Yet another 'Cyclists' thread...

swarlb

Following on from the recent mindmelt of a thread about lorries (trucks or big vans to those who don't know what a 'lorry' is) and cyclists on rural roads....Here's an article which will mean nothing to the "I hate cyclists and will never change my mind" brigade, but which might enlighten a few on the fence.
Most likely it will make little difference.....

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2011/aug/15/cyclists-paved-way-for-roads

amcalester

Whenever I’m out and about there’s just so many of them around taking up space and blocking everyone else. It’s a disgrace, and they’re all breaking the law, running red lights weaving in and out of lanes, blocking faster traffic etc.

Really, it’s high time we banned cars from cities and towns.

Eric Cartman

Dublin cyclists all need a mandatory training course and a stricter fine structure to stop the chronic bad behaviour and entitled attitudes among them. Thats just fact.

donvito99

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Dublin cyclists all need a mandatory training course and a stricter fine structure to stop the chronic bad behaviour and entitled attitudes among them. Thats just fact.

And yet all the traffic and fatalities are caused by....

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

donvito99 wrote: »

And yet all the traffic and fatalities are caused by....

If you want to post a statistic how about you post the % of accidents involving a cyclist.

Or how many of those are fatalities?

Of course more accidents are caused by motorists...because guess what, there are 1000 times motorists on the roads than bicycles.

Cycling is dangerous...the same way being on a motorbike is dangerous. You’ve to look twice as hard at what’s going on around you. One bump could be fatal.

meeeeh

swarlb wrote: »

Following on from the recent mindmelt of a thread about lorries (trucks or big vans to those who don't know what a 'lorry' is) and cyclists on rural roads....Here's an article which will mean nothing to the "I hate cyclists and will never change my mind" brigade, but which might enlighten a few on the fence.
Most likely it will make little difference.....

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2011/aug/15/cyclists-paved-way-for-roads

Yeah and typewriters paved the way for computers. And I agree bicycles are paving the way again in cities... For electric scooters. People are lazy by nature, as a whole we will always pick the lazy option.

triggermortis

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Dublin cyclists all need a mandatory training course and a stricter fine structure to stop the chronic bad behaviour and entitled attitudes among them. Thats just fact.

doesn't really work for motorists does it, so why do you think cyclists need it?

Eric Cartman

donvito99 wrote: »

And yet all the traffic and fatalities are caused by....

if somebody breaks the red light at a level crossing and the car gets hit by a train, do we blame the train or the idiot who crossed the red light infront of something too heavy to stop at a split second notice.

Cork Trucker

donvito99 wrote: »

And yet all the traffic and fatalities are caused by....

Cyclists do play their part in minor and serious injuries to pedestrians but it is rarely discussed regardless of what level they play in it all.

The below article is one i remember reading a good while back.

For the record just because i am a trucker i am not anti cycling, just prefer a level playing field.

https://www.thejournal.ie/woman-critical-collision-cyclist-3920019-Mar2018/

tuxy

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Dublin cyclists all need a mandatory training course and a stricter fine structure to stop the chronic bad behaviour and entitled attitudes among them. Thats just fact.

Goes both ways, what do you think of this?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2018/10/09/cyclists-are-better-drivers-than-motorists-finds-study/#403678616f6c

Cyclists who drive are better behind the steering wheel than motorists, a new analysis has found.

Mandatory cycling as part of driving lessons maybe?

Isambard

meeeeh wrote: »

Yeah and typewriters paved the way for computers. And I agree bicycles are paving the way again in cities... For electric scooters. People are lazy by nature, as a whole we will always pick the lazy option.

it is an obvious solution to congestion.

Eric Cartman

tuxy wrote: »

Goes both ways, what do you think of this?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2018/10/09/cyclists-are-better-drivers-than-motorists-finds-study/#403678616f6c



Mandatory cycling as part of driving lessons maybe?

was revealed by a UK insurance firm which offers specialist motor insurance policies for cyclists

an Insurance company trying to sell a product to a group of people tells that group of people that theyre class drivers... sounds legit.

also pooling drivers , somebody who cycles to and from work and only drives a little as a group vs a group of motorist only people who drive everywhere, shockingly enough the group in the car less is going to have less car accidents.

Seth Brundle

Cork Trucker wrote: »

Cyclists do play their part in minor and serious injuries to pedestrians but it is rarely discussed regardless of what level they play in it all.

The below article is one i remember reading a good while back.

For the record just because i am a trucker i am not anti cycling, just prefer a level playing field.

https://www.thejournal.ie/woman-critical-collision-cyclist-3920019-Mar2018/

Although the article does not point towards blame, one could assume that the pedestrian stepped put in front of the cyclist, a regular enough occurrence in some urban areas. Assuming that my assumption is correct then what's your point?

donvito99

When was the last time a cyclist killed a pedestrian? I think it was about 15yrs ago from recollection in Dublin?

How many people have been run over by cars since then?

somefeen

Eric Cartman wrote: »

an Insurance company trying to sell a product to a group of people tells that group of people that theyre class drivers... sounds legit.

also pooling drivers , somebody who cycles to and from work and only drives a little as a group vs a group of motorist only people who drive everywhere, shockingly enough the group in the car less is going to have less car accidents.

How do they prove that they're cyclists? Do they have to send a photo of their firm cyclist arses clad in Lycra and is this database publicly available

amcalester

Eric Cartman wrote: »

an Insurance company trying to sell a product to a group of people tells that group of people that theyre class drivers... sounds legit.

also pooling drivers , somebody who cycles to and from work and only drives a little as a group vs a group of motorist only people who drive everywhere, shockingly enough the group in the car less is going to have less car accidents.

Insurance companies don’t generally offer discounts unless they have the data to back it up.

Eric Cartman

amcalester wrote: »

Insurance companies don’t generally offer discounts unless they have the data to back it up.

its the same about the myth of women being safer drivers, or why lower kilometer policies are cheaper...

Less time in the car = less accidents.

Eric Cartman

somefeen wrote: »

How do they prove that they're cyclists? Do they have to send a photo of their firm cyclist arses clad in Lycra and is this database publicly available

id imagine they just look up anything you post online, if you look like a total cockwomble and keep posting about cycling every 5 minutes then youre set.

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

Can we differentiate between cyclists? I mean most cyclists are grand, using the bikes to get to work or the shops, using cycle lanes, aware of whats going around them.

Then you have the lycra brigade who don't believe in single file and "shur cycle lanes are too dirty"... 3 and 4 abreast as you go around a bend and there they are refusing to give way with their entitled stares.

amcalester

Eric Cartman wrote: »

its the same about the myth of women being safer drivers, or why lower kilometer policies are cheaper...

Less time in the car = less accidents.

Nah, more time on the bike = better road awareness and faster reaction times.

donvito99

Hunky Monster wrote: »

Can we differentiate between cyclists? I mean most cyclists are grand, using the bikes to get to work or the shops, using cycle lanes, aware of whats going around them.

Then you have the lycra brigade who don't believe in single file and "shur cycle lanes are too dirty"... 3 and 4 abreast as you go around a bend and there they are refusing to give way with their entitled stares.

3-4 cyclists two abreast still likely taking up less space than a car, so why do you find it so difficult to overtake?

Seth Brundle

Eric Cartman wrote: »

its the same about the myth of women being safer drivers, or why lower kilometer policies are cheaper...

Less time in the car = less accidents.

Have you more accurate stats than theirs?

Seth Brundle

Hunky Monster wrote: »

Can we differentiate between cyclists? I mean most cyclists are grand, using the bikes to get to work or the shops, using cycle lanes, aware of whats going around them.

Can we differentiate between the drivers who consistently break the road traffic laws to suit themselves and the law obeying ones?

Hunky Monster wrote: »

Then you have the lycra brigade who don't believe in single file and "shur cycle lanes are too dirty"... 3 and 4 abreast as you go around a bend and there they are refusing to give way with their entitled stares.

You're offended by their clothes? Must be because their behaviour is completely legal and safer than single file

jimmynokia

donvito99 wrote: »

When was the last time a cyclist killed a pedestrian? I think it was about 15yrs ago from recollection in Dublin?

How many people have been run over by cars since then?

Not the point here really, Cyclists need lessons in my book, Go to any set of lights in the morning or evening or along the quays,canal and they weave in and out of traffic then gather in a pile at the lights waving all over the shop overtaking each other and stupid maneuvers, ignore lights etc,yes motorists do the same but the point is they are a danger to society and the same applies to some morons on the electric scooters same thing again.
This is a prime example below..

https://youtu.be/ViWpGdP-Zes?list=UU90epHXnLJRU19R5PiYxS0g

amcalester

jimmynokia wrote: »

Not the point here really, Cyclists need lessons in my book, Go to any set of lights in the morning or evening or along the quays,canal and they weave in and out of traffic then gather in a pile at the lights waving all over the shop overtaking each other and stupid maneuvers, ignore lights etc,yes motorists do the same but the point is they are a danger to society and the same applies to some morons on the electric scooters same thing again.
This is a prime example below..

https://youtu.be/ViWpGdP-Zes?list=UU90epHXnLJRU19R5PiYxS0g

A danger to society? Less of the hyperbole, as annoying as it is society isn’t at risk because some cyclists run a red light.

Lessons wont make a difference anyway, people who break the lights do so because there’s very little enforcement. Be they cyclists, motorists or pedestrians.

tuxy

I think the stereotypical cyclist runs reds.
And the stereotypical motorist uses their phone while driving.

But it's very difficult to determine which of the two is the greater danger on the road!

donvito99

jimmynokia wrote: »

Not the point here really, Cyclists need lessons in my book, Go to any set of lights in the morning or evening or along the quays,canal and they weave in and out of traffic then gather in a pile at the lights waving all over the shop overtaking each other and stupid maneuvers, ignore lights etc,yes motorists do the same but the point is they are a danger to society and the same applies to some morons on the electric scooters same thing again.
This is a prime example below..

https://youtu.be/ViWpGdP-Zes?list=UU90epHXnLJRU19R5PiYxS0g

Cyclists "gathering in a pile" is evidence of the efficiency of people on bicycles and the criminal inefficiency of people driving their cars. Avg occupancy of a car in Dublin has dropped from 1.3 to 1.2.

Cyclists "weaving in and out of traffic" is another example of cars being entirely useless in the cities. One is a quiet, non-polluting, non-road surface degrading mode. The other is the mode digging up the roads, causing traffic grid lock, pumping shite into the air and, to boot, massively subsidised by the tax payer every year.

Limpy

The cyclists can argue they were using the roads before cars were invented.

Tell me how

tuxy wrote: »

I think the stereotypical cyclist runs reds.
And the stereotypical motorist uses their phone while driving.

But it's very difficult to determine which of the two is the greater danger on the road!

Risk = Probability of Occurrence X Severity of Outcome.



I would suggest that for both factors motorists would score higher and therefore are the greater danger on the road.

terrydel

amcalester wrote: »

Insurance companies don’t generally offer discounts unless they have the data to back it up.

The same way they had the data to back up their baseless nonsense about rampant claims fraud, at the public accounts committee recently?

amcalester

terrydel wrote: »

The same way they had the data to back up their baseless nonsense about rampant claims fraud, at the public accounts committee recently?

Yeah, fair point to be honest. But in this they were offering discounts not increasing price and it was the UK not Ireland.

There’s a similar study from Australia that shows that cyclist-drivers have faster observation skills than motorists.

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Can we differentiate between the drivers who consistently break the road traffic laws to suit themselves and the law obeying ones?


You're offended by their clothes? Must be because their behaviour is completely legal and safer than single file

I don't see car drivers breaking red lights every day, I see multiple cyclists do it. Seems they don't care much for any rules of the road.

..eh yeah, that was my point, the lycra thing, ignore the rest of the post, I obviously just really really hate lycra.

AulWan

jimmynokia wrote: »

Not the point here really, Cyclists need lessons in my book, Go to any set of lights in the morning or evening or along the quays,canal and they weave in and out of traffic then gather in a pile at the lights waving all over the shop overtaking each other and stupid maneuvers, ignore lights etc,yes motorists do the same but the point is they are a danger to society and the same applies to some morons on the electric scooters same thing again.
This is a prime example below..

https://youtu.be/ViWpGdP-Zes?list=UU90epHXnLJRU19R5PiYxS0g

This is an example of why I believe cyclists should have identifying marks of some kind. If they already have a car and motor policy, it could be the same number as their reg plate.

This clown could have caused a very serious accident, and yet sailed off into the distance, never to be found or held accountable.

amcalester

Hunky Monster wrote: »

I don't see car drivers breaking red lights every day, I see multiple cyclists do it. Seems they don't care much for any rules of the road.

Then you like many other motorists need to work on your observation skills.

Cycling will help.

tuxy

Tell me how wrote: »

Risk = Probability of Occurrence X Severity of Outcome.



I would suggest that for both factors motorists would score higher and therefore are the greater danger on the road.

Yes but the problem is real statistics to back that up.

Just imagine you are there driving to work and some cyclist runs a red and dents your car. Compared to the same scenario and someone driving while using a phone kills you.

It's the dented car that will get you riled up!

donvito99

AulWan wrote: »

This is an example of why I believe cyclists should have identifying marks of some kind. If they already have a car and motor policy, it could be the same number as their reg plate.

This clown could have caused a very serious accident, and yet sailed off into the distance, never to be found or held accountable.

That cyclist very nearly killed himself, like pedestrians pegging it across the road against a red. Are we going to start pedestrian registration and insurance?

Just because vehicles require licensing, insurance and inspection does not mean that a child going to school on a bicycle requires the same.

It is more PC, nanny state nonsense from the AA, SIMI etc.

Tell me how

tuxy wrote: »

Yes but the problem is real statistics to back that up.

Just imagine you are there driving to work and some cyclist runs a red and dents your car. Compared to the same scenario and someone driving while using a phone kills you.

