Motorbikes and the bus lane

jim_bob · 17-09-2003 6:18pm #1

just wondering been driving in and out of town lately along the n11 at rush hour. this happened to me twice in the last week was behind different bikers and when they see a garda they pull out of the bus lane and then start weiving in and out of traffic. are the garda doing motorbikes for been in the bus lane now or whats the story cause i just kept drivin in the bus lane by the garda and they did nothin

Samson · 17-09-2003 6:20pm

Motorcycles are permitted in bus lanes.

ondafly · 17-09-2003 6:21pm

motorbikes and bicycles ain't allowed in the bus lanes, unless its out of hours.

and another pet hate, bicycles ain't allowed go through red lights !

deecom · 17-09-2003 9:59pm

What i believe to be true is bicycles can anytime, motorbikes can't they must obey the same rules as cars. Which is in my opinion is more dangerous than motorbikes using them. What difference does a motorbike make to a bus? I have to say as well i pitty cyclists having to ride in the same lane as buses.

Victor · 17-09-2003 11:21pm

Originally posted by ondafly
bicycles ain't allowed go through red lights !

And car drivers aren't meant to kill hundreds of people every year, but htey still do! :P

Silent Bob · 18-09-2003 11:12am

Originally posted by Victor
And car drivers aren't meant to kill hundreds of people every year, but htey still do! :P

I'm gonna ignore the smiley and offer a serious reply:)

1) Car drivers on the whole do not intentionally kill people.

2) You have to intentionally ignore a red light on a bicycyle.

So we have two different situations, and the comparison is null and void. <shakes fist in air>Yes!!

How about if we don't condemn cyclists for breaking red lights then we shouldn't condemn other road users for it either?

Back on topic: Motorcycles aren't allowed in bus lanes, despite lobbying from MAG and even the police. The relevant city councillor refuses to even meet with people over this issue.
The cynic in me can't help but wonder if this is because he is a cyclist not a motorist.

Imagine what it would do for the traffic if you could get more people on to powered two wheelers! Letting them use bus lanes might be the kind of "carrot" that would do this (and perhaps letting you offset your insurance against tax)

ondafly · 18-09-2003 11:22am

AFAIK - cyclists, are only permitted in bus lanes, where the sign dictates, for instance on the quays, on the bus lane sign, there is a bicyle below the bus, i.e. cyclists are permitted. In other cases where only a bus is in the sign, no cyclists are allowed.

Motorbikes ain't allowed at all, same as cars.

as for the other comment - Bob deflected that perfectly

Victor · 18-09-2003 12:19pm

As regards motorcyclists, there is a general no prosecution policy for driving in bus lanes. That said if the cop tells you get out of the bus lane then get out.

The number of taxis using bus lanes may mena restrictions on them as they are preventing busses gettign through sensor activated traffic lights.

Originally posted by Silent Bob
1) Car drivers on the whole do not intentionally kill people.

Neither do sharks (they mistake people for seals), but do you think sharks get away with it? 400+ people killed on the roads and there are less than 30 prosecutions for dangerous driving causing death per year.

Drivers as a whole contribute through negligence to these deaths. It is only the big stick of having your driving licence (and your penis extension) taken away that is improving the figures. Otherwise, kindly explain these figures.

Comparative death tolls
Sept 2001 42
Sept 2002 36
Sept 2003 9*

* Expected total for month. Total at 9.00 a.m, September 18th, 2003 - 5.

Originally posted by ondafly
AFAIK - cyclists, are only permitted in bus lanes, where the sign dictates, for instance on the quays, on the bus lane sign, there is a bicyle below the bus, i.e. cyclists are permitted. In other cases where only a bus is in the sign, no cyclists are allowed.

Are you confusing this with taxis not being allowed use contra flow bus lanes?

Silent Bob · 18-09-2003 4:59pm

Originally posted by Victor
400+ people killed on the roads and there are less than 30 prosecutions for dangerous driving causing death per year.

And running a red light would be...? Cyclists can "drive dangerously" too you know.

And as for comparative death tolls there is always May 2003 to have a look at... (or is this explained away as a statistical anomaly and hence can be ignored? Awkward things, statistics)

Anyway.

