Have a care if you cycle to work

Spook_ie

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/blind-man-mowed-down-by-cyclists-who-consistently-break-traffic-lights-29833333.html


Says it all really about the attitude of some road users on their commute, let's all get to work safely!

Aishling Phelan – 12 December 2013
Mark Talbot said that when crossing over junctions he has been hit by cyclists on two occasions.

The blind man said he had been in pain after both collisions.

In both incidents the cyclists would have ''broken the lights and they would have seen me and - by mistake or otherwise - collided with me,'' he said.

Spook_ie

Full article was posted in case the indo site is off line for some reason, I would have thought a single occurrence in the OP was acceptable especially as it's not mentioned in the charter about not posting full articles

monument

Spook_ie wrote: »

Full article was posted in case the indo site is off line for some reason, I would have thought a single occurrence in the OP was acceptable

Please read the charter before posting again, thank you.

L1011

The number of cyslists light breaking has definitely got worse over the past few months (although so has the number of cyclists appears to have gone up too, or at least stayed higher than you'd expect in Winter due to the temperature - I'm not sure which). To the point that I've ordered a dashcam in case I need it for defence purposes at some point.

Evern saw two jumping lights at Capel Street Bridge while there was a Garda van there today - if there's any two that are likely to get mown down while flying through a junction it has to be them if they're that inattentive. So was the Garda unfortunately.

Gatling

This time last year while crossing on a pedestrian green light at the corner of George st and dame st my youngest buggy was clipped by a cyclist over taking several cars and ran the red light ,
He came off the bike and jumped up calling for witnesses to back his story of the dad who walked out infront of traffic with a buggy

Tea drinker

My mother was ran down by a cyclist in a pedestrian street. They regularly cycle through pedestrians at crossings. Some are an absolute menace and disgrace. Bringing ill repute on some of the excellently behaved cyclists on the roads.

Until we see a few more deaths due to this there will be no pressure on the gardai to force them to stop ignoring this danger.
2 Gardaí sitting in a marked car on clonskeagh bridge in the morning just ignored a guy going through the lights. Having said that I've heard of a few that were caught.

Jawgap

MYOB wrote: »

The number of cyslists light breaking has definitely got worse over the past few months (although so has the number of cyclists appears to have gone up too, or at least stayed higher than you'd expect in Winter due to the temperature - I'm not sure which). To the point that I've ordered a dashcam in case I need it for defence purposes at some point.

Evern saw two jumping lights at Capel Street Bridge while there was a Garda van there today - if there's any two that are likely to get mown down while flying through a junction it has to be them if they're that inattentive. So was the Garda unfortunately.

It's interesting - I'm not one for helmet cams but based on the number of near misses I've experienced (despite cycling defensively) in the last 2/3 months, I'm considering get one.

And while we're in the vein of using unsubstantiated anecdotes to generalise, I think I'll add mine.

The last time I came of my bike was in August. Cycling along one of the cranks failed and I was catapulted into the middle of a fairly busy road. Lying there, stunned bruised and bleeding the only reaction of the motorist (a Landrover Discovery, if it's of interest) in my immediate vicinity was to sound his horn, before inching around me on the inside !!! - then stopping to hurl a some foul mouth abuse at me - apparently my completely unforeseen dismount had delayed him. None of the other cars, trucks, etc that passed stopped to help.

The moral of the story is that not every cyclist is an RLJing idiot, and not every motorist / driver is a decent civic minded, law abiding road user. A$$holes are everywhere.

In contrast, about 5/6 years ago I took a bad spill and a taxi driver stopped put me in his car and took me to Tallaght, while a mate of his took my bike home then brought my wife to the hospital. Neither of them would accept a fare.

loyatemu

Tea drinker wrote: »

Until we see a few more deaths due to this there will be no pressure on the gardai to force them to stop ignoring this danger.

how many deaths have there been so far?

LeinsterDub

loyatemu wrote: »

how many deaths have there been so far?

Did you know there has been a 100% increase in the 0 deaths caused by cyclist last year. The statistics prove they are menace

L1011

Waiting for the first death before doing anything is the kind of negligence that leads to screams for resignations etc when that death actually happens.

bigar

Yesterday I was almost run over by a car when on my bike. Today the same thing happened with a Dublin Bus. I also hit a pedestrian who walked out in front of me without even a glance in my direction. I had green on all occasions while the others had a red light.

