Cyclists

donvito99

Motorists should be lynched. Can't park, can't accelerate, can't not block a yellow box, blame everyone but themselves for their own inefficiency and general uselessness. But because they pay road tax they are entitled to cripple traffic in the City for their own convenience.

Thelonious Monk

I break lights when safe to do so when cycling. I dont believe the same rules of the road should apply to cyclists as cars as we are harmless. Dont wear helmet or high viz. I can never understand why motorists are so concerned about cyclists wearing helmets given they are far more likely to die.

donvito99

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

I break lights when safe to do so when cycling. I dont believe the same rules of the road should apply to cyclists as cars as we are harmless. Dont wear helmet or high viz. I can never understand why motorists are so concerned about cyclists wearing helmets given they are far more likely to die.

The helmet hi viz thing is just another crutch for crap drivers.

It always starts with "I saw a cyclist no wearing hi viz yesterday". So they SAW the cyclist, and everything else thereafter is their inability to navigate the road properly.

They want everybody to be taxed up to their eyeballs and make moving in public a privilege for pedestrians and cyclists despite the fact that people were doing that in dublin long before everybody decided the only way to get around is to make no effort at all.

Pinch Flat

Edgware wrote: »

Green light. Go
Red light. Stop
Amber light. Boot to the floor

Red light. Keep going. Sure I’m only following the car in front of me.

As I mentioned on this forum about 18 months ago I was sitting in my car at the RTÉ traffic lights (coming out from Dublin) and I looked to the right and about 100 metres away on the far side of the road on the ground next to a bike was a human body with a blanket over it. I checked the news repeatedly over the subsequent hours and a 19-year-old cyclist, who had just started university, had died. The start of the best years of freedom. Taken.

While it is true that a ridiculous number of cyclists take stupid risks breaking traffic lights, a far greater truth is that our cities need to be redesigned away from giving so much space to vehicles and towards public transport, bikes, walking and the like. Many of the cycle lanes are complete pisstakes - the cycle lane which is also marked for car parking along the Sandford Road always springs to mind for me. Tokenism, at very best.

Between 1853-1870 the urban planner Georges-Eugène Haussmann ("Baron Haussmann") famously redesigned the entire city of Paris (which had a significantly higher population density than Dublin city today, where most people live in suburbs) to make it what it mostly is today. And people here would contend that Dublin and other established urban centres cannot make the necessary modernisation to facilitate cyclists, walkers, public transport and the like? We can, despite the heartbreaking lack of vision and abundance of naysayers.

Haussmann's renovation of Paris

Pinch Flat

there’s s huge cohort who insist on driving their 20% full car from their driveway to the front door of their place of work. You also have vested interests and useless politicians who have no interest in making Dublin more cycling friendly. As long as this exists, dublin will be besieged by vehicular traffic, with cyclists who don’t wear hi vis, helmets or have insurance portrayed as the problem.

2011

One More Toy wrote: »

Why do they never wear a helmet or adhere to road signs/traffic lights?

That’s a bit like saying “why do all motorists post on Facebook will driving?”. In other words complete boll0x. Some motorists behave in this irresponsible manner and some cyclists behave in the manner you describe. Painting either group with one brush is simply trolling. Please grow up.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Cyclists feed off the hate of the general public.

StinkyMunkey

The usual school yard arguments. It's a thread about cyclists, but a certain militant group of cyclists start pointing the finger at motorists being the route of all evil on the rounds.

Same rule applies as it does on boards, don't be a dick, whether a cyclist or motorist.

I use a bicycle, car and motorcycle, not wearing a helmet or blasting through red lights is retarded not matter your mode of transport.

Depending on what mode of transport I'm using, I adjust my driving style accordingly to offer me the best chance of making my destination safe and sound.

JohnnyFlash

A lot of MAMILs are frustrated men in sexless marriages who take out their anger and sense of privilege by being absolute knobs on the road.

Pinch Flat

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

A lot of MAMILs are frustrated men in sexless marriages who take out their anger and sense of privilege by being absolute knobs on the road.

I think cyclists seem to wind up more motorists rather than vice versa though. I mean, it's rare enough see a thread in AH with "motorists" in the title and people cribbing about safety gear for motorists or their lack of adherance to road signs/traffic lights.

StinkyMunkey

StinkyMunkey wrote: »

... motorists being the route of all evil

I see what you did there.

StinkyMunkey wrote: »

Same rule applies as it does on boards, don't be a dick, whether a cyclist or motorist.

While I agree with the egalitarianism of this, a dickhead with a killing machine verses a dickhead on a bike are not quite comparable, aside from being dickheads. Cyclists and pedestrians who take risks/are dickheads on the road will always lose against dickheads in vehicles. Right and wrong is a side issue if the cyclist/pedestrian who is in the right is dead. And the offending driver will probably get a slap on the wrist. Even if he got 2 years in prison, he will still have his life. All sorts of dickheads in history win, and good people lose, because they have more dangerous machines.

StinkyMunkey wrote: »

I use a bicycle, car and motorcycle, not wearing a helmet or blasting through red lights is retarded not matter your mode of transport.

Agree 100%, but if you do this on a bike, it's even more retarded given not only the vehicles coming at you, but the reality that you don't have the greater protection of your own vehicle. In short, cyclists do, in fact, take considerably more risk when they break a red light than somebody with the relative protection of a vehicle does.

Insect Overlord

2011 wrote: »

Painting either group with one brush is simply trolling. Please grow up.

The OP was drunk posting rubbish all over Boards last night. I don't think any of it was meant to be taken seriously.

What happened to the women cyclists thread?

There, we were able to express our irrational hatred of push-bikes, our fear of women, and general fear of change. Now it just feels like we're going backwards fellas

GrumpyMe

One More Toy wrote: »

Then why do the rsa shove ads down our throats about how much space we need to give them eh?

Because car/trucks kill cyclists

Canis Lupus

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

A lot of MAMILs are frustrated men in sexless marriages who take out their anger and sense of privilege by being absolute knobs on the road.

You're just jealous of our awesome, shaved smooth well defined legs.

greenspurs

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

A lot of MAMILs are frustrated men in sexless marriages who take out their anger and sense of privilege by being absolute knobs on the road.

A lot of posters on here are single fat men, sweating over their keyboard eating take aways and feeling outraged, and their other open tab is P0rnhub ….

Wayne Jarvis

greenspurs wrote: »

A lot of posters on here are single fat men, sweating over their keyboard eating take aways and feeling outraged, and their other open tab is P0rnhub ….

But those people could easily be MAMILs too!

murpho999

What is non cyclists obsession with cycle helmets?

How would wearing them prevent accidents or disregard for rules of the road that annoys drivers so much?

marvin80

For balance I created this thread:

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2058017327

prinzeugen

Yer Da sells Avon wrote: »

Thickest post I've seen on Boards in... hours.

Far from 'ceasing to exist' (what a stupid comment), the city centre would be a far nicer place if it wasn't clogged up with cars.

The exact same 'selfishness' generalisation could be made about the thousands of single-occupant vehicles on the streets at any given time - the main differences being that they cause more pollution, kill more people and take up a lot more space than cyclists.

The city centre would become concrete wasteland. Shops etc gone. The only stupid people are those that think banning everything non cyclist is the way to go.

Yer Da sells Avon

prinzeugen wrote: »

The city centre would become concrete wasteland. Shops etc gone. The only stupid people are those that think banning everything non cyclist is the way to go.

The giant multistory car parks would have to go. Everything else would survive.

gctest50

prinzeugen wrote: »

The city centre would become concrete wasteland. Shops etc gone. ...........

Nope

Potential-Monke

ted1 wrote: »

Traffic signs and lights are targeted towards motor vehicles, cyclists fall between pedestrians and vehicles.

No, they don't fall in between motorists and pedestrians. Like motorists, they are road users, and as such have to abide by the rules of the road. There's no grey area.

punisher5112 wrote: »

If they are identified and found as a cause they can be fined and if they hold a licence points mat well be applied.

punisher5112 wrote: »

[
Yes yes one can....

If they hold a driving licence this can be endorsed.

It's been done.

Not having a go, but you're wrong. A cyclist is simply a cyclist, regardless of whether they drive or not. You cannot endorse a driving licence for a cycling offence. Unless it was done to you, someone was winding you up. They're separate entities completely.

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

I break lights when safe to do so when cycling. I dont believe the same rules of the road should apply to cyclists as cars as we are harmless.

Then you're wrong. Regardless of if there was anyone coming, the law states as a cyclist you have to obey the rules of the road, which include not breaking a red light. Imagine if motorists took the same approach? If you're a road user, be it car, truck, bus, motorbike or bicycle, the rules of the road rightly apply.

Also, this idea of making city centers more pedestrian and cyclist friendly, that's great and all, and as a motorist I'd be ok with that. But before that can even be contemplated, the public transport system needs to be massively improved. With all the noise and fancy words, from my friends who still use public transport it's still shockingly bad. And I don't accept that current traffic is making it that way, more like bad planning based on the quickest and cheapest route while making the most money.

Potential-Monke

Oh, also, the law on cycling:

https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/travel_and_recreation/cycling/cycling_offences.html

Some of the main points:

If you are using a bike on a public road in Ireland it must be fitted with reflectors and lights to ensure that you are visible. All bikes on public roads must comply with the Road Traffic (Lighting of Vehicles) Regulations 1963 as amended. This law sets down the type of reflectors and lights that your bike must have and when you must use your bike lights. See our document on Bicycle lights for more information.

In addition to lights, your bike must also have:

- A bell, which can be heard from a reasonable distance
- Front and rear brakes
- A rear reflector that can be seen from a reasonable distance

What other rules of the road apply to cyclists?
The Road Traffic Acts 1961-2014 set out the main provisions for motoring and legislate for bikes. There is also secondary legislation, Road Traffic Acts and Road Traffic (Traffic and Parking) Regulations 1997-2014, which regulate the behaviour of motorists and cyclists.

When cycling you must:

- Stop at traffic lights when required
- Stop at pedestrian crossings and zebra crossings
- Stop at cycle traffic lights
- Stop at stop signs and yield right of way at yield signs.
- Avoid cycling on motorways (which is illegal)

Section 100 of the Road Traffic Act 1961 makes it an offence to ride a bicycle while holding on to another moving vehicle (other than another bicycle which no one is riding).

Is it legal to cycle two abreast in Ireland?
Cyclists can cycle two abreast but under Article 47 of the Road Traffic (Traffic and Parking) 1997 Regulations (as substituted by the 2012 Regulations), you must not cycle more than two abreast, except when overtaking and it does not endanger or obstruct other traffic.

Am I legally obliged to use cycle lanes?
You do not have to use a cycle lane unless the cycle lane is a contra-flow cycle lane allowing cyclists to go in the opposite direction to the traffic on a one-way street. If the cycle lane is a contra-flow cycle lane you must use it to navigate the street and you can only cycle in the contra-flow direction.

Penalties:

Since 2015 Gardaí have the power to stop cyclists and fine them for specific fixed charge cycling offences. Gardaí can fine cyclists for the following offences:

- No front or rear light during lighting-up hours
- Riding a bicycle without reasonable consideration
- Failing to stop for a school warden sign
- Failing to stop at traffic lights when the red lamp is lit
- Failing to stop at cycle traffic lights when the red lamp is lit
- Failing to stop at a stop line, barrier or half barrier at a railway level crossing, swing bridge or lifting bridge, when the red lamps are flashing
- Cycling in a pedestrianised street or area

Yer Da sells Avon

Potential-Monke wrote: »

Then you're wrong. Regardless of if there was anyone coming, the law states as a cyclist you have to obey the rules of the road, which include not breaking a red light. Imagine if motorists took the same approach? If you're a road user, be it car, truck, bus, motorbike or bicycle, the rules of the road rightly apply.

If motorists took the same approach, they could kill or injure people. A cyclist breaking a red light is more likely to kill or injure themselves. With the exception of pedestrian crossings, it should be legal for cyclists to proceed with caution through red lights. As a motorist, I'd prefer if cyclists could be clear of the traffic lights and out of my way before I move off, rather than having to move off at the same time as me. It means there's less chance that I'll have to overtake them.

Potential-Monke wrote:

Also, this idea of making city centers more pedestrian and cyclist friendly, that's great and all, and as a motorist I'd be ok with that. But before that can even be contemplated, the public transport system needs to be massively improved. With all the noise and fancy words, from my friends who still use public transport it's still shockingly bad. And I don't accept that current traffic is making it that way, more like bad planning based on the quickest and cheapest route while making the most money.

They might be smelly and ugly, when compared with pet projects like the Luas, but buses are probably the cheapest and simplest way of moving large numbers of people from one place to another. We need more of them. For them to work effectively, bus lanes need to be absolutely sacrosanct (i.e. not shared with cyclists or taxis. And definitely not for pulling into when your car breaks down or you have a minor accident) and on-street parking needs to be completely banned on bus routes, with no exceptions. Also, buses should be fitted with sensors that ensure they have priority over cars at traffic lights. Those are just a few simple things that would make public transport a lot more efficient and attractive.

Potential-Monke

Yer Da sells Avon wrote: »

If motorists took the same approach, they could kill or injure people. A cyclist breaking a red light is more likely to kill or injure themselves. With the exception of pedestrian crossings, it should be legal for cyclists to proceed with caution through red lights. As a motorist, I'd prefer if cyclists could be clear of the traffic lights and out of my way before I move off, rather than having to move off at the same time as me. It means there's less chance that I'll have to overtake them.

I think we're going to disagree on this one. A red light is a red light, and should not be broken under any circumstance. While you may think it's safer for a cyclist to move on if they believe the way is clear, and while they may only injure themselves, they could also cause a motorist to swerve and possibly crash, while the cyclist continues away never to be caught, because bicycles don't have visible identification plates. Or they could get hit by that car, possibly die, and the motorist who was driving legally is left with that death on them for the rest of their lives. Now, that wouldn't really bother me, I don't feel like that when I'm in the right, but there are plenty out there who would be affected by it.

I am 100% ok with cycle lanes having their own lights, and the green light for the cyclist going on 10 seconds before the motorists' green light.

Chiparus

Why do people who crash in motorsport not get whiplash while drivers of normal cars seem to be terribly debilitated often taking months off work following the most minor of collisions??


Why dont drivers wear helmets like they do in motor sports? Maybe that would help the poor craturs?

Wanderer78

Chiparus wrote:

Why do people who crash in motorsport not get whiplash while drivers of normal cars seem to be terribly debilitated often taking months off work following the most minor of collisions??

Who d marshal the roads?

Canis Lupus

Chiparus wrote: »

Why do people who crash in motorsport not get whiplash while drivers of normal cars seem to be terribly debilitated often taking months off work following the most minor of collisions??


Why dont drivers wear helmets like they do in motor sports? Maybe that would help the poor craturs?

Unsure how widespread it is but you often see devices to prevent that sort of injury in motorsport. I'm sure they have it in F1 and nascar and similar along with proper racing harnesses rather than standard seatbelts.