Red light runnners rant.

Harrybelafonte · 13-10-2010 12:00pm

I think it's totally unfair that my unintentional double entendres were pick up on, but all the posters talking about being "blown out of it" are being ignored. Surely it's the same as laying down with two girls as the same time?

Beasty · 13-10-2010 12:11pm

Harrybelafonte wrote: »

Surely it's the same as laying down with two girls as the same time?

Unfortunately I can honestly say ... I don't know

buffalo · 13-10-2010 1:25pm

Dead Ed wrote: »

I do not understand the righteous indignation when a red light is crossed safely. Is it not possible that people can and do go through reds without either impeding or negatively affecting anybody else?

Yes, it's possible. But who's to judge what's safe? I frequently have conversations* with RLJs who have either impeded me, or put my life in danger, who refuse to see anything wrong nor dangerous with what they did. You may be that one perfectly safe RLJ, but somehow I doubt it.

*conversation may be an exaggeration. Shouting match is probably more appropriate.

Edwardius · 13-10-2010 1:40pm

buffalo wrote: »

Yes, it's possible. But who's to judge what's safe?

You and I and everyone else can through use of a thing called common sense. This has prevented me from falling off cliffs amongst other things!

buffalo wrote: »

I frequently have conversations* with RLJs who have either impeded me, or put my life in danger, who refuse to see anything wrong nor dangerous with what they did. You may be that one perfectly safe RLJ, but somehow I doubt it.

Y'see I think you've happened upon a species known as "assholes" as opposed to red light jumpers.

Edwardius · 13-10-2010 1:54pm

seamus wrote: »

...and at some point you will make a mistake and you will not look correctly. If it was a four-way yield, you'd be OK, but the problem is that one set of drivers explicity have right of way and will blast through the junction without looking, making your mistake a costly one.
Everyone who jumps red lights has made or will make a mistake at least once. Because they're human. Hell, I've accidentally broken red lights in the past. If you stop at red lights, then you stand a much lower chance of making a serious mistake.

No I will not. It's not like I'm going to cross the n11 at peak times with blinkers on. I accidentally went through a light without looking... once and made damn sure it never happened again and it hasn't. I do stop, then I look twice and then go if my way is clear, just as if I'm exiting a sideroad with a yield sign down the country (in which case traffic is moving at twice the speed as town). Simples.

seamus wrote: »

Would you be happy to allow cars to break red lights on the basis that they can "go through reds without either impeding or negatively affecting anybody else". Because they can, even cars can.

If they don't screw with my right of way or affect me I don't care. What about someone coming from a road where they have to give way? Does the lack of the all-protecting traffic light mean that he's in grave danger? Lights are for traffic flow, if there's no traffic to flow then I don't obey them.

seamus wrote: »

Most people when confronted with their own mistakes, particularly in an aggressive manner, will respond with aggression and self-righteousness. We are very slow to admit that we've done something wrong and will generally attempt to pin the blame on someone else or forces outside of our control.

Again with "most people". "Most people" I confronted over mistakes apologised, largely because I didn't scream my tits off in a fit of righteous indignation.

senordingdong · 13-10-2010 2:04pm

Dead Ed wrote: »

Y'see I think you've happened upon a species known as "assholes" as opposed to red light jumpers.

Aye, you'll find 'em in all walks.

seamus · 13-10-2010 2:07pm

Dead Ed wrote: »

No I will not.

You just did. The above statement is a mistake on your part

Does the lack of the all-protecting traffic light mean that he's in grave danger?

Of course not, but it also enforces vigilance on the part of other road users - they will be more observation of side roads. When you stick lights in, people think, "Green - Go" and don't care about the possibility of traffic crossing.

Again with "most people".

Because as far as I know, you are "most people". We all believe that there should be one rule for ourselves and one rule for everyone else, but obviously that's not a possibility. So you can tell me until you're blue in the face that you will never have any trouble breaking a red light, but it's never going to change my opinion because for the population at large, consistent and constant light-breaking is a problem. I'm not necessarily trying to say that you are definitely going to come a cropper some day, but if everyone was to have your attitude, then many people will.

The biggest mistake anyone can make is to say, "That will never happen to me". A man died last year after he attempted to cycle through a red light and a truck came over a blind bridge from the right and ended his life. Do you think he sailed through without a care in the world, or do you think he stopped, looked, thought, "I'm good to go" and then went for it?

You can't claim, "That's a mistake I'll never make". And it only has to happen once.

nitrogen · 13-10-2010 3:25pm

I agree with the OP, but a certain type of light braking must be mentioned: breaking a pedestrian light (The type that should be a zebra crossing) when there is no one crossing, waiting or approaching. It does depend on the location of the crossing. However, it's mostly the equivalent of a pedestrian crossing when the little man is red and there is no traffic in sight.

