Should cyclists be made to Register and get Insurance - mod warning - see post 55

billyboy01

Should cyclists be made to have a reg plate and have public liability insurance or some form of insurance!

As it can be argued that cyclists CAN BE, not always be a menace to road safety.

I saw on the RTE six o'clock news back before Christmas, there was a test run of cyclists in Mayo having reg plates on there bikes. I think it was a CoCo and NRA/RSA plan!

Never heard anything about it since!

Anan1

Yeah, and pedestrians too. Don't forget prams & tricycles! Honestly, I think we've more than enough regulation as it is.

Baralis1

billyboy01 wrote: »

Should cyclists be made to have a reg plate and have public liability insurance or some form of insurance!

As it can be argued that cyclists CAN BE, not always be a menace to road safety.

I saw on the RTE six o'clock news back before Christmas, there was a test run of cyclists in Mayo having reg plates on there bikes. I think it was a CoCo and NRA/RSA plan!

Never heard anything about it since!

That wouldn't make any sense to me. Cyclists are a practically negible threat to road safety compared to cars. In fact cycling on public roads is practically a danger sport as most drivers don't recognise the fact that cyclist have equal rights to the road.

Monty Burnz

How many cyclists kill pedestrians or motorists each year? Cyclists have a very good incentive to stay out of the way of traffic. In some countries, to counter this natural imbalance between cars and bikes they have enacted laws to the effect that in an accident between a bike and a car, the car driver is always at fault. Now that seems a bit excessive to me, but it should give you an idea that Ireland is pretty bike hostile as it is compared to other countries.

And bear in mind that for every bike there is on the road, there's one less car clogging the place up and slowing your driving progress.

/rant

Oh yeah - registration and insurance? No, I don't think they should.

mickdw

What if a cyclist destroys the side of a nice new car with the handlebars or whatever? I would love if they had to carry a reg plate.

Tragedy

I see more cyclists knock people down in the City Centre around Trinity than I do cars. Way, way more.
Sure they don't kill, maim or mangle people but they definitely injure people, not particularly uncommon to break their bones(as well the cyclists own) so it'd be nice if people stopped the mock facetiousness.

The main problem is enforcement/regulation. Has any other country come up with a workable system? If not, forget it.

Baralis1

mickdw wrote: »

What if a cyclist destroys the side of a nice new car with the handlebars or whatever? I would love if they had to carry a reg plate.

According to the rules of the road, a car must be at least six feet out from a bicycle when overtaking. If motorist allowed cyclists full use of the road and didn't try to overtake/force them into the side of the road, this shouldn't arise. Btw, I'm a motorist, I rarely cycle.

kildare.17hmr

where would ya draw the line tho?? when i read the first post i imagined my 6 year old and her friends being stopped by the guards and being asked for their insurance details:p

ya no what pisses me off tho, these groups of cyclests every weekend from march to october who cycle 3 bikes wide and dont let cars pass... met my first group of the year yesterday going up a big hill and ya think they would go in single file????? wan*ers

Tragedy

Baralis1 wrote: »

According to the rules of the road, a car must be at least six feet out from a bicycle when overtaking. If motorist allowed cyclists full use of the road and didn't try to overtake/force them into the side of the road, this shouldn't arise. Btw, I'm a motorist, I rarely cycle.

Helloooo, it's Dublin. Likelihood the cyclist is overtaking the car and not the other way around. I've seen plenty of cyclists take off a wing mirror weaving through traffic. I've even been one of them :pac: (luckily it popped back into it's housing or else I was screwed)

billyboy01

Monty Burnz wrote: »

How many cyclists kill pedestrians or motorists each year? Cyclists have a very good incentive to stay out of the way of traffic. In some countries, to counter this natural imbalance between cars and bikes they have enacted laws to the effect that in an accident between a bike and a car, the car driver is always at fault. Now that seems a bit excessive to me, but it should give you an idea that Ireland is pretty bike hostile as it is compared to other countries.

And bear in mind that for every bike there is on the road, there's one less car clogging the place up and slowing your driving progress.

