The Rt. Hon. 'Mathew' of London
Discussion
will_ said:
The most worrying element of that article - which I've heard repeated elsewhere - is "some officers see the penalty for the infringement – six points on the licence the same as you'd get for sailing all the way through the red light – as somewhat disproportionate."
Since when was it the job of the police to decide whether the penalty for an offence is "disproportionate" and therefore decide not to enforce that particular law?
I accept that the issues surrounding ASLs are not completely understood either by the police or the general public, but it is a sad indicator of the polices' attitude to cyclists that whilst they (and by that I mean the City of London police) are often seen specifically targeting red-light jumping cyclists (and so they should), they are yet to hand out a ticket to anyone infringing upon an ASL....
The six point thing in itself seems to me confused, as elsewhere I've seen 3 points and 60 quid quoted. I think the confusion is down to the differentiation between encroaching on an ASL and actually running the light (see below TFL findings and differentiation between the two offences), being 3 and 6 points accordingly.Since when was it the job of the police to decide whether the penalty for an offence is "disproportionate" and therefore decide not to enforce that particular law?
I accept that the issues surrounding ASLs are not completely understood either by the police or the general public, but it is a sad indicator of the polices' attitude to cyclists that whilst they (and by that I mean the City of London police) are often seen specifically targeting red-light jumping cyclists (and so they should), they are yet to hand out a ticket to anyone infringing upon an ASL....
If it makes you feel better, I saw a scooter rider (the equivalent of a fixie rider to a motorcyclist
) being done for entering an ASL by a motorbike cop only last week in Clerkenwell Road - so it does happen!Stig said:
The six point thing in itself seems to me confused, as elsewhere I've seen 3 points and 60 quid quoted. I think the confusion is down to the differentiation between encroaching on an ASL and actually running the light (see below TFL findings and differentiation between the two offences), being 3 and 6 points accordingly.
If it makes you feel better, I saw a scooter rider (the equivalent of a fixie rider to a motorcyclist ) being done for entering an ASL by a motorbike cop only last week in Clerkenwell Road - so it does happen!
Indeed - the penalty is surely 3 points and £60 fine. But stil, as I said, I've heard this excuse used elsewhere by the police, as the penalty for cyclists is "only" a £30 fine (although, arguably, that reflects the differences in the risk/seriousness of the offence. Que frothing at the mouth by some posters).If it makes you feel better, I saw a scooter rider (the equivalent of a fixie rider to a motorcyclist
) being done for entering an ASL by a motorbike cop only last week in Clerkenwell Road - so it does happen!I hope when you say "done" you mean given a ticket, and not a warning. I've seen the police ignore blatent ASL infringements right in front of them whilst watching for RLJing cyclists....!
will_ said:
Indeed - the penalty is surely 3 points and £60 fine. But stil, as I said, I've heard this excuse used elsewhere by the police, as the penalty for cyclists is "only" a £30 fine (although, arguably, that reflects the differences in the risk/seriousness of the offence. Que frothing at the mouth by some posters).
I hope when you say "done" you mean given a ticket, and not a warning. I've seen the police ignore blatent ASL infringements right in front of them whilst watching for RLJing cyclists....!
Nope, definitely given a ticket. Whilst he was writing it out another biker (motor) rode into the box (you'll be pleased to say that I shook my head in disbelief - if I'd have known about 'RED' I'd have used it I hope when you say "done" you mean given a ticket, and not a warning. I've seen the police ignore blatent ASL infringements right in front of them whilst watching for RLJing cyclists....!
) - bike cope stopped the ticket, walked to biker, gave him an earful and made him reverse out.Then carried on with scooter ticket
Re seriousness of offence, sorry, cyclist/driver or rider - running a red light is equally dangerous IMHO. Sadly, I believe the fact that cyclists have no licence to lose (or effect on insurance etc.) to worry about, nor any ready means of identification, make it largely part of the problem.
Stig said:
Re seriousness of offence, sorry, cyclist/driver or rider - running a red light is equally dangerous IMHO.
I don't RLJ but I strongly disagree.For anyone, being hit by a car would be far worse than being hit by a bicycle.
Also - great find on the TFL report.
Finally we have evidence that not 100% of cyclists RLJ. It is just 17% of us!
Stig said:
will_ said:
Indeed - the penalty is surely 3 points and £60 fine. But stil, as I said, I've heard this excuse used elsewhere by the police, as the penalty for cyclists is "only" a £30 fine (although, arguably, that reflects the differences in the risk/seriousness of the offence. Que frothing at the mouth by some posters).