Edit: By the way, I'm not talking about speeding through either, but slowing down to an almost stop.

doozerie · 13-10-2010 3:32pm

Dead Ed wrote:

I don't think so. You've invented a situation which can be avoided by simply paying attention. If you sail through a red looking at the sky there might be a problem. However, if you're aware that your actions can be dangerous without the appropriate care, you will pay a lot more attention to the situation. Is this any different to crossing at a red man when there's no traffic? You stop and look, if there's nothing coming you go!

Road traffic accidents, as they are usually called, are referred to as "accidents" for the very reason that it is assumed the people involved didn't deliberately choose to collide with each other i.e. one or more parties made a mistake when they assumed their actions were safe and a collision was the result. If you have ever not spotted a moving vehicle, cyclist, or pedestrian until they were very close to you then you'll realise that your awareness and observational skills are not infallible. No-one is infallible (no, not even the pope) which is why there is a common set of road usage rules which we are required to adhere to to minimise the dangers we pose to others and vice versa. Once people start to make up their own set of rules they shorten the odds, for both themselves and those around them, of being involved in or, more specifically, being the cause of, an "accident".

Dead Ed wrote:

Now, I see plenty of times where cyclists put other road users in a position where they need to take action to avoid a collision both at and away from red lights. I would see this as inconsiderate and dangerous as others are adversely affected.

The only difference between these "inconsiderate and dangerous" people and yourself is that they chose wrongly when they decided on the spot whether their actions were likely to be a danger to themselves and/or others. If you routinely ignore red lights then you yourself are just one poor decision away from being the same source of danger to others. You might consider that a risk worth taking, others do not.

GreeBo · 13-10-2010 3:39pm

07Lapierre wrote: »

The Simple fact is, Cyclist/Cars/Trucks/Pedestrians Jump Red Lights because they can! Theres not enough enforcement.

No Cyclist would Jump a Red Light if they thought they were going to get caught and have to pay a hefty fine.

There was a thread recently about a cyclist stopped for not having any lights. The guy turned up at court but the Garda didn't! :rolleyes:

It all comes down to enforcement of the law

Thats a waste of court time. Why on earth do you need anyone to go to court? On the spot/fine/ticket with court only if you ignore this.
Of course it would require mandatory ID carrying...

Lumen · 13-10-2010 3:44pm

GreeBo wrote: »

On the spot/fine/ticket with court only if you ignore this. Of course it would require mandatory ID carrying...

On the spot fines do not require ID carrying. Neither do on-the-spot beatings for that matter.

Jawgap · 13-10-2010 3:48pm

.......BUT, surely any society that allowed the police (or any concerned citizen) to mete out on the spot beatings for trivial failures to comply with excessively annoying traffic laws would also be so authoritarian as to require the carrying of id cards?

Such a society, would probably also have us all tatooed and chipped to make sure there was only minimal id fraud - thus allowing on the spot fines to be easily dished out, negating the need for bodily harm to be inflicted on a whim.....

kylith · 13-10-2010 5:22pm

BostonB wrote: »

Grand Canal is full of them. Bikes with baskets do this a lot.

Saw one Basket Nellie cycle into the back of a bus, because she couldn't stop as she was holding a cup of coffee.

One day I am going to make someone eat their own bike for doing that. Probably one of those numpties who are on the phone while cycling

Nearly dropped the shaver when I saw that.

Ah, you made me lol.

Hungrycol · 13-10-2010 5:31pm

You call these runners? Huh, no way, they're all white and purple and they go far to far up the ankle to even be classified as a runner... and those red lights in the heel are just silly. They're something right out of the 80s.

Sorry just having a Red Light Runners Rant

dubmess · 13-10-2010 6:19pm

mahoo wrote: »

I remember was someone killed on baggot street by a cyclist. 10 or more years ago i guess. They were going the the wrong way down the one way section and a pedestrian stepped out in front of them, obviously not expecting someone to be coming from that direction. must have been doing some speed.. any time i see a cyclist doing this now i feel like clothes lining them.

I knew this guy, he was a courier. This incident destroyed him (yes I know, it killed someone as well, I'm just saying). The guy stepped back onto the kerb when he saw him coming and tripped and hit his head. The guy on the bike didn't touch him. He stayed with him and tried to get him into an ambulance but the guy said he was fine. I believe he fell into a coma later and died the next day. A horrific incident.

