Abuse

Chips Lovell

unionman wrote: »

@cOrk3r - cycling issues aside, I'm glad to hear someone gets attention from the girls while they are out cycling. Being an oulfella myself the only attention I get is from the odd abusive motorist...*sniff*

I got wolf whistled at by a bunch of guys in a car going down Georges St the other week.

unionman

TinyExplosions wrote: »

I dunno, you were looking fine at the traffic lights the other day...

That's the nicest thing that anyone has ever said to me.;)

rflynnr

hussey wrote: »

So you offer to fight him or "get physical" .. and you want to take him to the guards for shouting at you ... :rolleyes:

Just to clarify: the offer was to discuss whatever his difficulty was. I did nothing that could have remotely been construed as spoiling for a fight. My point was that by offering to stop for discussion I was presenting myself as a target to a driver who had already clearly demonstrated aggressive behaviour. Believe me when I say that I have never and would never resort to violence - or even the threat of violence - as a means of dealing with this kind of situation. To do so would be to descend to the driver's level.

TinyExplosions

el tonto wrote: »

I got wolf whistled at by a bunch of guys in a car going down Georges St the other week.

It was the pinstripe suit and white SIDI's that did it I'll bet

TinyExplosions

unionman wrote: »

That's the nicest thing that anyone has ever said to me.;)

You're welcome big boy

Chips Lovell

TinyExplosions wrote: »

It was the pinstripe suit and white SIDI's that did it I'll bet

No, was in my Orwell kit at the time. I asked them if they liked what they saw. Cue speeding off with sheepish looks.

unionman

el tonto wrote: »

No, was in my Orwell kit at the time. I asked them if they liked what they saw. Cue speeding off with sheepish looks.

I like it!

I told a beeping, tailing motorist once that if he wanted to rear-end me it was dinner and a movie minimum.*

So son't go thinking flattery will get you any further Tiny, I do have standards you know!!**

*See that? I managed to stay on topic

**And by 'standards' I mean I'm really a bit of a slut

rflynnr

unionman wrote: »

I like it!

See that? I managed to stay on topic

Elegantly done sir.

Chips Lovell

unionman wrote: »

I told a beeping, tailing motorist once that if he wanted to rear-end me it was dinner and a movie minimum.

I'll have to add that to my list of sexually charged ripostes.

TinyExplosions

el tonto wrote: »

I'll have to add that to my list of sexually charged ripostes.

I'll have to try it one night in Coppers

TinyExplosions

unionman wrote: »

I like it!

I told a beeping, tailing motorist once that if he wanted to rear-end me it was dinner and a movie minimum.*

So son't go thinking flattery will get you any further Tiny, I do have standards you know!!**

*See that? I managed to stay on topic

**And by 'standards' I mean I'm really a bit of a slut

I'm good for dinner and a movie*

*McDonalds Happy Meal, and DVD ok?

unionman

rflynnr wrote: »

Elegantly done sir.

Why thank you:D

el tonto wrote: »

I'll have to add that to my list of sexually charged ripostes.

Please do!

TinyExplosions wrote: »

I'm good for dinner and a movie*

*McDonalds Happy Meal, and DVD ok?

You had me at 'Happy Meal' :D:D

SerialComplaint

Muller_1 wrote: »

When I caught up with her at the next set of lights she won't even look in my direction. I think she was a bit embarrassed once she realized.

After catching up on drivers (as inevitably happens in busy traffic), I usually try landing at their window and having a quick word. It doesn't have to be aggressive, but hopefully it might make them think twice before abusing a cyclist next time. Responses vary from hugely apologetic, to 'I'll wrap that effin bike around your effin neck'.

bealbocht

Verb wrote: »

I used go that route for a bit o hill exercise, but now I just go up the upper drumcondra road and turn onto Collins avenue. Plenty of room.

c0rk3r wrote: »

This is the only stretch of footpath i cycle on and for good reason. Its the same as cyclists not using mandatory cycle tracks instead favouring the road because its safer. This stretch of road is the reason alot of people dont chose to cycle and i cant blame them. If you sat there one morning you'll notice every cyclist on the footpath because its just common sense. In every survey ive read ive notice the top reason people dont cycle is because of safety.

