Over the past week I've seen 2 cyclists jump red lights, Im not talking about kids either.

I've seen 2 car drivers jump red lights already today while riding my bike.

Some cyclists do it but from what I see more car drivers do!

I've nearly been knocked down on a pedestrian crossing by a cyclist who went through the red light. I was already half way across the road & he just ploughd into everybody who was crossing.

Like bad car drivers, it's only a minority. Unfortunately no one notices the cyclists who do stop at the lights as it's just expected behaviour.

It should be mentioned that many responsible cyclists loathe those who tar us all with the same brush by going through red lights. In fact there's an ongoing campaign by cyclists for cyclists to highlight the dangers of doing so at the link below.

http://www.stopatred.org/why.php

Like bad car drivers, it's only a minority. Unfortunately no one notices the cyclists who do stop at the lights as it's just expected behaviour.

I agree. I see plenty of car/bus drivers do it.

I generally stop for red lights on my bike. If not, I dont actively go through them but mount the pavement instead.

Like bad car drivers, it's only a minority. Unfortunately no one notices the cyclists who do stop at the lights as it's just expected behaviour.

Exactly, I stop at red lights 100% of the time now... However, once i was trackstanding slightly over the white line (endangering no-one) waiting for the light to go green and a Police Car who was in the traffic behind me decided to pull me over and give me a rollocking, a fixed penalty notice which subsequently went to court and ended up with me having to pay £45 with three points on my driving license.

I'm currently contesting the 3 points as there is nowhere in the law which states that you can have a driving license endorsed through a cycling offence.

Check this in the meantime http://www.stopatred.org/

I always stop at red lights, they are there to stop you from colliding with other cars after all, I am a great cyclist and get so angry when I see other cyclists just taking the ****, I see cyclists who go down the middle of the road and then stick fingers up to drivers if they beep at them, seen them go through red lights only to narrowly avoid getting crushed by another car...

Car drivers also annoy me tho especially ones that come out really fast of a side road nearly straight into me as I'm cycling along, drivers who open their doors without checking for me, nearly resulting in me flying over the door, drivers that turn left right in front of me, causing me to crash into the side of their car then shouting at me! Drivers that speed through a red and don't see me so I have to screech on my breaks nearly flying over the front of my handlebars only to discover that she was actually on the phone, I can go on..:rant:

Exactly, I stop at red lights 100% of the time now... However, once i was trackstanding slightly over the white line (endangering no-one) waiting for the light to go green and a Police Car who was in the traffic behind me decided to pull me over and give me a rollocking, a fixed penalty notice which subsequently went to court and ended up with me having to pay £45 with three points on my driving license.

I'm currently contesting the 3 points as there is nowhere in the law which states that you can have a driving license endorsed through a cycling offence.

Check this in the meantime http://www.stopatred.org/

thats insane, how would they know who you are, its not as if you have a license plate on your bike and I dont even drive a car anyway so how would they stop me from cycling:huh:

There are some traffic lights triggered only by the weight of a vehicle. There was a set in Peterborough where it was necessary to carefully pass through a red light at certain times of day - when the traffic was light, so there were no cars available to trigger the lights for you

I don't know of any such lights in Sheffield

I see cyclists jumping red lights everyday, maybe its because they pay no road tax, insurance, mot, that they think the road laws don't apply to them. I have little time for cyclists , they just get in my way.

LOL.....

I see cyclists jumping red lights everyday, maybe its because they pay no road tax, insurance, mot, that they think the road laws don't apply to them. I have little time for cyclists , they just get in my way.

LOL.....

I pay my roadtax/MOT/Insurance/M6 Tolls for my car. I pay insurance for my bicycle which is for theft and 3rd party injury/damage... I think taxing cyclists would be counterproductive.

Remember, its a minority that jump the red lights.

I have little time for impatient drivers like you and are usually the ones who get a windscreen covered in phlegm.

I pay my roadtax/MOT/Insurance/M6 Tolls for my car. I pay insurance for my bicycle which is for theft and 3rd party injury/damage... I think taxing cyclists would be counterproductive.

Remember, its a minority that jump the red lights.

I have little time for impatient drivers like you and are usually the ones who get a windscreen covered in phlegm.

thats grown up of ya :loopy::loopy::loopy::loopy::loopy::loopy::loopy:

I usually find that if you berate them for doing it, and you get a "f off" and hand gestures in return, they're usually not so big and clever when you catch up with them and pull in to have a word!

how right u are - similar with little boys who shout ill bang u out and then u confront them they shxt their pants

I see cyclists jumping red lights everyday, maybe its because they pay no road tax, insurance, mot, that they think the road laws don't apply to them. I have little time for cyclists , they just get in my way.

LOL.....
And I have no time for cars.....they just get in mine!!!

I see cyclists jumping red lights everyday, maybe its because they pay no road tax, insurance, mot, that they think the road laws don't apply to them. I have little time for cyclists , they just get in my way.

LOL.....

Interesting comment - because they ride a bike you assume they dont own a car!
I own a car but choose to cycle for the health benefits and enjoyment. You should be thanking me for not adding to the congestion this city experiences!

My 2 pet hates with fellow cyclists - Running red lights and having no lights on their bikes at night. Both stupid and unnecessary.

