Letter in Sunday Tribune

Dandelion6

Cycling should be
curtailed to cycle lanes

From T Mullins

The subject of cycling, as a means of improving the environment, has been mentioned recently in the Sunday Tribune. The reality is, however, that bikes and mechanical transport do not mix very well. A common sight, for example, on the Coast Road near my home is a line of cars trapped behind a lone cyclist. Because of the narrow and winding nature of the road, the cars cannot overtake the cyclist. I know that cars are getting a bad press these times but motorists do pay road tax and should be allowed to progress without this kind of obstruction.

The people of this country said goodbye to their bikes 40 years ago. Cycling should only be allowed on cycle paths and should not be at the expense of the motorist.

T Mullins,
Portmarnock, Co Dublin.

Podge_irl

Dandelion6 wrote: »

I know that cars are getting a bad press these times but motorists do pay road tax and should be allowed to progress without this kind of obstruction.

Motorists pay motor tax, not road tax. I really do find it hilarious how this seems to be a lot of motorists go-to argument.

Also, there have been plenty of times when I've been stuck behind a line of cars on a narrow road. I should be allowed progress without that kind of obstruction.

kenmc

Wonder how he proposes we get between the cycle tracks?

Hungrycol

His attitude demeans motorists more than it does cyclists.

brayblue24

kenmc wrote: »

Wonder how he proposes we get between the cycle tracks?

Drive, presumably!!

kenmc

that's what I was thinking, but sure then we'd all need around 8 or 10 cars just to cycle to work!

brayblue24

Yeah but then we would be paying more road tax than he is so by his logic that would give us more rights on the road than him and his ilk-I would use my extra rights to cycle!!

oobydooby

I suppose it's that lovely stretch between Baldoyle and Portmarnock he's on about. One of my favouite spins and a really hidden gem of Dublin IMO (scenery-wise). That road would make a great cycle track if they kept the motor vehicles off it.

Malari

brayblue24 wrote: »

Drive, presumably!!

No, don't you know that anyone on a bike doesn't own a car? That's why the "road" tax argument works so well :pac:

scottreynolds

oobydooby wrote: »

I suppose it's that lovely stretch between Baldoyle and Portmarnock he's on about. One of my favouite spins and a really hidden gem of Dublin IMO (scenery-wise). That road would make a great cycle track if they kept the motor vehicles off it.

The scary thing is -- he's on the road probably every day when I am cycling
that route.

RobFowl

For a start there is no such thing as road tax! there is motor tax though. It generates fund to part fund road building and upkeep although most of it comes out of general taxation.
If his argument holds water them other vehicles which are exempt form motor tax should stay off the road as well. These include ambulances and fire engines,:eek:

Chips Lovell

First of all, Mr Mullins is full of crap. I cycle that road regularly and there is ample opportunity to overtake cyclists, so much so that I've never seen anything like a line of cars build up behind a bike.

Of course there is a breed of motorists who, because they may have to slow down for a second or two before passing, feel they have some sort of right to start hitting the horn and gesturing frantically. Aside from the ignorance of road traffic legislation this displays, it is something I've always found faintly amusing. If it weren't for all the honking and hand waving they would have been long past me and halfway to Malahide.

Podge_irl wrote: »

Also, there have been plenty of times when I've been stuck behind a line of cars on a narrow road. I should be allowed progress without that kind of obstruction.

This is an excellent point. I think we should all write to the Tribune this week and and complain about our favourite stretches of road being obstructed by cars. I know I'd move much quicker through the city if I wasn't caught behind a whole load of slow moving cars and buses on O'Connell St and D'Olier St every morning. We pay our taxes too after all and should be allowed to progress without this kind of obstruction.

Anyhow, I don't think we should get our knickers in a twist too much over Mr Mullins. Local and national government is committed to promoting more cycling, despite the cack handed manner in which they often do so. It would be very hard to see them reverse that policy. Mr Mullins will just have to get used to more of us on the road, just as we have gotten used to his type long ago.

311

This type of thing is good in a way ,it really shows the mentality of some people and how backward their views are.

Personally the slower I have to drive around that area ,the more i can appreciate the view. Fair play to anyone on a bike.

oobydooby

el tonto wrote: »

First of all, Mr Mullins is full of crap. I cycle that road regularly and there is ample opportunity to overtake cyclists, so much so that I've never seen anything like a line of cars build up behind a bike.

What frequently happens is that a nervous driver is behind the cyclist and will not overtake. This causes the tailbacks that are not unknown on this stretch.
I agree heartily with your first sentence though.

rubadub

Dandelion6 wrote: »

The people of this country said goodbye to their bikes 40 years ago.

Wonder what event he was referring to that happened 40 years ago?

Maybe we should ban those damn non-road-tax paying pedestrians who cause all the traffic delays with their fancy pedestrian crossings too. Sure we said goodbye to shoes 50 years ago.

311 wrote: »

This type of thing is good in a way ,it really shows the mentality of some people and how backward their views are.

Yes, it is so bad that they possibly did publish it just to show him up, or to generate a response.

Chips Lovell

oobydooby wrote: »

What frequently happens is that a nervous driver is behind the cyclist and will not overtake. This causes the tailbacks that are not unknown on this stretch.

While I've never witnessed it on that stretch of road, yes I could see that happen. However, the fault is then with the motorist. I've seen plenty of nervous motorists unwilling to overtake a slow moving car, but you don't see people writing to the papers about that.

stabu

Sure weren't the ST were just looking for some nice copy to insert which might provoke debate in their dwindling letters pages.

I think it's time they got my anti-4x4 rant. I'm going to have to cut it down from its current 5000 words to 50 words though.

scottreynolds

el tonto wrote: »

While I've never witnessed it on that stretch of road, yes I could see that happen. However, the fault is then with the motorist. I've seen plenty of nervous motorists unwilling to overtake a slow moving car, but you don't see people writing to the papers about that.

Its only half true.... Sometimes cyclists are weaving not across the road but just far enough out of the road to mean that the motorist would have to wait for a clear stretch to pass.

I am exceedingly happy that some motorists cause tailbacks cause it actually means that someone on the roads respects our right to be there rather than just trying to brush past us at any attempt. Also, thaks to the nice lady today in the KIA who let me into the traffic not once but twice.

'68 Fastback

rubadub wrote: »

Wonder what event he was referring to that happened 40 years ago?

You mean you've forgotten the great bicycle exodus of '68?:D

Lumen

stabu wrote: »

I think it's time they got my anti-4x4 rant. I'm going to have to cut it down from its current 5000 words to 50 words though.

I'd be interested to read it in either form.

I can't think of more than about three words to say about this.

tricky D

I know that road very well and I've never seen a significant tailback due to a cyclist. I have got stuck behind bikes on it on rare occassions, but never for more than a minute and I can wait that long no problem as I'm 50/50 to get caught at the Sutton level crossing or the weekend road to Howth traffic jams.

Actually the last tailback (4/5 cars) I saw on that road was a few months ago, caused by a motorist recovering a stray hubcap - I was the motorist.

So I've seen just about no tailbacks, but plenty of impatient drivers who hate the notion of having not even a minute of patience.



He could be referring to the Oil Crisis 35 years ago in 73 where more expensive petrol forced more cars onto the roads..... ehhhh, no wait, I've got that wrong, I think, I'll have to get back on that one....:pac:

Raam

When I read this I took "coast road" to mean the stretch from Portmarnock to Malahide. That road is much more twisty than the Portmarnock to Baldoyle road. Either way, the author of the letter is still talking a load of codswallop.

oobydooby

I'd say bitter Mr/Ms Mullins is bitter about not living in Malahide too, so maybe that's the one he/she meant. There's a stupid section of "cycle-track" there too so it adds up.

cgf

I wouldn't worry too much about Mr Mullins. To quote himself http://www.tribune.ie/archive/article/2008/jan/27/letters-to-the-editor/

"an auld eejit like me"

Obviously just gets his kicks from trying to rile people - twat.

unionman

cgf wrote: »

I wouldn't worry too much about Mr Mullins. To quote himself http://www.tribune.ie/archive/article/2008/jan/27/letters-to-the-editor/

"an auld eejit like me"

Obviously just gets his kicks from trying to rile people - twat.

Thanks for the link, at least now we know what we're dealing with. That was priceless.

I wonder was the great bike exodus of '68 a result of all his 'sweating in the 40s and 50s'?

Chips Lovell

niceonetom

fukity fuk fuk

DirkVoodoo

We said goodbye to our bikes 40 years ago? Oh my god im so behind the times, time to hop in the car and start complaining about traffic and bad roads.

I never understand why so many motorists resent cyclists. As a recent poll here showed, a lot of us cycle out of choice and not necessity. By taking cars off the road we are making all their lives easier.

Tonto is right, not something to get worked up about. Especially someone who doesn't realise that bikes are mechanical by definition.

Hopefully he spends more time indoors writing angry letters and less time on the roads.

Bunnyhopper

It is indeed such a thunderingly cretinous letter that it's very hard to know where one might best begin to point out what's wrong with it.

I think the best option is to laugh in admiration at just how much ill-informed, poorly thought-out drivel this petty provocateur can squeeze into one little letter.

I think the next best option is to ignore it.

flickerx

Motorists as a species are disgusting.

Bunnyhopper

I suppose this must be me ignoring it...



@flickerx She does look a bit durrrty, but there's nothing wrong with that :eek:

'68 Fastback

By the sounds of it, he probably drives exclusively on that stretch of road. This would be due to the fact that his house/nursing home is at one end and the postoffice/sweet shop is at the other. He's obviously never seen the tailback on the M50, he'd have a stroke. Chances are, he's at the head of the tailback cause he's too chicken to overtake the bike that everyone else would pass with ease.

kenmc

Aye, if you're not even able to overtake a bicycle you really shouldn't be out on the roads.

Húrin

Muggins neglects to remember that cyclists are not allowed to use the most expensive roads that we all pay for out of income taxes - motorways.

B.roe wrote:

their virtuous use of a bicycle

Don't you love how they always leave a subtle hint that cyclists are self-righteous?