Has ignoring red lights gotten a lot worse?

CramCycle

The simple thing is, that while some of us follow the rules because we can see a societal benefit to it, and just it is the right thing to do, alot of people don't. These people are not obvious on the outside by the mode of transport they use. Unfortunately as these people continue to flaunt the rules, others eventually give in and copy them as they see no negatives (even though there are, they don't see them), eventually it becomes the norm (it already is for the most part). Enforcement needs to be heavy and continuous for the next 25 years, so that it is no longer something to not do in case you get caught but it is accepted as the norm, and young people coming up will not do it because they want to fit in with society and society doesn't do this.

PhilOssophy

CramCycle wrote: »

The simple thing is, that while some of us follow the rules because we can see a societal benefit to it, and just it is the right thing to do, alot of people don't. These people are not obvious on the outside by the mode of transport they use. Unfortunately as these people continue to flaunt the rules, others eventually give in and copy them as they see no negatives (even though there are, they don't see them), eventually it becomes the norm (it already is for the most part). Enforcement needs to be heavy and continuous for the next 25 years, so that it is no longer something to not do in case you get caught but it is accepted as the norm, and young people coming up will not do it because they want to fit in with society and society doesn't do this.

Decent people obey the law of the land, rules of the road, because it is the decent societal thing to do. Whether you are on a bike, car, lorry, is irrelevant.

It is not solely about whether you kill somebody or not.

And I would have to doubt there is significant savings in repeatedly running red lights, you'd be a long time saving 5 minutes as you sit at the next light.

Anteayer

I do think it's a "standards have slipped" issue.
I definitely remember maybe 10+ years ago people being beeped at if they went through on red. Now it's become normalised. We need a public safety campaign to make it as unacceptable as drink driving. It's really dangerous, especially for pedestrians.

AndrewJRenko

PhilOssophy wrote: »

Decent people obey the law of the land, rules of the road, because it is the decent societal thing to do. Whether you are on a bike, car, lorry, is irrelevant.

Presumably you're not one of the 60-82% of motorists that break speed limits in the RSA Speed Surveys - not too many decent people out there, it seems.

Seth Brundle

Anteayer wrote: »

I do think it's a "standards have slipped" issue.
I definitely remember maybe 10+ years ago people being beeped at if they went through on red. Now it's become normalised. We need a public safety campaign to make it as unacceptable as drink driving. It's really dangerous, especially for pedestrians.

It is becoming normalised simply because some people know that the likleihood of being caught is so remote that there is no issue with it.
First change should really be in the area of enforcement. People simply wont change unless they know there could be a chance of a punishment. Look at speeding, seat belt usage, drink driving. They are still problems, despite the marketing campaigns.

D9Male

Today I saw an airport express bus gunning it through the lights a few seconds after they turned at the Spire on O'Connell St. at c. 50km/h. A pedestrian had started to cross (anticipating the lights turning green) but quickly legged it back to the footpath away from the bus.

Pretty disgusting. I took his registration number and I am reporting it to Dublin Bus.

thelawman

D9Male wrote: »

Today I saw an airport express bus gunning it through the lights a few seconds after they turned at the Spire on O'Connell St. at c. 50km/h. A pedestrian had started to cross (anticipating the lights turning green) but quickly legged it back to the footpath away from the bus.

Pretty disgusting. I took his registration number and I am reporting it to Dublin Bus.

Enfield Coaches nearly flattened a few tourists twice this week at the ha’penny bridge. When you see the green man you would think it’s safe to walk, but not so,

DrumSteve

thelawman wrote: »

Enfield Coaches nearly flattened a few tourists twice this week at the ha’penny bridge. When you see the green man you would think it’s safe to walk, but not so,

Yeah I wait at least 5 seconds now when crossing after some **** head drove through a red and almost killed me and my daughter a couple of weeks back.

Shai

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Presumably you're not one of the 60-82% of motorists that break speed limits in the RSA Speed Surveys - not too many decent people out there, it seems.

I wonder what the numbers would be for illegal parking on cycle lanes "ah sure, I'll only be the five minutes". Judging by the way drivers tend to talk about clampers, I'm going to assume there's a problem there. If we are going to assume a correlation between decency and rules of the road, we aren't going to get anywhere. As others posters have said, more enforcement is needed.

