Should it be illegal to cycle while wearing headphones? On the spot fine?

monument

Deedsie wrote: »

1/3 of people in the cycling forum... Imagine if this poll was in a more general public forum... I think non cyclists thoughts on cyclists wearing heaphones/earphones would be that they are taking a serious risk and shouldn't be doing it.

Yes, there's lots of people like you, who cycle and many who do not, who think cycling is more dangerous than it it. Maybe cycling the N11 daily is more dangerous than most commutes and that is reflected in how dangerous you think cycling is?

And there's gems in this thread which show you're view on cycling is a little warped, for example where you said: "Well a motorist has mirrors and an almost 360 view of the area surrounding his or her car... A cyclist doesn't.." -- when the reality is that motorists do not have anywhere near a 360 degree view and have blind spots, while people cycling have far better views than those in cars.

Deedsie

PeadarCo wrote: »

You've missed the point of the question was asking.You say you consider it dangerous and I'm asking why.

If you where to take the examples in my post. Why should it be illegal to cycle with headphones and it not be for a car passenger to talk to a driver/two cyclists out together side by side chatting.

In both those examples it requires a person to deviate their attention from the road to communicate with another person. Earphones don't. If you've done any amount of cycling you should be aware of the issue of wind noise at higher speeds is far louder than any ear/headphones. Other people here have given other examples.

You can't propose to make something illegal just because you think its dangerous. There needs to be concrete reasons.

Motorists are much more restricted on their lane movements compared to cyclists. Cyclists unfortunately have to deal with stresses that motorists don't. Easier for a bus to see a car on it's inside than a cyclist. #squish

There is ALMOST a 360 degree view around a car from inside. Break lights, indicators (when used) allow other road users to know when they are going to make a lane change etc

Also of course motorists should be 100% focused on the job of driving a car.

PeadarCo

Deedsie wrote: »

Motorists are much more restricted on their lane movements compared to cyclists. Cyclists unfortunately have to deal with stresses that motorists don't. Easier for a bus to see a car on it's inside than a cyclist. #squish

There is ALMOST a 360 degree view around a car from inside. Break lights, indicators (when used) allow other road users to know when they are going to make a lane change etc

Also of course motorists should be 100% focused on the job of driving a car.

And what has that example to do with earphones?

The example you've mentioned relates more to road positioning and being aware of other peoples blind spots. A quick turn of the head should give any cyclist a good idea of what's around them for better than any car. Earphones have 0 impact on those 3 things.

Cycling in Dublin can be done safely and stress free with a mixture of good positioning and good visual awareness. Due to volume levels in built up area's earphones aren't that important as human ears aren't good enough to differentiate individual vehicles.

The only place I could thing where earphones might be a hindrance is on quiet country roads where a person might here the odd car coming earlier. But even that depends on a cyclists speed and the impact of the local geography on sound.

monument

Deedsie wrote: »

Motorists are much more restricted on their lane movements compared to cyclists.

What are you talking about? What does that even mean?

Deedsie wrote: »

There is ALMOST a 360 degree view around a car from inside.

People cycling have far better and far less obstructed views around them.

Deedsie wrote: »

Break lights, indicators (when used) allow other road users to know when they are going to make a lane change etc

Arm signals (when used) allow other road users to know when they are going to make a lane change etc.

Deedsie wrote: »

Also of course motorists should be 100% focused on the job of driving a car.

What do you mean by this?

Does it include no talking to passengers? And no radio?

boege

Amazing thread.

I will treat any rider wearing earphone in both ears as a road hazard. Such riders can't hear calls from other riders coming from behind. Speak from experience. No club worth their salt will permit in club spins.

Eyes are good, but eyes and ears are better.

bobcranfret

Most of us have been fortunate enough to be born with good eyesight and hearing. Why not use them, like other animals, to make us aware of what's going on around us? (OK, I know you won't see too many dogs and cats on bikes, but..........).

PeadarCo

boege wrote: »

Amazing thread.

I will treat any rider wearing earphone in both ears as a road hazard. Such riders can't hear calls from other riders coming from behind. Speak from experience. No club worth their salt will permit in club spins.

Eyes are good, but eyes and ears are better.

No cycling group should permit headphones on grounds of basic civility. Riding in a group with headphones on is extremely rude.

Riding on your own with headphones is it dangerous no. There are many equivalents to wearing earphones from both an attention and hearing reduction point of view that myself and others have posted. None of which anyone is proposing to make illegal.

The OP has ignored those points and has failed to produce any evidence that wearing headphones is so dangerous that it should be made illegal and criminal penalties added.

MadDog76

The wearing of earphones, whilst cycling, not only impairs hearing, it's also a distraction to the cyclist .......... common sense would tell anybody that if you are a vulnerable person (which every cyclist is!) engaging in a risky activity then you should be hyper aware of your surroundings and do everything possible to remain as safe as possible.