Every single day I see cars, busses, trucks, motor bikes, bicycles and pedestrian breaking red lights so please stop focussing on cyclists alone.

Jawgap

MYOB wrote: »

Waiting for the first death before doing anything is the kind of negligence that leads to screams for resignations etc when that death actually happens.

ok, when was the last death caused by an RLJing cyclist or one riding on the pavement?

I've no problem with scroats who RLJ or use the paths being fined (we're still waiting for the promised FPN Regs to come in) - but lets not blow the risk out of all proportion.

L1011

Jawgap wrote: »

ok, when was the last death caused by an RLJing cyclist or one riding on the pavement?

I've no problem with scroats who RLJ or use the paths being fined (we're still waiting for the promised FPN Regs to come in) - but lets not blow the risk out of all proportion.

That's not a figure that's published anywhere for Ireland. Cause figures for road deaths in Ireland are given in extremely broad categories.

Anyway, the point of my post was that it doesn't matter if nobody has been killed yet - its extremely dangerous and needs to be dealt with before someone gets killed.

Jawgap

MYOB wrote: »

That's not a figure that's published anywhere for Ireland. Cause figures for road deaths in Ireland are given in extremely broad categories..

You reckon?

Ireland Road Collisions

MYOB wrote: »

Anyway, the point of my post was that it doesn't matter if nobody has been killed yet - its extremely dangerous and needs to be dealt with before someone gets killed.

Extremely dangerous? How did you figure that out?

You produced no data to show that it is.

Based on your logic, what else should we ban - rugby? GAA?

How about vending machines - in a typical year in the US between 1978 and 1995 about 2 people per year were killed by vending machines - precisely two more than were ever killed in Ireland by 'extremely dangerous' RLJing and pavement cycling.

L1011

Jawgap wrote: »

You reckon?

Ireland Road Collisions

Those are the statistics I referred to in the first place. They are given in extremely broad categories.

Jawgap wrote: »

Extremely dangerous? How did you figure that out?

You produced no data to show that it is.

Based on your logic, what else should we ban - rugby? GAA?

How about vending machines - in a typical year in the US between 1978 and 1995 about 2 people per year were killed by vending machines - precisely two more than were ever killed in Ireland by 'extremely dangerous' RLJing and pavement cycling.

You've produced no data to prove that its *not* dangerous - and you're going against obvious logic in your claims

Care to explain how jumping a red light isn't extremely dangerous?

Cyclists on here always get ridiculously defensive when there is any mention of dangerous cycling by some of their cohort but this is really taking the biscuit.

Jawgap

MYOB wrote: »

Those are the statistics I referred to in the first place. They are given in extremely broad categories.



You've produced no data to prove that its *not* dangerous - and you're going against obvious logic in your claims

Care to explain how jumping a red light isn't extremely dangerous?

Cyclists on here always get ridiculously defensive when there is any mention of dangerous cycling by some of their cohort but this is really taking the biscuit.

What? You drill right down into those stats to see what class of road user was involved and what the outcome was.

You introduced the idea that it was 'extremely dangerous' - and have yet to provide anything other than anecdotal evidence to back this up.

Base jumping is extremely dangerous, spelunking is extremely dangerous - RLJing is a minor annoyance, the perpetrators of which fully deserve a €50 FPN.

If anything, the RLJ'er is more of a danger to him or herself than to other road users......

Injured cyclist gets driving ban for breaking red light

L1011

Jawgap wrote: »

What? You drill right down into those stats to see what class of road user was involved and what the outcome was.

None of which gives the figures you're looking for. The RSA does not provide figures on the number of collisions caused by cyclists breaking a red light, just as it doesn't provide the figures on the number of collisions caused by a driver doing the same.

Jawgap wrote: »

You introduced the idea that it was 'extremely dangerous' - and have yet to provide anything other than anecdotal evidence to back this up.

And you've purely linked to a set of stats I'm already fully aware of as if it actually disproves something?

Something which puts you at a severly heightened risk of serious injury or death is extremely dangerous. There is no other definition. Breaking a red light puts you at a severely heightened risk of serious injury or death. Hence its extremely dangerous. What are you trying to redefine it to?

Jawgap wrote: »

If anything, the RLJ'er is more of a danger to him or herself than to other road users......

