Reason for running red lights
 

I just read an article in the Washington Post. A couple reasons cited by the author was a sense of defiance to the motor based transportation system and another was a sense of risk taking. It's like an adrenaline rush.

When I think about it, those make more sense over some of the other things people bring up.

I only run them :
1. they don't sense my presence
2. it's dead empty road

I agree with this too. I don't even run the ones that don't sense my presence unless traffic won't be offended if I go. Stop signs is about the same thing, I always stop unless I'm on a country road and I can see at least 1/4 mile then I will slow down and head on across without stopping. Keep in mind though, any running of a red light or stop sign witnessed by a cop they can write you a ticket, most of the time they won't but they can so it's wise to check for cops before doing such an activity.

Does it still make sense when an innocent driver's life is ruined by injuring or killing some idiot cyclist running a red light for any of the reasons stated by the author? There is no excuse for running red lights (or riding on pavements).

There is a traffic light in my area that will turn green only when it senses the car. The sensor will not detect bicycle. I have made several attempts to have it fixed with my local traffic dept. They have adjusted the sensor to make it more sensitive, but it still will not turn green light to me.

Cars (and bikes) are allowed to turn left on red at intersecting one-ways here; I ride through several T intersections, where traffic comes from the left relative to me and can only turn left onto the road I'm on, so I feel justified in going straight through those reds in a bike lane (not a car lane).

Conversely there is one spot where I am turning right onto a T and I usually can't go right on red there because cars do and they take the corner so tightly that they are in the bike lane for a while. Even if they're not in the bike lane while waiting to turn.

Have you tried laying the bike down on its side above the sensors? This is what I was taught to do years ago and it is slightly more successful at some lights than simply riding over them.

As for running reds, I will occasionally do it when there is no traffic and I am being impatient, but when waiting at the light with cars, I can feel their opinion of cyclists improving by the second.

Stop signs, however, are just a suggestion.

Also, a state law recently came into effect here allowing bikes to run reds if they are not sensed. The law requires they wait a cycle but in practice it's immediately apparent when you've missed your turn. So, woohoo carbon wheels.

When I worked as a courier in a large city ~15 years ago, I could make it across town without taking (what I thought of as) unacceptable risks, including running red lights, as fast as any of my colleagues. I realized they were darting between cars and running reds because they had no respect for the law or their own safety, and enjoyed showing everyone.

I don't run them either, except ... at a T in the situation that HardyWeinberg mentioned, and sometimes at a big intersection with all-red I'll jump it a few seconds to get across before the rest of the traffic.

In these examples, it isn't a sense of defiance or risk-taking adrenaline. It's actually safer and less disruptive to "run" the red in these cases than to wait at the light.

Not in all states, unfortunately.

No excuse for riding on pavements. You have to be kidding.

I understand "dead red", although in my city it's pretty rare in practice. Even on low volume road a vehicle is typically not far behind. Generally I perceive running reds to just be a selfish sense of entitlement. I see it frequently with cyclists who don't even do the equivalent of proper stop sign stop. It's a gradually increasing practice with motorists to treat red lights as stop signs. I also regularly see cyclists that will go to the far right sometimes sidewalk to line jump, then go back to taking the lane, holding up the line of cars they just passed.

If there are cars along side me at a red light, or stop sign, I never ever run it, I feel it's important that drivers see not all cyclists are ruthless and think the laws of traffic don't apply to them, but complain that they have the same rights as a car.

On empty country roads I'll run a stop sign if I can see there's no cars coming.

No, I'm not - I've never done it nor will I ever do it.

I guess we would have to know what "riding on pavements" means ?

I ride about 20 miles at a time , 5 times a week. I run at least 5 red lights a ride. Cause I want to. I dont care what any one thinks about it
I am 62 been riding my entire life and dont wear a helmet.
Most fatalities of bike riders happens when, they are hit from behind and are riding perfectly legal, not from running red lights.

I don't run them. I look both ways and then proceed safely across the intersection.

Huh? Obviously "the pavements" is where people walk at the side of the road, i.e. "sidewalks" in North America. Pavement = sidewalk. The first streets were paved on the sides where people walk, and the middle where the horse-pulled carriages travelled was mud.

You've never heard the expression "pound the pavement"? You thought perhaps it meant sitting in the middle of the street and banging on the asphalt with your fist?

+1 Same here

This. Come to a stop, no one around, go!
I do roll stop signs though, but only on backroads where I'm familiar with the traffic patterns (as in, there's usually no one coming). Slow down, look both ways, no one coming, keep rolling.

I think I may have traumatized several riding partners over the years by running virtually every red light I encounter. My reason? . . . because I don't feel like getting off the bike.

My early biking days were in the streets of NYC where there is a traffic light every 250 feet. That's TWENTY of them to a mile. There's no way to get a workout stopping every time a light turns red. So seasoned riders learn to use various methods to stay on the bike until traffic allows you to proceed. Over the years I've maintained those habits for the most part, even though I ride now days in much more open conditions.

But that's just me, your mileage prolly varies.

why mention "riding on pavements" in a thread about running red lights?

I think it is painfully obvious to any rational person that running a red light anywhere there is the possibility of traffic is borderline motarded.
Out on a familiar country road where you can see a 1/4 mile + in all directions and you run a red light? A whole different story. Again, it comes down to rationality and plain old common sense imo.

Please continue with the irrational discussion...

I feel like the other poster is probably just trolling, but for anyone interested in stats...

Fatality Facts
Thirty-eight percent (38%) of bicyclist deaths in 2013 occurred at intersections.

1. Most fatalities occur on urban arterial roads
Fatalities were concentrated on high-speed “arterials” designed to speed motor vehicle traffic through urban areas. The second most frequent road category for cycling fatalities was local streets in urban areas.
8 Takeaways From the Bike League?s Study of Cyclist Fatalities | Streetsblog USA
2. The most common type of crash was being struck from behind - In 40 percent of the cases, the victim was struck from behind
(By "crashes" they seem to mean "crashes that resulted in a fatality")

3. In urban areas, cyclists were more likely to be killed at intersections
Cyclists traveling in rural areas were 3.7 times more likely to be struck and killed at a location that was not an intersection than urban cyclists.

4. Most victims were wearing a helmet
In the 150 cases where helmet use was cited in a crash account, 57 percent of the victims were wearing a helmet.

Seems like the first most dangerous place to be riding is on high speed arterial roads, second most dangerous is at intersections.