Police 1 - Cyclists 0

AMG · 11 Sep 2009 at 12:55

hahahah thats funny

the only time I jump red lights if I m going to fast and I can't stop my OCR2 :mad:

it does that a lot

but in twon I normally get stoped anyway so I m never going fast enough so my brakes are useless

I got a funny story about red light jumping

ethoir way red light jumping is risky and the lights are there for a reason

daven1986 · 11 Sep 2009 at 12:56

well that is don't swear. FF.. I jump red lights because often it means I don't have cars up my arse for the next mile or so. However I am a considerate light jumper - peds always get right of way and I never make cars stop or get worried when I do it.

And although Boris is going to allow cyclists to jump lights on left turns which is excellent this should NOT be implemented for cars. I doubt any car would stop to allow a pedestrian to cross and it would be very dangerous.

AMG · 11 Sep 2009 at 13:02

well when I was at school, i had a bunch of idiots pass me on thier mountain bikes while I was stopped at a red light 20 metres up the road they was all on top of each other in a pile of bikes/riders that made me lol

iaind · 11 Sep 2009 at 13:06

daven1986 said:
However I am a considerate light jumper - peds always get right of way and I never make cars stop or get worried when I do it.

Tell that to the driver who has to scrape you off their bonnet

BenjiSayers · 11 Sep 2009 at 13:11

daven1986 said:
well that is don't swear. FF.. I jump red lights because often it means I don't have cars up my arse for the next mile or so.

Does that mean I can jump Red lights in my car so I don't have to put up with cars following me either... :rolleyes:

Freefaller · 11 Sep 2009 at 13:11

bakes0310 said:
How do police fine cyclist?
What stopping them from screwing the fine up and riding away. What happens if you got no ID on you, if i was a cyclist i would have just rode away but then again i wouldnt ride through red traffic lights.

Same as any other fine. :confused:

Failure to pay leads to court action or bigger fines, or both.

peterattheboro said:
How is Sam?

Errr - I'm confused!

daven1986 said:
well that is don't swear. FF.. I jump red lights because often it means I don't have cars up my arse for the next mile or so. However I am a considerate light jumper - peds always get right of way and I never make cars stop or get worried when I do it.

And although Boris is going to allow cyclists to jump lights on left turns which is excellent this should NOT be implemented for cars. I doubt any car would stop to allow a pedestrian to cross and it would be very dangerous.

Jumping red lights is not safe. It's foolish, and you won't have a car "up your arse" if you're not in the way, keep to the side - no problemo!

You should be 100% liable when you run a red, but ultimately it never seems to eb the case.

Turning left, just like turning right on red in the States works fine, pedestrians have absolute priority and the lights for pedestrians are phased independently as well. It works in america VERY well even in busy cities like New York, San Fran and LA where I've spent significant time as both a driver and pedestrian.

Malt_Vinegar · 11 Sep 2009 at 13:22

daven1986 said:
well that is don't swear. FF.. I jump red lights because often it means I don't have cars up my arse for the next mile or so. However I am a considerate light jumper - peds always get right of way and I never make cars stop or get worried when I do it.

Do you realise how stupid that sounds?

bakes0310 · 11 Sep 2009 at 13:28

Freefaller said:
Same as any other fine.

Failure to pay leads to court action or bigger fines, or both.

What i mean is you dont have registration for a bike, and i dont carry id on me so i can get away with paying the fine.

gillywibble · 11 Sep 2009 at 13:32

Complete waste of resources in my opinion.

iaind · 11 Sep 2009 at 13:33

gillywibble said:
Complete waste of resources in my opinion.

So they should be left to run through red lights, causing accidents?

oap · 11 Sep 2009 at 13:38

Agree about the cyclists, but no worse thant he average motorist in my area, who seem to think that red means 'quick get across as fast as possible'

gillywibble · 11 Sep 2009 at 13:41

iaind said:
So they should be left to run through red lights, causing accidents?

Not sure what the stats are on accidents caused by cyclists running red lights. However, I think there are more important issues and crimes that need tackling first.

Freefaller · 11 Sep 2009 at 13:44

bakes0310 said:
Freefaller said:

Same as any other fine.

Failure to pay leads to court action or bigger fines, or both.