Injured cyclist gets driving ban for breaking red light

Not many people who'd want to be the driver who is involved in a light jumper killing or even only injuring themself. That they're physically unharmed doesn't change anything.

Making comparisons to vending machines and base jumping doesn't work to avoid the point.

Jawgap

MYOB wrote: »

None of which gives the figures you're looking for. The RSA does not provide figures on the number of collisions caused by cyclists breaking a red light, just as it doesn't provide the figures on the number of collisions caused by a driver doing the same.

And you've purely linked to a set of stats I'm already fully aware of as if it actually disproves something?

Something which puts you at a severly heightened risk of serious injury or death is extremely dangerous. There is no other definition. Breaking a red light puts you at a severely heightened risk of serious injury or death. Hence its extremely dangerous. What are you trying to redefine it to?

Not many people who'd want to be the driver who is involved in a light jumper killing or even only injuring themself. That they're physically unharmed doesn't change anything.

Making comparisons to vending machines and base jumping doesn't work to avoid the point.

Maybe because there are no figures to release - anyway, you don't need to find stats you just need to find one example.

Anyway, it is what it is - a minor annoyance. And while I might agree that in very narrow circumstances it is danger - e.g. barrelling through a major junction during rush hour without looking - the rest of the time, it's an irritation at worst.

Spook_ie

loyatemu wrote: »

how many deaths have there been so far?

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Did you know there has been a 100% increase in the 0 deaths caused by cyclist last year. The statistics prove they are menace

Does it have to be a death? what about another similar incident...

Why cyclists should stop at red lights

by Cian Ginty · May 22, 2013
While we are strong supporters of balance in the debate, there’s no point denying that some cyclists need to realise you should not cycle pass red lights or cycle on footpaths.

http://irishcycle.com/2013/05/22/why-cyclists-should-stop-at-red-lights/

monument

MYOB wrote: »

Something which puts you at a severly heightened risk of serious injury or death is extremely dangerous. There is no other definition. Breaking a red light puts you at a severely heightened risk of serious injury or death. Hence its extremely dangerous. What are you trying to redefine it to?

I'd say cyclist red light jumping likely does add a heightened risk of serious injury, but the risk of death is likely not high. That can be said very safety given there is such a low rate of cyclists killing people on foot.

But as Spook_ie points to -- it should not matter: Leaving people in fear regardless of injury should be enough for us to say stop.

I'm against red light jumping, but I'm also against claims that there's severely heightened risk of death, when that risk is so low and I'm partly against this because we should not need death or the risk of death before acting -- it's such an Irish thing.

Spook_ie

http://road.cc/content/news/90309-witness-appeal-police-seek-cyclist-who-collided-pedestrian-londons-regent-st

Witness appeal: Police seek cyclist who collided with pedestrian on London's Regent St

Pedestrian died from stroke two days after collision in West End last month

and

In 2011, the latest year for which figures are available, 99 pedestrians were seriously injured in incidents involving a pedal cycle, with two others killed

Jut because Ireland isn't very good at presenting statistics doesn't mean it's not happening here to

http://www.thejournal.ie/man-injured-crash-cork-douglas-west-bike-591917-Sep2012/

67-year-old man seriously injured after being struck by cyclist in Cork
Gardaí are appealing for witnesses after the collision this morning.

Jawgap

Spook_ie wrote: »

http://road.cc/content/news/90309-witness-appeal-police-seek-cyclist-who-collided-pedestrian-londons-regent-st
and


Jut because Ireland isn't very good at presenting statistics doesn't mean it's not happening here to

http://www.thejournal.ie/man-injured-crash-cork-douglas-west-bike-591917-Sep2012/

The facts of that incident will emerge in due course, but according to streetview there's no traffic lights or pedestrian crossing, so RLJing doesn't seem to be an issue.

......and the RSA and the AGS have become pretty good at collecting, collating and presenting statistics and evidence in the last few years. Just because their efforts don't back up the stereotypes doesn't mean the system is flawed.

Spook_ie

Jawgap wrote: »

The facts of that incident will emerge in due course, but according to streetview there's no traffic lights or pedestrian crossing, so RLJing doesn't seem to be an issue.

......and the RSA and the AGS have become pretty good at collecting, collating and presenting statistics and evidence in the last few years. Just because their efforts don't back up the stereotypes doesn't mean the system is flawed.

