:mad:traffic light ignorance:mad:
 

Apologies if this has been comprehensively covered already I'm playing catch up.

It seems that we compulsive/obsessive(sensible) road users, that is, if it's red it means stop, are a minority. Judging by the numbers of colour blind(dangerous) cyclists I see on my commute I'd say that's about right.

http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=77424 - see the poll results

Anyway, while the above is my personal opinion, it seems that the majority of cyclists ignore traffic lights. Does this either greatly increase the danger to the cyclist and other road users(peds and cross traffic) or merely create a more aware and thus safer and faster cyclist?

Also, what are your personal reasons for either stopping or continuing? Does running red lights satisfy a personal urge to ignore authority, is it sheer laziness (can't be bothered to stop start with the traffic) or is it always trying to go as fast as possible with minimal slow down on the trip? Again these choices are personally biased so please either point me at an answer already published or suggest your own reasons for this?

As you go through life you develop experience and you let that experience guide you. My experience is that riding a bike is very different from driving a car, and that it is possible to bike up to an intersection, look for traffic, and cross safely even when the light is red. Around here, there is also zero risk of getting ticketed for doing so. I always yield for red lights and stop signs, but I only stop when necessary. Why would I sit in the middle of the street for no reason when I could be going on my way? I can't recall ever having a close call when I've run a signal, but I've had a few close shaves with cars that ran their signal.

The city of Toronto did an excellent study of car-bike collisions -- the only reasonably scientific and objective study I've ever heard of. It's at http://www.city.toronto.on.ca/transp...ion_report.pdf .

One of their conclusions:
"For example, while there may be a perception that many cyclists recklessly disobey stop-signs and traffic signals, our analysis shows that less than 3% of collisions involve a cyclist failing to stop at a controlled intersection. Targeted stop-sign enforcement campaigns along busy cycling routes may result in large numbers of tickets being issued, but their effectiveness in improving traffic safety is questionable. Enforcement that focuses on driving and cycling infractions that are found to contribute most often to collisions and injuries can be expected to yield better results, in terms of improving safety, than campaigns that simply target infractions that are easy to enforce."

Finally, before you get too passionate, go sit by a stop sign and count how many cars actually stop completely. If it's more than 10% it's exceptional. Washington, DC, now has photo enforcement of red lights at a few intersections. The cameras average over 100 violations per day per intersection -- and violations are down 60% since the cameras were installed. Because the cameras are automated, they give the motorist the benefit of the doubt, and don't start shooting until several seconds after the light turns red, so the real number is higher.

It's a matter of convience. Cyclists run red lights, motorists speed. People are always going to break the law for the sake of convience to the extent they think they can get away with it.

I stop for most red lights but there are a few that I don´t. For example when going through a light and immediately making a right turn onto a bike path. In this case although I am technically going through a red light, I am not crossing the intersection so I am not doing anything dangerous. Sometimes it doesn´t make any sense to wait at a red light. My priority is to get safetly where I want to go in the shortest time.

Since the traffic system is built and designed primarily for cars I feel justified in exercising a little discretion at times. Compared to the dangerous stuff that cars do all the time, anything I can do on my bike is just insignificant IMO.

I track-stood and then headed through a red around P and Mass a couple weeks ago just as two bike cops pulled into view. No ticket. If I ever though I would get one...

I pause or at least feather at stop signs/lights, but it seems a waste to me to wait when I have clear view, good hearing, and good agility vis-a-vis cars. It also takes a lot of effort and time to stop and start each time, and would reduce the appeal of bike-commuting, earth-saving, etc.

I never go through a stop when others have the right of way, though. If cars are crossing with the green, I stop, and when I come to a stop sign and there are other cars stopped too, I definitely obey the rules about taking turns. What drives me crazy is watching other cyclists roll through such intersections and not yielding to cars who have the right of way. And often when I come to an stop-signed intersection and do a trackstand or slow roll (yielding the right of way), the cars won't go ahead because they expect me to roll through like those other d*ckheads.

People "rationalize" breaking laws because they feel "inconvenienced". "We" always know better than those pesky laws that limit us. Of course, there are people that feel the same about taking another human life as many do about running red lights, but "they" are "wrong", because that's not something "we"do.

I just thought i should point out a possible outcome of NOT stopping at a red that doesn't involve a car striking the cyclist.

I was in NYC in Riverside Park with my son (near Riverside Drive, a nice, straight, relatively fast road). I watched as a mother and her approx 5 year old son crossed the street on thier bicycles WITH the light (intersections on this road are all essentially sideways "T"s, although there are always parked cars limiting visibility). Out of nowhere, a group of cyclists tore through the intersection going between 15-20 mph, one of them hitting the boy dead-on. They probably didn't feel the need to slow down since there was 0% chance of traffic since they were travelling on the "top" of the "T".

Thankfully, no one was seriously injured, but that was more due to luck than anything else.

Long story short - stop, or at LEAST yield at reds and stop signs.

I have to agree with theo's approach. Nobody around, I'll blow a stop sign, although I do slow. I never blow one in a car. Stop lights, always stop, although I will go through one after I stop once I've established that there's no traffic. Cars present, I follow the rules completely.

