Meanwhile, over in After Hours...

Canis Lupus

ntlbell wrote: »

Sorry, I didn't think it was a complex question.

Let me dumb it down.

I'm driving down the road some twat on a bike is out in the middle of it.

I look to my left and there's two things.

One a footpath, this is where people walk.

Two a perfectly good cycle lane where this genius could be cycling.

Clear up the picture?

Cyclists don't like cycling on glass, debris and **** that regularly hangs about cycle lanes. But like someone said earlier there are wanker cyclists like there are wanker drivers. Sh8t happens etc etc.

TinyExplosions

ntlbell wrote: »

Sorry, I didn't think it was a complex question.

Let me dumb it down.

I'm driving down the road some twat on a bike is out in the middle of it.

I look to my left and there's two things.

One a footpath, this is where people walk.

Two a perfectly good cycle lane where this genius could be cycling.

Clear up the picture?

Yes, but allow us to retort:

One, footpath is a moot point as we're not allowed to cycle on it

Two the 'perfectly good cycle lane' is usually full of detritus, broken glass, potholes, manhole covers, leaves etc etc, making us more likely to slip and come off under your wheels, thereby ruining your day.

Unless it's a solid white line, and a properly marked cycle lane, cyclists are not obliged to use it, we have the exact same rights on the road as you do.

Build a bridge and get over it

kenmc

ntlbell wrote: »

Two a perfectly good cycle lane

If you can tell that this is true from the comfort of your car, I'm incredibly impressed. Otherwise get out of your car and try cycle along it and see if you come to the same conclusion.

ntlbell

kenmc wrote: »

If you can tell that this is true from the comfort of your car, I'm incredibly impressed. Otherwise get out of your car and try cycle along it and see if you come to the same conclusion.

I don't need to as I cycle to work in the very same cycle lane about 50% of the time

kenmc

and the other 50% of the time you cycle where? what's wrong with the perfectly good cycle path?

ntlbell

TinyExplosions wrote: »

Yes, but allow us to retort:

One, footpath is a moot point as we're not allowed to cycle on it

Two the 'perfectly good cycle lane' is usually full of detritus, broken glass, potholes, manhole covers, leaves etc etc, making us more likely to slip and come off under your wheels, thereby ruining your day.

Unless it's a solid white line, and a properly marked cycle lane, cyclists are not obliged to use it, we have the exact same rights on the road as you do.

Build a bridge and get over it

This is not about rights.

It's about commonsense I don't really care where people cycle as long as it's not in the middle of the road holding the rest of the country up.

Stay in on the fecking left and let cars pass safely.

ntlbell

kenmc wrote: »

and the other 50% of the time you cycle where? what's wrong with the perfectly good cycle path?

The other 50% I'm in my car.....

kenmc

Oh god. A cycling driver with the mentality of a driver who has never been on a bike.

c0rk3r

ntlbell wrote: »

holding the rest of the country up.

Drama much ?

TinyExplosions

ntlbell wrote: »

This is not about rights.

It's about commonsense I don't really care where people cycle as long as it's not in the middle of the road holding the rest of the country up.

Stay in on the fecking left and let cars pass safely.

We will when drivers generally pass safely, instead of within 6 inches of a cyclist

ntlbell

kenmc wrote: »

Oh god. A cycling driver with the mentality of a driver who has never been on a bike.

Look, this is not brain surgery.

When I'm cycling I don't hold up traffic.

If there's no cycle lane I'm as close to the left as I can be, I'm not whaling out in the middle of the road causing obstructions traffic in Dublin is bad enough as it without me thinking I own the road on my bike.

This is not about a mentality it's about common _sense_

ntlbell

TinyExplosions wrote: »

We will when drivers generally pass safely, instead of within 6 inches of a cyclist

If they moved into the left they would have 18 inches

kenmc

You might be better off over here. You seem to fit in better.

ntlbell wrote: »

When I'm cycling I don't hold up traffic.

Cyclists ARE traffic.

TinyExplosions

kenmc wrote: »

You might be better off over here. You seem to fit in better.


Cyclists ARE traffic.

Yup, and we also like annoying motorists -it's so much fun to hold everyone up!

ntlbell

kenmc wrote: »

You might be better off over here. You seem to fit in better.


Cyclists ARE traffic.

what has that got to do with anything?

I don't hold up cyclists either.

kenmc

You said "When I'm cycling I don't hold up traffic" - implying that you make a distinction between cyclists and traffic. I was just pointing out your error.

ntlbell

kenmc wrote: »

You said "When I'm cycling I don't hold up traffic" - implying that you make a distinction between cyclists and traffic. I was just pointing out your error.

I didn't make one you did by assuming.

kenmc

See, cyclists are always wrong :rolleyes:

ntlbell

kenmc wrote: »

See, cyclists are always wrong :rolleyes:

Not in this case, just you. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: I can do them to see?

Bunnyhopper

ntlbell wrote: »

If they moved into the left they would have 18 inches

No - they'd probably still have six inches on their right and a lot less of a safety margin on their left.

If you cycle you'll appreciate that not all drivers overtake safely and I for one allow myself a margin of error (for my error or someone else's). I'm not talking about holding up traffic, I just mean cycling in an assertive and defensive way.

As to the particular situation you're referring to - which roads and cycle lanes do you have in mind?

