Buffalo & Doozerie - The mild musings of two grumpy old men!

stecleary

BoardsMember wrote: »

He bent my front wheel right around, and went down.

bent as in buckled? If so i'd have frog marched him to the nearest bike shop and charged him for a new wheel

Fian

BoardsMember wrote: »

*snip*
I know the look, he was looking to avoid unclipping by picking a gap in the pedestrians crossing the road. the gap he identified was in front of me, he sped up so was going through the red light at a reasonable pace while people were still crossing. So I decided to take one for the team and closed the gap. He bent my front wheel right around, and went down. *snip*

Do you mean that you deliberately caused him to crash into you? If so not your finest hour indeed imo. Someone crossing at speed "between" pedestrians is indeed a tosser of the highest order and possibly "deserves" to come a cropper, but this does not justify deliberately causing a crash just to prove a point.

Someone (you, he or another pedestrian if he swerved to avoid your front wheel) could have been injured.

not to mention his poor innocent carbon bike.

BoardsMember

stecleary wrote: »

bent as in buckled? If so i'd have frog marched him to the nearest bike shop and charged him for a new wheel

No damage, just twisted....

BoardsMember

Fian wrote: »

Do you mean that you deliberately caused him to crash into you? If so not your finest hour indeed imo. Someone crossing at speed "between" pedestrians is indeed a tosser of the highest order and possibly "deserves" to come a cropper, but this does not justify deliberately causing a crash just to prove a point.

Someone (you, he or another pedestrian if he swerved to avoid your front wheel) could have been injured.

not to mention his poor innocent carbon bike.

Yeah, you're probably right. He was not travelling at speed, but he was not rolling extremely slowly either. Anyhow, it all happened very quickly, I didn't exactly think through it. My only regret was that his bike was fit to cycle off on, I'd love it it was fcked, might teach him a lesson.

Leroy42

Fian wrote: »

Do you mean that you deliberately caused him to crash into you? If so not your finest hour indeed imo. Someone crossing at speed "between" pedestrians is indeed a tosser of the highest order and possibly "deserves" to come a cropper, but this does not justify deliberately causing a crash just to prove a point.

Someone (you, he or another pedestrian if he swerved to avoid your front wheel) could have been injured.

not to mention his poor innocent carbon bike.

I was thinking the same thing. The cyclists was indeed a tosser, but you said yourself that you saw the look, you knew what he was going to do and you deliberately took an action to increase the likelihood of an accident.

That doesn't make what the cyclist did right, far from it, but it doesn't make you a hero either. To then assault the guy on the basis that you were at least partially to blame for the accident is somewhat warped.

We each have a responsibility to avoid accidents. Being right or wrong takes a backseat to the first principle. If I see a car on the wrong side of the road I don't just carry on driving straight into them if I can avoid it. Now if the crash happens of course the blame lies with the other person, unless it can be shown that I had sufficient time to avoid the accident but deliberately speed up in order to ensure the crash happened.

Chuchote

Leroy42 wrote: »

I was thinking the same thing. The cyclists was indeed a tosser, but you said yourself that you saw the look, you knew what he was going to do and you deliberately took an action to increase the likelihood of an accident.

That doesn't make what the cyclist did right, far from it, but it doesn't make you a hero either. To then assault the guy on the basis that you were at least partially to blame for the accident is somewhat warped.

We each have a responsibility to avoid accidents. Being right or wrong takes a backseat to the first principle. If I see a car on the wrong side of the road I don't just carry on driving straight into them if I can avoid it. Now if the crash happens of course the blame lies with the other person, unless it can be shown that I had sufficient time to avoid the accident but deliberately speed up in order to ensure the crash happened.

Thank you. This is it exactly. The desire to stop another person breaking traffic rules can be dangerous - it's the equivalent of the radio jock's "I'll tell you what to do, hit him with a walking stick".

Seve OB

I'm gonna say it.... Fair play to the BoardsMember. Manys the time I would have loved to do something similar but never had the balls. The fooker got what he deserved.

Also had a school incident yesterday. I had dropped my kids in and was walking back out, still on (primary) school grounds, heading up the ramp entrance. The bell had just gone and I got away fast so there was still lots kids coming in, lots of parents leavings, buggies younger kids etc.

Now, the school harp on about not cycling, skating, scooting, whatever in the school grounds. It's to tight and narrow, to many kids around and accidents bound to happen. The odd time you might see a toddler on their scooter, but in general, the rule is adhered to.

This gobsh1te parent decides it is ok for him to mount his bike and try and cycle through the crowd, up the ramp, which in no possible way could have gotten him out any quicker at all. Of course, as he was getting on his bike, there was a natural wobble to balance and he banged straight into a young lad who couldn't have been much more than 5. Not a major bang or anything, but if you bump into a young kid like that, they are going to feel it for a while. He said a very quick sorry and tried to cycle through the crowd.

