Cycle for the heart

realitykeeper

Nut case motorists aside, the health benefits of cycling are obvious. By opting to cycle, one is reducing the burden on the HSE because cyclists are taking responsibility for their heart health and reducing their risk of developing cancers and other stress related illnesses.

Furthermore, cyclists cut their personal carbon footprint and by proxy Ireland`s carbon footprint thereby saving the state a fortune in paying even more in fines for the excessive fossil fuel consumption by this country. In a way, cyclists are the heroes who are saving this world from the melting ice caps, flooding, climate change, mass extinctions etc caused by motorists in their fuel guzzling vehicles.

Despite these praise worthy merits, cyclists receive not gratitude but abuse from motorists! Certainly it is true that cyclists do often go through red lights but really that is a perk for not contributing to traffic jams or destroying the planet. Besides, cyclists must use effort to cycle so they need to use their momentum to move forward. Cyclists know they are vulnerable and they will certainly not crash the lights if it is not safe to do so.

This being the case, why do motorists express such outrage when they see cyclists crashing the lights? My theory is that they are frustrated sitting in traffic and to see a cyclist passing them and proceeding through red lights is something that makes them jealous.

Leo Varadkar has expressed the opinion that cyclists should be fined for going through red lights but that would only result in cyclists getting back in their cars and increasing the traffic jams. What is the point in cycling in the wet miserable weather if you don`t get to crash the odd light.

Mr Varadkar would do better if he were to concern himself with the shocking behavior of rude and obnoxious motorists who routinely cut off cyclists and refuse to allow space for them to pass when traffic is moving slowly.

Also, the lack of cycle lanes in the cities, towns and villages of Ireland are forcing cyclists to crash the lights because that is what would be possible if the cycling infrastructure together with cyclist right of ways were in place. Anti-cyclist laws are unenforceable anyway so the law should be brought to bare on the motorist where it might actually make a difference.

The Sidewards Man

realitykeeper wrote: »

What is the point in cycling in the wet miserable weather if you don`t get to crash the odd light.

You and other cyclists are a danger to the public with that attitude and pratice.

L1011

realitykeeper wrote: »

This being the case, why do motorists express such outrage when they see cyclists crashing the lights?

Its actually mostly pedestrians that complain, you know, the even more vulnerable road users that have a green sequence at the time when cyclists ignore a red to them.

Fines for illegal cycling need to be enforced and harshly - if it causes a few nutters to go to prison for non payment, all the better.

uck51js9zml2yt

An odd rant about Leo and transport considering he is the Minister for Health.
Maybe he can get you looked after slowly when you end up in a+e as a result of breaking a red light .

jimmycrackcorm

The Sidewards Man wrote:

You and other cyclists are a danger to the public with that attitude and pratice.

Its not actually. Since the new laws I've been careful about the lights and just observe that cyclists are only a danger to themselves especially art junctions where motorists may expect that they don't have to worry or expect any traffic coming from the left. Its aggravating to see so many other cyclists ignore the law simply because the are doing that. However if the government suddenly announced a clampdown on pedestrians crossing without a green light then they would her voted out pronto.

Regardless, its ridiculous to suggest that cyclists are a danger to anyone other than in a situation where they're travelling downhill at 60kmh and a pedestrian suddenly walks out.

L1011

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Regardless, its ridiculous to suggest that cyclists are a danger to anyone other than in a situation where they're travelling downhill at 60kmh and a pedestrian suddenly walks out.

You've clearly never been hit by a cyclist breaking a light, then

efb

Cyclists have no just cause for breaking red lights. Dismount and walk if required

Infini

L1011 wrote: »

Its actually mostly pedestrians that complain, you know, the even more vulnerable road users that have a green sequence at the time when cyclists ignore a red to them.

Fines for illegal cycling need to be enforced and harshly - if it causes a few nutters to go to prison for non payment, all the better.

Yeeeeeah. Some Cyclists can be twats but theres no point or need to send em to prison just because some car users get butthurt they break the light. Besides is a cyclist gonna kill someone by breaking the light? No. Only themselves if theyre daft enough. Problem these days is people forget something called Personal Responsibility. If they get themselves hurt its their own fault not someone elses.

