Cyclists in bus lanes (cut from 'giving way to buses' thread)

beauf

SeanW wrote: »

... the use of the colloquial term "road tax" more so than any other colloquial term...

Because not only is it incorrect. Its misleading, and usually used incorrectly.

beauf

What you really mean is YOU don't want to be inconvenienced by cyclists and want to take precedence over everything else on the road.

You don't want congestion, but are not willing to accept it requires losing precedence.

Spook_ie

beauf wrote: »

Except a car isn't a necessity for using the road. If I get a bus I'm using the road. If I cycle I'm using the road. If I walk or run on the road I'm using the road.

So motor tax is simply a tax to have a motor on the road.

The bus has already paid the road/motor tax for you and has added it by costing it into the ticket price, whereas the cyclists/walkers/runners are not contributing anything specifically extra for their use of the road ways

Granolite

SeanW wrote: »

So I am routinely faced with extreme hostility from cyclists both as a pedestrian and a motorist. On boards, I respond in kind.

But I assure you that I do not do so when behind the wheel, because I understand that as a motorist it is my duty to rise above the hateful pettiness and to consider respect and safety of others.

I find your position to be very, very extreme and cant help wonder where you might be picking up this attitude from? I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt on your behaviour behind the wheel but only hope you would extend the same benefit to the great many cyclists who do cycle in a legal and safe manner (in respect to themselves and others). From your contributions so far on this forum you have seemed to have adopted the position that all cyclists are a menace approach which I personnally cant agree with or let go without wading in here. I likewise have no time for renegade cyclists who seem to think they can hop on - hop off at will footpaths and through red light junctions without due regard to pedestrians (and driver's) in our city streets but I fail to see where you experience "extreme hostility" from cyclists outside of those areas.

seamus

Spook_ie wrote: »

The bus has already paid the road/motor tax for you and has added it by costing it into the ticket price, whereas the cyclists/walkers/runners are not contributing anything specifically extra for their use of the road ways

What do you believe would be an amount representative of walkers/runners/cyclists impact on the cost of road upkeep?

Spook_ie

No Pants wrote: »

In my opinion these are losing value. The last such publicity drive that I can recall was last year for headlights on cars. Didn't even see a guard during the supposed crackdown, nevermind come across a checkpoint.

Do you mean the one to use your headlights during the day, if so, no legal requirement to use them during the day except in the case of poor visibility.
If you mean a crackdown on faulty headlights then you'd probably find there were more night time checks ( y'know when people had their lights on ) and it would be much easier to spot faulty lights.

Spook_ie

No Pants wrote: »

What's the average speed of a bus in Dublin vs. the average speed of a cyclist?

Average speed is probably related to the speed of the cyclist holding them up

beauf

Spook_ie wrote: »

The bus has already paid the road/motor tax for you and has added it by costing it into the ticket price, whereas the cyclists/walkers/runners are not contributing anything specifically extra for their use of the road ways

Fares don't cover the cost of public buses. Tax does. All those people pay tax.
You can't assume someone with a car pays more tax than someone without a car. Besides which a lot cyclists/walkers/runners also have a car anyway. You have no idea is a cyclists/walkers/runners also has a car, or has paid more tax than you.

So you can't make a judgement of precedence based on tax. As you have no idea what tax people pay.

runawaybishop

beauf wrote: »

Fares don't cover the cost of public buses. Tax does. All those people pay tax.
You can't assume someone with a car pays more tax than someone without a car. Besides which a lot cyclists/walkers/runners also have a car anyway. You have no idea is a cyclists/walkers/runners also has a car, or has paid more tax than you.

So you can't make a judgement of precedence based on tax. As you have no idea what tax people pay.

Why does it matter what they pay anyway?

beauf

Spook_ie wrote: »

Average speed is probably related to the speed of the cyclist holding them up

My bus takes an 60 mins + to do the same journey I can do on the bike in 35~40 mins. Who is holding who up.

beauf

runawaybishop wrote: »

Why does it matter what they pay anyway?

It doesn't.

But some motorists think it give them priority on the road.

Spook_ie

beauf wrote: »

There are benefits to the economy of reduced congestion, pollution, and health benefits by more people cycling. Whats the cost if all those people drove instead.

So how many kilos of spuds, lirtes of milk etc. are you prepared to haul behind your bike then for delivery to the shops? Your argument is nonsense as the road ( as so many cyclists spout out ) is for more than one class of road user, however to keep this in context, how many of those people driving would use public transport if they weren't being held up by the selfish cyclist who insists they are given priority over the bus?

Simple exercise, could you get 92 average cyclists into the same footprint of an AX bus?

Zebra3

SeanW wrote: »

You can also fail your driving test for failing to make due progress ... hmm ... driving test ...

Because you're not allowed out on your own in a car until you've demonstrated a competence at it. Another thing cyclists can safely ignore.

Same for pedestrians.

Seaswimmer

It would be nice to hear from a bus driver on this topic (Alek Smart??) rather than lots of anecdotal evidence. I would be curious to hear their view to see if its a real issue that causes buses to lose lots of time..

beauf

Spook_ie wrote: »

So how many kilos of spuds, lirtes of milk etc. are you prepared to haul behind your bike then for delivery to the shops? Your argument is nonsense as the road ( as so many cyclists spout out ) is for more than one class of road user, however to keep this in context, how many of those people driving would use public transport if they weren't being held up by the selfish cyclist who insists they are given priority over the bus?

Simple exercise, could you get 92 average cyclists into the same footprint of an AX bus?

bikes don't get stuck in traffic. footprint is irrelevant to bikes.

do you get many bus passengers doing deliveries of milk and spuds ?

one cyclist in front of a bus is not all cyclists. seems like sweeping generalisations are only valid if they are anti cycling.

as a driver I am rarely held up more than a few seconds with cyclists. I'm held up by cars and buses far more often and longer.

smackyB

Spook_ie wrote: »

... how many of those people driving would use public transport if they weren't being held up by the selfish cyclist who insists they are given priority over the bus?

You're just trolling now, you really think people decide whether or not to use public transport based on the likelihood of being held up by these "selfish cyclists"?

cdebru

Seaswimmer wrote: »

It would be nice to hear from a bus driver on this topic (Alek Smart??) rather than lots of anecdotal evidence. I would be curious to hear their view to see if its a real issue that causes buses to lose lots of time..

I'd say the silence probably says enough, most cyclist are ok, a few gob****es but in general cyclists are ok if you give them the respect they deserve as road users.

monument

SeanW wrote: »

Doesn't matter. It's perfectly legal to own a car and not pay tax on it by not using it on public roads.

Examples on the fringe of the likes of people owning cars but not using them on a road is pointless and unimportant.

It's called a road tax mainly because there's a massive misconception that it goes to paying for roads.

SeanW wrote: »

Really? That's why - in the Galway bypass thread - it was claimed that the Galway commercial sector wanted the bypass to free up road space for shoppers - because the benefits of motorists driving to shops is negligable.

Yes, really -- the external benefits of cycling -- you get the economic benefits plus health benefits (which saves the user and the state, thus also the tax payer in general), plus environmental benefits (good for the user, the state and others).

SeanW wrote: »

Also the external benefits in terms of personal mobility - unachievable by any other means - were alluded to in my last post.

This would only apply if somebody was calling for something like a ban of cars or zero usage or ownership -- nobody is.

High car ownership does not mean high car usage -- there's loads of city/countries with around the same level or higher of ownership but with much lower usage.

And, again, we're talking population level -- bicycles and cars, like all tools, suit different tasks to different levels. But the context here is large percentages of trips all around the country being within the distance suited for cycling.

SeanW wrote: »

If cycling was so much better than using a bus in every single one of those cases how come so many people do the latter? Could it possibly be - suprise surprise - that the bus is most suited to their needs? Additionally, assuming that your figures were correct, how does this justify one cyclist adding a minimum of 120 person/minutes to a journey? Especially when motorists get bashed for doing something similar?

