Cyclists

pomgh

I am a cyclist and a car user, yet everyday as I driver to and from work at 5am I see cyclists with no lights front or back. They are putting themselves in danger and others also. I have written to the RSA and they have ignored this issue I have highlighted to them. These cyclists are cycling on back roads with no lights either. The road traffic regulations clearly state that cyclists must have working lights on their bikes, yet a lot of them put themselves in danger and others as well as pedestrians by not following a simple rule. 
The RSA have on radio and TV highlighted to give cyclists space on the road, cycle lanes, but have not once highlighted to cyclists that they like other vehicle users to have working lights on their bikes between the hours of dusk to dawn especially now that we are again in these dark evenings. The Gardaí are to blame also for not implementing the law for they will stop a car user, but I have never heard of a Garda stopping a cyclist....I am missing something here.....does it have to take a cyclist to get killed before the RSA / Gardaí broadcast this ever so important information for all?

Boards.ie: Mark

Hi pomgh,

I've moved your thread across to the Cycling forum and deleted posts that were made when it was in the other forum.

Fighting Tao

You are missing something...there are idiots using all modes of transport. There is also a lack of enforcement of laws in this country and that’s not just applicable to cyclists.

AndrewJRenko

Congrats on seeing all those invisible cyclists.

You may never have seen a Garda stopping a cyclist, but it does happen all the time.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/nearly-600-cyclists-fined-under-new-penalty-regime-1.2631593

If you really do want to improve safety for cyclists, the best thing you can do is to work with your fellow motorists to get them to slow down and put their phones down. That would save lives for many motorists, cyclists and pedestrians.

All but 1 of the cyclist deaths on the road last year occurred in daylight.

greenspurs

probably moved from the troll-fest that is AfterHours....
OP will be disappointed as there wont be as many trolls in here ........

Wildly Boaring

greenspurs wrote: »

probably moved from the troll-fest that is AfterHours....
OP will be disappointed as there wont be as many trolls in here ........

Actually moved from Sky TV.
OP new or not a fan of the Sky train

Fighting Tao

greenspurs wrote: »

probably moved from the troll-fest that is AfterHours....
OP will be disappointed as there wont be as many trolls in here ........

It was my initial thought too.

average_runner

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Congrats on seeing all those invisible cyclists.

You may never have seen a Garda stopping a cyclist, but it does happen all the time.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/nearly-600-cyclists-fined-under-new-penalty-regime-1.2631593

If you really do want to improve safety for cyclists, the best thing you can do is to work with your fellow motorists to get them to slow down and put their phones down. That would save lives for many motorists, cyclists and pedestrians.

All but 1 of the cyclist deaths on the road last year occurred in daylight.

But how many serious injuries occured in daylight? Its not all about deaths.
Stats can hide everything.

buffalo

average_runner wrote: »

But how many serious injuries occured in daylight?

I don't know, how many?

incentsitive

pomgh wrote: »

I am a cyclist and a car user, yet everyday as I driver to and from work at 5am I see cyclists with no lights front or back. They are putting themselves in danger and others also. I have written to the RSA and they have ignored this issue I have highlighted to them. These cyclists are cycling on back roads with no lights either. The road traffic regulations clearly state that cyclists must have working lights on their bikes, yet a lot of them put themselves in danger and others as well as pedestrians by not following a simple rule. 
The RSA have on radio and TV highlighted to give cyclists space on the road, cycle lanes, but have not once highlighted to cyclists that they like other vehicle users to have working lights on their bikes between the hours of dusk to dawn especially now that we are again in these dark evenings. The Gardaí are to blame also for not implementing the law for they will stop a car user, but I have never heard of a Garda stopping a cyclist....I am missing something here.....does it have to take a cyclist to get killed before the RSA / Gardaí broadcast this ever so important information for all?

I don't want to turn this thread into a cyclist v car debate. Yawn, been done before.
I am a cyclist, I can't cycle to work as it is too far but boy do I wish I could!
I have had several close ones with these heroes - black jacket, no lights, on my commute.
I have occasionally (when I am cycling) said it to other cyclists, I might as well have saved my energy and have been met with a barrage of abuse back "who do I think I am to tell them what to do". I won't be doing it again. Not worth the stresss.
The difference between a well lit cyclist and a cyclist relying on street lights is simply incredible.

But yep, just like every other road law applying to any road user, it is a waste of time unless it is enforced.

seamus

pomgh wrote: »

The RSA have on radio and TV highlighted to give cyclists space on the road, cycle lanes, but have not once highlighted to cyclists that they like other vehicle users to have working lights on their bikes between the hours of dusk to dawn especially now that we are again in these dark evenings.

