So much safer for cyclists to be allowed to go through red!

Marco_Panettone

It's the questions about cycling that get turned into issues about "cyclists" that are the most frustrating. This is certainly one of those.

brat

Bollotom wrote: »

Not at all, Armyknife. Lots of good debatable questions about cyclists and motorists descend into a slanging match and don't help when people without agendas want to put a genuine point across. Just like you and your assumptions. If that's all you have to offer etcetra. :cool:

My only agenda is road safety. It intrigues me sometimes that some people choose to misread it as an anti-motorist, anti pedestrian, pro-cyclist agenda. Altarf does this all the time, but he has to change my words to do it, which I find a bit childish and silly. If he actually took time to understand what I write, the discussion could possibly develop well.

I love cycling, I love driving, I love walking and running too. I want everyone to be as considerate and courteous to other road users as they can possibly be, and to consider their safety on the road even if the primary liability rests with someone else..
If anyone interprets anything else from my posts, they're wrong.

Altarf

brat wrote: »

You continually show that reasoned debate is beyond you Altarf. Firstly you need to understand what has been said before you respond. I'm not at all sure that you are capable of that. Secondly, you need to see beyond your prejudices, and argue from a factual rather than biased viewpoint.
Perhaps then you will understand that we all have similar interests at heart.

Reasoned debate with someone who has said that they think it is a child's fault if they are run over when crossing on a green man when a cyclists ploughs through a red light at speed!

I might as well try a reasoned debate with a brick wall, it would have more sense.

Norman_Castle

Kim_kim wrote: »

What about children using those crossings on the way to school?
Should they be responsible for their safety if they cross with the red stop sign on & the green man.
Who is liable if a cyclist ploughs into a child?

Everyone should be responsible for their own safety. A green light gives you a right of way but its not a guarantee of safety. Despite the green light most people will be aware and cautious of vehicles which haven't stopped Having a sense of self preservation instead of blind faith in a system will help avoid accidents.
I've often avoided accidents where the other road user would have been at fault. If I was injured by someone crossing a red light I would blame them but if the accident could have been avoided by me by checking and avoiding it I would be wishing I had done that.



22

Pelican crossings. These are signal-controlled crossings operated by pedestrians. Push the control button to activate the traffic signals. When the red figure shows, do not cross. When a steady green figure shows, check the traffic has stopped then cross with care. When the green figure begins to flash you should not start to cross. If you have already started you should have time to finish crossing safely.

Norman_Castle

Altarf wrote: »

Reasoned debate with someone who has said that they think it is a child's fault if they are run over when crossing on a green man when a cyclists ploughs through a red light at speed!

I might as well try a reasoned debate with a brick wall, it would have more sense.

Nobody has said its the childs fault. I pity the brick wall.

NBLondon

For the decent cyclist, who will give way to pedestrians already crossing or about to step out, not a bad idea since it makes life safer for them with minimal effect on anyone else.


For the anal sphincter minority of cyclists, who currently ignore red lights and swerve around pedestrians already crossing, it will just feed their sense of entitlement to ignore rules for their own convenience.


For the pedestrian - well, the cautious one already crosses with care since they are aware of the second type of cyclist so they will continue to be cautious. The oblivious ones who currently step into the road anywhere without looking because they are more concerned with beating the next level of Candy Crush will not notice the change.

Altarf

Norman_Castle wrote: »

Nobody has said its the childs fault. I pity the brick wall.

Yes they did.

In answer to the simple question -

Kim_kim wrote: »

What about children using those crossings on the way to school?
Should they be responsible for their safety if they cross with the red stop sign on & the green man.
Who is liable if a cyclist ploughs into a child?

brat wrote: »

Road safety is shared by all, and must always be the primary consideration. If I walked out onto a road and got hit by a cyclist, I would consider myself to be a fool for walking into the path of a cyclist, no matter who has the right of way.

For the dumb cyclists here, YOU are the person that is solely to blame if you plough into a child when cycling through a red light.

How anyone could suggest anything else defies belief.

Norman_Castle

Lifes too short to argue with prejudiced idiots.

frisbeej

Norman_Castle wrote: »

Lifes too short to argue with prejudiced idiots.

But it has built up such a great image of an old codger waving his umbrella angrily at cyclists, trees, columns of ants, clouds, pretty much anything that isn't a beige Rover 25.

custardy

frisbeej wrote: »

But it has built up such a great image of an old codger waving his umbrella angrily at cyclists, trees, columns of ants, clouds, pretty much anything that isn't a beige Rover 25.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7XCW1vHTfpA