a car, presumably some distance behind you, could even begin to imagine he could accurately determine the distance your car was from the lights at the very moment the light went amber. But then, I guess we'll now get posts claiming that they're "specially trained" or something, presumably with special Ninja powers that are immune from laws of physics like parallax errors

Mountjoy Mugger

From the Rules of the Road:

An amber light means that you must not go beyond the stop line or, if there is no stop line, beyond the light. However, you may go on if you are so close to the line or the light when the amber light first appears that stopping would be dangerous.

A flashing amber arrow pointing left can appear at a junction with another road. It means that you may move on past the traffic light, but only if you first give way to traffic already coming through the junction on the other road.

OldmanMondeo

Alun wrote: »

I'd love to know how a Garda (or indeed anyone come to that) in a car, presumably some distance behind you, could even begin to imagine he could accurately determine the distance your car was from the lights at the very moment the light went amber. But then, I guess we'll now get posts claiming that they're "specially trained" or something, presumably with special Ninja powers that are immune from laws of physics like parallax errors

In fairness he wasn't behind me, where he parked he would have seen the lights changing and my car going through. Bit like the linemans and the striker, I was onside but he claims I was off.... no goal...

droginexile

droginexile wrote: »

also cyclists, going against a one way system, so dangerous

Agreed - but keep in mind that there are some 'contra flow' cycle lanes in Dublin.

I'm a cyclist and I don't break red lights. In fact, I've noticed plenty of times when I'm stopping that cars to my right tend to proceed through the lights, so much so that I'm starting to consider whether it's safe to stop as the lights go red or will someone come ploughing through me one of these days.

Taltos

route I go the cyclists all appear to follow the regs.
However some of the cars I am behind seem to flout them, the times where I have had to go thru an amber light and a train of cars go thru after me - too many to count.

Or my light is green and cars from my left continue to turn around - clearly going thru a red...
>> top of Knockmaroon Hill
(not a nice place to be a cyclist & not a nice place to be a motorist behind the cyclist - no space to safely overtake)

Cuddlesworth

As a motorbike user this is very obvious to me as I'm always at the front on the lights and can be very quick off the mark. And I'm seeing this more and more daily.

My usual routine is wait till a green, make sure the cars on both sides have stopped and then go through. Sometimes with horns beeping behind me.

gorilla_image

I am both a cyclist and motorist. I think Dublin drivers drive slow enough, but f*ck me, they're innattentative. I've had many many close shaves and even ben hit from behind. That's why I bought a mountain bike and dont cycle dublin streets anymore. Saying that, I nearly killed a girl on a bike last week. She popped across the road right after bus had passed her without looking. I had to climb on the brakes and swerve to avoid hitting her. her eyes were like saucers and I'm sure she let go little pee. thank god for a.b.s. or else she'd have been seriously injured or maybe worse (no helmet). I missed her by literally inches. I'd also like to point out I was driving at around 25mph in a 30 zone... in short I found it pays to assume that every else on the road is about to do something stupid, that way at least you're prepared when they do...

Guy:Incognito

McSpud wrote: »

Any one seen a serious accident caused by going through red light?

I saw one this morning on Dorset St . I was third in line waiting to turn right onto the North Circular. There was a rigid truck first in line to turn right and he was out in the junction waiting to take his turn. He didnt get a gap so had to wait till the red stopped the oncoming traffic to turn. Allowing for the 2 or 3 seconds for him to clear the junction and the light for traffic from the right of us to be given a green light, react then move across the junction a young guy with L plates came down the inside lane to my left , through the red light and got ploughed by a Saab (iirc. I only saw it for a few seconds cos I got a filter to turn) that had come across the junction from my right. Thats the best way I can think it happened cos I wasnt really watchign till after impact but the way they ended up they can only have been coming from those directions, meaning the yuung guy way waaaaaaaay late coming through or just didnt see the lights at all.

Weird thing was when we got the filter to turn right (straight and left stays red because oncoming traffic also gets filter to turn right) two taxis took off from the lights throught the junction (theres still a red light for straight and left), manouvering around the crash while watching it :rolleyes:



I've noticed a huge amount of people either ignoring the fact that they need a filter to turn or just not caring.
People see a straight arrow as meaning they can proceed through every part of the junction. They turn against lights that are red for left or right turns, most often across green pedestrian crossings.