Is it ever acceptable to ride through a red light? One London cyclist explains why he thinks it is (+ video)

Evo Lucas wrote:

Tonight two officers were right at the ASL itself. No doubt ready to issue FPN's to any vehicle entering the ASL in an illegal fashion.

This had the effect that when I fitered up to the lights the ASL was clear for cyclists to enter and safely await a green light.

That seems to be happening on the Farringdon Road - Clerkenwell Road junction at the moment. There have been cops on it the last few mornings and it's about the only clear ASL I pass through.

catfordrichard wrote:

[This morning... no cops...motorist ignores me and actually drives at me whilst I'm dead central in the ASL box.

Ha!- That happened to me the other day on the junction of York Way and Copenhagen Street. I was sat on the top tube* waiting for the lights and the cnut behind me started creaping forward and ran straight into me.

* Don't worry, it's not a carbon bike.

catfordrichard wrote:

It still confuses me why cyclist only green lights are never mentioned. I was in Cambridge a couple of months ago and saw them in use there at a couple of the major junctions. They could have a transformative effect in the very heavy traffic central London junctions giving cyclists that crucial extra 10 seconds to get out and away ahead of the traffic or to make the right hand turn. Probably pretty cheap to retro fit to existing infrastructure.

They can't be retro-fitted to certain types of lights (or possibly not at all - not clear). You need modern controllers, or so is my understanding. The ones in Cambridge were installed when the traffic lights were completely replaced, and a couple of days ago another set went in on Castle St on same basis.

But it's also important to remember that advance greens do nothing for you if lights are already green: you will still have difficulty getting into a right-turn position, and you will still have the problem of left-hooks. Also possible that where there are many cyclists, the advance green isn't long enough for everyone to clear the junction.

Crikey, if you reported this to the local highways authority I'd like to know what the response was.

crikey wrote:

Quote:

It's never OK to jump a red light

The red light opposite my place of work will not operate when a bicycle rides up to it, so I would have to wait for a car to come along. I can see for a minimum of 2 km in all three directions.

It's OK...

There's a junction I have to use if I want to head South from my house where the lights won't switch for a cyclist. I frequently jump it because otherwise I'd be waiting all day for a car to appear behind me or across from me. I read something somewhere that said if the lights are triggered by the presence of a car then as far as a cyclist is concerned the lights can be treated as not working, and it then falls to you to use your common sense to determine when to enter the junction.

crikey wrote:

Quote:

It's never OK to jump a red light

The red light opposite my place of work will not operate when a bicycle rides up to it, so I would have to wait for a car to come along. I can see for a minimum of 2 km in all three directions.

It's OK...

Have you tried glueing a small neodynium magnet to either the sole of your shoe, or your bb shell? That should sort it. I've yet to find a light I can't trigger.

MikeOnABike wrote:

in my experience around London, 99% of RLJers are NOT doing it to be safe.

Yup, mine too.

MikeOnABike wrote:

It's never OK to jump a red light. You should be reading the traffic situation ahead. If it's safe to filter into the ASB, then do it. Otherwise take the lane and wait like other traffic. It'll cost you a maximum of 10 extra seconds.

And, in my experience around London, 99% of RLJers are NOT doing it to be safe.

WRONG

If jumping the light is the safest option then that is what you should do. That junction cycled through at the start of the video is not the place to get stuck in an awkward position, it is a dangerous junction and I would put my life 1st and the law 2nd every time.

If you feel you life is at risk then f*** the law, get yourself somewhere safe.

Leodis wrote:

Cycling through Leeds I have caught up with many RLJ'ers and not one of them RLJ for their health, it was for speed and convenience, some don't even check for oncoming traffic and I often pull them once I catch up with them.

It bloody annoys me when it gets to the stage that Peds and drivers say "Them lot give you lot a bad name"... What do you say to that.

I tell the motorists that the 21000 deaths and serious injurys caused by drivers give them a bad name.