Avatar MIA

Stooopid thread

brianomc

Jaysis OP you're right. I was on my bike yesterday coming up to a red light, I slowed down and the guy in the car beside me whipped out a gun and threatened to shoot me if I didn't break that light. Forced at gunpoint, ffs, what's this city coming to when a guy can't even stop at a red light.

We give out about motorists flying past us, rushing from A-B and seemingly not giving a damn about anyone else but themselves. Why do you want to end up like that?

It's hardly the end of the world stopping for 30 seconds at a light a few times on your commute. Relax a little, you'll live longer.

Carlos Orange

Not sure if the OP is a troll or a cyclist.

NomadicGray

Jaysus, I cant even get past the first two paragraphs with the pure density of smugness and bulls hit

Banjoxed

L1011 wrote: »

You've clearly never been hit by a cyclist breaking a light, then

I have, I was crossing over Eden Quay from O'Connell Bridge to O'Connell Street on a green pedestrian light. Thankfully I wasn't badly hurt but it didn't stop the cyclist from roaring at me. Tosseur.

end of the road

realitykeeper wrote: »

Nut case motorists

lovely. tar all motorists with the same brush. and you wonder why cyclists get little support from people, because they see a minority of pro cycling extremists insulting people, thinking they can do what they like, and thinking they are above everyone else.

realitykeeper wrote: »

Certainly it is true that cyclists do often go through red lights but really that is a perk for not contributing to traffic jams or destroying the planet.

no, running through a red light potentially hitting a person, specially a disabled person who may not be able to react as quick is not a "perk"

realitykeeper wrote: »

This being the case, why do motorists express such outrage when they see cyclists crashing the lights?

i'm a pedestrian and public transport user. i have absolutely no problem expressing outrage when some dimwit whoever they are crashes through a red light. traffic lights are there for a reason and you will obey them

realitykeeper wrote: »

Leo Varadkar has expressed the opinion that cyclists should be fined for going through red lights but that would only result in cyclists getting back in their cars and increasing the traffic jams.

thats the risk i'm personally prepared to allow happen. if motorists are fined for running red lights then so should cyclists. all vehicles 2 wheeled or more have no excuse not to obey traffic lights. i support varadkar on this.

realitykeeper wrote: »

What is the point in cycling in the wet miserable weather if you don`t get to crash the odd light.

and this is why as i said above, cyclists have little support from anyone. because of the minority of self entitled ones who think they are special, can behave however they like, do what they like, and that rules of the road shouldn't apply to them.

realitykeeper wrote: »

Mr Varadkar would do better if he were to concern himself with the shocking behavior of rude and obnoxious motorists who routinely cut off cyclists and refuse to allow space for them to pass when traffic is moving slowly.

well as they're was no shocking behaviour from RTe, and its not his job anyway, then he has no need to waste his time on that matter. motorists cutting off cyclists have laws to deal with them.

realitykeeper wrote: »

Also, the lack of cycle lanes in the cities, towns and villages of Ireland are forcing cyclists to crash the lights because that is what would be possible if the cycling infrastructure together with cyclist right of ways were in place.

no, no they aren't.

realitykeeper wrote: »

Anti-cyclist laws are unenforceable anyway so the law should be brought to bare on the motorist where it might actually make a difference.

they are enforcible with the proper resources. the truth is you just want to behave whatever way you like and bleet about anti-cyclist laws and blame everyone else.

the groutch

realitykeeper wrote: »

Leo Varadkar has expressed the opinion that cyclists should be fined for going through red lights but that would only result in cyclists getting back in their cars and increasing the traffic jams. What is the point in cycling in the wet miserable weather if you don`t get to crash the odd light.

so you think it's fine to put every other road user at risk so long as you're taking a few cars off the road?

Del2005

realitykeeper wrote: »

Despite these praise worthy merits, cyclists receive not gratitude but abuse from motorists! Certainly it is true that cyclists do often go through red lights but really that is a perk for not contributing to traffic jams or destroying the planet. Besides, cyclists must use effort to cycle so they need to use their momentum to move forward. Cyclists know they are vulnerable and they will certainly not crash the lights if it is not safe to do so.

