Cyclists

AndrewJRenko

Ally Dick wrote: »

Dublin city centre is too crowded for cyclists. They should get the f#ck out

It's always funny to see people who drive around with an empty couch and an empty armchair all day complaining about cyclists taking up the all the space. Car occupancy rates in Dublin are around 1.2 people.

Have you given much thought to what happens to traffic when the 56k commuting cyclists switch back to their cars instead?

AndrewJRenko

Ally Dick wrote: »

You have to watch yourself like a hawk in Dublin city centre. There are cycling maniacs everywhere. It gets worse every year. I have never seen anything like it. The cycle lanes along the canal are very generous, yet many cycles ignore them and cycle on the other side of the road, causing buses etc to have to go around them. Completely inconsiderate lunatics

Now do motorists.

Potential-Monke

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?

It's not the helmet that prevents whiplash, it's the 4 point harness, bucket seats and that thing that gets fastened around their neck (neck brace?). I would be up for that in my daily, but I would also expect to be able to drive like it's a race then.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

It's always funny to see people who drive around with an empty couch and an empty armchair all day complaining about cyclists taking up the all the space. Car occupancy rates in Dublin are around 1.2 people.

Have you given much thought to what happens to traffic when the 56k commuting cyclists switch back to their cars instead?

And what would happen if all 650,453 drivers turned into cyclists, it would be utter mayhem! And I'll have you know, I only have 3 empty armchairs, only 2 seats in the back of mine, so I'm doing my bit!

AndrewJRenko

Canis Lupus wrote: »

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.

Why don't all drivers wear these harnesses? Irresponsible not to. Should be mandatory.

Chiparus

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Who d marshal the roads?

Robotic marshals or "traffic lights" were introduced for motor vehicles - but many drivers seem to ignore these , so much they need robotic police officers ( traffic cameras) to police them.
https://blogs.bmj.com/injury-prevention/2015/08/05/traffic-lights-robots-robocops/
Motorists get upset when cyclists ignore the robotic marshalls.

Potential-Monke

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Why don't all drivers wear these harnesses? Irresponsible not to. Should be mandatory.

Because it would require the removal of back seats to make the correct anchor point for the harness. It's a racing set up designed to prevent injury in high speed crashes, bit pointless really on regular cars, overkill tbh:

AndrewJRenko

StinkyMunkey wrote: »

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.

The main difference would be that the dicks on bikes don't kill two or three people each week on the roads. It's the dicks in cars than does that - mostly other drivers and passengers, a bunch of pedestrians and a few cyclists.

AndrewJRenko

Potential-Monke wrote: »

Because it would require the removal of back seats to make the correct anchor point for the harness:

And the problem is?

A small price to pay to save your life, right?

Potential-Monke

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

And the problem is?

A small price to pay to save your life, right?

In that vein, why don't all cyclists use the Babel bike? Designed to bounce off of vehicles rather than get dragged under them. Not sure how much it will be, probably not cheap, but shur a small price to pay no?

AndrewJRenko

Potential-Monke wrote: »

And what would happen if all 650,453 drivers turned into cyclists, it would be utter mayhem!

Mayhem as in - not having two or three people killed each week and nine or ten people seriously injured?

Or mayhem as in dramatic reductions in cancer rates, hypertension rates, coronary heart disease rates, diabetes rates and more?

Or mayhem as in elimination of vast amounts of toxic emissions, brake pad emissions and tyre particle emissions?

Chiparus

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Why don't all drivers wear these harnesses? Irresponsible not to. Should be mandatory.

Clearly they work, never hear motor sports drivers sufferring from whiplash,

terrible, terrible injuries that happen when drivers have the most minor of collisions , thousands paid in compensation,

So bad that drivers have to pay hundreds ,....... sometimes thousands in insurance costs!

Must be terribly dangerous. poor craters.

