Fed up as cyclists as public enemy #1

monument

Who here really thinks cyclists break the law more than others?

Anybody answering 'yes', how brainwashed are you?

You really think cyclists break more lights than pedestrians? Or do you honestly think it's only a tiny percent of motorists who speed, park on footpaths, block ped crossings, tailgate, don't indicate, have no care around cyclists or pedestrians, hold their phones when driving, block advance stop lines and cycle lanes?

Many motorists and cyclists do many of the same wrong things like not yielding for pedestrians at side roads or not slowing down when people cross away from traffic lights.

Don't get me wrong here, as both a cyclist and a pedestrian (often with a baby), I get pissed off with poor cyclling which endangers and it is a problem, but anybody who thinks cyclists are somehow byfar the worst lawbreakers needs to think again.

liam7831

PAY SOME ROAD TAX

Bunnyhopper

liam7831 wrote: »

PAY SOME ROAD TAX

Please tell me that this is a joke....

monument

liam7831 wrote: »

PAY SOME ROAD TAX

I would if I could find any tax called "road tax," but there's no such thing.

And, as for motor tax, I already pay tax to fill my bike's motor with fuel. Cyclists likely pay more tax on fuel than electric car owners. :pac:

Bunnyhopper wrote: »

Please tell me that this is a joke....

Did you not hear the new law? It says once you pay tax you can break more laws...

doozerie

monument wrote: »

Don't get me wrong here, as both a cyclist and a pedestrian (often with a baby), I get pissed off with poor cyclling which endangers and it is a problem, but anybody who thinks cyclists are somehow byfar the worst lawbreakers needs to think again.

You are falling into the same narrow mindset of some journalists discussed here recently who adopt this attitude from the perspective of motorists or pedestrians. It really doesn't matter a ****e who are the "worst" lawbreakers between cyclists, motorists, and pedestrians. It's a pointless argument and achieves nothing. What matters is that lots of people believe it perfectly acceptable to make up their own rules of the road as they go along regardless of its impact on others. And discussions of whether other road user groups are worse than them seems to have the effect of supporting such idiotic actions on the basis that their actions are somehow not as bad.

If we want to be taken seriously as road users, and presumably we all do, lets drop this ****e of comparing ourselves against motorists and moaning that they deserve more grief because they are "worse than us". It has no place in a rational discussion, it just fuels argument and entrenchment of extreme views.

Dermot Illogical

liam7831 wrote: »

PAY SOME ROAD TAX

It's called motor tax. Go away and think about it for a while.

monument

doozerie wrote: »

You are falling into the same narrow mindset of some journalists discussed here recently who adopt this attitude from the perspective of motorists or pedestrians. It really doesn't matter a ****e who are the "worst" lawbreakers between cyclists, motorists, and pedestrians. It's a pointless argument and achieves nothing. What matters is that lots of people believe it perfectly acceptable to make up their own rules of the road as they go along regardless of its impact on others. And discussions of whether other road user groups are worse than them seems to have the effect of supporting such idiotic actions on the basis that their actions are somehow not as bad.

If we want to be taken seriously as road users, and presumably we all do, lets drop this ****e of comparing ourselves against motorists and moaning that they deserve more grief because they are "worse than us". It has no place in a rational discussion, it just fuels argument and entrenchment of extreme views.

It matters when the incorrect idea that cyclists break the law more becomes an idea that is nearly unquestionable in many people's mind.

It matters because many people in all groups -- cyclist, pedestrian, and motorist -- break the law often when they think it's ok to or when they think they'll get away with it. But cyclists are being singled out.

doozerie

liam7831 wrote: »

PAY SOME ROAD TAX

I already pay motor tax, and have been doing so for a few years now. I think you need a new argument. Or a hug.

doozerie

monument wrote: »

It matters when the incorrect idea that cyclists break the law more becomes an idea that is nearly unquestionable in many people's mind.

It matters because many people in all groups -- cyclist, pedestrian, and motorist -- break the law often when they think it's ok to or when they think they'll get away with it. But cyclists are being singled out.

Do you really think that the most effective response to cyclists being singled out is to single motorists out instead? Really?