/rant

Oh yeah - registration and insurance? No, I don't think they should.

How many cyclists kill pedestrians or motorists each year?

Probably more then you think! I dont know how many times I have been hit and nearly run over by cyclists in Dublin City! Especially at Nassau St. and College Green! Not to mention what are the stats on cars having accidents due to ignorant cyclists braking traffic lights and swerving out in front of cars to avoid puddles and potholes etc..!

unkel

billyboy01 wrote: »

Should cyclists be made to have a reg plate and have public liability insurance or some form of insurance!

No. The trend is quite the opposite.

In some countries (i.e. the Netherlands) an accident between a cyclist and a car is ALWAYS deemed to be the cars fault. Even when the cyclist is going the wrong way down a one way street, etc.

mickdw

Baralis1 wrote: »

According to the rules of the road, a car must be at least six feet out from a bicycle when overtaking. If motorist allowed cyclists full use of the road and didn't try to overtake/force them into the side of the road, this shouldn't arise. Btw, I'm a motorist, I rarely cycle.

Im thinking more of the situation where cars are stopped in traffic, cyclist comes down between cars, rubs off car then f*cks off and no one can catch them due to the traffic. This is quite common and very very annoying. I used to join the evening traffic on Pearse street in Dublin. It was a nightmare there on the dark & wet evenings. Where I joined, I had to cross Bus lane plus a lane or 2 to get where I wanted to go and it was lethal. Cyclists all sides, zipping past cars, no lighting or anticipation from the cyclists either. Never had an accident with one though thankfully

CiniO

Baralis1 wrote: »

According to the rules of the road, a car must be at least six feet out from a bicycle when overtaking. If motorist allowed cyclists full use of the road and didn't try to overtake/force them into the side of the road, this shouldn't arise. Btw, I'm a motorist, I rarely cycle.

Could you quote the appropriate part of ROTR? Because I was looking for something like this once, but never found it neither in ROTR not in Road Traffic Act or Road Traffic Regulations.

Alanstrainor

billyboy01 wrote: »

what are the stats on cars having accidents due to ignorant cyclists braking traffic lights and swerving out in front of cars to avoid puddles and potholes etc..!

I'm a cyclist. I probably cover more miles commuting into Dublin city centre these days than i do driving. But the bits i've highlighted above are exactly why motorists need to give cyclists plenty of space when they overtake. A pothole could be disastrous to a cyclist! And who knows what's under puddles.

Drummerboy08

unkel wrote: »

No. The trend is quite the opposite.

In some countries (i.e. the Netherlands) an accident between a cyclist and a car is ALWAYS deemed to be the cars fault. Even when the cyclist is going the wrong way down a one way street, etc.

This is crazy, but luckily we live in Ireland, not the Netherlands.

I've often though of what would happen if for example a cyclist runs a red light (fairly regular occurance in Dublin) and ploughs straight into the side of my car.

Depending on the damage done, any repair bill could be a four figure sum.

Now, if it were two cars involved in an accident like this, the car that runs the red light would be responsible.

What's the difference between a car and a bike?

How many cyclists can afford this kind of outlay? If the cyclist gets up and keeps going, can the motorist claim back the costs from the MIBI?

billyboy01

Alanstrainor wrote: »

I'm a cyclist. I probably cover more miles commuting into Dublin city centre these days than i do driving. But the bits i've highlighted above are exactly why motorists need to give cyclists plenty of space when they overtake. A pothole could be disastrous to a cyclist! And who knows what's under puddles.

What about braking traffic lights and weaving in and out of cars without notice! This is my point, how the hell is a motorist ment to know what a cyclist is planning to do!

Drummerboy08

Alanstrainor wrote: »

I'm a cyclist. I probably cover more miles commuting into Dublin city centre these days than i do driving. But the bits i've highlighted above are exactly why motorists need to give cyclists plenty of space when they overtake. A pothole could be disastrous to a cyclist! And who knows what's under puddles.

Swerving out under a car could be even more disastrous to a cyclist!

Given the amount of bikes on the cities roads, if a motorist was to treat every cyclist as you suggest above, traffic in the city would grind to a halt. It's not possible.