Running red lights by cyclists is a pet peeve of mine. I do not do it and write tickets to those that blatently do. I have no problem with a slowdown at a stop sign and moving on if it is safe. Red lights are different in my opinion. Most of the "Excuses" I have read in this thread would work for cars as well. As such I do not support the practice and will enforce compliance.

The one that bothers me the most is when a cyclist gets stopped and has no idea why running a red light is against the law for bikes as well as cars. They often feel the law does not apply to them. They find out different. Now that I cycle for work as well as fun I have become MORE attentive to this practice.

I am in the minority. Many of the other officers I know tend to avoid the whole bike situation. Saves them the hassle of writing the ticket and court if that happens.

I will admit my attention to this matter was reinforced when the very first traffic accident I worked was a fatality caused by a cyclist running a red light and hitting a pedestrian, killing them. That was 1975. Just 5 months ago two little girls were killed behind my house when a car ran a red light. Red lights mean stop and I am watching. :(

I could have used you in another thread! I was accused of hating cyclists for suggesting that they could be as dangerous as cars.

I too find cyclist ed light running a problem both from safety and perception and don't agree with most of the excuses made - that is all they are, excuses, not compelling reasons. I also agree those excuses would work just as well for a car or especially a motorcycle. For example a car can clear an intersection as fast as a bike if they want and can check just as easily if any traffic is coming.

Most important to me is that I acknowledge and respect that I have all the rights of the road that other vehicles have. With that right comes responsibility to follow the rules - once those rules are broken cyclists become second class users of the road. If one wants respect from motorists then don't flaunt the rules.

This situation (which happens occasionally) really bugs me: I pass a slower cyclist, then stop at a red light, then they pass me on my right blow it and then a minute later I need to pass them again (which is not easy with heavy traffic as gaps are not always open) Its times like this I wish I had a door on my bike to open as they pass ;)

Al

My only reason for running reds is that the darn things don't see me, so I treat them as stop signs and stop, check the traffic and then go when it is clear. If there are cars at the light, I never run it... it shows a bad example, and I know they will trigger it.

I have seen too many cyclists that just zoom through, and I think that creates a negative image of cyclists to motorists.

I also treat some stop signs as yield signs, most of the time stopping, but often just checking from a slowed speed to ensure that there are no vehicles/bikes coming and then zooming on... it depends on the street I am crossing and the neighborhood.

Foto, what about lights that don't change for cyclists?

This is also the approach I use.

It's my understanding that a cyclist can treat this like a stopsign.
If there are no vehicles around to trigger the lights, and there is no button to push,
I think it's OK to proceed with caution after coming to a complete stop.
I could be wrong about this of course, but that's the 'rule' I follow.

On my morning commute between 6:00 and 7:00 a.m., I will run a red light after slowing to determine that no cross traffic is within a block (two blocks for speeders), rather than push the button to change the light. This also spares vehicular traffic the 30-to-45-second delays involved in having the light change.

If I'm commuting after 7:00 a.m., I push the buttons as a matter of course, as there is always sufficient car traffic at that time to preclude running any light.

That is the law in many regions. In this case I don't think it should be considered 'blowing a red'

However a few nits on this:
1. If this is your regular route and you find certain sensors not to work, I would alert with at least by phone (and preferably email/letter if possible) the traffic department and request that the sensor be re-tuned to work for bicycles. I have done this with results and even when they don't fix them at least there is a record of these request, so keep sending them.
2. Give the signals time to switch even after being sucessfully triggered. The lights I encounter sometimes may take 2-3min to turn even after properly triggered by car or bike.

Al

Reasons why I stop on red.
1

Reasons why I always stop on red.

1 It is the law
2 Stopping helps me scan for crossing traffic better. Trees, buildings, and cars cut my sightline unless I am stopped at the stopline.
3 I try to minimize differences between my cycling procedures and my driving procedures so that I avoid developing bad habits.
4 Sometimes, it is good to rest for a minute or two.
5 Red means stop. I'm still not totally comfortable with "right turn on red."

Paul

I did want to mention that noisebeam and I agree on the idea of "blowing a red". I used the term "blatently" in my first post. If I on my patrol bike or patrol car were to see a cyclist approach a red light, stop, advance after it was clear, I would not fire up my ticket book. I do not believe the law in Florida grants cyclists the right to routinely ignore traffic signals. My pet peeve is those that "blow the red". Thats when "blatently" comes in to play. They believe they can see well enough to ignore the signal and pass on through. That's when I fire up my ticket book.

If you come to a signal that has no sensors that work with a bike and you proceed safely after a full stop and short wait to insure the signal is not going to cycle then no heartburn from me. I still see far too often cyclists riding up the road and blowing the stop sign or red light. That really sets me off and the blue lights go on.

If all police officers were as rational, sensible, and reasonable as FotoTomas, we would have alot more respect for the law. I always make a best effort to trigger a traffic light, and I know which local lights "work" for bikes and which don't. Even when I don't come to a complete stop at a stop sign, I always slow to walking speed or less, and I always yield the right-of-way to the party which has it.

I usually stop at stop signs unles I can clearly see that there is no one comming. I figure I can see and hear better than anyone in a cage so I should be able to not make a complete stop. Plus im a libertarian and I dont think we need stop lights anyways.