Anteayer

The issue is cultural though. I mean the penalties for drink driving went up but the thing that stops people doing it is that it's socially unacceptable.

Mowing people down at pedestrian crossings is totally unacceptable too, as is causing a side-on crash with traffic moving off from a green light or driving out under the luas.

One thing that might change it would be legal liability. If it's proven you broke a red, all costs should be against you and your insurer.

If you drive through a red and hit a pedestrian you should be looking at prison time and a life ban. If you kill someone by doing so, really should be looking at manslaughter by negligence type charges.

Driving a bus through a green pedestrian crossing should = loss of bus driving licence as you're clearly unfit to drive one.

This isn't a minor issue and has to be driving up accident rates which cause at worst major injuries or even death and even if they're just a crunch at a junction they can cause massive disruption to traffic in a city.
Collisions with the Luas are also hugely disruptive.

Not only that but it's making cities unpleasant for anyone walking around as you're constantly second guessing green lights.

downtheroad

Just remembered a particularly bad one I saw at Blanchardstown shopping centre a while back. Lights turned red for traffic, and a bus in the nearest lane stopped but blocked the view of the second lane. The green man appeared and pedestrians started crossing, including a lady pushing a pram, and next thing a car comes through the crossing at speed but pedestrians couldn't see it because of the bus. Had the pram been a couple of feet further across the junction the car would have gone straight into it. Shocking driving.

Duckjob

A major lack of enforcement / consequences has brought about the current situation and the only way to reverse it is to bring overhaul the system so that you will get caught and you will face consequences.

The court process also needs an overhaul and they need to stop listening to horsesh*t excuses that are currently being trotted out in the courts.
"Ah, but he's a grand fella normally yer honour, was just having a bad day"
"Ah, but he needs the car for his work yer honour"

So f***in what? He should have thought about that before he made the decision to charge his van through a pedestrian crossing with people all around, shouldnt he?

"Ah, but he drives a bus for a living yer honour"
Then it was doubly stupid of him to act the way he did and risk his livelihood, wasn't it?

Examples need to be made of people who are found to have created danger on the roads. Only when people have to face serious consequences from their misbehaviours will they modify their behaviours and then you will see a culture change.

PhilOssophy

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Presumably you're not one of the 60-82% of motorists that break speed limits in the RSA Speed Surveys - not too many decent people out there, it seems.

Sure to throw your own deluded twisted logic from yesterday back at you - "it only matters if you kill somebody".

And no I dont by the way. Nor am I a cyclist who thinks it is OK to run red lights, unlike yourself.

First Up

Cameras, then enforcement, fines, penalty points and bans.

It works; its the only thing that works.

blanch152

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Where are you getting this "fact" that a large percentage of cyclists break red lights?


As this appears to be descending into a motorist Vs cyclist debate which won't get us anywhere, lets try and bring it back on topic. There are increasing numbers of road users (of all vehicle types) that break red lights when compared to several years ago.
Obviously the potential for an incident comes with those driving be it car, bus, truck or whatever given that they frequently speed up on the approach.
I can't think of any occasion where a vehicle (car, bus, truck, etc) can break a red light safely. I can however think of scenarios where a bike needs to break a red light (some sets of traffic lights simply will not change when a bike approaches) but these are rare and don't justify recklessness of endangerment of either the cyclist or others.
Now can we get back on topic and stop with the cyclist vs everyone else theme please?

You are absolutely right that there is little difference. The statistics have basically shown us that both motorists and cyclists are human beings, and that the propensity to break the rules is around the same for both.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Presumably you're not one of the 60-82% of motorists that break speed limits in the RSA Speed Surveys - not too many decent people out there, it seems.

Some people don't get this and still try to propagate a false superiority complex.

AndrewJRenko

PhilOssophy wrote: »

Sure to throw your own deluded twisted logic from yesterday back at you - "it only matters if you kill somebody".

And no I dont by the way. Nor am I a cyclist who thinks it is OK to run red lights, unlike yourself.

The difference between speeding motorists and cyclists breaking red lights is that cyclists breaking red lights don't kill tens of people each year. Speeding by motorists is one of the top three causes of road deaths.

blanch152 wrote: »

You are absolutely right that there is little difference. The statistics have basically shown us that both motorists and cyclists are human beings, and that the propensity to break the rules is around the same for both.

