John Rowland wrote:
"Helen Deborah Vecht" wrote in message
...
"John Rowland" typed

Another thing - there is a pedestrian crossing in Kenton
Road near the Northwick Park roundabout which regularly
goes red (to vehicles) even though there are never any
pedestrians anywhere near. Is this a malfunction or design?

I've not tried that one. Are you sure that it
doesn't make pedestrians wait so long that
they cross long before the lights stop the traffic?

I thought that the first few times, but I've been stopped by it
about 100 times this year, and I don't think I have ever seen a
pedestrian in this road at all.

Try reporting it as a fault to http://streetfaults.tfl.gov.uk/
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

"JamesB" wrote in message
...
....
If I can see to the other side of those temp ones (often they are for all
of about 10 metres) I'll go through them anyway (if its clear) same as
overtaking a parked bus really!

Except that it is legal safely to overtake a parked bus, but, contrary to
popular belief, you are breaking the law by going through the red at
temporary traffic lights.

Colin Bignell

"Tom Anderson" wrote in message
.li...
On Tue, 25 Oct 2005, John Rowland wrote:

Why doesn't Britain extend the "flashing amber" signal from meaning "you
can go if no pedestrians are crossing" to also mean "you can go if no
cars are crossing"?

Good idea.

I'm not entirely sure about using flashing amber, though: rightly or
wrongly, people associate amber with 'go' - and, indeed, 'go, quick!' -
which is not what you want to say here.

Flashing amber is very distinct from a steady amber and the French use the
system quite successfully on quiet junctions at night.

Colin Bignell

"John Rowland" wrote in message
...

Sometimes a traffic light that you know very well seems to have a Windows
moment and will inexplicably remain on red for ages. If you are in a
one-way
road and a traffic light breaks down showing red, you can't back out out
of
it and so would have to go through it eventually. Does the law say
anything
about how long a traffic light has to stay on red before you are allowed
to
go through it? Or are you legally required to sit there for days with the
cars behind beeping at you until an engineer fixes it?...

It is an absolute offence to cross the stop line or to pass the light when a
red light is showing.

There used to be one in Glasgow, in the days of electro-mechanical systems,
that would sometimes only change if you got out and gave a hard kick to the
green box next to it. You then had to get back in the car sharpish if you
wanted to get across while it was still green.

Colin Bignell

"nightjar" nightjar@insert my surname here.uk.comtyped



"John Rowland" wrote in message
...

Sometimes a traffic light that you know very well seems to have a Windows
moment and will inexplicably remain on red for ages. If you are in a
one-way
road and a traffic light breaks down showing red, you can't back out out
of
it and so would have to go through it eventually. Does the law say
anything
about how long a traffic light has to stay on red before you are allowed
to
go through it? Or are you legally required to sit there for days with the
cars behind beeping at you until an engineer fixes it?...

It is an absolute offence to cross the stop line or to pass the light
when a
red light is showing.

AIUI you can squeeze past a red light if you think the traffic lights
are out of order. The OP waited five minutes and then had good reason to
believe this was the case.

Likewise, cyclists whose machines do not trigger sensors are not obliged
to die of exposure for that reason.

--
Helen D. Vecht:
Edgware.

Helen Deborah Vecht wrote:
"nightjar" nightjar@insert my surname here.uk.comtyped



"John Rowland" wrote in
message ...

Sometimes a traffic light that you know very well seems to have a
Windows moment and will inexplicably remain on red for ages. If
you are in a one-way road and a traffic light breaks down showing
red, you can't back out out of it and so would have to go through
it eventually. Does the law say anything about how long a traffic
light has to stay on red before you are allowed to go through it?
Or are you legally required to sit there for days with the cars
behind beeping at you until an engineer fixes it?...

It is an absolute offence to cross the stop line or to pass the
light when a red light is showing.

AIUI you can squeeze past a red light if you think the traffic
lights are out of order. The OP waited five minutes and then had
good reason to believe this was the case.

Likewise, cyclists whose machines do not trigger sensors are not
obliged to die of exposure for that reason.

Cyclists can always dismount and walk across the junction.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

On Wed, 26 Oct 2005 09:35:03 +0100, Helen Deborah Vecht
wrote:

Likewise, cyclists whose machines do not trigger sensors are not obliged
to die of exposure for that reason.

You can argue all night over whether a cyclist who gets off ad pushes
becomes a pedestrian. But I very much doubt that one who chooses
that option will get nicked :-)

"Richard J." typed


Likewise, cyclists whose machines do not trigger sensors are not
obliged to die of exposure for that reason.

Cyclists can always dismount and walk across the junction.

It is still an offence to pass the stop line whilst wheeling a bicycle though.

There is no particular necessity to dismount.

--
Helen D. Vecht:
Edgware.

Helen Deborah Vecht wrote:
"Richard J." typed


Likewise, cyclists whose machines do not trigger sensors are not
obliged to die of exposure for that reason.

Cyclists can always dismount and walk across the junction.

It is still an offence to pass the stop line whilst wheeling a
bicycle though.

Really? I thought if you wheeled a bicycle you became a pedestrian, as
with a shopping trolley.

Anyway, if you wheel your bicycle past the stop line on the pavement,
surely you count as a pedestrian then?
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

"Richard J." wrote in message
Anyway, if you wheel your bicycle past the stop line on the pavement,
surely you count as a pedestrian then?

How often have you seen a cyclist dismount before using the pavement? They
normally ride along the pavement and expect pedestrians to jump out of the
way, even though it has been offence for 180 years to ride on the pavement.
The police no longer enforce the no cycling on the pavement law as can be
clearly seen in dft_foi_037604.pdf. In 1984 there were 1991 successful
prosecution for cycling on the pavement. By 2003 there were only 82.

Similarly, in 1982 there were 4441 successful prosecution of cyclists for
lighting and reflector offences. By 2003 this had dropped to 166. Careless
and reckless cycling offences peak on the table mentioned above at 398 in
1983. By 2003 they had dropped to 77.

According to dft_transstats_031373, 214 pedestrians were hit by cyclists, 38
were seriously injured and 4 killed. I don't suppose that those injured and
the relatives of those killed by cyclists think that dangerous cycling is as
trivial as the police obviously now do.

Ian