Baron de Charlus wrote: » https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NGdQDEkWCE
Don't Chute! wrote: » Would you ever give it a rest.
Don't Chute! wrote: » You're constantly bringing up this rubbish about cyclists deliberately taking over the roads to piss drivers off. It's nonsense.
Don't Chute! wrote: » 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.
PlaneSpeeking wrote: » So, to allow the small but existing minority of groups who hold up road users - it's worth saving 6 measly seconds ????
PlaneSpeeking wrote: » Quick query - are there RSA videos or similar giving cyclists advice on how they should behave on roads ?
Rennaws wrote: » I've mentioned Windgates because it's an obvious one with a slow climber and no room to get past.
Baron de Charlus wrote: » What?
07Lapierre wrote: » Yes there are.. you'll find them on youtube (RSA have their own Youtube channel) and they've all been on TV
PlaneSpeeking wrote: » Thought it was self explanatory. Allowing two abreast means allowing the groups who don't all behave like those in the video. If you do that, then cars can pass in six seconds less. Yet my question was "is it worth the minute amount of time to permit potentially unsafe groups on the road ?" Really did not think that would need a further explanation.
Podge_irl wrote: » You don't save 6 seconds. It greatly increases your opportunities to safely pass the group in the first place.
PlaneSpeeking wrote: » Then why the stopwatch ?
PlaneSpeeking wrote: » Allowing two abreast means allowing the groups who don't all behave like those in the video.
Rennaws wrote: » That's great. Now all we need is cyclists to actually cycle like that as opposed to the wobbling mass of fat taking up the entire lane that we have now and we'll be good.
07Lapierre wrote: » A lot can happen in 6 seconds on the road. watch any "Car Crash" videos on youtube and you'll see that the longer it takes to overtake, the greater the risk (to everyone) It's in everyone's interest to keep overtaking time to a minimum. and to be honest, having to explain this to someone who i assume drives on our roads is scary!
07Lapierre wrote: » yep... this one?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swnGEbKp7QY
dense wrote: » Sorry that says nothing about it being safer or shows the RSA recommending that they ride two abreast. It simply says they may ride two abreast, which is not in dispute. So, as I said, I haven't seen any ad by the RSA making claims that it is not only safer but that they recommend cyclists to cycle two abreast as it's safer. Is there really one?
partyguinness wrote: » It seem that the 'Bastard Cyclist' brigade are bemoaning being held up on the road. Passing out cyclists safely might add 10-15 seconds to your journey at best. I cannot imagine for one moment that makes any difference to your journey and you are just spoiling for an argument. Have you ever thought about planning your journey a bit better so that the precious 10 seconds effort it took does not have such a devastating life changing impact on your journey? Expect there to be cyclists- live with it. It's not like cyclists suddenly appeared on the roads in recent years. There will always be there.
ballyharpat wrote: » I think he was actually hoping you didn’t mean what you actually meant. So you are saying that the safety of cyclists does not matter? And that saving time and making it easier for drivers to pass does not matter? If you cannot pass a single cyclist safely, it is unlikely you can pass 2 cyclists safely. If on a narrow road or where a cyclist can see the road up ahead, but the driver can’t, they cyclists should signal for the driver to pass when safe to do so. It is no wonder the roads are so dangerous if people with your attitude and lack of skill and care are actually driving on the road. I hate to think that I drive the same roads as you, not to mind walk or cycle them with you- Jesus wept.
ballyharpat wrote: » I hate to think that I drive the same roads as you, not to mind walk or cycle them with you- Jesus wept.
prinzeugen wrote: » 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 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.
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.
Rennaws wrote: » 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.
Patww79 wrote: » This post has been deleted.
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.
gctest50 wrote: » this sorta thing :
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.
Silent Running wrote: » 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.
Silent Running wrote: » Here's another view: cycling is dangerous. It get's 3-4 people killed every week. It should be banned.
P_1 wrote: » And tag the likes of Sticky Bottle, I Bike Dublin et al in it if you put it up on Twitter. Gobshiites like that who give the rest of us a bad name need to be named and shamed. I'm sick and tired of asshole cyclists being used as a stick to beat the rest of us up with
P_1 wrote: » Agreed. Calm, rational and educational discourse (on both sides) is needed. Yes cars can cause more damage but shrilly shouting "murderer" at people isn't going to solve this mess.
MarkY91 wrote: » I cycle on a regular basis. Don't drive at all. And even I think those lycra wearing cyclists holding up traffic are feckin eejits. Getting a bus to enniskerry to powerscourt, two cyclists kitted out in their Lance Armstrong wannabe clothing cycling too far out on the road so the bus couldn't pass it for a good couple of minutes. Well done lads holding a whole bus up because you don't move a couple of feet closer to the edge of the road.
partyguinness wrote: » It seem that the 'Bastard Cyclist' brigade are bemoaning being held up on the road. Passing out cyclists safely might add 10-15 seconds to your journey at best.
MarkY91 wrote: » I cycle on a regular basis. Don't drive at all. And even I think those lycra wearing cyclists holding up traffic are feckin eejits. Getting a bus to enniskerry to powerscourt, two cyclists kitted out in their Lance Armstrong wannabe clothing cycling too far out on the road so the bus couldn't pass it for a good couple of minutes.Well done lads holding a whole bus up because you don't move a couple of feet closer to the edge of the road.
MarkY91 wrote: » I cycle on a regular basis. Don't drive at all. And even I think those lycra wearing cyclists holding up traffic are feckin eejits.Getting a bus to enniskerry to powerscourt, two cyclists kitted out in their Lance Armstrong wannabe clothing cycling too far out on the road so the bus couldn't pass it for a good couple of minutes. Well done lads holding a whole bus up because you don't move a couple of feet closer to the edge of the road.
dense wrote: » Is it? I'm a motorist and cylist. I cycle with a partner and try to go single file because you feel like you're antagonising motorists by staying 2 abreast.
