Rogue cyclists set to face on-the-spot fines MOD WARNING in first post

mcgratheoin wrote: »

I think he's pointing out how low down in the list of road safety priorities cycling offences can be listed. I don't want to get into a round of whataboutery, but we have to be realistic about the aims and outcomes of specific pieces of legislation and specific actions. In this case, while the vast majority of people welcome FPNs for cyclists and condemn poor behaviour, it is irresponsible to suggest that cycling on footpaths, breaking red lights, cycling without lights or any other abhorrent behaviour is as dangerous or as reckless as equivalent behaviour in motor vehicles. If the government truly want to crack down on poor cycling behaviour without addressing the greater dangers then they have their priorities completely wrong. So the question then becomes what are these FPNs being introduced for? I may be cynical, but it smells to me of an easy piece of legislation that can be held up during the next general election as an "achievement" by the existing government in the area of road safety.

Apropos of this, there is an insidious narrative, promulgated by the Finian McGrath and George Hook types, that cyclists are criminals, irresponsible and a menace to society, when cyclists are in fact amongst the most vulnerable of road users. These commentators suggest that FPNs for cyclists should be uppermost in the minds of AGS, allowing drivers to continue along their merry way unaccosted. This narrative seeks to create and promote a division amongst all road users that increases the dangers for all road users.


@kazamo - did you seriously say that to a Garda? :rolleyes: Turning up in a garda station and providing a sarcastic answer to their first question is hardly the best way to go about things. A call logged with Trafficwatch is usually the first option. I would imagine if a bike knocked you into a wall necessitating a trip to hospital/possible concussion that it should be taken more seriously than that. I definitely would have demanded a more satisfactory response. Having said that, the last time I was knocked down, I was so shaken I never even thought of gathering details etc.

I was not sarcastic to the garda.
I detailed the accident, I produced a letter from the doctor in the hospital, and best of all I produced the name and address of the person who hit me ( as he lives near me).
During all of this time, he made no attempt to write anything down as he did not seem to consider it necessary. The question he asked came after I had detailed the accident and provided all details I could.

Hadn't considered contacting Trafficwatch and will do so if it happens again.
Am also researching camera's atm as the majority of cyclists I meet on my evening walk are on footpaths.

Your above post refers to cyclists as the most vulnerable of road users and I completely agree with that. However the majority of cyclists I meet aren't using the road.
To give it a bit of context, I walk about 60km a week on footpaths so when I say I see the majority on footpaths, it is not based on a 10 minute stroll to the shops.

If these FPN's result in reduced speeds and light's for cyclists on footpaths, it will be a big improvement imo. I understand the need to sometimes cycle on footpaths, it's the cycling at max speed assuming it's just for them and doing so without any illumination which shows a complete disregard for others. I prefer to not have to move off the footpath and step onto the road to avoid a speeding cyclist who is not paying attention

You stated you didn't wish to engage in whataboutery but then did so.
No one is condoning the behaviour of drivers and as a driver I am disgusted at the behaviour of drivers. Not enough drivers have been put off the road and that is due to haphazard and selective enforcement. I also believe that all drivers should have to resit their tests every 10 years and tailgating should incur an automatic driving ban

However we shouldn't delay the improvement in cycling standards just because there is a bigger and far more dangerous cohort around.

I agree with your opinion that this is a money generating exercise but we should all be used to that by now.

Btw the clown who hit me.......I see him from time to time and his speed cycling on footpaths continues. I know his route and stay on the other footpath as much as possible.

tomasrojo wrote: »

Paschal Donohoe confirms on Twitter that using a mobile phone while cycling will be under the FPN regime, under "cycling without consideration to others".

I'm fine with it this behaviour under the FPN regime, but I'm starting to get a little concern about all the things they might be sticking under "without consideration to others".

Yeh. That's an empty bucket you can chuck anything into.

kazamo wrote: »

You can be a hazard without actually killing someone.

Not much of a hazard though is it really.

You're much more likely to trip over some badly maintained pavement.

Tony EH wrote: »

Not much of a hazard though is it really.

You're much more likely to trip over some badly maintained pavement.

Pavement was a problem but it was fixed about 18 months ago ......just the cyclists now

psinno wrote: »

Maybe someone should post that number then.

Bicycles typically kill around two pedestrians a year; motor vehicles on average kill about two pedestrians a day. On pavements...Motor vehicles kill pedestrians on pavements or verges at a rate of about 40 a year...this latest incident is only the third time a cyclist has killed a pedestrian on the pavement this decade.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/ethicallivingblog/2009/aug/18/bike-blog-pavement

Dr Crippen wrote: »

That elderly man had a heart attack while driving that car, not particularly respectful to be holding that up as an example

But it's a hazard and danger regardless of the cause

buffalo wrote: »

They're not exempt from the rules. It's still an offence to cycle on the footpath (no matter what the age), they just can't be issued an FPN for it specifically.

They can however be given an FPN for cycling without consideration if the situation warrants it.

Or summoned to court as is the current reality as uninforced nationwide... As many have said most cyclists will welcome this versus time wasted in court but the reality is bar some money/headline grabbing sporadic checks this will be ignored by the guards, just like speeding, mobiles etc etc and bad behaviour will continue.

mcgratheoin wrote: »

Whereabouts are you? This sounds really excessive, I commute 20km each way by bike and I rarely see any cyclists on the pavement, so when I do it is a tiny minority. I have never seen anyone regularly cycle on a footpath at speed as part of their commute. It sounds to me as if there's one person in particular causing problems on your route - get trafficwatch on to it.

It would be convenient for you if this was down to one rogue cyclist......but it's not.

You are basing your opinion on commuting in which you are travelling at probably a decent pace so cyclists would rarely overtake you.
Mine is based on walking for about 2 hours 4-5 nights a week and facing these cyclists as well as keeping an eye out for cyclists from behind. I don't walk at normal commuter times but later on in the evening so the absence of lights on these bikes is probably the main reason they are using the footpath.

Not sure trafficwatch would be that interested if there wasn't an accident.
Cycling on a footpath is an offence in theory but it is one the gardai don't seem to enforce except in exceptional circumstances. Walked past garda checkpoint last christmas, no cars around but four teenagers cycling on footpath at a fair pace and without any lights. They passed within about three feet of the two guards who were facing the cyclists. Nothing done.
Not looking for prosecutions in that case but a warning wouldn't go astray

It is not a law our law enforcement offices wish to enforce.

Any cycling on footpaths is illegal per the statute books, but based on comments by the Minister Donohue that may change as he seems against the idea of FPN for this.
He also doesn't have the money to put in a proper cycling infrastructure.
There is a busy roundabout near me and there are plans to realign it to cater for more traffic.
As part of the work, the footpaths on all four corners of the junction will now become "shared surface for pedestrians and cyclists".
Wouldn't be surprised if more footpaths went that way.

What about cycling without a helmet.. everyday hundreds of people (some of whom seem a little off-balance) grab a Dublin bike and head off without a helmet.. We're practically promoting it!

I wonder how many cycle accidents are caused by cyclists actually breaking red lights.. The vast majority are smart enough not to cycle straight out into oncoming traffic. I've broken the odd pedestrian one when its obvious there is no one there crossing. does no harm.

I'd say where cyclist are most at risk is slipping up through traffic I close proximity to cars. I drive to work the odd day too and its seriously hard sometimes to keep an eye on whats in front and whats coming from behind. Also they get so close if you waiver at all you could hit someone.