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

Chips Lovell

Qualitymark wrote: »

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

The original offence was outlined in the Road Traffic Act of 1961:

Careless driving.

52.—(1) A person shall not drive a vehicle in a public place without due care and attention, or without reasonable consideration for other persons using the place.

(2) A person who contravenes subsection (1) of this section shall be guilty of an offence.

The current wording of the offence is from the Road Traffic (No. 2) Act 2011:

“Driving without reasonable consideration.

51A.— (1) A person shall not drive a vehicle in a public place without reasonable consideration for other persons using the place.

(2) A person who contravenes subsection (1) commits an offence.

Fixed Penalty Notices were introduced under the 1961 act and its subsequent amendments.

Qualitymark

Sorry, where's the word 'earphones' in that law? I can't seem to see it.

Chips Lovell

There's no law prohibiting earphones.

Qualitymark

Sorry, Jep, we're at cross-purposes; thought you were saying an earphones ban was an old law, whereas you were saying that leaving the decision on what was against the law to a random garda was an old law.

Chips Lovell

Ah. I understand.

CramCycle

A garda calls you or sets off the siren. If you don't turn or react in some way, its fair play that you clearly had your hearing inhibited.

I realise there are some headphones that allow you to hear outside noises, I have nothing against them to be honest, perfectly fine in my opinion. I still think its rich that some drivers give out about it when so much effort goes into reducing outside noises in a modern motor vehicle but the muppets with their Beatz / DJ style headphones on with noise cancelling features, there is no argument there.

Hearing is a large part of your situational awareness on a bike, it is not the be all and all but to remove it voluntarily is ludicrous. It certainly can be done without, eg in the case of the hearing impaired but to remove it, on purpose, is ridiculous.

On a personal note, and purely observational, the people wearing the large Beatz headphones tend to be the ones not looking around, and having even less awareness, have seen motorist slam on their brakes at junctions and beep the horn only to get no response from the Headset wearing muppets. I have let a roar (of fear) and went up on my front wheel because a guy at UCD pulled out wearing Beatz and texting. No response. They don't get injured because the rest of us make up for this deficiency of common sense.

RANT over

Deedsie

CramCycle wrote: »

A garda calls you or sets off the siren. If you don't turn or react in some way, its fair play that you clearly had your hearing inhibited.

I realise there are some headphones that allow you to hear outside noises, I have nothing against them to be honest, perfectly fine in my opinion. I still think its rich that some drivers give out about it when so much effort goes into reducing outside noises in a modern motor vehicle but the muppets with their Beatz / DJ style headphones on with noise cancelling features, there is no argument there.

Hearing is a large part of your situational awareness on a bike, it is not the be all and all but to remove it voluntarily is ludicrous. It certainly can be done without, eg in the case of the hearing impaired but to remove it, on purpose, is ridiculous.

On a personal note, and purely observational, the people wearing the large Beatz headphones tend to be the ones not looking around, and having even less awareness, have seen motorist slam on their brakes at junctions and beep the horn only to get no response from the Headset wearing muppets. I have let a roar (of fear) and went up on my front wheel because a guy at UCD pulled out wearing Beatz and texting. No response. They don't get injured because the rest of us make up for this deficiency of common sense.

RANT over

I agree 100%, cycling in every morning if there is a goon weaving in and out on the lane not looking around him or her he or she will be wearing earphones. It's dangerous enough cycling in Dublin why would someone voluntarily make it more dangerous by reducing their awareness of what is going on around them. Senseless

tomasrojo

Whatever about Beats, imagine the outrage if these had caught on:

Carawaystick

CramCycle wrote: »

A garda calls you or sets off the siren. If you don't turn or react in some way, its fair play that you clearly had your hearing inhibited.

...

Hearing is a large part of your situational awareness on a bike, it is not the be all and all but to remove it voluntarily is ludicrous. It certainly can be done without, eg in the case of the hearing impaired but to remove it, on purpose, is ridiculous.

RANT over

How is a person using headphones guilty of driving without due care and attention, when a deaf person dong the same actions isnt?

sconhome

Carawaystick wrote: »

How is a person using headphones guilty of driving without due care and attention, when a deaf person dong the same actions isnt?

A deaf person will generally use other senses and be aware of what's going on around them.

Gobsh1tes with their iphone on their lap and headsets are tuned out of this world completely.

PhilEllis

AKW wrote: »

A deaf person will generally use other senses and be aware of what's going on around them.

Gobsh1tes with their iphone on their lap and headsets are tuned out of this world completely.

Bit of a sweeping statement there. I cycle with headphones in. I start a podcast as I leave my house, it goes inside a pocket using earphones I can still hear the road with and doesn't come out until I reach my destination. I am not a danger on the road nor am I unaware of my surroundings.