DaveE128 wrote:

I'm still yet to be persuaded that the safest option isn't to wait behind the bus, taking the lane, in the situation described. This also happens to be legal. If it isn't safe to filter, don't filter, surely?

Does it come down to "if I want to get to my destination as quickly as possible, I have to run red lights to avoid dangerous situations?" Honestly, I would like to understand why this isn't the case if it isn't.

Edit: note - I don't ride in London so perhaps the psychology of negotiating the nasty conditions in the video is important to grasp to "get" this?

How do you know it isn't safe to filter? Often (especially in heavy traffic) you can only ever find out the bike box is blocked AFTER you've filtered to it. Build proper infrastructure and the situation disappears.

teaboy wrote:

DaveE128 wrote:

I'm still yet to be persuaded that the safest option isn't to wait behind the bus, taking the lane, in the situation described. This also happens to be legal. If it isn't safe to filter, don't filter, surely?

Does it come down to "if I want to get to my destination as quickly as possible, I have to run red lights to avoid dangerous situations?" Honestly, I would like to understand why this isn't the case if it isn't.

Edit: note - I don't ride in London so perhaps the psychology of negotiating the nasty conditions in the video is important to grasp to "get" this?

How do you know it isn't safe to filter? Often (especially in heavy traffic) you can only ever find out the bike box is blocked AFTER you've filtered to it. Build proper infrastructure and the situation disappears.

If you build good infrastructure you have the tools to beat the problem. It doesn't disappear. We'll still, in lots of situations, be on roads with imperfect driving and imperfect lines of sight.

But what I don't buy is the idea that just because someone is in the bike box, you have to cross the junction. I either pull in front of the vehicle blocking the box (making a point of being in front of them) or I wait behind them and in front of the vehicle behind. In both cases I take the lane. If there's a big lorry in the box who wont be able to see me in front of them, I wait behind. It's not hard. If you really can't see whether it's safe to filter, assume it isn't and don't. It just isn't that hard.

step-hent wrote:

But what I don't buy is the idea that just because someone is in the bike box, you have to cross the junction. I either pull in front of the vehicle blocking the box (making a point of being in front of them) or I wait behind them and in front of the vehicle behind. In both cases I take the lane. If there's a big lorry in the box who wont be able to see me in front of them, I wait behind. It's not hard. If you really can't see whether it's safe to filter, assume it isn't and don't. It just isn't that hard.

Crossing the line is what's illegal, it's no more or less legal to cross the junction once you've crossed that line. It might not be 'hard' to lake the lane on a road bike, but try it on a loaded utility bike, then try moving off with traffic behind you and see how you feel. Now imagine you need to be in the middle lane at a junction to go straight on, rather than turning left or right. If ALL motor traffic is stopped, and you give way to pedestrians, it will be safer to move through on a red light.

teaboy wrote:

step-hent wrote:

But what I don't buy is the idea that just because someone is in the bike box, you have to cross the junction. I either pull in front of the vehicle blocking the box (making a point of being in front of them) or I wait behind them and in front of the vehicle behind. In both cases I take the lane. If there's a big lorry in the box who wont be able to see me in front of them, I wait behind. It's not hard. If you really can't see whether it's safe to filter, assume it isn't and don't. It just isn't that hard.

Crossing the line is what's illegal, it's no more or less legal to cross the junction once you've crossed that line. It might not be 'hard' to lake the lane on a road bike, but try it on a loaded utility bike, then try moving off with traffic behind you and see how you feel. Now imagine you need to be in the middle lane at a junction to go straight on, rather than turning left or right. If ALL motor traffic is stopped, and you give way to pedestrians, it will be safer to move through on a red light.

Sometimes crossing the line is safer.

At the A23/A3 junction at Oval at the end of Brixton Road, it is much safer if you're on a bike to go way ahead of the ASL and right up to the junction. Yes it's an offence, but it's safer for you as you can clear the crossing when the lights change before any motor vehicles come thundering up behind two abreast and try to jam into a single lane due to the bus lane/bus stop.

I went that way home last night from training and pointed this out to the bloke I was with (we were in a motor vehicle). One cyclist had done just that and gone way ahead of the ASL, nearly to the junction. And yes, he was safely across and through the busy bus stop by the time all the cars caught up with him. The cyclists that had waited in the ASL meanwhile had to be careful because of buses pulling out from the stop and the risk of vehicles two abreast at the lights now trying to jam into one lane.

Yes the bloke on the bike broke the law and a cop could've fined him for it. But that's rather ridiculous seeing as how he was increasing his own safety and also reducing any effect he might have of slowing motor traffic at a busy junction. He did exactly as I used to when I commuted that way.

teaboy wrote:

step-hent wrote:

But what I don't buy is the idea that just because someone is in the bike box, you have to cross the junction. I either pull in front of the vehicle blocking the box (making a point of being in front of them) or I wait behind them and in front of the vehicle behind. In both cases I take the lane. If there's a big lorry in the box who wont be able to see me in front of them, I wait behind. It's not hard. If you really can't see whether it's safe to filter, assume it isn't and don't. It just isn't that hard.

Crossing the line is what's illegal, it's no more or less legal to cross the junction once you've crossed that line. It might not be 'hard' to lake the lane on a road bike, but try it on a loaded utility bike, then try moving off with traffic behind you and see how you feel. Now imagine you need to be in the middle lane at a junction to go straight on, rather than turning left or right. If ALL motor traffic is stopped, and you give way to pedestrians, it will be safer to move through on a red light.

I've spoken to a few road traffic police in London and they seem relaxed about moving in front of big vehicles if it is unsafe because of encroachment. So do it if you feel unsafe. They're not so cool if you just RLJ. Most are not doing it to make themselves safe. I do love repeatedly overtaking them on my way to work. Usually I bet them to my destination in any event.

While some people decry the 'us versus them' attitude, you won't get rid of it. But you do make things a bit better if you appear to adhering to the same set of rules that mire the rest of the road users at an average of 12 mph. You are also less likely to run over a pedestrian if you don't RLJ.
I was pretty annoyed the other day when a cyclist casually swung across my path as I cycled home myself. And I suppose the point is (rightly or wrongly) other road users see the rules there as being for the good of everyone and so when they are abused you do get people tutting 'well they're their own worst enemy'....in same way idiots who speed in cars or cut into traffic piss off other car users.

teaboy wrote:

DaveE128 wrote:

I'm still yet to be persuaded that the safest option isn't to wait behind the bus, taking the lane, in the situation described. This also happens to be legal. If it isn't safe to filter, don't filter, surely?

Does it come down to "if I want to get to my destination as quickly as possible, I have to run red lights to avoid dangerous situations?" Honestly, I would like to understand why this isn't the case if it isn't.

Edit: note - I don't ride in London so perhaps the psychology of negotiating the nasty conditions in the video is important to grasp to "get" this?

How do you know it isn't safe to filter? Often (especially in heavy traffic) you can only ever find out the bike box is blocked AFTER you've filtered to it. Build proper infrastructure and the situation disappears.

How do you know it isn't safe to filter? Would any of us seriously think it was OK for a driver to blindly head for a gap that he didn't know was there until he arrived?

Surely when riding or driving knowing what you are heading into is crucial. Can't see if the box is clear; then why would you go there?

I ride mainly around Manchester and a fair bit in London over the last few years, I do filter, I overtake, I take the lane. I don't end to jump red lights unless I've got something wrong on the approach.

Last week I passed one cyclist seven times on the way to work, each time after he'd continued through red lights. I can't be bothered challenging him because I'd get either excuses or abuse and I can happily live without it.

DaveE128 wrote:

And there I was hoping that the video would give me some insight into the kind of situations where some cyclists believe it's safer to jump a red light. But it doesn't, because the footage isn't from a rider who runs a red light.

I'm still yet to be persuaded that the safest option isn't to wait behind the bus, taking the lane, in the situation described. This also happens to be legal. If it isn't safe to filter, don't filter, surely?

Does it come down to "if I want to get to my destination as quickly as possible, I have to run red lights to avoid dangerous situations?" Honestly, I would like to understand why this isn't the case if it isn't.

Edit: note - I don't ride in London so perhaps the psychology of negotiating the nasty conditions in the video is important to grasp to "get" this?

Good post Dave. I do cycle in London and I don't break red lights. Quite often I could with impunity, but the point of traffic signals is to allow the free and safe passage of traffic. Waiting at a red light and giving consideration to all traffic never gets you in any harm - as you say, taking the lane or waiting behind large vehicles because it is not safe to pass (actually I always overtake, as undertaking is generally asking for trouble) does not put you in harms way. The people I see who are at risk are those that blindly and rigidly stick to the left and never look over there shoulder.

While I will admit that there are times when you may find that once at the front of a queue you end up in a dangerous position and it is therefore safer to pull forward or just move on from the junction, this is rare and usually about as much a case of bad judgement by the cyclist as it is the lorry/truck/bus driver who is sitting in the ASL - you can always sit and wait and in most cases in London the traffic does not move much faster than the cyclists anyway.

RLJ sets a bad example, and if you (and everyone else) follows the rules accidents would be fewer. The problem with the bad example is that novices sees this behaviour and emulate it without the same sense of road awareness. It's the push for the ASL at junctions which sees them trying to undertake lorries, buses and tipper trucks with disastrous consequences not realising what they are tangling with, because they see the mad dash for the box.

DaveE128 wrote:

I'm still yet to be persuaded that the safest option isn't to wait behind the bus, taking the lane, in the situation described. This also happens to be legal. If it isn't safe to filter, don't filter, surely?

Does it come down to "if I want to get to my destination as quickly as possible, I have to run red lights to avoid dangerous situations?" Honestly, I would like to understand why this isn't the case if it isn't.

Edit: note - I don't ride in London so perhaps the psychology of negotiating the nasty conditions in the video is important to grasp to "get" this?

I've some sympathy with this, often justifications for RLJing sound like they're basically saying "After I'd forced my way to the front rather than taking the lane a few cars back, I found I was in a sticky spot so then I had to go on red." I certainly see plenty of people putting themselves in situations where they've really no option but to go before the lights change, and it's usually to effectively save a few seconds.
So I think it's sometimes a bit disingenuous to suggest that these situations are totally outside the control of the cyclist- see also going to sit directly in front of a truck cab in an ASL.

I suspect a lot of people on here would think an excuse along the lines of "once I'd done X I had to do Y" was pretty flimsy if we heard it from a driver, and would have a rather obvious retort.

That said, like DaveE128 I don't ride in London and I'm happy to concede that there might be lots of places where there's not much other option.

DaveE128 wrote:

And there I was hoping that the video would give me some insight into the kind of situations where some cyclists believe it's safer to jump a red light. But it doesn't, because the footage isn't from a rider who runs a red light. I'm still yet to be persuaded that the safest option isn't to wait behind the bus, taking the lane, in the situation described. This also happens to be legal. If it isn't safe to filter, don't filter, surely? Does it come down to "if I want to get to my destination as quickly as possible, I have to run red lights to avoid dangerous situations?" Honestly, I would like to understand why this isn't the case if it isn't. Edit: note - I don't ride in London so perhaps the psychology of negotiating the nasty conditions in the video is important to grasp to "get" this?

Agreed, I can't understand why he didn't just wait behind the bus either. I don't cycle in London either but to me it seems that the speed and impatience of life  is the problem especially in the cities.