cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/54045255
I have adopted the habit of ignoring red lights.
Rationale: If cars did not exist, cyclists would never have to stop. Every time I must stop at a traffic signal it is to cator for motorists who are mostly a self-serving detriment to public health and safety. #FuckCars.
I used to obey all the traffic rules but after coming to the realisation that much of my time is wasted and my journey is downgraded so copious lazy people can exploit a luxury (some demographics aside). Fuck that. I now run red lights like crazy.
Now I must consider that Tesla may fuck up my lifestyle because Tesla is a moving point of unchecked uncontrolled surveillance. Theoretically, Tesla could be grabbing the faces of cyclists. It could offer to report cyclists who run reds. It could sell that info to law enforcement. Am I overthinking this or is this a problem to watch out for?
OTOH, I am somewhat looking forward to a day when I can spot when a car is self-driving and (if I can ever gain confidence that they won’t mistake me for a tumbleweed) I would happily take liberties – to cut-off the car and force it to slow down and give way. I hope that tactic can go from dream world to real world.
Sorry to say that while cars harm cyclists, the reverse is not only untrue but in fact cyclists benefit cars. Every person who switches from a car to a bike reduces the cause of traffic jams. Motorists who are foolish enough to hate cyclists are not buying dashcams to rat out cyclists. Your crazy theory isn’t convincing.
(edit)
Right-wing nutters (like Victor Orban) have enough hate for cyclists that they lobby against their own interest by lobbing against cycling paths (cutting their nose off to spite their face). Right-wing nutters aside, car lobbies and cycling lobbies are actually mutually aligned in the call for more cycling infra because motorists also want less car traffic.
I don’t care what benefits car, I don’t drive, I just don’t like assholes that think that traffic law doesn’t apply to them and almost all of those seem to be on bikes. So by all means, keep doing what you do but I’ll be cheering when you get isekaied.
This is a matter of fact. The law is clear. I don’t think you will find a cyclist who believes the law “does not apply” to them. OTOH, the law often does not get applied (enforced) on cyclists because cops have enough sense to understand the risks, the consequences, and the worth of their labor. Rightfully so. I would like to think cops also have enough humanity to consider the injustice cyclists face, but that’s perhaps overly optimistic.
And laws adapt because of this. It used to be illegal for anyone to turn right on red. Cyclists broke that law so regularly that lawmakers decided to revisit the law, and made the wise decision to remove the right-on-red prohibition on cyclists.
No idea what you’re waffling on about, running a red light on a bike is very much illegal and punishable. They’re just unlikely to get caught because without a licence plates witness reports will just go nowhere.
And while I generally hate surveillance in public, asshole cyclists are providing one of the best arguments for facial recognition cameras at traffic lights. So good job!
Seems clear English is not your 1st language. Indeed I said red light running was illegal and punishable. You not only missed the nuance of my reply but in fact this is central to the thesis of the thread.
No they’re not. The argument is so shitty a gov or car maker would be embarrassed to try it. They have plenty of crimes that actually matter to point to as their excuse and cover-for-action for surveillance. But if you find a surveillance pushing gov actually citing outlaw cyclists as their cause for action, please drop us a link.