In article <slrng72ha9.ghr.spamspam@bowser.marioworld>,
spamspam@spam.eggs (Ben C) wrote:

> On 2008-07-06, Terry  wrote:
> > In article <slrng72cqr.fo4.spamspam@bowser.marioworld>,
> > spamspam@spam.eggs (Ben C) wrote:
> >
> >> On 2008-07-06, Terry  wrote:
> [...]
> >> > It's just an excuse contrived by people who lack patience and
> >> > consideration for others, much like drivers who squeeze past a 
> >> > cyclist in order to get to a red light first.
> >> 
> >> But how exactly does it hurt anyone to filter up through the 
> >> traffic on a bike and nip through the lights (only when safe,
> >> obviously, as I said)?
> >> 
> >> You're getting out of the cars' way and getting home quicker. 
> >> Who loses?
> >
> > Law abiding cyclists lose, because we all get tarred with the 
> > same brush as reckless lawless irritants. 
> 
> Only by idiots.

Idiots in big heavy metal projectiles!

> > After all, if I start making up my own rules, what's to stop 
> > anyone else doing the same, in ways that may put me at greater risk? 
> 
> In principle yes, and although I am in favour of the rule of law 
> and all that there's a bit of wiggle room when it comes to traffic.

I have heard this before - proceeding against a red light as a safety
measure - from someone I respect, but I see many cyclists ignoring red
lights on my daily commute and very few seem to be carefully considering
the situation before proceeding as a safety measure. Most appear to be
blithely ignoring the lights, especially the arrogant few who go on to
ring their little bells imperiously as they barge through pedestrians.