As a daily commuter I don't have issues with other car drivers, I think the vast majority are fairly bike aware and give plenty of room, bus drivers on the hand - I've been cut up and almost knocked off a couple of times in the last 2 weeks. Its only a matter of time before a 1st bus kills a cyclist -some of those guys are a serious liability and have real issues with cyclists.

Its the ones that undertake you and then you have to continually re-overtake that really bug me - its very dangerous :(

There are some traffic lights triggered only by the weight of a vehicle. There was a set in Peterborough where it was necessary to carefully pass through a red light at certain times of day - when the traffic was light, so there were no cars available to trigger the lights for you

I don't know of any such lights in Sheffield

I know of two of them I'm there for like five minutes just waiting then finally a car will come along and its green straight away

I just jump off the bike and walk it along the pavement then get back on again.

I see cyclists jumping red lights everyday, maybe its because they pay no road tax, insurance, mot, that they think the road laws don't apply to them. I have little time for cyclists , they just get in my way.

LOL.....

Hilarious, I'm sure you won't be able to stop laughing if you kill someone because of your attitude.

I spread my dislike liberally around cyclists that jump lights, car drivers who think they own the road and pedestrians who walk in the cycle lane.

I know of two of them I'm there for like five minutes just waiting then finally a car will come along and its green straight awayit would be useful to know which those are ;)

Driving up St. Mary's Gate yesterday evening, I stopped at the lights where you would turn left to go down Shoreham St. Lights were obviously red. The driver to the right of me decided to stop, then go anyway through the red light, contravening the green light for the cyclist who was trying to cross on the cycle green light, nearly creaming him.

Bad on both sides. But a cyclist crossing a red light, foolishly, will usually only kill himself. I think half the problem is that testostarone kicks in, and male drivers who don't cycle just cannot bear the thought of being "beaten" to a destination, be that a fictitious one two hundred yards up the road.

The huge majority of adult cyclists one would suspect are also drivers. So have both perspectives. As demonstarted ad-infinitum on SF previously, one can fairly safely assume that most drivers do not cycle. (Certainly not on the roads, half an hour a month round the park with the kids in the summer doesn't count by the way...)

And let's not start the pointless "road tax" argument propagated by the hard of thinking. Under current arrangements, bikes would attract a zero rate anyway. :D

agreed with lotar, i have little time for cyclists for the same reason.

And the sooner they start obeying the rules of the road the better

I have little time for impatient drivers like you and are usually the ones who get a windscreen covered in phlegm.That's actually the insides of an impatient cyclist who jumped a red light and ended being impaled by someone's car bonnet.

It doesn't matter if you are right or wrong, you will lose.

Chill the **** out Mr Cyclone, I said they get in my way, not that I want to kill them,

Craig.

Don't any of you get bored senseless repeating the same old pony & trap over and over

Oooh, I bet we haven't had a thread about cyclists and the ineviatable coments about "Road Tax" (VED) with side mentions of low emission cars and...oh, let's mention horses as well somewhere in there.....hmmm..yes, at least 2 weeks since we've had one of those oh so novel, enlightening and REALLY REALLLY interesting and not at all repetitive and dull threads.

You know I've not been on this forum for so long I had to crank up a new user name.
And hey look! The same old rants!

I stopped cycling to work after 3.5 years of it (now use bus and running)

In my cycling time I treated the bike as a vehicle, and rode it safely, legally, on the road (not the pavement) and yes, even insured it,

No accidents no tickets no probs

bring back the sinclair c5 thats what i say, i cant imagine a finer method of transport.

You know the day of electrically powered small vehicles can't come soon enough.
Sinclair was ahead of his time in idea, so far ahead it nearly bankrupted him.

it would be useful to know which those are ;)

ok I don't know for sure but I seriously am left waiting once I listened to a whole song on my ipod before a bus came along and it turned green.

first one is on london road, the bus lane that goes onto the bottom of the moor
(just after the adult shop with manniquins in the window)

the other one is going onto chesterfield road, near lowfield school going towards the red lion pub is it?

you'll just wait there while it goes through all the other traffic lights at least three or four times then when a car comes along miraculously its your turn to go:rant:

This because some lights are activated by sensors beneath the road which don't respond to cycles.

There are many of them. Worth a campaign or hop off, wheel it round , hop back on again when safe.

Lights didn't apply to the lady cyclist on Queens Road, near old ice rink at quarter to six. Nice wrist gesture too

There are some traffic lights triggered only by the weight of a vehicle. There was a set in Peterborough where it was necessary to carefully pass through a red light at certain times of day - when the traffic was light, so there were no cars available to trigger the lights for you

I don't know of any such lights in Sheffield

The left turn lane at the junction of Parkside Road with Penistone Road down by Hillsborough Park used to be like that, it changes now though. That's the only red light I've ever gone through - I used to go when the right turn lane went, as it meant there was no traffic coming along Penistone Rd.
Not that I have to go that way anymore, new job means I'm going to have to drive to work :(

agreed with lotar, i have little time for cyclists for the same reason.

And the sooner they start obeying the rules of the road the better

Will all car drivers do the same, and stay out of cycle lanes and advanced stop areas?

Chill the **** out Mr Cyclone, I said they get in my way, not that I want to kill them,

Craig.

You will though, with an attitude like that. Maybe you'll even feel bad about it.

