As a bicyclist, there are certain traffic lights I ignore on my local rides. This is because *they* ignore *me*. The lights operate on traffic sensors which don't even recognize the existence of motorcycles . . .
Without a car to trigger those lights, they will *never* change.
Most of those lights can be triggered by a push-button (for pedestrians); many have spots painted on the road which indicate an area more sensitive to metal/weight so a bicycle can be detected. Otherwise... I treat the most bicycle-oblivious lights as a flashing red, essentially: stop, proceed with caution, any other traffic has the right of way. In other words, I don't necessarily follow the law to the letter, but I sure don't ignore those lights.
No such amenities on the lights I'm talking about. When I ride up to those, I am watching the traffic rather than the light. 9 times out of 10, that means I stop.
Some lights have push-buttons, but not all. Most lights these days have sensors, but not all of them are triggerable by bicycles. There is one light on one of my regular routes that would NEVER change if it was just me on the bike there.
That's the only one I'll run the red on, after I've sat for 5 minutes w/o the option of a green. I'll usually sit for a while first to see if a car will come up and trigger it. But in times of low traffic, that could take a long, long time.
I've seen small electric devices that you can attach to your frame, which when triggered, generate enough of a magnetic field to trigger sensors.
But, yes, treating it as a flashing red is the reasonable thing.
As a motorist, and sometimes cyclist, the thing that bugs the crap out of me are cyclists who are so anxious not to lose momentum that they run lights and stop signs without such care.
Ditto those who ride at night without lights - I've seen whole families doing that here in MA.
We *are* vehicles, we *do* weigh more than a pedestrian (within certain error bounds), and we do (normally) travel faster than an unaided human.
Here in Oz, the same deal applies, with a handful of specific restrictions (not being allowed on under-speed-limited roads for example), and another handful of specific permissions (e.g. dual-use paths).
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
Without a car to trigger those lights, they will *never* change.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
That's the only one I'll run the red on, after I've sat for 5 minutes w/o the option of a green. I'll usually sit for a while first to see if a car will come up and trigger it. But in times of low traffic, that could take a long, long time.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2011-04-11 12:03 pm (UTC)(link)But, yes, treating it as a flashing red is the reasonable thing.
As a motorist, and sometimes cyclist, the thing that bugs the crap out of me are cyclists who are so anxious not to lose momentum that they run lights and stop signs without such care.
Ditto those who ride at night without lights - I've seen whole families doing that here in MA.
no subject
We *are* vehicles, we *do* weigh more than a pedestrian (within certain error bounds), and we do (normally) travel faster than an unaided human.
Here in Oz, the same deal applies, with a handful of specific restrictions (not being allowed on under-speed-limited roads for example), and another handful of specific permissions (e.g. dual-use paths).
Now if *everyone* could just remember this...