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

Cyclists

Options
1…34689…12

Comments

  • Options
    #152
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    First Up wrote: »
    In heavy traffic on a wet evening, no I didn't see many motorists breaking the speed limit but I wouldn't defend them if I did.

    The important question isn't so much about who defends what, but who chooses to get excited about what.

    Motorists kill 3 or 4 people each week on the roads and maim many more. 60% - 80% of motorists break speed limits in the RSA Speed Survey. Speeding is one of the top three causes of road deaths.

    Do you think that maybe your top priority should be to get your fellow motorists to slow down and stop killing people before you start jumping up and down about unlit cyclists?
    First Up wrote: »
    You on the other hand seem to be defending cyclists without lights or high-viz clothing and I'm wondering why.
    Where exactly did I defend cyclists without lights? A specific quote would be great.

    First Up wrote: »

    Not all cyclist accidents result in deaths but I am intrigued at the attitude on display here. If an unlit cyclist is knocked over because he is virtually invisible, who do you think is responsible?

    Generally I find it more productive to focus on the real world rather than hypotheticals. In the real world, you have incidents like this where a cyclist with lights and hi-vis got run down and killed by a bus driver.


    http://www.thejournal.ie/bus-driver-cyclist-death-4335560-Nov2018/


    If you actually want to reduce road deaths, get motorists to slow down, put their phones down and put their pints down.

    If you want to divert attention from the real dangers on the road, you can jump up and down about ninja cyclists.
    Not one word of which does anything to explain why you object to criticism of unlit cyclists on dark winter evenings.


  • Options
    #153
    eeeee
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 6,824 Mod ✭✭✭✭eeeee


    Steve wrote: »
    Just to balance your point, this only gives merit to the motorists (of which I am one) for their awareness and care on the roads.

    Unlit cyclists need to cop on to the fact that they are next to invisible on suburban roads, especially when there is oncoming traffic (cars with lights on).

    It beggars belief that they take risks like this.


    Everyone needs to take responsibility for their ****ty behaviour on the road.


  • Options
    #154
    Steve
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 22,584 CMod ✭✭✭✭Steve


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    The important question isn't so much about who defends what, but who chooses to get excited about what.

    I disagree.

    I think the discussion should be based on facts and laws of physics than things that 'excite' you.

    I commend and respect those that are properly 'lit' and will always give them road room, those that I simply cannot see do not deserve the same respect or room yet I am still in the wrong?


  • Options
    #155
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,397 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    First Up wrote: »
    Not one word of which does anything to explain why you object to criticism of unlit cyclists on dark winter evenings.

    Perhaps you missed my earlier point?

    . Last year, two out of fifteen cyclists deaths occurred after dark. It's just not a significant issue


  • Options
    #156
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,397 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    nee wrote: »
    Everyone needs to take responsibility for their ****ty behaviour on the road.

    Indeed they do - but it's worth remembering that not all sh1tty behaviours result in death and serious injury.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #157
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,397 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Steve wrote: »
    I disagree.

    I think the discussion should be based on facts and laws of physics than things that 'excite' you.

    I commend and respect those that are properly 'lit' and will always give them road room, those that I simply cannot see do not deserve the same respect or room yet I am still in the wrong?

    When you're considering facts, have you considered looking at the actual causes of road deaths?


  • Options
    #158
    Steve
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 22,584 CMod ✭✭✭✭Steve


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    When you're considering facts, have you considered looking at the actual causes of road deaths?

    Yes.


  • Options
    #159
    07Lapierre
    Registered Users Posts: 8,215 ✭✭✭07Lapierre


    First Up wrote: »
    Not one word of which does anything to explain why you object to criticism of unlit cyclists on dark winter evenings.

    Nobody is defending cyclists that don't use lights at night. IMO even if every cyclist in the country did use lights on dark winter evenings, it would not reduce the number of cyclists fatalities that much.

    If I remember correctly, only one cyclist was killed during the hours of darkness in 2017. The other SIXTEEN were all killed during the hours of daylight. Their deaths were the result of lack of awareness on the part of drivers and also in some cases, lack of cycling experience on behalf of the cyclists. IMO lack of cycling experience and a lack of driving experience combined with a lack of awareness of dangerous situations leads to a lot of accidents.


  • Options
    #160
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    07Lapierre wrote: »
    First Up wrote: »
    Not one word of which does anything to explain why you object to criticism of unlit cyclists on dark winter evenings.

