[Closed] 57% of ALL cyclists run red lights, according to IAM?!?

No, seems about right from my experience. (Both figures)

it's annoying isn't it - been following Carlton's tweets this am and IAM aren't backign down on it at all.

His point about the '60%' figure being quoted in perpetuity as the 'correct' number of RLJing cyclists is a good one too.

From my experience that might be correct for London but I'd have thought it lower here in Edinburgh.

its ok I have stw that article and just repeat this

Ninety-four per cent of cyclists have seen a driver cross an advanced stop line*

And 43 per cent said they would be less likely to jump red lights if advanced stop lines were more strongly enforced

Its like they have an agenda or an arts student doing the sats 😀

This may be abog city issue where there are lots of traffic jams it is not an issue where I live - cycling on the pavement is but as I point out this is just someoen who owns a bike not a cyclist

No, seems about right from my experience.

The actual IAM figure for those responding: "Yes, frequently" was 2.2%
Even "Yes, sometimes" only amounted to 11.1%

I'd love to see the stats for "As a driver have you ever exceeded the speed limit?"

99.99% ?

based on my commute i seem to be the only one that stops ....

most folk seem to think that cutting onto the pavement is an acceptable throughfare .....

82.5% of statistics are inaccurate 🙂

The actual IAM figure for those responding: "Yes, frequently" was 2.2%
Even "Yes, sometimes" only amounted to 11.1%

Pretty much every set of lights I come to with a cyclist in front (whether I'm in car or on bike) the cyclist runs the red, drives me nuts. Seen so many near accidents.

50% of the time I run red lights every time.

Anyone who has cycled on the road would probably have to answer "Once or twice" if they were being truly honest and had a good memory.

e.g. I had to ride through temporary traffic lights the other day because they weren't activated by my bike.

e.g. I had to ride through temporary traffic lights the other day because they weren't activated by my bike.

TBH I'd walk it.

Pretty much every set of lights I come to with a cyclist in front (whether I'm in car or on bike) the cyclist runs the red, drives me nuts.

Maybe it is area dependent. I see a few cyclists on my commute (by bike or car) and I can't remember the last time I saw one bust through a red.

I do see some crawl beyond the stop line, to position themselves ahead of traffic, which I [i]guess[/i] counts, but isn't really the same thing.

TBH I'd walk it.

No pavements, so I'd just have been moving more slowly in the same amount of danger (which was minimal as I could see the other end of the roadworks anyway).

LOL at slimjim.

I had to ride through temporary traffic lights the other day because they weren't activated by my bike.

We had to do this yesterday (on a tiny backstreet, there were no cars at either end), I also had to bail onto the pavement at another set of temp lights because the timing was set up for 30mph cars not 15mph bikes and I would have been flattened if I carried on down the narrow barriered roadworks lane.

Which raises the question: how many cyclists would jump reds if junction designers ever considered the needs of cyclists when laying stuff out and working out timings, etc? It seems to me that most cyclist/motorist friction occurs because we have to fit into a system that doesn't make any sensible allowance for our presence whatsoever.

The way the figures are reported gives a very misleading & unbalanced view.

However.

I don't remember the last time I saw a motorist jump a red light, but I see two or three cyclists every day jumping or running reds, or using the pavement to bypass a junction.

There aren't very many cyclists on my suburban commute, so 'two or three' accounts for at least half.

Which raises the question: how many cyclists would jump reds if junction designers ever considered the needs of cyclists when laying stuff out and working out timings, etc? It seems to me that most cyclist/motorist friction occurs because we have to fit into a system that doesn't make any sensible allowance for our presence whatsoever.

It's being worked into most new junctions but there are thousands of old designs which cost a fortune to re-time I believe, so don't hold your breath.

No pavements, so I'd just have been moving more slowly in the same amount of danger (which was minimal as I could see the other end of the roadworks anyway).

Bit stuffed then I guess!

"I do see some crawl beyond the stop line, to position themselves ahead of traffic, which I guess counts, but isn't really the same thing."

not really

not every junction has an advanced cyclist box - unless you ride it everyday you dont know this

so what do you do - position your self inside the front car (after you filtered to the front as per the rules to find no advance box.....) where the driver may not see you , to the outside where he may not see you - or go to the front where he will obviously see you without you relying on him using windows and mirrors to seeing you

Not surprised by that figure really, even if the question had been 'regularly jump red lights'. I'd say at least 60% of the people commuting by bike through the south side of Glasgow jump red lights. I'm not one of them.

don't remember the last time I saw a motorist jump a red light

Those are extreme examples from one guys city commute, but I see motorists almost every day who blitz through amber or [i]just-turned-red[/i] lights. And a car doing that poses a far greater danger than a squishy cyclist who is only likely to kill himself.