I also think that kenmc's point is a valid one and you'd have more credibility if you actually engaged: as it is, you've given the impression that you either don't want to address the point he's made, or you simply haven't understood his point.

Jack Bauer999

Two the 'perfectly good cycle lane' is usually full of detritus, broken glass, potholes, manhole covers, leaves etc etc, making us more likely to slip and come off under your wheels, thereby ruining your day.


absolute rubbish, i came across this yesterday, cyclist taking over half
the road when there was a perfectly good cycle path beside him,
where i live there's cycle paths all around the place, and these are not covered in glass, pot holes, parked cars, landmines or whatever feeble excuse that comes to mind.

all cycle paths should be done away with and the the space used to
widen the roads seeing as no one ever uses the things!!

Raam

Jack Bauer999 wrote: »

all cycle paths should be done away with and the the space used to
widen the roads seeing as no one ever uses the things!!

At last, a sensible comment!

ntlbell

Bunnyhopper wrote: »

No - they'd probably still have six inches on their right and a lot less of a safety margin on their left.

If you cycle you'll appreciate that not all drivers overtake safely and I for one allow myself a margin of error (for my error or someone else's). I'm not talking about holding up traffic, I just mean cycling in an assertive and defensive way.

As to the particular situation you're referring to - which roads and cycle lanes do you have in mind?

I also think that kenmc's point is a valid one and you'd have more credibility if you actually engaged: as it is, you've given the impression that you either don't want to address the point he's made, or you simply haven't understood his point.

Mopeds are traffic, truckers are traffic, busses are traffic, cyclists are traffic

I didn't list all the above in my point why should I make special circumstances for cyclists

I don't hold up _any_ traffic of _any_ kind or at least do my best at all times not do so, while driving my car, motorbike or cycling. He didn't have a point he made an assumption that I made an error he was wrong.

The cycle lanes I frequent are usually From the Spawell to Clonskeagh

others would be the back of ballycoolin and the surrounding area all fine. but I mostly see cyclists on the road itself rather than in the lane's.

Maybe if they were asked to pay some road tax for the maintenance of these lanes they might start to use them

rflynnr

Jack Bauer999 wrote: »

all cycle paths should be done away with and the the space used to
widen the roads seeing as no one ever uses the things!!

I think you'll find a surprising degree of support for that notion amongst cycles in general. I'd be entirely happy to see them removed thus upgrading my status from "thing that gets in the way of traffic" to "traffic".

Raam

ntlbell wrote: »

Maybe if they were asked to pay some road tax for the maintenance of these lanes they might start to use them

YAY!

rflynnr

ntlbell wrote: »

Maybe if they were asked to pay some road tax for the maintenance of these lanes they might start to use them

(Types quickly.) Nobody - and I mean nobody - is to enter the road tax/motor tax issue here. Ntlbell is a big lad who's entirely capable of finding out for himself the distinction (and why it's a flawed argument).

petethedrummer

So some cyclist behaved like a t!t. ntlbell, if you stuck around this board long enough you'd realise most people on here are fairly considerate, both on the road and in posting behaviour.

Do you want the people here to apologise for this cyclist's behaviour or admit some sort collective responsibility by virtue of also being cyclists? You cycle yourself, most people here drive, so where are we going with this?

Someone in front of me didn't indicate exiting a roundabout this morning as I drove to work. As you are a motorist could you please explain why he did this? An old woman or small child could have been killed. If you can't explain it, can you at least make some sort of statement on behalf of all motorists about this incident?

ntlbell

petethedrummer wrote: »

So some cyclist behaved like a t!t. ntlbell, if you stuck around this board long enough you'd realise most people on here are fairly considerate, both on the road and in posting behaviour.

Do you want the people here to apologise for this cyclist's behaviour or admit some sort collective responsibility by virtue of also being cyclists? You cycle yourself, most people here drive, so where are we going with this?

Someone in front of me didn't indicate exiting a roundabout this morning as I drove to work. As you are a motorist could you please explain why he did this? An old woman or small child could have been killed. If you can't explain it, can you at least make some sort of statement on behalf of all motorists about this incident?

I'm not looking for a statement on behalf of anyone.

Just a discussion on it, which as your rightly point out isn't really going to go anywhere.

So it's some people are morons some are not case closed.

Canis Lupus

ntlbell wrote: »

So it's some people are morons some are not case closed.

Should have just said that at the start.

Chips Lovell

ntlbell wrote: »

Sorry, I didn't think it was a complex question

It isn't, now that you put it in proper English. I'm not trying to be smart, I honestly couldn't understand what you were trying to say.

Look, as others here have pointed out, there are reasons not to use a cycle lane, such as it being covered in broken glass, pedestrians, joggers or it simply not being a cycle lane as defined by law.

However, yes, there are muppets who cycle out of a lane when there's no excuse and there are muppets you cycle out in the middle of the road when they've no reason to. I've seen them myself and I've no trouble believing that you have too.

Cyclists aren't one big homogenous herd, so coming here asking 'why can't cyclists do this and that' is pretty pointless. We're all not accountable for the actions of the few.

Jack Bauer999 wrote: »

all cycle paths should be done away with and the the space used to widen the roads seeing as no one ever uses the things!!

I'd vote for that.