Do they, no matter what combination of filters/buttons etc. I select in the RSAs site can I filter out pedestrian v cyclists only

EDIT

Also given the fact here is no onus on calling the GS to a cyclist only accident or where a cyclist has had a collision with a pedestrian then no numbers or low numbers being presented is hardly a surprise, is it?

monument

Spook_ie wrote: »

http://road.cc/content/news/90309-witness-appeal-police-seek-cyclist-who-collided-pedestrian-londons-regent-st
and


Jut because Ireland isn't very good at presenting statistics doesn't mean it's not happening here to

Context of UK stats:

UK population: 63.7 million

Jawgap

Spook_ie wrote: »

Do they, no matter what combination of filters/buttons etc. I select in the RSAs site can I filter out pedestrian v cyclists only

EDIT

Also given the fact here is no onus on calling the GS to a cyclist only accident or where a cyclist has had a collision with a pedestrian then no numbers or low numbers being presented is hardly a surprise, is it?

Just another thing you're wrong about......

Section 3 of the RTA 1961 defines a pedal cycle as a vehicle and as such Section 106 of the same legislation applies in the case of an incident involving a bike.

Iwannahurl

There's a lot to ponder in this discussion.

Firstly, with regard to the general safety of cycling, it should be remembered that the hospital admission figures for injuries to cyclists far outweigh the collision statistics recorded by AGS. I'm not aware of any database which compiles details of the circumstances in which those injuries occurred.

That said, the fatality and serious injury statistics are likely to be more accurate, since there are standard operating procedures for investigating such collisions.

The RSA's records show that very few pedestrian casualties have been caused by cyclists.

It is more likely that cyclists are putting themselves at risk rather than endangering others. However, in my view it is unfair on other road users (all of them) for cyclists to break red lights in a reckless manner.

I frequently encounter cyclist RLJs on the morning school run, for example. I have had occasion to stop cyclists in their tracks while my child was trying to cross on the green man. The fact remains that motorists breaking red lights, among other offences, pose far more of a risk. There's a particular junction I pass through on the way to school every morning, and without fail at each change of the lights two or three motorists will try to scoot through the red light, ignoring the green man for pedestrians. They are often livid at being made to stop in order to let children cross the road on the way to school.

I know where the real danger lies. Personally I hate red light jumping and footpath cycling, which often go together, but at some stage I have to acknowledge that there are degrees of risk.

Spook_ie

monument wrote: »

Context of UK stats:

UK population: 63.7 million

More context for you

Irish Population 4.589 million

Assuming the cycling habits and infrastructure are similar then you could expect approx 7.2% of any UK results to apply in Ireland or 7 serious injuries per year based on a UK figure of 99 and a death on average every 6 years or so based on 2 deaths a year in the UK

So I think we can dispense with any arguments from people who say that cyclists don't cause injuries or deaths, unless of course people want to put an acceptable figure to injury and deaths

Spook_ie

Jawgap wrote: »

Just another thing you're wrong about......

Section 3 of the RTA 1961 defines a pedal cycle as a vehicle and as such Section 106 of the same legislation applies in the case of an incident involving a bike.

It does and the fact that if you are struck by a cyclist who then makes off you have a high likelihood of no traceability might make some difference as to people reporting it or not

Jawgap

Iwannahurl wrote: »

There's a lot to ponder in this discussion.

Firstly, with regard to the general safety of cycling, it should be remembered that the hospital admission figures for injuries to cyclists far outweigh the collision statistics recorded by AGS. I'm not aware of any database which compiles details of the circumstances in which those injuries occurred.

That said, the fatality and serious injury statistics are likely to be more accurate, since there are standard operating procedures for investigating such collisions.

The RSA's records show that very few pedestrian casualties have been caused by cyclists.

It is more likely that cyclists are putting themselves at risk rather than endangering others. However, in my view it is unfair on other road users (all of them) for cyclists to break red lights in a reckless manner.

........

the level of under-reporting is reckoned to be about 1:10 - for every RTC involving a cyclist recorded by the RSA, there are 10 hospital admissions of injured cyclists.

The HSE HIPE database records injuries resulting from pedestrian / cyclist collisions.

