Near misses - mod warning 22/04 - see OP/post 822

mr spuckler

RayCun wrote: »

Yes, but I asked

I know large vehicles turning left are a major cause of death, but are they killing cyclists who were sitting in front of them at a light, waiting for green, and were run over by a vehicle which took off quicker from the light?

and i provided an example of exactly that with pictures showing the moment of the collision. we don't have exact details or (thankfully) pictures for every collision. rather than going around in circles we should really think about cutting off the derailment of the thread sometime soon.

RayCun

mr spuckler wrote: »

actually the one i'm looking for implies that men move further ahead of trucks at junctions whereby 2 women killed in close proximity to each other had moved right in front of the truck, in the advance stop box, and the truck had gone straight over them because the driver didn't know they were there. truck was going straight on in both cases.

that's part of the implication in this article, related to kerb-hugging. Men are more likely to assertively take the lane, women to try to stay out of trouble - but in a counter-productive way.

RayCun

mr spuckler wrote: »

and i provided an example of exactly that with pictures showing the moment of the collision. we don't have exact details or (thankfully) pictures for every collision. rather than going around in circles we should really think about cutting off the derailment of the thread sometime soon.

But the assertion was that this is why most cyclists are killed.

(and the woman in that incident was sitting to the left of the truck that killed her)

V-man

Annie get your Run wrote: »

It seems to me there are definitely lethal junctions that need to be 'fixed'. I don't break red lights either on the bike or in the car but I'm not sure I'd be so law abiding if I had a highly dangerous junction on my commute.

And even on perfect junctions it can go horribly wrong.
This accident happened recently in the Netherlands.
Have a look at the junction layout and road-signs on the pictures and video in the article, fool proof.

http://www.destentor.nl/zutphen/fietser-overleden-bij-ongeval-met-vrachtwagen-in-zutphen~a29da975/

(Wonder why this design can't be done in Ireland)

Roadhawk

Tombo2001 wrote: »

And so many motorist go unpunished for breaking the speed limit - far more than the incidence of cyclists breaking red lights.

There is no double standard.

No there is a double standard. If a gard sees any driver on a phone, in a bus lane, speeding, without a seatbelt, etc. etc. they will absolutely pursue that driver and act on it and issue fine/points or whatever is warranted. The same cannot be said for cyclists committing an offense.

The drivers you mention not getting caught while breaking a speed limit is different.

Tombo2001 wrote: »

Are you in favour, as a motorist, of every motorist receiving a fine, whenever they exceed the speed limit by miniscule amount? As you do, and I do, and everyone else does?

I am in favour of the laws being enforced. The gardai show discretion when doing a couple of km over the limit but thats it.

mr spuckler

RayCun wrote: »

that's part of the implication in this article, related to kerb-hugging. Men are more likely to assertively take the lane, women to try to stay out of trouble - but in a counter-productive way.

yes both were certainly making a generalisation that women cyclists are less assertive than male cyclists. i suspect chuchote (unless i'm confusing with someone else) might disagree in individual cases

RayCun wrote:

But the assertion was that this is why most cyclists are killed.

(and the woman in that incident was sitting to the left of the truck that killed her)

fair enough, perhaps someone made a bold statement that they didn't have backup for to hand. life is ever thus, let's try to move on.

magicbastarder

Roadhawk wrote: »

No there is a double standard. If a gard sees any driver on a phone, in a bus lane, speeding, without a seatbelt, etc. etc. they will absolutely pursue that driver and act on it and issue fine/points or whatever is warranted. The same cannot be said for cyclists committing an offense.

partly because the law does not regard a cyclist committing an offence to be as serious as a motorist using a phone.

RayCun

Roadhawk wrote: »

No there is a double standard. If a gard sees any driver on a phone, in a bus lane, speeding, without a seatbelt, etc. etc. they will absolutely pursue that driver and act on it and issue fine/points or whatever is warranted.

Not at all.

If a garda who is on traffic duty at the time, and looking for that kind of law-breaking, sees a driver doing one of those things, then they will pursue the driver.

Most of the time they aren't looking and aren't bothered.

(same when if comes to cyclists. When they decide to enforce laws on cyclists, they will pull people. Most of the time they aren't looking)

Roadhawk

magicbastarder wrote: »

partly because the law does not regard a cyclist committing an offence to be as serious as a motorist using a phone.