Will all car drivers do the same, and stay out of cycle lanes and advanced stop areas?
Nah, it gets in their way too much, that extra 2 metres forward, it could mean ... well, nothing... but it won't stop them.

There are some traffic lights triggered only by the weight of a vehicle. There was a set in Peterborough where it was necessary to carefully pass through a red light at certain times of day - when the traffic was light, so there were no cars available to trigger the lights for you

I don't know of any such lights in Sheffield

My driving instructor told me about these - and I didn't believe him!:hihi:

I am a bit of a bugger for jumping red lights, often though it is beneficial to drivers. Certain lights which are safe to jump and slowly passing the white line (technically a red light jump if the police are in a bad mood?) gets me away a bit quicker from the stopped traffic, more traffic can pass through the light and then overtke slowly further along the road.
If I wait at lights (most I do), theres often a cautious driver who may wait a bit and then pull out, allowing maybe only them to go through before the lights change.

I tend to walk or get the bus,.....i used to cycle, but to be honest its safer not to, as there are to many drivers who basically dont really care about cyclists. And when it comes to cycle lanes, its surprising how close a car will try and get to the lane, while leaving a nice gap the other side :loopy: My other problem with cars, is the parked variety......which for me are a cyclists worst nightmare, especially at junctions where you cant see them until its too late.

I tend to walk or get the bus,.....i used to cycle, but to be honest its safer not to, as there are to many drivers who basically dont really care about cyclists. And when it comes to cycle lanes, its surprising how close a car will try and get to the lane, while leaving a nice gap the other side :loopy: My other problem with cars, is the parked variety......which for me are a cyclists worst nightmare, especially at junctions where you cant see them until its too late.

On Abbeydale RD some drivers pull into the cycle lane to stop you overtaking them in rush hour :(

That doesnt exactly surprise me..........so what do the drivers on here think of that situation?

My driving instructor told me about these - and I didn't believe him!:hihi:they're usually identifiable by the tar lines in the road just before the lights, which are presumably concealing a pressure pad. Others work on a motion detector, so presumably cyclists have a chance of tripping those (though I seem to have a devil of a job getting into some shops :suspect: )

On Abbeydale RD some drivers pull into the cycle lane to stop you overtaking them in rush hour :(

You get that when you ride a motorbike down the middle of the Parkway when the traffic is in very slow moving queues. For some reason, they can't stand the fact that someone is able to make progress when they can't so they'll nearly cause an accident to impede someones legal progress.

And before anyone says its not legal to filter on a motorbike. It is. Ask any traffic cop and they will tell you. Some bikers do go a bit quick I must admit, but again, good and bad in all groups of road user.

Anyway, as for cyclists, they should obey the rules of the road. Most do, some don't. If I see a guy go through a red light and get creamed, my thoughts will be with the poor sod who he rode into because they'll be feeling awful about it, whether they are at fault or not.

Those who try to ride through pedestrians using a crossing deserve to have someone suddenly apply their front brake for them.

Bringing this one up again.

Whilst going through traffic lights at Gleadless Townend about an hour ago a cyclist went straight across the front of us, he`d obviously gone through a red light, from White Lane turning right onto Ridgeway Road, in front of the petrol station, and then proceeded to go straight through another red when turning left into Gleadless Road.

Why do some cyclists think they can break the law and go through red lights.

I suppose if we had knocked him off his bike it would have been our fault.

I once knocked a cyclist off his bike, but he admitted that it was his fault as he had been knocked off many times before.

I once knocked a cyclist off his bike, but he admitted that it was his fault as he had been knocked off many times before. Such is the mentality of cyclists.

His admittance as to being 'knocked off' may have meant something other to him entirely. Lucky man :)

they're usually identifiable by the tar lines in the road just before the lights, which are presumably concealing a pressure pad. Others work on a motion detector, so presumably cyclists have a chance of tripping those (though I seem to have a devil of a job getting into some shops :suspect: )
I've never had a problem activating any lights with my bike - just stop on the outlined sensor. Even if it doesn't register me/is broken all lights will at some point trip through their phase - they have to in case the sensors are broken!

Why do some cyclists think they can break the law and go through red lights.


It's most likely because bycycles don't have number plates and cyclist are much harder to identify than a car.

Also a cyclist has no licence to lose.

If cars were not required to have number plates and drivers did not require driving licences then I suspect that many more car drivers too would take the risk and jump lights too.

I've always felt that ANY road user, whether that be cyclist or motorist,needs to be properly licence to use the road.... and oh yes, let's not forget they should also contribute something towards road taxes.
Radom police cycle checks could be a way to enforce things in future.

It's most likely because bycycles don't have number plates and cyclist are much harder to identify than a car.

Also a cyclist has no licence to lose.

If cars were not required to have number plates and drivers did not require driving licences then I suspect that many more car drivers too would take the risk and jump lights too.

I've always felt that ANY road user, whether that be cyclist or motorist,needs to be properly licence to use the road.... and oh yes, let's not forget they should also contribute something towards road taxes.
Radom police cycle checks could be a way to enforce things in future.

Stop talking sense. No good will come of it.

It's most likely because bycycles don't have number plates and cyclist are much harder to identify than a car.

Also a cyclist has no licence to lose.
A large number of cyclists are motorists as well, so they do have licenses to lose or points to be added to.