Spook_ie wrote: »

More context for you

Irish Population 4.589 million

Assuming the cycling habits and infrastructure are similar then you could expect approx 7.2% of any UK results to apply in Ireland or 7 serious injuries per year based on a UK figure of 99 and a death on average every 6 years or so based on 2 deaths a year in the UK

So I think we can dispense with any arguments from people who say that cyclists don't cause injuries or deaths, unless of course people want to put an acceptable figure to injury and deaths

the system for recording RTC data in Irish hospitals is every bit as sophisticated as any other country and is coded according to the WHO's International Classification of Diseases (ICD)10 data standard, but they may have updated it.

The data is internationally comparable.

Pedestrian injured by cyclist is coded as V01 or V01.10 depending on the exact circumstances - the reason there's no reports of pedestrians being injured by cyclists is not for the want of a system on which they can be recorded.

If they're happening they're being recorded.

Jawgap

Spook_ie wrote: »

It does and the fact that if you are struck by a cyclist who then makes off you have a high likelihood of no traceability might make some difference as to people reporting it or not

Well now you're just changing the nature of your argument to suit yourself - you said there was no onus to report and it was pointed out to you that there was - now you seem to be suggesting that there is an onus, but there's not really because the cyclist - just like a driver - cannot be physically compelled to remain at the scene.

The onus is there, it's then up to the individual road user whether they are going to respect it.

Cienciano

bigar wrote: »

Yesterday I was almost run over by a car when on my bike. Today the same thing happened with a Dublin Bus. I also hit a pedestrian who walked out in front of me without even a glance in my direction. I had green on all occasions while the others had a red light.

Every single day I see cars, busses, trucks, motor bikes, bicycles and pedestrian breaking red lights so please stop focussing on cyclists alone.

I don't understand this attitude, it happens in every cyclists thread. We all know all road users break the rules of the road. But this thread is about cyclists.
In a thread about motorists not using roundabouts properly would you come in and say "please remember that lots of cyclists break red lights". People would think you're mental.
But for some reason there has never been a boards thread criticising cyclists road behaviour without this response.

LeinsterDub

Spook_ie wrote: »

More context for you

Irish Population 4.589 million

Assuming the cycling habits and infrastructure are similar then you could expect approx 7.2% of any UK results to apply in Ireland or 7 serious injuries per year based on a UK figure of 99 and a death on average every 6 years or so based on 2 deaths a year in the UK

So I think we can dispense with any arguments from people who say that cyclists don't cause injuries or deaths, unless of course people want to put an acceptable figure to injury and deaths

So you're more likely to die hanging wallpaper

SilverLiningOK

Cienciano wrote: »

I don't understand this attitude, it happens in every cyclists thread. We all know all road users break the rules of the road. But this thread is about cyclists.
In a thread about motorists not using roundabouts properly would you come in and say "please remember that lots of cyclists break red lights". People would think you're mental.
But for some reason there has never been a boards thread criticising cyclists road behaviour without this response.

Doing great work for the establishment backed car lobby ?

ixoy

Gatling wrote: »

This time last year while crossing on a pedestrian green light at the corner of George st and dame st my youngest buggy was clipped by a cyclist over taking several cars and ran the red light ,
He came off the bike and jumped up calling for witnesses to back his story of the dad who walked out infront of traffic with a buggy

That junction is quite hazardous. Regularly see cyclists cutting through green lights there - too many seem to think that the lights turning red means it's a clear signal for them to take a right or left. Nearly got clipped by a courier there while crossing with the green man.

Days 298

Iwannahurl wrote: »

There's a lot to ponder in this discussion.

Firstly, with regard to the general safety of cycling, it should be remembered that the hospital admission figures for injuries to cyclists far outweigh the collision statistics recorded by AGS. I'm not aware of any database which compiles details of the circumstances in which those injuries occurred.

That said, the fatality and serious injury statistics are likely to be more accurate, since there are standard operating procedures for investigating such collisions.

The RSA's records show that very few pedestrian casualties have been caused by cyclists.

It is more likely that cyclists are putting themselves at risk rather than endangering others. However, in my view it is unfair on other road users (all of them) for cyclists to break red lights in a reckless manner.

I frequently encounter cyclist RLJs on the morning school run, for example. I have had occasion to stop cyclists in their tracks while my child was trying to cross on the green man. The fact remains that motorists breaking red lights, among other offences, pose far more of a risk. There's a particular junction I pass through on the way to school every morning, and without fail at each change of the lights two or three motorists will try to scoot through the red light, ignoring the green man for pedestrians. They are often livid at being made to stop in order to let children cross the road on the way to school.