So in essence, let it slide and do nothing?

magicbastarder

that certainly seems to be the attitude of many gardai.

mr spuckler

the last 3 posts all agree with each other (even though one is a question!)

magicbastarder

Roadhawk wrote: »

So in essence, let it slide and do nothing?

an example, one i've mentioned many times here. i live near ballymun road and am used to cycling it. there's a bus/cycle lane from griffith avenue up to the metro hotel on the north end of ballymun village, both directions (2.5km each way). there's one specific black spot for people parking illegally in it during its hours of operation. i leave it as an exercise to the reader to guess where that is.

Tombo2001

Roadhawk wrote: »

No there is a double standard. If a gard sees any driver on a phone, in a bus lane, speeding, without a seatbelt, etc. etc. they will absolutely pursue that driver and act on it and issue fine/points or whatever is warranted. The same cannot be said for cyclists committing an offense.

The drivers you mention not getting caught while breaking a speed limit is different.



I am in favour of the laws being enforced. The gardai show discretion when doing a couple of km over the limit but thats it.

So you want the guards to enforce for the laws that others break, but show discretion for laws that you break.

(Sorry for being a smart ass, but this is how it reads to me......)

Tenzor07

Roadhawk wrote: »

No there is a double standard. If a gard sees any driver on a phone, in a bus lane, speeding, without a seatbelt, etc. etc. they will absolutely pursue that driver and act on it and issue fine/points or whatever is warranted. The same cannot be said for cyclists committing an offense..

Given the lack of general road traffic law enforcement in Ireland i'd say 1. That's your opinion and 2. so it's just purely anecdotal evidence

Tombo2001

magicbastarder wrote: »

an example, one i've mentioned many times here. i live near ballymun road and am used to cycling it. there's a bus/cycle lane from griffith avenue up to the metro hotel on the north end of ballymun village, both directions (2.5km each way). there's one specific black spot for people parking illegally in it during its hours of operation. i leave it as an exercise to the reader to guess where that is.

You don't mean......

....surely not.....

.........ah here.......


Look ....Firehouse pack those pizzas pretty quick, it only takes three minutes to nip in and out. Whats the big deal......

amcalester

Roadhawk wrote: »

No there is a double standard. If a gard sees any driver on a phone, in a bus lane, speeding, without a seatbelt, etc. etc. they will absolutely pursue that driver and act on it and issue fine/points or whatever is warranted. The same cannot be said for cyclists committing an offense.

The drivers you mention not getting caught while breaking a speed limit is different.



I am in favour of the laws being enforced. The gardai show discretion when doing a couple of km over the limit but thats it.

So it's Garda discretion when ignoring motorist offences but it's a double standard when ignoring cycling offences?

Your bias shines through as usual.

CramCycle

RayCun wrote: »

That is surely the only way to compare them.
If 100 cyclists do x, and Y happens 3 times, meanwhile 1,000,000 drivers do x and Y happens 100 times that means it is much more likely that a cyclist doing x will have result Y.

There is the sample size there as well, it is not as simple as you might think. I would trust the motorist statistic more than the cyclist one because of the sample size. Few papers would except your conclusions if this is all you had.

mr spuckler wrote: »

yes both were certainly making a generalisation that women cyclists are less assertive than male cyclists. i suspect chuchote (unless i'm confusing with someone else) might disagree in individual cases

In direct contradiction about female cyclists being more at risk, studies in Canada show male cyclists are far more at risk, generally the reasons being identical to the reasons given to female cyclists in the UK being more at risk. I know what the biggest factor change is, and it is not the cyclist.

magicbastarder

Tombo2001 wrote: »

Look ....Firehouse pack those pizzas pretty quick, it only takes three minutes to nip in and out. Whats the big deal......

we ordered a firehouse pizza after rave reviews from a friend. it was barely middling.

RayCun

CramCycle wrote: »

In direct contradiction about female cyclists being more at risk, studies in Canada show male cyclists are far more at risk, generally the reasons being identical to the reasons given to female cyclists in the UK being more at risk. I know what the biggest factor change is, and it is not the cyclist.

UK accidents happen mostly in cities, where women are a relatively high proportion of cyclists, and Canadian accidents happen mostly outside cities, and men are a much higher proportion of cyclists there?

