Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Careless cyclists.

Options
24567…13

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Ewan Hoosarmi wrote: »
    It's the same body of evidence that you have presented that they don't.

    My own perception of cyclists moving faster than they could possibly stop in an emergency, oh, and posts in the cycling forum of cyclists going arse over handlebars at crossings. I do see motorists going faster than they should too, but that's not the subject if the thread.

    I'm going to leave it there as I've no interest in getting involved in cyclist hysteria and smartarsery.

    Have a safe journey everyone. ;)

    "moving faster than they could possibly stop" is so vague as to be useless.

    If you are walking and someone trips you up, you don't scream for speed limits for walking.

    There are new laws for cycling. Just no one to enforce them. The one most used for this is.
    1. Driving a pedal cycle without reasonable consideration.


  • Options
    #33
    cbreeze
    Registered Users Posts: 863 ✭✭✭cbreeze


    Motorists have to pass a driving test and know the rules of the road. Should cyclists be (a) obliged to pass a road theory test; (b) have insurance; (c) be subject to penalty for infringement?


  • Options
    #34
    Wheety
    Registered Users Posts: 5,510 ✭✭✭Wheety


    cbreeze wrote: »
    Motorists have to pass a driving test and know the rules of the road. Should cyclists be (a) obliged to pass a road theory test; (b) have insurance; (c) be subject to penalty for infringement?

    No.


  • Options
    #35
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    cbreeze wrote: »
    Motorists have to pass a driving test and know the rules of the road. Should cyclists be (a) obliged to pass a road theory test; (b) have insurance; (c) be subject to penalty for infringement?

    No


  • Options
    #36
    blackvalley
    Registered Users Posts: 671 ✭✭✭blackvalley


    Middle Man wrote: »
    I must also be said that a cyclist travelling at any speed of 30kph or higher tend to be far less observant than other road users. I've cycled (in the past) and now drive and walk a lot - between those three modes, cycling is the most dangerous in terms of awareness regarding one's surroundings.

    I absolutely disagree with you on this point . As someone who has cycled for over forty years I consider that the faster you are travelling the more observant you become . Its called " self preservation " .
    In more recent times it has not been an issue with me personally as travelling at over 30 kph is a distant memory :o


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    The faster you are the more careful you generally are. But your ability to do anything about it is reduced.


  • Options
    #38
    rushfan
    Registered Users Posts: 970 ✭✭✭rushfan


    Ewan Hoosarmi wrote:
    I'm going to leave it there as I've no interest in getting involved in cyclist hysteria and smartarsery.


    Good idea. Off with ya to the "Kite flying " forum!


  • Options
    #39
    Wishbone Ash
    Registered Users Posts: 24,960 ✭✭✭✭Wishbone Ash


    Ewan Hoosarmi wrote: »
    So, no cyclist knows their speed? We all carry around mobile phones capable of GPS speed readings.

    I'm sure there are posts in the cycling forum of cyclists saying how fast they were going. How do they know?

    It's all moot though, as there are no laws currently in place. But the speed some cyclists travel at has to be of some concern, especially with their small road contact.

    (I see the call to arms has gone out. :D)
    Yes, most of us use Garmins or other devices which record speed, distance, elevation etc. but the law states that speed limits only apply to vehicles constructed with a speed measuring device. I've yet to see a bike constructed with one. Motorised vehicles which are constructed without a speedometer are not subject to speed limits either.

    I see drivers exceeding the speed limit every day, yet the vast majority of them are driving vehicles with a speedometer so what point are you trying to make?
    Mystery Egg wrote: »
    ...Cyclists don't cause deaths. Drivers do....
    Yes, in the past 20 years only 2 road deaths have been attributed to cyclists.
    cbreeze wrote: »
    Motorists have to pass a driving test and know the rules of the road. Should cyclists be (a) obliged to pass a road theory test; (b) have insurance; (c) be subject to penalty for infringement?
    So a 10 year old must know the rules of the road, pass a theory test and have insurance as well as being subject to penalties?

    95% of adult cyclists are regular motorists but only a small percentage of motorists are regular cyclists. BTW - all club cyclists have insurance as it's a club requirement.


    Leo B - how do some cyclists behaving illegally give all cyclists a bad name? If I see a van driver breaking a red light I don't assume all van drivers have a bad name.


  • Options
    #40
    looksee
    Registered Users Posts: 28,135 ✭✭✭✭looksee


    Wheety wrote: »
    No.
    beauf wrote: »
    No

    Why not?


  • Options
    #41
    The Hill Billy
    Registered Users Posts: 22,749 ✭✭✭✭The Hill Billy


    Moved from Dublin County North to Commuting & Transport.

    @Op - If you wish to restart a thread specific to the locality please do so in DCN, but make that clear from the off.

    @All - C&T charter now applies.

    tHB


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Wishbone Ash
    Registered Users Posts: 24,960 ✭✭✭✭Wishbone Ash


    looksee wrote: »
    Why not?
    Not my answers but passing a test, having insurance, paying penalties etc, hasn't stopped drivers of motor vehicles killing hundreds of people each year. What makes people think applying those requirements to cyclists will reduce road deaths? It will just put more motorists on the road and raise road deaths as cycling will become undesireable to many people and we will just get fatter as a nation.


