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

plodder

fryup wrote: »

how in the name of flying fuk are the gaurds suppose to police this???

unless there's clear bike-cam footage, its going to boil down to his word against mine 99% of the time

its ludicrous legislation (imo)

Dangerous overtaking has always been an offence. Why is this suddenly a problem now?

Chips Lovell

Amended law states:

4. Article 10 (as amended by the Road Traffic (Traffic and Parking) (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2012 ( S.I. No. 332 of 2012 )) of the Principal Regulations is amended by the substitution of the following for paragraph (1):

“(1) (a) A driver shall not overtake or attempt to overtake if to do so would endanger or cause inconvenience to a pedal cyclist.

(b) A driver shall not overtake or attempt to overtake if to do so would endanger or cause inconvenience to a person other than a pedal cyclist.”.

As far as I can see, under the law there is nothing to prohibit a cyclist being prosecuted for dangerously overtaking another cyclist under (a) or dangerously overtaking any other vehicle under (b).

Kander

creedp wrote: »

No its OK I understand the position outlined. So presumably if a cyclist moves towards a car the motorist must take evasive action in order to stay within the law. A potential for a moral hazard issue here but for me I'd prefer to cycle safely and have due regard to other road users around me. Obviously there are some real muppet motorists out there and these need to be dealt with but equally some cyclists would want to cop on as well

Muppets and idiots everywhere. However it's the muppets and idiots driving dangerously that cause the most damage.

Pinch Flat

plodder wrote: »

Dangerous overtaking has always been an offence. Why is this suddenly a problem now?

Open to correction, but as far as I know the new law has moved from careless driving (on the statute books) to dangerous driving - a more serious offence. Can anyone confirm?

ED E

Before:

Dangerous Overtaking - Sec 35
+
Inconsiderate Driving 51
Careless Driving 52
Dangerous Driving 53

After:

Dangerous Overtaking - Sec 35
- Bigger fine if the overtaken is a cycle

+
Inconsiderate Driving 51
Careless Driving 52
Dangerous Driving 53



All he did was add €40 to a FCPN. Its pissing in the wind. Shame Skelton is singing his praise like he's cycling jesus.

ED E

Gardai were already bypassing Sec 35 for 51-53 anyways so in cases worth chasing with them this will probably not be at all useful.

CramCycle

The benefit now is that it is out there, the hope would be some drivers would second guess a bad overtake. Considering there is almost no enforcement of the overtaking rule before this, this might put it in a Gardas mind that not making contact doesn't mean it wasn't illegal, which was the excuse always given at the station, no contact = no danger was what many of them believed.

creedp

Kander wrote: »

Muppets and idiots everywhere. However it's the muppets and idiots driving dangerously that cause the most damage.

Again that fact is irrefutable. However I've lost count if the times I am driving in heavy urban traffic and indicating left well in advance of a junction only to have to hit the brakes to allow a cyclist to undertake me at just as I'm turning left. All I get for my consideration is at best a fist shaken at me with verbals but can also get a fist against the car window as the muppet squeezes past. Now could I be considered to be dangerously overtaking a vulnerable cyclist or is the cyclist dangerously undertaking me?



As I both cycle and drive I can see both sides and all I am doing is calling out muppetry on both sides because no matter who is at fault for an accident the cyclist will come off worst

Salary Negotiator

creedp wrote: »

Again that fact is irrefutable. However I've lost count if the times I am driving in heavy urban traffic and indicating left well in advance of a junction only to have to hit the brakes to allow a cyclist to undertake me at just as I'm turning left. All I get for my consideration is at best a fist shaken at me with verbals but can also get a fist against the car window as the muppet squeezes past. Now could I be considered to be dangerously overtaking a vulnerable cyclist or is the cyclist dangerously undertaking me?



As I both cycle and drive I can see both sides and all I am doing is calling out muppetry on both sides because no matter who is at fault for an accident the cyclist will come off worst

You’re overthinking it and just looking for something to complain about.

Breezer

creedp wrote: »

Again that fact is irrefutable. However I've lost count if the times I am driving in heavy urban traffic and indicating left well in advance of a junction only to have to hit the brakes to allow a cyclist to undertake me at just as I'm turning left. All I get for my consideration is at best a fist shaken at me with verbals but can also get a fist against the car window as the muppet squeezes past. Now could I be considered to be dangerously overtaking a vulnerable cyclist or is the cyclist dangerously undertaking me?