I hope when you say "done" you mean given a ticket, and not a warning. I've seen the police ignore blatent ASL infringements right in front of them whilst watching for RLJing cyclists....!
Nope, definitely given a ticket. Whilst he was writing it out another biker (motor) rode into the box (you'll be pleased to say that I shook my head in disbelief - if I'd have known about 'RED' I'd have used it I hope when you say "done" you mean given a ticket, and not a warning. I've seen the police ignore blatent ASL infringements right in front of them whilst watching for RLJing cyclists....!
) - bike cope stopped the ticket, walked to biker, gave him an earful and made him reverse out.Then carried on with scooter ticket
Re seriousness of offence, sorry, cyclist/driver or rider - running a red light is equally dangerous IMHO. Sadly, I believe the fact that cyclists have no licence to lose (or effect on insurance etc.) to worry about, nor any ready means of identification, make it largely part of the problem.
I haven't read the whole of the report you linked - it seems a bit lacking in depth, being only surveyed over two days. However, with this in mind, it's of interest that half the RLJers were cyclists, which represented 18% of all cyclists. Frankly I presumed those figures would be higher. It's a shame that the report didn't include the % of road users who encroach on ASLs or use cycle-lanes, although I can see that that is almost impossible to count.
As to the seriousness of the offence and the penalty attached - clearly an artic lorry running a red light poses a greater danger than a cyclist doing the same, even if the technical offence is the same. That's why penalties for drink-driving, speeding etc are also on a reflective scale - to indicate and punish the increased risk/harm.
I take your point regarding lack of identification - I do sometimes wonder how many motorists who froth at the mouth about cyclists running red lights would do the same if they were just as unlikely to be caught!
walm said:
I don't RLJ but I strongly disagree.
For anyone, being hit by a car would be far worse than being hit by a bicycle.
Also - great find on the TFL report.
Finally we have evidence that not 100% of cyclists RLJ. It is just 17% of us!
Not just a question of hitting someone with the bike, it's the accident that it may cause as a result. Bike runs red, car (or artic as per will's exmaple) emergency brakes to avoid, loses control, wipes out peds etc.For anyone, being hit by a car would be far worse than being hit by a bicycle.
Also - great find on the TFL report.
Finally we have evidence that not 100% of cyclists RLJ. It is just 17% of us!
Again, just as dangerous, though not necessarily for the same reasons IMHO.
will_ said:
It's a shame that the report didn't include the % of road users who encroach on ASLs or use cycle-lanes, although I can see that that is almost impossible to count.
Report said:
36% of all cyclists experienced some form of encroachment by vehicles onto the ASL reservoir. This suggests that ASLs are often not treated as a reserved space for pedal cyclists by all types of motorised vehicle, particularly cars and motorcycles.
Stig said:
Bike runs red, car (or artic as per will's exmaple) emergency brakes to avoid, loses control, wipes out peds etc.
Again, just as dangerous, though not necessarily for the same reasons IMHO.
Bike runs red - much easier to avoid than car or artic (bikes are smaller and slower); avoidance manoeuvre far higher chance of success. Again, just as dangerous, though not necessarily for the same reasons IMHO.
Again, far less dangerous. Just my 2p.
walm said:
will_ said:
It's a shame that the report didn't include the % of road users who encroach on ASLs or use cycle-lanes, although I can see that that is almost impossible to count.
Report said:
36% of all cyclists experienced some form of encroachment by vehicles onto the ASL reservoir. This suggests that ASLs are often not treated as a reserved space for pedal cyclists by all types of motorised vehicle, particularly cars and motorcycles.
Stig said:
walm said:
I don't RLJ but I strongly disagree.
For anyone, being hit by a car would be far worse than being hit by a bicycle.
Also - great find on the TFL report.
Finally we have evidence that not 100% of cyclists RLJ. It is just 17% of us!
Not just a question of hitting someone with the bike, it's the accident that it may cause as a result. Bike runs red, car (or artic as per will's exmaple) emergency brakes to avoid, loses control, wipes out peds etc.For anyone, being hit by a car would be far worse than being hit by a bicycle.
Also - great find on the TFL report.
Finally we have evidence that not 100% of cyclists RLJ. It is just 17% of us!
Again, just as dangerous, though not necessarily for the same reasons IMHO.
will_ said:
That's not quite the same thing though - what % of motorbikes entered the ASL? I know that of the vehicles that encroached on the ASL, 25% were motorbikes - but what percentage of the number of motorbikes at each junction did that represent?