I agree with you that some people have a very misguided view of the source of problems on the road, but I disagree on how that should be tackled. Education is the key thing - as one example I think it would be of huge benefit to get more motorists out on bikes, and more cyclists into cars for that matter, to give people a better appreciation of other road users and the effect on them of various actions. Pointing the finger at motorists and saying "you are the real problem" will not encourage anyone to be more open minded, it'll more likely have exactly the opposite effect.

Kensington

A very reasoned and balanced poll I see!

While cyclists continue to ignore basic rules like red lights and road signs, then they are going to continue to be singled out as law breakers. Running red lights is the single biggest and most obvious instance of law breaking I see on the roads going to and from work and the vast majority of those doing it are cyclists I'm afraid.

Not stereotyping, brush tarring, bandwagon hopping etc. etc., just simple observation by myself every single weekday.

monument

doozerie wrote: »

Do you really think that the most effective response to cyclists being singled out is to single motorists out instead? Really?...

Where "single out" motorists?

Or where did I say motorists "are the real problem"? Some days, cyclists are far more problematic for me when walking or on the bike. As I said in my OP: I get pissed off with poor cycling.

Lumen

Lazy generalisations are lazy.

monument

Kensington wrote: »

A very reasoned and balanced poll I see!

While cyclists continue to ignore basic rules like red lights and road signs, then they are going to continue to be singled out as law breakers. Running red lights is the single biggest and most obvious instance of law breaking I see on the roads going to and from work and the vast majority of those doing it are cyclists I'm afraid.

Not stereotyping, brush tarring, bandwagon hopping etc. etc., just simple observation by myself every single weekday.

All road users break basic rules every day of the week:

• Motorists speed every day of the week.
• Motorists block ped crossing and advance stop lines every day of the week.
• Motorists break traffic lights on orange and red phases every day of the week.
• Pedestrians jaywalk at or beside traffic lights on mass every day of the week.
• Pedestrians walk on front of cars and bicycles without looking every day of the week.

You're bias if you think cyclists are the only ones.

The poll is a bit of messing btw

doozerie

monument wrote: »

Where "single out" motorists?

Or where did I say motorists "are the real problem"? Some days, cyclists are far more problematic for me when walking or on the bike. As I said in my OP: I get pissed off with poor cycling.

Okay, what are you saying then 'cos I'm lost.

As regards lawbreaking generally: Do cyclists break the law? Yes, regularly. Do motorists break the law? Yes, regularly. Do pedestrians break the law? Yes, regularly. Who is the worst group? Who cares.

mal1

In regards urban cycling, cyclists break the rules and put themselves at risk, drivers break the rules and put others at risk. That's the main reason I don't understand why cyclists are so careless.

I wouldn't even rise to the road tax comment.

monument

doozerie wrote: »

Okay, what are you saying then 'cos I'm lost.

As regards lawbreaking generally: Do cyclists break the law? Yes, regularly. Do motorists break the law? Yes, regularly. Do pedestrians break the law? Yes, regularly. Who is the worst group? Who cares.

I guess I'm saying I care when there's nothing really to back up the idea that cyclists are the worst law breakers.

Does it matter? Yes, I think it does. On the one hand, it's annoying to be branded as a big group of law breakers, but there could be a wider point... If cyclists continue to be seen as outcasts it's (A) easier for some drivers to not care about us and (B) it's harder for others to become cyclists. Image does matter.

Bunnyhopper

doozerie wrote: »

What matters is that lots of people believe it perfectly acceptable to make up their own rules of the road as they go along regardless of its impact on others. And discussions of whether other road user groups are worse than them seems to have the effect of supporting such idiotic actions on the basis that their actions are somehow not as bad.

doozerie wrote: »

As regards lawbreaking generally: Do cyclists break the law? Yes, regularly. Do motorists break the law? Yes, regularly. Do pedestrians break the law? Yes, regularly. Who is the worst group? Who cares.

I care, because while I agree with the general point that one transgression is not more or less wrong than another, and I think that the us-and-them factionalism is deeply unhelpful, I also think that we shouldn't ignore the fact that the seriousness of the likely impact on others of some transgressions is worse that that of other transgressions, and that that seriousness does broadly relate to the vehicle involved. The law already recognizes that fact. Breaking a red light is a transgression regardless of vehicle, but the likely impact on others of that transgression is far greater when the vehicle involved is an articulated lorry or even a car than when it's a pedal cycle.