If the cyclist is coming from behind you, you're not overtaking anyone. If you've indicated, they are in the wrong in this situation. Of course, you have a responsibility to avoid an accident regardless, but that's not what this law is about.

When driving, you don't skim past other cars with inches to spare, at speed. You shouldn't do that to cyclists either, even prior to this law. All this law is doing is highlighting that doing so to a cyclist is more likely to result in injury because they're a more vulnerable road user, and increasing the penalty accordingly.

Roberto_gas

https://jrnl.ie/4887875

Cabaal

Roberto_gas wrote: »

https://jrnl.ie/4887875

There's just no point reading the comments section,

Many motorists (and I drive far more then I cycle these days) just feel like the world is out to get them when no matter what.

Stark

Coupled with the sense that people are entitled to drive no matter how competent they are or their behaviour record. You should see the amount of bleating and whinging when it's suggested it's not okay to drive unaccompanied for decades on a learner permit for example.

Pinch Flat

Stark wrote: »

Coupled with the sense that people are entitled to drive no matter how competent they are or their behaviour record. You should see the amount of bleating and whinging when it's suggested it's not okay to drive unaccompanied for decades on a learner permit for example.

yeah it;s weird. Driving on a provisional is almost excusable "sure what else are you meant to do", yet people bleating on about licences for cyclists, the vast majority of which are licensed drivers

CramCycle

Those van drivers are at it again :rolleyes:

Only joking, most vans I meet are quite reasonable and observant, this is just a story of a moron who happens to be a van driver.
This morning I was coming round a bus that had pulled in, in front of me, indicated, looked, never actually left the lane but the van behind me went mental, then slowed while passing to wave his fist at me like some comical crank from a sh1tty 1960s British black and white comedy. He then proceeded to enter a round about in the left lane to exit at the 3rd exit. I overtook him a minute later, he still looked angry.

creedp

Breezer wrote: »

When driving, you don't skim past other cars with inches to spare, at speed. You shouldn't do that to cyclists either, even prior to this law. All this law is doing is highlighting that doing so to a cyclist is more likely to result in injury because they're a more vulnerable road user, and increasing the penalty accordingly.

Again fully support the sentiments expressed here and elsewhere concerning protecting cyclists from dangerous and stupid motorists. I'm just making a point that some cyclists operate as if they have a death wish and IMO there should be more discussion around the risk to the health of cyclists from their own poor behaviour.

Mickiemcfist

creedp wrote: »

Again fully support the sentiments expressed here and elsewhere concerning protecting cyclists from dangerous and stupid motorists. I'm just making a point that some cyclists operate as if they have a death wish and IMO there should be more discussion around the risk to the health of cyclists from their own poor behaviour.

Grand, I'll pass it on next time we're at a big gathering :rolleyes:

Seth Brundle

creedp wrote: »

Again fully support the sentiments expressed here and elsewhere concerning protecting cyclists from dangerous and stupid motorists. I'm just making a point that some cyclists operate as if they have a death wish and IMO there should be more discussion around the risk to the health of cyclists from their own poor behaviour.

Do people go to the motors forum position about death wish of some motorists?
Do people post on boards fanatically about the death wish of motorcyclists, of pedestrians, of horse riders, of artic drivers, of bus drivers?

Pinch Flat

creedp wrote: »

Again fully support the sentiments expressed here and elsewhere concerning protecting cyclists from dangerous and stupid motorists. I'm just making a point that some cyclists operate as if they have a death wish and IMO there should be more discussion around the risk to the health of cyclists from their own poor behaviour.

We'll make sure we raise this as the top item on the agenda at the next AGM, which every cyclist in the country is obliged to attend. I'll chip in myself in the meantime by lecturing every cyclists I see stray from the rule book.

Duckjob

creedp wrote: »

Again fully support the sentiments expressed here and elsewhere concerning protecting cyclists from dangerous and stupid motorists. I'm just making a point that some cyclists operate as if they have a death wish and IMO there should be more discussion around the risk to the health of cyclists from their own poor behaviour.

Here's the thing (or things):

1) Like most people with a certain mindset, you seem intent on making something of a strawman argument because I don't think you'll find anyone on here (or in the wider cycling sphere) argue that there aren't some complete muppets riding around on bikes, just like there's some complete muppets driving around in cars.

