If all cyclists waited at the red light...

AndrewJRenko

work wrote: »

I did not call you a Muppet but was referring to your behaviour, apologies if You misunderstood or if my wording came accross like that. You are obviously smart and can explain your thinking well. I think breaking the law and flaunting it is pure muppetry sorry but that is my opinion. Just because you feel safe doing it doesn't make it good, ideal or acceptacble.
Here are some reasons not to do it.
1) You are breaking the countries laws.
2) You are a bad example.
3) You are not infallible, may make a mistake, cause an accident and hurt yourself or others.
4) Others less experienced may follow you, be less traffic aware, and have a negative outcome.
5) It is bad manners.
6) You feed the general anti cycle group think.
7) It is divisional among cyclists........"There goes another twat bringing us all down". .......thoughts in my head as I see it and often voiced among the law abiding cyclists waiting and drivers watching it.
8) It is dangerous
9) It makes people feel unsafe
10) It is frustrating having to overtake the same bike repeatedly because they keep sauntering through lights and just getting in everyone's way.

Finally the use of words that you do not like are not directed at you so do not be offended. They are directed to those with your behaviour and that think it is OK.

Do you have the same 1-10 list for every driver that breaks the speed limit? Do you ever (and I mean 'ever') break a speed limit yourself?

gk5000

I've answered all 10 below with a ->
Mostly your opinion which is different to mine.

work wrote: »

I did not call you a Muppet but was referring to your behaviour, apologies if You misunderstood or if my wording came accross like that. You are obviously smart and can explain your thinking well. I think breaking the law and flaunting it is pure muppetry sorry but that is my opinion. Just because you feel safe doing it doesn't make it good, ideal or acceptacble.
Here are some reasons not to do it.
1) You are breaking the countries laws.
->Yes, I believe most people choose to break some laws e.g. pedestrians, speeding

2) You are a bad example.
->Your opinion

3) You are not infallible, may make a mistake, cause an accident and hurt yourself or others.
->Correct, but that is the case at all times even on a straight road. The one difference here is that it would put you legally in the wrong which I accept.

4) Others less experienced may follow you, be less traffic aware, and have a negative outcome.
->Their decisions. It is also generally unwise /unsafe to kick off wobbly alongside traffic. I aim to cycle at least as safe as law abiding cyclists.

5) It is bad manners.
-> Your opinion

6) You feed the general anti cycle group think.
-> Your opinion but see my other post on what I believe is causing the anti cyclist feeling
7) It is divisional among cyclists........"There goes another twat bringing us all down". .......thoughts in my head as I see it and often voiced among the law abiding cyclists waiting and drivers watching it.
-> Your /their opinions - and many times lights are red with nobody watching/waiting

8) It is dangerous
-> Your Opinion . Many times it is safer to keep cycling to be ahead of the cars rather than starting off at the lights at the same time as them

9) It makes people feel unsafe
-> Opinion

10) It is frustrating having to overtake the same bike repeatedly because they keep sauntering through lights and just getting in everyone's way.
-> How am I in anyones way if I'm 100m ahead of the lights when you start off? How is it a problem for you if you have to overtake me on the straight part of the road. Is it a problem for you to have cyclists ahead of you? Is this the "cyclist with attitude" who feels they own the road?





Finally the use of words that you do not like are not directed at you so do not be offended. They are directed to those with your behaviour and that think it is OK.

work

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Do you have the same 1-10 list for every driver that breaks the speed limit? Do you ever (and I mean 'ever') break a speed limit yourself?

I quickly made up the list it can go on and on I suppose and it could of course apply to other road users (in some points) that cannot follow the rules of the road. This discussion is on breaking read lights by cyclists it is not about whataboutery. I break the law because someone else does is not real the basis to a functioning society.
Yes I have broken speed limits but I try not to and would never try to justify it. It is unacceptable and this county needs a serious mind check on behavior. However this is a different discussion to the OP.

average_runner

The thing about Ireland is, we have a "me culture" if Mr/Mrs/Miss X can break one of the rules of the road, well so can I.