If cars were not required to have number plates and drivers did not require driving licences then I suspect that many more car drivers too would take the risk and jump lights too.

I've always felt that ANY road user, whether that be cyclist or motorist,needs to be properly licence to use the road.... and oh yes, let's not forget they should also contribute something towards road taxes.
Radom police cycle checks could be a way to enforce things in future.

The license for a car is required because of the damage you can cause with it.
When a bike weighs over a ton and can travel at over a hundred miles an hour, then I'd support it requiring a license... Oh, we call those motorbikes and they do require licenses (even if they don't weigh that much or go that fast).
What level of license would you require for children who are learning to ride, or would they not be allowed on the street?

If road tax existed, well, you'd still not have a point, lets pretend you understand vehicle excise duty though and what you're suggesting is that cyclists all get a zero rated tax disc (ie no cost) because they produce no emissions. This has no benefit at all to anyone, but a massive cost to us all in the form of bureaucracy needed to manage the system.
Maybe you can explain how vehicle excise duty on bikes makes sense though?

It's most likely because bycycles don't have number plates and cyclist are much harder to identify than a car.

Also a cyclist has no licence to lose.

If cars were not required to have number plates and drivers did not require driving licences then I suspect that many more car drivers too would take the risk and jump lights too.

I've always felt that ANY road user, whether that be cyclist or motorist,needs to be properly licence to use the road.... and oh yes, let's not forget they should also contribute something towards road taxes.
Radom police cycle checks could be a way to enforce things in future.

I cant decide if this post is stupidity or very subtle extracting of urine...

The bit in bold may suggest the latter, the rest of the post leans more towards the former.

I'll just add that I've never ever seen a motorist going through a red light :rolleyes:

A large number of cyclists are motorists as well, so they do have licenses to lose or points to be added to.

The license for a car is required because of the damage you can cause with it.
When a bike weighs over a ton and can travel at over a hundred miles an hour, then I'd support it requiring a license... Oh, we call those motorbikes and they do require licenses (even if they don't weigh that much or go that fast).
What level of license would you require for children who are learning to ride, or would they not be allowed on the street?

If road tax existed, well, you'd still not have a point, lets pretend you understand vehicle excise duty though and what you're suggesting is that cyclists all get a zero rated tax disc (ie no cost) because they produce no emissions. This has no benefit at all to anyone, but a massive cost to us all in the form of bureaucracy needed to manage the system.
Maybe you can explain how vehicle excise duty on bikes makes sense though?

Ahh Cyclone, you never did get back to me about those reports about the effect of using mobiles whilst driving:!:

Let's no get pedantic fella, you and I both know I was talking about pedal cyclist NOT motor cyclists, next you'd be telling me you thought that the OP was talking about motor cyclists:rolleyes:

As for Road Tax, of course it exists!

Cyclist may not give off emmissions, but they still use the roads and therefore I think a small contribution to using their cycles on the road is fair.
Even if they have a car already, that shouldn't exempt them, after all you are still charged for each motor vehichle that you have on the road.

I cant decide if this post is stupidity or very subtle extracting of urine...

The bit in bold may suggest the latter, the rest of the post leans more towards the former.

I'll just add that I've never ever seen a motorist going through a red light :rolleyes:

What's wrong with that?

It's a valid suggestion, why should only motorists pay for roads?

What's wrong with that?

It's a valid suggestion, why should only car users pay for roads?

Stupidity then. There have been plenty of threads about this subject, I thought you may have been referring to those, where this argument has been churned up many times before.

Ahh Cyclone, you never did get back to me about those reports about the effect of using mobiles whilst driving:!:

Let's no get pedantic fella, you and I both know I was talking about pedal cyclist NOT motor cyclists, next you'd be telling me you thought that the OP was talking about motor cyclists:rolleyes:

As for Road Tax, of course it exists!

Nope, you're thinking of something called Vehicle Excise Duty, easy mistake.
Cyclist may not give off emmissions, but they still use the roads and therefore I think a small contribution to using their cycles on the road is fair.
Given that the current scheme has vehicles of under 100(ish) gms/kg of CO2 emissions having tax for free, no, it wouldn't be fair at all.
If road tax even existed and it were based on the wear and tear caused to the road, then it might cost them a penny for a year.
Even if they have a car already, that shouldn't exempt them, after all you are still charged for each motor vehichle that you have on the road.
You are, unless they are low emissions of course, or classic vehicles.

Ahh Cyclone, you never did get back to me about those reports about the effect of using mobiles whilst driving:!:


What reports are those?

What reports are those?

Those that you said you'd get back to me on but never did.

Nope, you're thinking of something called Vehicle Excise Duty, easy mistake.

Of course I know that Vehicle Excise Duty is the official name.

But Parkers still call it Road Tax.

http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/road-tax/

Stop talking sense. No good will come of it.

What's nonsense about it:confused:

What's nonsense about it:confused:

I said sense..............:hihi:

Of course I know that Vehicle Excise Duty is the official name.

But Parkers still call it Road Tax.

http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/road-tax/

Just because a large organisation says something, doesn't mean they're right. It is commonly called road tax yes, but the name is incorrect as not a single penny pays for the road. VED goes into general taxation, not directly back into roads.