I know where the real danger lies. Personally I hate red light jumping and footpath cycling, which often go together, but at some stage I have to acknowledge that there are degrees of risk.

I've never seen a scenario where 2-3 cars deliberately break red lights with people crossing. I have on the other hand been hit by a cyclist who broke a red light while I crossed with the green man.


That said most cyclists are grand as are most motorists. But in my experience I've had more close calls with cyclists not yielding than cars. As I said an idiot went right into my side. I have never had a car go into my side or cut me off when I crossed the road thankfully.

There are serious accidents waiting to happen. The degree of risk is still there and serious injuries could be caused.

We should be proactive not reactive.

Spook_ie

Jawgap wrote: »

the level of under-reporting is reckoned to be about 1:10 - for every RTC involving a cyclist recorded by the RSA, there are 10 hospital admissions of injured cyclists.

The HSE HIPE database records injuries resulting from pedestrian / cyclist collisions.



the system for recording RTC data in Irish hospitals is every bit as sophisticated as any other country and is coded according to the WHO's International Classification of Diseases (ICD)10 data standard, but they may have updated it.

The data is internationally comparable.

Pedestrian injured by cyclist is coded as V01 or V01.10 depending on the exact circumstances - the reason there's no reports of pedestrians being injured by cyclists is not for the want of a system on which they can be recorded.

If they're happening they're being recorded.

And if 90% of RTCs involving cyclists are unreported, how many of them are cyclist/pedestrian, if there's a 1:10 level then it stands to reason that there is also likely a 1:10 under reporting of pedestrians being injured by cyclists

A completely unknown variable, yet you just want to ignore the fact that it does happen which was the OP in this thread ( shockingly that 3 incidents cited in the thread so far involved blind people )

Jawgap

Spook_ie wrote: »

And if 90% of RTCs involving cyclists are unreported, how many of them are cyclist/pedestrian, if there's a 1:10 level then it stands to reason that there is also likely a 1:10 under reporting of pedestrians being injured by cyclists

A completely unknown variable, yet you just want to ignore the fact that it does happen which was the OP in this thread ( shockingly that 3 incidents cited in the thread so far involved blind people )

There are literally dozens of papers published each year using the HIPE data as well as it being used to populate the Health Atlas.

I've look at papers over the last 12/18 months and poked about in the Health Atlas - nothing is coded for pedestrian injury caused by cyclist.

So either the HSE are choosing to ignore such incidents and code them as something else or no such incidents are taking place or incidents are taking place but are so trivial they are not resulting in people seeking or requiring hospital treatment.

In other words the most likely and second most likely explanations all suggest it is a problem that is trivial at worst.

Can I suggest that if you think otherwise you interrogate the significant body of data available and produce something (anything) to back up what you are suggesting.

Spook_ie

Jawgap wrote: »

There are literally dozens of papers published each year using the HIPE data as well as it being used to populate the Health Atlas.

I've look at papers over the last 12/18 months and poked about in the Health Atlas - nothing is coded for pedestrian injury caused by cyclist.

So either the HSE are choosing to ignore such incidents and code them as something else or no such incidents are taking place or incidents are taking place but are so trivial they are not resulting in people seeking or requiring hospital treatment.

In other words the most likely and second most likely explanations all suggest it is a problem that is trivial at worst.

Can I suggest that if you think otherwise you interrogate the significant body of data available and produce something (anything) to back up what you are suggesting.

Just because it's not recorded doesn't mean it's not happening, but too many people like to have a head in the sand approach, if it can't be seen it can't be happening where as every one else knows that it is happening.

BTW Can't find anything on the http://www.esri.ie/__uuid/2f0dffd2-286c-4ba7-8c85-4d63e5f42d7f/HIPE-Data-Dictionary-2013-Version-5.0.pdf that actually seems to correlate to cause and just to clarify does HIPE ( Hospital In Patient Enquiry ) cover casualty wards where you might just be getting a stitch and tetenus booster?

Jawgap

Spook_ie wrote: »

Just because it's not recorded doesn't mean it's not happening, but too many people like to have a head in the sand approach, if it can't be seen it can't be happening where as every one else knows that it is happening.

BTW Can't find anything on the http://www.esri.ie/__uuid/2f0dffd2-286c-4ba7-8c85-4d63e5f42d7f/HIPE-Data-Dictionary-2013-Version-5.0.pdf that actually seems to correlate to cause and just to clarify does HIPE ( Hospital In Patient Enquiry ) cover casualty wards where you might just be getting a stitch and tetenus booster?

A point I acknowledged in my post - which goes to show that it is just a trivial issue. If there were more serious incidents (even one) people would be getting hospitalised. They're not. But I suppose you'll now suggest that the complete lack of data doesn't mean that there aren't loads being injured and not reporting it or heroically denying themselves hospital treatment.

Good luck with that.

Iwannahurl

Jawgap wrote: »

the level of under-reporting is reckoned to be about 1:10 - for every RTC involving a cyclist recorded by the RSA, there are 10 hospital admissions of injured cyclists.

The HSE HIPE database records injuries resulting from pedestrian / cyclist collisions.

the system for recording RTC data in Irish hospitals is every bit as sophisticated as any other country and is coded according to the WHO's International Classification of Diseases (ICD)10 data standard, but they may have updated it.

The data is internationally comparable.

Pedestrian injured by cyclist is coded as V01 or V01.10 depending on the exact circumstances - the reason there's no reports of pedestrians being injured by cyclists is not for the want of a system on which they can be recorded.

If they're happening they're being recorded.

Are reports being published though?

Here's an excerpt from a HSE report published a few years ago, concerning admissions to acute hospitals for road traffic injuries (emphasis added by me):

Using HIPE, all discharges from acute hospitals in the Republic of Ireland for the years 2005-2009, and who had been admitted as an emergency and assigned any diagnosis codes V01-V89 (land transport accidents) using ICD-10-AM were extracted. All non-traffic collisions were excluded, that is those accidents that occurred entirely in any place other than a public highway, for example, V01.0 ‘Pedestrian injured in collision with pedal cycle, nontraffic accident’, as were unspecified collisions.

I'm not sure what such exclusions might mean in practice.

Iwannahurl

Days 298 wrote: »

I've never seen a scenario where 2-3 cars deliberately break red lights with people crossing. I have on the other hand been hit by a cyclist who broke a red light while I crossed with the green man.

It's routine at some junctions in Galway.

My child and I have often encountered cyclist RLJs. The level of danger is very different.

Jawgap

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Are reports being published though?

Here's an excerpt from a HSE report published a few years ago, concerning admissions to acute hospitals for road traffic injuries (emphasis added by me):

Using HIPE, all discharges from acute hospitals in the Republic of Ireland for the years 2005-2009, and who had been admitted as an emergency and assigned any diagnosis codes V01-V89 (land transport accidents) using ICD-10-AM were extracted. All non-traffic collisions were excluded, that is those accidents that occurred entirely in any place other than a public highway, for example, V01.0 ‘Pedestrian injured in collision with pedal cycle, nontraffic accident’, as were unspecified collisions.

I'm not sure what such exclusions might mean in practice.

I'm working off a phone at the moment but you can interrogate the Health Atlas to get V01 data.

Spook_ie

Picked up from the same broadcast as this thread

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057103463

19 minutes in Broken Pelvis from cyclist/pedestrian incident of course if it's not entered onto HIPE then it didn't happen did it?

Jawgap

Spook_ie wrote: »

Picked up from the same broadcast as this thread

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057103463

19 minutes in Broken Pelvis from cyclist/pedestrian incident of course if it's not entered onto HIPE then it didn't happen did it?

Sorry, is that the Joe Duffy Liveline show

Because that's a truly objective and comprehensive source of information on Irish society.

Anything a bit more objective - even a hysterical Daily Mail report of a single court case?

Days 298

Iwannahurl wrote: »

It's routine at some junctions in Galway.

My child and I have often encountered cyclist RLJs. The level of danger is very different.

You have examples which is good but where I am RLJ cars is non existant and I say that as a pedestrian using busy crossing, suburban pedestrian lights and a motorist. To me a small coheart cyclists are the bigger danger. No need to focus on the motorist. Cars contain a higher momentum no doubt but the offence is the same, you also have the safety of the cyclist too to consider.

A cyclist breaking a RL is the same as a motorist breaking a RL. Dangerous, unnecessary, selfish and benefits no one.