Am I correct in thinking that taxis are only allowed in bus lanes when they have a fare?

ondafly · 18-09-2003 6:19pm

Are you confusing this with taxis not being allowed use contra flow bus lanes? [/B]

nope, big blue sign telling you of a buslane, has in some cases, a picture of a bike also, i.e. a combined lane for both buses and bicycles. A contra flow bus lane, is a bus lane that runs in the opposite direction to the traffic, i.e. Leeson St.

loyatemu · 19-09-2003 1:37pm

i think bicycles can use bus lanes unless there is a seperate cycle lane. (bikes have to use the cycle lane if there is one provided - regardless of how crappily designed it is)

After all bicycles are supposed to keep to the left edge of the road. If they weren't allowed in the bus lanes they would have to ride between the buses and the rest of the traffic which would be suicidal.

wrt breaking lights - I have no problem with bicycles breaking red lights. It is similar to jaywalking which everyone does. Dublin is designed for cars - if you are a pedestrian or a cyclist and you obey all the lights it takes forever to get anywhere. No cyclist is going to deliberately cycle into oncoming traffic.

Victor · 19-09-2003 2:42pm

Originally posted by loyatemu
No cyclist is going to deliberately cycle into oncoming traffic.

And it allows you a breather as well. I think the biggest problem with cyclist running red lights is the begrudgery from motorists.

superfly · 19-09-2003 2:52pm

the problem i have with cyclists running red lights is when the ****ers nearly ****ing run you over crossing at a pedestrian crossing

Silent Bob · 19-09-2003 2:55pm

Originally posted by loyatemu
wrt breaking lights - I have no problem with bicycles breaking red lights. It is similar to jaywalking which everyone does. Dublin is designed for cars - if you are a pedestrian or a cyclist and you obey all the lights it takes forever to get anywhere. No cyclist is going to deliberately cycle into oncoming traffic.

As a cyclist I can honestly say that on the route into work that I took for the summer it took me 25 minutes to get from Ballinteer to Trinity College (a distance of about 7 miles) without breaking any lights, it doesn't take "forever" to get places if you stop at lights.

The way I see it, if you use the roads then you should obey the rules of the road no matter what you drive (and this includes rediculous speed limits)

And a friend of mine saw a bicycle courier cycle into a bus...

K2 · 19-09-2003 3:04pm

Is the bus okay?

Silent Bob · 19-09-2003 3:17pm

Well it wasn't so much that he cycled into the bus

Apparently it happened a bit like this: Courier is on pavement and wants to cross road; Courier looks over shoulder and sees bus; Courier thinks he can make it and ramps off the pavement straight into the buses path; Bus hits brakes but still hits the courier squarely with the front windscreen.

Both parties survived without excessive injury

seamus · 19-09-2003 4:22pm

Yes, for some strange reason, us motorcyclists are still treated as a cancer of our roads by the government and are ignored for some common safety and commonsense legislations such as the ability to drive in bus lanes, zero tax on body armour and helmets, and an NCT for bikes.

But I drive in the bus lane all the time. Gardai turn a blind eye to it. But out of respect, I'll pull into a normal traffic lane when I see a Garda vehicle, so as not to appear so blatant.

Car drivers are just bitter.

Kazujo · 19-09-2003 5:28pm

What really bugs me is that motorcycles aren't allowed in the bus lane that travel (should travel) at a reasonable speed. Bicycles can and they travel at a slower speed which holds up the buses as the cyclists sway as they cycle and the bus cant overtake???

Bicycles can use the bus lane as they please, motorcycles use them and are sort of excepted once they dont speed down the lane or drive like idiots AFAIK.

Stephen · 20-09-2003 4:44pm

Victor

Get down off that high horse before you fall and hurt yourself.

twat.

Krusty_Clown · 21-09-2003 11:23am

Seamus: But I drive in the bus lane all the time. Gardai turn a blind eye to it. But out of respect, I'll pull into a normal traffic lane when I see a Garda vehicle, so as not to appear so blatant.

Ditto.. And I think it's true of most motorcyclists.. I always feel a little embarassed passing the Gardai in the bus-lane, while they're taking-down the details of a 4-wheel vehicle driver who moved into the slip-lane too early..

