Should Cyclists and pedestrians be Banned from using Roads?

Neither did I

Not for any perceived inconvenience they cause to motorists but rather on the grounds of health and safety. Does it make sense to have unprotected cyclists and pedestrians sharing the same pathways as cars, vans, lorrys, tractors and motor cycles? A momentary loss of balance, a slip, a gust of wind can have fatal consequences for both. Not to mention the ignorance and selfishness of drivers of all vehicles.

It seems to me that if roads were invented tomorrow, any sensible person would prohibit cyclists and pedestrians from using them on the basis of the risk of inury and death.

TwoShedsJackson

2/10.

Neither did I

TwoShedsJackson wrote: »

2/10.

I bet you give everything 2/10, two sheds.

LadyAthame

Neither did I wrote: »

I bet you give everything 2/10, two sheds.

Consistency.

libelula

Fcuk sake

Buona Fortuna

Neither did I wrote: »

Not for any perceived inconvenience they cause to motorists but rather on the grounds of health and safety. Does it make sense to have unprotected cyclists and pedestrians sharing the same pathways as cars, vans, lorrys, tractors and motor cycles? A momentary loss of balance, a slip, a gust of wind can have fatal consequences for both. Not to mention the ignorance and selfishness of drivers of all vehicles.

It seems to me that if roads were invented tomorrow, any sensible person would prohibit cyclists and pedestrians from using them on the basis of the risk of inury and death.

And where there are no pavements or paths?

SteelyDanJalapeno

Yes

Neither did I

Perhaps people will think I am on a wind up, I wouldn't blame them, but if you carried out a risk assessment, would it conclude roads are too dangerous for cyclists and pedestrians?

anncoates

So many new accounts; so much controversy.

desertcircus

If cars were invented tomorrow, they'd be banned from anything except motorways.

desertcircus

Neither did I wrote: »

Perhaps people will think I am on a wind up, I wouldn't blame them, but if you carried out a risk assessment, would it conclude roads are too dangerous for cyclists and pedestrians?

No.

Neither did I

Buona Fortuna wrote: »

And where there are no pavements or paths?

You have to create designated pathways for cyclists and pedestrians, protected from vehicles travelling at high speeds. Or reduce the speed of those vehicles to an acceptable one, which could be as low as 20km/h?

kylith

What a great idea! Lets ban two of the main sources of exercise so that the population can get even fatter!

Tilly

Why did the pedestrian cross the road?



They couldn't if the OP got his way.

Canis Lupus

Newly regged.... Controversial topic....

Seems legit.

anncoates

Canis Lupus wrote: »

Newly regged.... Controversial topic....

Seems legit.

Like talking in a hall of mirrors in here these days.

Neither did I

kylith wrote: »

What a great idea! Lets ban two of the main sources of exercise so that the population can get even fatter!

Or create a network of pathways specifically for cyclists and pedestrians.

Buona Fortuna

Neither did I wrote: »

You have to create designated pathways for cyclists and pedestrians, protected from vehicles travelling at high speeds. Or reduce the speed of those vehicles to an acceptable one, which could be as low as 20km/h?

That would take decades. In some parts of the country it would not even be possible. What do people do in the meantime?

Plus all that money that you are spending on cycle paths is coming from schools, hospitals, old people's homes, water modernisation ....

ThisRegard

Of course they should, they don't even pay road tax.

Neither did I

anncoates wrote: »

Like talking in a hall of mirrors in here these days.

Should I wait til I have 12,000 posts before I ask a question? Frankly, I don't have that sort of time to dedicate.

Tilly

Neither did I wrote: »

Or create a network of pathways specifically for cyclists and pedestrians.

Oh you mean like cycle lanes and footpaths?

anncoates

Neither did I wrote: »

Frankly, I don't have that sort of time to dedicate.

High pressure job?

tritium

Neither did I wrote: »

Perhaps people will think I am on a wind up, I wouldn't blame them, but if you carried out a risk assessment, would it conclude roads are too dangerous for cyclists and pedestrians?

And motorists, also too dangerous for motorists...

Lots of empty new roads so, sort of a first world north Korea....

Junkyard Tom

Neither did I wrote: »

if you carried out a risk assessment, would it conclude roads are too dangerous for cyclists and pedestrians?

S'not d'roads but d'cars an' lurrys dat do be does be dangerous Jaow.

tritium

Tilly wrote: »

Oh you mean like cycle lanes and footpaths?

Oh, that's what they're for! Looking at how they're used in Dublin I assumed they were parking spaces

Neither did I

anncoates wrote: »

High pressure job?

By the time I have 12,000 posts cyclists and pedestrians will already have been banned for using roads.

Gongoozler

kylith wrote: »

What a great idea! Lets ban two of the main sources of exercise so that the population can get even fatter!

He's not talking about banning the activities, just segregating them.

And walking is a main source of exercise? Really?

OP I think, while not necessarily practical, you have a valid point. The two groups are the most vulnerable on the roads. It came to be as is from natural progression.