2) What those who cycle WILL argue is the assertion constantly implied by those that don't cycle, that there's a higher percentage of muppetry by people on bikes than there is by people driving cars. They will argue this because study after study after study has shown that not to be the case.

3) The bit of your post I've highlighted is a totally separate discussion to the one about bringing in a law to protect the many ordinary people who don't operate as if they have a death wish and do their best to travel from A to B safely and healthily.

4) If you want to have a discussion about rule breaking by people on bikes, by all means go ahead, but try to be a bit more analytical and keep it as a separate and fact based discussion.

It's very tiresome and tedious that the default response of so many now is to try to derail every single discussion laws on cyclist safety laws as well as every single discussion around cycle infrastructure etc with the same tired old anecdote based crap about the behavior of a certain subset of people seen on bikes.

Seth Brundle

Just saw this tweet:
https://twitter.com/Dublin_Suzy/status/1194546931093135361

Kander

Todays dangerous overtake is brought to you by a car overtaking on a solid white line, at a junction and into two on coming cars. Yay...

https://streamable.com/ize1m

Stark

By an unaccompanied learner as well by the looks of it. "Oh but some cyclists break the RotR :rolleyes:".

I really hope you reported that one, one of the worst I've seen posted here.

Seth Brundle

Kander wrote: »

Todays dangerous overtake is brought to you by a car overtaking on a solid white line, at a junction and into two on coming cars. Yay...

https://streamable.com/ize1m

I find the head cam footage nauseating but not as nauseating as the pig ignorant agression by that prick.
Straight to the gardai with that video!

Don't Chute!

creedp wrote: »

Does it only apply to motorist or can dash cam footage of a cyclist passing close by a car be used to gain a prosecution against a cyclist? Just sitting close by a junction in Dublin city centre and watching muppetry unfolding. To date all cyclist related muppetry. A woman cycled straight through a red light then across a junction into the oncoming lane and the took a right with no visibility of traffic potentially coming against her. Luckily no oncoming traffic or else they would be charged with passing too close to her as they drove over her. When you actually observe what going on around you the amount of cyclists putting their life at risk by breaking red lights is alarming

Did you only see cyclist related muppetry or were you only LOOKING for cyclist related muppetry? There’s a big difference.

creedp

,

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Do people go to the motors forum position about death wish of some motorists?
Do people post on boards fanatically about the death wish of motorcyclists, of pedestrians, of horse riders, of artic drivers, of bus drivers?

Oh how silly of me I didnt realise l wasnt supposed to discuss poor cycling behaviour in a cycling forum. As for your first point above you should visit the Motors forum to see for yourself that level of commentary on the low standard of driving to be found on Irish roads.

Stark

creedp wrote: »

,


Oh how silly of me I didnt realise l wasnt supposed to discuss poor cycling behaviour in a cycling forum. As for your first point above you should visit the Motors forum to see for yourself that level of commentary on the low standard of driving to be found on Irish roads.

"And I'm going to be a **** and drive dangerously around every driver I see until the general driving standard improves and refuse point blank to admit that I might be part of the problem as a result".

I wonder how well that would go down there. Because it's the general **** we have to put up with in cycling "debates".

I used to post quite a bit in the Motors forum myself as it happens. No-one there gets to use the forum as their personal soapbox. If someone posts something ill-informed, they will be called out on it.

Some of the motorists who come into the cycling forum with zero experience of cycling seem to think they can use it as a soapbox and adopt a "how dare you back-answer a motorist when they're talking down to you" attitude when challenged.

Technophobe

Kander wrote: »

Todays dangerous overtake is brought to you by a car overtaking on a solid white line, at a junction and into two on coming cars. Yay...

https://streamable.com/ize1m

Perfect example of someone infringing the new law..be a very good test case to bring to Guards to see what they say...

Kander

Seth Brundle wrote: »

I find the head cam footage nauseating but not as nauseating as the pig ignorant agression by that prick.
Straight to the gardai with that video!

I ran out of space on my handlebars as I have my two set of lamps on there already. Yes the head bob and movement can be off putting but I like that it is always pointing where I'm looking just in case there there is something happening beside or behind me.

Okay off to the gardai with me so. What do I need to bring with me? I'm guessing a copy of the clip on USB but is there anything else?

tnegun

Bring your laptop so you can show them the footage and don't expect to get the USB key back either so use one you can afford to loose!