What's the obsession middle aged lads have with cycling?

24-07-2018 05:45PM

Blazer wrote: »

It’s very easy really.
Foreign= Courteous cyclists in single orderly file, slim, tanned, good looking.

Irish= minimum of 2 abreast preferably 3 abreast.
Rude , obnoxious , fat, sunburnt etc etc

Right so as I suspected, you didn't know anything about their nationality, but you made up a story to suit your own personal prejudices. Thanks for clarifying.

Internet Friend · 24-07-2018 05:58PM

Cycling 2 abreast is safer (legal and recommended) and faster to overtake safely

Fighting Tao · 24-07-2018 06:16PM

Mode of transport does not matter. If you are a clown using one mode, you are a clown using the others.

The Kop · 24-07-2018 06:17PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Right so as I suspected, you didn't know anything about their nationality, but you made up a story to suit your own personal prejudices. Thanks for clarifying.

You're some man to be accusing anyone of having personal prejudices lol

Atoms for Peace · 24-07-2018 06:58PM

RacoonQueen wrote: »

Where they shouldn't? Filtering is legal and generally safe. If a cyclist legally goes up the side of a vehicle which is not been driven properly, the error is the drivers.
By driven properly I also mean, indicating in good time rather than as you are turning so a cyclist knows to hang back and let you turn. Trucks/HGV's etc in the age of technology we have for vehicles now should be phasing in sensors/cameras etc to that the driver knows if something is alongside them or has come into the space in their blindspot.

Putting yourself in a vehicles blindspot is silly whatever the legality of it. Taking some self-responsibility and commonsense rather than expect somebody else or a sensor to protect you is the only option to stay safe.

Silent Running · 24-07-2018 07:08PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

We both know that your exaggerated story about your visit to the cycling forum isn't true, but if you'd like to share details of what username you were using at that time, we can all take a look and come to our own opinions on that incident.

Andy, Andy, Andy. That's twice you've told me what I'm thinking. Do you read minds over the interwebz. Are you a cyclic?

If so, you're not very good at it. Wrong at both attempts. Never mind, God loves a trier.

What was your username a couple of years ago? I'll tell you mine if you tell me yours.

Chips Lovell · 24-07-2018 07:14PM

Internet Friend wrote: »

Cycling 2 abreast is safer (legal and recommended) and faster to overtake safely

Get away out of here and stop bringing facts into the argument. You’re ruining it for everyone else.

meeeeh · 24-07-2018 07:27PM

magicbastarder wrote: »

in studies done in london and canada, it was found the motorist was to blame in the majority of KSIs.

And in the police report there it was stated that majority of those cases cyclist was at fault. The link was not about accidents in Canada or London.

Internet Friend · 24-07-2018 08:17PM

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

Get away out of here and stop bringing facts into the argument. You’re ruining it for everyone else.

My bad, forgot this was AH...rabble, rabble, rabble, don't even pay road tax joe! All I was trying to do was bring the kids down the road to school joe, wiggling their lycra clad bottoms in us poor motorists faces, won't somebody think of the children :eek:

prinzeugen · 24-07-2018 08:37PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

3-4 people killed by motorists on our roads each week, and you're focused on cyclists and horses. You're looking in the wrong place.

Have you found the evidence yet to back up your fake claim that "motorists" kill 3-4 each week?

Have you links to the Garda investigations and coroner's reports? You were asked for them last night.

The Rape of Lucretia · 24-07-2018 08:45PM

prinzeugen wrote: »

Have you found the evidence yet to back up your fake claim that "motorists" kill 3-4 each week?

Have you links to the Garda investigations and coroner's reports? You were asked for them last night.

Is that not the case ? 150-200 killed on the roads each year is 3-4 per week. There are very few cases of cyclists killing themselves when their bike 'goes off the road' at 2am with no other cyclists involved, or pedestrians dying when then are involved in a head-on walk into each other. So it is motorists killing 3-4 people per week.

meeeeh · 24-07-2018 09:17PM

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Is that not the case ? 150-200 killed on the roads each year is 3-4 per week. There are very few cases of cyclists killing themselves when their bike 'goes off the road' at 2am with no other cyclists involved, or pedestrians dying when then are involved in a head-on walk into each other. So it is motorists killing 3-4 people per week.

