#StopKillingCyclists - Kildare Street Tuesday 21st 5.30

Pinch Flat

tampopo wrote: »

I went. Is traffic usually that heavy or is it the Christmas effect?

Just a normal day in Dublin for traffic. Fair play to anyone though that sits in it day in day out. Must drive them batty eventually.

I couldn’t make the protest - for the first evening in months I had to collect pinch flat jnr from after school.

tomasrojo

circular flexing wrote: »

I think a "die-in" sends the wrong message and might be counter-productive in discouraging more people from cycling.

I lean towards that opinion too, but everyone is completely frustrated with the total lack of action in accommodating cyclists (of whom there are about 100,000 regular commuters in Dublin alone). I think the last attempt to facilitate cycling in any meaningful way was about eight years ago. So I suppose more striking tactics seem justified now.

The dangers are definitely being talked up though. Even the casual way people have informally reclassified one death back into the cycling death column to bring it up to 14.

And this:

Earlier this year, Dublin was named as one of the most dangerous cities in Europe to cycle in. The news shocked none, considering that deaths as a result of vehicles hitting cyclists are plentiful in this country's recent history.

https://lovindublin.com/news/there-is-currently-a-die-in-protest-going-on-outside-the-dáil
I don't think any of that is actually true. What study was that? I can only think of the Copenhagenize Index, and says nothing about how dangerous a city is to cycle in; just how much progress Mikael Colville Andersen thinks the city is making towards what he personally considers best practice.

And the numbers of deaths have been falling overall for years. Even this year's total, provided it doesn't rise further, is one more than 2014, and three more than 2016. That's not to belittle how terrible each death is, but it's not very strong evidence that things are getting starkly worse.

Pinch Flat

Pinch Flat wrote: »

Just a normal day in Dublin for traffic. Fair play to anyone though that sits in it day in day out. Must drive them batty eventually.

I couldn’t make the protest - for the first evening in months I had to collect pinch flat junction from after school.

You named your child pinch flat junction You sir are a monster !!!!!! :pac:

Pinch Flat

[Deleted User] wrote: »

You named your child pinch flat junction You sir are a monster !!!!!! :pac:

Ooooops. Edited.

Chips Lovell

Corca Baiscinn wrote: »

The point made re would why would CI support something which focuses on the negatives of cycling is interesting. Given that they must receive funding from the Sports Council or some such Gov Body I imagine they dont want to be seen biting the hand that feeds them either but given that several club cyclists were killed this year it's good to see that CI members are thinking about the issues.

Ah now. I've been a member of Cycling Ireland for the guts of a decade and in that time have met people from all levels of the organisation, involved in all aspects of cycling. I've never once heard that position expressed.

You need to remember that road deaths aren't just statistics. There are lots of Cycling Ireland members out there who've lost friends and club mates to accidents this year.

To suggest that Cycling Ireland members don't want to rock the boat because of concerns about funding is a low blow and quite insensitive.

Jawgap

circular flexing wrote: »

I think a "die-in" sends the wrong message and might be counter-productive in discouraging more people from cycling.

I would tend to agree.

There seems to be a view developing that cycling has, somehow, become more dangerous than it was 12/18 months ago. I would not agree. I don't doubt the motives of the organisers to be anything other than honourable, but I don't think such protests are long term constructive if they deter people from cycling.

Even on twitter there were people saying they were going to the event, but were getting the bus or walking because it was too dangerous to cycle

1bryan

doozerie wrote: »

I won't be there as, ironically, I'll be driving my car at the time (with two bicycles loaded in the back, so I'm not going complete cold turkey).

I'm all in favour of events that show cyclists in numbers on the road, I really think it does raise awareness of our existence but more importantly I think/hope it highlights that we are just normal people, like everyone else. We just happen to be normal people who ride bikes.