Anyone who pays income tax or VAT pays for the roads already. That includes most if not all cyclists. It also includes anyone without a car who never uses roads or motorways. So I'm afraid your comment "why should only car users pay for roads" does smack of stupidity, because they don't :hihi:

OP - why do red lights not apply to cyclists? Well, they do. The trouble is you put a human being on a bike, in a car, any mode of transport, and they are likely to flout the rules. Human nature, not restricted to cyclists.

if you are a cyclist please dont reply to any more anti cycling threads leave the car driving morons to moan amongst themselfs.
after all we know we are right and they are jut so wrong

I don't usually have a problem with bikes. If it's clear ahead and they want to ride across then let them do it. The times when I have a problem is when there are 2 or more riding together, side by side and taking up more than half the road just so they can have a chat, oblivious to the carnage behind them.

Cycling is fun and not at all dangerous

I have read all the posts on here. My conclusion is that my opinion has not changed. Todays busy roads are just too dangerous for cyclists. They are not easy to see, if someone hits them they have no protection , plus they pay no road tax and so should NOT be allowed to ride on OUR roads.....wonder who pays for the cycle tracks too?....taken out of cyclists tax?

All the posts except mine 3 above yours? :rolleyes: Taxpayers pay for the cycle tracks, yes that's you and the cyclists that use them. It is well proven that the more people cycle = the less cars there are on the road = the safer roads become for all.

I don't see why cyclists should be frightened off the roads. I think its good that they are trying to spread the message that cycling is cheap, healthy, faster than driving for journeys of less than 5 miles (>50% of all car journeys), and good for reducing our carbon emissions. It is also very safe when done properly. I try to encourage car users to consider joining cyclists in the one true path by riding responsibly, stopping at reds, and passing (safely on the right) huge lines of cars stuck in jams going nowhere much slower than me :hihi:

All the posts except mine 3 above yours? :rolleyes: Taxpayers pay for the cycle tracks, yes that's you and the cyclists that use them. It is well proven that the more people cycle = the less cars there are on the road = the safer roads become for all.

I don't see why cyclists should be frightened off the roads. I think its good that they are trying to spread the message that cycling is cheap, healthy, faster than driving for journeys of less than 5 miles (>50% of all car journeys), and good for reducing our carbon emissions. It is also very safe when done properly. I try to encourage car users to consider joining cyclists in the one true path by riding responsibly, stopping at reds, and passing (safely on the right) huge lines of cars stuck in jams going nowhere much slower than me :hihi:

OK...thats fine. I may run into you some day.

I have read all the posts on here. My conclusion is that my opinion has not changed. Todays busy roads are just too dangerous for cyclists. They are not easy to see, if someone hits them they have no protection , plus they pay no road tax and so should NOT be allowed to ride on OUR roads.....wonder who pays for the cycle tracks too?....taken out of cyclists tax?


YOUR roads eh? Is that YOUR zebra crossing because you pay road tax and pedestrians don't?

There is no such thing as road tax. I suggest you read through this thread, and the many others like it, just to educate yourself a little more.

I don't usually have a problem with bikes. If it's clear ahead and they want to ride across then let them do it. The times when I have a problem is when there are 2 or more riding together, side by side and taking up more than half the road just so they can have a chat, oblivious to the carnage behind them.


Perfectly legal for cyclists to ride two abreast. Any more than that and it is illegal.

However, there is a bit of sound logic behind riding two abreast at times.

Two abreast can make vehicles following slow and overtake appropriately, rather than trying to squeeze past therefore giving only a foot of space each between the rider and an oncoming vehicle.

Those that you said you'd get back to me on but never did.

Well that's made it all perfectly clear. Not.

Of course I know that Vehicle Excise Duty is the official name.

But Parkers still call it Road Tax.

http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/road-tax/

So you accept that there's no such thing as road tax then?

OK...thats fine. I may run into you some day.

Which suggests that some motorists shouldn't be on the road, not cyclists.

I have read all the posts on here. My conclusion is that my opinion has not changed. Todays busy roads are just too dangerous for cyclists. They are not easy to see, if someone hits them they have no protection , plus they pay no road tax and so should NOT be allowed to ride on OUR roads.....wonder who pays for the cycle tracks too?....taken out of cyclists tax?

Spot on, also to add you get so many cyclists that are so far up their own arse they will do dangerous manouvers just to **** off cars, one example a cross roads, north and south roads are on red, cyclist from the north wants to tun right, lights change, cyclist just pulls out straight accross the south lane causing the traffic to emergancy stop, cyclist carrys on and jumps the next red!!

Cycles were on the roads long before cars,so bugger off.
Stop whinging car owners,you get all those lovely motorways to yourselves.

I cycled to work for 10 years and we treated like a piece of litter on the road.

My favourite was traffic jams, when I would cycle past them, then one driver ahead would move his car close to the kerb forcing me to stop or mount the pavement.

Or the time a bus pulled out when I was turning right on a Roundabout forcing me to stop and get angry peeps from the cars behind me.

Indeed. Anyone care to guess on the cost/mile of a motorway versus other roads or a cycle track? Those who whinge about "cyclists" not paying "road tax" really haven't thought it all through at all.
Most "cyclists" are also "motorists". So they already pay.

Think it costs about a million quid for every mile of motorway laid.

