Paris to let cyclist run red lights

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
 thebigeasy 14 Jul 2015
Having just read the post about Ireland issuing on the spot fines for cycling offences.

I was wondering what people thought of Paris's take on cycling.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-33446899

I'm all about the French take on this.
In reply to thebigeasy:

I'll get the popcorn!
 Skip 14 Jul 2015
In reply to thebigeasy:

Good on the French.
In reply to thebigeasy:

i'm going long healthcare and medical equipment companies
 CurlyStevo 14 Jul 2015
In reply to thebigeasy:

I'm with the French on this too.
 Indy 14 Jul 2015
In reply to thebigeasy:

Can't work out who has priority then the car, the pedestrian or the cycle or who pays when cyclist crashes into car or pedestrian?
 elsewhere 14 Jul 2015
In reply to Indy:
When maneuvering from one road to another road (eg turning onto a side road) those already on that second road (eg pedestrians) have priority.
In reply to thebigeasy:

The article is confused: it talks about 'traffic lights for cyclists under traffic lights for cars', but the pictures show a give way sign under the lights, which seems to be the intent; if the lights are at red, you must treat the junction as a give way, so you may proceed if it is safe to do so, like any other give way junction. This seems eminently sensible...

 Trevers 14 Jul 2015
In reply to Indy:

> Can't work out who has priority then the car, the pedestrian or the cycle or who pays when cyclist crashes into car or pedestrian?

The article is a bit light on detail. From the pictures, it looks like the expectation will be for bike to merge into a cycle lane, with the expectation that bikes and cars won't tangle?
Bogwalloper 14 Jul 2015
In reply to thebigeasy:

Problem with this is that it assumes that the cyclist has the intelligence to slow down - look to see if a car is coming - ride through the red red light - carry on like nothing has happened. What can possibly go wrong?
Oh assuming that a cyclsit is intelligent!!!

Boggy
2
 Trevers 14 Jul 2015
In reply to Bogwalloper:

> Problem with this is that it assumes that the cyclist has the intelligence to slow down - look to see if a car is coming - ride through the red red light - carry on like nothing has happened. What can possibly go wrong?

> Oh assuming that a cyclsit is intelligent!!!

> Boggy

troll, ignore
 Timmd 15 Jul 2015
In reply to Bogwalloper:

> Problem with this is that it assumes that the cyclist has the intelligence to slow down - look to see if a car is coming - ride through the red red light - carry on like nothing has happened. What can possibly go wrong?

> Oh assuming that a cyclsit is intelligent!!!

> Boggy

Not wanting to be injured or killed by motorised transport is a big incentive to be on the alert when merging with traffic.
Removed User 16 Jul 2015
In reply to thebigeasy:

Over here (and in all of North America IIRC) cars can turn right on red with no significant impact on accidents. They just have to treat it as a stop sign.
 yorkshireman 16 Jul 2015
In reply to thebigeasy:

It's a shockingly bad article with a clickbait headline. Cyclists aren't going to be allowed to skip red lights at all.

> Traffic lights for bicycles will be placed under the traffic lights for cars on some junctions.

So cyclists will still have to obey lights - they will just have their own advanced lights on some junctions that will start before the ones for cars, and give them a head start.

> Where there are no traffic lights for cyclists, they must respect the main lights.

So yet again - cyclists are not free to skip red lights.

I think this is a good idea but unfortunately the logic will get drowned out by the outraged reaction of people who have only read the headline.
 GrahamD 16 Jul 2015
In reply to yorkshireman:

> So cyclists will still have to obey lights - they will just have their own advanced lights on some junctions that will start before the ones for cars, and give them a head start.

Cambridge already has some of these

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...