[url= http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/businessandpartners/traffic-note-8-cycling-red-lights.pdf ]TfL monitored multiple junctions, counted 7502 cyclists, and found around 16% of them violated red lights (PDF)[/url]

I'd say the figures are about right.

When I'm in pack mentality in That London I'd say the figure is correct, if you segregate Boris Bikes I'd say the figure is about 90%.
If you add in "riding down a oneway the wrong way" then BorisBike'ets will account for 98% of that population.

Different matter in rural Hants though.

mintimperial - Member

Which raises the question: how many cyclists would jump reds if junction designers ever considered the needs of cyclists when laying stuff out and working out timings, etc? It seems to me that most cyclist/motorist friction occurs because we have to fit into a system that doesn't make any sensible allowance for our presence whatsoever.

This is the critical thing - at the moment roads are engineered to keep the flow of cars high - with some allowances for buses that cycles can share. re engineering so that the needs of cyclists were seriously considered would make a huge difference to safety - whether it be a light that goes green 10 seconds ahead of the cars allowing you to clear the junction, a proper lane or whatever is appropriate for that junction

I don't remember the last time I saw a motorist jump a red light

It happens all the time, but it's different in that cars tag onto the end of streams of traffic and cross when the lights have changed, so you don't notice it so much. I suppose it's not quite as dangerous, but that has to be at least in part because it's so normal it's expected. Still, I've seen near misses a couple of times where someone a bit keen who knows the timings has set off on red-amber whilst two or three cars have carried on through on red behind a bus or lorry going slower than expected.

What's the [i]purpose[/i] of their survey and publicising those figures?
I've never seen it as the IAM's aim to discredit cyclists in the past.

so what do you do - position your self inside the front car (after you filtered to the front as per the rules to find no advance box.....) where the driver may not see you , to the outside where he may not see you - or go to the front where he will obviously see you without you relying on him using windows and mirrors to seeing you

I find it much safer to take my position as a piece of traffic and stay in my position in a queue rather than go to the front. I just don't agree that ASLs are safer, a) they put you back in front of someone who just overtook you and b) that cheeses them off and makes them dive past you dangerously again and c) you risk getting first impact from the morons who RLJ. Much like cycle lanes I feel they're a nod towards placating cyclists without actually identifying how they function in practice, especially when not universally applied.

I run them and always will, self preservation is the name of the game. As long as I'm not hurting anyone in the process, there's no issue.

Coffeeeking - even if it means sitting thru several cycles of the lights? actually if the cars didn't bother overtaking you they would end up in the same place in the next traffic queue usually

I think its a tiny minority of car drivers who drive legally - =obeying speed limits and leaving enough space for cyclists along with illegal parking and using bus lanes are the main issues

I blame Strava

What's the purpose of their survey and publicising those figures?
I've never seen it as the IAM's aim to discredit cyclists in the past.

https://www.iam.org.uk/cyclist

Which makes this all the more baffling?! I for one look forward to cycling being more enjoyable and safer after this inflammatory piece of shonky research hit the press 🙁

Coffeeeking - even if it means sitting thru several cycles of the lights?

Yup, the only time I'll feed to the front is if I'm going to be going left at that junction and I can see the lights have only just that second turned red so they're not going to move off when I'm filtering forward, and I do that without filter lanes anyway if the road is wide enough, but you need to be careful the first vehicle isn't a non-indicator or a wagon obviously. Any doubt, stay in place.

actually if the cars didn't bother overtaking you they would end up in the same place in the next traffic queue usually

I know, but I can't control car drivers, I can control me. And it makes far more sense for me not to push to the front to get overtaken again by an irate "I WANNA GET HOME, WHY DID YOU UNDERTAKE ME TO GET IN FRONT ONLY TO GET ME TO OVERTAKE AGAIN?" person. Just don't see the point in it.

I run them and always will, self preservation is the name of the game. As long as I'm not hurting anyone in the process, there's no issue.