So do train drivers, pilots, electricity, water, fire pollution and so on... I think society accepted long time ago that there is a cost-benefit relationship to everything. Cycling is fun, it will not replace cars or other types of motorised transport, like computers won't be replaced by typewriters. There are ways of making roads safer for everyone but not by overly emotional exaggerated language that will just antagonize those who they are trying to win over with their arguments.

Blazer · 24-07-2018 09:25PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Right so as I suspected, you didn't know anything about their nationality, but you made up a story to suit your own personal prejudices. Thanks for clarifying.

Well definitely European from Denmark side I’d say.
And actually what cyclists should be giving out about instead of attacking motorists is the government for the crap investment.
I’d love to cycle on the road but I wouldn’t risk it. Too many bad roads and too many dickheads on it. There should be a separate road like in Holland for people to only cycle on.
I imagone a few hundred million easily but I reckon we’d make it back from healthier citizens as well as lower carbon emissions etx

25-07-2018 12:05AM

prinzeugen wrote: »

Have you found the evidence yet to back up your fake claim that "motorists" kill 3-4 each week?

Have you links to the Garda investigations and coroner's reports? You were asked for them last night.

Seriously? Evidence? Do you read a newspaper or watch TV news at all?

All the data is at: http://www.rsa.ie/en/RSA/Road-Safety/Our-Research/Deaths-injuries-on-Irish-roads/ just in case you've been living in a cave recently.

meeeeh wrote: »

So do train drivers, pilots, electricity, water, fire pollution and so on... I think society accepted long time ago that there is a cost-benefit relationship to everything. Cycling is fun, it will not replace cars or other types of motorised transport, like computers won't be replaced by typewriters. There are ways of making roads safer for everyone but not by overly emotional exaggerated language that will just antagonize those who they are trying to win over with their arguments.

Did I miss the memo on when society 'accepted' that 150-200 road deaths each year are some kind of inevitability? Did the memo go into much detail on how many people are allowed break speed limits, break mobile phone abuse laws, break drink driving laws?

The first way to make roads safer is for drivers to stop killing people. It doesn't require extra infrastructure or new laws - it just requires people to decide to generally stick to existing traffic laws and stop killing people.

Blazer wrote: »

Well definitely European from Denmark side I’d say.

So when you say 'definitely .... I'd say', that's a slightly confusing way of saying that you made a guess - you actually have absolutely no information about the nationality of the cyclists in question, right?

Blazer wrote: »

And actually what cyclists should be giving out about instead of attacking motorists is the government for the crap investment.
I’d love to cycle on the road but I wouldn’t risk it. Too many bad roads and too many dickheads on it. There should be a separate road like in Holland for people to only cycle on.

Tell you what, wait until you've managed to cycle a bit, then you can start lecturing cyclists about they should be giving out about. Many people get a different view of things when they come out from behind the windscreen.

Blazer wrote: »

I imagone a few hundred million easily but I reckon we’d make it back from healthier citizens as well as lower carbon emissions etx

Nice to see we can agree on something. There is good research showing that the return from investments in cycling infrastructure is one of the highest paybacks available for transport infrastructure.

Silent Running wrote: »

Andy, Andy, Andy. That's twice you've told me what I'm thinking. Do you read minds over the interwebz. Are you a cyclic? If so, you're not very good at it. Wrong at both attempts. Never mind, God loves a trier.

What was your username a couple of years ago? I'll tell you mine if you tell me yours.

I'm not the one making claims about how I was treated a couple of years ago. You've made a specific claim about how you were treated, so let's see whether that exaggerated claim stands up or not. So come on, prove me wrong with a link to your past experience and we can all see what happened.

Atoms for Peace wrote: »

Putting yourself in a vehicles blindspot is silly whatever the legality of it. Taking some self-responsibility and commonsense rather than expect somebody else or a sensor to protect you is the only option to stay safe.

It's a bit rich to be lectured on 'self-responsibility' by someone who thinks it's OK to take dangerous equipment out on a public road to be shared with cyclists and pedestrians, young and old, abled and disabled.

Fighting Tao wrote: »

Mode of transport does not matter. If you are a clown using one mode, you are a clown using the others.

Mode matters quite a lot. There are indeed clowns using all modes, but the clowns on bikes don't kill 3 or 4 people each week on our roads.

prinzeugen · 25-07-2018 12:35AM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Seriously? Evidence? Do you read a newspaper or watch TV news at all?

