Bicycle fines for running a red light?

seamus

psychward wrote: »

I don't see why people can't cycle across Grafton Street for example to cut across one way systems.

Because a very simple solution already exists for that scenario - jump off and push.

While I hate when cyclists are treated like "fast pedestrians" in some cases - such as being asked to "dismount" at roadworks and push your bike for the next 750m, there are also certain instances where it's perfectly reasonable to be asked to hop off, push your bike 10m across a path and then jump on again to join another road. This doesn't require any new laws or special consideration, but it should make people on bikes think that when they're on a bike, they're not a pedestrian and so shouldn't try to act like one.

My main issue is where any road users are given less or more rights than another. If you allow cyclists to break certain laws in some circumstances, then you just enforce the idea that cars should be entitled to treat cyclists differently to other traffic.

psychward

seamus wrote: »

Because a very simple solution already exists for that scenario - jump off and push.

It's against common sense however if there is nobody on the street to hit even if you wanted to. And at early morning times when there are often very few people there are lots of heavy goods vehicles. Why should heavy vans and cars be able to drive around Grafton Street at this time yet careful cyclists be penalized ?

seamus wrote: »

My main issue is where any road users are given less or more rights than another. If you allow cyclists to break certain laws in some circumstances, then you just enforce the idea that cars should be entitled to treat cyclists differently to other traffic.

Road users will always be in different classes,motorbikes, cars, lorries, taxis, buses etc and have different rules apply to them regarding usage of bus lanes, right turns from Georges Street onto Dame Street etc etc. So they all don't have equal rights and never will. Cyclists exists on a spectrum closest to pedestrians. Theres no excuse for dangerous driving. Of course applying the law with common sense as it's driving principle assumes we have enforcers i.e Guards and lawmakers who are intelligent enough to make the distinction.

check_six

psychward wrote: »

It's against common sense however if there is nobody on the street to hit even if you wanted to. And at early morning times when there are often very few people there are lots of heavy goods vehicles. Why should heavy vans and cars be able to drive around Grafton Street at this time yet careful cyclists be penalized ?

I thought cyclists were allowed on Grafton St up till 11am? Am I mistaken?

psychward

check_six wrote: »

I thought cyclists were allowed on Grafton St up till 11am? Am I mistaken?

If they are that would make life a lot less complex for me.

jin.ie

Ha Monkeypants
I'm glad you think it's funny, but that's my opinion on the rules for bicycles in Ireland, you can go cross the road on a red light while walking your bike and the Garda wouldn't really care but if you cycle through slowly they stop you.
Why do you have to waste your time going to court? no option of an on the spot fine?
I've seen loads of people cycle through Grafton street, with the Gards present even when it's busy. and I've cycled on footpaths loads of times, it's safer than some of these f**ckin roads in Dublin, especially the roads where loads of cars are parked in the bicycle lanes!

wannabe7a I got stopped this morning as well. Was going through a red pedestrian crossing light after the pedestrians had gone. Cycled slowly through the red light (in my defense). I got away with a warning but next time it will be the court.

Does anybody know what the fine will be for going through red light?

ps. my opinion is that there should be different degrees of fines for going through red.

You got lucky!

ps.

Doom

you're going to an organ doner soon

what a nice comment you prick. I usually don't get pissed off but I had to say it.

Beasty

jin.ie wrote: »

what a nice comment you prick. I usually don't get pissed off but I had to say it.

And next time you say something like that you'll be getting a holiday from the forum

Beasty

jin.ie

Fair enough,
sorry just can't stand other people's nasty comments!

Doctor Bob

OP: You mentioned two junctions- one on Camden Street and one in Ranelagh. Which two exactly, and which directions were you going?

dave2pvd

Oldlegs wrote: »

"Right Turn on Red" is great. But I wonder would the "4-way stop" ever have a chance here in Ireland. It would be great to try it for a few weeks just to see the antics of competing drivers

For anyone not familiar with the concept. It is basically a crossroad junction where ALL have to stop. If multiple drivers are at the junction you take it in turns to pass through. Works if every one plays by the rules. Chaos otherwise.

Also gives rise to the concept of a "rolling stop" where if traffic is light you may not want to come to a complete stop, so you slow down, have a quick look and continue on. Great place to pick up a few traffic tickets

The 'American roundabout'. Confuses the hell out of Irish tourists.

dave2pvd

psychward wrote: »

In the states at least in San Fran I seem to remember cars could turn a corner slowly even if there was a red light but always had to give right of way.

In some states, yes. Not all.