    Nobody is defending cyclists that don't use lights at night. IMO even if every cyclist in the country did use lights on dark winter evenings, it would not reduce the number of cyclists fatalities that much.

    If I remember correctly, only one cyclist was killed during the hours of darkness in 2017. The other SIXTEEN were all killed during the hours of daylight. Their deaths were the result of lack of awareness on the part of drivers and also in some cases, lack of cycling experience on behalf of the cyclists. IMO lack of cycling experience and a lack of driving experience combined with a lack of awareness of dangerous situations leads to a lot of accidents.

    Not all accidents are fatalities.


  • Options
    #161
    07Lapierre
    Registered Users Posts: 8,215 ✭✭✭07Lapierre


    First Up wrote: »
    Not all accidents are fatalities.

    Which is a good thing right?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #162
    Chips Lovell
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,267 Mod ✭✭✭✭Chips Lovell


    Can we relax with the whatabouery and hostility please?

    Be nice. Be reasonable.


  • Options
    #163
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,397 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Steve wrote: »
    Yes.

    Did unlit cyclists come up as a significant factor when you did?


  • Options
    #164
    Steve
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 22,584 CMod ✭✭✭✭Steve


    07Lapierre wrote: »
    Nobody is defending cyclists that don't use lights at night. IMO even if every cyclist in the country did use lights on dark winter evenings, it would not reduce the number of cyclists fatalities that much.

    If I remember correctly, only one cyclist was killed during the hours of darkness in 2017. The other SIXTEEN were all killed during the hours of daylight. Their deaths were the result of lack of awareness on the part of drivers and also in some cases, lack of cycling experience on behalf of the cyclists. IMO lack of cycling experience and a lack of driving experience combined with a lack of awareness of dangerous situations leads to a lot of accidents.

    It doesn't matter what time of day or night it was.. if you have a bright flashing light on your bike that makes you visible day or night and may save your life then why would you not have that??? let alone cycle unlit in dark clothes at night??? that is nuts!!


  • Options
    #165
    LennoxR
    Registered Users Posts: 414 ✭✭LennoxR


    All bikes should be equipped with good lights, both front and back, if used after dark. Full stop. Reflective clothing is also a good idea. I find my functional cycling to be much safer when I have both; a lot more room seems to be given.

    But I do wish that motorists would reflect on this attitude that they are doing cyclists a favour by 'giving them room' on the roads. The cyclist has the same right to be there as a car. This attitude is what creates hostility in both directions.


  • Options
    #166
    07Lapierre
    Registered Users Posts: 8,215 ✭✭✭07Lapierre


    Steve wrote: »
    It doesn't matter what time of day or night it was.. if you have a bright flashing light on your bike that makes you visible day or night and may save your life then why would you not have that??? let alone cycle unlit in dark clothes at night??? that is nuts!!

    Agreed..I use lights when I'm cycling. Yet every day, even with bright lights, I experience close passes by cars. Every day on my commute I know at least one driver will be too impatient to wait until the oncoming truck passes me before overtaking me. Instead, the car will squeeze past me with only millimetres to spare! These are daily occurrences in daylight and at night and have nothing to do with visibility.


  • Options
    #167
    Steve
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 22,584 CMod ✭✭✭✭Steve


    07Lapierre wrote: »
    Agreed..I use lights when I'm cycling. Yet every day, even with bright lights, I experience close passes by cars. Every day on my commute I know at least one driver will be too impatient to wait until the oncoming truck passes me before overtaking me. Instead, the car will squeeze past me with only millimetres to spare! These are daily occurrences in daylight and at night and have nothing to do with visibility.

    I've seen drivers do that and really wish I had a gun I could evaporate them with. Fair is fair, there are a lot of a$$holes out there.


  • Options
    #168
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,397 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    First Up wrote: »
    Not all accidents are fatalities.

    It's well past time that we would follow the lead of Gardai and RSA and stop downplaying road deaths by calling them 'accidents'. They are crashes or collisions.

    But you're right, not all crashes or collisions are fatalities. So when we look at the big picture of crashes and collisions, that often cause death or serious injury, does unlit cyclists feature as a significant cause?


  • Options
    #169
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,397 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Steve wrote: »
    It doesn't matter what time of day or night it was.. if you have a bright flashing light on your bike that makes you visible day or night and may save your life then why would you not have that??? let alone cycle unlit in dark clothes at night??? that is nuts!!

    And if a bright, hi-vis stripe all round your car makes you visible day or night and may save your life, then why would you not have that???


