Cyclists breaking lights!!

RainyDay

SeanW wrote: »

Yes, we do indeed, mostly from cyclists.

For the second time, I'm calling on you to back up these statements.

Where have you actually seen such statements from cyclists? A few examples would be great.

Captain Flaps

ThisRegard wrote: »

That's 6 years old, hardly applicable to 'newer' cars.

I work in the industry, can confirm that this is still the case.

ThisRegard

Captain Flaps wrote: »

I work in the industry, can confirm that this is still the case.

As a valet ? The new Meganes just have a clip that needs undoing.

Captain Flaps

I'm a product photographer for a parts company.

Not specifically with Meganes, I mean that some manufacturers are still making it nigh on impossible to replace bulbs without dismantling something.

CramCycle

Doesn't matter how complicated it is, being complicated is not an excuse for continuing to drive. Restrict to daylight hour driving. If your pulled over at night, the car gets parked up or towed. To be fair if you can't tell your lights are not on, you probably should get the fine and PP for that rather than for the failed bulb. Retrieve the next morning and drop to garage or Halfords if you are unable to do it yourself.

Captain Flaps

Haha, we were so far off topic there I actually forgot which thread I was posting in!

I have spare bulbs in the car for the simple reason that I once had 2 main beams fail on a long night journey and it was awful, I do think it should be a legal requirement. While some cars are pretty much impossible to replace the bulbs most aren't, anyone should know how to change their own bulbs.

And tbh if you buy a car that's designed to make simple DIY servicing tasks impossible for the average driver, well, more fool you.

Spook_ie

Tenzor07 wrote: »

These sorts of "Bicyclist Bashing" threads always turn into a cesspit of diatribe which ultimately goes no where..

And always attracts the "Usual suspects" posting up there unqualified and one sided clap-trap and huge generalisations....(yes you know who you are!)



/thread

You really shouldn't talk about yourself in the 3rd person

Spook_ie

Captain Flaps wrote: »

Haha, we were so far off topic there I actually forgot which thread I was posting in!

I have spare bulbs in the car for the simple reason that I once had 2 main beams fail on a long night journey and it was awful, I do think it should be a legal requirement. While some cars are pretty much impossible to replace the bulbs most aren't, anyone should know how to change their own bulbs.

And tbh if you buy a car that's designed to make simple DIY servicing tasks impossible for the average driver, well, more fool you.

Not that far off, fecking cyclists cycling into the front of cars and breaking lights instead of doors

Captain Flaps

I think there was a coherent point to that post but I'm afraid that I honestly can't work out what point you're making...

Tenzor07

Captain Flaps wrote: »

I think there was a coherent point to that post but I'm afraid that I honestly can't work out what point you're making...

You and the rest of us! :rolleyes:

SeanW

RainyDay wrote: »

For the second time, I'm calling on you to back up these statements.

Where have you actually seen such statements from cyclists? A few examples would be great.

Just a few from cyclopath2001, there will be others from other cyclists later.

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Reduce all speed limits. The current limits are based on what speeds motorists want rather than what is actually safe. 30mph is not a safe speed in the city. The recent 'ready-up'where government engineers and the AA decided thespeeds should be must be thrwon out, it only reinforces the status-quo, a conspiracy against cyclists and pedestrians.

Reduce speed limits even more when it is wet, dark or both.

Enforce the speed limits via satellite monitoring of cars. Pass the information on to insurance companies so that prudent drivers do not have to pay for the bad habits of others. The satellite monitoring will also reduce thefts and help reduce insurance costs.

Enforce legislation that allows businesses to be sued where commercial vehicles are involved and where unreasonable delivery schedules have causes employees to drive dangerously.

Abolish traffic lights, require all drivers to slow down at junctions and give way to each other, make all drivers equally liable for accidents at junctions.

Drivers to give way to pedestrians at all times & to be required to drive at 30kph or less in residential & shopping areas.

If the same number of people killed on our roads had been killed by the IRA, we would have marshal law, so let's get tough on road-terrorists.

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

That's because stronger measures are needed. Current deterrants are not working.

Instant driving bans should be applied for speeding offences, then re-training followed by long periods of supervision/monitoring once the license has been restored.

Safety of innocent citizens should be the highest priority.

Once drivers realise the serious consequences for themselves when they put others at risk, then we'll see some real progress.

Time to take off the kid gloves.

Spook_ie

Captain Flaps wrote: »

I think there was a coherent point to that post but I'm afraid that I honestly can't work out what point you're making...

Title of thread......cyclists breaking lights
Present context...Broken headlights
Juxtaposed...cyclists breaking car headlights

RainyDay

SeanW wrote: »

Yes, we do indeed, mostly from cyclists.

SeanW wrote: »

Just a few from cyclopath2001, there will be others from other cyclists later.

Nothing there that suggests anyone is looking for different enforcement for cyclists and cars.

SeanW

RainyDay wrote: »

Nothing there that suggests anyone is looking for different enforcement for cyclists and cars.