Plus, you have to come to a complete stop before proceeding. [SARCASM]But only if there's a cop nearby[/SARCASM]

jin.ie

Doctor Bob

OP: You mentioned two junctions- one on Camden Street and one in Ranelagh. Which two exactly, and which directions were you going?

Em around Camden street towards Rathmines, (could have been Aungier street, was along that road anyway, not sure of the name of the intersection)

and going from Ranelagh to Rathmines, I'll go back and see for myself before I say for sure, because I was in a hurry last time

galwaycyclist

psychward wrote: »

Well the question is do we want to encourage people to use bikes or not. in Germany and many other countries you can often ride on the footpath and they will paint a cycle lane onto even a narrow path and people just learn to get out of the way or stay on their side of the path. The one way traffic system makes bikes even harder to use in Dublin City Centre. I don't see why people can't cycle across Grafton Street for example to cut across one way systems. I think pedestrians and cyclists should learn how to share the same space and that the fines should go towards the reckless idiots but not to everyone as some people do take care and adjust their speed appropriately. I often cycle across Grafton Street and if I see a baby buggy, a crowd of people or someone old I slow down to a stop and push the bicycle gently with my feet while sitting on it. The last thing I want is some drama or a guilty conscience. I don't want to see laws and fines go against common sense and hit someone who is pushing along with his feet at a snails pace but yes hit the idiots hard.

A lot of this reasonable, the one way streets system should be dismantled - reverted to two way use wherever possible. Any remaining one way streets should be made two way for cyclists by default as was done in Belgium in 2004. "Pedestrian" zones should be open to cyclists by default with perhaps some code of behaviour - particularly if they follow some natural desire line for cyclists. Both of these suggestions are contained in the reports published last week on extending bikeshare to other cities.


Cycling on roadside footpaths is more problematic because in the first instance it can be more dangerous for the cyclists than staying on the road. Also many of the cyclists on this forum are capable of sustaining 20-30 km/h this is bad news far any vulnerable pedestrians in the same space. If your granny has osteoporosis getting hit by a cyclist may not kill her but it could end any independent existence. Even the fear of getting hit by a cyclist could do that.

In any case cycling on footpaths is often a reaction to failures to police motorised traffic the solution to that is police motorised traffic.

galwaycyclist

Ref the point above re marking lines on footpaths in Germany this actually quite controversial and is deplored by some cyclists reps.

The http://verein-gegen-radwege.de/ (club against cycle tracks) might be a good place to start digging. I dont have time to find Englisch translations now.

ThisRegard

dave2pvd wrote: »

The 'American roundabout'. Confuses the hell out of Irish tourists.

Only the stupid ones, anyone with a bit of sense can figure out how they work pretty quickly.

dave2pvd

ThisRegard wrote: »

Only the stupid ones, anyone with a bit of sense can figure out how they work pretty quickly.

I don't know about that. I've seen plenty of Irish over here completely confounded by 4 way stops. Thankfully they all lived to take the return flight to roundaboutland.

Oldlegs

I have seen plenty who cannot deal with the 'basic' roundabout much less the american version.

4-way stop in rush hour traffic is still a sight to behold when it works well and an even better sight when it does not

cyclingrules

I don't think the OP is arguing his case very well at all, which isn't helping the discussion.

For what it's worth, I was stopped by a Gard after going through a red light a few months ago now. I was told I would get a summons, but I haven't yet. I know it can take quite some time though, but here's hoping I don't!

Anyway, I came to a stop at a set of lights, waited until all pedestrians had crossed. The pedestrian lights were amber for quite some time, and I moved a couple of seconds before my lights went green. Technically breaking the law, no argument there. Nothing dangerous about it though as there were no pedestrians crossing.

There is a massive difference between ploughing through a group of pedestrians at 30kph, or tipping slowly through when the way is clear. The Gard didn't see it that way in my case, however.

Only today did I see a Gard casually telling a cyclist that the light applied to him too, and the cyclist seemed to take it on board, as if he didn't know previously. A simple warning would go a long way, or even a 2/3 strikes and then a fine approach. Dragging cyclists to court over something so trivial, is a complete waste of everyone's time, and achieves little.

I'd be in favour of a system similar to that in Germany, cars(and bikes) can move through a pedestrian crossing if the way is clear. It keeps traffic moving, and keeps everyone alert. Disconcerting at first for, me as a pedestrian, but I quickly got used to it.

wannabe7a

It has been mentioned already during this thread but there should be a balance between the rules of red light and use of common sense.

Sometimes flow management can be applied when you just have to turn to the left. As a cyclist you are not endangering any other road user if you are slowly approaching the turn and then move in.