Makes me feel dirty... <shudder>

RicardoSmith · 21-09-2003 11:42am

Originally posted by ondafly
and another pet hate, bicycles ain't allowed go through red lights !

I've seen cyclists mow down a number of pedestrian doing this. Very clever. I've also seen them collide with other cyclists in the other direction, which is slightly amusing.

Another pet hate is some cyclists think they can beat the cars, motorbikes pulling off from lights. Thus just as you are pulling off looking left and right and ahead a cycylist will come up from behind you (or indeed any direction including the footpath) and pull right across your path regardless of your indicator etc. How dumb is that.

When I cycle I have to say I have more near misses with other cyclists than I do with other car. The exception being buses and hackneys and taxes which seem to obey no rules at all.

It stupid that all two wheelers are not allowed in bus lanes. It would make it a lot safer for them. Its not like theres a huge amount of cyclists is it. Most of the cycle lanes and bus lanes are empty most of the time.

Victor · 21-09-2003 3:54pm

Originally posted by Stephen
Get down off that high horse before you fall and hurt yourself.

(a) I've no horse, (b) even if I had a horse it's not high (c) i can't / don't ride horses (d) I don't cycle (e) because I don't have a bike (e) so i don't run red lights (f) but I've been hit by 20+ cars (all but one not my fault), so I have a reaosn to complain.

RicardoSmith · 21-09-2003 7:39pm

Originally posted by Victor
(a) I've no horse, (b) even if I had a horse it's not high (c) i can't / don't ride horses (d) I don't cycle (e) because I don't have a bike (e) so i don't run red lights (f) but I've been hit by 20+ cars (all but one not my fault), so I have a reaosn to complain.

'

...or a reason to give up cycling if that unlucky. Maybe you're a car magnet or something?

Stephen · 24-09-2003 3:38pm

Hit by 20+ cars? Are you blind or something? I spent years as a cyclist/pedestrian and was never involved in an accident. I now drive a motorbike. Car drivers are just as dangerous to me as they are to you, but I don't bitch and moan about them at every opportunity.

Mr. Fancypants · 24-09-2003 3:49pm

I belive the reasoning of not letting Motorbikes drive in the bus lane is that there is a good chance they will be passing other traffic on the inside which can be quite dangerous.

deecom · 24-09-2003 8:45pm

"mbroaders I belive the reasoning of not letting Motorbikes drive in the bus lane is that there is a good chance they will be passing other traffic on the inside which can be quite dangerous. "

And a bus isn't!

RicardoSmith · 24-09-2003 8:52pm

Originally posted by deecom
"mbroaders I belive the reasoning of not letting Motorbikes drive in the bus lane is that there is a good chance they will be passing other traffic on the inside which can be quite dangerous. "

And a bus isn't!

Its not like they don't do it now either.....:D

Mr. Fancypants · 24-09-2003 8:57pm

Originally posted by deecom
"mbroaders I belive the reasoning of not letting Motorbikes drive in the bus lane is that there is a good chance they will be passing other traffic on the inside which can be quite dangerous. "

And a bus isn't!

In free flowing traffic it would be quite rare to be overtaken by a bus. Also, it is certainly easier to spot a bus coming up your inside than a motorbike.

RicardoSmith · 24-09-2003 9:05pm

Originally posted by mbroaders
In free flowing traffic it would be quite rare to be overtaken by a bus. Also, it is certainly easier to spot a bus coming up your inside than a motorbike.

You haven't experienced the stealth bus then. Fills your mirrors just when you least expect it. Must of been expensive though cause they couldn't afford to get the indicators working. Its pulls out from bus stops in stealth mode too. Which is always good for a bit of excitment.

seamus · 24-09-2003 9:06pm

Originally posted by mbroaders
In free flowing traffic it would be quite rare to be overtaken by a bus. Also, it is certainly easier to spot a bus coming up your inside than a motorbike.

"I didn't see him" is no defence. A bicycle is even less visible than a motorcycle, and they use the bus lanes. As do taxis. It's quite common to be overtaken by a taxi on the inside lane in free-flowing traffic.

Fact of the matter is, when there is a lane on your left, you are obliged to check it for traffic before crossing it.