As has already been pointed out, the N11 route is in a horribly state for cyclists -- while DLR Co Co has been busy with some upgrades (which looks to be great work!), there's still a lot more to do and the Dublin City section of the route is desperate -- from cycle tracks which have not seen any decent maintenance even when the road has been renewed at least once or twice in the same time.

Danger (preserved or otherwise) is given as the main reason by far why people don't cycle and, with the case we're mainly talking about here, the N11 route seems to have it's fair share of problems -- nearly 1/5 cyclist commuters using N11 were in collisions.

markpb wrote: »

Has any driver in Ireland ever been prosecuted for obstructing the progress of other road users?

Motorists in many towns and cities should be prosecuted for obstructing the progress cyclists -- it happens to me far more so than cyclists holding up anybody.

Where I'm living at the moment there's about one or two places I'll regularly hold up a car or two behind me for a few seconds, while motorists will more often hold me up in many others places and often for longer.

Same thing use to happen in Dublin.

SeanW wrote: »

You can also fail your driving test for failing to make due progress ... hmm ... driving test ...

Hmm... driving tests don't seem to stop motorist from breaking the rules on mass.

SeanW wrote: »

Because you're not allowed out on your own in a car until you've demonstrated a competence at it. Another thing cyclists can safely ignore.

SeanW wrote: »

Firstly it's illegal to drive on your own on a Learner Permit (there hasn't been a "provisional license" in a long time) you also have to pass a Driver Theory Test before you get it. There are also some new regulations on LP users since any of that affected me.

It's not something that cyclists can "safely ignore", it's just does not apply to cyclists. Saying cyclists can ignore it implies it somehow covers them -- it does not.

It is however something that huge numbers of motorists safely ignore and, last time the gardai tried to crack down on it, there was uproar and political interference in the form on a huge amount of pressure on the gardai.

Jack Kyle wrote: »

The salient point is that motorists pay dearly for the "privilege" of using their vehicles on our roads while cyclists are free to cause mayhem and constantly moan about it without putting their hand in their pocket once.

Just do a quick search for mentions of "Fatal RTC" in garda press releases -- you'll find cyclists are not the ones cause mayhem on our roads.

You'll also find the you're free to get on a bicycle or on your two feet at any time without paying -- the tax is a motor tax. If you don't want to use those modes it's you're loss.

bmaxi wrote: »

Is this not a similar problem to cyclists in the bus lane? Yet you feel you have the right to complain and we don't.

Cyclists are legally allowed in bus lanes -- the same can't be said for walkers, joggers, and most cars parks in cycle lanes.

Granolite

Spook_ie wrote: »

So how many kilos of spuds, lirtes of milk etc. are you prepared to haul behind your bike then for delivery to the shops? Your argument is nonsense as the road ( as so many cyclists spout out ) is for more than one class of road user, however to keep this in context, how many of those people driving would use public transport if they weren't being held up by the selfish cyclist who insists they are given priority over the bus?

Simple exercise, could you get 92 average cyclists into the same footprint of an AX bus?

I cant believe we are continuing a "debate" around this spurious observation of a single cyclist holding up 3 buses one day as an example on which to pick on one road using group. I manage to occasionally cycle in bus lanes and always encounter buses passing/over-taking without any issue or perceptable hold up. This includes the N11 stretch of road mentioned by the OP I believe at the start of this thread. So, as we have it one anecdotal observation is being employed as a foundation to basically mud-sling at cyclists in general with..one word..absurd. its akin to complaining about the little old lady down teh road who occasionally holds up traffic tootling along in her little corsa of a saturday on her way to the shops and incriminating all other car driver's by her actions. Except most people can accomodate these little trifling episodes in life and have a sense of perspective!!

michael.dublin

Spook_ie wrote: »

The bus has already paid the road/motor tax for you and has added it by costing it into the ticket price, whereas the cyclists/walkers/runners are not contributing anything specifically extra for their use of the road ways

some of the runners and cyclist do have cars, and have therefore already contributing to using the road, so how it is used, would be up to themself

monument

Spook_ie wrote: »

So how many kilos of spuds, lirtes of milk etc. are you prepared to haul behind your bike then for delivery to the shops? Your argument is nonsense as the road ( as so many cyclists spout out ) is for more than one class of road user, however to keep this in context, how many of those people driving would use public transport if they weren't being held up by the selfish cyclist who insists they are given priority over the bus?