I have reservations about the "#StopKillingCyclists" tag though. I appreciate that sometimes it feels like only a stark message will shake people out of their complacency and make them pay attention. But on the other hand I suspect that if you ask someone whether they are associated with, or a member of a group responsible for, the killing of cyclists then they'd say no. Which, of course, is part of the fundamental problem, everyone believes the problem is someone else and that therefore they don't need to change their own attitude or behaviour.

Ultimately an event like this has to appeal to all road users, make all of us reconsider our all-too-often casual attitude and behaviour on the roads, make us realise that a single rash choice that we make on the spur of the moment could have horrific consequences for those around us and perhaps ourselves too. I like to think of myself as a conscientious cyclist and motorist but, just like anyone else, a self-serving poor decision on my part to overtake in poor visibility, drive too quickly into a blind bend, "squeeze through" a red light, etc., etc. is all that separates me from motorists that have badly hurt or killed another road user, cyclist or otherwise. And there is always the temptation to make such stupid and dangerous decisions, we are all selfish humans at the end of the day. Recognising the danger that we'd pose in doing so is what makes most of us choose not to make such decisions, and it's this kind of reasoning I think we need to encourage in all road users.

Safety on the roads will increase as we all act with more thought and consideration. A tagline like "#StopKillingCyclists" risks causing (more) division rather than encouraging empathy, in my view, and I think it is a poor choice.

I don't mean to have a go but I noticed the lack of an alternative suggestion. And while I take the point you make I'd go along with later posters who feel that, though the message is somewhat extreme, this is what it's come down to. I'd draw parallels with road safety ads relating to speeding/mobile phones/etc. Telling people to simply not do it didn't work so the RSA made those pretty shocking ads showing cars flipping, relatives of road victims screaming in hospital waiting rooms, etc. Pretty awful stuff and, sadly, even those ads have not worked. I wonder if someone is broaching the idea of making an ad like this in relation to cycling fatalities.

Your point about the prevalent attitude being 'someone else is the problem' is spot on and does need to change. How do we do that though? Other than shouting even louder I can't think of any other way.

13 road deaths so far this year, 3 more than at this time last year. If that trend continues, upwards of 20 of us will be dead by this time next year. That could be you, me or any one of us. I sure as hell don't want it to be me.

It's a subject we all, as cyclists, have a more than passing interest in. As someone who has already had a cycling-related fatality in my family, I have arguably a stronger interest than most. Every time there is news of another fatality every single member of my family will contact me. For just that split second until they're sure, they'll fear that I'm the victim this time.

I think the time for being nice has passed. Conditions are deteriorating for cyclists, not the other way around. Driving behaviour has regressed from a few years back when large numbers of gardai on the streets deterred people from taking a chance. We have arguably the most useless minister in the history of the state (ross) responsible for our safety. I really don't know about you but I feel like a sitting duck.

1bryan

Jawgap wrote: »

There seems to be a view developing that cycling has, somehow, become more dangerous than it was 12/18 months ago. I would not agree.

that is quite an astonishing comment. 3 more people are dead in the past year or so than in the same time period previous to that. What more evidence do you need that things are more dangerous?

gctest50

14


A two car and pedal cycle collision occurred and the male pedal cyclist (39 years) was seriously injured and removed to Kerry University Hospital where he later passed away.

Lusk_Doyle

ED E wrote: »

The road was closed first. Its a symbolic gesture that started in london to highlight the number of cyclists that are killed and end up lying prone on the street.

Oh my god. You seriously thought that I was being serious in my question.

secman

Unfortunately another cyclist killed in Kerry last night, a collision involving 2 cars. Rip and condolences to his family , a 39 year old man.

jon1981

TallGlass wrote: »

Seen that. Really is pretty poor. Who is it over cycling, is it department of transport or local councils or government policy. Which ever it is. They don't seem very interested.

RIP

Email response from wannabe ambassador to North Korea Minister Ross when i emailed him at death number 9 earlier in the year im July...


