RLJs are stupid -- it's official

BeerNut

El Presidente has a few choice words to say about ninjas and RLJs.

The cyclist travelling in the evening without lights or running the red, the driver who is careless about indicating, the pedestrian walking a country road at night in dark clothing are all people who have made stupid, life threatening and utterly avoidable bad choices.

Though if she really meant it she should be outside her gaff every evening, flagging down offenders on Chesterfield Avenue and giving out to them in person.

Story.

tunney

BeerNut wrote: »

El Presidente has a few choice words to say about ninjas and RLJs.



Though if she really meant it she should be outside her gaff every evening, flagging down offenders on Chesterfield Avenue and giving out to them in person.

Story.

Interestingly enough they are looking at introducing a "go left on red" policy in London as they have research to back up that doing so is safer for cyclists.

Lumen

tunney wrote: »

Interestingly enough they are looking at introducing a "go left on red" policy in London as they have research to back up that doing so is safer for cyclists.

It is also perfectly safe to cycle on the right hand side of the road, in countries where that is legal and normal.

Borneo Fnctn

Great to hear from the president. Nearly forgot we had one.

Bunnyhopper

tunney wrote: »

Interestingly enough they are looking at introducing a "go left on red" policy in London as they have research to back up that doing so is safer for cyclists.

I think it would make sense to allow cyclists to treat a red light as a stop sign for the purposes of a left turn. In some circumstances (where there's no cross traffic) it would be good to be allowed to go straight ahead, too. It would also be good to have rolling stops legalized for bikes.

Does anyone happen to have a link for the London research?

tunney

Bunnyhopper wrote: »

I think it would make sense to allow cyclists to treat a red light as a stop sign for the purposes of a left turn. In some circumstances (where there's no cross traffic) it would be good to be allowed to go straight ahead, too. It would also be good to have rolling stops legalized for bikes.

Does anyone happen to have a link for the London research?

No - heard an interview on the radio about it.

Ryaner

Bunnyhopper wrote: »

It would also be good to have rolling stops legalized for bikes.

What do you mean by this?

Bunnyhopper

Strictly you must stop at a stop sign, but on a bike that's particularly inefficient and often unnecessary, so in some places they allow bicycles to treat the stop sign as a yield sign and roll through. You're still required to look, take care, etc. but you don't actually have to come to a stop.

There's a nice video about it here:

http://vimeo.com/4140910

BeerNut

Bunnyhopper wrote: »

Strictly you must stop at a stop sign

It's a big thing in the States, but I don't think most motorists here even know this, let alone observe it.

When I was doing my driving test (in the UK) you not only had to stop, but also put on the handbrake.

Bunnyhopper

Yeah, I did the test in the UK as well. You feel such an eejit sitting there with nothing coming for a mile either way, putting your handbrake on to impress the examiner

In practice, legalizing rolling stops would be a minor thing, but it would at least put cyclists doing it on the right side of the law, and it would be a nice sign that road traffic legislation actually gave some sensible consideration to cyclists.