This is probably a fair observation. Granted, I can't say I watch TV with ads much any more, but it does seem to me that advisories with this in mind are pretty thin on the ground.

Part of the problem is that the RSA are too focussed on hi-vis rather than lighting. There is no excuse these days for riding without lights, especially in urban areas. Good, USB-rechargeable lights don't cost very much and modern dynamo lights, like you get on Dublin Bikes, aren't noisy and painful like friction dynamos used to be.

But the RSA still persist on telling people to wear hi-vis like it's some substitution for lights, and every now and again handing out pathetic lights to 50 people that will end up in the bin once the batteries run out.

A series of ads aimed at all road users, especially around this time of year, would be a good idea. Even during the day, it can be dark enough to need lights and rain is a disaster, yet you see all sorts of road users with lights either off or not working. You generally don't see any ads about this.

The Gardaí are to blame also for not implementing the law for they will stop a car user

They won't though. You see people driving around with one light or no lights, all the time. It seems to have gotten way worse in urban areas, I don't know what it is.

No word of a lie, I've heard of more people being stopped for cycling without lights than stopped for a broken headlight. Neither are things the Gardai seem to give much focus on.

Mike1961

Ah lads come one. The point is valid ... and is made around this time every year. I cycle home every day and it always annoys me ... (just about) seeing the many cyclists with ne'er a light.

I think I've moaned here before that the gardai don't kick in with extra checks when the clocks go back.

average_runner

buffalo wrote: »

I don't know, how many?

That's why I am asking. We always seem to refer to deaths, but forget about the life changing injuries etc.

My brother was unconscious for over two weeks after an accident on his bike. He eventually recovered but the stress our family went through, will he/ or not make it.

AndrewJRenko

Mike1961 wrote: »

Ah lads come one. The point is valid ... and is made around this time every year. I cycle home every day and it always annoys me ... (just about) seeing the many cyclists with ne'er a light.

I think I've moaned here before that the gardai don't kick in with extra checks when the clocks go back.

The question isn't whether the point is valid.

The question is, of all the issues on the road that need action, where abouts on the priority list of all valid issues is this one?

I don't think it is in the top 20. I'm not sure it is in the top 50.

I often wonder why the creativity and motivation of many motorists in coming up with ideas to 'fix' cycling and cyclists is not applied to fixing the real danger on the roads - the motorists who kill three or four people each week and maim many more.

jjpep

Anytime I see someone do something stupid on a bike I feel a little bit thankful that that person is not in charge of something bigger...

buffalo

average_runner wrote: »

That's why I am asking. We always seem to refer to deaths, but forget about the life changing injuries etc.

My brother was unconscious for over two weeks after an accident on his bike. He eventually recovered but the stress our family went through, will he/ or not make it.

So would you disqualify the use of one statistic in favour of another that apparently doesn't exist?

It's not all about deaths certainly, but it's all we have at present to indicate patterns and trends, unless you care to produce some more detailed data?

at1withmyself

But this is the cycling forum, not the motoring forum. Let the motorist have there own debate there.

Cycling without lights is against the law and just because people break debateably worse laws that is not a good argument.

As per other comments even 1 death is too much.

Why not have a discussion without bringing cars into it?

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

The question isn't whether the point is valid.

The question is, of all the issues on the road that need action, where abouts on the priority list of all valid issues is this one?

I don't think it is in the top 20. I'm not sure it is in the top 50.

I often wonder why the creativity and motivation of many motorists in coming up with ideas to 'fix' cycling and cyclists is not applied to fixing the real danger on the roads - the motorists who kill three or four people each week and maim many more.

OleRodrigo

The problem with lights is there is no minimum or maximum standard.

I'm about as diligent as they come, but even so I found myself riding home on a few occasions with a very dim rear light as the battery died en route. I often see the same with other commuters. At the other end of the scale, there are lights that are clearly too bright for the conditions they are used in.

If some conscientious public servant was to step up and copy the German system of roadworthy lights it would help things a lot.

Until then, hi vis is the best option for sweeping the problem under the carpet with the least amount of effort.

Fighting Tao

Didn't we just have this discussion a day or two ago?

incentsitive

The funny thing is, I bought 2 brilliant quality rechargeable USB lights for about 20 quid. I've had them for a few years now and they are as good as the day I bought them.
Its not like the cost of the lights is prohibitive, you don't even have the cost of batteries!
There is no excuse for not having lights!