What i mean is you dont have registration for a bike, and i dont carry id on me so i can get away with paying the fine.

Click to expand...

More often than not people will have IDs on them. What happens if they don't then I'm not sure - I'm sure one of our fellow boys in blue will tell us. Anyway, even if not, then this brings into absolute contendment the need for registration stamps on bikes.

gillywibble said:

Complete waste of resources in my opinion.

Click to expand...

How so? I'd much rather a pro-active police force than speed cameras and red light cameras and bus lane cameras that don't catch people's indescretions and blatant law breaking.

If this saves one cyclist his life by making him think twice, then it;'s a job well done.

I've seen over the past few years 3 cyclists get mowed down - one of which I had to be a witness in court. Every time it's been the driver's fault, even though it wasn't, purely owing to the fact that they are more vulnerable. Flesh and bones make very little odds vs over a tonne of car/bus/truck. Busses and Trucks in particular have caused numerous incidents, with loss of limbs, life and other serious injuries.

There is no education or recrimination for cyclists and this is a good way to start IMO. Road users are all contained within the laws of the road. You'd never actively run a red light in a car, or hop onto a pavement with a motorbike - why would you get away with it on a bike?

Sure there are "crimes" to be solved, but these were traffic cops - their duties are... on the road. So they are helping. If it was a CID or a panda car with regular officers in then I'd agree. However this road has seen a lot of accidents with cyclists getting knocked off their bikes - and then blaming the car drivers - or claiming with there's blame there's a claim type of attitudes etc...

OllyM · 11 Sep 2009 at 13:44

bakes0310 said:
What i mean is you dont have registration for a bike, and i dont carry id on me so i can get away with paying the fine.

No you won't - I expect they'll check the details you give against the electoral roll, so unless you happen to give the correct details for somebody else that looks about the right age they will be able to confirm who you are.

If you don't check out they'll just arrest you I expect

iaind · 11 Sep 2009 at 13:46

gillywibble said:
Not sure what the stats are on accidents caused by cyclists running red lights. However, I think there are more important issues and crimes that need tackling first.

Such as?

You realise traffic police deal with different issues (such as traffic) to the rest of the police force?

Freefaller · 11 Sep 2009 at 13:47

iaind said:
Such as?

You realise traffic police deal with different issues (such as traffic) to the rest of the police force?

Jinx!

Lister · 11 Sep 2009 at 14:07

Lister said:
picture contains swearing. FF.

is that a swear word?

Severity

The relative severity of the various profanities, as perceived by the British public, was studied on behalf of the Broadcasting Standards Commission, Independent Television Commission, BBC and Advertising Standards Authority. The results of this jointly commissioned research were published in December 2000 in a paper called "Delete Expletives?". This placed "b" in eighth position in terms of its perceived severity, between "p" (seventh place) and "a" (ninth place). By comparison, the word "balls" (which has a similar literal meaning) was down in 22nd place. Of the people surveyed, only 11% thought that "b" could acceptably be broadcast at times before the notional 9pm "watershed"[3] on television (radio does not have a watershed).

SlyReaper · 11 Sep 2009 at 14:07

Hehe idiots getting their comeuppance. Now if only they could ban cyclists from being on the road in the first place (or at least require a license and insurance), that would make my day.

Freefaller · 11 Sep 2009 at 14:14

Lister said:
Lister said:

picture contains swearing. FF.

is that a swear word?

Severity

The relative severity of the various profanities, as perceived by the British public, was studied on behalf of the Broadcasting Standards Commission, Independent Television Commission, BBC and Advertising Standards Authority. The results of this jointly commissioned research were published in December 2000 in a paper called "Delete Expletives?". This placed "b" in eighth position in terms of its perceived severity, between "p" (seventh place) and "a" (ninth place). By comparison, the word "balls" (which has a similar literal meaning) was down in 22nd place. Of the people surveyed, only 11% thought that "b" could acceptably be broadcast at times before the notional 9pm "watershed"[3] on television (radio does not have a watershed).

Click to expand...

It is on this forum yes.

peterattheboro · 11 Sep 2009 at 14:57

Freefaller said:
Errr - I'm confused!

Had a nosey on Google Maps

Police 1 - Cyclists 0

Transmission breaker