He's part of a group that disregards laws wholesale ...

Tenzor07

SeanW wrote: »

Just a few from cyclopath2001, there will be others from other cyclists later.

Quoting 11 Year old posts, you really have lost the debate here haven't you!?

Tenzor07

Spook_ie wrote: »

Juxtaposed...cyclists breaking car headlights

Jeebus!

RainyDay

Spook_ie wrote: »

Title of thread......cyclists breaking lights
Present context...Broken headlights
Juxtaposed...cyclists breaking car headlights

http://37.media.tumblr.com/70d263cb06f409a862473b162ed8eeb1/tumblr_n8cb3iaAgJ1rhf0i3o1_1280.jpg

SeanW wrote: »

He's part of a group that disregards laws wholesale ...

I'm really struggling to find some logic here. So because he is a cyclist and (in your opinion), cyclists are a group that disregard laws wholesale, it is therefore hypocritical for him to look for better enforcement of traffic law.

So how about we turn the logic around and say that because you are a driver, and in my opinion, drivers are a group that disregard laws wholesale (breaking urban speed limit, breaking red lights, phoning/texting at the wheel), it is therefore hypocritical of you to look for better enforcement of cycling traffic law - Is that logical?

I can only suggest that you stop looking at 'groups' and start listening.

CramCycle

SeanW wrote: »

He's part of a group that disregards laws wholesale ...

From the thread it would appear that most want existing legislature to be more heavily enforced for all road users. None of this "Fair enough" attitude from the Gardai. The risk of getting caught seems to be quite low for most road users, even when caught the penalty is also seemingly either low or unenforced. Without increasing the level of enforcement, which maybe near impossible due to sheer Garda numbers, the only option is to throw the book at everyone who is done for a RTA violation. This means while the risk of being caught is still low, there would then be a general view that the punishment is large enough that it outweighs the benefits of chancing your arm.

Spook_ie

Tenzor07 wrote: »

Jeebus!

Just because you can only comprehend insults as some kind of humour doesn't mean that satire shouldn't be used

Tenzor07

RainyDay wrote: »

I'm really struggling to find some logic here.

Like finding Ice in the desert with these 2 boys! :rolleyes:

Spook_ie

RainyDay wrote: »

http://37.media.tumblr.com/70d263cb06f409a862473b162ed8eeb1/tumblr_n8cb3iaAgJ1rhf0i3o1_1280.jpg



<snipped>

Yeah it is difficult to pitch satire at the correct level of a wide audience, I suppose I could lower it to the lowest common denominator and just aim it at Tenzor

Captain Flaps

ICE BURN

Spook_ie

RainyDay wrote: »

http://37.media.tumblr.com/70d263cb06f409a862473b162ed8eeb1/tumblr_n8cb3iaAgJ1rhf0i3o1_1280.jpg



I'm really struggling to find some logic here. So because he is a cyclist and (in your opinion), cyclists are a group that disregard laws wholesale, it is therefore hypocritical for him to look for better enforcement of traffic law.

So how about we turn the logic around and say that because you are a driver, and in my opinion, drivers are a group that disregard laws wholesale (breaking urban speed limit, breaking red lights, phoning/texting at the wheel), it is therefore hypocritical of you to look for better enforcement of cycling traffic law - Is that logical?

I can only suggest that you stop looking at 'groups' and start listening.

Not really, there is far more enforcement of motoring traffic offenders than cycling traffic offenders, simply by the reason that anyone who breaks a law in their motor vehicle can be traced/identified on the basis of the registration number, as there is no registration on bicycles it is therefore more difficult to enforce, involving instead the stopping of an offender, the requiring of personal ID, the appearence before a court etc.

Just look at the original OP, no registration, no ID, therefore why bother stopping to exchange details

Egginacup

Weepsie wrote: »

I walked up the quays from Ormond to the IFSC today and of the dozens of cyclists I saw coming from the south side, northside or coming up the quays I only saw one go ahead of the red light and he just stopped ahead of the lights. I saw 3 cars break a red light at the same time and one speeding up to beat a red (fast enough to possibly being over the limit). I also saw countless pedestrians jay walk. This was in 15 minutes.

There are drivers and cyclists who are doing this. It is certainly not the majority of either, and anyone claiming it is is either a liar or an idiot.

Well in fairness those junctions are a hell of a lot more dangerous to blow a red light than the ones on Dame Street / Lord Edward St. since you have traffic coming from multiple directions and the cyclists know this. The lights at Central Bank, George's Street, Cork Hill, Cow's Lane and Christchurch are more for pedestrians to cross than for traffic filtering so you can generally blow these lights as a cyclist without fear of being creamed by a car coming perpendicular to you. You'll even see cyclists whizzing through the red lights at Trinity College (BOI), onto Westmoreland Street.

RainyDay

Spook_ie wrote: »

Not really, there is far more enforcement of motoring traffic offenders than cycling traffic offenders, simply by the reason that anyone who breaks a law in their motor vehicle can be traced/identified on the basis of the registration number, as there is no registration on bicycles it is therefore more difficult to enforce, involving instead the stopping of an offender, the requiring of personal ID, the appearence before a court etc.

