Road issues that irritate me.......

RainyDay

Patww79 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Well, you could stick up dashcam footage from your average day or even a typical hour, and let the combined experts of Boards comb through it and find a traffic offence?

But just curious - do you find yourself standing out from other drivers because of your low speed? Do you reckon that most other drivers break the speed limit?

Patww79 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

No, I don't think I have a right to break red lights, whether motorists do it or not. And I don't generally break red lights, when I'm driving or cycling. I've had words with other cyclists from time to time about breaking lights, but I doubt if it has much effect. Some days it feels like I'm the only cyclist stopping, which can be a bit frustrating. And some days it feels like other cyclists follow my good example and stop behind me, which is mildly empowering.

And do I think I have the right to break the speed limit (like just about every motorist on the road does? No, I don't - but like most drivers, I do it fairly routinely, and fairly carefully.

Would it not be better if everybody stuck to every single traffic law? To be honest, I'd be more concerned about road users making case-by-case decisions to avoid danger to others. Is it a huge sin to drive at 55kmph on a decent road in good weather conditions with little traffic around? No, it's not. But it might be dangerous at other times depending on the weather or the lighting or the other road users around.

railer201 wrote: »

In dark clothes against the backdrop of a dark hedge or dark tarmacadam road surface they probably will not be visible at all even in headlights. I know because I've been there as a driver narrowly missing a pedestrian crossing the road. Putting it simply black can not be picked up against a black background no matter how powerful the light.

RobertKK wrote: »

I am blaming stupid victims, last year I was getting a taxi ride home, the taxi driver was driving safely.
We were nearly on top of this man walking on the road in the dark in dark clothes with no safety gear like an arm reflector/high vis jacket or a light.

If that person had gotten knocked down, the only person to blame would have been the victim who was walking on a rural road in the dark with no safety aids to protect them from traffic.

Sometimes victims deserve blame if they played a role in them becoming a victim.

Yes - pure and simple victim blaming. This may come as a surprise, but in rural areas, roads are not just for motorists. If there is no path, you may have pedestrians, cyclists, horses, dogs and others on the road. Even with a path, you may have parked cars, or slow tractors or whatever on the road.

Unless you're pushing for all cars to be in hi-vis colours with reflective strips first, you should ease off on the victim blaming of pedestrians.

RobertKK wrote: »

Well said, and thanks for the link.

I see they basically said everything I complained about lacking with some walkers on rural road in the dark.

I didn't think I was being unreasonable, and the RSA would agree.

Yes indeed - the RSA would be way closer to your view than mine, which is why they have become something of a joke among those who campaign for actual safety on the roads, not ineffective diversions designed to avoid facing up to the real issues of dangerous driving and poor infrastructure.

https://twitter.com/Flaminghobo1

railer201

RainyDay wrote: »

Yes - pure and simple victim blaming. This may come as a surprise, but in rural areas, roads are not just for motorists. If there is no path, you may have pedestrians, cyclists, horses, dogs and others on the road. Even with a path, you may have parked cars, or slow tractors or whatever on the road.

Unless you're pushing for all cars to be in hi-vis colours with reflective strips first, you should ease off on the victim blaming of pedestrians.

Well if the victim is to blame so be it - are you suggesting cars are always to blame. I would label it cyclist/pedestrian denial - just make sure you don't wear the most useless colour of all 'black' and light yourself up.

RobertKK

RainyDay wrote: »

Yes - pure and simple victim blaming. This may come as a surprise, but in rural areas, roads are not just for motorists. If there is no path, you may have pedestrians, cyclists, horses, dogs and others on the road. Even with a path, you may have parked cars, or slow tractors or whatever on the road.

Unless you're pushing for all cars to be in hi-vis colours with reflective strips first, you should ease off on the victim blaming of pedestrians.


Yes indeed - the RSA would be way closer to your view than mine, which is why they have become something of a joke among those who campaign for actual safety on the roads, not ineffective diversions designed to avoid facing up to the real issues of dangerous driving and poor infrastructure.

https://twitter.com/Flaminghobo1

That is why the Gardai and others tell motorists to have their lights on day and night when driving - for safety.

All I asked is for other road users to show the same courtesy.

Arcade_Tryer

THFC wrote: »

The fcukers that drive like old women in the parts where over-taking is impossible yet when they get to a straight bit of road they suddenly put the foot down.

I used to think the same.