  • Options
    #43
    jaxxx
    Registered Users Posts: 3,230 ✭✭✭jaxxx


    Not sure how common this is elsewhere, but I'm seeing a lot of cyslists not obeying traffic lights quite frequently. Now I don't cycle myself, but I assume that cyslists still have to adhere to traffic lights the same as drivers too?


  • Options
    #44
    Hurrache
    Registered Users Posts: 10,165 ✭✭✭✭Hurrache


    jaxxx wrote: »
    ... a lot of cyslists not obeying traffic lights quite frequently. ........ I assume that cyslists still have to adhere to traffic lights the same as drivers too?

    Seems like they are.


  • Options
    #45
    Tigger
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,707 ✭✭✭✭Tigger


    P_1 wrote: »
    Ok I'll bite...

    A car travelling @30kph has a stopping distance of about 12 meters
    A bike travelling @30kph has a stopping distance of about 6 meters

    I'd consider that a fairly safe stopping distance tbh

    Citation needed


  • Options
    #46
    Wishbone Ash
    Registered Users Posts: 24,960 ✭✭✭✭Wishbone Ash


    jaxxx wrote: »
    .. but I assume that cyslists still have to adhere to traffic lights the same as drivers too?
    I see dozens of drivers breaking amber/red lights every day. And even more would do it if they could but once the vehicle in front stopd, they have no option but to stop also.

    I'd love to see all cyclists stopping at red lights but how many people do those cyclists injure/kill? Concentrate on motorists first as they cause most injuries/deaths.


  • Options
    #47
    soups05
    Registered Users Posts: 1,086 ✭✭✭soups05


    Wishbone Ash wrote: »

    So a 10 year old must know the rules of the road, pass a theory test and have insurance as well as being subject to penalties?

    .

    as a 9 year old i passed a cycling proficiency test which involved a few weeks training and a cert at the end. :)

    this was in 1980, the rules of the road knowledge came in handy when i did my driving test in the 90s lol.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/7956939/Cycling-Proficiency-test-facing-axe.html

    as to the thread, we don't have a cyclist problem or a driver problem, we have an asshole problem. it does not matter what mode of transport they happen to use.


  • Options
    #48
    Charles Babbage
    Registered Users Posts: 5,512 ✭✭✭Charles Babbage


    Wishbone Ash wrote: »
    I'd love to see all cyclists stopping at red lights but how many people do those cyclists injure/kill? Concentrate on motorists first as they cause most injuries/deaths.

    This is the "don't worry about muggers when there are gang killings" argument. People being mugged are entitled to concern to.
    I'd suggest making some effort to stop all red light breaking, which would rapidly reduce the amount of it. The problem is that while cameras etc can detect motorists cyclists are currently undetectable and consequently do what they like.

    I notice too a new drive to have motorists not pass within one metre of cyclists, which is fair enough. But will we also have a drive to ensure that cyclists do not pass within one metre of pedestrians?


  • Options
    #49
    Wishbone Ash
    Registered Users Posts: 24,960 ✭✭✭✭Wishbone Ash


    soups05 wrote: »
    as a 9 year old i passed a cycling proficiency test which involved a few weeks training and a cert at the end. :)
    ...
    I did it myself in the 1970's. :)


  • Options
    #50
    P_1
    Registered Users Posts: 14,681 ✭✭✭✭P_1


    Charles Babbage wrote: »
    This is the "don't worry about muggers when there are gang killings" argument. People being mugged are entitled to concern to.
    I'd suggest making some effort to stop all red light breaking, which would rapidly reduce the amount of it. The problem is that while cameras etc can detect motorists cyclists are currently undetectable and consequently do what they like.

    I notice too a new drive to have motorists not pass within one metre of cyclists, which is fair enough. But will we also have a drive to ensure that cyclists do not pass within one metre of pedestrians?

    You mean cyclists should give pedestrians who are on a footpath separated from the road by a kerb a meter of space? I'd have thought the kerb would do that job just fine :confused:


  • Options
    #51
    average_runner
    Registered Users Posts: 12,846 ✭✭✭✭average_runner


    P_1 wrote: »
    You mean cyclists should give pedestrians who are on a footpath separated from the road by a kerb a meter of space? I'd have thought the kerb would do that job just fine :confused:

    Or was he talking about cyclists on footpaths. A common thing


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    Wishbone Ash
    Registered Users Posts: 24,960 ✭✭✭✭Wishbone Ash


    Charles Babbage wrote: »
    ... cyclists are currently undetectable and consequently do what they like.
    Some cyclists.
    .. we also have a drive to ensure that cyclists do not pass within one metre of pedestrians?
    Have cyclists been killing pedestrians lately?


  • Options
    #53
    P_1
    Registered Users Posts: 14,681 ✭✭✭✭P_1


    average_runner wrote: »
    Or was he talking about cyclists on footpaths. A common thing

    Quite true. I thought that was one of the grounds for FPN's though


  • Options
    #54
    average_runner
    Registered Users Posts: 12,846 ✭✭✭✭average_runner


    Wishbone Ash wrote: »
    I see dozens of drivers breaking amber/red lights every day. And even more would do it if they could but once the vehicle in front stopd, they have no option but to stop also.

    I'd love to see all cyclists stopping at red lights but how many people do those cyclists injure/kill? Concentrate on motorists first as they cause most injuries/deaths.

    That's the wrong attitude. You can't allow one to break the law and not the other.
    If your not going to obey the rules of the road then stay off them.


  • Options
    #55
    RacoonQueen
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 20,364 Mod ✭✭✭✭RacoonQueen


    Ewan Hoosarmi wrote: »
    So, no cyclist knows their speed? We all carry around mobile phones capable of GPS speed readings.

    I'm sure there are posts in the cycling forum of cyclists saying how fast they were going. How do they know?

    It's all moot though, as there are no laws currently in place. But the speed some cyclists travel at has to be of some concern, especially with their small road contact.

    Many cyclists will have their own speedometer that they use to track their ride.
    Not many will be averaging 30kph + in Dublin city centre...with motorised, pedestrian and other cycle traffic there simply isn't the space or time for that.

    Pretty sure I've seen the RSA at some stage put out advice to cyclists to always stay in the left lane on roundabouts? (years ago)
    I'd generally stay left...though somewhere like the Walkinstown roundabout with 3 lanes I always take the middle, forces people who might take a chance to wait. Bikes generally navigate roundabouts quicker than cars (in my experience as a cyclist and motorist), so can never understand why some motorists can get so arsey with cyclists on roundabouts. Though many motorists have no idea how to use roundabouts (or just don't care) so it's hardly surprising how some of them behave around cyclists on them.


  • Options
    #56
    RacoonQueen
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 20,364 Mod ✭✭✭✭RacoonQueen


    P_1 wrote: »
    Quite true. I thought that was one of the grounds for FPN's though

    No, no FPN for cycling on footapaths...they singled that one out with specific reasons why they did not introduce a FPN for it - though it is against the law - unless using footpath to enter a premises, same as when cars can use footpaths I guess, but we all know some motorists ignore this too and will see footpaths as parking spots. :)


  • Options
    #57
    Wishbone Ash
    Registered Users Posts: 24,960 ✭✭✭✭Wishbone Ash


    average_runner wrote: »
    That's the wrong attitude. You can't allow one to break the law and not the other.
    If your not going to obey the rules of the road then stay off them.
    I do obey the rules.

    My point is that a cyclist breaking a red light is mainly going to be a danger to themselves whereas a motorist will be a much greater danger to others. Strangely we rarely have threads complaining about motorists breaking red lights even though it become almost the norm at most junctions.


  • Options
    #58
    uck51js9zml2yt
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,268 ✭✭✭✭uck51js9zml2yt


    I was driving up Gardiner St last week and beeped a cyclist who broke a light and turned the corner to my left. He was going in my direction after the turn.

    He carried on oblivious and another cyclist shouted at me "was I serious"....he continued up and broke a few lights too:confused: It was just a pity I was stuck in traffic and couldnt catch up to him.


  • Options
    #59
    Wishbone Ash
    Registered Users Posts: 24,960 ✭✭✭✭Wishbone Ash


    RacoonQueen wrote: »
    No, no FPN for cycling on footapaths...they singled that one out with specific reasons why they did not introduce a FPN for it - though it is against the law...
    I think it was because lots of children use footpaths to cycle to school and the Gardai would be reluctant to apply road traffic regulations to children.


  • Options
    #60
    the_pen_turner
    Registered Users Posts: 7,506 ✭✭✭the_pen_turner


    Wishbone Ash wrote: »
    Not my answers but passing a test, having insurance, paying penalties etc, hasn't stopped drivers of motor vehicles killing hundreds of people each year. What makes people think applying those requirements to cyclists will reduce road deaths? It will just put more motorists on the road and raise road deaths as cycling will become undesireable to many people and we will just get fatter as a nation.

    our road death figures are going down hugely. hopefully they will reach zero and stay there.
    so a lot of these measures are reduceing figures


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Charles Babbage
    Registered Users Posts: 5,512 ✭✭✭Charles Babbage


    P_1 wrote: »
    You mean cyclists should give pedestrians who are on a footpath separated from the road by a kerb a meter of space? I'd have thought the kerb would do that job just fine :confused:

    It would. But of course there are thousands of people cycling on footpaths and you have the phenomenon of this being legalised in combined paths and the permitting of cyclists in so-called pedestrian areas. Then you have pedestrian space being turned into two paths with no dividing kerb, where the pedestrian space is reduced to less than one metre.
    RacoonQueen wrote: »
    No, no FPN for cycling on footapaths...they singled that one out with specific reasons why they did not introduce a FPN for it - though it is against the law - unless using footpath to enter a premises, same as when cars can use footpaths I guess, but we all know some motorists ignore this too and will see footpaths as parking spots.

    I am not condoning parking on footpaths, but cars rarely drive for long distances on the footpath. Many cyclists aim to make journeys entirely on the footpath.


Advertisement