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

Why cycle lanes will never work in Ireland

Options
135

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    Lumen
    Registered Users Posts: 31,031 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    zulutango wrote: »
    Cycling is dangerous. It's not a myth. Many people are injured while cycling ...can we stop pretending that it's not dangerous. It is.
    This is a controversial claim. Please provide statistical evidence.


  • Options
    #63
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,790 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    may as well shoehorn this in here.

    The media exaggerates negative news. This distortion has consequences

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/17/steven-pinker-media-negative-news


  • Options
    #64
    zulutango
    Registered Users Posts: 3,903 ✭✭✭zulutango


    Lumen wrote: »
    This is a controversial claim. Please provide statistical evidence.

    I don't see what's controversial about it. How is it not dangerous? The countries that have done most to increase cycle numbers have done so on the back of acknowledging that cycling is dangerous. They've done a wholescale re-design of their streets and laws because of this.

    I myself was nearly paralysed when hit by a motorist. I really don't see how any cyclist can say it's not dangerous.

    https://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/four-cyclists-a-day-attend-hospital-over-road-accidents-466489.html


  • Options
    #65
    Weepsie
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 20,040 Mod ✭✭✭✭Weepsie


    zulutango wrote: »
    Cycling is dangerous. It's not a myth. Many people are injured while cycling.

    I'd hazard a guess and say more people are injured playing football, and many people are injured doing athletics. This doesn't make them dangerous.

    I've had a few accidents on the bike. One this week. It wasn't because cycling is dangerous. It was because I turned off my brain for 10 seconds, and another person in a car turned theirs off for about the same time, ironically in the interest of safety. Had 1, or better both of us (especially me) been more tuned in it would have been easily avoided.

    Humans are dangerous. Cycling is not. It carries an element of risk, but it's generally not dangerous.


  • Options
    #66
    clod71
    Registered Users Posts: 641 ✭✭✭clod71


    Lumen wrote: »
    zulutango wrote: »
    Cycling is dangerous. It's not a myth. Many people are injured while cycling ...can we stop pretending that it's not dangerous. It is.
    This is a controversial claim. Please provide statistical evidence.
    Cycling is not dangerous.
    Cycling alongside with trucks, and cars that pass you too many times too close is though... About 16 people were killed by accidents with cars while they were riding a bike last year Lumen - Is evidence enough for you? I didn't really looked into the individual cases, but possibly the majority of them were not "cyclists", but just people who happen to go to work/school in their jeans and with a bag on their shoulders? 
    I'm not trying to be smart, but I don't understand why the argument against cycle lanes ???
    Am I missing something?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    buffalo
    Registered Users Posts: 8,060 ✭✭✭buffalo


    zulutango wrote: »
    Cycling is dangerous. It's not a myth. Many people are injured while cycling.

    Yes, it's an incredibly beneficial activity for individuals and society, but can we stop pretending that it's not dangerous. It is. We have to design our streets and enforce our laws to make it less so.

    "There is potential for injury" is a lot different to "Cycling is dangerous".

    People are injured climbing stairs all the time, but I've never heard anyone describe climbing stairs as dangerous.


  • Options
    #68
    no.8
    Registered Users Posts: 778 ✭✭✭no.8


    Lumen wrote:
    Just stop with this crap, please.

    Lumen wrote:
    If there's a car in a cycle lane, look, indicate, move out around it.

    Lumen wrote:
    If you're incapable of doing that, then yes, cycling is not for you.


    The point of his argument is that multiple cars are parked and blocking the cycle lane, not that he can't avoid them. So for our younger generation, it's simply far too dangerous to risk using these facilities. Segregated cycle ways are the way to go (where feasible on busy roads). Prevents ' couldn't give a damn about anybody else' types increasing risk on the roads +traffic congestion


  • Options
    #69
    lorcand1990
    Registered Users Posts: 356 ✭✭lorcand1990


    zulutango wrote: »
    Cycling is dangerous. It's not a myth. Many people are injured while cycling.

    Yes, it's an incredibly beneficial activity for individuals and society, but can we stop pretending that it's not dangerous. It is. We have to design our streets and enforce our laws to make it less so.

    I'm going to go out on a limb (not) and say all methods of transport have an element of risk involved in them, be it walking, driving, cycling, plane etc.. As with any mode of transport you need to have your wits about you at all times when cycling. Yes, you are more vulnerable on the road but I don't consider cycling in Dublin dangerous


  • Options
    #70
    Lumen
    Registered Users Posts: 31,031 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    zulutango wrote: »
    Cycling is dangerous. It's not a myth. Many people are injured while cycling ...can we stop pretending that it's not dangerous. It is.
    clod71 wrote: »
    Cycling is not dangerous. Cycling alongside with trucks, and cars that pass you too many times too close is though... About 16 people were killed by accidents with cars while they were riding a bike last year Lumen - Is evidence enough for you?

    Here are some stats from the UK.

    If I cycle 100km per week I have approx 0.01% chance being killed per year.

    The average death rate for someone my age is 0.2%.

    So cycling 100km per week increases my chance of death by 5%, excluding beneficial factors. Pfft.

    Screen%20Shot%202018-02-21%20at%2014.45.16.png?v=d827caa2


  • Options
    #71
    Chips Lovell
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,269 Mod ✭✭✭✭Chips Lovell


    If your qualifier for an activity being dangerous is that someone is killed or injured while doing it, then a quite a broad range of activities can be described as dangerous. If it were the qualifier, activities such as getting out of the shower or gardening would be classed as dangerous (you are more likely to get injured gardening than cycling).

    What matters is not that accidents happen, but the relative risk of an accident happening.

    Overall fatality and injury rates are quite low, especially in the context of rapidly expanding cycling numbers.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    zulutango
    Registered Users Posts: 3,903 ✭✭✭zulutango


    The pedants are out in full force ...

    ok, fine, there is potential for injury. It's not dangerous :rolleyes:

    If you are cycling on irish roads, you must accept that there is a considerable risk to life and limb. Every cyclist knows this. We cycle regardless, we do what we can to mitigate it, but we know the risk is there.

    This argument that saying cycling is dangerous puts people off and therefore shouldn't be said is ridiculous. We can't just pretend those risks aren't there. We will get far more people cycling if we acknowledge the risks and push to have our streets and laws changes to reduce them, than we will by burying our heads in the sand and saying cycling isn't dangerous, lest that put people off cycling.


  • Options
    #73
    Lumen
    Registered Users Posts: 31,031 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    Deedsie wrote: »
    The correlation between their mass and their physical development. Quite clear I would have thought?
    I reject the argument that children are worse at controlling bicycles.

    My 12 y/o son is better at mountain biking than me, despite having less experience. He is an unremarkable child.


  • Options
    #74
    GreeBo
    Registered Users Posts: 27,121 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    cython wrote: »
    To be fair to the bus driver, the road layout at those lights is crappy - even if the bus could have stopped safely before the lights, it would have been blocking up the yellow box which is simply trading one violation for another. When the driver entered said box the light was green, so proceeding through the lights (in particular as I'm not sure stopping would have been feasible without fairly harsh braking) was IMHO the preferable option there. Were it a car I'd be less forgiving, as they could in theory sit in the end of the box without necessarily being an obstruction depending on the layout.

    You mean the yellow box that you are not supposed to enter until you are sure you can clear it...?


  • Options
    #75
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,790 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    Lumen wrote: »
    So cycling 100km per week increases my chance of death by 5%, excluding beneficial factors. Pfft.
    just to be safe (pun unintended) it's worthwhile emphasising the 'by' there, which some people will read as 'to', possibly.


  • Options
    #76
    greenspurs
    Registered Users Posts: 10,313 ✭✭✭✭greenspurs


    Its down to manners + respect.

    The majority of people now HAVE to get in front of you, they HAVE to get ahead, they HAVE to pull out in front of you and then turn off 100m down the road, they HAVE to squeeze ahead of you at that yellow box and NOT let you out.
    Its the same whether you are in a car/van/truck or if you are on a bike. Except people on bikes get killed.

    Its a societal thing now, Manners come second to Position on the road.
    247469249_2017413731748359_7675802031635703098_n.jpg

    "Bright lights and Thunder .................... " #NoPopcorn



  • Options
    #77
    Lumen
    Registered Users Posts: 31,031 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    zulutango wrote: »
    This argument that saying cycling is dangerous puts people off and therefore shouldn't be said is ridiculous. We can't just pretend those risks aren't there. We will get far more people cycling if we acknowledge the risks and push to have our streets and laws changes to reduce them, than we will by burying our heads in the sand and saying cycling isn't dangerous, lest that put people off cycling.
    We constantly make improvements to the engineering of roads to reduce vehicle occupant casualty rates.

    Yet coverage of motoring is not dominated by safety discussions.

    Therefore I reject the argument that public safety discussions are necessary for engineering improvements.


  • Options
    #78
    zulutango
    Registered Users Posts: 3,903 ✭✭✭zulutango


    Lumen, your rejection isn't worth a curse if it's based on false equivalences.


  • Options
    #79
    TallGlass
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,935 ✭✭✭TallGlass


    VW 1 wrote: »
    The bus also goes straight through the amber light instead of stopping. Everyone's at fault!

    Amber means prepare to stop if safe to do so. Stopping a double decker bus in that space of time, would have been highly dangerous. Bus driver done the safe thing and also obeyed the rules of the road.


  • Options
    #80
    Lumen
    Registered Users Posts: 31,031 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    zulutango wrote: »
    Lumen, your rejection isn't worth a curse if it's based on false equivalences.
    Well fortunately it isn't! :pac:


  • Options
    #81
    WoollyRedHat
    Registered Users Posts: 10,462 ✭✭✭✭WoollyRedHat


    Lumen wrote: »
    All road users should proceed at a speed such that they can stop in the space that they can see to be clear and is likely to remain so.

    You'd have to be going so slow in that case, like I said it's a blind spot, easier said and done but in practice..


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    greenspurs
    Registered Users Posts: 10,313 ✭✭✭✭greenspurs


    Enjoy the petty squabbling over minute points of opinion..... :rolleyes:

    Slan.
    247469249_2017413731748359_7675802031635703098_n.jpg

    "Bright lights and Thunder .................... " #NoPopcorn



  • Options
    #83
    GreeBo
    Registered Users Posts: 27,121 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    Keeks wrote: »
    Haven't you just painted everyone with the same brush by saying Everyone breaks the rules to some degree.

    And that is the problem....once you start to break rules, you enter into your own judgement as to what to break and what not to break......and things like morality and perceived risk come into play.

    Once one numpty parks like that (bike land or otherwise) it encourages others to do it.

    Actually parking a clamped car there would do more to deter others than anything else.

    We have a terrible problem in this country in that we seem to ignore minor infractions under the misguided idea that we should focus on the major ones.

    This completely ignores the results of things like Broken Mirror...and in fact any study on human nature.

    If you police the minor laws overall crime levels drop.
    But when you live in a country where the Police themselves are often seen breaking these laws its no wonder that Joe Public follows suit.:mad:


  • Options
    #84
    Keeks
    Registered Users Posts: 2,199 ✭✭✭Keeks


    Lumen wrote: »
    Here are some stats from the UK.

    If I cycle 100km per week I have approx 0.01% chance being killed per year.

    The average death rate for someone my age is 0.2%.

    So cycling 100km per week increases my chance of death by 5%, excluding beneficial factors. Pfft.

    Screen%20Shot%202018-02-21%20at%2014.45.16.png?v=d827caa2

    I hate statistical comparison like and I am not sure it is a fair comparison.

    This is per miles traveled, but in 1 hour of travelling I can go a lot further in a car than a bicycle, so to travel the 1 billion miles for the statistcs the cyclist will spend more time on the road at risk than the motorist.

    So is it a good comparison?


  • Options
    #85
    Chips Lovell
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,269 Mod ✭✭✭✭Chips Lovell


    Anyway, I don't know where most people are based, but I cycle in Dublin and I've never had any difficulty passing a parked car.

    That's not to say I condone inconsiderate parking. Just that it's well down the list of hazards/annoyances.


  • Options
    #86
    Lumen
    Registered Users Posts: 31,031 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    Keeks wrote: »
    I hate statistical comparison like and I am not sure it is a fair comparison.

    This is per miles traveled, but in 1 hour of travelling I can go a lot further in a car than a bicycle, so to travel the 1 billion miles for the statistics the cyclist will spend more time on the road at risk than the motorist.

    So is it a good comparison?
    Perhaps, but I wasn't making a comparison with other modes of transport, those stats just happened to be in the same table.


  • Options
    #87
    Lumen
    Registered Users Posts: 31,031 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    WoollyRedHat wrote: »
    You'd have to be going so slow in that case, like I said it's a blind spot, easier said and done but in practice..
    It's not hard, it just requires care and attention.

    If you cycle or drive at speed into spaces that you cannot positively see to be clear and are likely to remain so, you're going to have an accident sooner or later.


  • Options
    #88
    GreeBo
    Registered Users Posts: 27,121 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    Baron de Charlus wrote: »
    Anyway, I don't know where most people are based, but I cycle in Dublin and I've never had any difficulty passing a parked car.

    That's not to say I condone inconsiderate parking. Just that it's well down the list of hazards/annoyances.

    Assuming a door doesnt suddenly open and the cars overtaking you give sufficient room for you to avoid said door....

    Its wrong so should be policed, its trivial to police and would pay for itself yet we ignore it "ah shure tis grand"


  • Options
    #89
    Lumen
    Registered Users Posts: 31,031 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    GreeBo wrote: »
    Assuming a door doesnt suddenly open and the cars overtaking you give sufficient room for you to avoid said door....
    So you cycle out far enough for that not to be a problem.


  • Options
    #90
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,790 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    Baron de Charlus wrote: »
    Anyway, I don't know where most people are based, but I cycle in Dublin and I've never had any difficulty passing a parked car.
    you are a confident, bronzed cycling god though, who can maintain 50km/h on the flat.

    a 70 year old woman may not be as confident at pulling off the moves you can manage, as you are though.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    Chips Lovell
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,269 Mod ✭✭✭✭Chips Lovell


    GreeBo wrote: »
    Assuming a door doesnt suddenly open and the cars overtaking you give sufficient room for you to avoid said door....

    Staying out of the door zone is part of any safe overtaking manoeuvre.
    magicbastarder wrote: »
    you are a confident, bronzed cycling god though, who can maintain 50km/h on the flat.

    a 70 year old woman may not be as confident at pulling off the moves you can manage, as you are though.

    A.) Believe me, I'm not. And B.) even if I were I would be a right w**nker if I was doing the "I'm alright Jack" thing of asserting that if I can do it, whether anyone else can doesn't matter to me. I wouldn't be saying it if I didn't think cyclists young and old could manage.


Advertisement