Although insurance companies are putting up bicycle insurane costs some are charging over €30 a year now!
https://www.bicycleinsurance.ie

Chiparus

Potential-Monke wrote: »

Because it would require the removal of back seats to make the correct anchor point for the harness. It's a racing set up designed to prevent injury in high speed crashes, bit pointless really on regular cars, overkill tbh:

Many thousands of motorists are left with debilitating injuries after the most minor of collisions- not overkill at all.

AndrewJRenko

Potential-Monke wrote: »

In that vein, why don't all cyclists use the Babel bike? Designed to bounce off of vehicles rather than get dragged under them. Not sure how much it will be, probably not cheap, but shur a small price to pay no?

How often do cyclists get dragged under vehicles? What problem are you trying to solve?

Canis Lupus

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

How often do cyclists get dragged under vehicles? What problem are you trying to solve?

Maybe us cyclists should wear full motorbike helmet and leathers in the interest of safety?

Chiparus

Potential-Monke wrote: »

It's not the helmet that prevents whiplash, it's the 4 point harness, bucket seats and that thing that gets fastened around their neck (neck brace?). I would be up for that in my daily, but I would also expect to be able to drive like it's a race then.

Many do already.

Potential-Monke

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

How often do cyclists get dragged under vehicles? What problem are you trying to solve?

No idea, and couldn't be arsed finding out. I could ask you the same though. The seat belts in most* cars are more than sufficient in all legal speed collisions. There's no problem with the seat belts. The problem is the diagnosis of whiplash. If you go back a few pages, you'll see a report from doctors giving out that whiplash is, basically, made up, and some European countries don't account for it in personal claims. That's where the problem with whiplash is, not the cars or the belts, it's the people.

Regarding the mayhem, cities can be a pain to walk through with just people, add 650k cyclists in there and it would be bedlam, people walking into cyclists, people getting knocked down by cyclists. Yeah, it wouldn't be as bad as being hit by a car, but cyclist related accidents would, imo, skyrocket.

*Most, not including the cheap as chips crap boxes some countries sell

Edit: I only came in to give my opinion, but it's obvious that some people are die hard "Motorists are bad" and others are die hard "Cyclists are bad". We can all get along, but the nature of people means that we never will.

Chiparus

Potential-Monke wrote: »

No idea, and couldn't be arsed finding out. I could ask you the same though. The seat belts in most* cars are more than sufficient in all legal speed collisions. There's no problem with the seat belts. The problem is the diagnosis of whiplash. If you go back a few pages, you'll see a report from doctors giving out that whiplash is, basically, made up, and some European countries don't account for it in personal claims. That's where the problem with whiplash is, not the cars or the belts, it's the people.

Regarding the mayhem, cities can be a pain to walk through with just people, add 650k cyclists in there and it would be bedlam, people walking into cyclists, people getting knocked down by cyclists. Yeah, it wouldn't be as bad as being hit by a car, but cyclist related accidents would, imo, skyrocket.

*Most, not including the cheap as chips crap boxes some countries sell

If there were a huge increase in cyclists there would not be bedlam, sure everyone would be at work 30 minutes earlier, but eventually people would realise they could spend more time with families etc.and leave for work later.

Driving seems to be the preserve of the poor and unhealthy
From CSO

Cyclists travelling to Dublin earned higher income than car drivers

Commuters on motor cycles or scooters travelling to Dublin had the highest median value for earned income in 2016 of €47,689. The next highest median values were for commuters travelling to Dublin on bikes (€44,812) and train, dart or luas passengers (€44,676), see Figure 7.5.

AndrewJRenko

Potential-Monke wrote: »

No idea, and couldn't be arsed finding out. I could ask you the same though. The seat belts in most* cars are more than sufficient in all legal speed collisions. There's no problem with the seat belts. The problem is the diagnosis of whiplash. If you go back a few pages, you'll see a report from doctors giving out that whiplash is, basically, made up, and some European countries don't account for it in personal claims. That's where the problem with whiplash is, not the cars or the belts, it's the people.