I was next to him so gave a him a piece of my mind and more or less told him to cop on and that cycling was not allowed on school grounds. I didn't get into stupidity of what he was doing with so many people around or anything. He looked at me and I could see he was actually about to have a go back, but I just waked off.

'68 Fastback

Hats off to Boardsmember for not beeting the guys teeth out. As for the innocent carbon frame, I'd have snapped it and cut the fecker up with the shards of his oversised BB shell. The guy had a red light to warn him not to proceed so he made his choice and it didn't pay off.

I don't break lights but I have nothing against someone checking out a situation and rolling through if it's all clear. But this kind of arrogance deserves instant karma. Hopefuly a lesson has been learned.

BoardsMember

Leroy42 wrote: »

That doesn't make what the cyclist did right, far from it, but it doesn't make you a hero either. To then assault the guy on the basis that you were at least partially to blame for the accident is somewhat warped.

We each have a responsibility to avoid accidents. Being right or wrong takes a backseat to the first principle.

I agree with you 100%.

And I actually admitted I was not proud of myself, i.e. not my finest moment, I don't consider myself a hero, nor my actions heroic.

I didn't assault him.

I cycle all the time, and usually avoid accidents or confrontations where I am or would be in the right. I have walked away from being knocked off my bike when in the right by incompetent drivers twice. Both times with a "don't worry about it, just take more care in future" type approach to the drivers, because we all make mistakes, and I had not been badly hurt. I go on group cycles all the time and I don't engage with cyclist v driver anger/sensitivities, I just get on with it, we all have to use the roads, and most of us are doing our best.

So I am not just some vigilante on a witch hunt looking to assault law breakers or cause accidents. I am sensitive to the fact that my kids, other kids, are constantly playing chicken at the green lights. Since this happened I have heard another couple of kids, along with my own, have been knocked down on the green man. It's just not good enough, and I'm sorry, but I'm still pleased I did something about it as I am not sure what else I could have done to stop him doing this every morning, and I don't want my kid, or another kid, to be knocked down by him. I would probably feel dreadful if he was injured, but I am glad I scared the sh1t out of him.

Seve OB

Seve OB wrote: »

Also had a school incident yesterday. I had dropped my kids in and was walking back out, still on (primary) school grounds, heading up the ramp entrance. The bell had just gone and I got away fast so there was still lots kids coming in, lots of parents leavings, buggies younger kids etc.

Now, the school harp on about not cycling, skating, scooting, whatever in the school grounds. It's to tight and narrow, to many kids around and accidents bound to happen. The odd time you might see a toddler on their scooter, but in general, the rule is adhered to.

This gobsh1te parent decides it is ok for him to mount his bike and try and cycle through the crowd, up the ramp, which in no possible way could have gotten him out any quicker at all. Of course, as he was getting on his bike, there was a natural wobble to balance and he banged straight into a young lad who couldn't have been much more than 5. Not a major bang or anything, but if you bump into a young kid like that, they are going to feel it for a while. He said a very quick sorry and tried to cycle through the crowd.

I was next to him so gave a him a piece of my mind and more or less told him to cop on and that cycling was not allowed on school grounds. I didn't get into stupidity of what he was doing with so many people around or anything. He looked at me and I could see he was actually about to have a go back, but I just waked off.

Same d1ckhead cycling around the school yard again this morning amongst the hundreds of people. I said it to him again... "I didn't know you were not allowed" he said. I told him to get of and wheel his bike.... which he didn't, but kinda sat and pushed his feet along the ground instead of propelling the pedals :rolleyes:

Now you have to be a complete moron to not know because it is said time and time again by the school, and, nobody actually does it!... except him of course! But forget about that, anyone with a pair of eyes can see it is impossible to cycle around with so many people all over the place, moving in all sorts of directions. The missus told me to report him to the principle...

Chuchote

A parent doing it? What a loon!

CramCycle

Chuchote wrote: »

A parent doing it? What a loon!

As my brother in law recently pointed out to me, it is only when you start cycling or walking a reasonable distance in Dublin, do you see the complete lack of reason and decency rife throughout our capital.

When in work or social situations, we tend to either blend in with those of a similar expectation/standard as ourselves, or we adjust and lower/higher our own standards to blend in. Not true for everyone but those two options cover alot of people.

Commuting does not have this, and what you consider reasonable or decent, may not even be an afterthought to some of those sharing the roads with you.