But having driven all over Ireland for the last few years, I do not blame people one bit for slowing down while approaching bends and brows of hills and so on. Driving on most national routes in Ireland is like a box of chocolates, you never know which one you're going to get; a tractor, a cow, an old woman sipping a pint of Guinness etc.

RainyDay

RobertKK wrote: »

That is why the Gardai and others tell motorists to have their lights on day and night when driving - for safety.

All I asked is for other road users to show the same courtesy.

'For safety' is a great catch-all, and unfortunately is often used the same way that 'common sense' is used in these discussions - to avoid any rational or evidence-based approach. Anyone with any expertise in safety knows that PPE (personal protective equipment) such as hi-vis clothing is a last resort on the hierarchy of controls. You do everything else possible to reduce or eliminate risk before you rely on PPE. And we are a long way from doing everything else possible.

I recall An Post doing a trial with their vans in Donegal some years back where they wired the lights to run in daylight, and found it made absolutely no difference to the collision rate compared to unlit vans.

And if pedestrians need hi-vis, so do cars. You could have a car parked by the side of the road, or pulling out from the side having forgotten to put their lights on, so all cars need to be hi-vis colours too then, right?

railer201 wrote: »

Well if the victim is to blame so be it - are you suggesting cars are always to blame. I would label it cyclist/pedestrian denial - just make sure you don't wear the most useless colour of all 'black' and light yourself up.

Just to be clear - we're talking about pedestrians on this particular issue. Cyclists should certainly have lights, front and rear, to allow them to see and be seen - no argument there.

But when it comes to pedestrians, the onus is on the person in control of the danger, the 1 or 2 tonnes of metal driving at considerable speeds to ensure that they don't kill or maim. It is not OK to kill or maim, simply because a person isn't wearing your particular choice of clothing.

What next - stab vests for everyone who goes into town, otherwise it's their own fault if they get stabbed, right?

Zipppy

(most) cyclists.. driving in their phones...pedestrians on their phones...drivers breaking the red light...bicycles parked every where blocking footpaths... passengers not thanking bus drivers 😀

andala

I'm surprised nobody has said it yet, but then maybe it's a Cavan thing: using hard shoulder as a merging lane. It drives me demented when people get onto a national road without even checking if there's an oncoming traffic and just drive straight into hard shoulder.

Better yet apologetic drivers driving with either 2 or all 4 wheels on hard shoulder. While it seems like a nice thing to do especially when they do much less than the speed limit, it's not really safe when suddenly they just get back into the driving lane without any indication whatsoever because there is a car/pedestrian/cyclist in front of them.

Don't even get me started on cyclist. Some refuse to use cycling paths and hold up everyone behind them. I get it. You have a bike and a beard. You're wearing lycra. That would make me hate the world too, but don't make my life harder only because you had a lapse of judgment buying gear in Aldi. Or don't go cycling on a narrow bendy country road where it's impossible to overtake you at around school drop off/collection time knowing that people from 3 schools have to take that road.

suicide_circus

if only all drivers posted on After Hours....the roads would be a safer place

pablo128

THFC wrote: »

Also, this sign needs to be erected on every motorway (plus the N4/7) at regular intervals.

I've just sent that to my mate. I was with him in his jeep on the m50 from clonee to tallaght and back last week. Middle lane all the way. I gave him dogs abuse all the way too.

I think the cnut was deliberately doing it after a while just to piss me off.:pac:

demanufactured

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

Hey, I pay my road tax.

No....you oay your motor tax.

allthedoyles

Tailbacks in a town waiting for a bypass where it takes 30 minutes to travel what should take 5 minutes.

Good news though the bypass has started hopefully complete by 2019 .

HS3

People who pull out in front of you and then dawdle along. What was the emergency? ?

M50 drivers. No one drives in the driving lane, meaning the middle lane and outer lanes are crammed and no longer fit for purpose. They are overtaking lanes! OR who don't recognise a 'safe distance ' between one car and another, but who cram themselves between the two.

Parents on the school run who think they can park wherever they like, blocking in whomever they want.

People talking on their phones while driving.

Cyclists who don't have lights.

Drivers who see a long queue, but think they're better than everyone else and too good to wait, so they skip the line of traffic and bully in front of one of the cars nearest the lights.

