Road Traffic Act 2010 - Impact on cyclists

seamus · 24-06-2010 10:49am #1

So although there's a whole pile of kerfuffaw about BAC limits, there's actually some new stuff in here which will affect cyclists if they ever bother enforcing it:

1. Drink Cycling: If a Garda determines that you are intoxicated to the point that you are incapable of having proper control over the vehicle, you can be arrested and convicted with a fine of up to €2,000. You can also be detained for up to 6 hours in a Garda station if the Garda considers you to be a danger to yourself or others.*

2. "A member of the Garda Síochána may demand of a person in charge of a pedal cycle whom the member suspects of having committed any crime or offence or of having been concerned or involved in a collision or other event in a public place causing injury to person or property, the name and address and date of birth of such person, and if such a person refuses or fails to give his or her name and address and date of birth or gives a name or address or date of birth which the member has reasonable grounds for believing to be false or misleading, the member may take the cycle, by reasonable force if necessary, and retain it until such time as he or she is satisfied as to the identity of such person."

Nothing about cycle lanes in it, though that may be retained for an S.I.

* Although there's no requirement by cyclists to provide a breath specimen, any action taken with the intent to "frustrate" the prosecution is an offence in itself. So strictly speaking, refusing to take a breath test, even on a bicycle, could theoretically be an offence in itself

RobBaxter · 24-06-2010 10:52am

stupid laws

limklad · 24-06-2010 11:26am

seamus wrote: »

So although there's a whole pile of kerfuffaw about BAC limits, there's actually some new stuff in here which will affect cyclists if they ever bother enforcing it:

1. Drink Cycling: If a Garda determines that you are intoxicated to the point that you are incapable of having proper control over the vehicle, you can be arrested and convicted with a fine of up to €2,000. You can also be detained for up to 6 hours in a Garda station if the Garda considers you to be a danger to yourself or others.*

It has already been here for donkey years with addons fines in recent years. It called Drunk and Disorderly and a breach of the peace. In the 80's, I known a few gentlemen trying to cycle home and I mean "Try". The guards took them into the station and into the cell to sleep it off.
You can be fined €200 for refusing to give his name, €100 for breach of the peace and Persons found to be drunk in public can now be fined €100 on the spot (or €140 in respect of disorderly conduct in a public place).
It is already an expensive exercise if caught.

seamus wrote: »

2. "A member of the Garda Síochána may demand of a person in charge of a pedal cycle whom the member suspects of having committed any crime or offence or of having been concerned or involved in a collision or other event in a public place causing injury to person or property, the name and address and date of birth of such person, and if such a person refuses or fails to give his or her name and address and date of birth or gives a name or address or date of birth which the member has reasonable grounds for believing to be false or misleading, the member may take the cycle, by reasonable force if necessary, and retain it until such time as he or she is satisfied as to the identity of such person."

The only thing new here is that they confiscate your bike for refusing to give a name. The rest is obstruction to an investigation and failure to identify yourself to the gardai if suspected of causing an offence.

seamus wrote: »

Nothing about cycle lanes in it, though that may be retained for an S.I.

* Although there's no requirement by cyclists to provide a breath specimen, any action taken with the intent to "frustrate" the prosecution is an offence in itself. So strictly speaking, refusing to take a breath test, even on a bicycle, could theoretically be an offence in itself

Refusing to give a breath test is an offence if you are operating a vehicle is an offence and technically as far as I am aware a bicycle is an vehicle under the law although it is exempt in many parts of Transport regulations.

The only problem is enforcement. If gardai arrest everybody for Drunk and Disorderly then we need to build alot of cells in gardai stations around the country. The on the spot fine is their way around this therefore you are no longer their responsibility to look after you when they arrest you.

There is alot of Cycling regulations and laws that the government need to tidy up on.

seamus · 24-06-2010 11:32am

limklad wrote: »

It has already been here for donkey years with addons fines in recent years. It called Drunk and Disorderly and a breach of the peace.

This is a different offence though. It's been there since the first RTA, but I think the fine up until now was £50. €2k is not to be sniffed at and worth thinking about if you usually spin down to the pub for one or two and end up having six or seven.

The only thing new here is that they confiscate your bike for refusing to give a name.

Indeed, it's something though and I think the intention is to make people more co-operative on the side of the road without the Garda having the hassle of bringing a separate offence of obstruction to court.

There's not much there that will change any of our lives, but it's useful to know this stuff, even if it's never enforced

limklad · 24-06-2010 11:50am

seamus wrote: »

This is a different offence though.

It is a different area of law when it comes to cycling offences, but still you can and will be caught with it. Just because you on a bicycle does not mean you cannot be Prosecuted with it.

seamus wrote: »

It's been there since the first RTA, but I think the fine up until now was £50. €2k is not to be sniffed at and worth thinking about if you usually spin down to the pub for one or two and end up having six or seven.
Indeed, it's something though and I think the intention is to make people more co-operative on the side of the road without the Garda having the hassle of bringing a separate offence of obstruction to court.

Painful costs yes, but only if it is enforced.

loyatemu · 24-06-2010 2:10pm

€2k fine is ridiculously disproportionate, but I'd imagine the guards will only pull you over if your clearly hammered and unable to cycle in a straight line.

kenmc · 24-06-2010 2:59pm

if you're cycling on the path you're immune though.

ednwireland · 24-06-2010 3:09pm

never understood why people think its ok to drink and cycle but not to drink and drive

Moflojo · 24-06-2010 3:13pm

ednwireland wrote: »

never understood why people think its ok to drink and cycle but not to drink and drive

I think that's down to a belief that drunk-cycling is really only endangering oneself, whereas drunk-driving causes significant risk to others.

At least that's how I justified it to myself...:(

liamo · 24-06-2010 5:07pm

Moflojo wrote: »

I think that's down to a belief that drunk-cycling is really only endangering oneself, whereas drunk-driving causes significant risk to others.

I had to swerve violently (in a car) recently to avoid a very drunk cyclist. Had I been closer to him when he wobbled into my path he might have gone under my wheels. At the very least that would have ruined my day (not to mention his day). If I had swerved into an oncoming vehicle my day would have been an awful lot worse. And it would probably have ruined the day for the occupant(s) of the oncoming vehicle.

So I don't buy the "only endangering oneself" argument and am in favour of some form of enforcement even if only a small fine.

Having said that, I have been known (many years ago) to cycle after a great many drinks and laboured under that "only endangering oneself" misapprehension myself so I understand how people can think it's ok to drink and cycle but not to drink and drive.

monument · 24-06-2010 6:17pm

The differences between cycling and driving with a few drinks:

Reality: The use of cars after drinking has killed 1,000s and 1,000 of people, the use of bicycles after drinking or not has killed so few people it's not notable.
Speed:Cars are still unrestricted, most still able to travel above the speed limits, say above 60km/h in towns and 100km/h+ on more open roads vs cyclists mostly likely being slower then 15km/h
Weigh: Cars weighing around 900kg to 3,000kg vs bicycles weighing from around 8kg to 16kg (both excluding driver/cyclist, passengers, cargo etc)
Size: Cars are generally fairly large things, most can fit five people or more in them plus boot and engine space, cars take up a lane on the road vs bicycles hardly taking up more space than a person, mostly designed for and mostly carriers one person and little else. This makes cyclists more easy to avoid and for cyclist to more easily avoid people, cars and objects

It's important to note that the difference between mass and speed is what kills or makes accidents with pedestrians, motorcyclists and cyclists worse.

My point isn't about rights or wrongs, but if you don't see the difference between drink driving and drink cycling you need to think long and hard about how blinkered you are.

Moflojo · 24-06-2010 6:37pm

monument wrote: »

The differences between cycling and driving with a few drinks:

(snip)

My point isn't about rights or wrongs, but if you don't see the difference between drink driving and drink cycling you need to think long and hard about how blinkered you are.

You haven't made any point about the difference between driving and cycling after a few drinks, you've simply pointed out the difference between cycling and driving, so well done on that. :rolleyes:

The issue here is responsibility, including responsibility to oneself; something that the state is obliged to enforce.

I would back the introduction of a reasonable fine for drunk-cycling, making it similar to a minor public order offence, that can be enforced on the spot without costing too much in administrative duties.

snollup · 24-06-2010 6:48pm

Moflojo wrote: »

You haven't made any point about the difference between driving and cycling after a few drinks, you've simply pointed out the difference between cycling and driving, so well done on that. :rolleyes:

The issue here is responsibility, including responsibility to oneself; something that the state is obliged to enforce.

I would back the introduction of a reasonable fine for drunk-cycling, making it similar to a minor public order offence, that can be enforced on the spot without costing too much in administrative duties.

I think what he is getting at is that you are really only going to kill yourself if on a bike whereas in a car you can kill somebody else.

Moflojo · 24-06-2010 6:52pm

snollup wrote: »

I think what he is getting at is that you are really only going to kill yourself if on a bike whereas in a car you can kill somebody else.

I understand that, and I addressed it:

"The issue here is responsibility, including responsibility to oneself"

monument · 24-06-2010 6:55pm

Moflojo wrote: »

You haven't made any point about the difference between driving and cycling after a few drinks, you've simply pointed out the difference between cycling and driving, so well done on that. :rolleyes:

First, the differences between cycling and driving and the differences of those acts after a few drinks are not mutialy exclusive.

Sure, the dangers of cycling after a few may be increased, but driving vehicles which already have a high potential for danger increases the potential danger to very high levels.

Furthermore, some of my points were only referring to the differences between driving and cycling after a few. For example, where I talked about the use of cars while drunk I was only referring to the deaths caused by people who driven after drinking, and, on speed, drink is likely to slow cyclists (or at least hinder them achieving then normal average and top speeds) while it is unlikely to do the same for motorists.

And the issue here is responsibility to oneself, and others -- an important distinction here given how many passengers, drivers and passengers of other cars, pedestrians, cyclists and motorcyclists who have been killed or seriously injured by drunk drivers.

24-06-2010 7:01pm

I don't predict any Garda ever confiscating a bike. Imagine the hassle?!

In order to make it look like they're even gonna bother, they'd need to slap a few bike racks onto some of the Garda cars.

Moflojo · 24-06-2010 7:04pm

@monument:

So we're in agreement then:

Drunk-driving is bad mmmkay.

People have a responsibility towards themselves, ergo drunk-cycling is bad mmmkay.

monument · 24-06-2010 7:05pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't predict any Garda ever confiscating a bike. Imagine the hassle?!

In order to make it look like they're even gonna bother, they'd need to slap a few bike racks onto some of the Garda cars.

It's not that much hassle at all. People here have reported that friends' bicycles have been taken temporally by the Gardai while the cyclist was taken to cells for the night. It's rightly only likely when the person is not in control of the bicycle.

Moflojo wrote: »

@monument: So we're in agreement then:

Drunk-driving is bad mmmkay.

People have a responsibility towards themselves, ergo drunk-cycling is bad mmmkay.

Only if what you mean is something comparable to:

Manslaughter is bad mmmkay.

Accidentally killing a spider is bad mmmkay.

Cycling with a few drinks is more comparable to walking after the same, it's not at all comparable to driving after a few.

BTW I have avoided mentioning the phrase 'drunk cycling' for very good reason. In Irish law 'drunk' is a very broad term, very subjective too.

24-06-2010 7:17pm

monument wrote: »

It's not that much hassle at all. People here have reported that friends' bicycles have been taken temporally by the Gardai while the cyclist was taken to cells for the night. It's rightly only likely when the person is not in control of the bicycle.

I agree, it makes sense, but what do they do with the bike?

The Gardaì hardly seperate, and one drives back to the station, whilst the other cycles behind?

monument · 24-06-2010 7:20pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I agree, it makes sense, but what do they do with the bike?

The Gardaì hardly seperate, and one drives back to the station, whilst the other cycles behind?

It can be put in the boot or a car (...as people here have reported has happened), in a van, or walked / cycled to the station if it's close by.

24-06-2010 7:26pm

monument wrote: »

It can be put in the boot or a car (...as people here have reported has happened), in a van, or walked / cycled to the station if it's close by.

Van makes sense alright, but I'd have assumed Garda car boots would have stuff in them already or such.

Still seems like a fair bit of messing around though. Hopefully it's a rare event that someone's bike is taken. I'd assume it is, as I've never seen it, nor expected it'd happen til I read this thread.

limklad · 24-06-2010 7:28pm

Moflojo wrote: »

I think that's down to a belief that drunk-cycling is really only endangering oneself, whereas drunk-driving causes significant risk to others.

At least that's how I justified it to myself...:(

I kind of disagree depending on the situation.
If there is nobody using the road then all is ok , the drunken Cyclist only harms him/herself, but we are not alone on the roads.

As most of you are aware no matter what transport you use, the roads are not safe due to arrogant and ignorant people out there.

If you on a country or city road and driving around and then a drunken cyclist veered in front of you. Your first reaction is try to avoid and probably end up on a ditch/wall or into a oncoming vehicle while the drunks cycles away, clueless to who really the cause of the accident.

Also like drink drivers the drink cyclist reaction time is as poor as a drivers. It takes longer while under the infulence of drink to recover you balance, control of the bike or position back to a safe situation after drinking.

Moflojo · 24-06-2010 7:29pm

I've witnessed Gardai instruct drunken cyclists to lock their bikes to the nearest post or bike rack and send them on their way. Not much hassle involved for the Gardai.

cyclopath2001 · 24-06-2010 10:31pm

seamus wrote: »

Nothing about cycle lanes in it, though that may be retained for

Since the existing mandatory use regulations are in SIs, it would have to be another SI that would change it.

Usually whatever when the authorities give with one hand, they take back with the other, so be careful what you wish for....they might withdraw the mandatory use rule and sneak in MHL and flappy High-Vis vests rules.

loyatemu · 24-06-2010 10:36pm

Moflojo wrote: »

I would back the introduction of a reasonable fine for drunk-cycling, making it similar to a minor public order offence, that can be enforced on the spot without costing too much in administrative duties.

there already is a public order offence of being drunk and disorderly and/or a danger to oneself. Whether you are on a bike or careering down a hill in a shopping trolley is irrelevant. As others have pointed out a bike is not a car, blindly applying the same rules to cyclists as to motorists is daft (see also, numerous threads about traffic lights, one-way streets etc).

Also, ending any point with the word "mmkay?" establishes you as a patronising jerk.

Moflojo · 25-06-2010 12:07am

loyatemu wrote: »

As others have pointed out a bike is not a car, blindly applying the same rules to cyclists as to motorists is daft

Also, ending any point with the word "mmkay?" establishes you as a patronising jerk.

Yeah, either that or I'm referencing a well-known animated character.

As far as I'm aware these new laws are aimed specifically at cyclists, they are not general road-traffic laws so why does everyone keep banging on comparing cyclists to motorists, it's a non-issue here.

This is about cyclists, as cyclists, not being allowed to cycle under the influence and the consequences of doing so.

Colmhayden76 · 25-06-2010 9:56am

I was stopped by a garda in Rathfarnam for being drunk in charge of a bike about 15 years ago.
He stood on the road and watched as I walked it home. (this was after a slap about the head and a stern talking to,I was 17 at the time) this sort of common sence approach is obviously the best way to handle it.

I have no problems with this type of enforcement as obviously it didn't cost me any thing but it sobered me up quick enough and yes I walked the mile home.

rflynnr · 25-06-2010 10:17am

Colmhayden76 wrote: »

I was stopped by a garda in Rathfarnam for being drunk in charge of a bike about 15 years ago.
He stood on the road and watched as I walked it home. (this was after a slap about the head and a stern talking to,I was 17 at the time) this sort of common sence approach is obviously the best way to handle it.

I'm intrigued: are you literally saying he hit you? If so, I kind of admire your stoicism, but that still seems like assault.

rflynnr · 25-06-2010 10:27am

Incidentally, I would expect pragmatism on this based on my - entirely subjective but generally positive - experience of the boys in blue. I came out of the Dice Bar one night, not pissed but having had sufficient alcohol to fail a breath test. Attempted to unlock bike but broke the key in the lock. Rang Store St and minutes later a van with three guardai arrived, equipped with a jaws of life. Reassuringly the lock proved impervious to this so they went off and got an even bigger set of cutting equipment which, after 20 minutes of effort and with four of us applying force, snapped the cable lock.

It was right outside the bar so it must have been obvious where I'd been for the previous hour but since I didn't appear to be under the influence the guardians of the peace said nothing but wished me a safe good night.

Hard not to be impressed by that sort of thing.

(Incidentally I'm aware that it wouldn't take much to twist this argument into a defence of drink-driving but I'm with Monument on this: the primary risk of cycling under the influence is to oneself, not other road users.)

limklad · 25-06-2010 12:50pm

rflynnr wrote: »

Incidentally, I would expect pragmatism on this based on my - entirely subjective but generally positive - experience of the boys in blue. I came out of the Dice Bar one night, not pissed but having had sufficient alcohol to fail a breath test. Attempted to unlock bike but broke the key in the lock. Rang Store St and minutes later a van with three guardai arrived, equipped with a jaws of life. Reassuringly the lock proved impervious to this so they went off and got an even bigger set of cutting equipment which, after 20 minutes of effort and with four of us applying force, snapped the cable lock.

It was right outside the bar so it must have been obvious where I'd been for the previous hour but since I didn't appear to be under the influence the guardians of the peace said nothing but wished me a safe good night.

Hard not to be impressed by that sort of thing.

(Incidentally I'm aware that it wouldn't take much to twist this argument into a defence of drink-driving but I'm with Monument on this: the primary risk of cycling under the influence is to oneself, not other road users.)

The gardai like most of the community are all right, they do not want trouble as you from them. But I have come across some pricks all-right (both male and female) over the years. I have no trouble in giving those pricks a hard time when they wrongly gives me a hard time and two of them I went straight to the Sargent or higher, the rest I responded in kind at their tone.

One prick female who was on duty at the station shop. I needed a garda stamp and signature for a document to claim I am who I am. I went to the Garda station in NCW and she claimed to me that she did not know who I am even though I gave her my Driver Licence and Passport for verification. The other Guards behind the counter who I knew very well were sniggering at her. When She refused to sign and stamp, I asked two questions. Do you claim that The Official Documentation I present to you is Fraudulent? and 2 Do you claim I am giving you a false name and address and if so why are you not arresting me if you have made an opinion of me giving you false misleading information about my identity and possible Fraudulent documents and after a brief pause, she was even angrier at me, I responded with my final question: Do I have to commit an offence for you to arrest me in order for you to verify that you will get to know me. She closed the shutters in a huff.

Her boss (The Sargent) walks in the door when it happened, I said hello Pat he responded and we started chatting small talk and then she open the shutters a minute later and then I start telling him the encounter with her. All he did was shook his head at her in embarrassment and order her for the Garda stamp and the book to sign it in and signed and stamped my documents. She knew me from that day on as she avoided me ever since.

Usually when I have unknowingly break the law due to something that I have done then I would like to be inform so I can rectify the situation. As a Kid/early teens one elderly Gardai who was more interested in keeping us on the right side of the law than wanting to arrest or fine us. He inform us especially anything silly (that others guards won't let you off or give us a hard time) and then he lets us know and always responded with respectable tone with "safe journey home lads" as we cycled off.

Two way respect and especially small talk goes along way in avoid unnecessary trouble.

n-dawg · 25-06-2010 2:56pm

Moflojo wrote: »

I've witnessed Gardai instruct drunken cyclists to lock their bikes to the nearest post or bike rack and send them on their way. Not much hassle involved for the Gardai.

That happened me before a few years ago... Gaurd was 100% right, I shouldn't have cycled! Just didn't fancy forking out €30 for a taxi on my own.

Road Traffic Act 2010 - Impact on cyclists

Comments