Paul Smith
in [UK Drivers]
|
From: Brimstone on 20 Dec 2007 05:08 "Peter Clinch" <p.j.clinch(a)dundee.ac.uk> wrote in message news:5sus9dF1apiipU1(a)mid.individual.net... > Alan Braggins wrote: >> In article <M9iaj.10784$h35.2172(a)newsfe2-gui.ntli.net>, MrBitsy wrote: >>> Alan Braggins wrote: >>>> Exactly. Just telling cyclists to keep clear of lorries isn't the >>>> whole answer, the drivers have to pay attention too. (Which almost >>>> all of them do, almost all of the time.) >>> Which we have all said throuought this thread >> >> All? Did you not see Brimstone's post and Pete's reply to it? > > Indeed. I think it's fair to say that a lot of the heat from the > cycling side has come solely from the suggestion in Brimstone's post > that we should just avoid lorries, period. That Brimstone either didn't > word his post very carefully and/or is in a minority doesn't remove the > post from the thread. > It's not for me to tell other road users what collisions to avoid. If cyclists really want to take on lorries and other large vehicles (as some of the posters here appear to) on the basis that they are legally in the right then by all means carry on. Just don't whinge about it after being killed.
From: MrBitsy on 20 Dec 2007 05:43 Brimstone wrote: > "MrBitsy" <ray(a)nowhere.com> wrote in message > news:bbiaj.17296$1j1.14918(a)newsfe7-gui.ntli.net... >> Going faster than a speed limit is based on what I can see and what >> I can reasonably expect to develop. As has been said so often, a >> speed limit is a best guess at likely hazzards, but this limit has >> to be too high or too low almost all the time. I will drive at a >> speed withing the law 90% of the time AND within a safe speed for >> the conditions 100% of the time. However, when the road and >> conditions allow a faster speed, I will drive faster than the limit. > > So why can't or won't you apply the same criteria and methods to a red > light? I think I have given my reasons. Green light gives a very strong 'its clear' message. Drivers will assume other traffic has stopped. Observations and anticipation are often dropped on this clear signal. Drivers will not expect me to be in their way. I think we all agree going faster than the limit where conditions allow, is not dangerous. My position on the road is where others expect me to be. I am not going into a zone where other drivers will drop observations due to a strong 'signal' that another vehicle will not be a factor. For me personally, The absolute message given by 'clear' and 'danger' aspects at traffic lights, are too strong to ignore. I will not cross a red aspect until I am sure I am justified in doing so - and this will be because of traffic light failure only. Maybe the signaller/train driver in me is too strong :-) -- MrBitsy
From: MrBitsy on 20 Dec 2007 05:44 Clive George wrote: > "MrBitsy" <ray(a)nowhere.com> wrote in message > news:bbiaj.17296$1j1.14918(a)newsfe7-gui.ntli.net... >> Brimstone wrote: >>> MrBitsy wrote: >>>> Brimstone wrote: >>>>> MrBitsy wrote: >>>>>> Clive George wrote: >>>>>>> "MrBitsy" <ray(a)nowhere.com> wrote in message >>>>>>> news:OWZ9j.10620$h35.4554(a)newsfe2-gui.ntli.net... >>>>>>>> Clive George wrote: >>>>>>>>> "MrBitsy" <ray(a)nowhere.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>>> news:deZ9j.12144$ov2.11527(a)newsfe5-win.ntli.net... >>>>>>>>>> DavidR wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> "MrBitsy" <ray(a)nowhere.com> wrote >>>>>>>>>>>> DavidR wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> "MrBitsy" <ray(a)nowhere.com> wrote >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Many cyclists, like pedestrians, seem oblivious in very >>>>>>>>>>>>>> simple ways to keep themselves safe - not obeying red >>>>>>>>>>>>>> lights for instance. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Is this dangerous? Are there any figures to bear it out? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Are you seriously suggestion it is safe to pass red traffic >>>>>>>>>>>> lights under normal conditions? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> The question makes no such suggestion. I am asking you - is >>>>>>>>>>> it dangerous? And please give reasons. Then I will offer my >>>>>>>>>>> opinion. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> You don't know why it would be dangerous to not obey red >>>>>>>>>> traffic lights? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I can think of cases where it would be safe to not obey red >>>>>>>>> traffic lights. If you can't, then you're pretty dim. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Are we talking everyday normal use of traffic controlled >>>>>>>> junctions? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Define that a bit better :-) The strict answer is "it depends". >>>>>>> >>>>>>> (coz I'm not Brimstone, I'll not stop there.) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Red traffic lights don't just happen at traffic controlled >>>>>>> junctions - road works and road crossings are the two other >>>>>>> ones I can think of. So that's one reason why your question >>>>>>> isn't helpful. But here's the main one: >>>>>>> Safety when not obeying them isn't an absolute - just as you say >>>>>>> safe speed isn't the absolute prescribed figure. It depends on >>>>>>> the circumstances - what other vehicles/people are present, how >>>>>>> much can you see, how fast are they going. You're very keen on >>>>>>> observing the hazards and making an appropriate decision when it >>>>>>> comes to speed limits - why not apply this to other laws too? >>>>>>> After all, it's easy to provide cases where it is perfectly safe >>>>>>> to ignore a red traffic light - and indeed, it's even easy to >>>>>>> provide them where it's not only safe, but doesn't even slightly >>>>>>> affect other road users. And that applies no matter what your >>>>>>> mode of transport. Of course, >>>>>>> the fact that it's rather easier when you're small, manoeverable >>>>>>> and have better opportunities for observation could be a reason >>>>>>> for considering some modes rather more than others (and indeed >>>>>>> the law recognises this to an extent). >>>>>> >>>>>> When choosing a speed to travel at, all hazzards, road & weather >>>>>> conditions are taken into account. I am always going to be >>>>>> travelling on the correct side of the road, in a direction other >>>>>> road users and pedestrians expect me to be going. A 10% >>>>>> difference in speed is not going to catch someone out, if the >>>>>> driver has chosen that speed on an accurate assesment of those >>>>>> conditions. A red traffic light is an absolute message to stop. I >>>>>> know this >>>>>> and all other road users are expecting me to comply with it. >>>>>> Other road users will be approaching green traffic lights >>>>>> expecting the road to be clear. Many motorists will not be >>>>>> observing either side of the junction for road users not obeying >>>>>> the red. Therefore, not obeying a red traffic signal, has far >>>>>> more risks associated with it than going a little faster than a >>>>>> posted speed limit - one that has no idea of the conditions when >>>>>> I pass it. >>>>> >>>>> What if there are no other road users? >>>> >>>> What about it? >>> >>> Quote, "I know this and all other road users are expecting me to >>> comply with it. Other road users will be approaching green traffic >>> lights expecting the road to be clear." >>> >>> That's quite true. but what if there are no other road users, why >>> shouldn't one drive/ride through a red light? >> >> Both of you are trying to get a 'because it is the law' answer, > > Is Brimstone schizophrenic then? I ask because I'm not after a > "because it is the law" answer - I'm after you to acknowledge that > there are circumstances when it is safe to pass a red light. > > Is it your fear of giving an answer which you think might be used > against you which is preventing you giving the correct one? See the reply to Brimstone. -- MrBitsy
From: Peter Clinch on 20 Dec 2007 05:48 Brimstone wrote: > It's not for me to tell other road users what collisions to avoid. If > cyclists really want to take on lorries and other large vehicles (as some > of the posters here appear to) on the basis that they are legally in the > right then by all means carry on. Just don't whinge about it after being > killed. Actually, I want to avoid all collisions, and that's whether I'm in the car or on a bike or on foot. I don't actually think I'll be /much/ better off in many instances in the car if I'm hit by a 40 tonne HGV (i.e., dead is dead, whether I'm a bit crushed or very, very crushed). And it's not about the legal niceties of it, it's about the practicalities of it. I can't just wish away a lorry that pulls up behind me or in the next lane, and I'm no more able to do that in a car than I am on a bike. There is more than one person involved, I cannot fully control the environment around me. So it's really just dumb to say "Just say no!", because it's not just down to me. You won't catch me squeezing up the side of a bus or HGV at a light 'cause I know it might get me killed, but I'll be "taking on" buses and HGVs on the roads for the simple reason that we're both there sharing the space. I'm not claiming that a lot of my safety isn't up to me, I'm just pointing out that I can't just decide not to be close to HGVs, any more than I can choose that if I'm in the car. Pete. -- Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net p.j.clinch(a)dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
From: Clive George on 20 Dec 2007 06:02