The only reason that motorbikes aren't allowed in the bus lanes is because back in the 70's, the Government had an informal policy of plowing all transport funds into cars. All other vehicles take a back seat. Motorcycles are nothing but an irritation. Busses and trucks have out of date regulations.

Silent Bob · 25-09-2003 8:34am

Originally posted by mbroaders
In free flowing traffic it would be quite rare to be overtaken by a bus. Also, it is certainly easier to spot a bus coming up your inside than a motorbike.

In free flowing traffic there is no reason for a motorbike to be in a bus lane

Mr. Fancypants · 25-09-2003 8:51am

Thats the reasoning the Director of Traffic guy gave on Newstalk 106 a couple of weeks ago anyhow.

Sleipnir · 25-09-2003 9:08am

Originally posted by Victor
(a)I've been hit by 20+ cars (all but one not my fault), so I have a reaosn to complain.

now this is plainly ridiculous. You've been hit by 20 cars and you haven't even considered the possibility that more than one was your fault?

Would a survey of cyclists show that most had been hit my more than 20 cars? I don't think so. I would imagine that i would show that 95% have never been hit by a car.

With that in mind, you're doing something wrong. You're cycling recklessly and without due care and attention (the law applies to road users, not just motorists)

I would imagine that you're one of those cyclists that flit in and out of traffic and expect drivers to be sitting in the boot watching every move you make.

You obviously have problems anticipating what other road users are doing and if you can't, you do not err on the side of caution.

Statistically, you're going to die on your bike and you won't be able to say
"It wasn't my fault"

Silent Bob · 25-09-2003 9:12am

Of course I firmly believe that in traffic which is slow moving and a bus lane is present then motorbikes should be allowed use it.

They take up less road space, wear the roads less (because they weigh a lot less than a car), use less petrol and take less time to get where they're going. In stopped traffic you can fit four powered two wheelers in the same road space as a car.

If we could get more people taking powered two wheelers to work we could significantly reduce rush hour traffic but you need incentives to get people to move to PTWs, incentives such as being allowed to use bus lanes in rush hour style traffic (and the insurance needs to be waaaay reduced, but that's another story...)

spockety · 25-09-2003 12:48pm

What does it matter if a car can't see a motorcyclist coming up along side him in a bus lane?
It's not like the car is going to have cause to pull into the bus lane anyway, now is it?

There was a court case last year where a motorcyclist was run over by a car that pulled into the buslane. The car driver's lawyer argued that the motorcycle wasn't allowed in the bus lane in the first place. The judge said he didn't care, the car driver should have been more aware, and awarded compensation to the biker!

Nice precedent

seamus · 25-09-2003 12:56pm

Originally posted by spockety
Nice precedent

Whether another driver is breaking the law or not is irrelevant. Most cases boil down to the rule of right-of-way. If a car is doing 150mph on a country back road, and an oncoming car crosses the road (to go into a driveway for example), causing a collision, the oncoming car (crossing the road) is at fault. The other driver may be prosecuted, but the fault still stands with whomever did not have right-of-way.

That said, yes it is nice to have a precedent, just in case

(And there's no need to point out that two vehicles colliding at 150mph would leave all the occupants in tiny little pieces. The point still stands)

Sleipnir · 25-09-2003 1:39pm

Originally posted by seamus
but the fault still stands with whomever did not have right-of-way.

The guy on the bike did not, under law, have right of way. I'm not saying that the driver had the right to pull out, but the biker was travelling in the bus lane illegally.
True, the driver probably didn't check his left-hand mirror but the biker shouldn't have been there anyway.

The crash would not have occured if the biker had not been doing something illegal.

Once again, you can't argue you're 'right of way' if you're dead.

What does it matter if a car can't see a motorcyclist coming up along side him in a bus lane? It's not like the car is going to have cause to pull into the bus lane anyway, now is it?

Most bus lanes do not operate 24x7. Many, including those on the quays can be used by all after hours and on Sundays. So, drivers often do have cause and the right to pull into the buslane.
The biker endangered himself and others by driving in the buslane illegally, the driver did the same by not checking his mirrors.

Motorbikes and the bus lane

Comments