Forum Topic

"Could this be any more silly. Pedestrians are killed in collisions with other pedestrians. Did I read that right?"You read it right Maggie.  In 2021 (most recent year for mortality data), 8 people died from being bumped into or pushed (excluding assaults).  All were aged over 75, and 3 were over 90.In 2021, one person died from a collision with a cyclist - and that was a non traffic accident (i.e. not on a public road) and the victim was aged 80-84.You appear to believe that the biggest danger to vulnerable pedestrians is cyclists and that requires the extraordinary measure of requiring them all to wear registration plates on hi-vis tabards and a huge enforcement operation to ensure they comply.Yet 8 times more people died in 2021 from collisions with other people, so why is it **more** stupid to require anyone walking in the street to wear hi-vis with clearly visible registration plates?And that's excluding all the other crime that pedestrians commit with impunity because they cannot be identified.Not just assaults in the street, but shoplifting, muggings, drunk and disorderly offences, sexual offences - and the anti social crimes of littering and allowing their dogs to poo in the street.I'm not suggesting that pedestrians should be forced to wear number plates.  I'm not even suggesting that pedestrians over 75 be forced to wear helmets to reduce injuries and deaths. I am saying these types of measures for pedestrians are about as stupid, unenforceable, illiberal and unnecessary as mandating them for cyclists.That's because a pedal bike isn't the same as an SUV, it poses negligible risk to others so it doesn't need to be regulated the same.

Ed Saper ● 1084d

You won't get done by an automatic (traffic light) camera for passing through on amber because the pictures captured solely by the camera can't prove an offence has taken place (even if it has). Hence traffic light cameras will only take photos once the red light has appeared.“AMBER means ‘Stop’ at the stop line. You may go on only if the AMBER appears after you have crossed the stop line or are so close to it that to pull up might cause an accident”.The camera records what the traffic light is showing at the time when the first photo is taken - and passing a red stop signal is an absolute offence - there is very little mitigation available.If you pass through on Amber, and are seen by a police officer to be increasing your speed as you pass the signal (which drivers sometimes do, to try and "beat the lights") then the police officer could decide to ticket you, and if it came to court, you wouldn't have much of a hope of avoiding a conviction if the police officer attended and gave evidence.The fact that traffic light cameras don't take photos of vehicles passing on Amber is the reason I say you can drive through them with (relative) impunity.On many occasions it will be safer to pass an amber signal rather than stopping, and if it's unsafe to stop then it's entirely legal, but it is absolutely incorrect to say you can pass an amber signal under all circumstances.I'm no angel, and I've passed traffic lights on amber when I could have stopped and equally on occasions I've ensured I stop before the stop line when I see the signal go amber, even though it meant braking more rapidly then I normally do.

Andrew Jones ● 1083d