Cyclists breaking lights!!

Baron Kurtz

OneOfThem Stumbled wrote: »

More red tape, more bureaucracy, probably more taxes; more headaches, etc.

I break the rules when cycling. I break read lights. I cycle the wrong way up cycle paths. I sometimes change from being cyclist to pedestrian and then back again - all in the course of several seconds. I don't wear a helmet, or a high viz jacket. But I try to cycle safely - both for myself and for others. I look out for other road users, and pedestrians alike.

While dangerous cyclists could be a subject of prosecution; pragmatically they can at most go at 25 km/ph (realistically, in a city setting). If they crash when cycling fast, they will likely do a lot of damage to themselves - and are far less likely to kill a road user than the other way around. Moreover, their vehicle is light. How many motorists or truck drivers could carry their vehicle under their arm?

If we were to licence cyclists, would we also have to licence skateboarders and rollerbladers?

IT goes without saying, of course, that motorists should not be considered liable for the actions of a reckless cyclist.

Oh jaysus, you're some messer on the roads:)

But yeah, I just posted up to see what people think on this issue and maybe folks might offer up some feasible fix to it (because the battle on this subject is rife - a tired quarrel tbh). That's all.

Maybe my notion on the licensing thing isn't what people think is a solution as such (as Rub was countering in a strictly logical fashion, and I respect his/her opinion). I've no gear to grind, pardon the pun, but this thread piqued my interest ephemerally. Shame on me to get nearly serious on an issue in AH!

Pinch Flat

Baron Kurtz wrote: »

Oh jaysus, you're some messer on the roads:)

But yeah, I just posted up to see what people think on this issue and maybe folks might offer up some feasible fix to it (because the battle on this subject is rife - a tired quarrel tbh). That's all.

Maybe my notion on the licensing thing isn't what people think is a solution as such (as Rub was countering in a strictly logical fashion, and I respect his/her opinion). I've no gear to grind, pardon the pun, but this thread piqued my interest ephemerally. Shame on me to get nearly serious on an issue in AH!

My one suggestion would 'Rechtsaf voor fietsers vrij' signs you see in holland that indicates cyclists turning to the right can go through the red lights. In our case apply to cyclists turning left.

blackvalley

Trebor176 wrote: »

I was almost in the middle of the road when an arsehole on a bicycle came bombing down the middle of the road almost clipping me?

My god he "ALMOST" clipped you call Joe Duffy quick . The trauma must be horrific . :eek:

loh_oro

blackvalley wrote: »

My god he "ALMOST" clipped you call Joe Duffy quick . The trauma must be horrific . :eek:

If that was a car that "ALMOST" clipped him would you be acting like such a condescending pri*k ? Point is he shouldnt have been almost clipped when he had the right of way

blackvalley

loh_oro wrote: »

If that was a car that "ALMOST" clipped him would you be acting like such a condescending pri*k ? Point is he shouldnt have been almost clipped when he had the right of way

I will reply without resorting to juvenile name calling unlike your good self and yes my reply would be exactly the same if he was ALMOST clipped by any form of transport

TheChizler

rubadub wrote: »

Just like the lax enforcement of the jaywalking laws, they know fine well why they were introduced and so enforce it accordingly. It would disgust me to see the gardai & courts tied up with every law broken by roadusers, especially when done in a pretty benign manner.

You know jaywalking isn't a crime in Ireland right? The closest thing is crossing the road within 15 m of a crossing without actually using the crossing.

Bray Header

jkiamasnake wrote: »

I am still in shock! I had an accident today and I am still shaking. I was at a junction this morning, my green filter light to turn right came on so I continued to proceed, I traveled about 15 feet and am almost into the junction where I wanted to travel to and a cyclist smashes into the side of my car doing considerable damage to my door. Thankfully the cyclist was ok too but I was in so much shock I could not think properly. The cyclist picked himself up, fixed his chain and continues on. I said to him that he broke a red light and that he will have to repair damage done to my car. He says accidents happen and that he doesnt have any money to fix it. He said he was late for work and continued on.