In the mornings traffic usually spans from town to the top of Mobhi road and in extreme cases can run as far back as DCU. So if your cycling on the road theres no room for cars to overtake you. They have to sit on your arse going 18-25km/h up the hill revving and beeping as you climb. Once you reach the top the window comes down and the verbal abuse starts. I cycle to college because i enjoy it. If i have to deal with this hassle, abuse and frustration every morning one of two things is going to happen. Im either going to stop cycling to college and take the bus or ill just use the footpath. Its a horrible way to start the morning and will leave you pissed of the whole day.

Alternatively you can turn down by botanic gardens -> bon secours -> turn right at the met office. Not as direct and a pain in the ass plus those secondary school girls shouting "will ya met her" has but me of that route altogether.

I once advised someone asking about cycling , that they should "that they should be confident enough to hold the center of the lane, to prevent a car from passing if in a situation where it was unsafe for them to pass" , I went on to advise that,in addition to this, they should learn how to turn around in the saddle , look a driver in the eye, and give him the finger, without falling off.
But having said that.. , there are a good few spots around town where there are alternative routes, down laneways and backstreets,that are much safer than the main road.

Possibly worth another thread, (although granted, any possible route is specific to each journey)

My favourite at the moment is avoiding Jervis St/O'Connell st, and getting to Parnell St from the quays by going up a laneway , (Arran St) before Caple St, up to Little Britan St/Parnell St. Virtually no traffic at all.. (although I suspect if you did this at 7am.. there would be forklift trucks wizzing about all over the place. )

rflynnr

c0rk3r wrote: »

Alternatively you can turn down by botanic gardens -> bon secours -> turn right at the met office. Not as direct and a pain in the ass plus those secondary school girls shouting "will ya met her" has but me of that route altogether.

I suspect we're going to the same august institution.

I normally take the route suggest there but only because I usually have the kids on the bike and I'm looking for a quieter route: Mobhi Road is much faster and at the around the point where it meets Ballymun Road has a favourable traffic light sequence.

I never get wolf whistles though. It must be the kids. Yeah, must be...

Vélo

To Tiny and Unionman,


GET A ROOM!!

TinyExplosions

Aquinas73 wrote: »

To Tiny and Unionman,


GET A ROOM!!

If only we could.....

Vélo

I'm picturing your kids

blorg

bealbocht wrote: »

I once advised someone asking about cycling , that they should "that they should be confident enough to hold the center of the lane, to prevent a car from passing if in a situation where it was unsafe for them to pass" , I went on to advise that,in addition to this, they should learn how to turn around in the saddle , look a driver in the eye, and give him the finger, without falling off.

First part is very true, second part less so- try to be the better person. Taking the centre of the lane because it is unsafe for a driver to pass is also quite different from doing it simply to piss a driver off.

I always wave if someone hoots at me; (1) it _could_ be someone I know greeting me, (2) if not a friendly wave pisses them off a hell of a lot more than the finger anyway.

TinyExplosions

blorg wrote: »

I always wave if someone hoots at me; (1) it _could_ be someone I know greeting me, (2) if not a friendly wave pisses them off a hell of a lot more than the finger anyway.

I agree, a big cheery smile and a wave does far more to irritate than the finger

unionman

TinyExplosions wrote: »

If only we could.....

Thank goodness we have the forum:D

Aquinas73 wrote: »

I'm picturing your kids

This picture of me was taken at last year's office Christmas party! How on earth did you get a hold of it?

@Verb (as I am desperate to remain on topic), that turning around and eyeballing the driver thing is very difficult on a fixie. And, everything that blorg said too. I am trying to unlearn the habit of flipping the finger, as it only ever makes a situation bad and a bad situation worse, but it is like some flippin' reflex I can't control sometimes!!

stabu

I almost feel bad trying to return to the original topic here :-), but is it actually officially illegal to use the road when there is a cycle path?

