Cyclists, Go use the footpad.

(this post is intended for outside city centre where hitting pedestrians isn't an issue..).

Seriously, I'm sick of driving along, getting caught behind a guy on a bike and having to overtake him dangerously.. seems to have happened to me constantly all week. all while there's a six foot wide footpad to his left with no one on it.


I see this happening all the time around galway and wouldn't mind if the footpad had babies lying all around the place that he might hit.. but an empty footpad? then i have to pass him out and make sure not to catch him on the left or hit traffic on the right..

so yea, break the law and use an empty footpad once in a while. make life easier for everyone and safer for yourselves.

Mossy Monk

Cyclists are road users too. It is illegal for them to cycle on a footpath. Before you overtake the cyclist be sure there is no oncoming traffic and then the worry about hitting traffic on the right is gone.

phasers

footpad?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Footpad

emeraldstar

Footpad? You know it's 'footpath', right?

i know what a footpath is.. thats why i said "break the law and use it"

Mr. Presentable

OP, just for clarity sake, a "footpad" is a term for a thief on foot.

On the meaning of your post, the cyclist has as much right to the road as do you. You should not be "dangerously overtaking" him, or anybody. In fact I'd say you should not be driving!

towel401

Deleted User wrote: »

Seriously, I'm sick of driving along, getting caught behind a guy on a bike and having to overtake him dangerously..

ya know ya don't have to overtake him, if it's that dangerous why would you?

nipplenuts

nipplenuts wrote: »

On the meaning of your post, the cyclist has as much right to the road as do you. You should not be "dangerously overtaking" him, or anybody. In fact I'd say you should not be driving!

don't see cyclists paying "cycle tax"..

and the point of my post is that it's still dangerous. In europe, they have cycles lanes on footpads in the middle of cities like.. that in my opinion is a much better option.

towel401

towel401 wrote: »

ya know ya don't have to overtake him, if it's that dangerous why would you?

cause i'm dyin for a **** sometimes when i'm driving.

or i'm late for work, one of the two.

Fremen

Conversely, I hate dangerous drivers who overtake into oncoming traffic risking major injury to cyclists just so they can get to their destination two minutes earlier.

Mossy Monk

Deleted User wrote: »

In europe, they have cycles lanes on footpads in the middle of cities like.. that in my opinion is a much better option.

In Europe they have a nicer climate and cheaper beer also. It is not the cyclists fault that there are no cycle paths.

Cullilingus

Deleted User wrote: »

(this post is intended for outside city centre where hitting pedestrians isn't an issue..).

Cycling on the path due to a lack of pedestrians, is about as much justification as driving on the wrong side of the road due to a lack of cars.

There will be pedestrians, there would be no path of there wasn't.

Corruptedmorals

What annoys me about cyclists is they seem to think they are a hybrid of road user and pedestrian. I've noticed several times cyclists continuing to cycle through a pedestrian crossing when the light is green, even at really busy crossings, like the one from outside the Provost's front gate opposite Barbardos across to Grafton Street and the one outside Trinity Arts block onto Dawson/Nassau street. And they act really annoyed too as if everyone shouldn't be crossing the road, ****.

emeraldstar

Deleted User wrote: »

don't see cyclists paying "cycle tax"..

and the point of my post is that it's still dangerous. In europe, they have cycles lanes on footpads in the middle of cities like.. that in my opinion is a much better option.

European cities have highwaymen?

Fremen

*sigh*

All X are Y.
Stupid f*cking X's.

super_furry

emeraldstar wrote: »

European cities have highwaymen?

Dandy ones.

fletch...

Have you ever seen a cyclist nearly get creamed when a car indicates to overtake, the following car thinks the car infront is turning right so undertakes it to nearly flatten the cyclist? just a taught, have seen it a few times... anyways back on topic.

If they use the roads then they should pay bloody tax and insurance
And while cycling up the wickla gap then put some proper cloths on, just cause theyv got the ghey doesnt mean ive to see thier arses bobbing up and down in thier stoopid shiny shorts maken me blind when im trying to concentrate on the road

themadchef

I fairness though, some cyclists do take the p1ss.

I think it's fair to say there are as many bad cyclists as there are bad drivers, not all even signal when turning. I can see the OP's point to a certain degree.

It's not a "paint all cyclists with the same brush" situation.

Fremen

Fremen wrote: »

Conversely, I hate dangerous drivers who overtake into oncoming traffic risking major injury to cyclists just so they can get to their destination two minutes earlier.

when i cycled, i cycled on footpads.. i didn't put anyone else in danger and i didn't put myself in danger.


on the way home, in the pissing rain and dark, there were about 10 cars behind one cyclist with no luminous colours on him.. and each car went by him when they could.

he was in danger cause it was near impossible to see him,
even if there is room for a car to pass him, he could easily dodge a gutter or his front wheel slide and him hit into the car..
or the driver could be inexperienced and clip him or
the driver mis-judge and hit an oncoming car.

the footpad in my opinion would have been a safer alternative as there were no people on it..

