Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Can you cycle up a one-way street?

Options
1234689

Comments

  • Options
    #152
    GM228
    Registered Users Posts: 8,925 ✭✭✭GM228


    galwaycyclist wrote: »
    Nevertheless the correct answer is "Yes the Irish Traffic regulations were updated in 1998 to provide for two-way cycling on streets that are one-way for other vehicles."

    We already know that, but it's not as simple as that, that would imply you can cycle the wrong way down any one way street, your post should read:-

    "Yes the Irish Traffic regulations were updated in 1998 to provide for two-way cycling on streets that are one-way for other vehicles when certain conditions are met."

    GM228


  • Options
    #153
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,072 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    Warning: calling people trolls or other names is against the Commuting and Transport charter and some posters above should expect to get warning and/or infractions (when I or another mod gets the time).

    Do not reply to this message in-thread!

    -- moderator


  • Options
    #154
    galwaycyclist
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭galwaycyclist


    GM228 wrote: »
    We already know that, but it's not as simple as that, that would imply you can cycle the wrong way down any one way street, your post should read:-

    "Yes the Irish Traffic regulations were updated in 1998 to provide for two-way cycling on streets that are one-way for other vehicles when certain conditions are met."

    GM228

    I accept the nuance :D


  • Options
    #155
    galwaycyclist
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭galwaycyclist


    Snickers Man wrote: »
    It was not illegal to own or use condoms. It was illegal to sell them. So if you could get hold of a carton of johnnies while visiting abroad (or Newry) you were NOT breaking the law by using them in Dublin, or Ballygobackwards.

    Whereas cycling the wrong way down a one-way street IS illegal, and, except in cases where there is a clearly demarked and/or kerb/cone separated contra flow system, rightly so.

    Straw man there? The words I used were "getting access" not own or use. If you read the rest of the thread you will see that two-way cycling on one-way streets is the normal situation in other countries.

    So Ireland is the unusual case in having local authority officials who keep attempting to make illegal that which is perfectly legal elsewhere.


  • Options
    #156
    GM228
    Registered Users Posts: 8,925 ✭✭✭GM228


    galwaycyclist wrote: »
    Straw man there? The words I used were "getting access" not own or use. If you read the rest of the thread you will see that two-way cycling on one-way streets is the normal situation in other countries.

    So Ireland is the unusual case in having local authority officials who keep attempting to make illegal that which is perfectly legal elsewhere.

    Other countries dosn't matter, certain laws are legal in some countries, should we follow suit with all other countries laws too, just because something is illegal dosn't give us an automatic right to make it legal here too!

    Perhaps those who make it legal are the exception, not those who make it illegal, afterall contra-flow cycling is illegal in more countries than it is legal!

    Local authority officials don't make it illegal!

    GM228

    EDIT: Post edited following hindsight


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #157
    galwaycyclist
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭galwaycyclist


    GM228 wrote: »
    Other countries dosn't matter, euthanasia is "normal" and legal in some countries as is acts associated with prostitution, should we follow suit with that too? Obviously totally seperate issues but just because something is illegal dosn't give us an automatic right to make it legal here too!

    Perhaps those who make it legal are the exception, not those who make it illegal, afterall contra-flow cycling is illegal in more countries than it is legal!

    Local authority officials don't make it illegal!

    GM228

    Good gosh. Cycling in both directions on a road = euthanasia?

    That kind of exaggeration only serves to support the parallels with the daft leaps of "logic" that went with attempts to block family planning in this country.

    Of course it is local authority officials who make it illegal they are the ones choosing the road signs and road markings. Are you trying to suggest that there is some conspiracy of "rogue" civil engineering firms going around installing different road markings and signs than they were given in the contracts?


  • Options
    #158
    GM228
    Registered Users Posts: 8,925 ✭✭✭GM228


    galwaycyclist wrote: »
    Good gosh. Cycling in both directions on a road = euthanasia?

    That kind of exaggeration only serves to support the parallels with the daft leaps of "logic" that went with attempts to block family planning in this country.

