Rogue cyclists set to face on-the-spot fines MOD WARNING in first post

tomasrojo

when cyclists will not only take their lives in their hands when they mount their trusty steeds

Hyperbole.

The "model cyclist" bit is baloney too.

tomasrojo

In fact, "the taking your life in your hands" trope, while statistically supportable only if you think people who walk to work are similar risk-takers, is pretty much analogous to writing about people who choose to drive and always mentioning the risk they take of killing someone every time they get behind the wheel.

Skrynesaver

tomasrojo wrote: »

In fact, "the taking your life in your hands" trope, while statistically supportable only if you think people who walk to work are similar risk-takers, is pretty much analogous to writing about people who choose to drive and always mentioning the risk they take of killing someone every time they get behind the wheel.

When faced with the "ye're a menace with the light breaking and the footpad riding and the like" conversation I tend to ask the motorist in question, about the 3 or 4 people they personally kill each week on the same ye're all at it basis...

Rakish Paddy

buffalo wrote: »

So now, no footpad cycling, and no cycling on the road either. Time to give up I think.

Jawgap wrote: »

No, because, let's face it, despite the reams of anecdotes, RLJing and cycling on the footpad is bloody annoying as anything to see - but in reality doesn't present a risk to anyone.
.

Skrynesaver wrote: »

When faced with the "ye're a menace with the light breaking and the footpad riding and the like" conversation I tend to ask the motorist in question, about the 3 or 4 people they personally kill each week on the same ye're all at it basis...

A bit off-topic, but I'm really curious as to what device / software is apparently autocorrecting 'footpath' to 'footpad'!

tomasrojo

Injoke.

CramCycle

Damn you Mr. Rojo

buffalo

tomasrojo wrote: »

Hyperbole.

Likewise his closing statement. Great note to end on...

I'm just going to be a little bit careful, because I don't want to die - on my bike - right now.

check_six

Rakish Paddy wrote: »

A bit off-topic, but I'm really curious as to what device / software is apparently autocorrecting 'footpath' to 'footpad'!

It's a reference to a thread from a good few years back where some head-the-ball was getting worked up about cyclists, as was the fashion, and either wanted all manner of cyclists banned from the roads, or paths, or shot, or both. In any case he referred to the footpath as the "footpad" throughout (despite corrections), which I always though was some kind of thief or ne'er-do-well.

Turns out I was right, but also wrong. Hence, forever more, the footpath is commonly referred to as the "footpad" when used as a cycle-carriageway in tribute to some half forgotten nutter.

Thargor

Anybody actually been fined yet?

Jawgap

Thargor wrote: »

Anybody actually been fined yet?

The FCPNs and the provisions to allow them to be issued don't come into force for another 17 days.

You'll have to wait.

Jan Laco

If I am at a T junction and want to turn left. If I dismount and walk my bicycle passed the red light before getting back on its ok isn't it?

Macy0161

Jan Laco wrote: »

If I am at a T junction and want to turn left. If I dismount and walk my bicycle passed the red light before getting back on its ok isn't it?

I think technically you have to carry it - wheeling around isn't enough.

seamus

Yes, technically you're not supposed to wheel a bicycle on a road. Dismounting and wheeling it across the path is just fine though...

CramCycle

It's been too long since I got to use this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIWxzhGI0jQ

galwaycyclist

Jan Laco wrote: »

If I am at a T junction and want to turn left. If I dismount and walk my bicycle passed the red light before getting back on its ok isn't it?

Technically unless there is a separate pedestrian crossing the red light also applies to pedestrians.

Edit: Although that might not apply if turning left

Edit: Also there was a case in the UK where a cyclist was found guilty by a court for wheeling a bike past a red light. Long time ago.

CramCycle

galwaycyclist wrote: »

Technically unless there is a separate pedestrian crossing the red light also applies to pedestrians.

I presume if you dismount and walk along the pavement you are OK?

Macy0161

CramCycle wrote: »

I presume if you dismount and walk along the pavement you are OK?

Again this is from memory, but I don't think you're allowed to wheel a bike on the pavement - hence you have to carry it.

You'd have to come across some absolute nob of a cop to get done though.

galwaycyclist

Rakish Paddy wrote: »

A bit off-topic, but I'm really curious as to what device / software is apparently autocorrecting 'footpath' to 'footpad'!

While were getting technical the legal term for the footpad (i.e the part of a road set aside for pedestrians) is "footway". The part of the road cyclists are supposed to be on is called the roadway.

Clear as mud your honour

coolbeans

http://www.lepoint.fr/tiny/1-1944162

Meanwhile the feckless French are at it again widening the criteria in which cyclists can skip red lights.

Selon elle, l'expérimentation des panneaux de « cédez le passage cycliste au feu rouge » a montré que « le passage cycliste au feu rouge n'est pas accidentogène » et qu'il « évite certains conflits entre les cyclistes et les véhicules arrêtés au feu, notamment l'angle mort ».

For those of us whose French is rusty it basically says that allowing cyclists to RLJ under certain conditions does NOT cause accidents and that it can even lead to the avoidance of conflict between cyclists and vehicles stopped at lights.

This experience is backed up by evidence gained over the period 2013 -14 where relaxing red light laws for cyclists was trialled for the first time there.