As I've mentioned in the past and almost had on video once (had I not forgotten to hit record) RLJs do cause a danger to others. Other road users may not be expecting you to be there and can and do take very odd evasive action to avoid the unexpected, sometimes endangering 3rd parties. Of course you can always claim "I only do it when it's safe" but then most people would say they only speed when it's safe or they only use the phone where it's safe but both of those are frowned upon.

TJ (and other Edinburgers) did you see the piece in the Evening News the other day?

[url= http://www.scotsman.com/edinburgh-evening-news/transport/police-collar-138-drivers-and-cyclists-in-traffic-crackdown-1-2279522 ]Police collar 138 drivers and cyclists in traffic crackdown[/url]

Officers stopped [b][u]106 motorists[/u][/b] for entering Advanced Stop Lines (ASL) – red boxes designed to allow cyclists a head start at traffic lights – during an operation along North Bridge.

A total of [b][u]26 cyclists[/u][/b] were stopped for jumping red lights and six more for cycling on pavements as part of the “Drive Safe, Cycle Safe” initiative.

More here: http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=6253

Damn cyclists ignoring the rules! 🙄

What was the percentage of passage though? 106 motorists out of how many total flow, same with the cyclists? Outright numbers prove nothing in either direction.

As I've mentioned in the past and almost had on video once (had I not forgotten to hit record) RLJs do cause a danger to others. Other road users may not be expecting you to be there and can and do take very odd evasive action to avoid the unexpected, sometimes endangering 3rd parties. Of course you can always claim "I only do it when it's safe" but then most people would say they only speed when it's safe or they only use the phone where it's safe but both of those are frowned upon.

Yeah, so....

Time to join up!
https://www.iam.org.uk/cyclist/iam-cycling-membership

What was the percentage of passage though?

Not stated, though Edinburgh is a very popular city for cycling (especially as half the centre roads are impassable due to the tramworks).

Does it matter though? Taken to extremis: if five thousand drivers go through a red light and the only cyclist that day also does, then you could say that 100% of cyclists jumped the red. While that may be accurate it is clearly [u]not[/u] "the problem".

^ It is also difficult to measure because every cyclist who comes up to a red light has the opportunity to jump it while only the first car in the queue can infringe the ASL.

I see motorists jumping red lights very single day. This morning I saw 2 double decker buses jumping properly turned red lights, and at the 127 sets of traffic lights I pass on my commute each way at all of the red lights there were always cars or motorbikes in the advanced stop box. Tbh when I get there and find a motor vehicle sitting in the box I keep going as its actually not safe to stop as a cyclist.
Oh, and thanks to the ignorant bitch driving an Audi estate who pulled out right across me as I was riding at just under 30 mph onto the Wandsworth one way system this morning. Just think next time that you're not going to get away from an angry cyclist in London unless you run red lights as well - although she did drop her mobile phone when I turned up at the next set of red lights and hammered on her window.

When Im commuting I can be a c*** whether Im cycling or whether Im driving.

When I relaxed and not in a tush I tend to be a good/considerate cyclist/driver.

I would therefore suggest banning commuting before discussing any other changes that need to be made.

I saw 2 double decker buses jumping properly turned red lights

Yeah see this is part of the problem. The popular idea of a "just turned / slightly red".

Any red light is "properly turned", because the amber phase [u]also means stop[/u] and it is still an offence to go through an amber unless it was impossible to stop safely.

at the 127 sets of traffic lights I pass on my commute each way at all of the red lights there were always cars or motorbikes in the advanced stop box

Yep and that is also a popular "jumping red lights" offence which is largely ignored and somehow doesn't count.

I did like one of Carlton's tweeters who pointed out IAM could have chosen to report [i]exactly the same figures[/i] as [b][i]"87% of cyclists never or rarely jump red lights"[/i][/b].

Lies, damn lies and statistics.

Any red light is "properly turned"

Fully agree, but like Andrew I regularly see motorists jump lights on busy roads some seconds after they've changed to red - ie there's no possibility that they 'couldn't have safely stopped in time' which is the the defence against passing on Amber

A couple of times in the last week I've seen vehicles pull out and overtake the car in front when it has stopped at amber.