    Of course it is local authority officials make it illegal they are the ones choosing the road signs and road markings. Are you trying to suggest that there is some conspiracy of "rogue" civil engineering firms going around installing different road markings and signs than they were given in the contracts?

    I'm not comparing euthanasia with cycling, just using it solely as an example that because something is legal somewhere else dosn't automatically make it legal here or necessary say it should be legal here.

    I never made any suggestions of rogue firms fitting signs they shouldn't! Signs are fitted as per the legal requirements and accepted best practice, no sign is fitted that shouldn't be. Some signs are required by law.

    GM228


  • Options
    #159
    roverrules
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 331 ✭✭roverrules


    galwaycyclist wrote: »
    Straw man there? The words I used were "getting access" not own or use. If you read the rest of the thread you will see that two-way cycling on one-way streets is the normal situation in other countries.

    So Ireland is the unusual case in having local authority officials who keep attempting to make illegal that which is perfectly legal elsewhere.

    They're not making it illegal, IT IS illegal.


  • Options
    #160
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,072 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    FYI

    In this country, it is adopted national government policy for the last two governments to provide for: "contra-flow cycle lanes on one-way streets / making two-way streets for cyclists;"

    In this country, a number of city development plans have said the same thing.

    In this country, there was a choice in recent years made to replace no-entry signs on mass without following the stated policy.


  • Options
    #161
    galwaycyclist
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭galwaycyclist


    GM228 wrote: »
    I'm not comparing euthanasia with cycling, just using it solely as an example that because something is legal somewhere else dosn't automatically make it legal here or necessary say it should be legal here.

    I never made any suggestions of rogue firms fitting signs they shouldn't! Signs are fitted as per the legal requirements and accepted best practice, no sign is fitted that shouldn't be. Some signs are required by law.

    GM228

    Uh sorry no this is what you said

    GM228 wrote: »
    Other countries dosn't matter, euthanasia is "normal" and legal in some countries as is acts associated with prostitution, should we follow suit with that too? Obviously totally seperate issues but just because something is illegal dosn't give us an automatic right to make it legal here too!

    If there were differences between Irish law and the law elsewhere there are numerous examples you could have given.


    Instead, you personally chose to use the examples of euthanasia and undefined acts associated with prostitution. Whatever way you want to dress it up this suggests that you personally view cycling on public roads as being in some way equivalent to activities that many view as perverse.

    And the problem here is that two-way cycling on all public roads is already provided for under Irish law as it is in other countries, it is not some perverse or unusual act. If the thing we were discussing was not already legal, and perfectly normal, then you might have some tenuous grounds. But because we are talking about something that was first proposed in Foras Forbartha reports 35 years ago and has been legally permissable for 17 years you just sound weird - in my view.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #162
    GM228
    Registered Users Posts: 8,925 ✭✭✭GM228


    galwaycyclist wrote: »
    If there were differences between Irish law and the law elsewhere there are numerous examples you could have given.

    That's true, but for some reason they were the first two which came to mind, I did say totally different issues so there's obviously no comparison, the point I was making as I stated was just because something is legal in one country dosn't automatically make it legal in another-if I gave the wrong impression that I was actually comparing cycling with euthanasia then I apologise, that was certainly not what I meant, so please don't say well you said this, that or the other because I have clarified it twice now.
    Whatever way you want to dress it up this suggests that you personally view cycling on public roads as being in some way equivalent to activities that many view as perverse.

    What a conclusion! FYI I'm a cyclist at times, possibly more often than I'm a motorist and a pedestrian, and I see cycling just as normal as any other form of road transport!
    And the problem here is that two-way cycling on all public roads is already provided for under Irish law as it is in other countries, it is not some perverse or unusual act. If the thing we were discussing was not already legal, and perfectly normal, then you might have some tenuous grounds. But because we are talking about something that was first proposed in Foras Forbartha reports 35 years ago and has been legally permissable for 17 years you just sound weird - in my view.

    Again it is not already legal on ALL public roads, it is illegal on all on way streets to cycle the wrong way unless certain provisions are made which are supposed to have ministerial signing before hand.

    GM228


  • Options
    #163
    GM228
    Registered Users Posts: 8,925 ✭✭✭GM228


    monument wrote: »
    FYI

    In this country, it is adopted national government policy for the last two governments to provide for: "contra-flow cycle lanes on one-way streets / making two-way streets for cyclists;"

    In this country, a number of city development plans have said the same thing.

    In this country, there was a choice in recent years made to replace no-entry signs on mass without following the stated policy.

    We do know that, there's no issue with contra-flow cycling in a contra-flow cycle lane, it's the fact that some suggest that contra-flow cycling in any one way street (without a lane) is perfectly legal and that authorities choose to make it illegal that's the issue.
    Battery Kinzie wrote: »
    I've often heard that they're bringing in a law that says cyclists can go the wrong way up a one way street. Has that been brought in yet, or is it something we can expect to come in soon?

    In response to the OPs question, it has been answered already several times, there's already provisions in law to allow cycling in a contra-flow fashion in a contra-flow cycling lane on a one way street when certain conditions are met, otherwise it's not legal on the majority of one way streets in this country.

    The thread has answered the question several times and should at this stage be locked, otherwise it will continue for another 14 pages going around in circles.

    GM228


  • Options
    #164
    galwaycyclist
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭galwaycyclist


    GM228 wrote: »
    it's the fact that some suggest that contra-flow cycling in any one way street (without a lane) is perfectly legal and that authorities choose to make it illegal that's the issue.

    Who has suggested such a thing?


  • Options
    #165
    Roadhawk
    Registered Users Posts: 935 ✭✭✭Roadhawk


    Why would a cyclist want to cycle up a one way street anyway?

    The mind set of cyclists clearly needs to change. I would have thought that the rules of the road have to be complied with by all road users including cyclists.


  • Options
    #166
    GM228
    Registered Users Posts: 8,925 ✭✭✭GM228


    galwaycyclist wrote: »
    Who has suggested such a thing?

    That's the impression I get from this thread!

    Stating that authorities choose to make it illegal or personally make it illegal suggests that it is or should be legal, but it's not legal and only by personal choice, if I have that wrong by all means clarify it for me.
    galwaycyclist wrote: »
    And in case you haven't checked the traffic regs in a while (or read this thread) there is nothing inherently unlawful in two-way cycling on one-way streets. The law was changed in 1998 to provide for two-way cycling arrangements.

    So for the last 17 years, the local authority officials who try to ban two-way cycling have been exercising personal choices. The have been personally choosing to use their powers to try and ban two-way cycling - other choices were available.
    galwaycyclist wrote: »
    Therefore to get back to the original question by the original poster, there is nothing in law that makes it inherently illegal to cycle both ways on a one way street.

    The issue is simply that Irish local council roads engineers personally choose to make it illegal even on minor streets or roads with schools (where children could be approaching school from any direction)

    galwaycyclist wrote: »
    Edit: But just to make sure we understand the blame game. It is the local council roads engineers who are "acting the maggot" as you put it. The cyclists are doing something perfectly normal and something that also has a good safety record.
    galwaycyclist wrote: »
    Uh no if you read the thread you will see that it can already be perfectly legal. It is just that certain local authority officials choose to make it illegal.
    galwaycyclist wrote: »
    Straw man there? The words I used were "getting access" not own or use. If you read the rest of the thread you will see that two-way cycling on one-way streets is the normal situation in other countries.

    So Ireland is the unusual case in having local authority officials who keep attempting to make illegal that which is perfectly legal elsewhere.

    GM228


  • Options
    #167
    GM228
    Registered Users Posts: 8,925 ✭✭✭GM228


    Roadhawk wrote: »
    Why would a cyclist want to cycle up a one way street anyway?

    The mind set of cyclists clearly needs to change. I would have thought that the rules of the road have to be complied with by all road users including cyclists.

    The rules apply to all, it would appear though that some cyclists believe that it's something personal that authorities choose to block them from contra-flow cycling.