Think it costs about a million quid for every mile of motorway laid.

And worth every penny, no cyclists, no crossings, very few busses. And thats why there are far less accidents on motorways!!

Well spaced, well controlled junctions only ever on the left and all the traffic going the same way, that's why motorways are very safe.

And worth every penny, no cyclists, no crossings, very few busses. And thats why there are far less accidents on motorways!!

For a minute there I thought you were going to surprise us all by posting something intelligent. Guess you just like to keep us waiting :loopy:

Spot on, also to add you get so many cyclists that are so far up their own arse they will do dangerous manouvers just to **** off cars, one example a cross roads, north and south roads are on red, cyclist from the north wants to tun right, lights change, cyclist just pulls out straight accross the south lane causing the traffic to emergancy stop, cyclist carrys on and jumps the next red!!

Yeah, as a cyclist I carry out all sorts of suicidal moves such as the following:

Being correctly placed on a roundabout with right of way and nearly being creamed by the t****r driving onto the roundabout at about twice the legal speed limit whilst on his mobile. My high viz vest, two sets of front lights, two rear lights, numerous standard reflectors plus the extra ones I've stuck on being completley invisible obviously.

Same roundabout the day before. Minibus does exactly the same thing, causing me to swerve to the right to avoid him. Bloody good job nothing was coming past to my right. The driver nearly crapped himself when he saw how close he'd been to killing me.

And I've totally lost count of the near offs I've had whilst being on the main road and some idiot pulling out of a side road over a "give way" into my path. I can very easily be doing 20mph when they do this, so any crash is gonna hurt.

I am also very much a driver, doing well in excess of the annual average mileage for the UK every year. I don't agree with cyclists jumping lights, but I think that some of the cyclist hateing drivers could do with having a little look at their own behaviour. Not least because of the consequences for themselves if they take a cyclist out. If the cyclist comes to grief through their own stupidity thats one thing, but if a driver kills one through aggression? Well, they can work out the consequences. :rolleyes:

For a minute there I thought you were going to surprise us all by posting something intelligent. Guess you just like to keep us waiting :loopy:

And the winner for the most hipocritcal post goes too..........

oops almost forgot to add a :loopy:

Yeah, as a cyclist I carry out all sorts of suicidal moves such as the following:

Being correctly placed on a roundabout with right of way and nearly being creamed by the t****r driving onto the roundabout at about twice the legal speed limit whilst on his mobile. My high viz vest, two sets of front lights, two rear lights, numerous standard reflectors plus the extra ones I've stuck on being completley invisible obviously.

Same roundabout the day before. Minibus does exactly the same thing, causing me to swerve to the right to avoid him. Bloody good job nothing was coming past to my right. The driver nearly crapped himself when he saw how close he'd been to killing me.

And I've totally lost count of the near offs I've had whilst being on the main road and some idiot pulling out of a side road over a "give way" into my path. I can very easily be doing 20mph when they do this, so any crash is gonna hurt.

I am also very much a driver, doing well in excess of the annual average mileage for the UK every year. I don't agree with cyclists jumping lights, but I think that some of the cyclist hateing drivers could do with having a little look at their own behaviour. Not least because of the consequences for themselves if they take a cyclist out. If the cyclist comes to grief through their own stupidity thats one thing, but if a driver kills one through aggression? Well, they can work out the consequences. :rolleyes:

Yes there are plenty of idiotic drivers too, but I was trying to be on topic.

Over the past week I've seen 2 cyclists jump red lights, Im not talking about kids either.

I think cyclists over the 18 should be managed by the police just like any other road user:

1. Should have a road user test
2. Carry insurance (my dad is a wheel chair user and has to have 3 party insurance, he moves slower than a push bike).
3. Should be registered, so if they are involved in an accident, they then can be prosicuted like any other road user. #
4. the bike should carry a reg plate. Ok they won't be caught by speed cameras unles its a steep hill.

I think cyclists over the 18 should be managed by the police just like any other road user:

1. Should have a road user test
2. Carry insurance (my dad is a wheel chair user and has to have 3 party insurance, he moves slower than a push bike).
3. Should be registered, so if they are involved in an accident, they then can be prosicuted like any other road user. #
4. the bike should carry a reg plate. Ok they won't be caught by speed cameras unles its a steep hill.


1. Agree.
2.

I think cyclists over the 18 should be managed by the police just like any other road user:

1. Should have a road user test
2. Carry insurance (my dad is a wheel chair user and has to have 3 party insurance, he moves slower than a push bike).
3. Should be registered, so if they are involved in an accident, they then can be prosicuted like any other road user. #
4. the bike should carry a reg plate. Ok they won't be caught by speed cameras unles its a steep hill.


1. Agree.
2. What about children on bikes with no income?
3. They can still be prosucted without registration in either civil or criminal law so what will registering do?
4. How will this work if someone borrow's their mate's bike? Unlikely to be caught on speed cameras and it'll be down to proving who was on it? Waste of time.

Think it's a bit pointless really. Why not just force everyone in the country to carry compulsory insurance in case they're ever involved in any sort of accident in any shape or form with any object be it human, vehicle or otherwise?

Yes there are plenty of idiotic drivers too, but I was trying to be on topic.

