Letter in Sunday Independent-Anti cyclist rant

cycletheroad

I see their a letter in the Sunday Independent today having a right go at cyclists breaking traffic lights etc.....:eek:

"Please fine our lawless bike hogs"


Sir -- In Ireland when a cyclist encounters a set of traffic lights it's the norm to keep on pedalling be they red, green, or amber -- and if they should collide with traffic, blame the other party and sue for compensation.

So it was with puzzlement that I recently spotted two cyclists stopped at a red light, but as the green light appeared and the bikers pulled away I noticed small Norwegian flags attached to the cycle bags. Those folks hail from a land where if a cyclist breaks the road code they will be issued with a ticket and will have to pay a fine. It would be a neat idea if the authorities here would please copy and start slapping fines on our own native lawless bike hogs.

Paddy O'Brien,

Balbriggan, Co Dublin

4leto

Guilty as charged, but I don't break them if cars are coming.

Its the ould Irish jaywalking thing, us cyclists somehow feel we are pedestrians.

But how about motorist breaking the cyclelanes regulations. I don't know any motorist who got points for parking in or entering a cyclelane.

But that is not an excuse us cyclists should cop on.

Roger Hassenforder

from Sunday September 04 2011

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/letters/please-fine-our-lawless-bike-hogs-2866189.html

:rolleyes:

ThisRegard

Reading the Sunday Independent is a much bigger issue for society than cyclists breaking red lights.

monument

I'd agree with the main point of the letter -- on the spot fines are needed for cyclists.

At the moment, it's craziness that cyclists have to be dragged to court for minor offences (not all red light breaking is minor, but most are). Same with cycling on the footpath.

Lumen

cycletheroad wrote: »

Sir -- In Ireland when a cyclist encounters a set of traffic lights it's the norm to keep on pedalling be they red, green, or amber -- and if they should collide with traffic, blame the other party and sue for compensation.

Sure, Paddy.

I have a double mattress stuffed with compensation. Sometimes I invite my ambulance chasing lawyer round, and we take out all the cash and roll around in it, singing songs about those poor suckers we've sued.

happytramp

It drives me mad that almost every single time I stop at a traffic light some d***head edges closer and closer to the traffic until they spot a break and dart across the road. The main reason it annoys me is that it makes the rest of us look bad. A lot of those people probably don't identify themselves as being 'cyclists' more likely to them a bike is just something the use when they need to and hence don't really give a **** about it makes the cycling 'community' as a whole look.

Beasty

2 days since our last RLJ thread
3 days since the most recent post in the Should traffic laws be enforced thread

Is there really that much more we can debate on the topic of red light jumping?

Moflojo

Cycling is in a transitionary period in this country; we're very much on the verge of being a fully fledged "cycling nation". It'll take a couple of years to iron the kinks out, mainly because new people are taking up cycling almost every single day.

Until then, I will continue to enjoy reading these threads, no matter how frequently they pop up!

BURN THE RLJs!!! BURN THEM ALL IN HELL'S OWN FIRE!!!!!

cyclopath2001

Beasty wrote: »

Is there really that much more we can debate on the topic of red light jumping?

How drivers get worked up over red light offences, but are remarkably mute about widespread offences of failing to stop on amber?

Beasty

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

How drivers get worked up over red light offences, but are remarkably mute about widespread offences of failing to stop on amber?

I don't see how you can draw such a conclusion. I would guess that those drivers who complain when cyclists fail to obey the lights typically obey them themselves (I know I do, both as a cyclist and driver) - there's no getting away from the fact though that a higher proportion of cyclists break red lights than motorists

The position with red lights is clear - red means stop. However with amber it's less clearcut, as although on the face of it amber also means stop you may go on if you are so close to the line or the light when the amber light first appears that stopping would be dangerous.

Captain Havoc

amber means stop unless it's unsafe to do so, pretty clear cut to me.

-Chris-

Beasty wrote: »

2 days since our last RLJ thread
3 days since the most recent post in the Should traffic laws be enforced thread

Is there really that much more we can debate on the topic of red light jumping?

You need an RLJ Megathread!

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

How drivers get worked up over red light offences, but are remarkably mute about widespread offences of failing to stop on amber?

I'm pretty sure motorist bad behaviour gets brought up every time RLJing is discussed.

Hermy

Beasty wrote: »

I would guess that those drivers who complain when cyclists fail to obey the lights typically obey them themselves...