If I, as a motorist, need to avoid an object on a road in front of me, I slow down, check my mirrors and blindspot, and if it is safe to do so, I move around the object.

Surely, a cyclist can slow down and look over his shoulder to see what's behind him?

kildare.17hmr

are cyclests not bound to the same road rules as drivers?? i was told they were and have seen a guard pulling in a cyclest for going through a red light

Baralis1

billyboy01 wrote: »

How many cyclists kill pedestrians or motorists each year?

Probably more then you think! I dont know how many times I have been hit and nearly run over by cyclists in Dublin City! Especially at Nassau St. and College Green! Not to mention what are the stats on cars having accidents due to ignorant cyclists braking traffic lights and swerving out in front of cars to avoid puddles and potholes etc..!

Swerving out in front of cars? A cyclist is entitled to hold the centre of the road of he wishes and the car should only overtake if the right hand lane is clear. In Dublin, this is probably never. Unless its a dual carriage way of course.

Drummerboy08

Baralis1 wrote: »

Swerving out in front of cars? A cyclist is entitled to hold the centre of the road of he wishes and the car should only overtake if the right hand lane is clear. In Dublin, this is probably never. Unless its a dual carriage way of course.

I think a cyclist is only entitled to do that where a cycle lane has not been provided.

And there is a big difference between holding the centre of the road and moving from one side to another in front of cars with no notice.

billyboy01

Cyclists playing Russian roulette with traffic lights, and playing chicken with cars is not wise, as the motorist will always win! Risking death or a life changing injury is not worth shaving a few seconds of your journey!

No insurance claim is going to buy back your health!

Alanstrainor

Drummerboy08 wrote: »

Swerving out under a car could be even more disastrous to a cyclist!

Given the amount of bikes on the cities roads, if a motorist was to treat every cyclist as you suggest above, traffic in the city would grind to a halt. It's not possible.

If I, as a motorist, need to avoid an object on a road in front of me, I slow down, check my mirrors and blindspot, and if it is safe to do so, I move around the object.

Surely, a cyclist can slow down and look over his shoulder to see what's behind him?

I didn't mean to imply that i would blindly swerve out into traffic, a quick check over my shoulder is a definite must.

Anan1

billyboy01 wrote: »

What about braking traffic lights and weaving in and out of cars without notice! This is my point, how the hell is a motorist ment to know what a cyclist is planning to do!

Just give them enough room and this won't be a problem.

Jumpy

billyboy01 wrote: »

No insurance claim is going to buy back your health!

billyboy01

Alanstrainor wrote: »

I didn't mean to imply that i would blindly swerve out into traffic, a quick check over my shoulder is a definite must.

A Hand signal would be nice too!

Drummerboy08

Alanstrainor wrote: »

I didn't mean to imply that i would blindly swerve out into traffic, a quick check over my shoulder is a definite must.

Absolutely, I know there are cyclists out there who do, but there are alot who don't either. It's 50:50 in my experience.

Anan1 wrote: »

Just give them enough room and this won't be a problem.

That's not possible on most roads in Dublin. If a motorist was to do that, it would be impossible to move around the cyclist as there is always oncoming traffic.

This means the motorist has to match the speed of the bike, causing a massive tailback behind. If this was to become practice, traffic would grind to a halt.

Monty Burnz

Drummerboy08 wrote: »

I think a cyclist is only entitled to do that where a cycle lane has not been provided.

Would that be one of those cycle lanes that is full of parked cars? Or one of those full of potholes?

A cycle lane in this country is often just a bit of paint on the road, with no thought for the practicalities of using it or the safety of cyclists.

timogen

Alanstrainor wrote: »

I'm a cyclist. I probably cover more miles commuting into Dublin city centre these days than i do driving. But the bits i've highlighted above are exactly why motorists need to give cyclists plenty of space when they overtake. A pothole could be disastrous to a cyclist! And who knows what's under puddles.

Now while i understand the plight of cyclist,and i wouldn't do it, it's to scary
But what just came to me as a road user why is it ok for a cyclist to swerve to avoid a pot-hole, like others shouldn't you be reading the road conditions in front of you and be able to stop if there is a pot-hole ahead.


someone got in ahead of me.......

bladebrew

there was a case in england where a cyclist swerved around a pothole but went under a truck, he was killed, no charges were brought against the driver as it was accidental death,
what is the fine for running a red light? if cyclists had to pay fines for breaking traffic laws then they might think twice before sailing through a red light,
and if drove against the kerb at 5mph i woulnt be very popular but i have every right to,

kildare.17hmr

Anan1 wrote: »

Just give them enough room and this won't be a problem.

how do you give someone ya cant see enough room?? cyclests appear from nowhere when traffic is movin slow!

mikemac

Drummerboy08 wrote: »

Surely, a cyclist can slow down and look over his shoulder to see what's behind him?

I cycle and at least used to have a moped.
Shoulder checks are done, called a lifesaver.

But I'm not clinging to the side of the road on the bicycle, it's there a drain or pothole I move around it in good time, not a sudden swerve right before it.. And you don't know what's under a puddle.
If the car behind has to slow down so be it, it'll be over in a few seconds.

I'm looking over the examples in this thread, you'd think everyone lives in Dublin

Monty Burnz

timogen wrote: »

Now while i understand the plight of cyclist,and i wouldn't do it, it's to scary
But what just came to me as a road user why is it ok for a cyclist to swerve to avoid a pot-hole, like others shouldn't you be reading the road conditions in front of you and be able to stop if there is a pot-hole ahead.

I'd suggest you try cycling in the city to get an idea of why. You spend a lot of time looking around you for threats to your life, and a lot of energy getting the damned bike moving. If you had to stop every few metres because of a pothole or parked car or whatever, the whole thing would be a waste of time and you'd just have another few hundred thousand cars clogging up towns and cities around the country.

Baralis1

CiniO wrote: »

Could you quote the appropriate part of ROTR? Because I was looking for something like this once, but never found it neither in ROTR not in Road Traffic Act or Road Traffic Regulations.

Ok, apologies, it dosen't mention specific distances in the ROTR. But it does say that cyclists must be given sufficient room to avoid potholes etc if they need to if cars are overtaking. Practically, in a driving test, you would be expected to give cyclist six feet or get marked down. I have no proof of this besides my own experience of doing the driving test.

Alanstrainor

billyboy01 wrote: »

A Hand signal would be nice too!

Indicating is easy in a car, if i'm avoiding an obstacle on a bicycle it's in my interest to keep my hands on the handle bars! I'd encounter obstacles every 100 yards or so in Dublin, i'd look like a complete lunatic if i was waving my arms around. If i can, i will indicate around an obstacle, but it's certainly not something that i can guarantee.

In all seriousness, if you were to cycle into Dublin city centre just once you would understand where i'm coming from.

-Chris-

Thread moved to Cycling forum.

Drummerboy08

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Would that be one of those cycle lanes that is full of parked cars? Or one of those full of potholes?

A cycle lane in this country is often just a bit of paint on the road, with no thought for the practicalities of using it or the safety of cyclists.

As it is illegal to park in a cycle lane, I suggest you take registration numbers and report the vehicles to the Gardai.

As most roads in this country are also full of potholes, I see your point.

The point I'm trying to make is that cyclists do not make life easy for themselves.

If I drive down the canal in Dublin outside of rush hour traffic, I regularly see cyclists jumping red lights, dragging the bike onto the footpath and using pedestrian crossings, swerving out in front of cars without looking, amonst other things.

A bit of common sense goes a long way on a bike.

Monty Burnz

feelingstressed wrote: »

I'm looking over the examples in this thread, you'd think everyone lives in Dublin

Everyone in Dublin thinks that...
(former Dublin resident)

Monty Burnz

Drummerboy08 wrote: »

As it is illegal to park in a cycle lane, I suggest you take registration numbers and report the vehicles to the Gardai.

Why bother? The guards can see it just as well as I can but do nothing about it.

yop

If everyone went out on a bike for a few hours then they would soon cop that maybe its the drivers who need to take a few lessons.

I drive about 25k miles a year and cycle about 3k KM a year. In that year I would have been nearly killed about 5 times more by drivers than I would while driving. The absolutely idiocy I have seen on the road and ignorance to cyclists is incredible, some must obviously think that we have a protective shield around us.

I have to admit though until I started to cycle I didn't realise what it was like to be a cyclist, so maybe thats where a lot of the breakdown occurs.

I wouldn't be going off on some high ground about cyclist and reg plates etc, yes there are some stupid cyclists, but there are plenty of drivers to make up for them

Captain Havoc

-Chris- wrote: »

Thread moved to Cycling forum.

Thanks, popcorn anyone?

Stark

billyboy01 wrote: »

A Hand signal would be nice too!

Do you indicate for every pothole you drive past?

mikemac

Bit off topic but I always thought if you were going to train a car driver, take them out in your local town or city for an hour or two on a scooter or bicycle do a few laps of the area. See things from a different perspective.

Easy for car drivers to get disconnected in their air conditioned cocoons and radio blaring.

Being on a scooter made me a better car driver if that makes sense.
I would think cycling would have a similar effect.

Edit yop has most of my points above ^^

The tax man

Captain Havoc wrote: »

Thanks, popcorn anyone?

I ran out of mine while over on the Motors forum. What flavour you got?

timogen

Monty Burnz wrote: »

I'd suggest you try cycling in the city to get an idea of why. You spend a lot of time looking around you for threats to your life, and a lot of energy getting the damned bike moving. If you had to stop every few metres because of a pothole or parked car or whatever, the whole thing would be a waste of time and you'd just have another few hundred thousand cars clogging up towns and cities around the country.

Monty i agree it's dangerous for cyclist,because of some idiots in cars,They're are just as many idiots on bike.Some motorist infuriate me and have seen one of the biggest of those idiots earlier today.
Youll have to agree there is alot of idiot cyclist to.
As for a pot-hole yes you should stop if there is a car just over your shoulder it could save your life stopping.

Baralis1

Drummerboy08 wrote: »

I think a cyclist is only entitled to do that where a cycle lane has not been provided.

And there is a big difference between holding the centre of the road and moving from one side to another in front of cars with no notice.

Yeah, that would be where a cycle lane is not provided. Swerving out with no notice randomly would be wrong of course but I think most cyclists that value their lives wouldn't do that. A cyclist can swerve though if they encounter a pot hole or some other obstacle on the road and the motorist must allow enough room. Otherwise, they should use hand signals.

Doctor Bob

-Chris- wrote: »

Thread moved to Cycling forum.

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

This thread doesn't need a dose of rationality. It needs a hug. Or a lethal injection.

RandolphEsq

The common enemy is the pedestrian. Pedestrians, in the city, are absolutely clueless and deserve to be hit unless crossing at a green man, or in good time where there is no green man. Car-dodging has to be the most insane thing that happens. Stepping off a kerb without looking is also done by peds and results in a good kick from me if I'm on my bike (happened twice from me on my bike when they stepped off the kerb right into the cycle lane without looking!)

man.about.town

as jeremy clakson put it last week on top gear, who pays the road tax? cars, therefore there more entitled to use the than bike.

<snip>

kona

man.about.town wrote: »

as jeremy clakson put it last week on top gear, who pays the road tax? cars, therefore there more entitled to use the than bike.

<snip>

Following on from this excellent logic:

People who pay more tax are more entitled to live in Ireland.

People who drive smaller engined cars are less entitled to be on the Road, than people who drive larger engined cars.



What would happen if say cyclists may own a car and pay road tax too! although this variable may cause severe confusion amongst

<snip>

<snip>

Kintarō Hattori

Drummerboy08 wrote: »

As it is illegal to park in a cycle lane, I suggest you take registration numbers and report the vehicles to the Gardai.

Is it? What if a car owner parks the car on the street outside their home but that part of the road is also a cycle lane.

Lumen

This thread deserves to be run over.