Kensington wrote: »

While cyclists motorists continue to ignore basic rules like red lights speed limits and road signs indicating, then they are going to continue to be singled out as law breakers. […]
Not stereotyping, brush tarring, bandwagon hopping etc. etc., just simple observation by myself every single weekday.

You can single out any group ("brush tar") you want if you generalize ("stereotype") on the basis of subjective anecdotal evidence ("simple observation").

Eamonnator

what's a "stenotype"?

kincsem

Cyclists probably break the law more than motorists or pedestrians. But is a pedestrian dropping a sweet wrapper on the foothpath, or a cyclist cycling through a red on an empty pedestrian crossing, as bad as driving a 40 foot container truck while talking on the phone or texting?

I know someone who keeps their phone on while driving as they do not want to miss a call. They tell you they don't use the phone while driving. It is a scary experience being a passanger as they scramble for the phone trying to answer it before a caller hangs up.

gottarun

Eamonnator wrote: »

what's a "stenotype"?

Is it what a stenographer does?

Btw, I cycle and don't break the lights, I sometimes break the posted speed limit and I agree it is dangerous that good cyclists run the wrath of some bad drivers who beliver that all cyclists are bad.

I would prefer that all road / path / cycle lane users apply the same duty of care and consideration for other users as is expected from drivers. But then this country is, due to the current economic environment, far from utopia. When they pass laws making it illegal to be a gobsh1te then it will all be better for everyone.

Maybe a zero tolerance attitude from the law enforcers like in New York could change attitudes?

Cookie_Monster

monument wrote: »

All road users break basic rules every day of the week:

• Motorists speed every day of the week.
• Motorists block ped crossing and advance stop lines every day of the week.
• Motorists break traffic lights on orange and red phases every day of the week.
• Pedestrians jaywalk at or beside traffic lights on mass every day of the week.
• Pedestrians walk on front of cars and bicycles without looking every day of the week.

You're bias if you think cyclists are the only ones.

The poll is a bit of messing btw

don't forget motorist on phones, it absolutely epidemic again now

Personally I know I break more laws while driving than cycling.

monument

kincsem wrote: »

Cyclists probably break the law more than motorists or pedestrians.

What on earth are you basing that on? Seriously.

Eamonnator wrote: »

what's a "stenotype"?

What you get when you don't look a second time at an auto-corrected word.

Traumadoc

Cyclists Public enemy no. 1???

You should try being a male cycling hospital consultant.:rolleyes:

Cookie_Monster

Traumadoc wrote: »

You should try being a male cycling hospital consultant.:rolleyes:

what's a cycling hospital look like
:pac:

Holyboy

Well on my short ride home from the shop today I first encountered two young girls standing in the cycle lane that didn't seem to want to move for some reason so I looked behind me to check for cars and went around them, then I came across a lady cycling the wrong way up Cork street while texting on her phone, so I checked behind me and went around her, then when in Smithfield after rolling slowly down a footpath I turned up a one way street (myself going the right way) and was met with a taxi coming at me so I went around him ( I didn't even check behind me this time!!!) Did these things bother me? No. Did I roll through a couple of pedestrian lights when no one was crossing? Yes.
I agree that we should all respect each other as road users, but lets just RELAX a little bit, all this stressing will kill you!!
Haha I sound like a hippy:D

Hermy

gottarun wrote: »

When they pass laws making it illegal to be a gobsh1te then it will all be better for everyone.

Do you really expect the gobsh!tes that make the laws to pass a law that will outlaw their very existence?:p

Jawgap

Absolutely - A scientific poll conducted on Liveline, the Right Hook and in the AH forum confirmed this.

If cyclists had paid their fair share of road tax over the years, we wouldn't be in the state we are now.

Cyclists could also improve their rep by sticking to the cycle lanes and not cycling where there are no such lanes........

hobochris

Op, If you want more accurate feedback from your poll maybe try post it in a neutral forum. Here you will mainly get answers from like minded people(which is maybe what your after, to back up your own opinions on the issue),being a cycling fourm.

petethedrummer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rE8Ngk_Yrus

goingpostal

Coming to a petrol station near you soon!! 10EUR per litre gasoline!! Then we'll all be back on bikes!! I can't wait to ogle all the finely-toned female bottoms!! Females: Feel free to return the compliment!! Peak oil is great!!