I am sick of cyclists everyday breaking lights...they seriously need to cop the f**k on and obey rules of the road.

The way I look at it is, as a city centre dweller, cyclist, pedestrian and motorist; If you've never broken a red light on a pedestrian crossing, traffic junction in a car, or a red on a bicycle, then please pontificate away. Anybody else is just a bandwagoner.

TL;DR Let those without sin yadda yadda

funkey_monkey

eamonnq wrote: »

Accidents don't just happen.

They are usually caused.

That is why they are now reclassified from RTA (Road Traffic Accident) to RTC (Road Traffic Collision). Well up here in the North anyway...

Spook_ie

Bray Header wrote: »

The way I look at it is, as a city centre dweller, cyclist, pedestrian and motorist; If you've never broken a red light on a pedestrian crossing, traffic junction in a car, or a red on a bicycle, then please pontificate away. Anybody else is just a bandwagoner.

TL;DR Let those without sin yadda yadda

Thankyou for giving me permission to pontificate.....
The only time I've broken a red light is to facilitate the passage of a ER vehicle using Blues n Twos, and even then it's only by enough to allow me to allow them through ( technicaly crossing the white stop line is breaking the red, even if it's to move forward and to the side, not necessarily crossing the junction ), other times I stick with stopping on red

Hell I've even been known to stop on amber

Roquentin

first time i saw a cyclist break a red i was like WTF. seen it a lot more since then. I remember i was stopped in traffic lights on my bike and another cyclist rode straight by me at a crossroads. asking to be killed if i may pontificate

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

Bray Header

Spook_ie wrote: »

Thankyou for giving me permission to pontificate.....
The only time I've broken a red light is to facilitate the passage of a ER vehicle using Blues n Twos, and even then it's only by enough to allow me to allow them through ( technicaly crossing the white stop line is breaking the red, even if it's to move forward and to the side, not necessarily crossing the junction ), other times I stick with stopping on red

Hell I've even been known to stop on amber

I'm genuinely impressed - drive on sir!

SeanW

super_furry wrote: »

They don't even pay road tax AND KIND OF TAX Joe!

FYP. Cyclists do nothing but take subsidies, Bike to Work subsidies, cycle lanes paid for by everyone else. Which I wouldn't mind, if they weren't mostly a bunch of c***s.

I Heart Internet wrote: »

A cyclist that does stop at red lights, doesn't travel the wrong ay up one way streets and doesn't cycle all over footpaths is very much the exception.

I am going to walk 2 minutes to my car now and I can pretty much guarantee you that I will see one of these 3 things....

I saw three cyclists jump red lights in different directions today within in 5 seconds!

Wicklowrider wrote: »

For example, last week a girl I know was beaten and robbed on the luas. Using the logic of a lot of posters on these threads , that makes luas passengers violent robbing thugs.

Which would indeed by a good generalisation, if 99% of Luas passengers were violent robbing thugs. But in my experience as a routine pedestrian in our cities, it's fairly close that proportion of cyclists that have a love/hate relationship with traffic lights, footways, lane directions etc.

Chinasea wrote: »

What is this bloo*dy ob national obsession with cyclists breaking red lights.
...
As for cyclists cycling on a footpath. Again, another national obsession. Most of the footpaths (except in the city centre) are clear-ways for joggers, with low pedestrian usage and and should be shared with a SMARTER form of transport i.e cyclists.

The "obsession" from my part comes from the fact that not only do cyclists disregard every road law that supposedly applies to them, but their sense of importance, entitlement and blatant hypocrisy is beyond belief.

Cyclists are a bunch of hypocrites in that their attitude to motorists is so hostile it borders on being anti-human, they champion things like the "Essex design" of housing estates that have absolutely no benefits whatsoever to anyone but add severe inconvenience for residents who have cars, needless to say that if a motorist breaks any law anywhere anytime, for any reason - regardless of any safety concern which may be non-existent - they will insist that it's because motorists are scum and need zero-tolerance everywhere on absolutely everything, including GPS trackers in cars for speed monitoring as just one of a long list.