S. Goodspeed

I was cycling through a part of Dublin yesterday at a relatively quiet time of day. Came to a set of red lights and slowly came to a stop. Another cyclist overtook me and without missing a beat dismounted his bike at pretty high speed and ran through the junction on his cleats, once he got through he swung his leg over the bike again and away he went. It was the lycra version of something out of a wild west movie. I did my usual, look left/right, made sure no one was coming (car or pedestrian) and then cautiously made my way through the same red light (guilty as charged your honour).

There is something seriously wrong with a legal system that deems what the other cyclist did legal (and by inference safe/safer?) and what I did illegal. Maybe what he did was still illegal (i honestly don't know) but in fairness to him he is obviously trying to be a law abiding citizen

Grandpa Hassan

S. Goodspeed wrote: »

I was cycling through a part of Dublin yesterday at a relatively quiet time of day. Came to a set of red lights and slowly came to a stop. Another cyclist overtook me and without missing a beat dismounted his bike at pretty high speed and ran through the junction on his cleats, once he got through he swung his leg over the bike again and away he went. It was the lycra version of something out of a wild west movie. I did my usual, look left/right, made sure no one was coming (car or pedestrian) and then cautiously made my way through the same red light (guilty as charged your honour).

There is something seriously wrong with a legal system that deems what the other cyclist did legal (and by inference safe/safer?) and what I did illegal. Maybe what he did was still illegal (i honestly don't know) but in fairness to him he is obviously trying to be a law abiding citizen

Ha I'd have liked to have seen that! I pull the same manoeuvre all the time, but not at that speed. Get up to the lights. Walk 4 or 5 steps across them, or round the left turn, and am off on my way again. Once he's on foot I don't see what law could possibly apply to him....it would be an interesting discussion with a Garda about whether he got off his bike too fast! He is a law abiding citizen as far as I can tell....

seamus

^^
Not strictly legal, especially if it was a pedestrian crossing, but this guy was obviously looking for an excuse to get some CX practice in on his commute.

Grandpa Hassan

seamus wrote: »

^^
Not strictly legal, especially if it was a pedestrian crossing, but this guy was obviously looking for an excuse to get some CX practice in on his commute.

Why? He's on foot, pushing his bike. Same as what I do, but seems like it was faster

cython

Grandpa Hassan wrote: »

Why? He's on foot, pushing his bike. Same as what I do, but seems like it was faster

Road Traffic Act says following:

Pedestrians crossing roadway


36.—(1) When crossing a roadway a pedestrian shall remain on the roadway only for so long as is necessary.


(2) At a road junction where traffic is controlled either by traffic lights or by a pointsman, a pedestrian shall cross the roadway only when traffic going in the direction in which the pedestrian intends to cross is permitted (by the lights or pointsman) to proceed, and shall yield the right of way to any traffic turning in front of the pedestrian.


(3) At a point on a road where traffic is controlled by a pointsman, a pedestrian shall cross the roadway only when permitted to do so by the pointsman.


(4) For the purposes of this bye-law, each carriageway of a dual carriageway shall be deemed to be a separate roadway, and where there is a traffic refuge on a roadway the portion of the roadway on each side of the refuge shall be deemed to be a separate roadway.
Pedestrian lights


37. A pedestrian about to cross a roadway at a place where pedestrian lights have been provided shall do so only when a lamp of the pedestrian lights facing him is lit and green.

The bolded sections are relevant here - if there were ped lights they may have been green in the direction in which he crossed, in which case it may be ok, but otherwise it seems highly unlikely either your or his approaches are fully legal.

It just happens that enforcement of traffic legislation for pedestrians is probably even worse than enforcement of same for cyclists, so people don't cope this

seamus

Grandpa Hassan wrote: »

Why? He's on foot, pushing his bike. Same as what I do, but seems like it was faster

As cython says, if there was a pedestrian crossing there which was red, then he was breaking the law.

Another thread way back also discovered that pushing your bike (or any vehicle) on a road is technically illegal except in an emergency. You either cycle it on the road or wheel it along the path. Of walk on the road carrying it.

That's all technicalities though. If there was a green ped light, I have no ethical objection to the guy's cyclocross manouver.

tomasrojo

coolbeans wrote: »

Selon elle, l'expérimentation des panneaux de « cédez le passage cycliste au feu rouge » a montré que « le passage cycliste au feu rouge n'est pas accidentogène » et qu'il « évite certains conflits entre les cyclistes et les véhicules arrêtés au feu, notamment l'angle mort ».

Rather taken by this word. Sounds like one of Jean Michel Jarre's less successful albums.

coolbeans

tomasrojo wrote: »

Rather taken by this word. Sounds like one of Jean Michel Jarre's less successful albums.

Never came across it before myself but at the same time I didn't need to look it up.

laraghrider

tomasrojo wrote: »

Rather taken by this word. Sounds like one of Jean Michel Jarre's less successful albums.

Now there is a musical reference I never expected to see on the cycling forum! Niche to say the least.

tomasrojo

The remarkable thing is he's sold 80 million albums and played to the largest outdoor crowd in history.

mcgratheoin

tomasrojo wrote: »

The remarkable thing is he's sold 80 million albums and played to the largest outdoor crowd in history.

Non-paying crowds, people will watch anything if it's free