Alun

Drivers yielding to others that they don't need to, like stopping to allow someone out of a side road or stopping on a main road to allow someone to turn right when there's absolutely nobody else on the road apart from them, and me behind them. Different matter when traffic's at a standstill of course.

maudgonner

When you're turning left at a T-junction and some twat in a van/4WD is turning right and pulls up right to the edge of the junction so that you'd need a bloody periscope to see past them.

Because if they have to sit and wait for a gap both ways in the traffic then they'll make you sit there too. Arseholes.

Colser

HS3 wrote:

Drivers who see a long queue, but think they're better than everyone else and too good to wait, so they skip the line of traffic and bully in front of one of the cars nearest the lights.

People who let them in should be shot...

railer201

RainyDay wrote: »

Just to be clear - we're talking about pedestrians on this particular issue. Cyclists should certainly have lights, front and rear, to allow them to see and be seen - no argument there.

But when it comes to pedestrians, the onus is on the person in control of the danger, the 1 or 2 tonnes of metal driving at considerable speeds to ensure that they don't kill or maim. It is not OK to kill or maim, simply because a person isn't wearing your particular choice of clothing.

What next - stab vests for everyone who goes into town, otherwise it's their own fault if they get stabbed, right?

Just to be doubly clear i'm referring to pedestrians and cyclists and both have a responsibility to make themselves 'safe and seen' as per RSA advice. If people want to put themselves in danger due to their own ignorance then that's their problem.

Sure it's not ok to kill or maim, or put yourself in a position to be killed or maimed by ignoring basic advice of making yourself visible.

demanufactured

RayM wrote: »

That proves nothing. Find me proof that the fast lane doesn't exist.

It's doesn't.

1. Being stuck behind somebody driving a Nissan Micra or Toyota Yaris.

2. People who don't wave in gratitude when you let them out. Bad breeding. Basic stuff that makes our society just a little bit nicer.

HellSquirrel

Going back to the pedestrians in dark clothing at night on country roads - yeah, I got caught out needing to walk home a couple of nights ago from work (crossed wires between me and my partner who usually collects me), along a fast, narrow country road at just after dusk. I was wearing a black top and dark blue jeans and I swear to god, I have never felt so absolutely vulnerable. I don't have great night-vision anyway, so that made it even worse. I had my ears peeled and soon as I heard an engine, I was into the hedge! Fortunately, my partner got my message and was able to round me up before I had to try the particularly alarming stretch of road, much to the relief of both of us!

I now have a headtorch and a hi-vis living in my work bag!

demanufactured

I do a 100 mile motorway round trip every day...

I'm on cruise control at 120.
Idiots who overtake and then slowly down..so I have to overtake them..and they repeat the stupidity further up the road....

Idiots who sit in the overtaking Lane.

Idiots with HID bulbs in standard lenses....blinding everyone.

Idiots who leave their main beams on and don't seem to realise why your flashing at them.

Idiots in a truck who try to overtake another truck...trucks are limited to 56 mph.

Idiots who speed excessively.

Idiots who drive way too slow.

Idiots who havnt a clue what to do at a roundabout

CaptainR

Muahahaha wrote: »

yeah Im a motorcyclist too and the amount of people in slow moving traffic texting away is chronic. People in earlier posts also said about drivers on the motorway who constantly use their brakes- chances are they are texting too and take their eyes of the road for 3 or 4 seconds and then when they get their eyes back on the road theyre nearly up someones arse, so they slam the brakes. Then when the distance is safe again they go back to finishing their text till they slam the brakes again, and so on.

Its dangerous driving plain and simple and should be treated as such, England have taken a two strike system and I think one strike for novices, 6 month ban I think not 100% sure.

Problem is enforcement, a garda bike could catch 50 people a day but there doesn't seem to be any desire to push this as a serious offence.

The Specialist

1) Assholes who crawl along a motorway or 100kph road at 60-80 max. **** off and buy a bicycle you *****, you can piss about all day then at a speed suited to you.

2) Female drivers on phones (and I single females out because I've seen 8 of them in the past week including one dopey **** who nearly caused a 3 car accident).

the_pen_turner

there is a t junction near me. smaller road going onto a bigger road.
every day i go up to that t junction.most of the time i see 2 things that irritate me.
1 a vehicle coming from the right ( so on the close side to me) driving along fine. i wait for them to pass, then at the last minute they indicate and turn left into the road im on.