All the data is at: http://www.rsa.ie/en/RSA/Road-Safety/Our-Research/Deaths-injuries-on-Irish-roads/ just in case you've been living in a cave recently.

Where does it say that motorists were responsible for all these deaths? Nowhere because it is not the case as you claim.

It records how many died not HOW they died. That is the problem with your bullcrap accusations that motorists killed them all.

Sure I could say that every cyclist killed on the roads committed suicide by throwing themselves under a vehicle. I know that is not the case but it is as ridiculous as the crap you come out with.

prinzeugen · 25-07-2018 12:42AM

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Is that not the case ? 150-200 killed on the roads each year is 3-4 per week. There are very few cases of cyclists killing themselves when their bike 'goes off the road' at 2am with no other cyclists involved, or pedestrians dying when then are involved in a head-on walk into each other. So it is motorists killing 3-4 people per week.

A person jumped of a bridge on the M50 into the path of a truck a few years ago. The death was recorded by the RSA as a road death even although it was suicide. (Coroners verdict was misadventure IIRC). Did the motorist kill them?

As I said, unless you know the intimate details of EVERY road death in Ireland, cut the crap about motorists being killers.

Sal Butamol · 25-07-2018 01:03AM

prinzeugen wrote: »

A person jumped of a bridge on the M50 into the path of a truck a few years ago. The death was recorded by the RSA as a road death even although it was suicide. (Coroners verdict was misadventure IIRC). Did the motorist kill them?

As I said, unless you know the intimate details of EVERY road death in Ireland, cut the crap about motorists being killers.

There's enough people mowed down by drivers without needing to know the circumstances of every road fatality.

prinzeugen · 25-07-2018 01:18AM

Sal Butamol wrote: »

There's enough people mowed down by drivers without needing to know the circumstances of every road fatality.

That is true but not every single road death is caused by a motorist. That is what is being claimed by some here.

The Bishop Basher · 25-07-2018 05:24AM

tuxy wrote: »

I agree it would be better if they closed the road off and set up detours. The locals from each area should have the say in which they prefer.

Or how about we not close roads at all. The rest of us use them for things like visiting sick relations and getting them to hospital for appointments, we use the roads for getting in a few bits of shopping, attending funerals etc etc

You know, things we have to do in life.. none of us view the roads as a toy ora personal playground so why should cyclists ?

Take it off road.

Internet Friend wrote: »

Cycling 2 abreast is safer (legal and recommended) and faster to overtake safely

This line keeps getting trotted out over and over again ad nauseum and it’s simply untrue in so many cases.

I can understand your desire to have a chat given how boring cycling actually is and have no problem with this behavior on the hard shoulder of the N11 or anywhere else that you’re not obstructing vehicular traffic..

But there are numerous roads in my area where cyclists like to “take the lane” and block the road and you can hear them form the blockade, they actually take delight in doing so. In one case there’s excellent off road cycle lane facilities available but again they choose to block an entire land of vehicular traffic as they haul their fat asses up that hill. As I keep mentioning, I never have a problem with experienced cyclists. Just the slow fat ones wobbling all over the road and being a danger to themselves.

Then I had a moron decide to pass a slow cyclist while climbing windgates, problem is she had zero road awareness and swerved out in front of me. Luckily for her there was no traffic coming at us because I would have kept left given the circumstances and she would have paid the price.

Cyclists were fine until recently but lately there are just too many of them, particularly in large groups, often little to no experience on the road and taking this road hogging business to a new level and in places where it’s inappropriate.

I understand defensive cycling and I get the need for taking the lane but it’s become the default position for all cyclists groups on all roads and that’s not teneable for any road network.

Don't Chute! · 25-07-2018 05:44AM

Rennaws wrote: »

Or how about we not close roads at all. The rest of us use them for things like visiting sick relations and getting them to hospital for appointments, we use the roads for getting in a few bits of shopping, attending funerals etc etc

You know, things we have to do in life.. none of us view the roads as a toy ora personal playground so why should cyclists ?

Take it off road.

This line keeps getting trotted out over and over again ad nauseum and it’s simply untrue in so many cases.

I can understand your desire to have a chat given how boring cycling actually is and have no problem with this behavior on the hard shoulder of the N11 or anywhere else that you’re not obstructing vehicular traffic..