I have to disagree with that generalisation Beasty. My experience is that those road users who complain most are usually oblivious of their own shortcomings.

cyclopath2001

Beasty wrote: »

However with amber it's less clearcut, as although on the face of it amber also means stop you may go on if you are so close to the line or the light when the amber light first appears that stopping would be dangerous.

What is very clear to anyone using the roads is that drivers who could stop safely on amber do not, and this is a very significant number.

Add to that the number of drivers who could not stop safely on amber because they were driving too quickly (86% of them break the urban speed limit) and I think we'll find that drivers' moral authority to lecture cyclists on traffic signal observance is practically nil.

Diarmuid

Red light jumping is the cyclists version of driving while talking on the mobile phone.

Redjeep!

Diarmuid wrote: »

Red light jumping is the cyclists version of driving while talking on the mobile phone.

Hahahaha, that's about right. I'd reckon that at any one time, about 1 in 5 motorists are on the phone. *

(* This statistic has absolutely no scientific basis other than my own observation.)

Limestone1

Captain Havoc wrote: »

amber means stop unless it's unsafe to do so, pretty clear cut to me.

incorrect - amber means "red's coming so gun it or you will have to stop" !

reallyunique

2002-2006:
Cyclists killed 59, Car users 1028.
Cyclists injured 1354, Car users 29793
The number motorists killed and injured is a genuinely serious issue affecting many families over the years, let's spend our time ranting about the problems that kill and injure people and forget worrying about our own personal irritations.

Of the 11 cycling fatalities reported to the Gardai in Dublin:
8 killed by left-turning Lorries.
1 vehicle hitting a cyclist when changing lanes
1 vehicle rear-ended a cyclist
1 stolen vehicle driving head on into a cyclist
Real numbers, real issues.

RLJ threads are great fun but...
There is no evidence to show that RLJing results in a statistically significant number of accidents and I cannot remember a mention of it in a fatal road accident report. RLJing is a trivial matter that annoys many but materially affects almost none. If this is such a problem then why is it that there is no data on it, no journalist researching this scourge, no politician on the rampage to right this wrong and distract us from his own misdeeds? Is it only the occasional angry letter-writer and forum troll who knows the real truth? Find the accident records, the insurance claims, the injured cyclists, pedestrians and motorists, the overworked A&E staff. Then it'll stop being a rant and become a well reasoned argument.

As for the effect of RLJing on the perception of the cycling community, there is no cycling community in the same way that there is no motoring community or shopping community. We cycle, some cycle dangerously some less so. We drive, some dangerously some less so. Cyclists are as prone to breaking the law as anyone else, in fact once they're off the bike they are anyone else.

Obey they law if you must but cycle and drive safely please.

Trojan

RJL? Cool, we got a new acronym

I view cyclists RJLing as equivalent to drivers doing 35 in a 30 zone. It's not really a huge deal to anyone, and almost every driver does it (I'd guess ~99.999% over a long enough time period).

Still, it's good for a rant.

4leto

reallyunique wrote: »

2002-2006:
Cyclists killed 59, Car users 1028.
Cyclists injured 1354, Car users 29793
The number motorists killed and injured is a genuinely serious issue affecting many families over the years, let's spend our time ranting about the problems that kill and injure people and forget worrying about our own personal irritations.

Of the 11 cycling fatalities reported to the Gardai in Dublin:
8 killed by left-turning Lorries.
1 vehicle hitting a cyclist when changing lanes
1 vehicle rear-ended a cyclist
1 stolen vehicle driving head on into a cyclist
Real numbers, real issues.

RLJ threads are great fun but...
There is no evidence to show that RLJing results in a statistically significant number of accidents and I cannot remember a mention of it in a fatal road accident report. RLJing is a trivial matter that annoys many but materially affects almost none. If this is such a problem then why is it that there is no data on it, no journalist researching this scourge, no politician on the rampage to right this wrong and distract us from his own misdeeds? Is it only the occasional angry letter-writer and forum troll who knows the real truth? Find the accident records, the insurance claims, the injured cyclists, pedestrians and motorists, the overworked A&E staff. Then it'll stop being a rant and become a well reasoned argument.

As for the effect of RLJing on the perception of the cycling community, there is no cycling community in the same way that there is no motoring community or shopping community. We cycle, some cycle dangerously some less so. We drive, some dangerously some less so. Cyclists are as prone to breaking the law as anyone else, in fact once they're off the bike they are anyone else.