Surely loosing momentum at traffic lights would make a cyclists happy, then they can show how super fit they are as they burn away from the lights. Stopping at red lights will only ad a few minutes to the journey but risks injuries to many.

ezra_pound

Reality keeper, you are a moron.

I don't mind you representing some extremist right wing nut job political farce but I will not accept you making representations on behalf of a group with which I associate. Leo indeed is a cycle enthusiast.

Please stop. You're giving good cyclists a bad name.

You do not represent cyclists. You're just a moron on a bike.

Cookie_Monster

realitykeeper wrote: »

Nut case motorists aside, the health benefits of cycling are obvious. By opting to cycle, one is reducing the burden on the HSE because cyclists are taking responsibility for their heart health and reducing their risk of developing cancers and other stress related illnesses.

Furthermore, cyclists cut their personal carbon footprint and by proxy Ireland`s carbon footprint thereby saving the state a fortune in paying even more in fines for the excessive fossil fuel consumption by this country. In a way, cyclists are the heroes who are saving this world from the melting ice caps, flooding, climate change, mass extinctions etc caused by motorists in their fuel guzzling vehicles.

Despite these praise worthy merits, cyclists receive not gratitude but abuse from motorists! Certainly it is true that cyclists do often go through red lights but really that is a perk for not contributing to traffic jams or destroying the planet. Besides, cyclists must use effort to cycle so they need to use their momentum to move forward. Cyclists know they are vulnerable and they will certainly not crash the lights if it is not safe to do so.

This being the case, why do motorists express such outrage when they see cyclists crashing the lights? My theory is that they are frustrated sitting in traffic and to see a cyclist passing them and proceeding through red lights is something that makes them jealous.

Leo Varadkar has expressed the opinion that cyclists should be fined for going through red lights but that would only result in cyclists getting back in their cars and increasing the traffic jams. What is the point in cycling in the wet miserable weather if you don`t get to crash the odd light.

Mr Varadkar would do better if he were to concern himself with the shocking behavior of rude and obnoxious motorists who routinely cut off cyclists and refuse to allow space for them to pass when traffic is moving slowly.

Also, the lack of cycle lanes in the cities, towns and villages of Ireland are forcing cyclists to crash the lights because that is what would be possible if the cycling infrastructure together with cyclist right of ways were in place. Anti-cyclist laws are unenforceable anyway so the law should be brought to bare on the motorist where it might actually make a difference.

what does your health or carbon emissions have to do with breaking red lights. You are once again posting the most ridiculous load of nonsense and trying (badly) to make some sort of point.

What does Varadkar have to do with traffic enforcement, he's not a Garda
How does a lack of cycle lanes cause cyclist to break lights? Especially since most of those lanes would be on road and subject tot he same lights if built.
What anti-cycle laws?
What bearing does the weather have on the legality of breaking lights?

Besides, cyclists must use effort to cycle so they need to use their momentum to move forward.

And this somehow exempts them from the law. So what if slightly more effort is required to start again at lights, more fat burnt...

Cyclists know they are vulnerable and they will certainly not crash the lights if it is not safe to do so.

And you don't think you would be more vulnerable sailing through every red light you come across. I don't think I'm excessively vulnerable every day while I'm out on the bike.

Victor

ezra_pound wrote: »

Reality keeper, you are a moron.

I don't mind you representing some extremist right wing nut job political farce but I will not accept you making representations on behalf of a group with which I associate. Leo indeed is a cycle enthusiast.

Please stop. You're giving good cyclists a bad name.

You do not represent cyclists. You're just a moron on a bike.

Personal abuse is not acceptable.

Moderator

LuckyLloyd

There are a myriad of other ways to keep yourself cardiovascular fit and generally strong and healthy that do not involve cycling. Always is a point on the cycling 'debate' I find odd.

Cookie_Monster

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

There are a myriad of other ways to keep yourself cardiovascular fit and generally strong and healthy that do not involve cycling. Always is a point on the cycling 'debate' I find odd.