CramCycle

Carawaystick wrote: »

How is a person using headphones guilty of driving without due care and attention, when a deaf person dong the same actions isnt?

Hearing is important for situational awareness. Unfortunately for the deaf person, this has been removed and nothing can be done in this regard. They can alter their tactics, behaviour etc. to alleviate this deficit as much as possible.

My belief is that people with noise cancelling headphones do not adjust their behaviour to account for this loss in situational awareness, but this is based purely on observation, so maybe I just have the idiots around UCD annoying me.

PhilEllis wrote: »

Bit of a sweeping statement there. I cycle with headphones in. I start a podcast as I leave my house, it goes inside a pocket using earphones I can still hear the road with and doesn't come out until I reach my destination. I am not a danger on the road nor am I unaware of my surroundings.

Not really, several headphones allow you to hear whats going on around you, my issue was specifically with the ones that drown out surrounding noise. Beatz, over ear and certain buds. A garda can't tell which ones are fine but they should certainly be able to recognise which ones are definitely eg beatz.

If a Garda gives it the old blues and twos or calls you over, you will hear them. Some people won't, these are the people who have lost situational awareness.

Tony EH

PhilEllis wrote: »

Bit of a sweeping statement there. I cycle with headphones in. I start a podcast as I leave my house, it goes inside a pocket using earphones I can still hear the road with and doesn't come out until I reach my destination. I am not a danger on the road nor am I unaware of my surroundings.

I listen to music or newsyap.

If I can't hear the road around me over the music, it means it's too high, then I lower it.

It's a very simple procedure.

Someone should tell Paschal and then ask him to actually do something useful while he's in office.

I wonder how he feels about radios in cars?

buffalo

Tony EH wrote: »

Someone should tell Paschal and then ask him to actually do something useful while he's in office.

I wonder how he feels about radios in cars?

If you read the story, it was Ruairi Quinn who raised the matter - Pascal responded that it was up to the Gardaí, but it wasn't an offence

tomasrojo

buffalo wrote: »

If you read the story, it was Ruairi Quinn who raised the matter - Pascal responded that it was up to the Gardaí, but it wasn't an offence

I saw RQ on a Dublin Bike some years ago. He wasn't wearing earphones or headphones. No "safety" paraphernalia either.

Tony EH

buffalo wrote: »

If you read the story, it was Ruairi Quinn who raised the matter - Pascal responded that it was up to the Gardaí, but it wasn't an offence

Ruairi Quinn's no better.

But if these things are being mooted around, it's usually to a view to be seen doing "something".

I doubt that anything concrete will come of it, as cyclists will quite right kick up a stink about the same provisions in cars etc.

cdaly_

I find my earbuds cut wind noise so I can, possibly, hear better.

sconhome

PhilEllis wrote: »

Bit of a sweeping statement there. I cycle with headphones in. I start a podcast as I leave my house, it goes inside a pocket using earphones I can still hear the road with and doesn't come out until I reach my destination. I am not a danger on the road nor am I unaware of my surroundings.

So do I.

My statement was in relation to car drivers which were mentioned in the quoted post I replied to. I have no issue with people using headphones as long as they themselves are clued in.

I see so many pedestrians, cyclists and drivers that are on a different planet altogether. Its like their heads are on fixed rods they can't even manage a life saver look.

tomasrojo

https://twitter.com/Flaminghobo1/status/666182051557715968

I will be using the term "Big Cycling" in future. I've always wanted a term for that powerful cabal.

ThisRegard

Messr Pachal(Pascal?) was on Newstalk this morning talking about the roads, not quite sure if he fixed them, but at the end the troll Ivan got excited when he started to question him over cyclists breaking the laws, again, and how dangerous those cyclists are when they have headphones on.

tomasrojo

Good for you, Ivan. Don't let Big Cycling silence you.

tomasrojo

This is pretty clever:

Guerrilla style: Pitt grad student uses cell phone to track speeds on Forbes Ave in Oakland
Approximately half of motorists caught traveling above speed limit

http://bikepgh.org/2015/11/13/guerrilla-style-pitt-student-uses-cell-phone-to-track-traffic-speeds-on-forbes-ave-in-oakland/

Might be an interesting college project to see the percentage of motorists speeding around Ireland using similar cheap technology.

CramCycle

tomasrojo wrote: »

This is pretty clever:


http://bikepgh.org/2015/11/13/guerrilla-style-pitt-student-uses-cell-phone-to-track-traffic-speeds-on-forbes-ave-in-oakland/

Might be an interesting college project to see the percentage of motorists speeding around Ireland using similar cheap technology.

A similar thing, not as accurate, was done for a national school project. They had a large number of drivers well in excess of the limit (even if you included the obvious errors, the speeds were far enough above to say they were possibly wrong in my opinion).