Then they get on their bikes and proceed to try to one-up each other on how many red lights they can run, how many footways they can mount and how many lane directions they can disregard.

And when it results in an accident they demand "Strict Liability" so that the fault is assigned to motorists regardless of cause - the OP would have been 100% liable for any injuries in the accident referred to in the first post simply because he/she was a motorist, if some cyclists had their way.

Then they whine like a bunch of spoiled babies when someone says "ROAD TAX!" But of course, taxes on motorists are far too low and should be doubled anyway and motorists should "pay for the external costs" blah blah blah while cyclists not only should pay nothing but be subsidised.

loh_oro wrote: »

Some bit*h clipped me this morning on her bike when I was crossing the road and the pedestrian light was green. This isn't the first time either. Why do dome cyclists think they ar above the laws of the road

Because, in practice they are. They're ENTITLED! And woe betide you if you question it.

Gongoozler

Wow.

Darkglasses

I have a bike. Who do I talk to about not paying tax anymore?

SeanW

You're paying cycling taxes? Methinks you need a new tax advisor ...

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

Crash

I occasionally break soft left-turns and straight-ons provided it's safe to proceed - pedestrians obviously get priority.

To be honest, the main reason I do this is to get ahead of car traffic - there are a couple of pinch points on my commute where cars have done very stupid things in an attempt to overtake (to then be caught in traffic instantly) and nearly knocked me off my bike - whether this be overtaking on a narrow road without sufficient space, or, in a case where I had moved to take a right turn, undertaking me, subsequently pulling back in, then slamming on the brakes as they'd misjudged the lights (and forcing me into the lane beside, which I was VERY lucky was empty).

There's one specific junction though, I wish I could break - if anyone ever cycles from Cardiff Lane, across Pearse Street, onto Macken Street, you'll know what I'm talking about. You get to the lights, move in front of the right hand lane (to keep the left turn ONLY lane free) and 9 out of 10 times I have a car on the inside who decides he's going to floor it going straight when the lights turn, and essentially put me in a two-car sandwich. It's horrendous and if I could do anything to get out of there earlier I would.

Milly33

Jesus what an ass!! Shame on him, hope you are ok now OP!! Sick of seeing cyclists acting stupid on the roads, I am sure if it was the other way around and you were in the wrong he would not be long slapping a claim on you.. Cyclist should have to go a general rules of the road test before being aloud on the main roads. I had one cycle up next to the car on a very tight roundiebout once he was lucky I ddint clip him he would have got a nasty blow...

even on cycle paths you see these chaps flying around no bell to warn that they are approaching you and they own the road..

I am all for cycling but do it properly, behave like a car when approaching any junctions, obey the lights just as a car would they have as much responsibility to be carefull on the roads as cars do

Pinch Flat

Darkglasses wrote: »

I have a bike. Who do I talk to about not paying tax anymore?

Yeah, I mean there must be some sort of rebate for 'road tax' on a car I choose not to take to work 5 days a week, right?




















Right?

Pinch Flat

SeanW wrote: »

FYP. Cyclists do nothing but take subsidies, Bike to Work subsidies, cycle lanes paid for by everyone else. Which I wouldn't mind, if they weren't mostly a bunch of c***s.

I saw three cyclists jump red lights in different directions today within in 5 seconds!

Which would indeed by a good generalisation, if 99% of Luas passengers were violent robbing thugs. But in my experience as a routine pedestrian in our cities, it's fairly close that proportion of cyclists that have a love/hate relationship with traffic lights, footways, lane directions etc.

The "obsession" from my part comes from the fact that not only do cyclists disregard every road law that supposedly applies to them, but their sense of importance, entitlement and blatant hypocrisy is beyond belief.

Cyclists are a bunch of hypocrites in that their attitude to motorists is so hostile it borders on being anti-human, they champion things like the "Essex design" of housing estates that have absolutely no benefits whatsoever to anyone but add severe inconvenience for residents who have cars, needless to say that if a motorist breaks any law anywhere anytime, for any reason - regardless of any safety concern which may be non-existent - they will insist that it's because motorists are scum and need zero-tolerance everywhere on absolutely everything, including GPS trackers in cars for speed monitoring as just one of a long list.