My last parargaph states that I disagree with cyclists jumping red lights, which is what I believe the OP was all about. However, I believe I have a right to counter some of the vitriol aimed at cyclists, if that's ok with you...

My point is, that generally speaking a cyclist jumping red lights will do themselves a michief.
Whereas the motorists who are mud slinging would be better off aiming at those idiots beheind the wheel who do exactly the same thing, but are far more likely to kill someone else. Or are on the mobile. Or doing 60mph in a 30 zone. Or smoking dope whilst driving. Or have had 6 pints of Stella...etc etc.

I think cyclists over the 18 should be managed by the police just like any other road user:

1. Should have a road user test
2. Carry insurance (my dad is a wheel chair user and has to have 3 party insurance, he moves slower than a push bike).
3. Should be registered, so if they are involved in an accident, they then can be prosicuted like any other road user. #
4. the bike should carry a reg plate. Ok they won't be caught by speed cameras unles its a steep hill.

I'd agree with 1, and make it a pre-requisite to getting a driving license, with exemptions for disabilities etc.

A pre-requisite for a driving license. That would be cool. Then anyone in a car would also have experience of other road users and perhaps be a bit more careful. Not sure it would work though. Especially if exemptions had to be made for those who couldn't cycle - wouldn't that be a bit of discrimination?

I don't know exactly how to implement it, but it's something I've felt since I passed my Cycling Proficiency back when I was about 9 or 10.

And, no point in worrying about perceived discrimination, many requirements have similar exemptions, I'd imagine :)

It's certainly way more doable than registering cycles for instance, and the benefits for everyone would be immense

I think cyclists over the 18 should be managed by the police just like any other road user:

1. Should have a road user test
2. Carry insurance (my dad is a wheel chair user and has to have 3 party insurance, he moves slower than a push bike).
3. Should be registered, so if they are involved in an accident, they then can be prosicuted like any other road user. #
4. the bike should carry a reg plate. Ok they won't be caught by speed cameras unles its a steep hill.

I think every pedestrian who has to cross a road should be registered and insured too, in case they are involved in an accident whilst crossing, or damage a vehicle parked on the road whilst walking along the pavement.

What does everyone else think?


:D

If they're on the pavement surely they shouldn't have to come into contact with a vehicle?

Unless it's one of those selfish ones who parks half their car on the pavement. Then it's fair game on wing mirrors I'm afraid!

There's been countless threads about cyclists during my time on the forum, but they've all been started by motorists. I'm a cyclist who doesn;t drive, so why is it that I'm starting to find other cyclists amongst the most annoying of my fellow road users?

I'm that rarest of things; a considerate cyclist. I never go through red lights, I always choose the safest option and I'm happy to pull over to let faster vehicles get past me on narrow roads. Yet the other cyclists I see on my rides seem to be totally self-obsessed, perpetually angry and think that the highway code isn't relevant to them.

The worst of these, surprisingly, isn't the young lads with their BMXs and mountain bikes; it's the "pro" cyclists, clad head to foot in lycra with designer helmets and shades, some even wearing headpohnes so they can't hear traffic approaching. At road junctions they always assume they have right of way and anyone who gets in their way (even if they're a fellow cyclist) gets a volley of abuse. Increasingly, they're starting to ride with the same lack of consideration on off-road cycle routes such as towpaths, scattering walkers, dog owners and anyone else who gets in their way without even ringing a bell or calling out as they approach from behind.

It used to be that there was a kind of "fellowship of the road" amongst cyclists. If you saw one coming the other way you'd always shout a friendly greeting at them, and if you overtook another one you'd exchange a few words.

You might wonder why this should concern me, but I find that when I'm out on my bike, other road users treat me by the same standards as the "bad" cyclists, thus even though I ride safely and considerately, I rarely get treated with the same respect by motorists. Some even look shocked when I do stop at red lights!

I'm spending some time in London at the moment and the behaviour you mention is far far more prevalent down here BR. I've not seen a cyclist stop for a red light once, I've also seen cars nearly run them over several times, sometimes the cars fault and sometimes the bike.

It doesn't have to be like that, maybe we should solve it by pushing 'bad' cyclists off when we overtake them.

Here's an interesting experiment

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/public/cyclesafety/article3311182.ece

Not like America where a cyclist can legally turn right (turning against the kerb, equivelant to our turning left) through a red light, the Parisian experiment allows for going straight ahead. It does not seem to include turning left (across the carriageway) -as this would involve waiting in the middle of the junction, as would in our turning right

I'm not saying this will work, I'm quite happy to wait at a red light (at the top of some hills I pray for a red light as an excuse to catch my breath! lol) but would be interested in seeing the results.

Whether it ends up with cyclist spattered on the roads as liberally as chewing gum down The Moor, or whether it works quite well.

There are some good points raised in favour, notably that cyclists are not the same as cars, they do not cause the same congestion and degree of hazard, so some rules designed for the specifics of cars and larger vehicles may not be apt

It doesn't however give carte-blanche for a cyclist to career across any junction without looking - a caricature of the red light jumping cyclist that is probably in the minority. It also seems to allow for some junctions to retain light control for cyclists, in the absence of a yellow sign - I can think of some junctions where ANY vehicle proceeding through red would have to be mad (disregarding the present legalities)

I'm impartial on this really, as I say, red lights don't bother me overly - but I'll be interested in the results of the experiment and applaud Paris for trying it out, whatewer the result.

