Is it OK for cyclists to run red lights?
Is it justifiable to blatantly break one of the most basic rules of the road?
In this episode, Jake and Ant discuss the morality of skipping red lights on a bike. They begin by chatting about unexpected outcomes of laws that are designed to improve safety and the possibility that running reds is actually safer for cyclists. They discuss the “Reverse Peltzman effect'' and how by making a behaviour more risky, people compensate by being more careful, which may be enough to outweigh the increased risk.
They also talk about whether the laws applied to cyclists on the road are justified, the letter of the law versus the spirit of the law, as well as musing about what changes may be beneficial for road safety.
Thanks so much to the people who've left reviews! We read them all and the words of encouragement mean the world to us. If you could spare the time, leaving a review on Apple Podcasts would help us a lot. If you don't have Apple Podcasts, feel free to rate using whatever service you use. Sign up to our newsletter here to receive a breakdown of the arguments presented, some memes and updates on future episodes: https://moedt.substack.com/ If you'd like to support the show, checkout our patreon at: https://www.patreon.com/moedt--- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/moedt/message
If you'd like to listen ad-free (on any podcast app) and support us as creators, become a member for as little as $2 per month at: https://plus.acast.com/s/moedt.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.