They have acknowledged this for cyclists in some countries like in Holland, Germany and what I understand the US.

The threat of a cyclist doing harm to other road users is far less than harm that can be done against a cyclist. I noticed this every day for my commute. For me it is sometime like a survival game: cars, other cyclists, traffic jams, put holes, glass on the road, sewage lids where your tyres can get stuck into, buses and so on. It would be "kind" if there was more focus on reducing the threats to cyclist instead of adding another threat of bringing a cyclist to court for a red light offence where there was no dangerous situation!

Amen

oheilis

I got nabbed on Friday too, quite possibly by the same Guard as the OP. Approx. 6.30pm coming up George's St., at the junction with Stephen's St. Jumped the light as ped light was Amber and no peds in sight, and Guard stopped me about 15 metres past the junction.

No defense, I was breaking the law, didn't argue with him, but like some others here, I think there should be some leniency (e.g. a stern warning) where the cyclist has demonstrated SOME care. I believe my case is different to some idiot who just ploughs through the junction and forces peds to have to react. Similarly, I couldn't care if peds cross the road on a red provided they check properly for oncoming traffic (particularly bikes, which so often seem to be invisible to them).

Anyway, similar story, I was told to expect a summons. Hopefully it won't materialise, or if it does, Mr. Judge won't be too harsh in setting the fine.

Does the guard HAVE to turn up in court for the fine to be given? Anyone any similar experience and know how much a typical fine is?

coolbeans

I've no truck with running lights generally as it gives cyclists a bad name but has anyone noticed the number of cars running reds? At every junction around rush hour I see at least two cars are squeezing through on reds. It's really become quite remarkable. There'll be a major incident (not accident, stupid term) soon followed by a knee jerk reaction from AGS and the RSA.

radiat

coolbeans wrote: »

I've no truck with running lights generally as it gives cyclists a bad name but has anyone noticed the number of cars running reds? .

Oops!!!
i ran a red light in the car on Sunday. I was in dreamland and was half way through the junction before i released the light was red. I (and others too) were bloody lucky

HivemindXX

coolbeans wrote: »

I've no truck with running lights generally as it gives cyclists a bad name but has anyone noticed the number of cars running reds? At every junction around rush hour I see at least two cars are squeezing through on reds. It's really become quite remarkable. There'll be a major incident (not accident, stupid term) soon followed by a knee jerk reaction from AGS and the RSA.

I'd be amazed if all those red light running motorists aren't thinking that it's perfectly safe since cross traffic hasn't started yet and they wouldn't do it if there were cars coming and some common sense is needed. :rolleyes:

To address a bunch of points in no particular order:

Give police officers a financial incentive to hand out fines is a terrible idea. There is the concept of 'speed trap towns' in the US where fining people passing through is a primary source of funding for the police. Locals, of course, do not get stopped.

Cyclists are not more like pedestrians than cars. We use the road like a car. I strongly suspect people who say this want to be treated like a pedestrian when it suits them (footpath cycling, ignore red lights) and a car when it suits them (using the road).

Any suggestion that laws should use 'common sense' is terrible. Speed limits are good, you are either over the limit or under it. Drink driving limits are good, you are either over it or under it. In both of those cases you can not argue your guilt. Rules that are vague are much more difficult to prosecute. Dangerous driving for example, only the most outrageous examples can be brought to court. What's a dangerous left hook to you is no big deal to the motorist. This is what will happen with any rule like 'it is ok to cycle on the footpath so long as you don't go too fast or get too close to pedestrians'. For some people slow will mean anything less than 30kph and so long as you don't hit them you didn't get too close, other will think getting within a couple of feet at more than 10kph is wrong.

Red turn on red does not work perfectly in the US. Cars are supposed to notice if there is a pedestrian crossing but they often don't have line of sight and they just assume (conveniently) that the way is clear. There have been people killed by drivers using the right on red rules and I've seen plenty of cities which have junctions where this is explicitly forbidden. I've seen Irish motorists miss the fact that the junction they are at is green for straight ahead only and turn left on a red light and then have the sheer self-absorbed stupidity to lay in to the horn at the pedestrians who are already in the junction. This makes me dubious about how well right on red (or left on red for us) would work here.