So if a car breaks a red light, then some people believe ah sure we can do it and gives an example to younger drivers to do it and next thing is we have an accident.

The same applies to bike users, if I break a red light on my bike (safe or not) and some kid see me doing it, we are setting an example to that kid, saying its ok to break a red light and next thing the kid does it at a not so safe junction and ends up in an accident.

Same applies to all road users. Yeah we can break the rules of the road daily, but our actions does have repercussions, just you don't see it.

gk5000

doozerie wrote: »

I did. Every word. My comment/post was because of what you wrote, not in spite of it.



Yeah, I hear and read that a lot from people working hard to justify all sorts of anti-social behaviour. They'd have you believe that such behaviour is totally innocuous and without consequence.

Yet, when it comes to the roads many people are hurt or killed every year. I choose to believe that none of those people willingly chose to be the cause of, or victim of, a collision, that the collisions most likely occurred because some person(s) made a mistake.

Mistakes happen all the time, someones because people don't stop and think before they act, sometimes because people look for a hazard but don't spot it, etc. I obey the rules of the road (or, in your opinion apparently I "climb onto my high horse") because I accept that I am not infallible and I don't want to be either the victim of, or cause of, a collision through my own conscious actions.

The climb off/on high horse is for anyone who is preaching about rules of the road applied to cycling while they themselves disregard the rules as applied to themselves say as pedestrians or as motorists who sometimes speed.


Mistakes/accidents happen and the rules of the road have obviously not helped or prevented them.

Cyclists are largely not considered in the bulk of the rules. Disregarding some rules of the road does not necessarily cause accidents. I am responsible for my own safety and go beyond the rules of the road when necessary - i.e I do not depend on them to blindly protect me - and similarly do not over concern myself with the strict letter of the law.

average_runner

gk5000 wrote: »

The climb off/on high horse is for anyone who is preaching about rules of the road applied to cycling while they themselves disregard the rules as applied to themselves say as pedestrians or as motorists who sometimes speed.


Mistakes/accidents happen and the rules of the road have obviously not helped or prevented them.

Cyclists are largely not considered in the bulk of the rules. Disregarding some rules of the road does not necessarily cause accidents. I am responsible for my own safety and go beyond the rules of the road when necessary - i.e I do not depend on them to blindly protect me - and similarly do not over concern myself with the strict letter of the law.

You might not concern yourself with the strict letter of the law, but you are setting an example to next generation that might think its ok to break that law no matter what.

Rechuchote

Most rules of the road exist because people are racing around (or sitting with toe poised over accelerator) in tonnes-weight metal machines.

At the same time, it's worth having a titter of sense about them. It's one thing to saunter through when a road is totally clear; it's another to assume the road is clear. And there's also the fear that your going through may, in some circumstances, lead to someone following you without noticing and being put in danger by doing so.

work

gk5000 wrote: »

I've answered all 10 below with a ->
Mostly your opinion which is different to mine.

I take all you points and cannot agree with your opinion at all.


1) Breaking laws:....people breaking one law means you should break others???
2) Are you a good example
3) ... "legally in the wrong which I accept". There really is no come back on this, you just feel laws do not apply to you?
4) Their decision....Ah sure we all may as well do what we like, people are influenced by what others do. The consequence of this could take someones life but sure it is there decision. Can we not at least try to protect other users.
5) Bad manners: breaking the law is not "good manners" so my opinion has some weight whereas yours is ridiculous.

6) Your argument is "my opinion" like that solves everything. Your previous post on anti cycle feeling has plenty of merit but don't be so naive as to think you are helping things by flaunting the law it really infuriates people. I am not saying the law is perfect but there is a system to change the law.
7) Again your "opinion" argument, should i not have an opinion? I agree it is my opinion but one I see expressed all the time so not in any way unusual. Plenty of cyclists abhor those that flaunt the rules.

8) Interesting the unsafe argument. There is a school of thought that with lawbreaking among cyclists it is safer to "get ahead" of the traffic. This may actually be true when looked at with blinkers on or for that person. I doubt it improves road safety overall however. Complex point really and if proved could be used to argue for changing the law not breaking it.

9) People who break road laws make others feel unsafe. It is not simply an opinion it is obvious.

10) You give one scenario. There are many others. If you are a slower cyclist and break lights then the faster cyclist has to overtake you possibly numerous times which means they have to look over their shoulder to check for traffic and leave the bike lane (if present). Overtaking cyclists on busy roads is no fun and sometimes not possible or safe but to continually look at the ass of someone you cycle past is annoying at least and dangerous at worst. Nobody "owns the road" and I think it is the law breakers that are selfish that have that opinion.


I wasn't going to reply to you because we just have very different opinions. You are probably decent and would not willingly put someone or yourself at risk. I believe you are misguided however and I know that is just my opinion which is the same as the law. I do not really want to have a tit for tat on this any more so I accept our minds will not meet on this. It is a shame though as we both support cycling but in different ways.

work

Rechuchote wrote: »

Most rules of the road exist because people are racing around (or sitting with toe poised over accelerator) in tonnes-weight metal machines.

At the same time, it's worth having a titter of sense about them. It's one thing to saunter through when a road is totally clear; it's another to assume the road is clear. And there's also the fear that your going through may, in some circumstances, lead to someone following you without noticing and being put in danger by doing so.

Point in bold is hugely important thank you. I am sure nobody really wants to put others at risk even by this indirect action.

07Lapierre

gk5000 wrote: »

I am responsible for my own safety and go beyond the rules of the road when necessary - i.e I do not depend on them to blindly protect me - and similarly do not over concern myself with the strict letter of the law.

You also have a responsibility to other road users to obey the rules of the road.
The reason you don't depend on the ROTR to protect you is because there are other people like you who choose not to obey the ROTR! you cant change other peoples behaviour, but you can change your own...i.e. Lead by example!

doozerie

gk5000 wrote:

Mistakes/accidents happen and the rules of the road have obviously not helped or prevented them.

That's quite a claim to make.

What would happen if every road user entirely ignored the rules of the road tomorrow do you think? Before you ever got to worry about what happens at red lights, you'd have to worry about which side of the road the next bit of oncoming traffic would be using. Would you feel safer on the roads in that environment, I wonder.

These kinds of "discussion" remind me of a guy I encountered once several years ago, thankfully I saw him in the distance as he drove towards me on the outer lane of a motorway. I quickly drove into the furthest lane left that I could, as did every car I could see in my rear view mirror. That driver must have been thrilled as a clear path opened up in front of him. I heard nothing reported in the news later so there is a good likelihood that he made it to where he was going without colliding with anything/anyone. From his perspective then it was probably a perfectly safe thing to do, those of us subjected to his behaviour would have offered a different perspective though.

CramCycle

In regards to the opinion bit, gardai have already made it clear that opinions are not enough unless they feel like it.

There are many whose opinion would suffice but the problem is that those with poor judgement often do not realise this and will be damned if you pointing it out is acceptable.

On holiday recently and on a big open green there is space for cars to drive around. One lad came booting it around, doing at least 60kmph. There are kids on the green and a speed limit of 15kmph. I let a roar at him as there were kids near where he was about to pass and he roared back that it was grand as he had seen the kids. I mean, god forbid he would miss the one hiding behind the numerous amounts of furniture littering the place or that he would get distracted by something and miss a kid running out.

The truth is, opinions are like arseholes, everyone's got one, it does not mean that everyone is right. A subset of Irish road users are a case in point where they really miss why a certain rule is in place or that a speed limit is just that and it is not always appropriate to drive at the limit. The truth is until those people are actively removed from the roads or actively policed better, then no, opinions can take a back seat.

magicbastarder

gk5000 wrote: »

Mistakes/accidents happen and the rules of the road have obviously not helped or prevented them.

this is a stupendous leap of logic, assuming you meant what you actually typed.

gk5000

magicbastarder wrote: »

this is a stupendous leap of logic, assuming you meant what you actually typed.

Yes that is an unfortunate fact. People have died/injured with our current rules of the road."Mistakes/accidents happen and the rules of the road have obviously not helped or prevented them".
Now, more may die without any rules or any application of the rules so I'm not suggesting that, but the current rules have obviously failed in some way - be it the rules themselves or the way people follow them - or there would be no deaths/injuries.

TheHouseIRL

gk5000 wrote: »

Yes that is an unfortunate fact. People have died/injured with our current rules of the road."Mistakes/accidents happen and the rules of the road have obviously not helped or prevented them".
Now, more may die without any rules or any application of the rules so I'm not suggesting that, but the current rules have obviously failed in some way - be it the rules themselves or the way people follow them - or there would be no deaths/injuries.

Let's see if he picks up on what he's written here...

magicbastarder

gk5000 wrote: »

Yes that is an unfortunate fact. People have died/injured with our current rules of the road."Mistakes/accidents happen and the rules of the road have obviously not helped or prevented them".
Now, more may die without any rules or any application of the rules so I'm not suggesting that, but the current rules have obviously failed in some way - be it the rules themselves or the way people follow them - or there would be no deaths/injuries.

i read that you were saying 'in general, the ROTR does not help in preventing accidents', rather than pointing at specific accidents and saying 'the ROTR did not help here'.
however, as pointed out above, that opens up another hole. saying 'the ROTR obviously did not prevent this accident' is not the same as saying 'the ROTR were deficient'.
you're trying to run with the foxes and hunt with the hounds. you're saying that the ROTR can be ignored because they're deficient, and you're saying they're deficient because they're being ignored.

gk5000

What about the law requiring a bell and reflectors? Do all posters obey this? Is this not selective application of cycling laws - and laws specifically for cyclists? Do all fixies have 2 brakes?



Many posters commute in bikes designed for aerodynamics and speed, with resulting trade off in lateral visibility - in club/racing kit with reduced visibility for other drivers - bombing along - passing too close to other cyclists - blinding lights ..undue consideration to other road user etc. And then on spins hold up traffic and be a general pita for motorists...
Hypocrisy, and yet wonder where the anti cycling sentiment is coming from ..

TheHouseIRL

gk5000 wrote: »

What about the law requiring a bell and reflectors? Do all posters obey this? Is this not selective application of cycling laws - and laws specifically for cyclists? Do all fixies have 2 brakes?



Many posters commute in bikes designed for aerodynamics and speed, with resulting trade off in lateral visibility - in club/racing kit with reduced visibility for other drivers - bombing along - passing too close to other cyclists - blinding lights ..undue consideration to other road user etc. And then on spins hold up traffic and be a general pita for motorists...
Hypocrisy, and yet wonder where the anti cycling sentiment is coming from ..

A swift move from circular reasoning to whataboutery. The ad-hominems can't be far behind.

TheHouseIRL

gk5000 wrote: »

What about the law requiring a bell and reflectors? Do all posters obey this? Is this not selective application of cycling laws - and laws specifically for cyclists? Do all fixies have 2 brakes?



Many posters commute in bikes designed for aerodynamics and speed, with resulting trade off in lateral visibility - in club/racing kit with reduced visibility for other drivers - bombing along - passing too close to other cyclists - blinding lights ..undue consideration to other road user etc. And then on spins hold up traffic and be a general pita for motorists...
Hypocrisy, and yet wonder where the anti cycling sentiment is coming from ..

Particularly important when going through red lights.

magicbastarder

gk5000 wrote: »

Many posters commute in bikes designed for aerodynamics and speed, with resulting trade off in lateral visibility - in club/racing kit with reduced visibility for other drivers - bombing along - passing too close to other cyclists - blinding lights ..undue consideration to other road user etc. And then on spins hold up traffic and be a general pita for motorists...
Hypocrisy, and yet wonder where the anti cycling sentiment is coming from ..

you're throwing out vague and unspecific accusations of bad behaviour and accusing an unspecified group of posters of resulting hypocrisy.
'undue consideration to other road users'? 'bombing along'?

i can see where the anti-cycling sentiment is coming from, true.

07Lapierre

TheHouseIRL wrote: »

Particularly important when going through red lights.

I can't see how have an "Aero" bike limits lateral visibility??

magicbastarder

if you're using sonar to detect it, maybe it does?

TheHouseIRL

07Lapierre wrote: »

I can't see how have an "Aero" bike limits lateral visibility??

Nor can I, unless he's talking about the cyclist not looking around because they're in an 'aero' position.


Just as puzzling is the special 'reduced visibility' club gear that all these cyclists are wearing

CramCycle

If you cannot see me in my club gear, two things.
First, your not looking.
Second, your missing out.

doozerie

Perhaps "reduced visbiility" club kit is a jab at the CCC team kit. As green and red are apparently one and the same to some, I guess that amber is redundant and therefore essentially invisible to them.

AndrewJRenko

gk5000 wrote: »

the current rules have obviously failed in some way - be it the rules themselves or the way people follow them - or there would be no deaths/injuries.

Or perhaps it's the way people don't follow the rules that result in people being killed - you know, the ones that the RSA highlight every day for motorists - speeding, phoning, drink driving being the major ones.

Rechuchote wrote: »

And there's also the fear that your going through may, in some circumstances, lead to someone following you without noticing and being put in danger by doing so.

This could just as easily happen after going through a green light - that someone following you without noticing that the light has changed to amber/red may follow you through.

average_runner wrote: »

You might not concern yourself with the strict letter of the law, but you are setting an example to next generation that might think its ok to break that law no matter what.

work wrote: »

Yes I have broken speed limits but I try not to and would never try to justify it.

Do you think that maybe you should upgrade your 'try not to' to 'never do it' before you go lecturing others?

gk5000

Ahh I see I'm still the only sinner though plenty still throwing stones.



Maybe the peloton close ranks and don't like to admit to their own indiscretions or try to silence anybody who does... could have form in this regard?


Maybe the cycle lobby could try a little honest introspection to figure out the disconnect between their own high self regard v's the general public opinion - but I'll not hold my breath.

07Lapierre

gk5000 wrote: »

Ahh I see I'm still the only sinner though plenty still throwing stones.



Maybe the peloton close ranks and don't like to admit to their own indiscretions or try to silence anybody who does... could have form in this regard?


Maybe the cycle lobby could try a little honest introspection to figure out the disconnect between their own high self regard v's the general public opinion - but I'll not hold my breath.

Everyone breaks the odd law now and then, but only you have tried to justify it by saying you choose not to obey them as you don’t feel the laws apply to you (you feel the traffic laws apply to motorists traffic only)

doozerie

gk5000 wrote: »

Maybe the cycle lobby could try a little honest introspection to figure out the disconnect between their own high self regard v's the general public opinion

You first.

gk5000

07Lapierre wrote: »

Everyone breaks the odd law now and then, but only you have tried to justify it by saying you choose not to obey them as you don’t feel the laws apply to you (you feel the traffic laws apply to motorists traffic only)

No, they legally apply to me - I fully accept this and have never said otherwise.

I stated that many traffic laws and the roads themselves were designed for motorized traffic and largely do not consider cyclists - and that it is best for me (and safest in many cases) to disregard certain rules when it is safe to do so without inconveniencing anybody else.

e.g.
Going through red after pedestrian has crossed allows me to be safely up to speed and visible prior to the cars starting off at the lights. This principle applies to many red lights - get ahead of the cars.

Going through 20 yards wrong way up a small quiet one way street allows be to avoid a busy multi-lane road and several complicated/dangerous junctions.


Being in single file in a line of cyclists, alongside a line of cars, lorries, buses all waiting on a green light as dictated by the rules on many roads is a very uncomfortable and I believe unsafe place to be. I dislike and believe it to be unsafe to be within an arms-length of any other road user, including cyclists but especially buses and lorries. I avoid these situations if possible - firstly by route selection, but then possibly by going through red...and back to the opening post/picture and title of this thread.