Tenzor07

magicbastarder wrote: »

we ordered a firehouse pizza after rave reviews from a friend. it was barely middling.

I find that the healthier option is homemade pizza as I don't want to support rapid pizza delivery by car! :pac:

Annie get your Run

V-man wrote: »

And even on perfect junctions it can go horribly wrong.
This accident happened recently in the Netherlands.
Have a look at the junction layout and road-signs on the pictures and video in the article, fool proof.

http://www.destentor.nl/zutphen/fietser-overleden-bij-ongeval-met-vrachtwagen-in-zutphen~a29da975/

(Wonder why this design can't be done in Ireland)

Does that truck say Driver Training on the side of it!! There will never be a solution that works 100% but yes looks far better than anything we have here - how more people aren't killed on our roads is amazing (thankfully). From the stuff I see daily the word fluke comes to mind.

Tombo2001

magicbastarder wrote: »

we ordered a firehouse pizza after rave reviews from a friend. it was barely middling.

I'd agree. Not far off a Mizzoni.

Da Mimmo in Fairview; Independent, or the Mick Wallace place by Croke Park.

In separate, very sad pizza related news - Steps of Rome on Chatham Street has shut down.

I believe this is called a de-rail; so I will shut up.

Tombo2001

A conclusion I've come to from this and other conversations

- Motorist believe a lot of cyclists are 'Kamikaze', crazy etc......because they do things that if a Motorist did it, it would be Kamikaze.

Regularly breaking red lights - if motorists do it its highly dangerous.

So motorists project the same onto cyclists - if cyclists break red lights, its highly dangerous.

But its not the same thing, and they are not equivalent - if the discussion is about road safety.

A motorist breaking a red light to my mind is more equivalent to a cyclist cycling at high speed on pavement. Which some, but not many do. Just as some, but not many motorists break red lights.

RayCun

While the conclusion I come to is that cyclists see going through red lights the same way motorists see going through was-amber-a-minute-ago lights

• It's almost certainly safe
• Everyone else is doing it
• It saves me lots of time
• It might be dangerous if I don't!

Annie get your Run

Tombo2001 wrote: »

A conclusion I've come to from this and other conversations

- Motorist believe a lot of cyclists are 'Kamikaze', crazy etc......because they do things that if a Motorist did it, it would be Kamikaze.

Regularly breaking red lights - if motorists do it its highly dangerous.

So motorists project the same onto cyclists - if cyclists break red lights, its highly dangerous.

But its not the same thing, and they are not equivalent - if the discussion is about road safety.

A motorist breaking a red light to my mind is more equivalent to a cyclist cycling at high speed on pavement. Which some, but not many do. Just as some, but not many motorists break red lights.

But shouldn't the discussion be about the fact that both are breaking the law? You can argue the law is flawed etc - and if you believe that then you should campaign on it - in the meantime it's an offense, safe or not. That's enough of a reason for many people but not everyone it seems.

Tombo2001

Annie get your Run wrote: »

But shouldn't the discussion be about the fact that both are breaking the law? You can argue the law is flawed etc - and if you believe that then you should campaign on it - in the meantime it's an offense, safe or not. That's enough of a reason for many people but not everyone it seems.

You can have both discussions.

It doesn't have to be about one or the other.

But a discussion about safety is not the same as a discussion about the law.

Tombo2001

RayCun wrote: »

While the conclusion I come to is that cyclists see going through red lights the same way motorists see going through was-amber-a-minute-ago lights

• It's almost certainly safe
• Everyone else is doing it
• It saves me lots of time
• It might be dangerous if I don't!

I would disagree in that for me a car breaking an orange light is far less safe than a cyclist breaking a red.

That's based on personal experience, my own opinion so obviously subjective; and ultimately depends on circumstance.

Pinch Flat

Its seems like the red light breaking of cyclists touches a nerve with motorists - its frequently brought into these discussions. Yet the red / late amber breaking of cars is somehow glanced over.

One way to close off this is to bring in a law that all traffic could break a red turning left, provided the way is clear. This would assist all forms of traffic that are needlessly stopped when turning left and the way is clear.

mr spuckler

don't they allow that in the states? although for them it's a right turn...

PaulieC

Yes and it works wonderfully well there in my experience.