    On a lighter note I suggest we should start a "let the buses and taxis go up a one way street too" campaign, afterall they can have exemptions too and the authorities like them better, and sure when we do let them do that we will just put a bus lane only at the start of the one way street, after that they can play dodgers with the oncoming traffic, afterall I think that's the normal safe way for a bus to travel over the Himalayas on the Delhi to Shimla road! :)

    GM228


  • Options
    #168
    galwaycyclist
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭galwaycyclist


    GM228 wrote: »
    it's the fact that some suggest that contra-flow cycling in any one way street (without a lane) is perfectly legal and that authorities choose to make it illegal that's the issue.

    @GM228 Please answer the question. Who has suggested that contra-flow cycling in any one-way street is perfectly legal?


  • Options
    #169
    Snickers Man
    Registered Users Posts: 5,301 ✭✭✭Snickers Man


    galwaycyclist wrote: »
    Straw man there? The words I used were "getting access" not own or use.

    Mealy mouth there?

    You also said that people who "got hold of " contraceptives were "ignoring the law" and were "otherwise law abiding" whereas in fact they were, as you now concede, very much abiding by the law and far from ignoring it were aware, ie not ignorant, of its strictures.

    Comparing law-breaking, not to mention recklessly stupid, cyclists with law abiding sexually responsible people is just silly. And impertinent.
    RainyDay wrote:

    Zero people are killed each year by cyclists breaking red lights.

    Now that's just offensive! I have seen an elderly lady being smashed by a cyclist as she crossed a pedestrian crossing on the green man because the cyclist was sailing through a red light across the top of a T-junction while looking to his right (down the stem of the T) to avoid the traffic that was coming from that direction.

    The lady needed an ambulance and was hospitalised but I saw her a few days later so obviously she wasn't killed. So that makes the cyclist's actions all right then?

    If it had been my ma he'd done it to he'd have lost his teeth.


  • Options
    #170
    galwaycyclist
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭galwaycyclist


    GM228 wrote: »
    On a lighter note I suggest we should start a "let the buses and taxis go up a one way street too" campaign, afterall they can have exemptions too and the authorities like them better, and sure when we do let them do that we will just put a bus lane only at the start of the one way street, after that they can play dodgers with the oncoming traffic, afterall I think that's the normal safe way for a bus to travel over the Himalayas on the Delhi to Shimla road! :)

    GM228

    Contraflow bus lanes are also provided for in law


  • Options
    #171
    galwaycyclist
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭galwaycyclist


    GM228 wrote: »
    That's the impression I get from this thread!

    Stating that authorities choose to make it illegal or personally make it illegal suggests that it is or should be legal, but it's not legal and only by personal choice, if I have that wrong by all means clarify it for me.

    GM228


    Absolutely it should be very clear. Most Irish town centres significantly pre-date mass motorisation. In pretty much every case that I know of, any one-way streets were originally two-way. So creating a one-way street, by the very definition, involves the banning of behaviour that was previously quite legal. Local authority officials choose to render unlawful that which was previously lawful.

    However there is nothing in law that forces them to do so for all drivers (and cyclists are drivers in law). The officials are exercising a personal choice to make the normal pre-existing cycling behaviour unlawful as well.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #172
    GM228
    Registered Users Posts: 8,925 ✭✭✭GM228


    galwaycyclist wrote: »
    Contraflow bus lanes are also provided for in law

    I do know that!

    GM228


  • Options
    #173
    Roadhawk
    Registered Users Posts: 935 ✭✭✭Roadhawk


    Ok well let’s look at this from a cyclist’s point of view. The main danger that cyclists in Cities complain about are motorists (cars, buses, trucks, etc.). To cycle the wrong way up a one-way street is clearly putting the cyclist in danger if there is traffic coming the opposite way. The sense of entitlement to use the road should take safety into consideration. In my opinion, to cycle the wrong way up a one-away street, illegal or not, is dangerous and wrong.