You might want to clarify that when you say 'little difference' you presumably mean 'little difference in rate'. It's not really valid to say 'little difference' when motorists are killing 2 or 3 people each week, while cyclists don't.

blanch152 wrote: »

Some people don't get this and still try to propagate a false superiority complex.

I'm not sure where you got this from. There's no suggestion that cyclists are better people or nicer people or cooler people than motorists. Given that most cyclists ARE motorists, it would be difficult to draw a line between the two groups. The main difference is that cyclists don't kill 2 or 3 people each week.


Should we get back to the problem of motorists breaking red lights?


https://streamable.com/dsjwd

.G.

AndrewJRenko wrote:

Should we get back to the problem of motorists breaking red lights?

Yeah can we? The thread was worrying but worth reading till the cyclist v motorist wars started.

As a motorist who never cycles, cyclists who break lights are d!ckheads, motorists who do it are a danger to us all and should be hauled over the coals at every opportunity.

magicbastarder

Saw an interesting one earlier. Inbound on the rock road, pulled up at a red at the hospital. The light went red for crossing traffic, but a guy on a motorbike saw the light go red for him from about 100m away and absolutely gunned it. Went through the junction in front of us at a speed I'm not going to try to guess, at least two seconds after the light had turned green for us. Nearly cleaned a poor cyclist the other side of the road out of it, poor chap probably needed a change of pants after that

magicbastarder

blanch152 wrote: »

You are absolutely right that there is little difference. The statistics have basically shown us that both motorists and cyclists are human beings, and that the propensity to break the rules is around the same for both.



Some people don't get this and still try to propagate a false superiority complex.

Hypothetical situation. You have an issue where you're trying to deal with two criminal gangs. One chooses baseball bats as their signature weapon, the other chooses semi automatic firearms. Both are, without question, breaking the law and need addressing. Which group do you assign resources to, to a greater extent, to curtail?

kirving

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Where are you getting this "fact" that a large percentage of cyclists break red lights?

I often drive in the opposite direction to rush hour Dublin traffic, it's very common.

https://www.tcd.ie/news_events/articles/60-of-dublins-cyclists-run-red-lights/

You even tend to agree with me later in your post.

Seth Brundle wrote: »

There are increasing numbers of road users (of all vehicle types) that break red lights when compared to several years ago.

Anyway, in the second part of my post, I said "breeding a culture of *no-one* caring about the any of the rules". ie: drivers

CramCycle wrote: »

These people are not obvious on the outside by the mode of transport they use. Unfortunately as these people continue to flaunt the rules, others eventually give in and copy them as they see no negatives (even though there are, they don't see them), eventually it becomes the norm (it already is for the most part). Enforcement needs to be heavy and continuous for the next 25 years, so that it is no longer something to not do in case you get caught but it is accepted as the norm, and young people coming up will not do it because they want to fit in with society and society doesn't do this.

Completely agreed, you've worded it better than me. What gets me is that certain people here take any comment whatsoever on cyclists as such a grave personal insult that it soon descends into a debate using the same tired old analogies about potential damage done by cyclists vs cars.

magicbastarder wrote: »

Hypothetical situation. You have an issue where you're trying to deal with two criminal gangs. One chooses baseball bats as their signature weapon, the other chooses semi automatic firearms. Both are, without question, breaking the law and need addressing. Which group do you assign resources to, to a greater extent, to curtail?

We all know the answer to that. But in reality it's more nuanced and is the same reason that 100% of our doctors don't work in the cardiac department, even though heart disease kills half the population.

On the other hand, I bet that insurance scammers and dole cheats piss most people off more that large scale tax avoidance by multinationals.

AndrewJRenko

Kevin Irving wrote: »

Completely agreed, you've worded it better than me. What gets me is that certain people here take any comment whatsoever on cyclists as such a grave personal insult that it soon descends into a debate using the same tired old analogies about potential damage done by cyclists vs cars.

Just for the record, I don't take grave personal insult at any comment about cyclists whatsoever. In fact, I'm happy to give grave personal insults to cyclists, especially the little bollixes who shoal or block junctions for pedestrians.

What I take grave personal insult at is the suggestions that cyclists are a significant problem on the roads that needs to be fixed, as long as motorists are killing 2 or 3 people each week.

PhilOssophy

You are just not getting it Andrew. The sole metric of whats OK on the road is not whether you kill somebody or who kills anybody.
It is up to everybody to obey the rules of the road, whether you are a cyclist or a driver or whatever you are peddling or driving.
As I have repeatedly said, as a pedestrian, I have a much bigger problem with cyclists than with car drivers running red lights.
You just won't take any criticism of cyclists, will you? Get down off that high moral ground and look around you.

trellheim

As I have repeatedly said, as a pedestrian, I have a much bigger problem with cyclists than with car drivers running red lights.

There a giant big thread about cyclists running reds - this is the one for motorists running reds and for me its a million times a bigger problem than pushbikes running reds.

jjpep

PhilOssophy wrote: »

You are just not getting it Andrew. The sole metric of whats OK on the road is not whether you kill somebody or who kills anybody.
It is up to everybody to obey the rules of the road, whether you are a cyclist or a driver or whatever you are peddling or driving.
As I have repeatedly said, as a pedestrian, I have a much bigger problem with cyclists than with car drivers running red lights.
You just won't take any criticism of cyclists, will you? Get down off that high moral ground and look around you.

I'd agree it shouldn't be the sole metric of what's accepted on the roads. But in a world of finite resources there should be a logic in where we apply those resources. And if one group/demographic is shown to be more measurablely dangerous than others than that's where the resources should go.

Like most people I drive, cycle, walk and use public transport. It's not a them Vs us thing. It's literally the application of logic and not allowing emotion to be part of it ie 'i saw someone on a bike break a red light and I feel angry about that'.

PhilOssophy

trellheim wrote: »

There a giant big thread about cyclists running reds - this is the one for motorists running reds and for me its a million times a bigger problem than pushbikes running reds.

No I think you'll find the title is "Has ignoring red lights gotten a lot worse", under the thread of "commuting & transport", under "Motoring and Transport".

Last time I looked a bike is a form of transport, is used for commuting. So no, I think it is fair game to discuss it here.

PhilOssophy

jjpep wrote: »

I'd agree it shouldn't be the sole metric of what's accepted on the roads. But in a world of finite resources there should be a logic in where we apply those resources. And if one group/demographic is shown to be more measurablely dangerous than others than that's where the resources should go.

Like most people I drive, cycle, walk and use public transport. It's not a them Vs us thing. It's literally the application of logic and not allowing emotion to be part of it ie 'i saw someone on a bike break a red light and I feel angry about that'.

I agree largely, that doesn't cut it. It isn't just about who is dangerous on the road, it is a basic expectation that all road users should obey the rules of the road. Whether driving a bike, car, or walking.

It is not possible for the Gardai to police every junction in the city, what is possible is that everyone will show a bit of civic decency and wait their turn. That isn't too much to expect in a civilised society, is it?

magicbastarder

it's fairly simple; gardai, when they police a junction, should pull in and fine light breakers, be they motorists or cyclists. that is all.
the issue is that they don't police junctions.

PhilOssophy

magicbastarder wrote: »

it's fairly simple; gardai, when they police a junction, should pull in and fine light breakers, be they motorists or cyclists. that is all.
the issue is that they don't police junctions.

Spot on. Unfortunately they don't police anything. But they can't police every junction either so people need to show some pride about how they represent themselves.

Anyway I've had enough of this argument.

Unfollow. Have a good weekend!

blackwhite

magicbastarder wrote: »

it's fairly simple; gardai, when they police a junction, should pull in and fine light breakers, be they motorists or cyclists. that is all.
the issue is that they don't police junctions.

Red light cameras and yellow box cameras with automatic fines are needed.

Or my personal favorite suggestion (although impractical and certainly too costly to ever do) - have recessed "stinger"-style spikes in the white line at lights. (the type of spikes that cause a controlled puncture as opposed to a blowout)
When lights go red, spikes come up!

Not sure our compo culture would allow for these though :P

trellheim

PhilOssophy wrote: »

No I think you'll find the title is "Has ignoring red lights gotten a lot worse", under the thread of "commuting & transport", under "Motoring and Transport".

Last time I looked a bike is a form of transport, is used for commuting. So no, I think it is fair game to discuss it here.

Read the OP. Its about motorists in cars breaking yellows and reds. Discussing cyclists here just lets people go on about cyclists when we have a multi-thousand post thread for just that purpose.