Should traffic lights apply to cyclists?

MrCreosote

Sort of inspired by a thread over on the cycling forum.

My question is should red lights apply to cyclists the same as for motorists as the law currently states, or should cyclists be allowed to break them if it's safe to do so?

As it is plenty of cyclists break or jump red lights already, but if the law was changed it would put the onus on cyclists to make sure it is safe before they proceed. And it would avoid these same cyclists being criminalised or feeling guilty about breaking the law.

I means they would be able to proceed much more quickly and even better, would mean they are not holding up cars when the lights do change. Win-win!

(By the way, I'm not talking about hooning through without stopping or looking so forget about the whole I-was-crossing-the-road-and-was-nearly-hit argument. That is an example of unsafe breaking of the lights.)

Pottler

On yer bike. Cyclists are always green, I thought everyone knew that? Even traffic lights.

Wacker The Attacker

Instead of penalty points, we should have a bonus point system for annoying cyclists as much as they annoy drivers sometimes.

franktheplank

Thinly veiled I wish I could drive thread?

Ghandee

Cyclists = great rides.

dreamers75

If they on the road they should obey the rules of the road.

Stained Class

Mow them all out of it & let God sort 'em out.

MrCreosote

dreamers75 wrote: »

If they on the road they should obey the rules of the road.

That's what I mean. Shouldn't the rules be changed to help safety and traffic flow (not to mention what happens in reality)

Shryke

Stained Class wrote: »

Mow them all out of it & let God sort 'em out.

Except the really hot girl I passed yesterday morning. She caught up to me at the lights and stopped too. Seriously hot, such an ass and the pins on her. I wanted her wrapped around me face.

Wacker The Attacker

Shryke wrote: »

Except the really hot girl I passed yesterday morning. She caught up to me at the lights and stopped too. Seriously hot, such an ass and the pins on her. I wanted her wrapped around me face.

I'd say she's great in the saddle

Maudi

Ghandee wrote: »

Cyclists = great rides.

96% of cyclists cycle thru red lights..its so fkn annoying..im a driver.pedestrian.and biker..its no big deal numnuts...stop fkn cycleing thru red lights...

BostonB

MrCreosote wrote: »

Sort of inspired by a thread over on the cycling forum....

Why change anything. The main problem it seems to cause is excessive thread creation/duplication on forums. That consumption of energy is keeping companies alive.

MrCreosote

Maudi wrote: »

96% of cyclists cycle thru red lights..its so fkn annoying..im a driver.pedestrian.and biker..its no big deal numnuts...stop fkn cycleing thru red lights...

Why does it bother you so much. Your going to be stuck there at the lights no matter what they do. It's a victimless crime- if anything it's better for you cos they won't be holding you up when the lights change

PickledLime

dreamers75 wrote: »

If they on the road they should obey the rules of the road.

As a cyclist I have to say that I always thought we were meant to for this exact reason!

I always try to think that if I'm coming up to a red light, there's a green one nearby, and there's traffic flowing though it. In a case of PickledLime on his bike vs. the bonnet of a moving car, the victor is gonna be pretty clear cut, every time! :pac:

Hence, if you're on the road, obey the rules.

prettygurrly

if they're so desperate to go through a red light why don't they just dismount for the 10 seconds it takes to walk through and then continue on their way?

girl in the striped socks

Cyclists have gotten away with prick acting on bikes for far too long. It's about time they had a set of rules to follow & I'd be delighted if the rules could be enforced.
I pay for tax, insurance, tolls, diesel etc so I can use the roads in this country, however bad they are.
It would be nice to see the bad cyclists fined for acting the fool on the bike so they can contribute towards the roads they seem to think they own.

MrCreosote

PickledLime wrote: »

As a cyclist I have to say that I always thought we were meant to for this exact reason!

I always try to think that if I'm coming up to a red light, there's a green one nearby, and there's traffic flowing though it. In a case of PickledLime on his bike vs. the bonnet of a moving car, the victor is gonna be pretty clear cut, every time! :pac:

Hence, if you're on the road, obey the rules.

There's a green light for sure, doesn't mean there's any traffic, or if there is that that traffic is actually moving.

The rules are designed for motorised traffic, then slapped on for cyclists without thinking whether they should be changed.

BostonB

prettygurrly wrote: »

if they're so desperate to go through a red light why don't they just dismount for the 10 seconds it takes to walk through and then continue on their way?

Thats also illegal. Not that thats the reason.

MrCreosote

girl in the striped socks wrote: »

Cyclists have gotten away with prick acting on bikes for far too long. It's about time they had a set of rules to follow & I'd be delighted if the rules could be enforced.

Totally agree- it's just that the rules for cyclists should be different than those for cars.