True but cycling is semi-unique in being a mode of transport and fitness at the same time

ezra_pound

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

There are a myriad of other ways to keep yourself cardiovascular fit and generally strong and healthy that do not involve cycling. Always is a point on the cycling 'debate' I find odd.

You can't really play football to school or weight lift to work.
You can't surf to shop or ski to the beach.
You can't power lift to the park.

So cycling is pretty unique in practical terms as a way to get fitness into your daily routine and save time while you're doing it... As well as the health, environmental and financial benefits and public benefits to transport system.

realitykeeper

the groutch wrote: »

so you think it's fine to put every other road user at risk so long as you're taking a few cars off the road?

Every road user will be at risk of drowning if the motorists keep melting the polar ice sheets and glaciers of the planet. Time to tax-hike petrol prices methinks.

realitykeeper

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

There are a myriad of other ways to keep yourself cardiovascular fit and generally strong and healthy that do not involve cycling. Always is a point on the cycling 'debate' I find odd.

True. You could drive to the gym in your suv to pedal a bicycle that goes nowhere.

Patser

realitykeeper wrote: »

Every road user will be at risk of drowning if the motorists keep melting the polar ice sheets and glaciers of the planet. Time to tax-hike petrol prices methinks.

On the plus side we won't have to worry about Polar bear attacks.

What if we all switched to electric vehicles, would you stop for red lights then or can we legitimately go through them now as well?

Cookie_Monster

realitykeeper wrote: »

Every road user will be at risk of drowning if the motorists keep melting the polar ice sheets and glaciers of the planet.

how do you figure that, every road is below 2-6m above current sea levels and flash flooding / instant sea level rise is a certainty?

realitykeeper wrote: »

Time to tax-hike petrol prices methinks.

between duty and tax about 2/3rds the price is tax already. Taxing it more is clearly not the solution, it hasn't worked too well so far. (between that and motor tax rates)

Are you going to provide anything on the topic other than random soundbites with zero substance?

the groutch

realitykeeper wrote: »

Every road user will be at risk of drowning if the motorists keep melting the polar ice sheets and glaciers of the planet. Time to tax-hike petrol prices methinks.

sure I'll use my car bonnet to stay afloat on, I can't imagine your bike will float too well.

ezra_pound

Patser wrote: »

On the plus side we won't have to worry about Polar bear attacks.

What if we all switched to electric vehicles, would you stop for red lights then or can we legitimately go through them now as well?

While I abhor the suggestions by reality keeper regarding bad cyclist behaviour and his disregard for the law, I must point out that simply making cars electric doesn't make them energy efficient. You still need to generate that energy somehow and the vast majority of electricity is generated by fossil fuels, particularly in this country.

Re polar bear attacks, anything that can help reduce this scourge on Irish society is to be welcomed. Ditto sea gulls.

Patser

ezra_pound wrote: »

Re polar bear attacks, anything that can help reduce this scourge on Irish society is to be welcomed. Ditto sea gulls.

Reg last bit, maybe we need a bear tax, similar to the one introduced in Springfield by Mayor Quimby. I suggest cyclists pay more as they're more at risk than those of us safely inside our cars. Ditto seagulls. Convertible drivers to be charged per km roof down driving.

I also suggest some of this tax be used to invest in Public Transport Submarines as a precaution for the 500m sea level rise predicted by Reality Keeper.

ezra_pound

Patser wrote: »

Reg last bit, maybe we need a bear tax, similar to the one introduced in Springfield by Mayor Quimby. I suggest cyclists pay more as they're more at risk than those of us safely inside our cars. Ditto seagulls. Convertible drivers to be charged per km roof down driving.

I also suggest some of this tax be used to invest in Public Transport Submarines as a precaution for the 500m sea level rise predicted by Reality Keeper.

The blatant disregard shown by submersible and amphibious vehicles on mini roundabouts also needs to be addressed with specific legislation.

I find that in rainy weather they show particular disregard.

Patser

ezra_pound wrote: »

The blatant disregard shown by submersible and amphibious vehicles on mini roundabouts also needs to be addressed with specific legislation.

I find that in rainy weather they show particular disregard.

The Garda diving unit will have to be equipped with speed guns or depth charges, depending in severity of the issue.