I'd like to point out though that many of the accidents are easily avoided if people followed the rules of the road. For example, you said about being in close proximity to cyclists, but it's apparent that most people don't know that you're meant to be 1.5 metres from a cyclist at all times.

Neither did I

anncoates wrote: »

High pressure job?

By the time I have 12,000 posts cyclists and pedestrians will already have been banned from using roads.

whiskeyman

Due to the amount on fatalites and injuries on our roads these days, I'd reckon the below would be more true...

It seems to me that if roads were invented tomorrow, any sensible person would prohibit cars from using them on the basis of the risk of injury and death.

Cars may only then be considered to be in use after a far more stricter learning strategy, change of rules and much better enforcement of such.

Don't Chute!

ThisRegard wrote: »

Of course they should, they don't even pay road tax.

Neither do you.

Collie D

I must be the bigger fool for even clicking in here given the ridiculous thread title.

LadyAthame

Canis Lupus wrote: »

Newly regged.... Controversial topic....

Seems legit.

There is a proxy served somewhere out there that is knackered.

anncoates

Neither did I wrote: »

By the time I have 12,000 posts cyclists and pedestrians will already have been banned for using roads.

Neither did I wrote: »

By the time I have 12,000 posts cyclists and pedestrians will already have been banned from using roads.

Trying to catch up?

Badly Drunk Boy

Gongoozler wrote: »

And walking is a main source of exercise? Really?

It probably is. Loads of people go out walking every morning and evening, but of the people who don't 'intentionally' exercise, walking would probably be their main source of exercise.

(My avatar doppelganger...) :pac:

Neither did I wrote: »

By the time I have 12,000 posts cyclists and pedestrians will already have been banned from using roads.

I've heard that one before!! (Somewhere...)

Neither did I

Ok I understand, don't ask anything interesting until I have a proven track record of following the consensus...

It is a topic I have thought about while sitting through health and safety training. I just felt if you approached road use with the same level of scrutiny that you do other areas, would you allow vehicles, cyclists and pedestrians to share the same routes.

Practically it would be hugely difficult to implement this type of change, I understand that.

Badly Drunk Boy

Okay then, if you were going to carry out a risk assessment on car driving and the associated accidents, what would your findings be?

LadyAthame

Neither did I wrote: »

It is a topic I have thought about while sitting through health and safety training. .

You have a great imagination would you consider doing something else with it?

kylith

Neither did I wrote: »

Or create a network of pathways specifically for cyclists and pedestrians.

Because the current footpaths and cycle paths aren't good enough?

Actually, the current ones aren't good enough; full of parked cars and broken glass, flooded after any rain, in a poor state of repair. Do you really think that new ones would be any better?

And, presuming that you're saying that every road in the country should have a footpath and a separate bike path, where is the money going to come from to compel purchase of the land and to build these?

Gongoozler wrote: »

He's not talking about banning the activities, just segregating them.

And walking is a main source of exercise? Really?

I'd say that walking is the main source of exercise for many people. Even if it's just from their house to the car.

LadyAthame

No they should not be banned because there are not proper cycle paths yet and until then no.

dmc17

Buona Fortuna wrote: »

And where there are no pavements or paths?

Make them walk through the fields!

Darkglasses

Cycling on the road is fine, really.

desertcircus

Darkglasses wrote: »

Cycling on the road is fine, really.

Exactly. Cycling in Ireland is, by and large, quite safe.

traprunner

Would the chicken be allowed to cross the road? I don't know why it would want to but would it be allowed?

Darkglasses

desertcircus wrote: »

Exactly. Cycling in Ireland is, by and large, quite safe.

Probably one of the healthiest things you can do.

Neither did I

Darkglasses wrote: »

Probably one of the healthiest things you can do.

I am very much in favour of cycling. I just think they are very unprotected on our roads.

dubscottie

Gongoozler wrote: »

I'd like to point out though that many of the accidents are easily avoided if people followed the rules of the road. For example, you said about being in close proximity to cyclists, but it's apparent that most people don't know that you're meant to be 1.5 metres from a cyclist at all times.

1.5 meters is a recommendation NOT a legal requirement.

The Road Traffic Act is the law not the rules of the road...

Gongoozler

dubscottie wrote: »

1.5 meters is a recommendation NOT a legal requirement.

The Road Traffic Act is the law not the rules of the road...

Where did I say it was the law.. ?

whisky_galore

People should be banned (from Boards) for proposing to ban anything.

What should be banned from the road is terrible drivers. If you did that, we would have the quietest roads in the world.

Neither did I

Deleted User wrote: »

What should be banned from the road is terrible drivers. If you did that, we would have the quietest roads in the world.

Having being abroad for the last while, I don't think Irish drivers are the worst in the world. Its mad stuff altogether here in France.

Neither did I

Neither did I wrote: »

Having being abroad for the last while, I don't think Irish drivers are the worst in the world. Its mad stuff altogether here in France.

You've obviously never been a cyclist.