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

Tony EH

Deleted User wrote: »

it takes a special kind of stupid to take a look at Dublin in rush hour and conclude the problem is cyclists and pedestrians.

It's just willful blindness.

There cannot be anybody with an honest appraisal of our road use that any one type of user is the scourge.

I meet clowns every single day on my commute to and from work and that's a half hour in and a half hour out.

The difference being a clown in a motor is 100 times more dangerous to everybody else than the clown on their bicycle or on foot.

Pinch Flat

Deleted User wrote: »

it takes a special kind of stupid to take a look at Dublin in rush hour and conclude the problem is cyclists and pedestrians.

I love these articles. If Dublin was a city where motorists obey the speed limits, use lights properly, keep in lane and generally be a role model to be held up in worldwide esteem, I'd get these articles.

In reality, they're a sad indictment of our car-centric culture, where those who cause the hundreds of deaths, maim thousands and cause pollution are the ones who demonise those who use the roads differently.

RainyDay

traprunner wrote: »

Probably belongs here. http://www.independent.ie/life/city-cycling/tanya-sweeney-irish-cyclists-are-lawless-to-the-point-of-sheer-arrogance-34131121.html

Poor Tanya is a bit sensitive to criticism, it seems, if you want to follow the conversation on Twitter

https://twitter.com/tanyasweeney/status/657178592464510977

Pinch Flat

Meanwhile, on the other side

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/over-500-banned-drivers-in-serious-crashes-in-two-years-1.2400717

Tony EH

RainyDay wrote: »

Poor Tanya is a bit sensitive to criticism, it seems, if you want to follow the conversation on Twitter

https://twitter.com/tanyasweeney/status/657178592464510977

Tanya Sweeney ‏@tanyasweeney 2h2 hours ago @Jasondodd111 Maybe next I'll write about the (usually) men who leap on Twitter to harsh your buzz with their own opinions, because....

Wow...

Generalise much?


How do these people get jobs writing for national papers? I know it's the Indo and all...but jesus... :rolleyes:

eeeee

She is not covering herself in glory there at all. It's really quite something. Popcorn time!

Carlos Orange

Tony EH wrote: »

Wow...

Generalise much?


How do these people get jobs writing for national papers? I know it's the Indo and all...but jesus... :rolleyes:

Journalism isn't quite what it used to be.

tomasrojo

Tony EH wrote: »

The difference being a clown in a motor is 100 times more dangerous to everybody else than the clown on their bicycle or on foot.

Actually, even an averagely careful, averagely responsible person in a car is probably more likely to cause somebody's death or serious injury than a clown on foot or possibly even on a bike. Not quite sure how the numbers break down, but when cases involving drivers go to court, many of the cases are judged to be effectively "just one of those things", so obviously the drivers are not deemed to have been acting outrageously, and yet they still managed to kill or maim somebody.

(And that's before you start considering the air pollution.)

CramCycle

tomasrojo wrote: »

Actually, even an averagely careful, averagely responsible person in a car is probably more likely to cause somebody's death or serious injury than a clown on foot or possibly even on a bike. Not quite sure how the numbers break down, but when cases involving drivers go to court, many of the cases are judged to be effectively "just one of those things", so obviously the drivers are not deemed to have been acting outrageously, and yet they still managed to kill or maim somebody.

(And that's before you start considering the air pollution.)

To be fair, having read what a typical Irish Judge thinks are just one of those things compared to what are clearly a case of neglect or dangerous driving by myself. There seems to be no difference bar a well paid solicitor.

tomasrojo

CramCycle wrote: »

To be fair, having read what a typical Irish Judge thinks are just one of those things compared to what are clearly a case of neglect or dangerous driving by myself. There seems to be no difference bar a well paid solicitor.

Oh yeah, I put in "averagely" because I don't actually consider most of these cases blameless. They often involve a failure to moderate speed when unable to see ahead properly, or looking away from the road for some trivial reason.

But even omitting those cases, and considering only those who drive in a manner all would consider very responsible, you still see vulnerable people being killed for quite trivial mistakes, or just for acting like a child. These sort of incident barely ever happen with pedestrians and cyclists in the role of the collider, even when they're acting antisocially or carelessly.

Carawaystick

SI 182/97 S46(2) wrote:

A pedestrian facing a traffic light lamp which shows a red light shall not proceed beyond that light.