Most road deaths and serious injuries happen in cars, vans and trucks. I'm not sure why 'legal speed collisions' are anyway relevant given that four out of five motorists break speed limits.

Seat belts and air bags and SIPS and more, and still we have two or three people killed each week.

Surely we should be considering mandatory crash helmets and harnesses. They really should have fire retardant suits too.

If it saves one life...

Chiparus

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Most road deaths and serious injuries happen in cars, vans and trucks. I'm not sure why 'legal speed collisions' are anyway relevant given that four out of five motorists break speed limits.

Seat belts and air bags and SIPS and more, and still we have two or three people killed each week.

Surely we should be considering mandatory crash helmets and harnesses. They really should have fire retardant suits too.

If it saves one life...

We should have speed limiters also, - if they save one life .......

micar

One More Toy wrote: »

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

For me....yes to both and in the morning front and rear lights and a high viz.

Motorits still behave disgracefully.....and put my life in danger. Had 2 quite nasty incidents last week.

This country has an inherent dislike of cyclists......an article of the journal about cyclists protesting hand 346 comment.....an article about the death of a cyclist had 1 and another about a cyclist being hit by a car yesterday during a race to date has had 0.

amadangomor

Chiparus wrote: »

If there were a huge increase in cyclists there would not be bedlam, sure everyone would be at work 30 minutes earlier, but eventually people would realise they could spend more time with families etc.and leave for work later.

Driving seems to be the preserve of the poor and unhealthy
From CSO

Cyclists travelling to Dublin earned higher income than car drivers

Commuters on motor cycles or scooters travelling to Dublin had the highest median value for earned income in 2016 of €47,689. The next highest median values were for commuters travelling to Dublin on bikes (€44,812) and train, dart or luas passengers (€44,676), see Figure 7.5.

Nah just indicates that they are the self entitled upper middle class that only care about themselves.

See it at work where managers are the only ones to wear shirts and it's guaranteed that if you have a manager going through the door in front it won't be held for you, he will breeze through in his own world and won't care if the door bangs in your face.

Chiparus

amadangomor wrote: »

Nah just indicates that they are the self entitled upper middle class that only care about themselves.

See it at work where managers are the only ones to wear shirts and it's guaranteed that if you have a manager going through the door in front it won't be held for you, he will breeze through in his own world and won't care if the door bangs in your face.

Do you in the prolitariates work topless at your work place or gaff as you probably call it?

hatrickpatrick

One thing that gets overlooked in these threads is the fact that motorists cannot easily speed or break red lights in Dublin city centre during busy periods because the city gets so unbelievably gridlocked, so for pedestrians, cyclists are proportionally more of a nuisance. A car can't run a red light on Nassau St or George's St if the traffic is backed up all the way to the next junction, but cyclists in these locations regularly do so, and also have a tendency to mount the curb (Nassau St turning on to Dawson St in particular) in order to cut around the corner when the lights are red.

Yes, motorists overall cause more trouble on the roads, but in the very specific case of city centre rush hour, they simply don't have the space required to speed or break lights on a regular basis, and obviously there's no point in a motorist trying to mount the kerb in order to cut around a corner since the pavement isn't wide enough between buildings and traffic lights. Gridlock doesn't tend to slow cyclists down, so it's much more annoying when a whole line of cars is stopped, you have a green man to cross the road, and you're just getting to the other side when some asshole on a bike who was obscured by the tailback on the far side of the road comes flying through without regard for the pedestrians trying to cross. And this happens every single day, in one or two very busy and very specific locations.

Chiparus

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

One thing that gets overlooked in these threads is the fact that motorists cannot easily speed or break red lights in Dublin city centre during busy periods because the city gets so unbelievably gridlocked, so for pedestrians, cyclists are proportionally more of a nuisance. A car can't run a red light on Nassau St or George's St if the traffic is backed up all the way to the next junction, but cyclists in these locations regularly do so, and also have a tendency to mount the curb (Nassau St turning on to Dawson St in particular) in order to cut around the corner when the lights are red.

