Pedestrians vs cyclists vs motorists

the dee

Mods feel free to move this if you want.

Was cycling into work yesterday and was at the front of a queue of traffic. I was waiting to turn right. It was a fairly narrow road and the cars behind me couldn't get past to turn left. I put my arm out several times to indicate that I wanted to go right. The cars behind me beeped me.

Things like this seem to happen every day on the bike. I was wondering what other road users do that really annoy you.

On the bike I hate when people overtake me with an inch to spare. I hate that motorists don't realise that I can't see behind me. I don't know what way you're indicating! I hate when people pull out in front of me from side streets - bikes can have the right of way sometimes you know! I hate when pedestrians step out without looking, as if nothing using the side of the roads. I hate when cars park in the cycle lanes. I hate when buses crawl along on top of you approaching a bus stop - back off.

I hate other cyclists when they don't obey pedestrian lights or think it's ok to act like a pedestrian and use these lights as an excuse to cross a junction. It bugs me when cyclists weave in and out of traffic like the rules don't apply to them.

Ok rant over - what do you guys think? Maybe we can all learn from each other.

Gavin

Motorists do stupid things. Cyclists do stupid things and pedestrians do stupid things. The trick is being aware of this.

Gav

Stark

the dee wrote:

or think it's ok to act like a pedestrian and use these lights as an excuse to cross a junction.

Uhm, that's because it is okay to use a pedestrian crossing to get across a junction? You'll notice that some pedestrian crossings have a bicycle light to facilitate this. The ones that don't, you can still use, you're just expected to dismount the bike and walk across with it.

Tomas_V

the dee wrote: »

what do you guys think?

This is Ireland, the free-ist little country in the world.

Reyman

For cyclists the two most dangerous vehicles on the road are: Taxis and white vans. Steer clear of them .

The most considerate/courteous vehicles on the road are buses. Bus drivers are trained and professional

Stark

Cycling was so much easier when the bus lanes were closed off to taxis

daymobrew

the dee wrote: »

On the bike I hate when people overtake me with an inch to spare. I hate that motorists don't realise that I can't see behind me. I don't know what way you're indicating!

I have a mirror on my bicycle handlebars. 15 euro in CycleWays. I first bought one back in 1994. A godsend.

To list the things I dislike would send the thread down a useless direction. Suffice to say that Verb sums it up perfectly.

the boss of me

Stark wrote: »

Cycling was so much easier when the bus lanes were closed off to taxis

When was this ??

AFAIR taxis have always been allowed used bus lanes...

Stark

Hmm..., after googling I think it was '97 that they were officially allowed use them (according to the Road traffic parking and regulations act in that year). I remember cycling round around '02/'03 though and only having to worry about buses. I definitely didn't have to contend with the sheer numbers of taxis tearing and up and down them as there is now. I remember there being quite a bit of debate about the use of bus lanes by taxis as well at the time. Maybe I'm mixing things up with deregulation, which probably happened about that time and would have contributed to an explosion in the numbers of taxis using the lanes. Hackneys definitely wouldn't have been allowed use the lanes.

the boss of me

I'm pretty sure that they have always been allowed to use bus lanes. It's just that pre-deregulation there were no taxis, so they wouldn't have been seen anywhere, never mind bus lanes.

I'm a taxi driver and a leisure cyclist and believe it or not, with a little bit of courtesy and common sense there is actually eneough room in the bus lane for both of us..

stovelid

When I drive:

Motorbikes weaving in and out of traffic.

Cyclists riding double file.

Cyclists riding at night with no markings.

People standing on the road when waiting for traffic lights to change.

When I cycle:

Like the OP said - people overtaking me suddenly.

People standing on the road when waiting for traffic lights to change.

My feeling is that there are knobs in every group (motorbikes, cyclists and pedestrians) and we shouldn't always demonize drivers.

VERYinterested

the boss of me wrote: »

I'm pretty sure that they have always been allowed to use bus lanes.

No, sorry, Taxis were not allowed to use Bus lanes when they were introduced. I remember getting MY ear burnt many a time about that one. After a big row they were allowed to use them as a sweetener.

the boss of me

VERYinterested wrote: »

No, sorry, Taxis were not allowed to use Bus lanes when they were introduced. I remember getting MY ear burnt many a time about that one. After a big row they were allowed to use them as a sweetener.

Really ? I didn't know that... so when were they given access to bus lanes, I'd guess it was the early eighties ?

Reyman

stovelid wrote: »

When I drive:

Motorbikes weaving in and out of traffic.

Cyclists riding double file.

Cyclists riding at night with no markings.

Cyclists are allowed to ride in double file. This is quite legal!

Tomas_V

stovelid wrote: »

My feeling is that there are knobs in every group (motorbikes, cyclists and pedestrians) and we shouldn't always demonize drivers.

It would be wrong to place drivers, in general, on the same moral level as pedestrians and cyclists. It's true that pedestrians and cyclists break laws imposed on them to facilitate the smooth passage of motorists. Bad drivers, more so than law-breaking pedestrians or cyclists, are responsible for more death, injury and fear on the road than any other group.