  • Options
    #174
    GM228
    Registered Users Posts: 8,925 ✭✭✭GM228


    galwaycyclist wrote: »
    @GM228 Please answer the question. Who has suggested that contra-flow cycling in any one-way street is perfectly legal?

    Read that sentence as a whole, I didn't just say "it's the fact that some suggest that contra-flow cycling in any one way street (without a lane) is perfectly legal".

    I said "it's the fact that some suggest that contra-flow cycling in any one way street (without a lane) is perfectly legal and that authorities choose to make it illegal that's the issue"

    GM228


  • Options
    #175
    galwaycyclist
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭galwaycyclist


    GM228 wrote: »
    Read that sentence as a whole, I didn't just say "it's the fact that some suggest that contra-flow cycling in any one way street (without a lane) is perfectly legal".

    I said "it's the fact that some suggest that contra-flow cycling in any one way street (without a lane) is perfectly legal and that authorities choose to make it illegal that's the issuend that authorities choose to make it illegal that's the issue"

    GM228

    Thats the same thing. So again who has suggested "that contra-flow cycling in any one way street (without a lane) is perfectly legal" ??


  • Options
    #176
    galwaycyclist
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭galwaycyclist


    Roadhawk wrote: »
    Ok well let’s look at this from a cyclist’s point of view. The main danger that cyclists in Cities complain about are motorists (cars, buses, trucks, etc.). To cycle the wrong way up a one-way street is clearly putting the cyclist in danger if there is traffic coming the opposite way. The sense of entitlement to use the road should take safety into consideration. In my opinion, to cycle the wrong way up a one-away street, illegal or not, is dangerous and wrong.

    With regret you've missed the point. All roads are not equally risky. In fact in city cycling (and driving) the main risks come from junction conflicts - with some junctions such as roundabouts having a particular risk of collisions.

    If taking a route contraflow along a one-way street allows cyclists to avoid more problematic locations, then they have reduced their risk.

    There is also good reason to think that contraflow cyclists may be at lower risk of incidents involving parked, or parking, cars than are cyclists using the street in the "with-flow" direction.


  • Options
    #177
    GM228
    Registered Users Posts: 8,925 ✭✭✭GM228


    galwaycyclist wrote: »
    Absolutely it should be very clear. Most Irish town centres significantly pre-date mass motorisation. In pretty much every case that I know of, any one-way streets were originally two-way. So creating a one-way street, by the very definition, involves the banning of behaviour that was previously quite legal. Local authority officials choose to render unlawful that which was previously lawful.

    However there is nothing in law that forces them to do so for all drivers (and cyclists are drivers in law). The officials are exercising a personal choice to make the normal pre-existing cycling behaviour unlawful as well.

    So based on that argument should we bring back slavery and so called "eye for an eye" laws, afterall they were previously lawful!

    GM228


  • Options
    #178
    Roadhawk
    Registered Users Posts: 935 ✭✭✭Roadhawk


    Guys you are getting caught up in technicalities of each others quotes. Back to the main question... "can you cycle up a one way street?"


  • Options
    #179
    GM228
    Registered Users Posts: 8,925 ✭✭✭GM228


    Roadhawk wrote: »
    Guys you are getting caught up in technicalities of each others quotes. Back to the main question... "can you cycle up a one way street?"

    It's not a simple yes or no, it's yes-there are provisions in law to allow cycling in a contra-flow fashion in a contra-flow cycling lane on a one way street when certain conditions are met, otherwise it's not legal on the majority of one way streets in this country

    GM228


  • Options
    #180
    Roadhawk
    Registered Users Posts: 935 ✭✭✭Roadhawk


    Perfect answer. Unless a contra-flow lane is provided you cannot cycle the wrong way up a one-way street into oncoming traffic.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #181
    galwaycyclist
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭galwaycyclist


    GM228 wrote: »
    So based on that argument should we bring back slavery and so called "eye for an eye" laws, afterall they were previously lawful!

    GM228

    To follow your logic in the other direction. Are you arguing that because some roads are made one-way then it must follow that all roads must be made one-way?


Advertisement