I ask 'cos I know that it is definitely illegal to break a red light, and I'd venture it is easier to see a cyclist breaking a red than not using the cycle path.

blorg

stabu wrote: »

I almost feel bad trying to return to the original topic here :-), but is it actually officially illegal to use the road when there is a cycle path?

Yes, it is illegal.

S.I. No. 274/1998: ROAD TRAFFIC (TRAFFIC AND PARKING) (AMENDMENT) REGULATIONS, 1998 wrote:

"14. (1) A cycle track shall be indicated by traffic sign number RUS 009 or RUS 009A provided in association with traffic sign number RRM 022 (continuous white line) or RRM023 (broken white line) which latter signs may be marked on the right-hand edge of the cycle track or on the right-hand and left-hand edges of the cycle track.
(2) The periods of operation of a cycle track may be indicated on an information plate which may be provided in association with traffic sign number RUS 009 or RUS 009A.
(3) (a) Subject to paragraph (b), a pedal cycle must be driven on a cycle track where one is provided.
(b) Paragraph (a) shall not apply in the case of a cycle track on the right-hand edge of which traffic sign number RRM 023 has been provided,
(i) where a person driving a pedal cycle intends to change direction and has indicated that intention, or
(ii) where a bus is stopped in the cycle track at a point where traffic sign RUS 031 (bus stop) is provided, or
(iii) where a vehicle is parked in the cycle track for the purpose of loading or unloading.
(4) Where a cycle track is two-way, pedal cycles shall be driven as near as possible to the left-hand side of each lane.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1998/en/si/0274.html

Doesn't make the law right but it is illegal. There may be technicalities as many cycle tracks are not properly demarcated.

Lumen

blorg wrote: »

S.I. No. 274/1998: ROAD TRAFFIC (TRAFFIC AND PARKING) (AMENDMENT) REGULATIONS

In other words, mandatory (solid line) cycle lanes are mandatory and non-mandatory (dotted line) ones are not.

Chips Lovell

You don't have to cycle on tracks that are demarcated by a dashed white line.

blorg wrote: »

There may be technicalities as many cycle tracks are not properly demarcated.

Yes, there is a loophole in that a lot of the off-road cycle tracks, i.e. the ones one footpaths aren't actually signed with RUS009 or RUS009a. Technically they are then footpaths.

kenmc

Yeah there's quite a few around ballyboden/rathfarnham that have a nice big sign saying "Cycleway" on it, whatever that is :rolleyes:

blorg

Lumen wrote: »

In other words, mandatory (solid line) cycle lanes are mandatory and non-mandatory (dotted line) ones are not.

No, you must also cycle on a RRM023 (broken white line) track with the sole exceptions:

(i) where a person driving a pedal cycle intends to change direction and has indicated that intention, or
(ii) where a bus is stopped in the cycle track at a point where traffic sign RUS 031 (bus stop) is provided, or
(iii) where a vehicle is parked in the cycle track for the purpose of loading or unloading.

With a solid white line track you are not even allowed these exceptions, you are not allowed leave the lane to turn right, go around a bus, parked car, etc.

The main difference between solid white line and broken white line is not from a cyclist's point of view but a drivers; a driver can drive in a broken white line lane but not a solid white line lane; they can also park in them for up to 30 minutes.

Lumen

Thanks for the clarification (and comprehension lesson!) blorg.

Guess that means I break the law a lot then. I have heard that cyclists can have points put on their car licences (no idea whether that's true) but since I have a UK licence that would make me immune, currently.

blorg

Lumen wrote: »

Guess that means I break the law a lot then. I have heard that cyclists can have points put on their car licences (no idea whether that's true) but since I have a UK licence that would make me immune, currently.

Points on licenses is in place in some European countries but not here in Ireland. I break the law too and don't cycle on cycle tracks I consider unsafe, no plans to change that.

kenmc

kenmc wrote: »

Yeah there's quite a few around ballyboden/rathfarnham that have a nice big sign saying "Cycleway" on it, whatever that is :rolleyes:

Traffic Signs Manual wrote:

"A cycleway is part of a public road reserved for the exclusive use of pedal cyclists or both pedal cyclists and pedestrians."

Not that that really helps.