Help could be given especially like your example, such as signs warning motorists of crossings around corner (not saying innocence is the reason for your example). But I have turned left with the lights in my favour to find pedestrians sprinting across. As I knew the crossing existed from prior experience I was prepared, but a tired motorist/cyclist in a town they didn't know could be a different story.

Iwannahurl

Days 298 wrote: »

You have examples which is good but where I am RLJ cars is non existant and I say that as a pedestrian using busy crossing, suburban pedestrian lights and a motorist. To me a small coheart cyclists are the bigger danger. No need to focus on the motorist. Cars contain a higher momentum no doubt but the offence is the same, you also have the safety of the cyclist too to consider.

A cyclist breaking a RL is the same as a motorist breaking a RL. Dangerous, unnecessary, selfish and benefits no one.

Help could be given especially like your example, such as signs warning motorists of crossings around corner (not saying innocence is the reason for your example). But I have turned left with the lights in my favour to find pedestrians sprinting across. As I knew the crossing existed from prior experience I was prepared, but a tired motorist/cyclist in a town they didn't know could be a different story.

A cyclist breaking a red light is demonstrably not the same as a motorised vehicle doing so. The clear differences are speed and mass, and these inescapable realities are inevitably reflected in both the road casualty and hospital admission statistics.

Technically the RLJ offence is the same, because bicycles are vehicles and cyclists are drivers under legislation dating back to the 1960s.

However, it is self-evident that the offence is not being treated the same in terms of law enforcement and the administration of justice. There are very good reasons for that difference, which have to do with pragmatism, practicality and common sense.

I recall a Garda saying several years ago that he would get short shrift in court if he were to start prosecuting significant numbers of law-breaking cyclists for offences such as not being lit up at night.

Personally I am p:ssed off with the lack of enforcement, but since I see AGS blithely ignore other road traffic offences every day, some of them serious, what can I do?

Where do we start in this country with ensuring better compliance with the RoTR? Obviously road deaths have been greatly reduced over the last few decades, and driving standards have markedly improved, but from my perspective travelling on the roads often has me gritting my teeth because of the constant muppetry displayed by all classes of road user.

The vast majority of road users, even tired visitors, know a red light or a green man when they see one. Equally, Irish roads engineers are, I suspect, fully aware of what they are doing when they configure traffic signals in a manner that entirely ignores cyclists. An alternative possibility is an appalling vista in which Irish roads engineers are clueless in this regard.

monument

Spook_ie wrote: »

So I think we can dispense with any arguments from people who say that cyclists don't cause injuries or deaths, unless of course people want to put an acceptable figure to injury and deaths

Did somebody here claim cyclists don't cause injuries or deaths?

Days 298

Iwannahurl wrote:

A cyclist breaking .....

You obviously have a passion for road safety. Is there any country you could visit and not grit your teeth.

How would you react if a moped or motorcycle broke a red light. The masses are not totally incomparable. The person breaking a red light is breaking a red light whether on a bike or in an artic truck. Same offence, being on a lighter mode of transportation doesn't make you less immune to the RoTR.

People must take responsibility for their actions. If a cyclist breaks a red light they shouldnt have any complaints if they hear blue and twos behind them, same with any other road user.

Id rather not be hit by a car or a cyclist tbh. So when I am a pedestrian I would like the gards to threat both infringements of my right of way and endangerment of my person the same.

You missed my point on the pedestrian crossing not being signalled.

Iwannahurl

I found Copenhagen, Stockholm and a number of cities in the Netherlands to be very relaxing.

Now that I think of it, however, in the Netherlands mopeds were allowed on the cycle paths. Unlike the cyclists they were annoying and occasionally dangerous. I recall one teenage gobshyte deliberately passing between us from behind at high speed (compared to a cyclist).

Do you really believe the two situations below are potentially equivalent and deserve the same amount of police attention? (Random clips found in a hurry -- there may be better examples of each).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Tp5KNzWxSA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9e9eeCbWzQI

Spook_ie

Jawgap wrote: »

Sorry, is that the Joe Duffy Liveline show

Because that's a truly objective and comprehensive source of information on Irish society.

Anything a bit more objective - even a hysterical Daily Mail report of a single court case?

It is provided by Monument in t'other thread, you think I should just diss the guy because he rang into Joe?

L1011

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Copenhagen

One of only two cities I've been hit by a light jumping cyclist (the other being Dublin) co-incidentally.