2 same as above but folowing behind someone turning left. they stay out in the middle of the road and not into the little lane they have marked off in the hard shoulder. how hard is it to get out of the way.

the_pen_turner

those idiots who stop half way into ghost island boxs. they are holding the whole road up




i hate those half wits that dont know the size of their vehicle.
you see them crawling through a gap that is 3 feet wider than their vehicle. you would think there was only an inch the way they sergically make minute changes to the wheel. get a grip you fool, its not an artic you are dricing its a small micra

those drivers that make 6-7 point turns to get out of a parking space when 2 would easily do it if you used your mirrors and knew where the front and back of your car ended

RainyDay

andala wrote: »

Don't even get me started on cyclist. Some refuse to use cycling paths and hold up everyone behind them. I get it. You have a bike and a beard. You're wearing lycra. That would make me hate the world too, but don't make my life harder only because you had a lapse of judgment buying gear in Aldi. Or don't go cycling on a narrow bendy country road where it's impossible to overtake you at around school drop off/collection time knowing that people from 3 schools have to take that road.

Same happens to me in Dublin all the time - one or two or three cars holding me up, crawling in heavy traffic, when I'm on the bike. So rude and inconsiderate, and some of them have beards too.

railer201 wrote: »

Just to be doubly clear i'm referring to pedestrians and cyclists and both have a responsibility to make themselves 'safe and seen' as per RSA advice. If people want to put themselves in danger due to their own ignorance then that's their problem.

Sure it's not ok to kill or maim, or put yourself in a position to be killed or maimed by ignoring basic advice of making yourself visible.

Again, to be clear, cyclists are required by law to have lights at night. Pedestrians aren't required to have lights at night. You need to drive in a manner that doesn't kill a person who is entirely legally walking on the road.

HellSquirrel wrote: »

Going back to the pedestrians in dark clothing at night on country roads - yeah, I got caught out needing to walk home a couple of nights ago from work (crossed wires between me and my partner who usually collects me), along a fast, narrow country road at just after dusk. I was wearing a black top and dark blue jeans and I swear to god, I have never felt so absolutely vulnerable. I don't have great night-vision anyway, so that made it even worse. I had my ears peeled and soon as I heard an engine, I was into the hedge! Fortunately, my partner got my message and was able to round me up before I had to try the particularly alarming stretch of road, much to the relief of both of us!

I now have a headtorch and a hi-vis living in my work bag!

Watch out for the quiet hybrids too!

the_pen_turner

drivers who pull a trailer when they cant reverse it.
i see it all the time.
one time i seen 6 cars and a truck have to reverse 50 yards because the driver with the trailer couldnt reverse 10 feet . what was worse is that she wouldnt let anyone take the trailer off or let someone do it for her (i can undertand not letting a stranger drive)

Samsgirl

Malachi Scarce Yodeler wrote: »

Not strictly a driving matter, but people who aren't disabled using a disabled parking space or parents who get so all precious over parent and child spaces ~ in my opinion they're legit targets for me finding a parking space (tough sh*t, since when did owning a baby entitle you to f*ck all).

Outside of that hardly anything else, taxi drivers, women drivers, bus drivers etc ~ let 'em all be.

Don't complain then when you make yourself a 'legit target' to have your car door dinged by a parent trying to get a car seat or child into a car. In my opinion of course.

HellSquirrel

RainyDay wrote: »

Watch out for the quiet hybrids too!

Fortunately pretty much everything around here seems to be diesel! But yeah, won't be doing that again in a hurry :P

The Specialist

Samsgirl wrote: »

Don't complain then when you make yourself a 'legit target' to have your car door dinged by a parent trying to get a car seat or child into a car. In my opinion of course.

Considering the width of parent child spaces, if you can't fit a car seat or child in to a car without damaging those parked beside you, you should probably get a smaller car. Totally agree with that poster, parent child spaces are fair game.

railer201

RainyDay wrote: »

Again, to be clear, cyclists are required by law to have lights at night. Pedestrians aren't required to have lights at night. You need to drive in a manner that doesn't kill a person who is entirely legally walking on the road.

And the person needs to be visible - how is a motorist supposed to deal with an invisible person ??? Remember black clothing against a black background cannot be seen even with full headlights !

Are all cars meant to park up overnight to prevent any accidents with pedestrians who fail to follow basic advice of how to be 'safe and seen' ?

Legality won't physically protect you as a pedestrian - reflective clothing and a good flashlight will.