If this thread was in a general forum (as opposed to a cycling forum) the results of the poll and the opinions posted would definitely favour not using earphones whilst cycling ......... it doesn't surprise me that most of the cyclists on here are stupidly saying "wearing earphones are grand, not a problem" etc. as I see cyclists every day taking equally as stupid chances on the road ......... we are always being told to "watch out for our most vulnerable road users", I think it's time our most vulnerable road users started looking out for themselves .......... not wearing earphones would be a good place to start!!!

tomasrojo

MadDog76 wrote: »

The wearing of earphones, whilst cycling, not only impairs hearing, it's also a distraction to the cyclist .......... common sense would tell anybody that if you are a vulnerable person (which every cyclist is!) engaging in a risky activity then you should be hyper aware of your surroundings and do everything possible to remain as safe as possible.

Cycling isn't especially risky, depending on what type of cycling you're doing. Commuting/utility cycling is about as dangerous as walking near traffic.

MadDog76 wrote: »

If this thread was in a general forum (as opposed to a cycling forum) the results of the poll and the opinions posted would definitely favour not using earphones whilst cycling

Since people who don't cycle tell me that I should stay as far to the left as possible, including on roundabouts and at junctions, forgive me if I take their opinions with some salt.

Also, the poll was whether using earphones while cycling should be illegal, not whether it shouldn't be done, or was less safe. Plenty of people have conceded that it probably is somewhat less safe, but not so much less safe that the law should get involved.

MadDog76 wrote: »

......... it doesn't surprise me that most of the cyclists on here are stupidly saying "wearing earphones are grand, not a problem" etc. as I see cyclists every day taking equally as stupid chances on the road .........

Is that helpful?

MadDog76 wrote: »

we are always being told to "watch out for our most vulnerable road users", I think it's time our most vulnerable road users started looking out for themselves .......... not wearing earphones would be a good place to start!!!

A good place to start would be to concentrate on the activities that cause most KSIs. There's no evidence that wearing earphones is one of these.

I do concede that I personally think that wearing them isn't a great idea on some roads. On some it really doesn't matter.

MadDog76

tomasrojo wrote: »

Cycling isn't especially risky, depending on what type of cycling you're doing. Commuting/utility cycling is about as dangerous as walking near traffic.



Since people who don't cycle tell me that I should stay as far to the left as possible, including on roundabouts and at junctions, forgive me if I take their opinions with some salt.

Also, the poll was whether using earphones while cycling should be illegal, not whether it shouldn't be done, or was less safe. Plenty of people have conceded that it probably is somewhat less safe, but not so much less safe that the law should get involved.



Is that helpful?



A good place to start would be to concentrate on the activities that cause most KSIs. There's no evidence that wearing earphones is one of these.

I do concede that I personally think that wearing them isn't a great idea on some roads. On some it really doesn't matter.

If it's not safe it should not be legal ........ thought that was obvious :rolleyes:

PeadarCo

MadDog76 wrote: »

If it's not safe it should not be legal ........ thought that was obvious :rolleyes:

Well then there's lots of things that are legal that should me made illegal - driving cars ( look at the accident statistics) smoking, swimming, flying on planes, walking down the street( potential to get hit by car/cyclist, mugged etc) getting on a boat. How long do you want the list to be?

Everything has some element of danger its just the degree. If you want to make something a criminal offence like the op is suggesting it needs a good reason. Which is something this idea is lacking. No studies have been produced/accident statistics have been produced that would point headphones while cycling to be especially dangerous. I notice you've responded to none of many equivalents to cycling with headphones.

Plenty of other things could be done to improve cyclists safety before you got near this idea.

RainyDay

MadDog76 wrote: »

If this thread was in a general forum (as opposed to a cycling forum) the results of the poll and the opinions posted would definitely favour not using earphones whilst cycling ......... it doesn't surprise me that most of the cyclists on here are stupidly saying "wearing earphones are grand, not a problem" etc. as I see cyclists every day taking equally as stupid chances on the road .

So just to be clear, if you wanted to review a horse riding safety issue, for example, you would take views of those who've never sat on a horse over the views of regular horse riders?

MadDog76

PeadarCo wrote: »

Well then there's lots of things that are legal that should me made illegal - driving cars ( look at the accident statistics) smoking, swimming, flying on planes, walking down the street( potential to get hit by car/cyclist, mugged etc) getting on a boat. How long do you want the list to be?

Everything has some element of danger its just the degree. If you want to make something a criminal offence like the op is suggesting it needs a good reason. Which is something this idea is lacking. No studies have been produced/accident statistics have been produced that would point headphones while cycling to be especially dangerous. I notice you've responded to none of many equivalents to cycling with headphones.

Plenty of other things could be done to improve cyclists safety before you got near this idea.