I was working as a courier at the time as well. For the rest of the week I received horrific abuse from members of the public (the poor man's wife had been on Joe Duffy the next day). I was called a murderer and spat on by a taxi driver.

The courier involved, subsequently descended into drug addiction, crime to feed the habit and is, I believe still serving time in Mountjoy for a series of bank robberies. I don't know if you remember the 'politest bank robber in Ireland' story from a few years back, this was him. And before you say it, he wasn't into drugs or anything beforehand, he ran his own courier company, was a science graduate from Trinity, came from a good home, yadda, yadda, yadda.

I'm not trying to moralise or anything, just relating the tale for those who may be interested. It was a horrific accident, I have never taken that stretch on Merrion Row the wrong way and I'm reminded of that incident every time I pass by and see someone, anyone, riding that way without a care in the world.

Life can change in an instant, if more people knew about incidents like this maybe people would take a bit more care.

Lumen · 13-10-2010 6:23pm

This?

That's awful.

dubmess · 13-10-2010 6:30pm

Yeah that's it. He was put away for 4 years and was due to get out early but NIB challenged it and I think they actually increased the sentence.

Terrible altogether, for everyone involved.

Wishbone Ash · 13-10-2010 9:12pm

kylith wrote: »

The amount of people who sail past me when I'm waiting at a red light only for me to overtake them 50m later and them to pass me while I wait at the next lights

Happens to me regularly on the Whitehall/Drumcondra/Dorset Street stretch. I've even been berated for 'blocking' the cycle lane while waiting at a red!!

I stop at 99% of lights but there is one close to my house which has an induction loop which my bike wont activate. (The default position is green for the other road). If I leave the house very early (before 5am) I usually sneak through with care. Otherwise I'd have to wait until a vehicle arrives (or dismount and walk through).

cdaly_ · 13-10-2010 9:39pm

I usually hit the pedestrian button in that case.

And then cycle through...

DirkVoodoo · 13-10-2010 9:48pm

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

Happens to me regularly on the Whitehall/Drumcondra/Dorset Street stretch. I've even been berated for 'blocking' the cycle lane while waiting at a red!!

I stop at 99% of lights but there is one close to my house which has an induction loop which my bike wont activate. (The default position is green for the other road). If I leave the house very early (before 5am) I usually sneak through with care. Otherwise I'd have to wait until a vehicle arrives (or dismount and walk through).

One in Sandyford Industrial estate is like that, along Blackthorn Avenue where the Luas crossing is. Basically, late at night no one is driving that way and the standard light rotation doesn't include the straight on along Blackthorn Avenue (with Stillorgan Heath on your left). You could sit there and wait like an idiot, get off your bike and walk across a few sets of pedestrian lights or just use a little caution and common sense and proceed slowly through the lights.

buffalo · 13-10-2010 10:59pm

Dead Ed wrote: »

Y'see I think you've happened upon a species known as "assholes" as opposed to red light jumpers.

Well perhaps I'm cycling in the wrong areas, but I've yet to meet a RLJ who apologises.

Jawgap · 14-10-2010 8:38am

Saw the ultimate RLJ'er this morning - he ran the lights at the Baldoyle level crossing - just about made it through and under the opposite barrier!

buffalo · 14-10-2010 9:32am

I thought of this thread this morning, as I watched a car drive down the wrong side of the road toward me, after overtaking a stationary Luas at George's Dock. I'm sure if I'd asked the driver, they would've said it was a perfectly safe manoeuvre.

I wonder if I held my ground, would they have stopped for me? I've encountered the same behaviour there before, and I've yet to have a driver brake, and sheepishly admit that they wrong to have thought it was safe. Or would they point out it that it was safe? because I had stopped, and therefore nobody had gotten hurt. What's the problem?

Likewise, I wonder how many times a RLJ has avoided an accident, because of other people's actions. Because a motorist decided to be sensible and yield. Because a pedestrian stepped back out of the way, rather than bear the brunt of an impact.

I realise that it's possible to break a red light safely. However, I am not arrogant enough to put myself above the law, and potentially further jepordise my own and others safety.

cdaly_ · 14-10-2010 11:00am

Jawgap wrote: »

Saw the ultimate RLJ'er this morning - he ran the lights at the Baldoyle level crossing - just about made it through and under the opposite barrier!

Whoosh!

I wonder do the don't-land-on-a-car sensors register bikes on those crossings?