In similar vein I don't think we have the right culture for four way stops. There will be no social pressure against people who slip through out of turn and as soon as one person does it then everyone else will do it. The same applies to the idea of four way amber flashing lights at night. People forget that for every junction where they stop at red even though nobody is coming they get to plough through another one at full speed because it is already green. The four way flashing amber means you should slow down at every single junction and verify it is clear to proceed. I think a lot of people will treat a flashing amber like a green and when the eventually meet a similar idiot coming the other way there will be a fatal accident. If I get to such a junction first but I can see a car approaching at high speed on the cross road I'm never going to be certain that they will actually stop to let me proceed. Perhaps this is because I don't see why people who completely ignore our current rules for amber lights would obey the rules for this new system.

Lumen

HivemindXX wrote: »

Speed limits are good, you are either over the limit or under it.

If speeding were a good guide to accident risk we'd all be driving around with black boxes in our cars because insurance companies would offer hugely cheaper premiums for them.

Speed limits are a crude and largely ineffective pandering to the "something must be done" lobby, promoted because those responsible for governing our roads lack the imagination or will to come up with something more effective.

Lumen

sheamo f wrote: »

very well said, civilised society has rules so that all people can go about their business in a safe enviroment and when these are breached offenders should be seen to be prosecuted. Where does it stop if everyone decided to take liberties.

mcmoustache

sheamo f wrote: »

very well said, civilised society has rules so that all people can go about their business in a safe enviroment and when these are breached offenders should be seen to be prosecuted. Where does it stop if everyone decided to take liberties.

Up in the trees, flinging poo at one another?

tomasrojo

HivemindXX wrote: »

I've seen Irish motorists miss the fact that the junction they are at is green for straight ahead only and turn left on a red light and then have the sheer self-absorbed stupidity to lay in to the horn at the pedestrians who are already in the junction.

I see this all the time, over and over again. I had to change my route walking home because I got fed up with motorists harassing me and shouting insults at me as I crossed with the green man.

It occurs to me, from principles of software usability that I studied, that if so many motorists misunderstand the signal, it's probably the fault of the signal more than the users. You have to take relative dimwits into account. They need to add a red arrow signal or something like that; the absence of a green arrow doesn't seem to be explicit enough for the careless and thick among us, and we need them to understand as well.

psychward

oheilis wrote: »

Anyway, similar story, I was told to expect a summons. Hopefully it won't materialise, or if it does, Mr. Judge won't be too harsh in setting the fine.

It seems ridiculous what with the costs of courts and judges and lawyers etc for the state that this can't be dealt with out of court unless you wish to appeal against the fine in which case a hearing would be necessary.

seamus

tomasrojo wrote: »

It occurs to me, from principles of software usability that I studied, that if so many motorists misunderstand the signal, it's probably the fault of the signal more than the users. You have to take relative dimwits into account. They need to add a red arrow signal or something like that; the absence of a green arrow doesn't seem to be explicit enough for the careless and thick among us, and we need them to understand as well.

I don't know if you can ever get this perfectly right though. Most of these instances are not down to misunderstanding, but down to just not paying attention.

At a junction close to me, they've changed the layout slightly such that a left-hand lane now gets a filter light every now and again. Previously it was just a standard green light. There are two lanes. Twice now I've seen people sitting waiting to go straight on, and put their foot to the floor when the filter light goes, ploughing straight through a junction where traffic has a green light coming from the left. And anyone I've spoken to has seen this happen at least once at this junction since it changed a few months ago.
It's kind of irrelevant that the junction layout has changed - if someone was familiar with the junction, they would be aware that it has changed and act accordingly.

It's just pure blind doziness and I don't think any amount of red arrows, flashing green arrows or whatever can mitigate this.

tomasrojo

seamus wrote: »

Twice now I've seen people sitting waiting to go straight on, and put their foot to the floor when the filter light goes, ploughing straight through a junction where traffic has a green light coming from the left.

That's interesting. So in this case they're taking a green left turn signal to mean you can go straight ahead, which is even dimmer than the previous instance.

So maybe in both cases they're just responding unthinkingly to the green signal, without looking at the shape.

Maybe they need worded signals: "Straight ahead only", "Left turn only", and light the words up in amber, rather than green.

I guess the large minority of dozy people among will always make mass car ownership a problem.

EDIT: Another odd response is from people who don't realise that lights apply only to vehicles entering the junction, rather than leaving. So you get motorists proceeding correctly through a green light, turning right through the junction and then coming to a sudden halt when they see a red light. But the red light they see is for motorists waiting to enter the junction behind them. Used to see this every day outside East Point business park.

cipo

Haven't read the thread but just wanted to say I think it's only right that fines are being handed out for RLJs.

We are all road users and I'm so sick of idiots getting me tarred with the same brush as them for not obeying rules of the road.

Some of the stuff I see weekdaysin & out of work is just ridiculous.

We all needto do our bit whether you're riding or driving.