Fighting Tao

incentsitive wrote: »

The funny thing is, I bought 2 brilliant quality rechargeable USB lights for about 20 quid. I've had them for a few years now and they are as good as the day I bought them.
Its not like the cost of the lights is prohibitive, you don't even have the cost of batteries!
There is no excuse for not having lights!

Just like there is no excuse for speeding, for walking across roads in front of cars, for not tying shoelaces, for being lazy....people are people. They don't all behave the same.

jjpep

at1withmyself wrote: »

But this is the cycling forum, not the motoring forum. Let the motorist have there own debate there.

Cycling without lights is against the law and just because people break debateably worse laws that is not a good argument.

As per other comments even 1 death is too much.

Why not have a discussion without bringing cars into it?

I guess there's not a whole lot to discuss really if we narrow the scope too much. Everyone agrees that not having lights is stupid. But people do stupid things all the time. There's laws against it but laws get broken all the time. The gardai only have finite resources so they use them on what they perceive to be the most important things.

A more interesting topic (IMHO) is why do people do stupid things in general but might belong in a psychology forum more than a cycling one.

tomasrojo

On my route home in the evening (half five/sixish heading south from Dublin city centre towards D16) there are a gratifyingly large number of cyclists with ok to good lights. Much better than I remember. Guess the range of cheaper, good lights is making a difference.

tomasrojo

Given this is the most eponymous thread a cycling forum could hope for, it's a pity it isn't a bit more positive.

Wishbone Ash

Before dawn yesterday morning Mercian Pro and myself were 'on the road'.

We were passed by a motorist in darkness with no lights on. At the next set of lights MP tapped on his window to tell him. He responded "I know".

tomasrojo

tomasrojo wrote: »

On my route home in the evening (half five/sixish heading south from Dublin city centre towards D16) there are a gratifyingly large number of cyclists with ok to good lights. Much better than I remember. Guess the range of cheaper, good lights is making a difference.

I'd say it's down to price partly and seeing other people with lights, sowing the seed with them maybe. I've also noticed it in our town.

irishrover99

I’m predominantly a cyclist but for the last few weeks I’ve been forced to use the car everyday and TBH I can see why some get upset at people on bikes.
But these are not cyclists. They are piss heads with their hands down their bags hiding drugs and men cycling home from a day on the building site and after having a few pints.
Woman who won’t wear a helmet as it will mess their hair.
Men who want to talk on the phone while on the bike and going against the traffic.

If these are cyclist, then we need to start calling people on mopeds and Honda 50’s bikers and dominos pizza drivers rally drivers.

So OP,you are posting in the wrong place as we here are proper cyclists for the most part.

buffalo

tomasrojo wrote: »

Given this is the most eponymous thread a cycling forum could hope for, it's a pity it isn't a bit more positive.

AndrewJRenko

at1withmyself wrote: »

But this is the cycling forum, not the motoring forum. Let the motorist have there own debate there.

Cycling without lights is against the law and just because people break debateably worse laws that is not a good argument.

As per other comments even 1 death is too much.

Why not have a discussion without bringing cars into it?

I'm a motorist, like most cyclists. So I can talk about the dangers of motoring on any thread, subject to usual moderation rules. The more interesting question is why so many people are so dedicated to 'fixing' cyclists and cycling, but they seem to run out of ideas before they start when it comes to fixing the motorists who kill 3 or 4 people each week.


It's like a doctor finding a patient bleeding out due to an amputation, and giving them a sticking plaster.

cletus

irishrover99 wrote: »

I’m predominantly a cyclist but for the last few weeks I’ve been forced to use the car everyday and TBH I can see why some get upset at people on bikes.
But these are not cyclists. They are piss heads with their hands down their bags hiding drugs and men cycling home from a day on the building site and after having a few pints.
Woman who won’t wear a helmet as it will mess their hair.
Men who want to talk on the phone while on the bike and going against the traffic.

If these are cyclist, then we need to start calling people on mopeds and Honda 50’s bikers and dominos pizza drivers rally drivers.

So OP,you are posting in the wrong place as we here are proper cyclists for the most part.

I don't think you can differentiate like that. If I'm driving a car, I'm a driver. If I'm cycling a bike, I'm a cyclist. There are good and bad drivers, just like there are good and bad cyclists, but you can't discount bad behaviour on a bike by saying "but they're not real cyclists"

AndrewJRenko

cletus wrote: »

There are good and bad drivers, just like there are good and bad cyclists, but you can't discount bad behaviour on a bike by saying "but they're not real cyclists"

I agree.



The best way to differentiate the bad cyclists from the bad drivers is to highlight that the bad drivers kill 3 or 4 people each week, while the bad cyclists don't.

