Near misses - mod warning 22/04 - see OP/post 822

Seth Brundle · 06-07-2018 07:12PM

cython wrote: »

Had the cyclist stayed in line with the cyclists ahead of them, the car had loads of space.

Did the 1m minimum passing distance become law recently?

cython · 06-07-2018 07:17PM

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Did the 1m minimum passing distance become law recently?

Not that I know of, and not sure of the context of the selectively quoted part of my post? Do you contend that the driver was too close to the cyclist(s) being overtaken (EDIT to add) by the fallen cyclist or something?

site_owner · 06-07-2018 07:21PM

cython wrote: »

And yet the car was well away from the line of other cyclists...... As Cram said, two people at fault, cyclist failed to hold their line through the junction and didn't look/signal ahead of their overtake, with the net result that the driver squeezed them to the point of colliding. Had the cyclist stayed in line with the cyclists ahead of them, the car had loads of space.

And if the car hadn't sped up to undertake moving traffic with no care for the cyclists who could just have eaislly fallen it been avoiding a pothole...

It's madness that cyclists are defending this driving and blaming the victim.

cython · 06-07-2018 07:22PM

site_owner wrote: »

And if the car hadn't sped up to undertake moving traffic with no care for the cyclists who could just have eaislly fallen it been avoiding a pothole...

It's madness that cyclists are defending this driving and blaming the victim.

I'm blaming both of them, if you read and comprehend my post fully - if you want to go down that route, to me it's mad that people are trying to claim that the cyclist has absolutely no culpability. Such a view is blinkered in the extreme.

ED E · 06-07-2018 07:25PM

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Did the 1m minimum passing distance become law recently?

Its gathering dust on his desk despite his claims that its with the AG.

Seth Brundle · 06-07-2018 07:26PM

cython wrote: »

Not that I know of, and not sure of the context of the selectively quoted part of my post? Do you contend that the driver was too close to the cyclist(s) being overtaken (EDIT to add) by the fallen cyclist or something?

The cyclist moved but drivers are constantly to be wary of cyclists having to move to avoid obstacles. The driver didn't anticipate this and left far too little room.
Cyclist should have been more aware of traffic behind but the car was the one that made the choice to drive close to them. I completely blame the driver.

magicbastarder · 06-07-2018 07:48PM

site_owner wrote: »

And if the car hadn't sped up to undertake moving traffic

i don't see this here? there's two lanes there; the left one is the sensible one to be in anyway (the right hand lane has a filter for turning right so a motorist going straight on could get caught behind them if they stayed in the right lane).
there's absolutely nothing in the video to suggest the driver 'sped up' or was specifically in that lane to overtake on the left.
he was moving only fractionally faster than the car on his right, and (crude estimate) doing maybe 30 or 40km/h.
the only issue i see with what the driver did was not leaving enough space.

ct5amr2ig1nfhp · 07-07-2018 09:52PM

0:05, Why did you keep going up the cycle lane and side of the car when you saw the car was moving into the cycle lane?
The car was at fault but you put yourself at risk.

Chiparus wrote: »

2 within 200 mt, first guy was surfing the net on his phone, 2nd......she says she did not see me and I believe her.

Chiparus · 07-07-2018 10:47PM

Emmet Chubby Memory wrote: »

0:05, Why did you keep going up the cycle lane and side of the car when you saw the car was moving into the cycle lane?
The car was at fault but you put yourself at risk.

Because I felt I could make it through.

ct5amr2ig1nfhp · 07-07-2018 11:23PM

You made it past on this occasion. It was a silly risk to take given that you had plenty of time to back off or slow down to avoid a possible collision.

Chiparus wrote: »

Because I felt I could make it through.

Chiparus · 08-07-2018 09:41AM

Emmet Chubby Memory wrote: »

You made it past on this occasion. It was a silly risk to take given that you had plenty of time to back off or slow down to avoid a possible collision.

I was doing 10kmph, I could have stopped in a split second, like I did with the second incident. If you look and listen, I stopped pedeling once he starts to cross the line, and slowed down.
Cyclists deal with the net surfers all the time, they tend to slowly meander across lanes - sometimes you have to stop, sometimes it forces you onto the foot path.
Thanks for the advice.

Tenzor07 · 08-07-2018 07:16PM

Another day, another Taxi manages to take out two people on bicycles!

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/be-extra-vigilant-warning-after-taxi-collides-with-two-cyclists-37093266.html

DaveyDave · 08-07-2018 07:25PM

If there is a message for cyclists it is to be extra vigilant especially where it comes to taxis and buses where people are driving for a living and where attention can sometimes get distracted,

Instead of giving cyclists the message to be careful, tell that to motorists, specifically taxi drivers? He didn't even look or proceed with any caution.

Tenzor07 · 08-07-2018 07:28PM

DaveyDave wrote: »

Instead of giving cyclists the message to be careful, tell that to motorists, specifically taxi drivers? He didn't even look or proceed with any caution.

Appears that this Taxi driver overtook a car waiting in the que to go straight so he could cut through the yellow box junction and swing a left towards Donnybrook village, while not indicating or looking... typical!

magicbastarder · 08-07-2018 07:29PM

lest there's confusion, i think the cyclist is being quoted there, not the taxi driver.

Unknown Soldier · 08-07-2018 07:38PM

Tenzor07 wrote: »

Another day, another Taxi manages to take out two people on bicycles!

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/be-extra-vigilant-warning-after-taxi-collides-with-two-cyclists-37093266.html

That article is seriously wanting.

Who is "he" ?

"One of them" and then "He"

So, Stuff then video. In stuff is "One of them said the taxi driver did all he could to help them after the crash."

Then video.

Then Quote. "If there is a message for cyclists it is to be extra vigilant especially where it comes to taxis and buses where people are driving for a living and where attention can sometimes get distracted," he told Independent.ie

I don't think "he" was the cyclist. But they want you to think that.

"He added that the matter would not be going any further as there was no lasting injuries and any damage to the bikes had been covered."

The bikes, not his bike.

I thought I was done with this crap from nordie land. Seems not.

Chiparus · 08-07-2018 07:45PM

magicbastarder wrote: »

lest there's confusion, i think the cyclist is being quoted there, not the taxi driver.

Do you believe that?

magicbastarder · 08-07-2018 08:05PM

to be fair, i was following the logic of the flow of the article.
if the journalist was quoting the taxi driver, they're being misleading or amateurish.

magicbastarder · 08-07-2018 08:07PM

and yes, that's nothing to do with a driver being distracted, that's a driver cutting past stationary traffic (into the oncoming lane) and swinging a left. it's bad driving full stop, not distraction.

ewc78 · 08-07-2018 08:08PM

DaveyDave wrote: »

Instead of giving cyclists the message to be careful, tell that to motorists, specifically taxi drivers? He didn't even look or proceed with any caution.

Maybe everyone, cyclists and motorists, should take the message on board...

Chiparus · 08-07-2018 08:09PM

magicbastarder wrote: »

to be fair, i was following the logic of the flow of the article.
if the journalist was quoting the taxi driver, they're being misleading or amateurish.

They may be quoting the driver of the vehicle with the dash cam.

magicbastarder · 08-07-2018 08:11PM

Chiparus wrote: »

They may be quoting the driver of the vehicle with the dash cam.

if so, they've muddied the waters even further.

anyway, this is not a news story. cyclists relatively uninjured in collision with taxi is not news, it's just a chance to get people to perve at dashcam footage and drive clicks.

not that i'm averse to watching dashcam compilations myself, to be fair.

Chiparus · 08-07-2018 08:17PM

magicbastarder wrote: »

if so, they've muddied the waters even further.

anyway, this is not a news story. cyclists relatively uninjured in collision with taxi is not news, it's just a chance to get people to perve at dashcam footage and drive clicks.

not that i'm averse to watching dashcam compilations myself, to be fair.

Again We have no evidence the cyclists were uninjured.

magicbastarder · 08-07-2018 08:25PM

ewc78 wrote: »

Maybe everyone, cyclists and motorists, should take the message on board...

you don't see the irony though? cyclists advised to watch out for stupid drivers.
not stupid drivers advised not to be stupid. shift the burden of safety onto people who shouldn't be the ones bearing that burden.

if it was a video of a cyclist being an idiot, the 'cyclists advised to...' message might be pertinent.

Unknown Soldier · 08-07-2018 08:30PM

magicbastarder wrote: »

to be fair, i was following the logic of the flow of the article.
if the journalist was quoting the taxi driver, they're being misleading or amateurish.

Misleading. Though as you have said, as was wanted from you, and the majority. Job done!

It was wrote in that manner, aka a smoke and mirrors scenario. You saw what they wanted you to see. They do it quite a lot with SF and politics. Not that we all want to go there.

Chiparus · 08-07-2018 08:34PM

Its like the RSA advice to cyclists to obey the ROTR to gain drivers "respect"

"Always obey the Rules of the Road. Other road users will respect you more if you respect the rules."

ewc78 · 08-07-2018 08:49PM

magicbastarder wrote: »

you don't see the irony though? cyclists advised to watch out for stupid drivers.
not stupid drivers advised not to be stupid. shift the burden of safety onto people who shouldn't be the ones bearing that burden.

if it was a video of a cyclist being an idiot, the 'cyclists advised to...' message might be pertinent.

I think everyone needs to look out for their own safety as well as be mindful of others.
If I'm driving or cycling I always treat everyone else the same and try to be mindful of all road users but I also think everyone else is a threat to my safety so I always watch out for stupid drivers and also stupid cyclists and pedestrians etc etc
My own safety is my concern and I don't leave it in the hands of someone else who might not be as worried about my safety as I am. So yes I do think cyclists should be advised to watch out for stupid drivers.

08-07-2018 08:51PM

At least folks weren't slow to go check on them.

Tenzor07 · 08-07-2018 09:07PM

Article on Irish cycle: http://irishcycle.com/2018/07/08/shocking-moment-taxi-overtakes-on-a-solid-white-line-hits-cyclists-and-independent-ie-warns-cyclists/

magicbastarder · 08-07-2018 09:15PM

Unknown Soldier wrote: »

It was wrote in that manner, aka a smoke and mirrors scenario. You saw what they wanted you to see. They do it quite a lot with SF and politics. Not that we all want to go there.

i would favour the 'never mistake for malice what is easier to attribute to incompetency'. it's not like they had an editorial meeting on how to spin a video of a collision into an anti-cycling message. it was probably just given to a sub to lash up online.
if anything, i think the most likely source of invention in the article was the notion that the quotes have any basis in reality. probably invented all round, which is why the author was not keeping track of who actually said what.

Near misses - mod warning 22/04 - see OP/post 822

Comments