Lumen

hobochris wrote: »

Op, If you want more accurate feedback from your poll maybe try post it in a neutral forum. Here you will mainly get answers from like minded people(which is maybe what your after, to back up your own opinions on the issue),being a cycling fourm.

There are no like-minded people in this forum.

We can't even agree about appropriate sock length.

doozerie

monument wrote: »

I guess I'm saying I care when there's nothing really to back up the idea that cyclists are the worst law breakers.

Does it matter? Yes, I think it does. On the one hand, it's annoying to be branded as a big group of law breakers, but there could be a wider point... If cyclists continue to be seen as outcasts it's (A) easier for some drivers to not care about us and (B) it's harder for others to become cyclists. Image does matter.

I think that the idea that cyclists are the worst law breakers exists in the heads of those people too lazy to think for themselves (e.g. those who like people like Joe Duffy and his angry callers to do their thinking for them), or those whose self-interest it serves (e.g. those who use it as justification for their own obnoxious behaviour on the roads). There are many who like to believe that motorist are the worst law breakers and their motivations for choosing to believe that are probably largely the same. The topic of who are the worst law breakers is a debate/argument that can soak up a lot of energy which would be better spent on discussing why people in/on any form of transport should feel it acceptable to treat the roads like their own playground.

I share your annoyance at the general dim view of cyclists by the way. But while I used to put forward strong arguments against people who said in my presence that *all* cyclists are just red-light jumping arses, I find I can't make the same arguments now because there are indeed many many people acting the bollix on bikes these days. Every day I see people on bikes pretty much ignoring the rules of the road and all other road users, be they motorists, other cyclists, or pedestrians crossing on a green light. If we want to improve the image of cycling then we need to insist on something been done about such obnoxious behaviour because it seems to me that it is getting more prevalent rather than less, certainly on my commuting route.

doozerie

Lumen wrote: »

There are no like-minded people in this forum.

I strongly disagree...

doozerie

Bunnyhopper wrote: »

I care, because while I agree with the general point that one transgression is not more or less wrong than another, and I think that the us-and-them factionalism is deeply unhelpful, I also think that we shouldn't ignore the fact that the seriousness of the likely impact on others of some transgressions is worse that that of other transgressions, and that that seriousness does broadly relate to the vehicle involved. The law already recognizes that fact. Breaking a red light is a transgression regardless of vehicle, but the likely impact on others of that transgression is far greater when the vehicle involved is an articulated lorry or even a car than when it's a pedal cycle.

Certainly the implications of being hit by a truck versus a bicycle are potentially very different, but as you say the penalties imposed by law already reflect that. The topic of this thread seems to mainly be about applying (what I consider to be) a meaningless ranking system though where some user group is nominated as being representative of the "worst offenders" end of the scale (or more specifically this thread is about putting cyclists somewhere on the scale other than the top, which means some other group presumably takes the top slot in their place). I don't think its a constructive angle on the whole debate about road safety.

At the very least, this kind of discussion risks going down the well-worn path of arguments along the lines of "as a cyclist I pose less risk than a car so I see nothing wrong with breaking a light. Cars kill, I simply hug!". Which is clearly a nonsense argument (for one thing, I suspect such people wouldn't submit to the tables been turned and having to stand still while a cyclist aimed their bike at them, and with good reason), but before you know it you'll have motorists ringing up Joe Duffy arguing with equal conviction that their breaking a red light is at least not as risky as an articulated lorry breaking a red light thereby making it acceptable. And once Joe is on the case we'll never hear the end of it!

manwithaplan

Is it wrong that I couldn't give a flying ****? Can't I have a non-political commute? I never even realised I was public enemy number 1.

Sometimes I think I'm not self-satisfied enough. Maybe I would be happier if everyone else would just see the error of their ways.

Bunnyhopper

doozerie wrote: »

[…]The topic of this thread seems to mainly be about applying (what I consider to be) a meaningless ranking system […]. I don't think its a constructive angle on the whole debate about road safety.

I think I broadly agree with you. My point was more that we should take care not to allow rejecting that particular meaningless ranking scale to flatten other more meaningful ranking scales, e.g., the huge variations in how bad the various outcomes for different vehicles are likely to be.

I just think that is relevant and constructive here because it shows up some of the mote-and-beam hypocrisy about vilifying cyclists.

manwithaplan wrote: »

Can't I have a non-political commute? I never even realised I was public enemy number 1.

I hope so, but the white van man behind you who's listening to Joe Duffy and reading Ian O'Doherty might feel otherwise

Lumen

doozerie wrote: »

At the very least, this kind of discussion risks going down the well-worn path of arguments along the lines of "as a cyclist I pose less risk than a car so I see nothing wrong with breaking a light. Cars kill, I simply hug!". Which is clearly a nonsense argument (for one thing, I suspect such people wouldn't submit to the tables been turned and having to stand still while a cyclist aimed their bike at them, and with good reason), but before you know it you'll have motorists ringing up Joe Duffy arguing with equal conviction that their breaking a red light is at least not as risky as an articulated lorry breaking a red light thereby making it acceptable. And once Joe is on the case we'll never hear the end of it!

Aside from the accident outcome, the accident risk is lower for an attentive cyclist breaking a red light than for an attentive driver because visibility on a bike is so much better. Modern cars have massive blindspots, driving is akin to peering out of a postbox compared to cycling.

I stop for reds because it's less stressful and more considerate/respectful, not because it's necessary for safety. As a pedestrian I don't enjoy having to dodge or be dodged by cyclists when crossing on green, so I treat others as I would like to be treated.

Daniel S

liam7831 wrote: »

PAY SOME ROAD TAX

I think a lot of people have missed the joke lol

Bunnyhopper

mtb_kng wrote: »

I think a lot of people have missed the joke lol

I thought it was just a joke but then I saw that more than half of liam7831's posts are related to cars and driving so I began to wonder...

Bens

Being a keen cyclist myself as well as a driver I tend to notice faults on both sides.

Yesterday I was driving along looking at the cyclist in my mirror overtaking me as the driver in front was slowing down to turn left. The driver in front was indicating left.
Cyclist keeps going, speeds up, catches up with the car and tries to pass it even though the car started to slow and turn before cyclist was even level with me.
Driver sees cyclist and jams on the brakes. Cyclist gets a fright and and slips, falling off the bike. Cyclist starts roaring and shouting and trying to blame the driver.

It was clearly the cyclists fault. But two other cyclists who were about 5 cars back at the time of the accident then join in. I thought they were going to kill the driver.

Lesson : It doesnt matter whose fault it is. We all have the brains to prevent ourselves getting killed, even if we dont think the person who kills us is in the wrong and we are always right. Use the fcuking head. No point being dead, but being happy because it was up to the driver to watch out for you.

As Lumen has pointed out. Better saving your own life yourself, than hoping a driver doesnt make a mistake and kill you.

Dermot Illogical

Bunnyhopper wrote: »

I thought it was just a joke but then I saw that more than half of liam7831's posts are related to cars and driving so I began to wonder...

Me too.

mickmcl09

I don't really think it matters who's the worst.
From a cyclists perspective, it's so irritating waiting at the lights on the bike while (I wouldn't call them fellow cyclists) some twat comes on and breaks the red or cycles on when pedestrian green light is on. They ruin our rep on the road.
May get slated for this as the serious Lycra cyclist is guilty of breaking rules as well, but most of these cycling rule breakers are commuters or at the very least, clad in a pair of jeans and travelling at no more than around 16-20kph. Hence we all get tainted the same by the motor possie.
Image will never be changed IMO unless we get €10/litre for fuel and put everyone on bikes.

kincsem

monument wrote: »

What on earth are you basing that on? Seriously.

Observation. Seriously.

Lumen

kincsem wrote: »

Observation. Seriously.

Perhaps you're excluding speeding. That's not really illegal.

kincsem

Going through red lights is ok too. Driving on footpaths?

doozerie

Lumen wrote: »

Aside from the accident outcome, the accident risk is lower for an attentive cyclist breaking a red light than for an attentive driver because visibility on a bike is so much better. Modern cars have massive blindspots, driving is akin to peering out of a postbox compared to cycling.

I agree that an attentive cyclist is more likely to see, and hear, dangers than an attentive driver. However, attentiveness seems to be in very short supply amongst the idiots on bikes that I see on my commute. They seem to be a mix of people who simply don't care and people who might actually care but whose bike control wouldn't allow them to pass between a barn opening without clobbering the door frame at both sides (so a pedestrian who steps out in front of them doesn't have a chance).

Lumen wrote:

I stop for reds because it's less stressful and more considerate/respectful, not because it's necessary for safety. As a pedestrian I don't enjoy having to dodge or be dodged by cyclists when crossing on green, so I treat others as I would like to be treated.

I completely agree, my motivation too for obeying the rules of the road is the fact that I don't want to emulate the kind of obnoxious behaviour that I've seen others subjected to (whether in the car or on the bike). That makes me quite "the ghay" or so I'm told - apparently empathy is not a desirable trait in males, or something.

monument

doozerie wrote: »

I think that the idea that cyclists are the worst law breakers exists in the heads of those people too lazy to think for themselves (e.g. those who like people like Joe Duffy and his angry callers to do their thinking for them)...

I wish that was the case, but I think it has the spread of an urban myth at this stage, far beyond Joe Duffy listenership.

doozerie wrote: »

...I find I can't make the same arguments now because there are indeed many many people acting the bollix on bikes these days.

The argument isn't that cyclists as a group don't break laws (they do), the argument is that cyclists are hardly different than others.

doozerie wrote: »

Every day I see people on bikes pretty much ignoring the rules of the road and all other road users, be they motorists, other cyclists, or pedestrians crossing on a green light.

Every day I see people in cars, on bikes, and walking pretty much ignoring the rules of the road and all other road users, be they motorists, other cyclists, or pedestrians crossing on a green light.

kincsem wrote: »

Observation. Seriously.

No ped crossing around where you are to observe? Do you also observe cars speeding? What about tailgating on the M50, M1 etc, do you observe these much?

Here's some stuff to help your observations:

Study: More than 90% of drivers break speed limits

More than half of motorists admit to speeding regularly

53.8% of motorists surveyed admitted to using a handheld mobile phones

40.7% of those surveyed said they text while driving (same as last link)

What new city-centre speed limit? 97% of motorists ignore traffic law

Jaywalking is as bad but nobody bothers to do surveys about it...

Piercemeear

I was under the impression that there were no laws pertaining to peds and jaywalking in this country. Am I wrong that it is not actually illegal to cross wherever you like as a pedestrian?

Out of the three groups you mention, I am most frustrated by cyclists' bad behaviour because I am one, I think. I feel like I'm in a much maligned group, in part because of unfair assumptions and confused facts, but also in large part because we act like eejits in Dublin city. I'm a pedestrian too but, as above, I think jaywalking is legal here. Open to correction.

monument

Piercemeear wrote: »

I was under the impression that there were no laws pertaining to peds and jaywalking in this country. Am I wrong that it is not actually illegal to cross wherever you like as a pedestrian?

There is at or within 15m of a ped crossing.

Piercemeear

monument wrote: »

There is at or within 15m of a ped crossing.

That's really interesting, and makes a lot of sense. If the crossing is there you must use it.

I also have this kind of bias that pedestrians are the purest unit of transport in the city. They are the city, everything else is just clutter. I couldn't hold it against them if they walked all over the place.

galwaycyclist

Piercemeear wrote: »

That's really interesting, and makes a lot of sense. If the crossing is there you must use it.

Hmm makes sense to whom? There is good reason to believe that Irish traffic engineers often use pedestrian crossings to manage and control pedestrians for the benefit of motorised traffic. In that case, is there any moral obligation on pedestrians to use them? (lets leave aside the legalities)

We need to sit back from the behaviour/rule breaking being castigated and think about what is going on underneath. What is going on underneath is that we have a traffic system managed from the perspective of facilitating motorised traffic to the exclusion of all other considerations. Even much of the "cycling" and "pedestrian" infrastructure appears to have this as the underlying purpose.

So if "rules" are being applied to manage people for someone elses benefit at the expense of their own convenience, and occasionally, safety. Is it then realistic to expect the targets of these "rules" to comply?

(It is clearly also possible to use much of the same "rules" in support of a fairly managed system but is that what is actually happening here?)