Ah - in that case: Report? tl;dr.Stig said:
will_ said:
But if you use that analogy, almost anything you do behind the wheel (or handlebars) should be considered on the "worst case scenario" risk and punished accordingly? I.e. dangerous driving and prison?
Maybe it should - cuts both ways though Maybe I should get a PH smiley on my helmet [fnar]
walm said:
Stig said:
Re seriousness of offence, sorry, cyclist/driver or rider - running a red light is equally dangerous IMHO.
I don't RLJ but I strongly disagree.For anyone, being hit by a car would be far worse than being hit by a bicycle.
Also - great find on the TFL report.
Finally we have evidence that not 100% of cyclists RLJ. It is just 17% of us!
Would that be worse for the car or the cyclist.
Hackney said:
And what if the cyclist jumps the red light and hits a car which went through a green light.
Would that be worse for the car or the cyclist.
Quite possibly the motorist, who may well end up tortured with guilt because they've killed someone, even if rationally they know that it wasn't their fault at all.Would that be worse for the car or the cyclist.
I hold the same view about Sikhs on motorbikes. You either wear your turban or you ride your motorbike, but you can't have both. The RLJ cyclist and the turban-wearing motorcyclist might be happy to take the element of added risk, but they don't have the right to project that onto others.
Needless to say, given this thread, I've been even more attentive as to the use of the ASL in the last couple of days.
Bemusement this morning when coming down Theobald's road. Stopped before ASL at a busy junction and (for a change) so did other motorists, leaving the cycle box completely clear.
Several cycles turn up and ride into and straight through the empty cycle box and wait on the far side of the box exit line on the ped crossing.
Had I not been wearing a helmet, I would have facepalmed
I do admit to having a chuckle about the irony of their actions in the context of this thread though
Bemusement this morning when coming down Theobald's road. Stopped before ASL at a busy junction and (for a change) so did other motorists, leaving the cycle box completely clear.
Several cycles turn up and ride into and straight through the empty cycle box and wait on the far side of the box exit line on the ped crossing.
Had I not been wearing a helmet, I would have facepalmed
I do admit to having a chuckle about the irony of their actions in the context of this thread though
Stig said:
Needless to say, given this thread, I've been even more attentive as to the use of the ASL in the last couple of days.
Well what can you do Even more staggeringly, this morning at the second of the two junctions where motorbikes religiously overtake me and then sweep left immediately thereafter, a motorbike (nay, a BMW motorbike) not only didn't do that but also, through the medium of sign language, confirmed that he, like I, was in fact going straight on. He then moved over to let me overtake a slowing and turning van.
If there were such a thing as an anti-face-palm, I would have done it.
will_ said:
Well what can you do
Even more staggeringly, this morning at the second of the two junctions where motorbikes religiously overtake me and then sweep left immediately thereafter, a motorbike (nay, a BMW motorbike) not only didn't do that but also, through the medium of sign language, confirmed that he, like I, was in fact going straight on. He then moved over to let me overtake a slowing and turning van.
If there were such a thing as an anti-face-palm, I would have done it.
There's hope for us yet! Even more staggeringly, this morning at the second of the two junctions where motorbikes religiously overtake me and then sweep left immediately thereafter, a motorbike (nay, a BMW motorbike) not only didn't do that but also, through the medium of sign language, confirmed that he, like I, was in fact going straight on. He then moved over to let me overtake a slowing and turning van.
If there were such a thing as an anti-face-palm, I would have done it.
Stig said:
will_ said:
Well what can you do
Even more staggeringly, this morning at the second of the two junctions where motorbikes religiously overtake me and then sweep left immediately thereafter, a motorbike (nay, a BMW motorbike) not only didn't do that but also, through the medium of sign language, confirmed that he, like I, was in fact going straight on. He then moved over to let me overtake a slowing and turning van.
If there were such a thing as an anti-face-palm, I would have done it.
There's hope for us yet! Even more staggeringly, this morning at the second of the two junctions where motorbikes religiously overtake me and then sweep left immediately thereafter, a motorbike (nay, a BMW motorbike) not only didn't do that but also, through the medium of sign language, confirmed that he, like I, was in fact going straight on. He then moved over to let me overtake a slowing and turning van.
If there were such a thing as an anti-face-palm, I would have done it.
As I heard this I noticed he was v comfortably inside the ASL. I mentioned to him that it was a bit hypocritical of him as he was in an ASL (and that's illegal too). His response "these don't count"! He wouldn't let it go and couldn't see the point that he was in the wrong.
He screamed off from the lights but a little further up the road I managed to catch up ... not sure having a faster bike makes any difference in London traffic ....
Gassing Station | Pedal Powered | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff