Calling out fellow cyclists for illegal or dangerous behavior

magicbastarder

nonsense racist ****e deleted; apols to people challenging it but those posts were removed too.

magicbastarder

MarkY91 - do not post in this thread again.

Effects

LeChienMefiant wrote: »

GDPR is very clear on what is private information and how it must be handled.

Can you show me where is says that a picture of someone in a public space can't be posted to social media?

Time

LeChienMefiant wrote: »

Even if you don't publish it, by storing it you become a data controller (possibly not the GDPR terminology) surely?

No you don't, the lack of understanding people have around GDPR is actually astounding.

Art.2 of the regulation states that it applies "to the processing of personal data wholly or partly by automated means and to the processing other than by automated means of personal data which form part of a filing system or are intended to form part of a filing system." not only does recording someone on the street not fall within that scope but "personal activities" are specifically exempted.

What she is doing is clearly a personal activity and whether people like it or not she's not doing anything illegal (unlike her subjects).

Hrududu

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/sharing-videos-on-social-media-not-the-way-to-report-crime-garda-1.3775031%3fmode=amp

Hmm I wonder if the same will happen here.

For those not wanting to click it’s a story about the guards asking cyclists to take down videos from social media showing motorists up to no good.

The Garda’s main Twitter account said people who were identified, or whose vehicles were identified by their registration in the videos or photos were entitled to their good name.

LeChienMefiant

Time wrote: »

What she is doing is clearly a personal activity and whether people like it or not she's not doing anything illegal (unlike her subjects).

All I know is I've had my photo removed from instagram using the following text:

I contest that publishing my photo violates my privacy rights under GDPR. I have not consented to publication of my image, there is no legitimate interest in publishing my image.

Time

Hrududu wrote: »

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/sharing-videos-on-social-media-not-the-way-to-report-crime-garda-1.3775031%3fmode=amp

Hmm I wonder if the same will happen here.

For those not wanting to click it’s a story about the guards asking cyclists to take down videos from social media showing motorists up to no good.

There's a difference between it being undesirable and illegal, the gardai aren't going to do anything on the back of a video, unless its something particularly egregious like that video from citywest yesterday, or the one from cavan that was reported today. Note that they don't say you can't just that they'd rather it not happen.

Time

LeChienMefiant wrote: »

All I know is I've had my photo removed from instagram using the following text:

Thats all well and good, but they likely do as policy that due to resources required to investigate. Anyway people would be better focusing on the activity that she's actually filming, rather than her doing it, if they weren't breaking the law there'd be no story in the first place.

dubrov

There's a GDPR addiction on boards at the moment.

Half the threads seem to end up as a monotonous discussion about what does and doesn't constitute a breach resulting in everyone else abandoning the threads due to boredom

LeChienMefiant

Time wrote: »

Thats all well and good, but they likely do as policy that due to resources required to investigate. Anyway people would be better focusing on the activity that she's actually filming, rather than her doing it, if they weren't breaking the law there'd be no story in the first place.

I've had direct experience and her posts lack context. You're only getting one side of the story.

Time

LeChienMefiant wrote: »

I've had direct experience and her posts lack context. You're only getting one side of the story.

Then discuss that instead, because she has several videos up (not all) that clearly show people breaking lights and lots of photos of people illegally parking. There’s no contextual issue with those but if there’s an issue with some of the others then let people know.

LeChienMefiant

Time wrote: »

Then discuss that instead, because she has several videos up (not all) that clearly show people breaking lights and lots of photos of people illegally parking. There’s no contextual issue with those but if there’s an issue with some of the others then let people know.

Plenty of discussion in thread.

Stark

Also quite a few where the person is doing nothing illegal. Except maybe for cycling full stop which wouldn't surprise me if she considers "illegal". Like the guy, heaven forbid having both hands on the handlebar in the middle of a turn.

Time

Stark wrote: »

Also quite a few where the person is doing nothing illegal. Except maybe for cycling full stop which wouldn't surprise me if she considers "illegal". Like the guy, heaven forbid having both hands on the handlebar in the middle of a turn.

Totally agree, but this thread is about calling out bad behaviour and she's quite a topical example of someone who is doing it, but it seems to make some people here uncomfortable, and the classic whataboutery of drivers gets brought up, or like you have, people focus on the exception rather than the rule (and having looked at her full insta 90% are people obviously breaking the law) rather than just accepting that some cyclists are selfish road users who couldn't give a **** about the law when if it means getting somewhere five minutes quicker. The road is a shared space for all of us, and bad behaviour by any user should be condemned irrespective of whether they're pedestrian motorist or cyclist.

CramCycle

She is harmless, can't see why anyone is giving her the time of day, basically she is the internet without the privacy. People ranting about sh1t, some of it important, some of it not. Unless she is being physically abusive, who cares.

Guy ran through a red light today, in his car, and I let a shout. Taxi driver rolled up beside me, smiled and said, I needed to go home and take a break, the stress isn't worth it. He was 100% right. Now I wasn't stressed, I just have a boring voice which makes me sound serious or angry all the time, I was actually trying to warn the driver but the taxi guy still made me smile.

I hope it is taxi dave and I get a video.

AndrewJRenko

Time wrote: »

The road is a shared space for all of us, and bad behaviour by any user should be condemned irrespective of whether they're pedestrian motorist or cyclist.

It's a completely false equivalence.


https://www.roadbikerider.com/correcting-the-false-equivalencies-in-the-cars-vs-cyclists-debate-d5/


Do you not wonder about why she never posts videos of the 1 or 2 or 3 drivers that break the lights at every change of lights in Ranelagh?

magicbastarder

CramCycle wrote: »

I hope it is taxi dave and I get a video.

he might not upload the video if you sounded boring, as you say. taxi dave wants action and drama.

Time

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

It's a completely false equivalence.


https://www.roadbikerider.com/correcting-the-false-equivalencies-in-the-cars-vs-cyclists-debate-d5/


Do you not wonder about why she never posts videos of the 1 or 2 or 3 drivers that break the lights at every change of lights in Ranelagh?

It’s the complete opposite of a false equivalence. Breaking a red light is breaking a red light the law makes no distinction as to bike and car in that regard they’re completely equal. In reality that’s what matters and that link is just a subjective opinion piece.

As for motorists roughly 70 of her 200 posts are about motorists and parking with another 20-30 being unrelated to traffic at all, so that leaves 100 max on cyclists so hardly like she’s only posting about cycling.

Why have people such difficulty with accepting that the people breaking red light shouldnt be without pointing the finger and shouting we’ll the cars did it first or some nonsense like that

AndrewJRenko

Time wrote: »

As for motorists roughly 70 of her 200 posts are about motorists and parking with another 20-30 being unrelated to traffic at all, so that leaves 100 max on cyclists so hardly like she’s only posting about cycling.

The motorist posts are all about parking, right? No posts about drivers breaking red lights, or moving past the stop line, or speeding or using their phones? The issues that cause drivers to kill people with alarming regularity.

Time wrote: »

Why have people such difficulty with accepting that the people breaking red light shouldnt be without pointing the finger and It’s the complete opposite of a false equivalence. Breaking a red light is breaking a red light the law makes no distinction as to bike and car in that regard they’re completely equal. In reality that’s what matters and that link is just a subjective opinion piece. we’ll the cars did it first or some nonsense like that

Probably because it's not cyclists that kill 2 or 3 people each week on the road and maim many more. That's why it's not 'completely equal'.

rubadub

I think she is hilarious, I am still wondering if this is some clever windup satire account, taking us all for fools, trying to sabotage those who might be posting legit complaints/examples. She is advertising hoodies for sale now, would be funny if it was a money making scam
https://www.instagram.com/angela.fahy.1.0/

I have only seen a few and the majority are pretty much benign acts, not really what the law actually set out to prevent, stuff a reasonable garda would not give a damn about -e.g. somebody in loads of high viz gear who does not have the legally required reflector.

Does she always ignore all the pedestrians breaking reds?

Time

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

The motorist posts are all about parking, right? No posts about drivers breaking red lights, or moving past the stop line, or speeding or using their phones? The issues that cause drivers to kill people with alarming regularity.


Probably because it's not cyclists that kill 2 or 3 people each week on the road and maim many more. That's why it's not 'completely equal'.

Ok so it’s grand for cyclists to brake the law (which is what this thread is about) but not motorists got it

site_owner

Time wrote: »

Ok so it’s grand for cyclists to brake the law (which is what this thread is about) but not motorists got it

Its not a rant thread, it's about whether it's worthwhile calling other people on their behavior and, if it is, when and how should it be done.

A lot of people have an opinion that minor law breaking by Cyclists is not really a problem. based on the fact that 99.99% of damage and death is caused by drivers and that other countries have very different laws for cyclists (Idaho stop etc) with little to no issue.

If you want to rant about cyclists there are other places you'll get more support

Time

site_owner wrote: »

Its not a rant thread, it's about whether it's worthwhile calling other people on their behavior and, if it is, when and how should it be done.

A lot of people have an opinion that minor law breaking by Cyclists is not really a problem. based on the fact that 99.99% of damage and death is caused by drivers and that other countries have very different laws for cyclists (Idaho stop etc) with little to no issue.

If you want to rant about cyclists there are other places you'll get more support

I’m not looking to rant at all, I happen to think that we all know it’s against the rules to run red lights and can’t complain when called out on regardless of what mode of transport we use. But there’s serious whataboutery going on here, and arguments along the lines that everyone but cyclists are wrong

AndrewJRenko

Time wrote: »

Ok so it’s grand for cyclists to brake the law (which is what this thread is about) but not motorists got it

Maybe you could try arguing with something that I actually said?

Macy0161

In the car today. Motorists I saw breaking red, circa 10, including 3 going through a clear red onto Fosters Avenue from the N11 through a pedestrian Green (obviously the left turn red didn't apply to them once straight on got the green). That's not including amber gamblers. Cyclists breaking red - zero.

Time

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Maybe you could try arguing with something that I actually said?

Well you're bringing it back to what drivers do rather than other cyclists, which is what this thread is about. Why no condemnation of bad cycling behaviour? So you'll forgive me for believing that you have no problem with cyclists breaking the law and instead only care when drivers do it.

AndrewJRenko

Time wrote: »

Well you're bringing it back to what drivers do rather than other cyclists, which is what this thread is about. Why no condemnation of bad cycling behaviour? So you'll forgive me for believing that you have no problem with cyclists breaking the law and instead only care when drivers do it.

I haven't condemned ISIS or Pol Pot recently either. Do you assume that I've no problem with them also? Is there some level of outrage that I'm supposed to reach?

Every Garda hour spent chasing cyclists breaking red lights is an hour not spent reducing the death toll on the roads.

work

Every Garda hour spent chasing cyclists breaking red lights is an hour not spent reducing the death toll on the roads.[/quote]

I absoloutely agree but laws should be obeyed and we should canvass for better laws and infrastructure for cyclists.

A simple way to pay for Garda enforcement is charge fees for breaking the law based on danger caused. As such a cyclist on the path going carefully would be 10 cents or breaking a red 10 euro. Drivers on the phone 1000 euro and tailgating 5000 euro. I doubt there would be an issue paying the extra traffic Garda then? Added benefit of saving lives and making the roads more comfortable. So simple and nobody can complain laws aren't enforced!

CramCycle

Financial fines won't work, they will go to court on every single one and jam up the system. A far better one would be a driving ban, effective immediately. Phone use and red light jumping. 1 year ban for both with immediate notification to the insurance company. The last one would do the most damage and the threat would stop alot although the number on English plates would suggest many don't care. This could be helped my immediate seizure and crushing order on anyone with an attachment to the state.

work

CramCycle wrote: »

Financial fines won't work, they will go to court on every single one and jam up the system. A far better one would be a driving ban, effective immediately. Phone use and red light jumping. 1 year ban for both with immediate notification to the insurance company. The last one would do the most damage and the threat would stop alot although the number on English plates would suggest many don't care. This could be helped my immediate seizure and crushing order on anyone with an attachment to the state.

Can't agree change the system, Garda do xyz and get a conviction. I like the idea of immediate crush notice. Also immediate removal of any yellow plate cars with infractions. Really need to just pull the finger out!