Yeah. But it's very poorly drafted.
It refers to no specific traffic sign.
It could be interpreted as saying if any red lamp is lit, a pedestrian cannot proceed. At a junction, a red lamp will always be lit so you cannot walk past
You can walk backwards past the light no bother.
If there were lights on a T junction, it would prevent a pedestrian on a footpath crossing the T. I can't see it being a kosher section, its completely irrational imho. It would prevent you walking along the path here here for example

Nichard Dixon

tomasrojo wrote: »

Actually, even an averagely careful, averagely responsible person in a car is probably more likely to cause somebody's death or serious injury than a clown on foot or possibly even on a bike. Not quite sure how the numbers break down, but when cases involving drivers go to court, many of the cases are judged to be effectively "just one of those things", so obviously the drivers are not deemed to have been acting outrageously, and yet they still managed to kill or maim somebody.

a clown on foot or a bike is quite likely to kill themselves.

Qualitymark

Nichard Dixon wrote: »

a clown on foot or a bike is quite likely to kill themselves.

Statistics, please?

traprunner

Why are clowns the new target? It used to be cyclists. All clowns do is try to make people happy.

tomasrojo

There is an ineffable melancholy about clowns too. It seems wrong to pick on them.

tomasrojo

Nichard Dixon wrote: »

a clown on foot or a bike is quite likely to kill themselves.

More likely than someone who is cautious and considerate. However, they're not the meance to society, however annoying they are (and I support FCNs by and large; making people behave better is a good idea), that some make them out to be.

This post about bicycle and Vision Zero in New York from yesterday is coincidentally about this, more or less:
http://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.ie/2015/10/vision-zero.html

If NYPD’s goal is encouraging cyclists to help prevent traffic deaths and serious injuries, we have good news: New Yorkers who ride bikes have all but achieved Vision Zero. In fact, cyclists were Vision Zero pros long before the initiative launched in NYC.

Qualitymark

tomasrojo wrote: »

There is an ineffable melancholy about clowns too. It seems wrong to pick on them.

So unfair.

More seriously, I find a really nasty class hatred appearing on Boards, reflecting, I suppose, that in mainstream Ireland.

Tony EH

traprunner wrote: »

Why are clowns the new target? It used to be cyclists. All clowns do is try to make people happy.

Clowns are evil.

Qualitymark

Tony EH wrote: »

Clowns are evil.

Now this is the kind of clownist hate-speech that is becoming far too common.

daragh_

Qualitymark wrote: »

Now this is the kind of clownist hate-speech that is becoming far too common.

Typical. Politically correct apologists continue to drive the pernicious Clown agenda in our media.

It's time that we, as a society, wake up to the the fact that the Clown 'lifestyle' is essentially inimical to traditional family values.

It's a slippery slope Sheeple. Wake up before your kids are forced to wear red noses to school and only novelty tricycles are allowed in CX races.

Qualitymark

I think I'll change my username to @wakeupsheeple

Tony EH

Qualitymark wrote: »

Now this is the kind of clownist hate-speech that is becoming far too common.

One day you'll see the truth! But it'll be too late! They'll flood into our beautiful country in their tiny cars, with their stupid makeup and noisy horns and unfunny "comedy".

Is this the way you want our country to look in a few generations!





We should start building the camps now!

Kav0777

This thread has turned into a bit of a circus.....

Macy0161

traprunner wrote: »

Why are clowns the new target? It used to be cyclists.

Clowns wear funny looking shoes that are hard to walk in, whereas cyclists...

RainyDay

Nichard Dixon wrote: »

a clown on foot or a bike is quite likely to kill themselves.

Except that they're not, if you take a look at road death statistics. Even if you make a false assumption that all cyclists killed on the road are killed because of their own mistakes, there are still very few cyclist deaths on the road.

Deedsie

http://irishcycle.com/2015/11/06/td-says-large-number-of-cyclists-with-headphones-putting-themselves-and-fellow-road-users-at-risk/

Could be an on the spot fine if you are caught wearing headphones while cycling.

Qualitymark

Deedsie wrote: »

http://irishcycle.com/2015/11/06/td-says-large-number-of-cyclists-with-headphones-putting-themselves-and-fellow-road-users-at-risk/

Could be an on the spot fine if you are caught wearing headphones while cycling.

The dangerous precedent set by this law is that it allows an individual garda's personal, uninformed opinion to be used to fine citizens. A very bad precedent that should be resisted.

Macy0161

Qualitymark wrote: »

The dangerous precedent set by this law is that it allows an individual garda's personal, uninformed opinion to be used to fine citizens. A very bad precedent that should be resisted.

Yes, it's too open ended. These comments give the cops the go ahead to pull cyclists for headphones without any real evidence of it being a danger, or being done inconsiderately.

Even a specific law about headphones would be ridiculous anyway, given there are specific designs that allow you to hear traffic and whatever is around you, and what if you've only one head phone in (which I quite often do if I am on a spin on my own - single earphone in my left ear).

Chips Lovell

It isn't a new law. And the offence exists for motorists as well.

Qualitymark

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

It isn't a new law. And the offence exists for motorists as well.

Where's this law in the statue book, please, Jep?