Dear name

I am very aware of the increase in cyclist fatalities to date this year. I met with representatives of cycling organisations, relatives of victims, as well as with the Road Safety Authority and senior members of An Garda Síochána very recently to address the tragic number of people cycling who have died on our roads.

I understand from the Road Safety Authority that the deaths of people cycling in recent years including 2017 have been spread across urban and rural locations and on every type of road (National, Regional, Local). The Road Safety Authority are continuing to examine the circumstances of these deaths to see what learnings can be taken from them and that will of course feed into their communications and promotional campaigns.

The creation of a safer cycling environment is a priority for me. Hence, in 2017, funding of just under €30 million has been allocated by the National Transport Authority under the Sustainable Transport Management grant scheme for the Greater Dublin Area and for the Regional Cities. This funding will be allocated to Cycling and Walking projects and Bus Priority measures, enabling better segregation of users. In 2016 the funding for the GDA was €21.22m and over 80% of this was spent on Cycling and Walking projects, with similar expected for 2017. I am very aware of the need for more and better cycling infrastructure and I am seeking additional funding for it as part of the mid-term review of the Capital Investment Plan.

Infrastructure is part of the solution only - how all road users behave is also important. The RSA has highlighted the dangers of distracted driving and the importance of passing cyclists at a reasonable distance.
I intend, with the RSA, to further highlight the need for all road users to take account of the vulnerability of cyclists in the coming weeks, as I am conscious that the numbers of people cycling generally peaks at this time of year.




With best wishes,

amcalester

And the response I got when I emailed after the tenth fatality

​I am very aware that there have been ten cyclist fatalities so far this year. I recently met with representatives of cycling organisations, relatives of victims as well as the Road Safety Authority and senior members of An Garda Síochána specifically to address the tragic number of people cycling who have died on our roads.

The greatest risks are where many different road users share space. Hence, in 2017, funding of just under €30 million has been allocated by the NTA under the Sustainable Transport Management grant scheme for the Greater Dublin Area and for the Regional Cities. This funding will be allocated to Cycling and Walking projects and Bus Priority measures, enabling better segregation of users. In 2016 the funding for the GDA was €21.22m and over 80% of this was spent on Cycling and Walking projects, with similar expected for 2017.

I am acutely aware of the need for more and better cycling infrastructure and I am seeking additional funding for this as part of the mid-term review of the Capital Investment Plan.

Infrastructure is part of the solution but it is not all of the solution. How all road users behave is also important. I understand from the Road Safety Authority (RSA) that the deaths of people cycling in recent years have been spread across urban and rural locations and on every type of road (National, Regional and Local). While we all are free to use the road safely, we also all have the responsibility to ensure that our driving or cycling does not impact on that. It is up to all road users to be attentive and the RSA have highlighted the dangers of distracted driving and the importance of passing cyclists at a reasonable distance.

My Department has also allocated €350,000 for the purpose of subsidising participating schools for training in the new standard Cycle Right, with additional funding from the RSA, and with Cycling Ireland administering and managing the scheme registration.


I intend - with the RSA, to further highlight the need for all road users to take account of the vulnerability of cyclists in the coming weeks, as I am conscious that the numbers of people cycling generally peaks at this time of year.


With best wishes,

RIP to the cyclist.

jon1981

Driverless cars is the solution. Remove the unpredictable variable from behind the wheel...the human.

Mongfinder General

Lambay island wrote: »

FFS, RIP that man..

I fear for people this morning too in that weather. My cycle in consisted of 2 very close passes this morn and a car beeping me in a buslane of course, despite me signalling to move out of arms reach of a pond basically. Its bad enough in normal conditions but the behaviour of some drivers in these conditions this morn were terrifying. Virtually all the bus lanes on my route were taken up with lines of cars too.

Whenever it rains, drivers get impatient and start making stupid decisions. Today is a day when to watch your back

Wood

My condolences to the family.

Lads you do realise that Shane Ross doesn't read or write any of those replies don't you?