You are correct to say that "anyone who breaks a law in their motor vehicle can be traced/identified on the basis of the registration number". You are incorrect to say that "there is far more enforcement of motoring traffic offenders than cycling traffic offenders". Every day that I drive, I break the urban speed limit. I've been caught twice in 30 years. Every traffic light that I stop at in Dublin, I see 1 or 2 or 3 or maybe even 4 cars break the light, without any enforcement.

The existing of a registration scheme in itself does not lead to enforcement. Enforcement leads to enforcement.

ronn

I've come to the conclusion nobody gives a sh!t,
Cyclists, buses, cars, trucks everyone
Knows the chances of been caught are slim to none,

PeadarCo

RainyDay wrote: »

You are correct to say that "anyone who breaks a law in their motor vehicle can be traced/identified on the basis of the registration number". You are incorrect to say that "there is far more enforcement of motoring traffic offenders than cycling traffic offenders". Every day that I drive, I break the urban speed limit. I've been caught twice in 30 years. Every traffic light that I stop at in Dublin, I see 1 or 2 or 3 or maybe even 4 cars break the light, without any enforcement.

The existing of a registration scheme in itself does not lead to enforcement. Enforcement leads to enforcement.

Well to fair to Spook there is more attention to motoring offences but the Op case is a prime example why.

If the idiot of a cyclist who broke the red light had been in a car the Op would have been in hospital or worse. Thankfully both the Op and the idiot could walk away. Damage caused to a car is a pain particularly given the Op's financial situation. The Op is perfectly entitled to be annoyed and anybody would be in the same situation

But in the grand scheme the damage can be fixed. If it had been a car instead of a bike the OP wouldn't have been as lucky.

Bike with their lower mass and speed aren't subject to the same amount of regulation or penalties because they are a lot less dangerous than cars. For the same reason to drive a big bus you need another licence. Bigger vehicle more responsibility more regulations. Nothing specifically unique to bikes.

rubadub

Spook_ie wrote: »

simply by the reason that anyone who breaks a law in their motor vehicle can be traced/identified on the basis of the registration number, as there is no registration on bicycles it is therefore more difficult to enforce, involving instead the stopping of an offender, the requiring of personal ID, the appearence before a court etc

While I do think that is partly the reason I do not think its the main one. As I have said time & time again the gardai are aware why these laws were introduced and what they actually set out to prevent. I firmly believe this is why they are so lax in enforcing the laws, since many people are commiting illegal acts which though technically illegal are pretty benign, or in many cases are safer or more benficial acts than if they were to obey the law.

This is why I believe I have never heard of a single case of a 5 year old getting in trouble, or their parents getting in trouble, if the kid is cycling on a footpath, children are obliged to cycle on the road, there is no exemption. That is an extreme case but most law breaking I see by cyclists is done in a fairly safe manner, just like law breaking pedestrians.

RainyDay wrote: »

You are incorrect to say that "there is far more enforcement of motoring traffic offenders than cycling traffic offenders". Every day that I drive, I break the urban speed limit. I've been caught twice in 30 years.

They would need speed guns etc to do this. I think there is far more enforcement of blatant/obvious motor traffic offenders. I frequently blatantly break the law while on my bike, I said earlier I have done this in full view of gardai, whom I knew could see me, the place I break the law most is in view of a garda station. I have gotten nods of approval from gardai acknowledging my law breaking, knowing I am doing it for my own safety and to benefit the flow of traffic. I have cycled up on (completely empty and very wide) footpaths to allow garda cars to pass and got a friendly wave for doing so as they passed, I have done this for cars with sirens too, whom I presume probably had no objections.

I break the laws far more on foot, and I never knowingly do it driving -I have got points for speeding once but thought I was well under the limit on that main road.

Spook_ie

RainyDay wrote: »

You are correct to say that "anyone who breaks a law in their motor vehicle can be traced/identified on the basis of the registration number". You are incorrect to say that "there is far more enforcement of motoring traffic offenders than cycling traffic offenders". Every day that I drive, I break the urban speed limit. I've been caught twice in 30 years. Every traffic light that I stop at in Dublin, I see 1 or 2 or 3 or maybe even 4 cars break the light, without any enforcement.

The existing of a registration scheme in itself does not lead to enforcement. Enforcement leads to enforcement.

How do you reckon incorrect, how many penalty points issued to motorists v court appearances of cyclists. If there were no enforcement you would expect no penalty points.

Just because you've escaped a lot so far doesn't mean there's no enforcement

CramCycle

2 points to the last two posts.

1. 5 year old are legally and more importantly for their own safety allowed cycle on the footpads.

2. Lack of enforcement does not equal no enforcement. The punishments are so minor and the risk of getting caught so slight that alot of people gamble on it. I am just sorry for those I see do it, that they care more about the zero time saved over the safety of others and basic manners.