Obey they law if you must but cycle and drive safely please.

Excellent post,

I find a good bicycle right side mirror has aided my safety in spades.

But what cracks me up is cars in the cycle lanes on a busy road.

I was cycling the on the coast road towards Howth this morning in poor conditions and people just ignored the lanes and parked whereever. Why arn't these rules enforced, what is the point of having the lane there in the first place.

Dermot Illogical

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/new-traffic-trial-to-picture-redlight-jumpers-in-the-act-2866542.html

bcmf

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/new-traffic-trial-to-picture-redlight-jumpers-in-the-act-2866542.html

DRIVERS who jump a red light will be caught on camera under a new trial.

Dublin is to get the country's first red-light enforcement camera, which is due to be tried out at two junctions crossing the city's red line Luas.

Gardai have confirmed that the images from the camera will be used to issue fixed-charge notices to motorists who break red lights at the junctions.

The 12-month trial is in response to a number of collisions between motorists and trams.

Sergeant Jim Molloy at the garda press office said: "This would be the first red-light camera enforcement project in Ireland."

Failure to obey traffic lights can attract two penalty points, or five on conviction. Motorists will be fined €80, or €120 if that remains unpaid after 28 days.

"In accordance with the standard practice in respect of fixed charge notices, prosecutions would be initiated if payment of the fixed charge wasn't received," said Sgt Molloy.

A spokeswoman at Dublin City Council said: "The purpose of this trial is to monitor vehicles breaking red lights at a junction and to ascertain the extent and seriousness of problems and its implications.

"This camera is in a testing and commissioning phase at present."

The trial will involve one camera, which will be moved between the junctions where the Luas red line meets Blackhall Place and Queen Street near Dublin's quays.

Tom Manning, spokesman for the Railway Procurement Agency (RPA), said: "The primary issue is the failure of motorists, and cyclists in particular, to stop at the red traffic signal at these junctions, thereby jeopardising their own safety and the safety of Luas passengers."

Mr Manning said motorists who drove on to tram tracks without being able to clear the junction also posed a safety problem.

The RPA will collect data from the trial, along with records of collisions along the red line, and monitor the use of the emergency braking system on trams.

This data will be used to give a better picture of safety issues along the Luas red line.

Collisions are less frequent on the Luas green line, as it intersects with fewer busy streets because it was built on the former Harcourt Street railway line.

- Cian Ginty

manwithaplan

Lumen wrote: »

Sure, Paddy.

Careful now

Lurching

Id assume this means they'd just count the amount of cyclists breaking lights, as opposed to the cameras being capable of doing anything about it.

Eitherway, I doubt that many cyclists break reds across Luas lines.

studiorat

So the RPA are policing traffic now. Not sure if I like the idea of that...

Lurching wrote: »

Id assume this means they'd just count the amount of cyclists breaking lights, as opposed to the cameras being capable of doing anything about it.

Get off and walk the bike through the red light...
They'll want reg plates on bikes next.

ashleey

Most of those cameras in London wouldn't get triggered by a bike otherwise pedestrians would set them off. Plus what about no number plates? Or us that coming next?!

tomasrojo

I'm reasonably certain that more cyclists break the lights at that junction than motorists, because that's true of most junctions.

However, I'm not sure whether

The primary issue is the failure of [...] cyclists in particular, to stop at the red traffic signal at these junctions

Perhaps cyclists are making a total nuisance of themselves here, but they don't block the junction and there hasn't yet been a collision with a cyclist that I know of. The problem, as far as I can guess, is mostly motorists chancing the junction and finding themselves stuck in the middle, blocking the progress of the Luas.

And, as already stated, I don't see what these cameras can do about cyclists anyway.

tomasrojo

From my point of view as a sometime pedestrian, I'd certainly like to see more of these cameras.

cdaly_

bcmf wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/new-traffic-trial-to-picture-redlight-jumpers-in-the-act-2866542.html

DRIVERS who jump a red light will be caught on camera under a new trial.

Dublin is to get the country's first red-light enforcement camera, which is due to be tried out at two junctions crossing the city's red line Luas.

I can see he headlines now...

some newspaper wrote:

Red light camera leads to massive surge in rear-end collisions

"Sure the light was only orange and didn't the eejit stop!"...

kincsem

If all cyclists stop at red lights will motorists be happy to be stuck behind a large group of cyclists?