Yes, motorists overall cause more trouble on the roads, but in the very specific case of city centre rush hour, they simply don't have the space required to speed or break lights on a regular basis, and obviously there's no point in a motorist trying to mount the kerb in order to cut around a corner since the pavement isn't wide enough between buildings and traffic lights. Gridlock doesn't tend to slow cyclists down, so it's much more annoying when a whole line of cars is stopped, you have a green man to cross the road, and you're just getting to the other side when some asshole on a bike who was obscured by the tailback on the far side of the road comes flying through without regard for the pedestrians trying to cross. And this happens every single day, in one or two very busy and very specific locations.

Certainly they kill a lot of pedestrians,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, but but the cyclists,,,,,,,,,,,,,,they break the lights, and annoy people stuck in cars.

Hoboo

micar wrote: »

For me....yes to both and in the morning front and rear lights and a high viz.

Motorits still behave disgracefully.....and put my life in danger. Had 2 quite nasty incidents last week.

This country has an inherent dislike of cyclists......an article of the journal about cyclists protesting hand 346 comment.....an article about the death of a cyclist had 1 and another about a cyclist being hit by a car yesterday during a race to date has had 0.

All that says is cyclists don't give a **** about their own, can't even be bothered writing thoughts and prayers or other such nonsense.

beauf

Potential-Monke wrote: »

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. ...

Make it legal like Paris...

https://youtu.be/Brh9Dv_5NaA

micar

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Gridlock doesn't tend to slow cyclists down

Home to work is about 8km

Takes me about 25 mins to cycle to work and about 30 mins to cycle home regardless of weather and traffic.

Anyone living within 10km of their workplace should be cycling. On the basis, there is a secure place to leave your bike and you've shower and changing facilities.

hatrickpatrick

Chiparus wrote: »

Certainly they kill a lot of pedestrians,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, but but the cyclists,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Are more annoying at rush hour when the traffic is moving too slowly for cars to be much of a threat. That's when the rampant light breaking and pavement mounting becomes incredibly noticeable. How is that so difficult to at least engage with? You can't get hit by a speeding car on Leeson Street at rush hour when the traffic is backed up all the way to Donnybrook and is crawling along at a snail's pace, but you'll regularly have to dash across the road at the canal even with a green man, because the cyclists turning off from the cycle lanes generally ignore the red lights such that a green man becomes totally meaningless.

Surely it's obvious that cars become more or less of a threat depending on how congested the traffic is at a particular time of the day, in a particular location? The point is that cyclists do not, because such congestion affects them far less. So if you have a daily on-foot commute through the city centre at rush hour when speeding or breaking red lights is virtually impossible for cars, you'll notice the rampant sh!tty behaviour from cyclists far more than usual.

EDIT to address your edit:

Chiparus wrote: »

Certainly they kill a lot of pedestrians,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, but but the cyclists,,,,,,,,,,,,,,they break the lights, and annoy people stuck in cars.

I don't drive and I have never driven. I commute via public transport and walk. I have no reason whatsoever to have an ambivalent attitude towards motorists and a hostile attitude towards cyclists apart from personal experiences over ten years of commuting in this manner.

Invisibleman

I used to drive to work in Dublin City for 15 years but have cycled the last two, I stop at most lights , sometimes I’ll go through but only if safe with no cars around, no helmet but have a hi vis vest, anyway the point is, as a cyclist you get dogs abuse for all sorts,having to go around cars parked in bike lanes or on the path,yet cars are flying through red lights, it happens on both sides, but people seem to think it’s ok to shout and throw stuff at a cyclist it’s crazy

micar

Hoboo wrote: »

All that says is cyclists don't give a **** about their own, can't even be bothered writing thoughts and prayers or other such nonsense.

What a wonderful take on my post.

The number of comments on an article about an an accident resulting in injury or death of pedestrian or vehicle occupant is equally low.

Really shows that people have become so normalised to incidents like there.

But a article about cyclists protesting brings all the haters out.