Dennis the Stone

There are wanker cyclists, just like wanker drivers. Just like there are probably wanker lollipopmen. Although hopefully not lollipopmen that **** when there are children around because that is not on. These lollipopmen need to be sorted out once and for all, coming over here taking our jobs and children

Thomas_S_Hunterson

Deleted User wrote: »

when i cycled, i cycled on footpads.. i didn't put anyone else in danger and i didn't put myself in danger.

From now on, i'm going to cycle out in the middle of the road just on the off chance that it'll annoy you.

connundrum

Deleted User wrote: »

when i cycled, i cycled on footpads.. i didn't put anyone else in danger and i didn't put myself in danger.


on the way home, in the pissing rain and dark, there were about 10 cars behind one cyclist with no luminous colours on him.. and each car went by him when they could.

he was in danger cause it was near impossible to see him,
even if there is room for a car to pass him, he could easily dodge a gutter or his front wheel slide and him hit into the car..
or the driver could be inexperienced and clip him or
the driver mis-judge and hit an oncoming car.

the footpad in my opinion would have been a safer alternative as there were no people on it..

OMFG stop saying footpad!

Down with this sort of thing!

phasers

STOP SAYING FOOTPAD


*careful now

connundrum

connundrum wrote: »

OMFG stop saying footpad!

Down with this sort of thing!

did i say it twice? it was pretty important to set the scene of my story like.. :cool:

Tzetze

If you hit the cyclist while driving at least he's covered by your insurance.
What about the pedestrian who walks into the the path of the cyclist that they couldn't see? Doesn't get covered by any insurance.

So, the footpad... is he on the pavement, or on the road?

Sean_K

Sean_K wrote: »

From now on, i'm going to cycle out in the middle of the road just on the off chance that it'll annoy you.

my bonnet is harder than you

SAVE_ME.222

"Footpad" ....

*Chortle*

fletch...

Domo230 wrote: »

And im sick of motorists thinking they own the whole road, honking their horns and almost running over cyclists in an effort to shave a few seconds off their journey. Cyclists have just as much right to be on the road as motorists so stop thinking the roads were built just for you lot.

But roads are built for cars, cycle lanes for cyclists and fields for horses.
Hows about if i drive my car up the cycle lanes to avoid traffic?

Ive been knocked on my motor bike, had cyclsts damage mirrors ect on my bike and car and they dont bother to stop and apologies or offer to pay for damage so naturally im a bit bitter against them, now if i was to bump into or over a cyclist in my gigantic 4x4 while on a road which is made for cars it would be a different story alltogether.

in other words STAY OUT OF MY WAY!!!!

staker

Don't you know cyclist's are all ex smokers OP?
"Thou shan't smoke outdoors, thou shan't drive cars!"
They won't be happy 'til thishttp://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055432984&highlight=wind+farms

giggsy664

Mossy Monk wrote: »

Cyclists are road users too. It is illegal for them to cycle on a footpath. Before you overtake the cyclist be sure there is no oncoming traffic and then the worry about hitting traffic on the right is gone.

Ooohhh bollox

robinph

WTF are footpads?

Deleted User wrote: »

my bonnet is harder than you

..and you'll get a big fine/ points/ jail once you bounce a cyclist off your hard bonnet. Drive safe and try not to kill anyone with all the dangerous overtaking you've admitted to being "forced" to do.

RacoonQueen

Not biting is KILLING me here.

Domo230

Domo230 wrote: »

Cyclists have just as much right to be on the road as motorists so stop thinking the roads were built just for you lot.

pedestrians have a place to walk, cars have a place to drive.

cyclists are this grey annoying area, no tax or insurance but can in reality use either..
still quite likely to cause a crash but protected by law and they could pretty much never be in the wrong.


if i hit a cyclist who is turning without a signal.. his fault. but if he dies, i'm pretty much fucked.

RoundyMooney

Jeez, that footpad thing is nearly as annoying as those mongs on adverts who insist on saying "add" instead of "ad".

Generally, if I saw "add" over there, I used to presume the user probably suffered from it to a varying degree during their schooling or summat.

On topic-we are not always on two legs, two wheels, or four. More often than not we do a little of each. How about a little empathy for the other guy, eh?

swingking

Few things about "some" cyclists.

1. Please use the cycle lanes when there are cycle lanes available to use. The other day I was driving along and some tosser thinks he would rather cycle on the road even though there was a perfectly good cycle lane beside him AND there was a footpath.

2. Please make yourselves visable at night. Road users don't have super powers to be able to see in the dark like they are wearing night vision goggles.

3. When the lights go red please stop. Just because you are not a chunk of metal does not mean you can zip through a red traffic light and carry on normally at a fast speed.

Also, the cyclist groups give out so much about not having enough safety when cycling in the city and how they fear for their lives. how many do you see wearing helmets. Do they not realise that as soon as they are thrown off their bikes they could fall on their unprotected heads and suffer brain damage.

emeraldstar

super_furry wrote: »

Dandy ones.

I do like dandy highwaymen. Do they ride bikes too?

Dennis the Stone

Deleted User wrote: »

if i hit a cyclist who is turning without a signal.. his fault. but if he dies, i'm pretty much fucked.