They are filtered down to the relevant section in the department, in this case, probably Road Safety section, or sustainable travel, and answered by regular joe civil servants.

average_runner

jon1981 wrote: »

Driverless cars is the solution. Remove the unpredictable variable from behind the wheel...the human.

Yeah because drivers causes all the accidents!!


The cause of every accident should be published, because like the poster above, he/she believes it's always the drivers, while for fact we dont know.

Don't get me wrong there is some serious bad drivers out there but the same for cyclists, things that I saw this morning on the road from people was brutal and considering the conditions it was disgraceful.

Some examples:

Cork Street: 3 Big trucks parked in the cycle lanes.

Kilnamangh: Cyclist on the road, going against traffic no lights and wearing black at 7 am!!!

Crumlin: Car's darting in ahead of a bus while the bus is waiting for cyclists (I know a shock, the bus waited )

Pearse St: Cyclist in the luas lane and just merging in with traffic without yielding or looking over their shoulder!!!

We need to learn from these accidents and not hide from them

Jawgap

1bryan wrote: »

that is quite an astonishing comment. 3 more people are dead in the past year or so than in the same time period previous to that. What more evidence do you need that things are more dangerous?

I'm quite sensitive to the fact that the headline number of fatalities is practically at unprecedented levels, in comparison to recent years.

However, that's a poor indication of risk. For example, how many more people are cycling? And how many more trips and journey kilometres are being made by bike?

Also, is there any data to suggest that the rate of major and minor injury rates and 'near misses' have increased?

I based my original opinion on my own experience - I cycle fewer kilometres than I did a few years ago but the greater proportion of them are now within the M50. I make more trips on my bike - and I cycle more frequently (lots of short trips instead of longer 'rides') - and again most of those are within the M50. My own sense is that cycling hasn't become less safe, but the perception of as being 'dangeorus' has shifted, and, in my opinion, events like last evenings are driving that perception.

Personally, rather than a die-in, my preference has always been for critical mass events. Much more visible and they don't rely on the whims of the media.

jon1981

average_runner wrote: »

Yeah because drivers causes all the accidents!!


The cause of every accident should be published, because like the poster above, he/she believes it's always the drivers, while for fact we dont know.

Don't get me wrong there is some serious bad drivers out there but the same for cyclists, things that I saw this morning on the road from people was brutal and considering the conditions it was disgraceful.

Some examples:

Cork Street: 3 Big trucks parked in the cycle lanes.

Kilnamangh: Cyclist on the road, going against traffic no lights and wearing black at 7 am!!!

Crumlin: Car's darting in ahead of a bus while the bus is waiting for cyclists (I know a shock, the bus waited )

Pearse St: Cyclist in the luas lane and just merging in with traffic without yielding or looking over their shoulder!!!

We need to learn from these accidents and not hide from them

It's rarely the invisible ninja, contra flow cycling lunatic who cycles now and again that's killed. It's the frequent cyclist, the person who is out in all conditions commuting or training, the cyclist who is wearing protective gear whether it's lights, helmet or reflective gear...

average_runner

jon1981 wrote: »

It's rarely the invisible ninja, contra flow cycling lunatic who cycles now and again that's killed. It's the frequent cyclist, the person who is out in all conditions commuting or training, the cyclist who is wearing protective gear whether it's lights, helmet or reflective gear...

But that doesn't excuse the ninja cyclists. All it does is cause people to class all cyclists into a certain group.

This ninja cyclists is out every morning on my route, so I expect him.

amcalester

average_runner wrote: »

This ninja cyclists is out every morning on my route, so I expect him.

What a piss poor ninja!

07Lapierre

average_runner wrote: »

But that doesn't excuse the ninja cyclists. All it does is cause people to class all cyclists into a certain group.

This ninja cyclists Muppet is out every morning on my route, so I expect him.