Unfortunately Squiggs I can't imagine this happening in the UK.

As a nation we're desperate to bring everyone down to our own level and the idea of somebody else getting something that we're not just won't do - no matter how much sense it makes, or how little impact it has on them.

I'll now step back and let the SF massiv take the floor to prove the sad truth.

Excellent. A pan European, red light based,cycling thread with undertones of Tory philosophy thrown in for good measure.

This should be well worth a watch:)

Excellent. A pan European, red light based,cycling thread with undertones of Tory philosophy thrown in for good measure.

This should be well worth a watch:)

How long till Islam gets blamed for bad cyclists and bad car drivers?

Triple popcorn please usher! :)

I am a cyclist and know that most cyclists spend a lot of effort trying not to get killed. However today (admittedly at 6:30 so there were very few cars around) I saw an idiot with no lights and no helmet turning right at an island by turning right onto it (ie going the wrong way round) then coming off into the lane for traffic approaching the roundabout from that turn (there were bollards in the middle). What a prize idiot:loopy: He must have saved himself about 5 m and maybe half a second:rant:

I feel the same about drivers that rev and swerve to get round me before the road narrows for traffic lights etc just to hit the back of the traffic jam ahead earlier-seriously why?

It would be good to see a trial of allowing left turns only through red lights in the UK (for all traffic). Some signage at junctions where any proceeding through a red is prohibited would be good.

I am a motorist and know that most motorists spend a lot of effort trying not to get killed. However today (admittedly at 6:30 so there were very few cars around) I saw an idiot with no lights and no helmet turning right at an island by turning right onto it (ie going the wrong way round) then coming off into the lane for traffic approaching the roundabout from that turn (there were bollards in the middle). What a prize idiot He must have saved himself about 5 m and maybe half a second

I feel the same about cyclists that pedal and swerve to get round me before the road narrows for traffic lights etc just to hit the back of the traffic jam ahead earlier-seriously why?

Can someone please start an interesting thread and not necromance this tired old rubbish?

... Can someone please start an interesting thread and not necromance this tired old rubbish?

Off you go then, the floor is yours.

jb

I am a motorist and know that most motorists spend a lot of effort trying not to get killed. However today (admittedly at 6:30 so there were very few cars around) I saw an idiot with no lights and no helmet turning right at an island by turning right onto it (ie going the wrong way round) then coming off into the lane for traffic approaching the roundabout from that turn (there were bollards in the middle). What a prize idiot He must have saved himself about 5 m and maybe half a second

I feel the same about cyclists that pedal and swerve to get round me before the road narrows for traffic lights etc just to hit the back of the traffic jam ahead earlier-seriously why?

Can someone please start an interesting thread and not necromance this tired old rubbish?

do you have some kind of problem:loopy:

I feel the same about cyclists that pedal and swerve to get round me before the road narrows for traffic lights etc just to hit the back of the traffic jam ahead earlier-seriously why?

Thats what motorists do not cyclists! Traffic jams are irrelevant to cyclists because you can cycle past them quite legally and are even recommended to do so in the highway code. People in cars force themselves past cyclists only to stop a few metres down the road in a jam, not the other way round!

Thats what cars do not cyclists! Traffic jams are irrelevant to cyclists because you can cycle past them quite legally and are even recommended to do so in the highway code. People in cars force themselves past cyclists only to stop a few metres down the road in a jam, not the other way round!

I think he/she knows that as it was my post with a few of the motorist/cyclist bits changed (although not all for some reason) so it made no sense:hihi:

Here's an interesting experiment

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/public/cyclesafety/article3311182.ece

Not like America where a cyclist can legally turn right (turning against the kerb, equivelant to our turning left) through a red light, the Parisian experiment allows for going straight ahead. It does not seem to include turning left (across the carriageway) -as this would involve waiting in the middle of the junction, as would in our turning right



It would be good to see a trial of allowing left turns only through red lights in the UK (for all traffic). Some signage at junctions where any proceeding through a red is prohibited would be good.

'Right on Red' (after first coming to a complete stop) is allowed in many places in the US and in Europe. It seems to work well enough, too.

The article isn't as clear as it might be. Surely, if you were to go straight on at a 'T' junction (irrespective of whether you had a red light a green light or any other colour light) you would go up onto the pavement and run into the wall on the other side of the road?

Most people don't go straight on at a 'T' junction; they either turn right or left.

I note that the article says "...They [cyclists] do not have priority and will be held responsible in the event of an accident...."

Presumably, they will have to have personal liability insurance? (As is required in many countries anyway.)

The article seems to suggest that cyclists in Paris can ignore red lights, but do so at their own risk. Parisian pragmatism, perhaps.

'Right on Red' for all vehicles (or as it would be in the UK 'Left on Red') does assist traffic flow. It doesn't seem to cause problems elsewhere.

I think he/she knows that as it was my post with a few of the motorist/cyclist bits changed (although not all for some reason) so it made no sense:hihi:

oh right I get it now. The hilarity of that post went right over my head. :)

Another motorist today cut me up to use his mobile, such a weird one I didn't even get angry-it made me laugh...must.. get.. past.. cyclist.. before I stop dead to answer this phone call.

Forgot to smack the bonnet though-epic fail!