LuckyStar

I hate cyclists riding 3 or 4 abreast on a narrow road. They usually have the high vis gear, bike lights, helmets, the whole lot, to be safe??? But it defeats the purpose when they insist on cycling 3 or 4 wide on narrow roads, especially bendy ones!

bk

LuckyStar wrote: »

I hate cyclists riding 3 or 4 abreast on a narrow road. They usually have the high vis gear, bike lights, helmets, the whole lot, to be safe??? But it defeats the purpose when they insist on cycling 3 or 4 wide on narrow roads, especially bendy ones!

Just to repeat what they are doing, may not be very considerate, but it is completely legal and they have just as much right to use the road as you do.

Also if the roads are bendy then you should slow down. If you hit one of those cyclists because you were going around bendy corners too fast, then you are responsible, not them.

Stark

bk wrote: »

Just to repeat what they are doing, may not be very considerate, but it is completely legal and they have just as much right to use the road as you do.

I thought the rule was maximum 2 abreast? It probably makes sense on bendy roads to spread out a bit though. Otherwise cars will try to squeeze past you then pull in suddenly when another car comes against you. Also if the cyclists are spread out, they can be seen from a good bit off, whereas if they're cycling single file close to the edge, then a car coming round the bend at speed won't see them until it's too late. They should pull in on good straight sections of road if they're doing this though.

Reyman

The law is a max of two cyclists abreast. After that you're on your own.

But don't forget a driver must take account of 'the cyclist wobble' i.e. a cyclist's natural sideways movement necessary to retain balance while moving forward.

There was a court case on this and I think a leeway of 3 feet must be given from the outer edge of the cycle being propelled forward.

---

I hope the taxi drivers who use bus lanes are reading this !!

bk

Reyman wrote: »

The law is a max of two cyclists abreast. After that you're on your own.

Fair enough, I didn't know that, must go look it up.

Tomas_V

Reyman wrote: »

The law is a max of two cyclists abreast. After that you're on your own.

47. (1) A pedal cyclist shall not drive a pedal cycle on a roadway in such a manner as to result in more than two pedal cyclists driving abreast, save when overtaking other pedal cyclists, and then only if to do so will not endanger, inconvenience or obstruct other traffic or pedestrians.

(2) Pedal cyclists on a roadway shall cycle in single file when overtaking other traffic.

Cycling two abreast is permitted at all times, and more than 2 abreast may be allowed when overtaking other cyclists, if it's safe and does not inconvenience anyone.

When overtaking other traffic, single file is required.

There is no legal requirement to get out of the way of impatient motorists.

stovelid

Reyman wrote: »

Cyclists are allowed to ride in double file. This is quite legal!

It inconveniences drivers (and other cyclists) and places the onus on drivers to try and get around them, increasing the chance of an accident.

I cycle too, but I don't think being on a bike excuses you from showing consideration to (safe) drivers.

Tomas_V wrote: »

It would be wrong to place drivers, in general, on the same moral level as pedestrians and cyclists. It's true that pedestrians and cyclists break laws imposed on them to facilitate the smooth passage of motorists. Bad drivers, more so than law-breaking pedestrians or cyclists, are responsible for more death, injury and fear on the road than any other group.

Cyclists break rules. Motorists break rules. Both are wrong.

I should be able to comment on the topic without getting into a relative discussion about the merits of cycling and driving - although this will probably be impossible.

Tomas_V

stovelid wrote: »

I cycle too, but I don't think being on a bike excuses you from showing consideration to (safe) drivers.

True. I was clarifying the legal position. The law requires everyone to show consideration to each other. So, it's nice if cyclists give over for cars, but it's also nice if car-drivers don't make cyclists move over.

straricco

Personally cyclists drive me mad! Sorry but they really do. I drive a motorbike & a car but find them the most annoying. They are so dangerous, popping out from residential roads onto main roads without even looking just sailing along! And the amount of times when crossing the road as a pedestrian, with the green man, nearly getting knocked over by one of them breaking the red light!! Why do they think they don't have to abide to traffic lights? Drives me absolutely crazy!

LuckyStar

straricco wrote: »

Personally cyclists drive me mad! Sorry but they really do. I drive a motorbike & a car but find them the most annoying. They are so dangerous, popping out from residential roads onto main roads without even looking just sailing along! And the amount of times when crossing the road as a pedestrian, with the green man, nearly getting knocked over by one of them breaking the red light!! Why do they think they don't have to abide to traffic lights? Drives me absolutely crazy!

Those are not actually regular cyclists, they are planted by the Government to improve our stunt driving and swerving skills. Especially on the windy, potholed, unlit country roads with 80kph speed limits.

Stark

The big distinguishing factor between muppet cyclists and muppet drivers in my opinion is that idiot cyclists will eventually get themselves injured/killed, whereas idiot drivers will eventually get someone else injured/killed (in city driving anyway).