If a cyclist negligently turns out in front of you without signalling and gets killed I don't believe you would be, no.

robinph

robinph wrote: »

Drive safe and try not to kill anyone with all the dangerous overtaking you've admitted to being "forced" to do.

it was more a general statement about it being dangerous to pass out cyclists.


although, i did admit it.. perhaps you should ring the guards.

Tago Mago

Tago Mago wrote: »

If a cyclist negligently turns out in front of you without signalling and gets killed I don't believe you would be, no.

well i'd hope so... and i'd hope there be witnesses who specifically seen lack of signals.

robinph

Deleted User wrote: »

although, i did admit it.. perhaps you should ring the guards.

Already done it, they did ask for directions to Galway though?

CheGuedara

fletch... wrote: »

But roads are built for cars, cycle lanes for cyclists and fields for horses.
Hows about if i drive my car up the cycle lanes to avoid traffic?

Ive been knocked on my motor bike, had cyclsts damage mirrors ect on my bike and car and they dont bother to stop and apologies or offer to pay for damage so naturally im a bit bitter against them, now if i was to bump into or over a cyclist in my gigantic 4x4 while on a road which is made for cars it would be a different story alltogether.

in other words STAY OUT OF MY WAY!!!!

As a cyclist that has seen friends hit by motorists I really appreiciate seen the depth of thought being explored here.

You do realise at this point that *if* ever are stupid enough to hit a cyclist at this point, what you've written above could be taken as intent. Smart.

Oh, and good luck with the personality, bet you'll get far with that..

giggsy664

swingking wrote: »

Few things about "some" cyclists.

1. Please use the cycle lanes when there are cycle lanes available to use. The other day I was driving along and some tosser thinks he would rather cycle on the road even though there was a perfectly good cycle lane beside him AND there was a footpath.

2. Please make yourselves visable at night. Road users don't have super powers to be able to see in the dark like they are wearing night vision goggles.

3. When the lights go red please stop. Just because you are not a chunk of metal does not mean you can zip through a red traffic light and carry on normally at a fast speed.

Also, the cyclist groups give out so much about not having enough safety when cycling in the city and how they fear for their lives. how many do you see wearing helmets. Do they not realise that as soon as they are thrown off their bikes they could fall on their unprotected heads and suffer brain damage.

Oh hank god I didn't get brain damage amage amage amage amage amage amage amage

CheGuedara

CheGuedara wrote: »

You do realise at this point that *if* ever are stupid enough to hit a cyclist at this point, what you've written above could be taken as intent. Smart.

is boards.ie legal documentation now?

CheGuedara

Deleted User wrote: »

is boards.ie legal documentation now?

Just making the point.

paulgreene

Corruptedmorals wrote: »

What annoys me about cyclists is they seem to think they are a hybrid of road user and pedestrian. I've noticed several times cyclists continuing to cycle through a pedestrian crossing when the light is green, even at really busy crossings, like the one from outside the Provost's front gate opposite Barbardos across to Grafton Street and the one outside Trinity Arts block onto Dawson/Nassau street. And they act really annoyed too as if everyone shouldn't be crossing the road, ****.

well, for sure a remark from someone not cycling....

CheGuedara

CheGuedara wrote: »

Just making the point.

grand.



now honestly, which do you think is safer? road or empty footpath ( i think that's what i should call it )

forget legalities etc. which is safer?

RoundTower

I really hope this tard gets in a minor accident with a cyclist that is the cyclists fault, but ends up getting owned in court when the cyclist's lawyer submits this thread as evidence.

RoundyMooney

emeraldstar wrote: »

I do like dandy highwaymen. Do they ride bikes too?

We don't know, he's too scared to mention.

phasers

Deleted User wrote: »

footpath

Thank you

RoundTower

RoundTower wrote: »

I really hope this tard gets in a minor accident with a cyclist that is the cyclists fault, but ends up getting owned in court when the cyclist's lawyer submits this thread as evidence.

hey roundtower, i'm a tard now? it's a pretty legitimate argument that i think footpaths are safer for cyclists



and wishing me to get into a minor accident? and get owned in court? fuck you.

and boards.ie used as evidence? what exactly is written in this thread that caused me to get into that minor accident? in the future?

One Cold Hand

Deleted User wrote: »

pedestrians have a place to walk, cars have a place to drive.

cyclists are this grey annoying area, no tax or insurance but can in reality use either..
still quite likely to cause a crash but protected by law and they could pretty much never be in the wrong.


if i hit a cyclist who is turning without a signal.. his fault. but if he dies, i'm pretty much fucked.

Don't blame the cyclists, the vast majority are safe competent cyclists.

Blame our retarded incompetent government for not building more cycle lanes while the ecomony was booming and we had the money. Now that we're in recession we're stuck with shit road and no cycle lane

Also why should cyclists pay tax? There's no carbon emissions from a bike so their not polluting the atmosphere. And they do basically zero damage to the roads, not like the soccer moms driving their fat SUV's 50 yards down the road to drop their fat kids to school.