Zillah

In the US (or maybe just some states) drivers are allowed to turn left through a red light if it is safe to do so. Pedestrians get a green light at the same time, so the drivers start inching forward and wait for the pedestrians to finish crossing and then they go through. This is a nice example of how drivers can be trusted to yield to someone else's right of way, but be allowed to proceed if it is clear.

I would very much like to see something similar for cyclists and red lights. They are to be treated like a STOP sign. You have to stop (or at least slow to a crawl) and make absolutely sure there are no pedestrians crossing or cars going through, then proceed carefully.

BostonB

girl in the striped socks wrote: »

Cyclists have gotten away with prick acting on bikes for far too long. It's about time they had a set of rules to follow & I'd be delighted if the rules could be enforced.
I pay for tax, insurance, tolls, diesel etc so I can use the roads in this country, however bad they are.
It would be nice to see the bad cyclists fined for acting the fool on the bike so they can contribute towards the roads they seem to think they own.

You do realise that is all actually in place. (including cyclists contributing towards road in general tax, same as motor tax).

There's almost no enforcement. of course other than annoying drivers its doesn't cause much problems. So do you really want to divert Police resources to that, rather than crime?

girl in the striped socks

BostonB wrote: »

You do realise that is all actually in place.

Theres almost no enforcement. of course other than annoying drivers its doesn't cause much problems. So do you really want to divert Police resources to that, rather than crime?

Well considering there's a specific unit of the guards that focuses on the roads, the traffic corps, then it's not too much of a stretch is it?
They're out anyway so all the better if they catch a cyclist doing something dangerous that has the potential to cause an accident.

Victor

There is an argument to be made to allow 'left turn on red', which has the proviso that such traffic needs to yield to traffic with a green light. It is possible it should only be used at certain junctions and htat traffic would have to come to a complete stop.

Maudi wrote: »

96% of cyclists cycle thru red lights.

No they don't

prettygurrly wrote: »

if they're so desperate to go through a red light why don't they just dismount for the 10 seconds it takes to walk through and then continue on their way?

Would you give the same advice to motorists?

Guy:Incognito

Lots of people disregard a law so the solution is to change the law to suit them? What other laws will we extend that too? If compliance falls below 50% for any law should it just be taken off the books?

MrCreosote

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Lots of people disregard a law so the solution is to change the law to suit them? What other laws will we extend that too? If compliance falls below 50% for any law should it just be taken off the books?

If there are no consequences to disregarding the law, then yes it should be changed.

staker

BostonB wrote: »

You do realise that is all actually in place. (including cyclists contributing towards road in general tax, same as motor tax).

There's almost no enforcement. of course other than annoying drivers its doesn't cause much problems. So do you really want to divert Police resources to that, rather than crime?

As in at source, a PAYE worker or PRSI contributor? Or are there taxes specifically directed at cyclists?

Ronan|Raven

the cyclists near the KCR in Kimmage care not for red lights... one day one will be run over and I wont give a hoot.

3rdDegree

MrCreosote wrote: »

That's what I mean. Shouldn't the rules be changed to help safety and traffic flow (not to mention what happens in reality)

What a ridiculous idea. Just because a large majority ignore traffic laws, putting themselves and others in danger, is no reason to scrap those laws.

Think if it this way, just because we all want to kill Brian Cowen, doesn't mean we should legalise murder.

Guy:Incognito

MrCreosote wrote: »

If there are no consequences to disregarding the law, then yes it should be changed.

So if one cyclist is killed or injured, leave it be?

UCDVet

Dear Cyclists...

I will gladly treat you as a vehicle.
I will gladly treat you as a pedestrian.

But not both. Pick one.

If you want to ride in the road with the real vehicles, follow the damn traffic laws.

_sparkie_

prettygurrly wrote: »

if they're so desperate to go through a red light why don't they just dismount for the 10 seconds it takes to walk through and then continue on their way?

whats the difference if they are on the bike or walking the bike across the road? if they are breaking the light they are still taking the same risk if not an even higher risk.

Procrastastudy

3rdDegree wrote: »

Think if it this way, just because we all want to kill Brian Cowen, doesn't mean we should legalise murder.

I'm not sure this has the makings of a winning argument in all honesty

shed head

Zillah wrote: »

In the US (or maybe just some states) drivers are allowed to turn left through a red light if it is safe to do so. Pedestrians get a green light at the same time, so the drivers start inching forward and wait for the pedestrians to finish crossing and then they go through. This is a nice example of how drivers can be trusted to yield to someone else's right of way, but be allowed to proceed if it is clear.

I would very much like to see something similar for cyclists and red lights. They are to be treated like a STOP sign. You have to stop (or at least slow to a crawl) and make absolutely sure there are no pedestrians crossing or cars going through, then proceed carefully.

this is the way it should be!!

Gran Hermano

For €3.50 this Christmas you can adopt a middle aged fat bloke who got a new bike on the cycle to work scheme. For only €5 a week you can ensure he is fully clothed in Lycra and help him pretend he is in the tour de france as he ignores all rules of the road.

Procrastastudy

shed head wrote: »

this is the way it should be!!

Putting aside for a moment its right and not left in the US (and only some states)... Irish drivers can't even be trusted to use filters correctly. Turning left on red would be a nightmare.

prettygurrly

if they are wheeling their bike with the green pedestrian light then surely they're not breaking the law?

and to the person who asked me would I give that advice to a motorist...not sure you could fit a motorcar through the railings...ask a stupid question.

Lingua Franca

BostonB wrote: »

Why change anything. The main problem it seems to cause is excessive thread creation/duplication on forums. That consumption of energy is keeping companies alive.

Because everyone over there told him to wind his neck in on the subject of cyclists being exempt from the rules of the road. He started this new thread here to see if he could get anyone to agree with him. :pac:

Beasty

Lingua Franca wrote: »

Because everyone over there told him to wind his neck in on the subject of cyclists being exempt from the rules of the road. He started this new thread here to see if he could get anyone to agree with him. :pac:

Yes, a certain irony - he couldn't get support in the Cycling Forum for his suggestion that cyclists should be allowed to go through red lights, so starts a thread in AH on the subject ...

Dravokivich

It does apply to cyclists. You just get gobsh!tes that ignore it.

MrCreosote

Beasty wrote: »

Yes, a certain irony - he couldn't get support in the Cycling Forum for his suggestion that cyclists should be allowed to go through red lights, so starts a thread in AH on the subject ...

Not true. I didn't go looking for any support in the Cycling forum. I was defending another poster.

Not a problem surely to get other people's views rather than from the niche market of the cycling forum.

It's pretty clear from this thread that the silent majority agree with me anyway.

opti0nal

UCDVet wrote: »

If you want to ride in the road with the real vehicles, follow the damn traffic laws.

Tell that to the 78% of motorists who break speed limits.

Canis Lupus

So if cyclists can cycle through red lights then why can't all traffic ignore as long as they care to make sure it's safe.....

Or perhaps people could all just follow the rules and we'd be all one big happy family...

MrCreosote

Canis Lupus wrote: »

So if cyclists can cycle through red lights then why can't all traffic ignore as long as they care to make sure it's safe.....

Because a lot of the laws are designed for other types of vehicle and are silly or dangerous for cyclists.

And as most cyclists break red lights at least some of the time, and the gardai don't enforce the laws, it would seem in practise the majority of people agree...

And as for pissing off motorists, if every cyclist stopped at every red light and obeyed every law, they would still hate cyclists. They hate the freedom- they were supposed to have bought the freedom of the roads with the car but here they are stuck in traffic....

keith16

Ronan|Raven wrote: »

the cyclists near the KCR in Kimmage care not for red lights... one day one will be run over and I wont give a hoot.

Sounds like you do give a hoot. Sounds like you're hoping one will get run over.

Canis Lupus

MrCreosote wrote: »

Because a lot of the laws are designed for other types of vehicle and are silly or dangerous for cyclists.

And as most cyclists break red lights at least some of the time, and the gardai don't enforce the laws, it would seem in practise the majority of people agree...

And as for pissing off motorists, if every cyclist stopped at every red light and obeyed every law, they would still hate cyclists. They hate the freedom- they were supposed to have bought the freedom of the roads with the car but here they are stuck in traffic....

But I think it's equally reasonable to break a red in a car 'if safe to do so'. I would imagine everyone would like to drive through red lights if they felt it was safe to do so. However that said it's nothing to do with being on a bike rather we have rules of the road and what we need is garda enforcement and then the problems will go away.

Sofiztikated

Zillah wrote: »

In the US (or maybe just some states) drivers are allowed to turn left through a red light if it is safe to do so. Pedestrians get a green light at the same time, so the drivers start inching forward and wait for the pedestrians to finish crossing and then they go through. This is a nice example of how drivers can be trusted to yield to someone else's right of way, but be allowed to proceed if it is clear.

I would very much like to see something similar for cyclists and red lights. They are to be treated like a STOP sign. You have to stop (or at least slow to a crawl) and make absolutely sure there are no pedestrians crossing or cars going through, then proceed carefully.

That'd mean turning across the road. It's turn right on red. And only in some places.

And no, most people here can't cope with traffic lights, yellow boxes or roundabouts, can you imagine the chaos caused by left on red?

MrCreosote wrote: »

Not true. I didn't go looking for any support in the Cycling forum. I was defending another poster.

Not a problem surely to get other people's views rather than from the niche market of the cycling forum.

It's pretty clear from this thread that the silent majority agree with me anyway.

Silent majority? Are you having a laugh? You posted that on a Saturday night, at 3am. It's the busiest weekend for Christmas parties. The "silent majority" are pissed, and no crawling Board.ie trying to defend a position that noone agrees with.

Oh, and FYI, pick up a copy of the Rules of the Road. There is a section that applies to cyclists.

Seriously, can you imagine what would happen if cyclists could cycle through reds legally? Bonnet repairs and window screen sales would soar!

MrCreosote

Canis Lupus wrote: »

But I think it's equally reasonable to break a red in a car 'if safe to do so'.

In a car it's inherently more dangerous because of its size and poorer field of view.

Sofiztikated wrote: »

Seriously, can you imagine what would happen if cyclists could cycle through reds legally? Bonnet repairs and window screen sales would soar!

Nothing more than what happens now would happen. In case you haven't noticed it, red light jumping by cyclists isn't exactly rare. And apart from a few motorists getting hot under the collar, it's a victimless crime.

Chinasea

Here we go again, another cyclist bashing thread. It seems there is an ingrained notion that ALL cyclists are, light crashing pavement cycling maniacs. I can't remember when I last saw someone cycling on the path not that I think it is a crime in par with a mass murderer but it seems to insight the same emotives especially in a country who's public transport SUCKS and there is no proper infrastructure for cyclists.

Motorists constantly crash red lights, constantly abandon their cars with no regard for pedestrians, park in the few bloddy cycle lanes we have. Cop on, think for yourself as opposed to be whipped up in this mass hysteria.

girl in the striped socks

MrCreosote wrote: »

In a car it's inherently more dangerous because of its size and poorer field of view.



Nothing more than what happens now would happen. In case you haven't noticed it, red light jumping by cyclists isn't exactly rare. And apart from a few motorists getting hot under the collar, it's a victimless crime.

Victimless? Really?
A man down the road from me has been paralysed from the waist down because he broke a red light & assumed the car would avoid him. Despite the fact that he zipped out in front of the car. His own admission, not my opinion on it. 32 years old & in a wheelchair due to his carelessness, not to mention the torment he caused the motorist who hit him.
A woman my mother used to meet at mass was hit by a bus a few months ago because she wobbled out in front of it. Her family had to have a closed coffin for the funeral.
And a guy i went to school with killed a cyclist who was cycling in the middle of the road, at night around a blind bend without any lights or reflective gear on.
And you say it's victimless?
Cop the fcuk on to yourself. Just because you see cyclists breaking red lights & getting away with it doesn't make it ok.
Motorists have a responsibility to drive with care & caution for other road users but its becoming increasingly difficult due to asshole drivers, moronic cyclists, idiot joggers in the middle of the road & fat arsed walkers stepping it out two & three abreast without a care for anyone else they might encounter on the road.
If people actually had a bit of respect & consideration for other road users then there wouldn't be half as many accidents.
Instead it's turned into the usual car vs bicycle debate but what's really shocking is your attitude that people get away with jumping red lights & not getting hurt/ killed so its ok. Grow up.

MrCreosote

girl in the striped socks wrote: »

Victimless? Really?
A man down the road from me has been paralysed from the waist down because he broke a red light & assumed the car would avoid him. Despite the fact that he zipped out in front of the car. His own admission, not my opinion on it. 32 years old & in a wheelchair due to his carelessness, not to mention the torment he caused the motorist who hit him.
A woman my mother used to meet at mass was hit by a bus a few months ago because she wobbled out in front of it. Her family had to have a closed coffin for the funeral.
And a guy i went to school with killed a cyclist who was cycling in the middle of the road, at night around a blind bend without any lights or reflective gear on.
And you say it's victimless?
Cop the fcuk on to yourself. Just because you see cyclists breaking red lights & getting away with it doesn't make it ok.
Motorists have a responsibility to drive with care & caution for other road users but its becoming increasingly difficult due to asshole drivers, moronic cyclists, idiot joggers in the middle of the road & fat arsed walkers stepping it out two & three abreast without a care for anyone else they might encounter on the road.
If people actually had a bit of respect & consideration for other road users then there wouldn't be half as many accidents.
Instead it's turned into the usual car vs bicycle debate but what's really shocking is your attitude that people get away with jumping red lights & not getting hurt/ killed so its ok. Grow up.

I think you need to calm down and read my original post. I specifically said WHEN IT'S SAFE TO DO SO. I mentioned not to bother posting worst case scenarios like this BECAUSE THEY ARE IRRELEVANT TO WHAT I'M TRYING TO DISCUSS.

I'm not trying to condone dangerous cycling or driving by anyone.

irishmotorist

Maudi wrote: »

96% of cyclists cycle thru red lights..its so fkn annoying..im a driver.pedestrian.and biker..its no big deal numnuts...stop fkn cycleing thru red lights...

Wow...96%. That's rather a lot! I wonder what are the chances of a not-made-up statistic being a nice round number like that? Probably about 5 or 6 , I'd say!