A quick google shows a few similar projects for NS's around the country, my favourite quote from one of the students

Then Garda Scully showed us the speed gun that is used to stop people from speeding on the roads. He let us test it and then the Green Schools Committee watched him use it outside the school. The speed limit outside our school is 80 kilometres per hour. However the five cars that were scanned were travelling at 100 kilometres per hour. When they saw Garda Scully they slowed down.
SLOW DOWN OUTSIDE CLONTUSKERT SCHOOL!!

The project I had read, the school were asking the Gardai to provide a camera, they (the students and a teacher) then done the leg work themselves to show it was warranted, and they were refused for some technical reason.

tomasrojo

I think the approach used in the post above using phone footage and some software might work for schools, if someone can just set it up for the teachers. The professional equipment might prove difficult to borrow for any length of time.

The speed limit outside our school is 80 kilometres per hour

Give. Me. Strength.

Jawgap

CramCycle wrote: »

A similar thing, not as accurate, was done for a national school project. They had a large number of drivers well in excess of the limit (even if you included the obvious errors, the speeds were far enough above to say they were possibly wrong in my opinion).

A quick google shows a few similar projects for NS's around the country, my favourite quote from one of the students



The project I had read, the school were asking the Gardai to provide a camera, they (the students and a teacher) then done the leg work themselves to show it was warranted, and they were refused for some technical reason.

i think I may have posted about that. Some TY kids at my sons' school did a project a few years ago looking at road safety in vicinity of the school and found, among other things, that a lot of cars passing the school were speeding.

The figures were presented at the parents' council and a meeting was arranged with the local Garda Sergeant, who was sympathetic to calls for a speed van to be placed on the road but he said it wouldn't happen because there wasn't enough traffic (implication: not enough revenue) and because there hadn't been a serious collision on the stretch of road! Obviously prevention is not better than cure!

RainyDay

tomasrojo wrote: »

This is pretty clever:


http://bikepgh.org/2015/11/13/guerrilla-style-pitt-student-uses-cell-phone-to-track-traffic-speeds-on-forbes-ave-in-oakland/

Might be an interesting college project to see the percentage of motorists speeding around Ireland using similar cheap technology.

This cycling campaigner in Galway has his own speed gun, apparently;

https://twitter.com/cosaingalway/status/657702934906470400

tomasrojo

Yes, I've seen his Tweets. They do make a good visual point about speeding.

He's really a "pedestrian campaginer". Actually, I probably shouldn't say this, but he may be a member of the "Walking Industrial Complex", a shadowy organisation similar to "Big Cycling".

https://twitter.com/Flaminghobo1/status/666566866937233408

galwaycyclist

Jawgap wrote: »

The figures were presented at the parents' council and a meeting was arranged with the local Garda Sergeant, who was sympathetic to calls for a speed van to be placed on the road but he said it wouldn't happen because there wasn't enough traffic (implication: not enough revenue) and because there hadn't been a serious collision on the stretch of road! Obviously prevention is not better than cure!

Yes this has come up before with regard to the Guards apparently their official position on speeding is that it is only a problem if someone actually dies.

tomasrojo

And if motorists speed and lead to parents not allowing their children to walk the road, or to the elderly avoiding walking there, the speed limit is effectively unpoliced and will only become of interest to the Gardaí when car occupants start being killed.

Which is part of the reason the UK has a "good safety record": a very substantial withdrawal of the vulnerable from their streets. Presume it also applies to Ireland, especially rural Ireland, to a great extent.

CramCycle

tomasrojo wrote: »

Which is part of the reason the UK has a "good safety record": a very substantial withdrawal of the vulnerable from their streets. Presume it also applies to Ireland, especially rural Ireland, to a great extent.

I think I mentioned it before about being home in rural Ireland and getting criticized for driving too slowly. The speed limit was 80kmph, I was varying between 50 and 80kmph. There have been several road deaths on the road over the years (none of which come up on that map the RSA used to have) and were directly attributable to speed.
The passenger informed it was perfectly safe to open her up to over 100kmph, a few seconds later we were going round a blind bend, followed by one of those dips that can hide oncoming traffic, I dispaired as he referred to me as a granny driver.

Its rural Ireland as well, there is always a chance of loose livestock etc. The attitude of some drivers is shocking.

I really think for many drivers in the country, the speed limit is an implied target that you can oscillate around depending on road conditions. There is no concept of it being a limit and you really should only drive at the speed that road conditions and safe driving permit.

I used to walk to school in the country but my mam tells me kids don't do that, even the ones who are only 5 minutes away, because of this fear of other drivers. Its a great big circle jerk, the less people who use the roads, the worse the driving becomes, leading to less people using the roads.