It's the dented car that will get you riled up!

Ah, I get it, you're playing the 'how sarcastic can I be' game. :pac:

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

amcalester wrote: »

Then you like many other motorists need to work on your observation skills.

Cycling will help.

I come from a motorcycle background.

I'm WELL aware of my surroundings on the road. I know I'm on two wheels, I know its dangerous.

Tell me how

Hunky Monster wrote: »

I come from a motorcycle background.

I'm WELL aware of my surroundings on the road. I know I'm on two wheels, I know its dangerous.

The CAPS have me convinced.

tuxy

Tell me how wrote: »

Ah, I get it, you're playing the 'how sarcastic can I be' game.

No, the truth of the matter is that most people would be more angry with the cyclist.
I see it all the time!

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

Tell me how wrote: »

The CAPS have me convinced.

Good. I don't have to convince you any further.

is_that_so

tuxy wrote: »

Yes but the problem is real statistics to back that up.

Just imagine you are there driving to work and some cyclist runs a red and dents your car. Compared to the same scenario and someone driving while using a phone kills you.

It's the dented car that will get you riled up!

Nope, it's the law breaking and the unlikelihood of the the cyclist coming up with the cash to fix your car. Why does the defence of bad cyclists always come down how many cars kill them?

tuxy

is_that_so wrote: »

Nope, it's the law breaking and the unlikelihood of the the cyclist coming up with the cash to fix your car. Why does the defence of bad cyclists always come down how many cars kill them?

That was my point, the dent in the car is the issue that will really get to most people.

AulWan

donvito99 wrote: »

That cyclist very nearly killed himself, like pedestrians pegging it across the road against a red. Are we going to start pedestrian registration and insurance?

Just because vehicles require licensing, insurance and inspection does not mean that a child going to school on a bicycle requires the same.

It is more PC, nanny state nonsense from the AA, SIMI etc.

We're not talking about children cycling to school, weak attempt at deflection.

Why are you so anti being idenifiable on the road? If you truly believe cyclists are all so squeaky clean, then what is there to hide?

What if this clown's reckless behaviour was responsible for a pile up and getting someone else killed, what then? If he gets himself killed there is no one for his family to blame but him. However, if he is the cause of someone elses death...

I see behaviour like this daily from cyclists, for that very reason I installed a dashcam, and I'd advise every motorist to do so, for their own protection in case some clown like this results in them being involved in an accident.

is_that_so

amcalester wrote: »

Then you like many other motorists need to work on your observation skills.

Cycling will help.

Sure, we're all bad motorists and can't see anything on the road. What makes me a non-risky driver is anticipation of all sorts of dubious behaviour from all manner of road users.

donvito99

Weepsie wrote: »

Another thing worth nothing, is when a car goes through amber/red it's not only the danger issue, it's having a very real knock on effect in the traffic flow. That bell-end you see blocking a junction, probably jumped a light, probably preventing you from passing through and slowing everything down. Repeat this a couple hundred times in a relatively small area and you have a very real traffic management issue that goes beyond rotr.

This is the thing. Piles of cyclists going through red lights and the city keeps moving. One motorist does this at Portobello bridge and there are tailbacks towards Harold's Cross and Rathgar.

Traffic lights were put in to mitigate the effect of cars on congestion and safety. Pedestrians and cyclists don't require them, but the law treats them as if they're as utterly useless as vehicles. Survival of the fattest

is_that_so

Weepsie wrote: »

If they were doing that much damage (they're not) there would be serious moves to do something about it.

More apples and oranges comparions! Pedestrians rarely cause damage either but they are a huge risk to everyone else by their behaviour.

donvito99

AulWan wrote: »

What if this clown's reckless behaviour was responsible for a pile up and getting someone else killed, what then? If he gets himself killed there is no one for his family to blame but him. However, if he is the cause of someone elses death...

We live in reality. In your own example, a "pile up" results in a fatality. Cars crashing into cars. Are you picking up on the one common thread here? People travelling around at speed in metal boxes are going to cause havoc (and do), people travelling along using their own legs and balancing on two skinny wheels are not (and don't).

is_that_so

tuxy wrote: »

That was my point, the dent in the car is the issue that will really get to most people.

Given the cost of it of course it is. I'd expect them to be prosecuted as well.

donvito99

is_that_so wrote: »

More apples and oranges comparions! Pedestrians rarely cause damage either but they are a huge risk to everyone else by their behaviour.

Yeah, it's pedestrians that are responsible for all of the fatal hit and runs. How in the name of god can a pedestrian introduce any risk to another person on the roads that's worth talking about?

The no hi-viz, no helmet, wearing head phones spiel is pure whataboutery and dancing around the real, obvious danger to everyone on the roads - the full licence holder.