But there are numerous roads in my area where cyclists like to “take the lane” and block the road and you can hear them form the blockade, they actually take delight in doing so. In one case there’s excellent off road cycle lane facilities available but again they choose to block an entire land of vehicular traffic as they haul their fat asses up that hill. As I keep mentioning, I never have a problem with experienced cyclists. Just the slow fat ones wobbling all over the road and being a danger to themselves.

Then I had a moron decide to pass a slow cyclist while climbing windgates, problem is she had zero road awareness and swerved out in front of me. Luckily for her there was no traffic coming at us because I would have kept left given the circumstances and she would have paid the price.

Cyclists were fine until recently but lately there are just too many of them, particularly in large groups, often little to no experience on the road and taking this road hogging business to a new level and in places where it’s inappropriate.

I understand defensive cycling and I get the need for taking the lane but it’s become the default position for all cyclists groups on all roads and that’s not teneable for any road network.

Would you ever give it a rest. You're constantly bringing up this rubbish about cyclists deliberately taking over the roads to piss drivers off. It's nonsense. You've also brought up the roads in your area being constantly blocked by cyclists. Given that you've mentioned Windgates twice I'm going to assume you are around Greystones/Bray? If so could you please point out these roads to me because I must be missing them. As I've said before on another thread I drive more than I cycle and I could count on one hand the amount of times I've been "held up" by cyclists.

OldMrBrennan83 · 25-07-2018 06:19AM

This post has been deleted.

gctest50 · 25-07-2018 06:46AM

this sorta thing :

PlaneSpeeking · 25-07-2018 07:04AM

Or the idiot who STILL insists on cycling through Portlaoise ticket office and on to the platform. He did it in front of two ticket inspectors just now.

Nothing will ever be done, I've tried.

P_1 · 25-07-2018 07:09AM

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Or the idiot who STILL insists on cycling through Portlaoise ticket office and on to the platform. He did it in front of two ticket inspectors just now.

Nothing will ever be done, I've tried.

That guy sounds like a tool.

PlaneSpeeking · 25-07-2018 07:12AM

P_1 wrote: »

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Or the idiot who STILL insists on cycling through Portlaoise ticket office and on to the platform. He did it in front of two ticket inspectors just now.

Nothing will ever be done, I've tried.

That guy sounds like a tool.

He is.

silverharp · 25-07-2018 07:19AM

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Or the idiot who STILL insists on cycling through Portlaoise ticket office and on to the platform. He did it in front of two ticket inspectors just now.

Nothing will ever be done, I've tried.

video him and make him famous

PlaneSpeeking · 25-07-2018 07:25AM

silverharp wrote: »

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Or the idiot who STILL insists on cycling through Portlaoise ticket office and on to the platform. He did it in front of two ticket inspectors just now.

Nothing will ever be done, I've tried.

video him and make him famous

Definitely!!!!

Fighting Tao · 25-07-2018 07:28AM

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Or the idiot who STILL insists on cycling through Portlaoise ticket office and on to the platform. He did it in front of two ticket inspectors just now.

Nothing will ever be done, I've tried.

It’s sad that he is the responsibility of all cyclists.

PlaneSpeeking · 25-07-2018 07:32AM

Fighting Tao wrote: »

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Or the idiot who STILL insists on cycling through Portlaoise ticket office and on to the platform. He did it in front of two ticket inspectors just now.

Nothing will ever be done, I've tried.

It’s sad that he is the responsibility of all cyclists.

He very much isn't typical but his behaviour has a) caused injury (hit two people's legs with his pedals); and b) been ignored by Irish Rail staff via photos on Twitter, a complaint by email and both regular staff and ticket inspectors in person.

Silent Running · 25-07-2018 07:42AM

The crap you see Andy and co. coming out with about motorists killing cyclists is very deliberate language to demonise drivers. Nobody sets out on their drive with the intention of killing anyone. The stance taken by this type of cyclist is designed to antagonise motorists and shut down any conciliatory discussion. In other words: the usual bullshlte.

I'm a motorist. I've huge mileage under my belt. I've never killed a cyclist. Therefore motorists never kill cyclists. Makes about as much sense as the stuff they come out with.

Here's another view: cycling is dangerous. It get's 3-4 people killed every week. It should be banned.

Until the paranoia and hysteria is taken out of the conversation, nothing will change.

The bull from a couple of posters here is best ignored, and I'm going to follow my own advice here and ignore them.

What's the obsession middle aged lads have with cycling?

Comments