prinzeugen wrote: » What I find funny is that had this been a cyclist/motor vehicle incident, the usual suspects would be shouting about banning cars, phones, red light breaking.. Another motorist maiming a poor cyclist and the driver is automatically at fault and must have been on the phone etc.. Cyclist hits pedestrian.. Pedestrian must have been on the phone etc.. Some excuse to pass the blame onto someone other than the cyclist. That folks is why cyclists are hated so much. The attitude of a few.
prinzeugen wrote: » That folks is why cyclists are hated so much. The attitude of a few.
LeoB wrote: » Was just an interesting point. Some of the serious cyclists fairly belt along.Important to point out this is not an anti-cyclist post just a concern for health and well being of all roads users.
Weepsie wrote: » Drivers do this all the time too on roundabouts. Some people just don't know how to use them or try to cut ahead by purposely taking the wrong lane. Some also think that cyclists don't have the same rights of way on them that cars do. It's not a cyclists problem. It's a people problem Some people are either idiots, or ignorant.
Canis Lupus wrote: » Now that dash cams are so widespread we have entire youtube channels devoted to how sh*t road users are in general and you can often see a clip within of a cyclist doing something dumb or illegal and there are hundreds of comments hating on cyclists despite the users watching a 15+ minute video almost exclusively showing reckless and life endangering driving. I find that odd. I think every type of road user has this weird us vs them mentality. Must be human nature. Pedestrians, cyclists, motorcyclists, car drivers, van drivers truck drivers. It's always a different group who is at fault and doesn't know how to use the road. I assume motorists being the biggest percentage on the road is why cyclists get all the hate and whilst cyclists are no angels neither are any other group. The sooner people realise that the better.
masculinist wrote: » helmets should be compulsory. Thats another thing. You can drone on about safety all you want but if you refuse compulsory helmets while whinging about the dangers of roads then Im just laughing at you
masculinist wrote: » It will work now . They can even put it on the back of compulsory cycle helmets.
masculinist wrote: » It will work now . They can even put it on the back of compulsory cycle helmets. The tone and attitude above in posts towards my legitimate opinion is appalling by the way. I have been hit by cyclists cycling the wrong way down the street. I have also had a few close calls while holding my daughters hand crossing the road. Cyclists take full advantage of the legal situation car drivers are in and they cycle right up to the limits of the patience and skills of drivers. Theres a lot of arrogance and desire to dodge accountability from certain characters who cycle on this thread.
masculinist wrote: » He can hurl himself under my car and then sue me or get me blamed . I've had maniac cyclists taking left turns across my bonnet from my right side while I was creeping and peeping to merge from a minor to a major road. Theres no shortage of maniacs on bicycles. He can cause an accident and then flee the scene unidentified.
masculinist wrote: » And I'm not reading the hysterical gibberish on this page which is designed to waste my time and energy and distract from my main point. You lot can deflect all you want. A cyclist who obeys the rules of the road has nothing to fear from a registration plate
masculinist wrote: » It would enable me to use dashcam footage to report reckless dangerous cyclists who risk my life and my families lives when I am driving them from A to B And dont worry about not being held accountable - because the dashcams of the future will only get better as will the cctv. All I see are a pile of excuses from cyclists for dodging accountability. And personal insults towards drivers such as myself who support accountability for everyone. You cant have it both ways.
masculinist wrote: » That was an extremely immature comment. And that's the attitude those people who have valid criticisms and opinions of cyclists have to deal with. I will not allow you to drag my part of the thread down to your level . I gave my opinion as a gentleman unlike you.
Unlike drivers who are easily identifiable by any cycling crank with a video recorder.
masculinist wrote: » Cyclists are opposing measures which make them more accountable .
prinzeugen wrote: » What I find funny is that had this been a cyclist/motor vehicle incident, the usual suspects would be shouting about banning cars, phones, red light breaking.. Another motorist maiming a poor cyclist and the driver is automatically at fault and must have been on the phone etc..
H3llR4iser wrote: » I'd say it's for the victim and "holier than thou" mentality that quite a few cyclists show, more or less everywhere. As someone who drives, walks and cycles (at least in stints between bike thefts!!!), I can easily say that the vast majority of near misses I had was while I was crossing at a "green man" and some cyclist came barreling through the crossing with no regard whatsoever. The area around the Grand Canal and in general D2/D4 is particularly bad for this. The fact that most will reply "motorists do that as wel!!!" is exactly part of the problem - brushing the issue aside as "no big deal" when it's a cyclist doing something wrong.
Canis Lupus wrote: » I assume motorists being the biggest percentage on the road is why cyclists get all the hate and whilst cyclists are no angels neither are any other group. The sooner people realise that the better.
AndrewJRenko wrote: » It's not so much that motorists do it 'as well' - they do it so much better than cyclists that they manage to kill one pedestrian each week on average, whereas it is more than 15 years since a cyclist killed a pedestrian. Would the 4,500:1 ratio of deaths over the last 15 years possibly indicate that you're looking in the wrong place for your big deals?
H3llR4iser wrote: » This kind of comparison is EXACTLY part of the problem; The fact people don't die doesn't mean that the act (ignoring lights and pedestrian crossings) doesn't happen, nor makes it less problematic, nor less infuriating - especially when the violation is committed by someone who constantly points fingers at other categories. It's the same position of someone taking a different stance of other people speeding and himself doing it, because he "never killed anyone". Being so aware of the danger of the road, you'd expect cyclists to lead by example, but it doesn't happen. Basically a number (the most, I'd say based on pure personal observation) do to pedestrians what they say drivers do to them; The result is different just because of the masses and energies involved. TL;DR - lead by example, or don't go around pointing fingers. You'll see that the perceived "hatred" for cyclists will magically disappear.
bebeman wrote: » If you drive a car get a dash cam, relax and dont worry. DB would alway blame the driver when a bus was involved in a incident with a cyclist, then all the buses where fitted with CCTV, as soon as there is a incident they look at the video, most of the time the driver done nothing wrong and never hears of it again, CCTV is the best thing to ever happen. Get a dash cam , and dont worry about cyclists, let them worry about themselves
H3llR4iser wrote: » The fact people don't die doesn't mean that the act (ignoring lights and pedestrian crossings) doesn't happen, nor makes it less problematic, nor less infuriating - especially when the violation is committed by someone who constantly points fingers at other categories. It's the same position of someone taking a different stance of other people speeding and himself doing it, because he "never killed anyone".
H3llR4iser wrote: » Being so aware of the danger of the road, you'd expect cyclists to lead by example, but it doesn't happen. Basically a number (the most, I'd say based on pure personal observation) do to pedestrians what they say drivers do to them; The result is different just because of the masses and energies involved. TL;DR - lead by example, or don't go around pointing fingers. You'll see that the perceived "hatred" for cyclists will magically disappear.
AndrewJRenko wrote: » the maddening lycra (who knew that clothing could cause such infuriation, right?
AndrewJRenko wrote: » If swerving for a pothole causes a collision, that's a pretty good sign that the driver didn't leave anything near enough room to overtake safely. But regardless, why don't you answer your own question about how many cyclists have caused collisions (not accidents). .
magicbastarder wrote: » this is the one part of the debate that i find hilarious. the 'dressed like they were in the tour de france' line. people seem bizarrely focussed on the fact that many cyclists wear clothing which is specifically designed for the activity of cycling.
LeoB wrote: » I dont know the answer to how many accidents have been caused. Does anyone have an accurate number? I doubt it.
LeoB wrote: » Need to point out again sadly for the anti brigade, that is ant car or anti bike that this is about safety for people.
H3llR4iser wrote: » TL;DR - lead by example, or don't go around pointing fingers. You'll see that the perceived "hatred" for cyclists will magically disappear.
LeoB wrote: » I dont know the answer to how many accidents have been caused. Does anyone have an accurate number? I doubt it. Need to point out again sadly for the anti brigade, that is ant car or anti bike that this is about safety for people. Stay safe this weekend folks.
Lumen wrote: » I've been riding by example for ten years and yet the number of stupid rants about cyclists has increased.
AndrewJRenko wrote: » Yeah, helmets should definitely be compulsory for motorists, given that about 50% of head injuries occur in cars vs about 2% on bikes, even with airbags and seatbelts and all the other safety measures. The evidence of the value of cycling helmets is sketchy at best. In Australia, compulsory helmets has succeeded in deterring casual cycling, taking lots of teenagers, female cyclists and older cyclists off their bikes and back into there cars, adding significantly to traffic load and reducing population health. Be careful what you wish for.
AndrewJRenko wrote: » But beware of the 'sure they're all the same' false equivalence. Only one group of road users kills 3 or 4 people each week on the roads. Here's a hint: it's not cyclists or pedestrians.
Kevin Irving wrote: » . And in all cases of pedestrians and cyclists dying on the roads, none were even partially at fault, ever?
Kevin Irving wrote: » How does that compare per km driven/cycled, or, per hour of use? In a thread about cyclists, how is that of relevance anyway?
07Lapierre wrote: » There were 15 cyclists killed on our roads last year. From what I read (and this is just my opinion), there were two fatalities where the cyclist's may have contributed to the accident due to their own inexperience. I didn't read anything about the other 13 incidents that would indicate who was at fault. IMO, it could also be argued that if the truck drivers involved were more experienced/cyclist aware, they would have exercised more caution when turning left. It could also be argued that the layout of the junctions were dangerous (for cyclists) I also remender last year reading about a schoolboy that was killed while crossing the road. And i recall reading about a pedestrian that collapsed onto the road and was run over by a car, but that was a few years ago.
AndrewJRenko wrote: » So why the obsession with all the terrible things that cyclists do
07Lapierre wrote: » Not sure what can be deduced from such small numbers though. Our roads are dangerous places unless your surrounded by a metal box, airbags etc.?
Carawaystick wrote: » Or our roads are dangerous places because you're surrounded by metal boxes. Remove them and very few people would be killed on the roads.
jaxxx wrote: » I don't know if this is just a Limerick thing or not, but the amount of cyclists in the city that cycle the wrong way, even on one way streets is getting scary!