Simple exercise, could you get 92 average cyclists into the same footprint of an AX bus?

You did not reply to my question about taxis in bus lanes -- the main problem blocking up Dublin's bus lanes.

beauf

a lot of bus lanes aren't continuous that's a much bigger issue. there's usually a line of cars holding them up.

Seaneh

SeanW wrote: »

Because you're not allowed out on your own in a car until you've demonstrated a competence at it. Another thing cyclists can safely ignore.

Because cars are one of the most dangerous weapons you can own in this state and bad driving kills hundreds of people in this country every year.

Aard

Spook_ie wrote: »

Simple exercise, could you get 92 average cyclists into the same footprint of an AX bus?

Perhaps not, but cycling has the advantage of being point-to-point so it is unlikely those 92 bus-users would take the exact same route if they were to cycle. Their respective routes would be more spread out than the narrow file of the bus route, leading to less congestion and bottleneck effects.

Surveyor11

Anyway, looks like all our arguing will soon come to an end

http://www.breakingnews.ie/world/new-travel-method-would-be-twice-as-fast-as-flying-claims-inventor-603425.html

Now, I wonder will cyclists be allowed use the same lane as this yoke?:pac:

Spook_ie

monument wrote: »

You did not reply to my question about taxis in bus lanes -- the main problem blocking up Dublin's bus lanes.

Did you ask me a question? no problem I'll answer it anyway, taxis don't block the bus lanes otherwise you wouldn't have people complaining about taxis pulling out of bus lanes all the time to over take buses and causing them to jam on, usually mentioned alongside no indicators! You really need to stick to one argument at a time

Spook_ie

smackyB wrote: »

You're just trolling now, you really think people decide whether or not to use public transport based on the likelihood of being held up by these "selfish cyclists"?

I'm not trolling just reversing the argument that cyclists continually recycle about getting people out of cars onto bikes, why not get them out of cars and onto public transport, a public transport not being hindered by cyclists as seems to be the case when cyclists insist they should have priority over buses

monument

Aard wrote: »

Perhaps not, but cycling has the advantage of being point-to-point so it is unlikely those 92 bus-users would take the exact same route if they were to cycle. Their respective routes would be more spread out than the narrow file of the bus route, leading to less congestion and bottleneck effects.

60 people and 40 people -- bicycle, bus, and car:







But because all of these move and the static footprint isn't the real footprint, this is the important image:

Spook_ie

beauf wrote: »

What you really mean is YOU don't want to be inconvenienced by cyclists and want to take precedence over everything else on the road.

You don't want congestion, but are not willing to accept it requires losing precedence.

As I drive almost exclusively at night time between 22.00 and 5.00 cyclists very rarely cause me problems other than when they cycle to the airport the wrong way up Pinnock Hill with no lights, so you need find a better counter argument

Spook_ie

beauf wrote: »

Fares don't cover the cost of public buses. Tax does. All those people pay tax.
You can't assume someone with a car pays more tax than someone without a car. Besides which a lot cyclists/walkers/runners also have a car anyway. You have no idea is a cyclists/walkers/runners also has a car, or has paid more tax than you.

So you can't make a judgement of precedence based on tax. As you have no idea what tax people pay.

Same old tosh recycled forever by the cycling community...


2 thoretical families, both families get the same income after income tax, prsi etc. both families spend exactly the same amount on the same food etc. the ONLY difference is in one family one person cycles to work in the other one person commutes to work via bus/train or car whch one pays the most tax into the system? which one ( considering they are possible able to take advantage of a tax scheme to save them money ) is paying the least tax, therefore which one is subsidising the other?