You can and should lessen the degree of danger whilst cycling by not wearing earphones or headphones ........... obviously

monument

Look, it's an accident waiting to happen: And, with so many unsuspecting people cycling behind, there will be a pileup...



Should cycling with umbrellas be banned?



What about cycling with a friend who could distract you with their talking?



What about backers, should they be banned?



Maybe we should also ban pregnant woman from cycling? To save them from them self and protect their unborn child?




This clearly could be distracting to others cycling and, worse still, drivers! Should it be banned?

MadDog76

RainyDay wrote: »

So just to be clear, if you wanted to review a horse riding safety issue, for example, you would take views of those who've never sat on a horse over the views of regular horse riders?

If the regular horse rider said "I don't think I need to use a helmet, I'm very experienced ......" and the individual who never sat on a horse said "I think, just to be safe, you should wear the helmet ......." ....... well I'd listen to the individual with common sense, not the idiot on the horse!

MadDog76

monument wrote: »

Look, it's an accident waiting to happen: And, with so many unsuspecting people cycling behind, there will be a pileup...



Should cycling with umbrellas be banned?



What about cycling with a friend who could distract you with their talking?



What about backers, should they be banned?



Maybe we should also ban pregnant woman from cycling? To save them from them self and protect their unborn child?




This clearly could be distracting to others cycling and, worse still, drivers! Should it be banned?

You just proved my point by showing some idiots on bikes doing some stupidly risky and selfish things .......... thanks!!

LiveIsLife

RainyDay wrote: »

So just to be clear, if you wanted to review a horse riding safety issue, for example, you would take views of those who've never sat on a horse over the views of regular horse riders?

Are the horses using the roads or public areas? If so then it would be wise to get others views. Would you trust the banks if they said they would self-regulate?

PeadarCo

MadDog76 wrote: »

You can and should lessen the degree of danger whilst cycling by not wearing earphones or headphones ........... obviously

Good so I assume you're also proposing banning the wind, banning radio from cars, headphones in any public place full stop, cycling in groups, banning talking in public places, banning driving, walking, running etc. All having the same/greater effect than earphones on a bike. All my proposed idea's would reduce or eliminate the chance of a person/driver/cyclist being involved in a road accident.

Ear/headphones don't increase the risks of cycling materially and there's no evidence presented that has suggested otherwise.

MadDog76

PeadarCo wrote: »

Good so I assume you're also proposing banning the wind, banning radio from cars, headphones in any public place full stop, cycling in groups, banning talking in public places, banning driving, walking, running etc. All having the same/greater effect than earphones on a bike. All my proposed idea's would reduce or eliminate the chance of a person/driver/cyclist being involved in a road accident.

Ear/headphones don't increase the risks of cycling materially and there's no evidence presented that has suggested otherwise.

Yes, I am proposing that we ban the wind ....... :rolleyes:

PeadarCo

MadDog76 wrote: »

Yes, I am proposing that we ban the wind ....... :rolleyes:

Well why not. If you've ever gone very fast on a bike say 50km + you'll be perfectly aware of all the noise generated and as you said its all about reducing risks. All we need to do is extend the met eireann weather notices to the likely noise impact of the wind and cyclists just like they do for boats. Add speed limits to bikes and make it illegal to cycle once Met Eireann declares a certain notice. And there you go the wind banned.

MadDog76

PeadarCo wrote: »

Well why not. If you've ever gone very fast on a bike say 50km + you'll be perfectly aware of all the noise generated and as you said its all about reducing risks. All we need to do is extend the met eireann weather notices to the likely noise impact of the wind and cyclists just like they do for boats. Add speed limits to bikes and make it illegal to cycle once Met Eireann declares a certain notice. And there you go the wind banned.

And why shouldn't cyclists have speed limits anyway??? So yes I agree with you .......

PeadarCo

MadDog76 wrote: »

And why shouldn't cyclists have speed limits anyway??? So yes I agree with you .......

4 reasons

1- Cyclists don't have to have speedometers. Very hard to judge the difference between 29km/hr and say 33km/hr

2- Even for strong cyclist is actually quite hard to break them bar the 30km/hr in Dublin City Centre. It takes effort to hit 50km/hr and outside racing there are very few places that can be done in built up area's with cars, traffic lights etc.

3-While speed limits aren't exact a cyclist can still be convicted under the general dangerous driving/cycling rules.

4- Crashing at high speed on a bike is quite painful. Self preservation generally restricts high speed cycling to where it is safe to do so.

LiveIsLife

PeadarCo wrote: »

Well why not. If you've ever gone very fast on a bike say 50km + you'll be perfectly aware of all the noise generated and as you said its all about reducing risks. All we need to do is extend the met eireann weather notices to the likely noise impact of the wind and cyclists just like they do for boats. Add speed limits to bikes and make it illegal to cycle once Met Eireann declares a certain notice. And there you go the wind banned.