"MrBitsy" <ray(a)nowhere.com> wrote in message news:3Iraj.11977$745.1793(a)newsfe1-win.ntli.net... > Clive George wrote: >> "MrBitsy" <ray(a)nowhere.com> wrote in message >> news:bbiaj.17296$1j1.14918(a)newsfe7-gui.ntli.net... >>> Brimstone wrote: >>>> MrBitsy wrote: >>>>> Brimstone wrote: >>>>>> MrBitsy wrote: >>>>>>> Clive George wrote: >>>>>>>> "MrBitsy" <ray(a)nowhere.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>> news:OWZ9j.10620$h35.4554(a)newsfe2-gui.ntli.net... >>>>>>>>> Clive George wrote: >>>>>>>>>> "MrBitsy" <ray(a)nowhere.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>> news:deZ9j.12144$ov2.11527(a)newsfe5-win.ntli.net... >>>>>>>>>>> DavidR wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> "MrBitsy" <ray(a)nowhere.com> wrote >>>>>>>>>>>>> DavidR wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> "MrBitsy" <ray(a)nowhere.com> wrote >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Many cyclists, like pedestrians, seem oblivious in very >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simple ways to keep themselves safe - not obeying red >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lights for instance. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is this dangerous? Are there any figures to bear it out? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you seriously suggestion it is safe to pass red traffic >>>>>>>>>>>>> lights under normal conditions? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> The question makes no such suggestion. I am asking you - is >>>>>>>>>>>> it dangerous? And please give reasons. Then I will offer my >>>>>>>>>>>> opinion. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> You don't know why it would be dangerous to not obey red >>>>>>>>>>> traffic lights? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I can think of cases where it would be safe to not obey red >>>>>>>>>> traffic lights. If you can't, then you're pretty dim. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Are we talking everyday normal use of traffic controlled >>>>>>>>> junctions? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Define that a bit better :-) The strict answer is "it depends". >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> (coz I'm not Brimstone, I'll not stop there.) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Red traffic lights don't just happen at traffic controlled >>>>>>>> junctions - road works and road crossings are the two other >>>>>>>> ones I can think of. So that's one reason why your question >>>>>>>> isn't helpful. But here's the main one: >>>>>>>> Safety when not obeying them isn't an absolute - just as you say >>>>>>>> safe speed isn't the absolute prescribed figure. It depends on >>>>>>>> the circumstances - what other vehicles/people are present, how >>>>>>>> much can you see, how fast are they going. You're very keen on >>>>>>>> observing the hazards and making an appropriate decision when it >>>>>>>> comes to speed limits - why not apply this to other laws too? >>>>>>>> After all, it's easy to provide cases where it is perfectly safe >>>>>>>> to ignore a red traffic light - and indeed, it's even easy to >>>>>>>> provide them where it's not only safe, but doesn't even slightly >>>>>>>> affect other road users. And that applies no matter what your >>>>>>>> mode of transport. Of course, >>>>>>>> the fact that it's rather easier when you're small, manoeverable >>>>>>>> and have better opportunities for observation could be a reason >>>>>>>> for considering some modes rather more than others (and indeed >>>>>>>> the law recognises this to an extent). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> When choosing a speed to travel at, all hazzards, road & weather >>>>>>> conditions are taken into account. I am always going to be >>>>>>> travelling on the correct side of the road, in a direction other >>>>>>> road users and pedestrians expect me to be going. A 10% >>>>>>> difference in speed is not going to catch someone out, if the >>>>>>> driver has chosen that speed on an accurate assesment of those >>>>>>> conditions. A red traffic light is an absolute message to stop. I >>>>>>> know this >>>>>>> and all other road users are expecting me to comply with it. >>>>>>> Other road users will be approaching green traffic lights >>>>>>> expecting the road to be clear. Many motorists will not be >>>>>>> observing either side of the junction for road users not obeying >>>>>>> the red. Therefore, not obeying a red traffic signal, has far >>>>>>> more risks associated with it than going a little faster than a >>>>>>> posted speed limit - one that has no idea of the conditions when >>>>>>> I pass it. >>>>>> >>>>>> What if there are no other road users? >>>>> >>>>> What about it? >>>> >>>> Quote, "I know this and all other road users are expecting me to >>>> comply with it. Other road users will be approaching green traffic >>>> lights expecting the road to be clear." >>>> >>>> That's quite true. but what if there are no other road users, why >>>> shouldn't one drive/ride through a red light? >>> >>> Both of you are trying to get a 'because it is the law' answer, >> >> Is Brimstone schizophrenic then? I ask because I'm not after a >> "because it is the law" answer - I'm after you to acknowledge that >> there are circumstances when it is safe to pass a red light. >> >> Is it your fear of giving an answer which you think might be used >> against you which is preventing you giving the correct one? > > See the reply to Brimstone. The one which basically gives no reasons why with adequate observation it can in fact be safe? You do hint that it's possibly just you being dogmatic - is that the real answer? clive |