From the guy who blasts through the ped lights outside a national school, to seveOBs ass literally tunnelling out space for himself through kids. Most things I ignore because while i would not do them, I can either understand or realise that it is not harmful. My standards don't adjust, so maybe I am broken but I do have an error bar for acceptance. I think it just gets me sometimes that some have such a disconnect from common decency that vehicular manslaughter are reasonable responses to a percieved inconvenience, or that inconveniencing others via unintentionally threatening behaviour (skimming pedestrians, left hooking cyclists etc.) by making them adjust to what you want is OK if you are in a rush.

Chuchote

CramCycle wrote: »

As my brother in law recently pointed out to me, it is only when you start cycling or walking a reasonable distance in Dublin, do you see the complete lack of reason and decency rife throughout our capital.

Yeah.

I hear you.

We absolutely have to win back a meditative, calm and considerate way of dealing with each other.

dermabrasion

Actually Cram, how about you thinking about this another way. Because we have practically zero enforcement of minor traffic laws in the city, do you not think that we actually behave quite well compared to other cities with no effective police deterrent?

CramCycle

dermabrasion wrote: »

Actually Cram, how about you thinking about this another way. Because we have practically zero enforcement of minor traffic laws in the city, do you not think that we actually behave quite well compared to other cities with no effective police deterrent?

You are of course, quite right to an extent. Considering the lack of enforcement or follow up, it is surprising how good the accident, injury and death rate is on our roads.

Like I said though, I have been brought up a certain way, to this extent I expect a certain standard from myself and hope that others meet it or exceed it. This said, becoming a member of boards has done more to improve my understanding of what good behaviour is, than what I was taught growing up. So maybe I can grow, and if there is hope for me, there is hope for everyone.

I suppose my question is, is it lack of knowledge that leads to my perception of bad manners or is bad manners a domineering factor that overrides knowledge, present or otherwise.

Either way, people being people, we have staggeringly good manners considering the financial or judicial risk associated with not following the rules.

Bloggsie

BoardsMember wrote: »

Last week...having dropped the kids to school via the pedestrian crossing right outside the school, I used the crossing to get back to town-ward direction of road, wheeling my bike. There were others using the crossing, mostly in front of me. The light sequence is quite short as a green man/red light to traffic, though there is a generous orange. Still on the green man I notice lycra clad man on carbon bike eye up the situation as he approached the lights. I know the look, he was looking to avoid unclipping by picking a gap in the pedestrians crossing the road. the gap he identified was in front of me, he sped up so was going through the red light at a reasonable pace while people were still crossing. So I decided to take one for the team and closed the gap. He bent my front wheel right around, and went down. I lost it completely with him. I didn't curse or hit him, but it was all I could do not to. I roared at him for several minutes, holding him all the time, marching him from the middle of the road while still grabbing him. I was absolutely livid. My own kid has been knocked down crossing on the green man here by a cyclist, as have other kids. I made a huge scene. Not my finest moment, but I was so incensed. It takes a special kind of tosser to break the red light outside a school with kids/parents/prams crossing on the green man. I eventually stopped roaring abuse at him and let him go when he promised not to do it again. In my enraged state, I thought I might hang onto him and call the Gardaí but I decided to just let the scene come to an end. Several parents and teachers saw the aftermath, I think my new nickname is Walter White.

I have to agree with your actions, my only issue with your actions are had he bounced into someone else that got hurt, the end result would have not been worth the risk, but I still would like to think id have done the same in the heat of the moment.
What are the chances he has done it again already, do you think your shock tactics have changed his mindset?

Leroy42

Bloggsie wrote: »

I have to agree with your actions, my only issue with your actions are had he bounced into someone else that got hurt, the end result would have not been worth the risk, but I still would like to think id have done the same in the heat of the moment.
What are the chances he has done it again already, do you think your shock tactics have changed his mindset?

Do you think that should you break a red light a car driver should be allowed to drive straight into you. Do you think it would be appropriate to open their door into your path?

An then where do you stop it. Should people be allowed to punch children for riding on the footpath? What about if a motorist feels you are taking up too much space and not close enough to the kerb, should they be allowed to run into you?

Our primary goal is to avoid accidents and secondly the law. If you have to break the law to avoid an accident then so be it, no judge will do you for that. What you guys seem to be suggesting is that people actively take the implementation of laws, and their understanding of them, into their own hands and dole out justice as they see fit.

Chuchote

Leroy42 wrote: »

What you guys seem to be suggesting is that people actively take the implementation of laws, and their understanding of them, into their own hands and dole out justice as they see fit.

Look how that's playing out in the Philippines…

Seve OB

Whilst I understand what you are trying to say, you are going about it completely wrong.

Leroy42 wrote: »

Do you think that should you break a red light a car driver should be allowed to drive straight into you.

If you broke a red light, then it would have been your own fault.

Leroy42 wrote: »

Should people be allowed to punch children for riding on the footpath?

Eh, that would be assault.

Leroy42 wrote: »

What about if a motorist feels you are taking up too much space and not close enough to the kerb, should they be allowed to run into you?

Well there is no law saying you have to cycle close to the kerb. If a motorist acted as you describe, then that would be dangerous driving and they could face a conviction.

Chuchote

Seve OB wrote: »

If you broke a red light, then it would have been your own fault [if a driver "drove straight into you".

If the driver did it accidentally, it would be your own fault.

But if a driver "drove straight into" a cyclist on purpose to punish the cyclist for breaking the lights, that would be attempted murder, with malice aforethought.

Leroy42

It would be your own fault is a motorist drive straight for you just because you broke a red light? I did say they drive straight into you, not that you crashed into their car. The action of driving means it was on purpose.

Why is a punch on a child assault but actively causing an accident is considered good form?

On the kerb example, I deliberately used one that is not breaking the law so show how it is a slippery slope. Many motorist feel/think that a cyclist has an obligation to get out of their way. So thinking that they would be right to hit the cyclist (in their head the cyclist is breaking the rules).

magicbastarder

Seve OB wrote: »

If you broke a red light, then it would have been your own fault.

if you break a red and create an unavoidable collision, your fault.
if you break a red and create an avoidable collision - one which the other driver chooses not to avoid - that other driver is clearly at fault.

Seve OB

magicbastarder wrote: »

if you break a red and create an unavoidable collision, your fault.
if you break a red and create an avoidable collision - one which the other driver chooses not to avoid - that other driver is clearly at fault.

I know.

I was being devils advocate

Chuchote

Seve OB wrote: »

I know.

I was being devils advocate

No need. The devil already has many, many advocates.

CramCycle

Chuchote wrote: »

No need. The devil already has many, many advocates.

I support the devil, it is the righteous (not correct, or even legally knowledgeable) preachers on the road, who feel it is their god given right to enforce the law in an almost biblical fashion.

Rogue-Trooper

Anyone that goes to city centre through Fairview noticed this piece of fantastic signage placement recently? (That's the cycle lane on the left hand side of the footpath)



There are a number of concerns I have about this:

• It is positioned at a pinch point - there's just enough room to get a bike through between the railing and the sign. It's great fun for any poor peds in the morning with all of the bikes piling through that small aperture.
• The telecoms boxes (or whatever they are) just before it create a 'chicane'.
• The manhole covers are at the exact point where you brake before you enter the 'chicane' - lethal when wet.
• The cycle lane moves back on to the road a couple of metres past the sign, however the sign completely obscures your view of the road so it's impossible to see if there's anything coming as you pop back onto the road

I've no idea who governs the placement of these signs or if anyone does. Are they just told to put them out wherever they fit?


Anyway, rather than just moan about it here, I called DCC earlier and spoke to a helpful gentleman who has logged my concerns. I've also sent them on the pic above.



S'pose time will tell if they do anything about it. I just hope they do it before someone falls off at the sign or gets a smack of a 29A as they rejoin the road.

buffalo

Kudos to the few pricks this morning, livening up an otherwise dull Friday morning. Pedalling along the canal, hear a bell from behind and I immediately indicate and move over to my left to allow the overtake. Instead I get a roar of abuse because the muppet had decided to overtake on the left, and he has been delayed for approximately a second. No response to my call of 'calm down'.

Dude #2 cycling on the wrong side of the road on Seville Place, a pretty busy city centre location. Which means oncoming cars are swerving out around him and toward where I'm filtering up the outside of a line of traffic.

Dude #3 in a car... I'm not even arsed. Cut me off, overtaking tightly on a left turn leaving me no room.

Incidentally, I heard an RSA ad this morning recommending a 1m overtaking distance in certain areas, instead of the universal 1.5m. Anyone know where that idea came from?

Chips Lovell

buffalo wrote: »

Incidentally, I heard an RSA ad this morning recommending a 1m overtaking distance in certain areas, instead of the universal 1.5m. Anyone know where that idea came from?

Came from? I think you're giving them far too much credit there.

Chuchote

buffalo wrote: »

Incidentally, I heard an RSA ad this morning recommending a 1m overtaking distance in certain areas, instead of the universal 1.5m. Anyone know where that idea came from?

Where was that ad? Immediately report it to the Advertising Standards Authority, perhaps using this

buffalo

Chuchote wrote: »

Where was that ad? Immediately report it to the Advertising Standards Authority, perhaps using this

Morning Ireland on RTE Radio 1 today at about 07:16...

http://www.rte.ie/radio/utils/radioplayer/rteradioweb.html#!rii=b9%5F10630072%5F48%5F07%2D10%2D2016%5F

50kph and under: give 1m space
over 50kph only: 1.5m