The wind argument is nonsense, it's part of the environment your cycling in and hearing it is part of the sensory awareness. Plugging in earphones is reducing and distracting one of your important senses when cycling

PeadarCo

LiveIsLife wrote: »

Wind is nonsense, it's part of the environment your cycling in and hearing it is part of the sensory awareness. Plugging in earphones is reducing and distracting one of your important senses when cycling

Nobody here has disputed that earphones reduce the effectiveness of a persons hearing. What I and others are disputing is the impact of that reduction. If your going to make earphones illegal its up to who ever is proposing it to show the reduction is so material on safety that it warrants making it a criminal offence.

Just because it reduces your hearing doesn't mean it has a material impact on a persons safety. If you think it does please supply the relevant research and statistics.


The point about the wind is that it reduces a persons ability to hear what's going on around them. Its an environmental factor that can have a far greater impact on a persons hearing than any set of turned up earphones. If the argument that anything that reduces hearing and or attention on the road should be made illegal, its natural that that ban should extend to things like radio, wind, car passengers etc.

MadDog76

PeadarCo wrote: »

4 reasons

1- Cyclists don't have to have speedometers. Very hard to judge the difference between 29km/hr and say 33km/hr

2- Even for strong cyclist is actually quite hard to break them bar the 30km/hr in Dublin City Centre. It takes effort to hit 50km/hr and outside racing there are very few places that can be done in built up area's with cars, traffic lights etc.

3-While speed limits aren't exact a cyclist can still be convicted under the general dangerous driving/cycling rules.

4- Crashing at high speed on a bike is quite painful. Self preservation generally restricts high speed cycling to where it is safe to do so.

So maybe cyclists should have to have speedometers .........

And, like motorists, cyclists will have different speed limits in different parts of the city, country etc.

Crashing at high speed in a car can be quite fatal yet self preservation doesn't stop idiots in cars driving at excessively high speeds ......... still illegal to speed though and it is enforced when observed by the Guards

Lumen

MadDog76 wrote: »

So maybe cyclists should have to have speedometers .........

And, like motorists, cyclists will have different speed limits in different parts of the city, country etc.

Crashing at high speed in a car can be quite fatal yet self preservation doesn't stop idiots in cars driving at excessively high speeds ......... still illegal to speed though and it is enforced when observed by the Guards

The purpose of speed limits for motor vehicles is not to stop drivers from killing themselves, it's to stop (or rather, reduce the likelihood of) them killing other people.

Motor vehicles kill scores of passengers, other drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians each year. Bicycles do not because they're much slower, much lighter, carry no passengers, have better visibility, are narrower (and therefore more difficult to collide with) and present a more or less symmetrical risk to the cyclist as they do to the pedestrian. So for all sorts of reasons "death by cyclist" is just not a major threat facing humanity.

Aside from bicycle speed limits being practically unenforceable they would also have no effect on the third parties which speed limits are designed to protect.

LiveIsLife

PeadarCo wrote: »

Nobody here has disputed that earphones reduce the effectiveness of a persons hearing. What I and others are disputing is the impact of that reduction. If your going to make earphones illegal its up to who ever is proposing it to show the reduction is so material on safety that it warrants making it a criminal offence.

Just because it reduces your hearing doesn't mean it has a material impact on a persons safety. If you think it does please supply the relevant research and statistics.


The point about the wind is that it reduces a persons ability to hear what's going on around them. Its an environmental factor that can have a far greater impact on a persons hearing than any set of turned up earphones. If the argument that anything that reduces hearing and or attention on the road should be made illegal, its natural that that ban should extend to things like radio, wind, car passengers etc.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1369847811000684

There hasn't been much research done on it, but that doesn't prove or disprove anything

The argument isn't anything that reduces attention. If that logic was used then talking on a mobile while driving a car would never have been.

07Lapierre

We'll I for one have seen the error of my ways. From now on I'm going to drive to work, with the car windows open and no radio on! I mean, if it saves just one life?

PeadarCo

LiveIsLife wrote: »

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1369847811000684

There hasn't been much research done on it, but that doesn't prove or disprove anything

The argument isn't anything that reduces attention. If that logic was used then talking on a mobile while driving a car would never have been.

Listening to earphones is the same as listening to a radio in a car. Its one way communication, talking on a phone is 2 way.

Given the amount of research that's be done on road safety over the last few the fact nothing much as been done on earphones says a lot. If really so dangerous as some people here believe work would have been done.

PeadarCo

LiveIsLife wrote: »

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1369847811000684

Reading through that study its says nothing about the danger of earphones. It says they reduce hearing perception something I agree with.

What it doesn't give any indication of is if that decrease substantially increases the chances of an accident and to such a degree that it should be a criminal offence. Which is what the op is essentially asking.