Then they get on their bikes and proceed to try to one-up each other on how many red lights they can run, how many footways they can mount and how many lane directions they can disregard.

And when it results in an accident they demand "Strict Liability" so that the fault is assigned to motorists regardless of cause - the OP would have been 100% liable for any injuries in the accident referred to in the first post simply because he/she was a motorist, if some cyclists had their way.

Then they whine like a bunch of spoiled babies when someone says "ROAD TAX!" But of course, taxes on motorists are far too low and should be doubled anyway and motorists should "pay for the external costs" blah blah blah while cyclists not only should pay nothing but be subsidised.
Because, in practice they are. They're ENTITLED! And woe betide you if you question it.

Buy a bike. Go for a spin. Feel the breeze on your face. Return refreshed. Man, you need it.

Gongoozler

Milly33 wrote: »

even on cycle paths you see these chaps flying around no bell to warn that they are approaching you and they own the road..

What are they meant to be warning you about? If you mean a cycle lane then they are part of the road, and I don't know who would need warning. If it's a cycle path you mean, they again don't have to warn anybody of anything. Pedestrians walking on the cycle path?

Jimoslimos

Milly33 wrote: »

JI am all for cycling but do it properly, behave like a car when approaching any junctions, obey the lights just as a car would they have as much responsibility to be carefull on the roads as cars do

But the point is that cyclists aren't the same as cars. They don't have the speed nor mass to pose a significant risk*. Add to this they are much more vulnerable than other road users, even motorcyclists, since they can't accelerate out of dangerous situations. The rules are there primarily to protect themselves from danger - if they don't abide by them then Darwin awards are in waiting

BTW I drive, I get irritated at being held up by cyclists like everyone else but being delayed is a minor gripe compared to the lunacy I see from my fellow motorists. I'd rather be hit by a cyclist than an arctic weighing several tonnes. If people, rather than whining about cyclists put half as much effort into campaigning for proper segregated cycle lanes (not an afterthought in a bus lane, or shared space with pedestrians) then we'd have much safer roads for all users.

*Yes I know cyclists can be a hazard for pedestrians, whether crossing or wrongly using footpaths but the numbers injured (or even sadly killed) are minimal compared to those by motor vehicles.

hatrickpatrick

sblythe wrote: »

Driver's break red lights too, you know. Are you sick of those?

They're not nearly as dangerous because you can see and hear them coming around corners far better than with cyclists.

Baron Kurtz

Crash wrote: »

I occasionally break soft left-turns and straight-ons provided it's safe to proceed - pedestrians obviously get priority.

To be honest, the main reason I do this is to get ahead of car traffic - there are a couple of pinch points on my commute where cars have done very stupid things in an attempt to overtake (to then be caught in traffic instantly) and nearly knocked me off my bike - whether this be overtaking on a narrow road without sufficient space, or, in a case where I had moved to take a right turn, undertaking me, subsequently pulling back in, then slamming on the brakes as they'd misjudged the lights (and forcing me into the lane beside, which I was VERY lucky was empty).

There's one specific junction though, I wish I could break - if anyone ever cycles from Cardiff Lane, across Pearse Street, onto Macken Street, you'll know what I'm talking about. You get to the lights, move in front of the right hand lane (to keep the left turn ONLY lane free) and 9 out of 10 times I have a car on the inside who decides he's going to floor it going straight when the lights turn, and essentially put me in a two-car sandwich. It's horrendous and if I could do anything to get out of there earlier I would.

Yeah, I know it well. You really have to try and take off early to assume the position on the road you want to take. It gets pretty hairy on that road at rush hour (evening, in particular). I always find that I really have to bust a gut to get ahead onto Macken street (as I turn right to Misery lane, by Bord Gais) because there's little window of opportunity to centre if you stay left too long. All the hand signalling right in the world is regularly ignored. Not sure why on this road.

Pinch Flat

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

They're not nearly as dangerous because you can see and hear them coming around corners far better than with cyclists.

Lolz

stefanovich

Svalbard wrote: »

Well I'm a cyclist and a driver too and I see cyclists breaking red lights everyday. Sometimes I think I'm the only cyclist who doesn't.

Cyclist's morph from road user to pedestrian depending on what is convenient. As a rule I only cycle on footpaths, the roads are too dangerous.

Roger Hassenforder

stefanovich wrote: »

Cyclist's morph from road user to pedestrian depending on what is convenient. As a rule I only cycle on footpaths, the roads are too dangerous.

That's fine if you're 5.

Wicklowrider

SeanW wrote: »

FYP. Cyclists do nothing but take subsidies, Bike to Work subsidies, cycle lanes paid for by everyone else. Which I wouldn't mind, if they weren't mostly a bunch of c***s.

I saw three cyclists jump red lights in different directions today within in 5 seconds!

Which would indeed by a good generalisation, if 99% of Luas passengers were violent robbing thugs. But in my experience as a routine pedestrian in our cities, it's fairly close that proportion of cyclists that have a love/hate relationship with traffic lights, footways, lane directions etc.

The "obsession" from my part comes from the fact that not only do cyclists disregard every road law that supposedly applies to them, but their sense of importance, entitlement and blatant hypocrisy is beyond belief.

Cyclists are a bunch of hypocrites in that their attitude to motorists is so hostile it borders on being anti-human, they champion things like the "Essex design" of housing estates that have absolutely no benefits whatsoever to anyone but add severe inconvenience for residents who have cars, needless to say that if a motorist breaks any law anywhere anytime, for any reason - regardless of any safety concern which may be non-existent - they will insist that it's because motorists are scum and need zero-tolerance everywhere on absolutely everything, including GPS trackers in cars for speed monitoring as just one of a long list.

Then they get on their bikes and proceed to try to one-up each other on how many red lights they can run, how many footways they can mount and how many lane directions they can disregard.

And when it results in an accident they demand "Strict Liability" so that the fault is assigned to motorists regardless of cause - the OP would have been 100% liable for any injuries in the accident referred to in the first post simply because he/she was a motorist, if some cyclists had their way.

Then they whine like a bunch of spoiled babies when someone says "ROAD TAX!" But of course, taxes on motorists are far too low and should be doubled anyway and motorists should "pay for the external costs" blah blah blah while cyclists not only should pay nothing but be subsidised.
Because, in practice they are. They're ENTITLED! And woe betide you if you question it.

If even 1/10th of this rant or any of the ranting on these anti cyclist threads were true, the A&E in every hospital of the country would be jammed with maimed cyclists or their victims.

BTW - why do you raving ranting types assume cyclists aren't drivers and as such do not pay the same taxes you pay?

If any of your points bore any truth in the real world then insurance firms could not provide me with 3rd party insurance to cover my cycling for less than 50 CENTS a week.

As a driver who has driven hundreds of thousands of miles, including under blue lights, I have not experienced hold ups, danger or aggression from cyclists. I mentioned this to an elderly driver who has covered in excess of a million miles and he agreed that he did not experience problems with cyclists.

I wonder how many of you whiners bring this stuff on yourselves?

First Up

Wicklowrider wrote: »

If even 1/10th of this rant or any of the ranting on these anti cyclist threads were true, the A&E in every hospital of the country would be jammed with maimed cyclists or their victims.

BTW - why do you raving ranting types assume cyclists aren't drivers and as such do not pay the same taxes you pay?

If any of your points bore any truth in the real world then insurance firms could not provide me with 3rd party insurance to cover my cycling for less than 50 CENTS a week.

As a driver who has driven hundreds of thousands of miles, including under blue lights, I have not experienced hold ups, danger or aggression from cyclists. I mentioned this to an elderly driver who has covered in excess of a million miles and he agreed that he did not experience problems with cyclists.

I wonder how many of you whiners bring this stuff on yourselves?

Isn't it dangerous to be doing all that driving with your eyes shut?