What, 57% have run through a red light ever? Bah. I guess I'm branded in the naughty book. There used to be a dodgy junction near here, the positioning meant cars would try and race and turn infront of you every time. I did occationally just go when the pedestrians were going when I could see the car next to me was going to be an arse.

No junctions like that on my current commute, haven't been in that situation in years.

One guy I work with just used to chase the cars and bang on their bonnet with his fist, could have been worse 😛

Waves at Si!
I might call round to say hi sometime soon as I cycle near yours on my new commute.

if you'd have asked my how many cyclists I see jumping red lights (in London) I'd have said 50-60% at any given crossing when there was a gap in traffic or the pedestrian (green man) signal was on.

asking people if they would jump a red light is a daft question.

So what % of car drivers obey the highway code always? o0.00001%?

So what % of car drivers obey the highway code always?

what %ge have a clue what's in it?

Friday evening.

Going into the Imax junction before Waterloo station, Woppit sees a bunch of cyclists stopped at the red light. He has a quick look and can't see anything coming from the feeder road on the left so stamps on the pedal and shoots into the empty space... just in time to catch the briefest image, out of the corner of his left eye, of... a car. Right there. Virtually on top of him and so close that neither he or the car driver had time to react.

There being less than a razor's width of time difference between absolute catastrophe and staying alive in Woppit's favour, the car passed ascloseasthis to his back wheel (insert sound effect of rapidly vibrating rectal cavity here).

A split second earlier and Woppit would have suddenly become a screaming, twisted and bloody mess all over the tarmac from being hit broadside on, so: Hmmm. Yes. Stopping at red lights goooood. Jumping red lights baaaad.

Stopped at all the red lights this morning.

Felt smug.

you've already posted that Woppit.

What have dodgy stats about cycling got to do with manufacturers of dog food? My dog can't ride a bike, but if he could I'm quite sure red lights would be the last thing on his mind. He'd be thinking, "oh my god I'm riding a bike" or "can I smell bacon". And I don't even own a dog.

Institute of Advanced Madeupstatistics.

Teh Grauniad has got hold of the story. Good coverage but some of the readers comments are depressing.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/bike-blog/2012/may/14/cycling-red-light-jumping-iam-survey

What, 57% have run through a red light ever?

Yep. That's why it is 100% meaningless.

if you'd have asked my how many cyclists I see jumping red lights (in London) I'd have said 50-60% at any given crossing

Well the TfL survey mentioned earlier said 16%, from monitoring 7500+ cyclists at five junctions in London in 2007.

I'd suggest it the actual figure is very dependent on where you are in the country and which junctions you monitor.

127 traffic lights on a commute!!!

I am gobsmacked by this stat

I am going to have to have a lie down just thinking about it

A split second earlier and Woppit would have suddenly become a screaming, twisted and bloody mess

As it was he just started referring to himself in the third person.

Graham approves of this.

brakes - Member
you've already posted that Woppit.

Well spotted. Top of the class. 🙄

Well the TfL survey mentioned earlier said 16%, from monitoring 7500+ cyclists at five junctions in London in 2007.

2007 was a loooong time a go with respect to cycling in London.
I've said this before but I've been cycle commuting here since 2006 and there are far, far more cyclists on the roads than there were 5 years ago.

Well spotted. Top of the class.

thanks Sir.

I'da waved at you Mr Wappit for I was there, at that Imax roundabout nr That Waterloo, on Friday Eve.. along with 4bn other commuters running red lights and trying to catch the train home. Nice eve it was too. I came down Temple to find a bucket of Barristers and Clerks hanging out of the pub on the corner..
Rather fancied joining them I did.

Waves at Mr Wappit, cooo'eeeee over here, black Dahon, no helmet.

2007 was a loooong time a go with respect to cycling in London.
I've said this before but I've been cycle commuting here since 2006 and there are far, far more cyclists on the roads than there were 5 years ago.

Agreed, but I doubt the figure has changed that significantly outside of our glorious capital.

My brief experiences of London traffic suggested that [i]everyone[/i] considered amber to mean [i]"hurry up"[/i] and red to mean [i]"still go if it is has been less than 5 seconds"[/i].

So I'd suggest that 16% figure could well be quite reasonable for the rest of the country. It'd be nice to have a [u]properly conducted[/u] nationwide survey to see the facts.

Sadly the IAM one is far from that.

but I see motorists almost every day who blitz through amber or just-turned-red lights. And a car doing that poses a far greater danger than a squishy cyclist who is only likely to kill himself.