Of course there's also the other side of the coin, that the driver is more likely to get blamed for an accident even if it's the cyclist's fault. I guess it all balances out: more risk of death vs more risk of getting blamed.

rubadub

straricco wrote: »

Why do they think they don't have to abide to traffic lights? Drives me absolutely crazy!

Because they are not enforced. Pedestrians are by far the worst offenders of breaking traffic laws. I love seeing hypocritical motorists casting the first stone when the majority of motorists are also pedestrians and many have probably broken the traffic laws at one time or another.

The gardai lightly enforce pedestrian law, so many break it. Same goes for cyclists. And if you do not realise why the gardai do not enforce the laws then you should turn off the TV and try and think for a minute, because your mind must be slowing down. I get worried thinking about people behind the wheel, so stupid that they cannot think why cyclists/pedestrians will break some laws, and why gardai allow them to. If you drive a vehicle with the potential of causing serious harm, and you cannot think of a reason people break traffic laws, then you should ask to sit the theory test again, there is no way such a fool could pass, and you are not fit to drive if you are really that ignorant. (that is not targeted at straricco, who was speaking of idiots endangering themselves)

I see cyclists breaking the law all the time and a lot of the time it is with good reason. I drive and lsee certain laws broken by cyclists, it is safer for me, and safer for the cyclist. I cycle too and regularly break the law, only for my own safety, and the safety and convenience of others. I regularly do this in full view of the gardai, who never question/stop me, as they realise why I do it. The law I am technically breaking was not put in place to prevent the action I take, the gardai realise this, I realise this, most motorists would be happy to see my do it, it speed up their journey. Only the bitter pedantic arsehole of a motorist/cyclist/pedestrian would get upset with my actions. There was a gardai on traffic duty for a week or so, policing bus lanes, he used to give me a nod as I broke the law right in front of him. Some people have sense.

There are still a lot of idiots out there all the same. The way some people go on you would think they were different species. They are not mutually exclusive.

A lot of drivers go mental at cyclists not using cycletracks, when in fact many of the cycletracks are not cycletracks, they are therefore technically footpaths and illegal to cycle on. So before you start beeping or driving dangerously close like a homocidal lunatic "to teach them a lesson", try and figure out first if it is actually a cycletrack or cycleway at all.

straricco

rubadub wrote: »

Only the bitter pedantic arsehole of a motorist/cyclist/pedestrian would get upset with my actions.

I must be one of these bitter pedantic arseholes in that case because it does upset me! How can you justify a cyclist breaking a red light and going through a pedestrian crossing when people are trying to cross the road? Why should we always have to check for cyclists before proceeding? Lucky for me I'm not blind so!

seamus

straricco wrote: »

I must be one of these bitter pedantic arseholes in that case because it does upset me! How can you justify a cyclist breaking a red light and going through a pedestrian crossing when people are trying to cross the road? Why should we always have to check for cyclists before proceeding? Lucky for me I'm not blind so!

That's not what he was saying. He was saying that there are times when it makes more sense (in safety terms) for a cyclist to break the law than to abide by it. Clearly cycling through a pedestrian light is not safer.

As an example, there's a section of cycle track on my commute, probably about 400m long. To cycle on this section is far more dangerous than cycling on the road, so I don't do it even though it's technically illegal to not use the track.

For those who know it, the section I'm referring to is going through Templeogue village towards town. The track crosses in front of multiple blind driveways, is covered in manholes and other slippery metal covers, and crosses both the entrance and exit to a garage, where customers absolutely do not check to see if there are cyclists using the track, and there are no markings to indicate who (if anyone ) has right-of-way.

The nature of the track means that you can be doing upwards of 20mph without breaking a sweat, so hitting a car or a pedestrian could end up in serious injury.

straricco

Thanks Seamus, to be honest I hadn't a breeze what he was talking about:

"I get worried thinking about people behind the wheel, so stupid that they cannot think why cyclists/pedestrians will break some laws, and why gardai allow them to. If you drive a vehicle with the potential of causing serious harm, and you cannot think of a reason people break traffic laws, then you should ask to sit the theory test again, there is no way such a fool could pass, and you are not fit to drive if you are really that ignorant."

He must have been specifically talking about cycling lanes, of which I have no experience, other than that I can't think of why cyclist/pedestrians break traffic rules so was thinking I must be one of these "fools" he's talking about!

Tomas_V

straricco wrote: »

I must be one of these bitter pedantic arseholes in that case because it does upset me! How can you justify a cyclist breaking a red light

At the risk of being pedantic, I find it quite annoying the way motorists refer to red-light breaking. Is this an attempt to draw attention away from their own habitual amber-light breaking? Every time I stop my bicycle on amber, I count up to 4 cars passing me without a care in the world.

As I understand it, the motorist's excuse for amber light-breaking is "The lights unexpectedly changed to amber and I was travelling to fast to stop safely.":rolleyes: