doozerie Registered User
#16

The vindictiveness demonstrated by some posts in this thread is alarming. Some people can obviously think coherently enough to manage to type a few words yet seem unwilling or unable to think about the implications of what they are writing.

Take another scenario - if you were on a moving escalator and the person in front of your stepped off and stopped right there blocking everyone behind them (yeah, you people know who you are...) would you cheer for their right to punch you in the snot if you were to ask them to move? 'Cos those arguing that the bus driver was justified are basically saying that any degree of violent response is justified if someone has the audacity to annoy you. Thankfully you are completely at odds with most of the rest of the world and you might want to take a look at the people sharing that world view with you 'cos they're likely not the most pleasant of company to be keeping.

7 people have thanked this post
coolbeans Registered User
#17

Alarming alright. The logical fallacy seems to be along the following lines; Some cyclists run red lights therefore I hate all cyclists and reserve the right to run them all down and the bus driver was right to assault the cyclist.
One cyclist hit me on the footpath and therefore they all deserve a flogging. If an errant motorist had done the same would you demand the same flogging with an Optare Solo (whatever that is)? Nah, I didn't think so. Try thinking before you type guys. Generalisations are fun but they don't help you win any arguments.

3 people have thanked this post
rich.d.berry Registered User
#18

coolbeans said:
...Optare Solo (whatever that is)?


1 person has thanked this post
n97 mini Registered User
#19

Stark said:
Jail for what? Reckless endangerment of the bus's paintwork?


Reckless endangerment, of himself and others.

n97 mini Registered User
#20

rich.d.berry said:
cyclist of acting the maggot because he swerves slightly within his lane?

Slighty? He swerved as hard as he could in an attempt to get his bike back in front of the bus after he was overtaken.

#21

whereas the bus driver deserves jail for violently losing his temper, somehow, i can't have any sympathy for the cyclists broken leg. I daresay he'lldo well on the compo though

2 people have thanked this post
rich.d.berry Registered User
#22

n97 mini said:
Slighty? He swerved as hard as he could in an attempt to get his bike back in front of the bus after he was overtaken.


I don't know what you were watching. The cyclist in the video I watched moved maybe 2 foot to his right but still stayed within his lane. And at what point was he overtaken? The proper way to overtake is to only return to the lane when well clear of the vehicle being passed (yes, in Irish law a bicycle is classed as a vehicle). I don't think the bus completed the overtake properly.

I believe that Specsavers are offering a special at the moment, perhaps you should avail of it.

2 people have thanked this post
n97 mini Registered User
#23

rich.d.berry said:
I don't know what you were watching. The cyclist in the video I watched moved maybe 2 foot to his right but still stayed within his lane. And at what point was he overtaken? The proper way to overtake is to only return to the lane when well clear of the vehicle being passed (yes, in Irish law a bicycle is classed as a vehicle). I don't think the bus completed the overtake properly.

I believe that Specsavers are offering a special at the moment, perhaps you should avail of it.

The cyclist swerved towards the bus, simple as. Go on, tell us, what was the good intention he had?

monument Moderator
#24

Stark said:
Jail for what? Reckless endangerment of the bus's paintwork?


Reckless endangerment, of himself and others.


Where do you see the cyclist recklessly endangering anybody?

rich.d.berry said:
cyclist of acting the maggot because he swerves slightly within his lane?

Slighty? He swerved as hard as he could in an attempt to get his bike back in front of the bus after he was overtaken.


At no point in the video does the bus overtake the cyclist, unless you're counting when the driver knocks him off the road.

rich.d.berry said:
I don't know what you were watching. The cyclist in the video I watched moved maybe 2 foot to his right but still stayed within his lane. And at what point was he overtaken? The proper way to overtake is to only return to the lane when well clear of the vehicle being passed (yes, in Irish law a bicycle is classed as a vehicle). I don't think the bus completed the overtake properly.

I believe that Specsavers are offering a special at the moment, perhaps you should avail of it.