  • Options
    #170
    Steve
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 22,584 CMod ✭✭✭✭Steve


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    And if a bright, hi-vis stripe all round your car makes you visible day or night and may save your life, then why would you not have that???

    Because it would not save your life? In a car? are you actually serious with that point or are you just trolling now? the former I am willing to discuss, the latter - mmm.


  • Options
    #171
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,397 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Steve wrote: »
    Because it would not save your life? In a car? are you actually serious with that point or are you just trolling now? the former I am willing to discuss, the latter - mmm.

    Are you sure? There's good evidence that bright colour cars have less crashes;

    https://www.carbuyersguide.net/motoring-news-ireland/details/which-is-the-safest-colour-car-to-have

    That's why Gardai and ambulances use then.

    So why wouldn't you have a hi-vis stripe on your car?

    Or is it only cyclists have to do things to reduce the death toll on the road caused by motorists?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #172
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,397 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Steve wrote: »
    those that I simply cannot see do not deserve the same respect or room yet I am still in the wrong?
    If you're not driving in a manner that allows you to stop within the distance you can see to be clear (as required by law), then yes, you are still in the wrong.


  • Options
    #173
    07Lapierre
    Registered Users Posts: 8,215 ✭✭✭07Lapierre


    Steve wrote: »
    I've seen drivers do that and really wish I had a gun I could evaporate them with. Fair is fair, there are a lot of a$$holes out there.

    Yep lots of assholes out there,which is why we really need better enforcement by the Gardai of the ROTR for all road users.

    But given the Gardai's limited resources, focusing on the assholes who are a danger to themselves and others should be their priority. In the greater scheme of things, cyclists without lights are a rare breed and a danger to themselves alone.


  • Options
    #174
    Steve
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 22,584 CMod ✭✭✭✭Steve


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    If you're not driving in a manner that allows you to stop within the distance you can see to be clear (as required by law), then yes, you are still in the wrong.

    Your argument is self defeating. If I cannot see an obstacle, legally it is not there... i.e. If I can see a clear road ahead, yet there is an 'invisible' cyclist then meh...

    Please stop defending illegal cyclists with no lights.


  • Options
    #175
    07Lapierre
    Registered Users Posts: 8,215 ✭✭✭07Lapierre


    Steve wrote: »
    If I cannot see an obstacle, legally it is not there



    I doubt that. Can you post a link to the relevant legislation?


  • Options
    #176
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,397 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Steve wrote: »
    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    If you're not driving in a manner that allows you to stop within the distance you can see to be clear (as required by law), then yes, you are still in the wrong.

    Your argument is self defeating. If I cannot see an obstacle, legally it is not there... i.e. If I can see a clear road ahead, yet there is an 'invisible' cyclist then meh...

    It's not 'my argument'. It's the law.
    Steve wrote: »
    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    If you're not driving in a manner that allows you to stop within the distance you can see to be clear (as required by law), then yes, you are still in the wrong.

    Please stop defending illegal cyclists with no lights.

    As I said to another poster earlier :

    Where exactly did I defend cyclists without lights? A specific quote would be great.

    I'd also be interested in hearing your thoughts about the hi-vis stripes for all cars, given the actual evidence that brighter cars have less crashes.


  • Options
    #177
    Steve
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 22,584 CMod ✭✭✭✭Steve


    07Lapierre wrote: »
    I doubt that. Can you post a link to the relevant legislation?

    Eh no, there is none. How can I link to something that does not exist?


  • Options
    #178
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,397 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Steve wrote: »
    07Lapierre wrote: »
    I doubt that. Can you post a link to the relevant legislation?

    Eh no, there is none. How can I link to something that does not exist?
    There is legislation that requires you to drive in a manner that allows you to stop within the distance you can see to be clear


  • Options
    #179
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Steve wrote: »
    Eh no, there is none. How can I link to something that does not exist?

    Then what are you saying ? I'm tired and confused now.


  • Options
    #180
    Rodin
    Registered Users Posts: 3,130 ✭✭✭Rodin


    Lack of enforcement of existing laws in all facets of life and paltry sentences for those that do get caught are two of the state's biggest scourges.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #181
    Steve
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 22,584 CMod ✭✭✭✭Steve


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    Where exactly did I defend cyclists without lights? A specific quote would be great.
    You didn't, I concede that point and apologise.
    I'd also be interested in hearing your thoughts about the hi-vis stripes for all cars, given the actual evidence that brighter cars have less crashes.
    All cars, by law, are required to have 'hi viz' reflectors front and back and they all do. Number plates on front and back and red reflectors on rear.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement