Here we go again

unionman

Following the inarticulate Mr Mullins in the Sunday Tribune, here's another 'us & them' argument against cyclists in today's Irish Times.

It may well be worth responding to.

kenmc

Might be better off calling him
The phone book lists one

Roe, B & H
12 Cullenswood Pk Dublin 6
Phone number here

Although I wouldn't waste my breath on the spa

Turbulent Bill

I actually agree with the first two paragraphs - riding on the paths and breaking pedestrian lights isn't on, whatever way you look at it. I'd have serious issue with the "most inconsiderate" group bit.

studiorat

Ranelagh?

Must be me he's talking about...

Sorry folks still a bit wobbely with the new headset an all...

Caroline_ie

Bill Roe of Renalagh wrote:

being struck by some thug riding his or her bicycle in the middle of the pavement or the inability of pedestrians to cross safely at pedestrian crossings because cyclists ride through the red lights at speed.

1/ Or could it be that the pedestrian is actually walking on the cycling lane.
2/ I agree there are badly behaved cyclists out there who break the lights, I admit it happenned to me in the past, both as a cyclist and as a pedestrian ... taught me a lesson.

Bill Roe of Renalagh wrote:

Cyclists are easily the most inconsiderate of the various groups using our public roads.

After bus, van and car drivers, Mmmm yeah.

Bill Roe of Renalagh wrote:

their virtuous use of a bicycle

... yeah, and we look cool too ... at least I do

Bill Roe of Renalagh wrote:

entitles them to ignore the rules of the road.

As I said previoulsly there are some badly behaved cyclists out there ...

I really don't feel concerned by this man's comment ...

Chips Lovell

I'd agree with most of that letter.

TinyExplosions

I like this line:

My suggestion is prompted, inter alia, by the frequent sight of an elderly person cowering in a doorway

First of all, I had to check and see what "inter alia" meant (amongst other things), but I'm mostly concerned by the poor old person mentioned, as he only mentions one that has to cower in doorways frequently... maybe he's not cowering, but lives in said doorway.... or maybe it's the door to his house, and being elderly, just has a permanent cowardly look about him (maybe paranoid because every time he goes to open his door, Mr Roe is staring at him...

Hmmm

seamus

I'd agree with most of the letter too. Except that I'd consider pedestrians to be the "most inconsiderate" of road users.

kenmc

I only agree with the second paragraph, which is 1/3 of the letter. Bikes should not be on the path. Bikes should stop at red lights. We are not the most inconsiderate of road users by a long shot.

Mr. Presentable

Apart from a bit of colour thrown in by the pomposity of the author, I agree with his letter. Particularly the "holier than thou" cyclist part - go on, prove him wrong

Caroline_ie

I think we can go on and on about this forever ... who is a bad cyclist and who is a good cyclist, it's a never ending circle ...

I think Most of the people I cycle with are considerate road users, who use good lights, helmets, signal turns, stop at lights, Don't cycle on the footpath, look out for cars, pedestrians, pets and so on.

I have come across a massive number of those cyclists B Roe describes and they do make us all look bad, but what ca you do to change that?

I just focus on being a good cyclist, for commuting, and as a sport, so I don't feel concerned by anyone's rants. I am just annoyed that we get a bad reputation ...

zzzzzzzz

Caroline_ie wrote: »

I am just annoyed that we get a bad reputation ...

In fairness, I don't think there's any group that don't cause/get annoyed about things another group do.

I mean - you just need to take a look at the above posts - cyclists have issues with bus drivers, car drivers, pedestrians. Motorists have issues with cyclists, pedestrians, bus drivers, taxi drivers. Taxi drivers have issues with the rest of the world. It goes on and on and on due parts of particular groups giving their group a "bad name".

To be honest, I don't think it's worth talking about...

Killgore Trout

While Mr Mullins is a grumpy auld Victor Meldrew type, Mr Roe's letter does have a valid point.

I can agree that plenty of people on bicycles don't have a clue what they're doing - but they'd probably be the ones to scoff at mandatory training, claiming "sher what would i need that for?" There should be more road safety including exams integrated into the education system to address "mandatory training".

And infraction of rules of the road? People are going to do that regardless of training as there very little enforcement - the risk of potential embarrasment of getting a ten minute bollicking from a copper while busloads of people go by is low at the moment. If you see someone getting pulled by the Gardai every day behaviour may improve. Or perhaps the threat of "what'll it be - mandatory training or a day in court?", but I doubt there is the political will out there to make that a reality.

unionman

I can't disagree with what he says about cyclists behaviour, there are those who cycle on the path, break red lights and cause all the associated problems with same. I've seen some very nasty cyclist vs pedestrian collisions over the years, and invariably it was a cyclist at fault.

If the editor publishes any replies to this, I would hope to see letters from cyclists that advocate responsible road use by everyone, and shift the argument away from the idea that each group of road user has an agenda that is mutually exclusive to everyone else's (yes I will be writing one myself).

Unfortunately, his contention that 'Cyclists are easily the most inconsiderate of the various groups using our public roads' will probably attract equally polarised responses, which doesn't really help.

@kenmc - any chance you could edit that post to remove the guy's number?

Rob_l

I would agree with the letter about cyclists who use paths but i also dont see the benefit for any cyclist to use a path( not that they dont).
Anyway if anything the letter should be used as a reason why more cycles cycles should be provided, the only time I ever end up on a path is when Im forced onto one by cars doing such things as trying to create two lanes on a single lane road, and then I only use it to get around them and only if its empty Im quite scared of pedestrians.

Mucco

This is a very common complaint against cyclists. It's easy to see that many cyclists break red lights, and cycle on the pavement, but the real danger to pedestrians is elsewhere.

I'm looking at a few stats (nra.ie) in preperation of a response to this.
From 1998 to 2003, there were 2 fatalities in 'pedal cyclist pedestrian' incidents. Both occured in 2002. Does anyone have any more information on this, as I'm not sure what the statistic means? ie 2 peds killed, 1 ped one cyclist? 2 cyclists?
Same time period, total 570 pedestrian deaths.

My conclusion would be that depsite to annoyance, inconvenience and danger? of cyclists on footpaths, I'd rather people were on the bike than in a car.

M

RobFowl

Rob_l wrote: »

I would agree with the letter about cyclists who use paths but i also dont see the benefit for any cyclist to use a path( not that they dont).
Anyway if anything the letter should be used as a reason why more cycles cycles should be provided, the only time I ever end up on a path is when Im forced onto one by cars doing such things as trying to create two lanes on a single lane road, and then I only use it to get around them and only if its empty Im quite scared of pedestrians.

Have to say I'd go along with cyclist.ie line. Cycle lanes are a waste of time (they way they do them here anyway). To small, badly positioned, too many interruptions and often end suddenly and in the case of one out of balbriggan in a ditch !!!

Rob_l

RobFowl wrote: »

Have to say I'd go along with cyclist.ie line. Cycle lanes are a waste of time (they way they do them here anyway). To small, badly positioned, too many interruptions and often end suddenly and in the case of one out of balbriggan in a ditch !!!

This is very true they should be seperated from both the road and the path but seeing as we have trouble getting them at all Im not going to start dreaming of that.

blorg

In fairness I regularly see people cycling on pavements and breaking red lights. Disagree with the "most inconsiderate group" bit only if because I believe it is wrong to look at these things in terms of "groups"- I am not in a "cyclist group" that believes in RLJing and pavement cycling any more than a driver is in a "driver group" that believes in harassing cyclists.

There was a pedestrian killed by a cyclist only last month.

oobydooby

How can Mr Roe be sure that these inconsiderate cyclists are really cyclists and not just motorists on bicycles?

In fairness though he does have a point. I'm back on the streets during the day again and some of my fellow bike riders do behave disgracefully.

Malari

blorg wrote: »

In fairness I regularly see people cycling on pavements and breaking red lights. Disagree with the "most inconsiderate group" bit only if because I believe it is wrong to look at these things in terms of "groups"- I am not in a "cyclist group" that believes in RLJing and pavement cycling any more than a driver is in a "driver group" that believes in harassing cyclists.

There was a pedestrian killed by a cyclist only last month.

Yeah, I don't consider a lot of the people who are termed "cyclists" actually cyclists. They are people who ride bikes. I was probably like that when I was 12, cycling around on the footpath, using pedestrian crossings to take a right turn, etc. I see guys riding to work in the morning who are all over the place, don't know what position to take up on roundabouts, T-junctions, can't take their hands off the bars to indicate and all that. People that I would term cyclists are wiser road users who are probably using their bike recreationally or commuters who are well versed in the rules of the road. I hate being lumped in with people on bikes who don't have a clue.

TinyExplosions

Is it bad that I don't use hand signals on my commute.... I just go with the flow of traffic.... oops!

oobydooby

TinyExplosions wrote: »

Is it bad that I don't use hand signals on my commute.... I just go with the flow of traffic.... oops!

Have you a taxi-bike?:)

petethedrummer

All types of Irish road users break/bend rules in order to gain 20 secs on their journey. Personal gain beats the greater good every time in this country and in all situations.

I sometimes drive, sometimes cycle and sometimes walk. I'm very confused about my identity.

Lumen

Malari wrote: »

I hate being lumped in with people on bikes who don't have a clue.

Anyone riding a bike is a cyclist, same way anyone driving a car is a motorist.

The problem is not with exclusivity or otherwise of terminology, it's with generalisations in general (!). I am an individual, and appreciate being treated as one.

I have probably only ridden less than 10k in my life, but driven about 200k in cars and on motorbikes.

In all those kms I can honestly count the number of dangerous interactions between car and bike on the fingers of one hand, but I've had a few car accidents where no bike was in sight.

Defensive driving and riding is much the same approach. Anticipate the actions of others, be predictable and unambiguous yourself.

Cyclists tend to make better drivers and vice versa (which I'll pass off as correlation, not generalisation).

Malari

Lumen wrote: »

Anyone riding a bike is a cyclist, same way anyone driving a car is a motorist.

Yes of course anyone on a bike is called a cyclist, I'm just saying there are people who are cyclists for sport and there are people who ride bikes. Radically different groups.

Mr. Presentable

Mucco wrote: »

This is a very common complaint against cyclists. It's easy to see that many cyclists break red lights, and cycle on the pavement, but the real danger to pedestrians is elsewhere.

I'm looking at a few stats (nra.ie) in preperation of a response to this.
From 1998 to 2003, there were 2 fatalities in 'pedal cyclist pedestrian' incidents. Both occured in 2002. Does anyone have any more information on this, as I'm not sure what the statistic means? ie 2 peds killed, 1 ped one cyclist? 2 cyclists?
Same time period, total 570 pedestrian deaths.

My conclusion would be that depsite to annoyance, inconvenience and danger? of cyclists on footpaths, I'd rather people were on the bike than in a car.

M

I've never so far been hit by a car while walking to work. I have twice been hit by cyclists.

Chips Lovell

In my experience, the majority of cyclists you see on the road either don't have a clue about traffic law or simply feel that it shouldn't apply to them.

I think the reason people tend to get a bit upset here when motorists start complaining is that pretty much everyone here is a cycling enthusiast in some shape or form and tend to be responsible road users. People who break lights and ride on the footpath aren't going to be posting on Boards.

While I'd agree with blorg that lumping people into groups and tarring them all with the same brush isn't helpful, I think the sheer number of cyclists flouting the law doesn't do the rest of us any favours. I'm quite convinced that the irrate rage you come accross now and then from motorists stems from resentment built up over time at seeing cyclists behave in this fashion.

seamus

nipplenuts wrote: »

I've never so far been hit by a car while walking to work. I have twice been hit by cyclists.

Did you walk into them or did they hit you?

</stir>

There's animosity on both sides. As I pointed out on another thread, pedestrians badly contribute to tension between the two because they completely ignore the existence of cyclists and even expect cyclists to give way to them. They don't ignore cars because they know that getting hit by a car will hurt.

Gavin

Letter sent off, hopefully it will be published and I'll be back beating my mate on our published letters rate

RobFowl

nipplenuts wrote: »

I've never so far been hit by a car while walking to work. I have twice been hit by cyclists.

Never been hit by a cyclist walking, have been hit by cars and buses (twice walking and 8-9 times cycling). Been hit by cyclists cycling f**k knows how many times

Turbulent Bill

Malari wrote: »

Yes of course anyone on a bike is called a cyclist, I'm just saying there are people who are cyclists for sport and there are people who ride bikes. Radically different groups.

But bound by the same rules when commuting. On my commute it seems that the recreational/functional (flapping high-vis and wobbling) to 'sporting' (road bike, nice gear) cyclists are equally likely to jump red lights, though the roadies obviously don't go on the paths and have better bike control.

'68 Fastback

Like alot of people replying I agree with the opinions on footpath use and breaking red lights but tarring all cyclists with the one brush gets my back up.
Most of the bikes I pass on my commute will break lights at junctions and pedestrian crossings. It doesn't seem to matter if they're on a hack or a high end roller. They're idiots, I don't mind.
HOWEVER! Monday night I was at the junction at Cuffe St. and Wexford St. track standing at the lights. Next thing I feel a little bump from behind. Turn my noggin to see a bike in the lane, assumed he couldn't stop in time or something. Took off and stopped for a red at Kevins St. Same thing happens:eek: The pr!ck was tapping his front wheel off my back wheel!
What can you do? I was dumbstruck but told him to p!ss off. He just smiled like a retard and I took off at speed.
Point is(!) these people are outright fools. The fact they're on a bike or in a car is secondary. Rant over. Sorry Unionman for hijacking the thread:o

DirkVoodoo

I object to being called a brute!

The cowering in doorways sounds about right, makes me feel like a big man!

But really, these one sided opinions are fairly unproductive in the end. I'm amazed this tripe got published, must have been a slow day for the editor.

Bunnyhopper

nipplenuts wrote: »

I've never so far been hit by a car while walking to work. I have twice been hit by cyclists.

Sorry to hear that. In about 15-20 years of regular cycling I've had three spills in total (touch wood (and not counting the off-road spills)), every one caused by a pedestrian stepping out onto the road in front of me.

That said, personal anecdote doesn't make for a very convincing argument in your case or mine.

With regard to the original Irish Times correspondence, overstatement fatally weakens what might have been a sensible letter. I, too, object to cyclists who behave dangerously and inconsiderately, just as I object to similar behaviour by drivers and pedestrians, but that third paragraph...oh dear. "Mandatory re-education is urgently required": sounds a bit Clockwork Orange.

I suppose the purpose of a paper's letters page is to provoke more letters, but, while I wasn't surprised at the Sunday Tribune indulging in crackpot provocation I'd have hoped for a bit more sense from the Irish Times.

Gavin

Bunnyhopper wrote: »

I suppose the purpose of a paper's letters page is to provoke more letters, but, while I wasn't surprised at the Sunday Tribune indulging in crackpot provocation I'd have hoped for a bit more sense from the Irish Times.

Ah now, the Irish Times is always publishing loonies letters. That crazy woman from Donegal is always getting her lunacy published, merely to provoke a reaction.

DirkVoodoo

Don't forget that incident with the crazy french lady who hated irish people! (not OUR french lady of course).

buffalo

Mucco wrote: »

I'm looking at a few stats (nra.ie) in preperation of a response to this.
From 1998 to 2003, there were 2 fatalities in 'pedal cyclist pedestrian' incidents. Both occured in 2002. Does anyone have any more information on this, as I'm not sure what the statistic means? ie 2 peds killed, 1 ped one cyclist? 2 cyclists?

I know at least one of those was a male pedestrian who died after being struck by a cyclist going the wrong way down a one-way street. I remember hearing his daughter on the radio - absolutely tragic.

I'm pretty sure it was a cycle courier, and that they never succeeded in tracking him down.

Caroline_ie

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

Don't forget that incident with the crazy french lady who hated irish people! (not OUR CRAZY french lady of course).

Corrected above ...

unionman

Response in today's paper

Caroline_ie

unionman wrote: »

Response in today's paper

Is that one of us?

unionman

Caroline_ie wrote: »

Is that one of us?

I don't know. Didn't publish mine anyway. I know Verb wrote in, but that's not him.

niceonetom

Where drivers assume responsibility by default in any altercation between cycle and motor, their heightened care and solicitude quickly become obvious.

while this may be true, i doubt it is a winning argument in the context of trying to soften the attitude of the anti-cyclist motoring brigade.

it's all too easy for them to go straight to the "sure they don't respect the law - and now they want it changed to make everything our fault? feic off oura da..."

that said, i'd be all for making motorists a bit more respectful of cyclist's space, and if similar legislation led to that kind of attitude i'd be pleased.

it has to be a quid pro quo thing (i can use latin to make myself sound clever too mr. mullins! ya pretentious wanker :P) - changing in the allocation of responsibility (or culpability) would also have to come with some enforcement of existing law for cyclists. we can't be both above the law and protected by it.

kenmc

niceonetom wrote: »

would also have to come with some enforcement of existing law for cyclists. we can't be both above the law and protected by it.

True, but I think a lot of the mindset is of the "if I'm not protected by the law then I'll do everything I can to protect myself, even if that means breaking the law". Although looking at some of the muppets I see every day that's clearly not the case, cos if it was they'd be well lit up too, but plenty of them are not unfortunately. We should be allowed to push them down

Chips Lovell

kenmc wrote: »

Although looking at some of the muppets I see every day that's clearly not the case, cos if it was they'd be well lit up too, but plenty of them are not unfortunately. We should be allowed to push them down

I was standing at a bus stop last night marvelling at the number of cyclists who went by with no lights. And then people tell me I have a death wish for going up the mountains at night.

TinyExplosions

el tonto wrote: »

I was standing at a bus stop last night marvelling at the number of cyclists who went by with no lights. And then people tell me I have a death wish for going up the mountains at night.

You were standing at a bus stop???? Where were you going on a bus man, cycle -it's quicker!

Chips Lovell

TinyExplosions wrote: »

You were standing at a bus stop???? Where were you going on a bus man, cycle -it's quicker!

It was raining, I was in my work clothes and I wanted to use the journey time to read some of a massive big book I have to review. Happy now?

niceonetom

el tonto wrote: »

Happy now?

not even slightly. i'm very disappointed in you tbh.

TinyExplosions

niceonetom wrote: »

not even slightly. i'm very disappointed in you tbh.

+1... you've shattered my confidence in you El_Tonto Baby Jesus is crying from heaven

Caroline_ie

... El Tonto ... That's all you deserved that day!

el tonto wrote: »

It was raining, I was in my work clothes and I wanted to use the journey time to read some of a massive big book I have to review. Happy now?

unionman

el tonto wrote: »

It was raining, I was in my work clothes and I wanted to use the journey time to read some of a massive big book I have to review. Happy now?

El Tonto (centre) uses 'massive big book' for shelter as he contemplates the taunts of his fellow boardsie cyclists...