Lumen · 14-10-2010 11:08am

Win:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mrgAfi041c

Fail:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7iyKedffJjA

doozerie · 14-10-2010 11:31am

Some time last year I stopped at the level crossing near Landsowne Road as the barriers came down. There were a bunch of people walking towards the crossing at the time, and a teenager casually walked under the lowering barrier on my side and practically strutted his way across the tracks. People waiting beyond the barriers stared, he strutted even more slowly. Unfortunately for him his coolness didn't permit him to duck under the descending barrier on the other side with the result that although his head and shoulders managed to clear it, the bag on his back didn't and the barrier effectively stapled his bag plus himself to the spot.

Coolness led to anger, which turned to panic when he found himself on the wrong side of the barrier as he struggled to free his bag. The train, clearly no respecter of cool, was coming and it didn't sound like it was stopping. His coolness took another blow when a non-cool adult stepped forward to help him free his bag. They managed to wrench it free and the cool kid disappeared from view seconds before the train went past. In reality he was well away from the tracks themselves and in no danger whatsoever of being hit by the train but judging by the urgency of his actions he wasn't entirely convinced of this fact. Who knew that a level crossing could be so entertaining?

strange john · 14-10-2010 11:47am

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

I think what he is saying is that not every red light breaking involved terrorizing mothers and children.

Turning left on red for example. Another one is passing through pedestrian lights when the pedestrian has already crossed, heading into town opposite John of Gods is one. I don't go through it, but I wouldn't begrudge someone doing it, I don't think it's dangerous and to say "but it's still breaking a red light" is an oversimplification. Not everything is black and white.

I agree totally. We're far too reliant on traffic lights and people are led by them. If the light is green, I have to go, even if it means I'm blocking a junction or entrance/exit to a premesis. There's a pilot study in Denmark I think, (and I know..I read it in a magazine a few months back but can't find the article anymore, so sorry, poorly researched point), where they've abolished traffic lights, foot paths and pedestrian crossings in a town centre. People naturally slow down in cars while pedestrians take care of themselves and the accident rate has dropped considerably. As far as I know it's only in one small town so far, so I don't know if that's scalable for a city centre.

Lumen · 14-10-2010 11:50am

strange john wrote: »

There's a pilot study in Denmark I think, (and I know..I read it in a magazine a few months back but can't find the article anymore, so sorry, poorly researched point), where they've abolished traffic lights, foot paths and pedestrian crossings in a town centre. People naturally slow down in cars while pedestrians take care of themselves and the accident rate has dropped considerably. As far as I know it's only in one small town so far, so I don't know if that's scalable for a city centre.

Except for the blind people who are completely screwed (according to a previous poster).

07Lapierre · 14-10-2010 11:55am

strange john wrote: »

I agree totally. We're far too reliant on traffic lights and people are led by them. If the light is green, I have to go, even if it means I'm blocking a junction or entrance/exit to a premesis. There's a pilot study in Denmark I think, (and I know..I read it in a magazine a few months back but can't find the article anymore, so sorry, poorly researched point), where they've abolished traffic lights, foot paths and pedestrian crossings in a town centre. People naturally slow down in cars while pedestrians take care of themselves and the accident rate has dropped considerably. As far as I know it's only in one small town so far, so I don't know if that's scalable for a city centre.

Thats not quite correct:

"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."

Karma · 14-10-2010 12:12pm

:rolleyes:
until the day the garda enforce the laws, what are you going to do, take the law into your own hands. complaining here is just venting steam. with all the different road users out there, of course we all going to have muppets in every group. We ride in certain ways because it is safer than obeying the rotr.
Cyclists receive no support from the garda when in accidents( too many examples personally) and when i did break the law and get stopped for it, i get a 10 minute rant in G minor and let go...
they don't do their job, I wont mention what happens then they stop me in my car....
with the G men not pursuing drivers for dangerous or careless driving for causing accidents. drivers have no worries except that of their conscience.anyone been prosecuted for killing a cyclist?(I don't know)

I broke a red light recently(went red when i was 10 feet away from it,truth be told, i did not see it till it tuned red) broke it and turned around and apologised to the mother and baby i gave a fright to. she said, she expected all cyclists to break the lights. felt bad about that as i "am not that sort of guy" sounds like a defenders description with a panache for breaking legs

but lets be honest, I am replying because the original post pissed me off.
"As a cyclist I want to believe that my choice to cycle is superior to other forms of transport like the bus or a car."

leave the law to those who may or may no enforce it. there are laws against most things but people will keep braking those laws until someone starts, you know, doing their job, by actually enforcing the road laws. maybe some respect may start and heh, we all get along.
So, write a letter to those who are not doing their job or do one better, ring Joe Duffy, 'cause he loves a good cyclist bashing

its what we did to sort out the banks :P

but i blame the couriers because you know its their fault :rolleyes:

Red light runnners rant.

Comments