The cyclist swerved towards the bus, simple as. Go on, tell us, what was the good intention he had?


The cyclist swerved towards the bus?!

You are the one who would defend anything.

Sour Lemonz Registered User
#25

Personally i think it is about high time that cyclists be made take out insurance for being on the roads and have a cyclist license. I drive, cycle yet i dont act like a prick when doin any of those.

But there are those that drive who shouldnt be on roads, there are cyclists who equally should not be on the roads because they are flippant to other road users, dont use proper hand signals for turning, running lights, riding on footpaths and the list goes on.

My vote is for cyclists to be held accountable for their actions like motorists are, have to take insurance and have a license. If they break the rules, cause accident on road or by knocking down a pedestrian they should suffer similar consequences to motorist.

5 people have thanked this post
n97 mini Registered User
#26

Well I suppose both sides got justice, but one side got it a bit rougher than the other.

n97 mini Registered User
#27

monument said:
The cyclist swerved towards the bus?!

You are the one who would defend anything.

Yes, even the people who are defending the cyclist can see that...

monument Moderator
#28

Sour Lemonz said:
Personally i think it is about high time that cyclists be made take out insurance for being on the roads and have a cyclist license. I drive, cycle yet i dont act like a prick when doin any of those.

But there are those that drive who shouldnt be on roads, there are cyclists who equally should not be on the roads because they are flippant to other road users, dont use proper hand signals for turning, running lights, riding on footpaths and the list goes on.

My vote is for cyclists to be held accountable for their actions like motorists are, have to take insurance and have a license. If they break the rules, cause accident on road or by knocking down a pedestrian they should suffer similar consequences to motorist.


WOW! Here's hoping you're taking the piss, but in case you're not...

A license and insurance really helped the bus driver act accountable?!

The motorists around Dublin are mostly all licensed, insuranced and they even have licence plates. It's all works brilliantly. You don't see motorists on a daily bases from running lights, parking partly or fully on footpaths, and blocking pedestrian crossings/bus lanes/cycle lanes/clear ways/junctions/advance stop lines etc. Oh, no. Actually, all of those things are done by motorists on a huge scale on a daily bases.


n97 mini said:
Well I suppose both sides got justice, but one side got it a bit rougher than the other.


It's a bit sick and twisted calling a bus driver using a vehicle as a weapon to ram cyclist off road "justice".

And this isn't cyclist vs motorist, there isn't sides here for me. I'd say the same thing for a cyclist using their bike a weapon against pedestrians just because the pedestrian annoyed the cyclist or dared to try to cross the road -- sick and twisted!

Would you be saying it's "justice", "rougher" or otherwise, if some somebody on a bicycle assaults a bus driver or another motorist? I would not, I don't agree with your sick and twister form of "justice".


n97 mini said:
Yes, even the people who are defending the cyclist can see that...


Again: Where do you see the cyclist recklessly endangering anybody?

2 people have thanked this post
doozerie Registered User
#29

Sour Lemonz said:
My vote is for cyclists to be held accountable for their actions like motorists are, have to take insurance and have a license. If they break the rules, cause accident on road or by knocking down a pedestrian they should suffer similar consequences to motorist.


Cyclists can already be held accountable for their actions, the rules of the road apply to us as much as to motorists, we are all classed as vehicles under the rules. And yes the rules are applied. Whether the gardai actively enforce those rules enough is another matter entirely, you'd have to talk to the gardai themselves about that. While you are at it you can remind them that they often don't seem that pushed about enforcing the rules of the road on anyone, be they cyclists, motorists, or pedestrians.

As for insurance and a license, I have both of those as does anyone else who is a member of Cycling Ireland. You seem so keen on both requirements that I'm surprised that you are not already a member in order to avail of them - you can register here. Ask and you shall receive.

doozerie Registered User
#30

n97 mini said:
Well I suppose both sides got justice, but one side got it a bit rougher than the other.


Ah, a proponent of the homeopathic approach to common sense.

Want to share your thoughts?

Login here to discuss!