Wishbone Ash

cletus wrote: »

.., but you can't discount bad behaviour on a bike by saying "but they're not real cyclists"

But what's the point 'preaching to the converted' here?

at1withmyself

Cycling forum = fix cycling forums

Motoring forums = fix motoring forums

I can see the difficulty here alright, tis very confusing

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I'm a motorist, like most cyclists. So I can talk about the dangers of motoring on any thread, subject to usual moderation rules. The more interesting question is why so many people are so dedicated to 'fixing' cyclists and cycling, but they seem to run out of ideas before they start when it comes to fixing the motorists who kill 3 or 4 people each week.


It's like a doctor finding a patient bleeding out due to an amputation, and giving them a sticking plaster.

cletus

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

But what's the point 'preaching to the converted' here?

Sorry, I don't understand what you mean

ewc78

at1withmyself wrote: »

But this is the cycling forum, not the motoring forum. Let the motorist have there own debate there.

Cycling without lights is against the law and just because people break debateably worse laws that is not a good argument.

As per other comments even 1 death is too much.

Why not have a discussion without bringing cars into it?[\b]

That particular poster (andrewjrenko)is incapable of doing that

Unfortunately there are a few cases who persist in chancing their arm after dark - no reflective gear or lighting rendering them almost invisible to the motorist. The rest of us then suffer cheap labelling i.e. "pesky cyclists". The Gardaí haven't the easiest job on their hands enforcing the law, but something has to give.

average_runner

buffalo wrote: »

So would you disqualify the use of one statistic in favour of another that apparently doesn't exist?

It's not all about deaths certainly, but it's all we have at present to indicate patterns and trends, unless you care to produce some more detailed data?

I never disqualify any stat. Just asked simple question.

average_runner

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

The question isn't whether the point is valid.

The question is, of all the issues on the road that need action, where abouts on the priority list of all valid issues is this one?

I don't think it is in the top 20. I'm not sure it is in the top 50.

I often wonder why the creativity and motivation of many motorists in coming up with ideas to 'fix' cycling and cyclists is not applied to fixing the real danger on the roads - the motorists who kill three or four people each week and maim many more.

But you are forgetting the bigger problem. If we allow one group away with something, all the other groups will behave the same way. Thats human behaviour.

So we need to treat all the same which in turn will make the roads safer for all and save lives.

07Lapierre

The problem is ENFORCEMENT or should I say lack of enforcement. People don’t use lights because the RSA give out free “immunity”vests!

We have cycle lanes on the roads, cycle paths on the pavements which assume cyclists act like pedestrians. We have motorists who see any cyclists as a tax evading freeloader who can’t afford a car, so shouldn’t be on the road!

In short no wonder people are confused!

bilbot79

It's the time of year. About a month from now they'll all have bought new lights etc

incentsitive

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

The best way to differentiate the bad cyclists from the bad drivers is to highlight that the bad drivers kill 3 or 4 people each week, while the bad cyclists don't.

That's a lame enough argument though in fairness too. I mean, if I am cycling home from work and am lit up properly, get hit by a car through no fault of my own, that's the car's fault.
Conversely, if I have no lights on and a black jacket and a car driver knocks me off and kills me, do you think the vast majority of car drivers would not be completely traumatised by that, regardless of right/wrong?
The old "oh they are much worse because they can kill more people" is a lame argument.
It is up to everybody to behave on the roads.

Fighting Tao

I think the Boards needs a 'The Visible Invisible Ninja Cyclist' super thread at this stage.

07Lapierre

I hope their descent lights!

https://www.facebook.com/186031000051/posts/10161042261685052/

rubadub

average_runner wrote: »

If we allow one group away with something, all the other groups will behave the same way. Thats human behaviour.
.

no we/they do not!!!! FFS pedestrians get away with breaking red lights all the time, when is the last time you heard of one been prosecuted for jaywalking!! Do articulated truck drivers "behave the same way" as them!~ bizarre BS nonsense. What sort of moronic mind thinks people will behave the same walking/jogging/running/bicycle/moped/bus

average_runner wrote: »

So we need to treat all the same which in turn will make the roads safer for all and save lives.

the gardai thankfully quite obviously disagree with you, thanks be to christ. Ludicrously ignorant comments if you actually bothered your hole to actually think about it. Quite worrying stuff.

AndrewJRenko

at1withmyself wrote: »

Cycling forum = fix cycling forums

Motoring forums = fix motoring forums

I can see the difficulty here alright, tis very confusing

The difficulty is that you've just made that up. It's not part of the forum rules for either forum.


Certainly, the cycling forum has frequent discussions about keeping cyclists safe. By and large, this involves getting motorists to comply with the law.

Deleted User wrote: »

Unfortunately there are a few cases who persist in chancing their arm after dark - no reflective gear or lighting rendering them almost invisible to the motorist. The rest of us then suffer cheap labelling i.e. "pesky cyclists". The Gardaí haven't the easiest job on their hands enforcing the law, but something has to give.

The best way to avoid the rest of us suffering is to point out how ridiculous any kind of collective responsibility is.


Do the rest of motorists suffer 'pesky drivers' labelling because of the few idiots driving round with no back lights because they don't know how their DRLs work?

average_runner wrote: »

But you are forgetting the bigger problem. If we allow one group away with something, all the other groups will behave the same way. Thats human behaviour.

Great, so let's stop motorists from getting away with routinely breaking speed limits and red lights, and then cyclists will certainly follow. The bigger problem is the motorists that kill and maim.

average_runner wrote: »

So we need to treat all the same which in turn will make the roads safer for all and save lives.

I don't think that's how policing works.

incentsitive wrote: »

That's a lame enough argument though in fairness too. I mean, if I am cycling home from work and am lit up properly, get hit by a car through no fault of my own, that's the car's fault.
Conversely, if I have no lights on and a black jacket and a car driver knocks me off and kills me, do you think the vast majority of car drivers would not be completely traumatised by that, regardless of right/wrong?
The old "oh they are much worse because they can kill more people" is a lame argument.
It is up to everybody to behave on the roads.

If I'm a pedestrian with no lights and a black jacket crossing the road and a car driver knocks me off, who are we going to blame?

AndrewJRenko

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

The difficulty is that you've just made that up. It's not part of the forum rules for either forum.


Certainly, the cycling forum has frequent discussions about keeping cyclists safe. By and large, this involves getting motorists to comply with the law.







The best way to avoid the rest of us suffering is to point out how ridiculous any kind of collective responsibility is.


Do the rest of motorists suffer 'pesky drivers' labelling because of the few idiots driving round with no back lights because they don't know how their DRLs work?


Great, so let's stop motorists from getting away with routinely breaking speed limits and red lights, and then cyclists will certainly follow. The bigger problem is the motorists that kill and maim.




I don't think that's how policing works.


If I'm a pedestrian with no lights and a black jacket crossing the road and a car driver knocks me off, who are we going to blame?

Do you sincerely believe that, should we not acknowledge others on the road at all?

AndrewJRenko

Mike1961 wrote: »

The best way to avoid the rest of us suffering is to point out how ridiculous any kind of collective responsibility is.

Do you sincerely believe that, should we not acknowledge others on the road at all?[/quote]
My point about collective responsibility was about the ridiculous suggestion that the actions of some law breaking cyclists give all cyclists a bad name.

The easiest way to prove how ridiculous it is is to suggest that the motorists who killed 3 or 4 people this week give all motorists a bad name.

I'm not sure I get your point about 'acknowledging'?

AndrewJRenko

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

My point about collective responsibility was about the ridiculous suggestion that the actions of some law breaking cyclists give all cyclists a bad name.

The easiest way to prove how ridiculous it is is to suggest that the motorists who killed 3 or 4 people this week give all motorists a bad name.

I'm not sure I get your point about 'acknowledging'?

Fair enough, I assumed you were dismissing the concept of collective responsibility. You seized on my "rest of us" remark, and then somehow equated this with fatalities caused by motorists. That's quite the leap, I was making the point that certain people will utilise idiotic cyclists as cannon-fodder to make a blanket assumption that all cyclists are a menace on the road.

AndrewJRenko

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I was making the point that certain people will utilise idiotic cyclists as cannon-fodder to make a blanket assumption that all cyclists are a menace on the road.

Yes, I get that some people will make that assumption. And I suggest that we challenge their assumption rather than play along with their game.

Ask them what they, as a motorist are doing about the 3 or 4 people killed by motorists each week. See how long it takes for them to work out that collective responsibility doesn't work.

Steve

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Yes, I get that some people will make that assumption. And I suggest that we challenge their assumption rather than play along with their game.

Ask them what they, as a motorist are doing about the 3 or 4 people killed by motorists each week. See how long it takes for them to work out that collective responsibility doesn't work.

"Us and them"

It's always the other side's fault.

If you want collective responsibility then you have to remove the terms 'cyclist' and 'motorist' from the discussion and replace them with 'road user'.

beauf

Used to be you'd get Garda stopping cyclists for no lights. These days never. That's the problem.