[url= http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=quay+street+manchester&ll=53.480164,-2.255427&spn=0.002043,0.004351&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&hnear=Quay+St,+Manchester,+United+Kingdom&gl=uk&t=h&z=18&layer=c&cbll=53.480279,-2.25555&panoid=cIx18YrA1kDXmAykWfK0Bw&cbp=12,149.11,,0,15.54 ]These lights[/url] have got precisely sod all buffer time between one set going to red and the other changing to green so have had and seen quite few near misses due to only-just-red twunts.

What a load of pap from IAM

I am back doing a central London cycle commute as of last week. The closest I've come to a crash was a female cyclist jumping a red and turning across in front of me as I was going straight ahead through a green light. Missed by about 12", largely because I braked.

Then there was the car in moving traffic getting ever closer to me and the kerb. When I looked the driver was no hands on the steering wheel digging his mobile out of his pocket before proceeding with one handed steering and chatting over the phone.

Then there was the parked van driver opening his door right in front of me when I was descending a hill.

NEXT?????????

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/bike-blog/2012/may/14/cycling-red-light-jumping-iam-survey?CMP=twt_gu

+ a squillion, alright RLJ cyclists are not always only a hazard to themselves but still a lot less of a hazard than those pesky drivers.

I agree, but just because they're less of a threat doesn't mean it isn't bloody stupid, dangerous and something which should not be tolerated. That's like saying ignore all the other wars in the world because war X is a bit more feisty.

I agree, but just because they're less of a threat doesn't mean it isn't bloody stupid

Completely agree coffeeking - but it does show how misdirected the public anger (not to mention funding) is when it comes to these issues.

That's like saying ignore all the other wars in the world because war X is a bit more feisty.

To stretch your analogy further, if you only have the funds to fight one enemy do you tackle the enemy killing 1 person per year or the one killing several thousand?

I see the CTC have added a nice quote to Teh Grauniad article along those very lines:

[b]"Of pedestrians injured in London in a collision caused by red light jumping, only 4% involve cyclists, whereas 71% occur when a car driver jumps a red light and 13% when a motorcyclist does."[/b]

I don't jump red lights myself, in a car or on the bike. I agree it IS bloody stupid.

But bogus headlines like this IAM one get Joe Public all enraged about [i]"law-breaking cyclists"[/i] while completely ignoring that it is the [i]law-breaking motorists[/i] that are killing them.

i like that CTC quote very much

i know quite a few junctions where drivers regularly continue to accelerate through well beyond the amber - if at front of line you just don't pull away until they've passed through even though you've got green - seems to have increased a lot in last few years and i can only assume that its because traffic police as such have virtually disappeared and there is little liklihood of being caught - that and f u attitude

oh and last week on a pelican had two cars drive straight through well after light red - one turned out of a junction at speed and just decided to hammer it (i've taught my kids the green man doesn't mean cross - you cross when the cars have actually stopped - second just didn't register the crossing)
mind you my daughter did ask the other week why the cyclist was in the middle of the road - i had to explain that he was running the red light and was half expecting us to step off the kerb in front of him ho hum

I've started RLJing on one bit of my new commute, the lights don't get activated by me, and there's often big gaps in the traffic that mean I can do so safely.

Where's AnalogueAndy to defend IAM?

I've done various studies of my own over the years in several towns and cities including London. Not exactly scientific but easy to do on a regular commute. Ride as normal for a week - maybe a few RLJs, one or two bits of pavement riding or wrong-way-down-a-one-way-street, whatever your normal style of riding is.

Then do a week of obeying every rule of the road to the letter. Never jumping lights or riding on the pavement, indicating every move, generally being a model citizen.

Then tell me which is the most dangerous. I guarantee it'll be option 2. Every single time I've tried this little experiment (at different times of the year, different cities) I've had more near misses than with option 1.

I'm not reckless, I don't go hurtling through every single red light but there are a few junctions where it's safer for me to "anticipate" the lights than to obey the rules of the road to the letter.

I tried it again tonight riding home, being a good rider. In that time I counted 12 drivers on the mobile (2 of them texting) and when I stopped in my ASL at one junction, the car which had until then been stopped legally behind it decided that my presence meant he could edge forward until he was back in front of me. Cock.

Anyone who has cycled on the road would probably have to answer "Once or twice" if they were being truly honest and had a good memory.

I RLJed once a few years ago at an empty junction late at night because my bike wasn't triggering the induction loop that was controlling the lights. In retrospect I should probably have dismounted and used the pedestrian crossing. Other than that I occasionally sit in front of an ASL's stop line if I've reached the ASL only to discover that it's full of car.

One of the scarier RLJ moments I've experienced occurred when I stopped at lights as they turned red only for the car [b]behind the card behind me[/b] to pull out and scream past the car behind me and me, while taking a sharp left around the junction.

I RLJed once a few years ago at an empty junction late at night because my bike wasn't triggering the induction loop that was controlling the lights. In retrospect I should probably have dismounted and used the pedestrian crossing.

If that's a joke it's wonderfully subtle.

That Press Officer ought to be sacked for coming to entirely the wrong conclusion to a set of figures and releasing an inaccurate and irresponsible press release.

One of the things I like most about the internet is when idiots like her, James Martin, Addison Lee boss etc come out with ignorant and inflammatory guff, Carlton Reid, BC, CTC, Sustrans etc come at them publicly with sensible facts and figures and show them up for the manipulative ignoramuses they are.

Although it feels a bit like open season on cyclists sometimes, it does feel like we're beginning to make some headway against the ignorance.

And when I drive in London Village, when I brake to stop at an amber I check my mirrors first, to make sure the driver behind me isn't trying to get through the lights...

Shouldn't the law allow us (cyclists) to turn left, or go straight ahead where there is no left turn, against red lights where it's safe to do so? I reckon so...

Then do a week of obeying every rule of the road to the letter. Never jumping lights or riding on the pavement, indicating every move, generally being a model citizen.

Why is this dangerous?

I admit that being slightly out in front at junctions is safer than sitting in the queue, but I don't know how riding on pavements is safe, unless you are being knocked off or something.

On the BBC News this morning - already the presenters have made the claim that 57% of cyclists jump red lights 🙄

Here we go with the badly made 'poll' and spurious claims based on selective use of dodgy statistics...

Yep, haven't got time to watchit, as I need to get riding to work and, of course, cause as much havoc as possible.
Ever been made to feel like you're the enemy?

Yup - i'm just about to set off on my daily commute - the one where i sit at every light in the middle of the lane just like a vehicle - and get daily abuse/poor driving/dangerous overtakes etc - all because i'm apparently 'the enemy'...

IAM dude on the Beeb has presented himself well this morning.
The roads are for everyone.

I noticed they reworded the story when it actually came out - "57% of cyclists admit to going through a red light [i]at least once"[/i]. I like to think my email to them helped.

[i]IAM dude[/i]
I bet that's the first time he's ever been called a "dude"! 🙂

IAM dude on the Beeb has presented himself well this morning.
The roads are for everyone.

Yeah, I was surprised, normally they have people that are on opposite sides of an argument and at least one that’s quite rabid (Carole Malone versus the anorexia suffer springs to mind…), but the IAM dude came across as being very reasonable, saying that the issue was that cyclist were breaking the law because they felt unsafe, so we had to make sure that ACL boxes were properly enforced and that there’s more respect from everyone. He was all a bit Bill & Ted, “Be excellent to one another”.

Duuuuuude!

And it's made the Daily Wail - the comments at the bottom really are depressing. 🙁

http://www.****/news/article-2144472/More-half-cyclists-jumped-red-lights-ahead-road-users.html

I will not read the Mail's report!
Its weird though - I realised this morning that I go through a red light every day I ride, without even realising. It's a bus lane that goes past the shopping precinct. When I get there, there are no buses around and the light is always red. So I ride though it. I think that makes me a regular red light jumper 🙁

I actually quite enjoy reading the rubbish on the Daily Hates comment section. Really does make me feel good about myself!

Anyway, this report is tosh.

Headline should read: "Humans willing to break rules for their own advantage when they know there is almost no chance of punishment"

I realised this morning that I go through a red light every day I ride, without even realising. It's a bus lane that goes past the shopping precinct. When I get there, there are no buses around and the light is always red. So I ride though it. I think that makes me a regular red light jumper

I think you're comitting a mopery.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mopery

Funnily enough IAM seem less keen to publicise the 32% of drivers that also admitted the offence.