FYP

Then people are muppets! A car crashed this morning...so obviously every single motorist out there is a bad driver right?

magicbastarder

i wonder how big an issue cyclist fatalities really is for the likes of ross and the RSA.
it's (usually) less than 10% of the total, but is it the canary in the mine as regards general attitude towards the roads?
that said, if it's only 10% they may be focussing more on other issues which may have a greater effect on fatality levels.

TallGlass

jon1981 wrote: »

It's rarely the invisible ninja, contra flow cycling lunatic who cycles now and again that's killed. It's the frequent cyclist, the person who is out in all conditions commuting or training, the cyclist who is wearing protective gear whether it's lights, helmet or reflective gear...

They say your chances of having an accident on a road your familiar with are higher as your more relaxed on that part of your journey so you 'switch off'.

thelad95

Hey, don’t you all think that too a certain extent bikers can be at fault too? I cycle to university every morning (about 20-30 minutes) with a luminous jacket, lights and a helmet on, the jacket and lights cost nothing as both were being given out free by the RSA at an event I was at and the helmet cost €25. Yet I see idiots in the dark, weaving in and out of traffic and attempting to overtake buses with their right indicator on who very likely can’t see them.

Also, why be a martyr to the cause and cycle in on a morning like this morning? I don’t buy that there’s ‘no other option’ of course there is and I certainly would rather arrive into university dry, relaxed and refreshed than soaked through and having had a few near death experiences due to incompetent/impatient drivers.

seamus

Jawgap wrote: »

However, that's a poor indication of risk. For example, how many more people are cycling? And how many more trips and journey kilometres are being made by bike?

Indeed, raw numbers and the increase or decrease of the same are actually pretty useless for measuring risk.

For example, in the Netherlands, 185 cyclists were killed in 2015. Even population-adjusted, that's 5 times higher than Ireland in 2015.

Yet the Netherlands is considered probably the safest country on earth to go cycling. The higher raw number of deaths is simply down to there being more people cycling. Accidents and deaths are inevitable. It's the rate that's important, not the number.

AndrewJRenko

average_runner wrote: »

But that doesn't excuse the ninja cyclists. All it does is cause people to class all cyclists into a certain group.

Do the ninja drivers with no back lights who don't know to work their DRLs that I see every day bclass all motorists into a certain group?

People class cyclists into a certain group for the same reasons they class jews into a certain group or Pakistanis into a certain group or gay people into a certain group.

average_runner

magicbastarder wrote: »

i wonder how big an issue cyclist fatalities really is for the likes of ross and the RSA.
it's (usually) less than 10% of the total, but is it the canary in the mine as regards general attitude towards the roads?
that said, if it's only 10% they may be focussing more on other issues which may have a greater effect on fatality levels.

I doubt anything is an issue for Shane Ross until it affects his wages!!

tomasrojo

1bryan wrote: »

that is quite an astonishing comment. 3 more people are dead in the past year or so than in the same time period previous to that. What more evidence do you need that things are more dangerous?

You get quite a lot of fluctuations from year to year when you're dealing with quite small numbers. You can't really argue, for example, that the roads became way safer between 2012 and 2013 (8 down to 5) and then became way more dangerous in 2014 (12).

This is not the worst year on record, which I've heard said a few times. In the late 80s you sometimes got yearly totals in the high thirties. There have been worse years and similar years more recently too. In the last ten years, 2007 had 15 deaths and 2008 had 13. 2014 had 12.

This may well be the worst year in over ten years by the year's end though. I do think the roads were safer from 2009 to 2013 (consistently below 10, despite rapidly increasing numbers of cyclists) than in the years immediately before and after, probably due to lower amount of traffic due to the economic crash, especially heavy vehicles.

1bryan

TallGlass wrote: »

They say your chances of having an accident on a road your familiar with are higher as your more relaxed on that part of your journey so you 'switch off'.

are you suggesting more frequent (ie: more experienced) cyclists 'switch off'? The implication being that less frequent (ie: less experienced) cyclists are somehow more careful?

That is a very ignorant statement.