Cycling on paths and other cycling issues (updated title)

Shelga wrote: »

I found it! A thread where I can share my immense irritation at cyclists all over the footpaths these days. So selfish and inconsiderate. I am a pedestrian, a runner, a cyclist and a driver, and I don't understand all the bile aimed at joggers, who do everything they can to avoid people on the path, and are gone by in 1 second and take up barely any space.

Adult cyclists are all over the paths, everywhere you go- I swear it has increased tenfold since this pandemic started. Selfish morons.

I give a bit more leeway to the endless families I see with 3 kids on bikes and 2 parents, clogging up the entire footpath. How else are they meant to get to and from the park or wherever, I guess, if the kids are young- but it's still deeply annoying and I'm not sure of the legalities of it.

So good to vent

Agreed ... cycling on the pavement is selfish, inconsiderate, irritating and illegal. But in a lot of cases, it’s a lot safer than cycling on the road.. Cycling on the road is dangerous and stressful for cyclists and adds to motorists stress too. Not surprising that some People choose to cycle on the pavement.

Shelga wrote: »

I don't understand all the bile aimed at joggers, who do everything they can to avoid people on the path

good god, as if there wasn't another direction this thread could be derailed by.

ewc78

Shelga wrote: »

I found it! A thread where I can share my immense irritation at cyclists all over the footpaths these days. So selfish and inconsiderate. I am a pedestrian, a runner, a cyclist and a driver, and I don't understand all the bile aimed at joggers, who do everything they can to avoid people on the path, and are gone by in 1 second and take up barely any space.

Adult cyclists are all over the paths, everywhere you go- I swear it has increased tenfold since this pandemic started. Selfish morons.

I give a bit more leeway to the endless families I see with 3 kids on bikes and 2 parents, clogging up the entire footpath. How else are they meant to get to and from the park or wherever, I guess, if the kids are young- but it's still deeply annoying and I'm not sure of the legalities of it.

So good to vent

Yeah but motorists kill people...

(Yes I know that has absolutely nothing got to do with what you said, its just the common answer to everything on this thread)

Shelga

Also when I am cycling, can honestly say it is incredibly rare that I would break a red light, but I would say 95% of cyclists simply do not give a **** about the rules of the road and think red lights do not apply to them. Gardai need to start enforcing on the spot €100 fines, would be glorious to see.

Shelga

I found it! A thread where I can share my immense irritation at cyclists all over the footpaths these days. So selfish and inconsiderate. I am a pedestrian, a runner, a cyclist and a driver, and I don't understand all the bile aimed at joggers, who do everything they can to avoid people on the path, and are gone by in 1 second and take up barely any space.

Adult cyclists are all over the paths, everywhere you go- I swear it has increased tenfold since this pandemic started. Selfish morons.

I give a bit more leeway to the endless families I see with 3 kids on bikes and 2 parents, clogging up the entire footpath. How else are they meant to get to and from the park or wherever, I guess, if the kids are young- but it's still deeply annoying and I'm not sure of the legalities of it.

So good to vent

Stark

Nice. The AI must be able to see wavelengths outside of the bright yellow visible light spectrum.

LeinsterDub

07Lapierre wrote: »

There’s a car in there somewhere as well!

Hold on too yizzer hats but I had that video analysed by an AI and it suggests there is a high probability there are also scooters and pedestrians

https://twitter.com/BrentToderian/status/1273494631599095809

Stark wrote: »

I could only see one cyclist at the very start of that video Next to the dayglo bollards in the empty street.

There’s a car in there somewhere as well!

Stark

Hurrache wrote: »

07Lapierre wrote: »

This is Paris... TODAY! WOW

https://twitter.com/peterkinvara/status/1273888253683412993

Shocking, not a builders vest and nary a helmet to be seen. A&E departments won't cope with the mayhem.

I could only see one cyclist at the very start of that video

Next to the dayglo bollards in the empty street.

Hurrache

magicbastarder wrote: »

unfortunately there are still some bizarre examples of planning being granted; this is a recently completed small estate (10 houses) i pass occasionally on the bike, and it's a couple of km from the nearest town, no paths of any description provided (and they'd be economically unviable anyway). i just don't get the notion of wanting to live in the countryside, while living in a housing estate?

https://www.google.com/maps/@53.4703172,-6.3758863,243m/data=!3m1!1e3

Ha, before I even clicked the link I had an idea in my head of an area matching your exact description, and it was this.

On the former grounds of Ashbourne GAA club. Houses themselves are nice, I popped in when passing back when they were launching, but crazy money. Don't think they're all sold yet. Kilbride is the nearest village, but not on a pleasant road and commercially there's only a pub and petrol station (which only reopened relatively recently). Ashbourne is the other direction, but not within the distance where you might take a stroll to for a paper and coffee on a morning.

Hurrache

07Lapierre wrote: »

This is Paris... TODAY! WOW

https://twitter.com/peterkinvara/status/1273888253683412993?s=21

Shocking, not a builders vest and nary a helmet to be seen. A&E departments won't cope with the mayhem.

LeinsterDub

SeanW wrote: »

There seems to be a common thread on here. Two wheels good. Four wheels bad. Cyclists break the law - intentionally - as a matter of routine. Jumping red lights. Menacing pedestrians on the footpath. Disregarding lane direction controls. And in so doing, they present much more danger to pedestrians than some motorist returning to cruising speed when they leave a town as opposed to crawling through the countryside for 1/2 mile for no reason (Andy's 98%). But to listen to some here, Irish motorists who are generally among the world's safest, are the ONLY problem, and they need to be regulated to mind-blowingly absurd extremes.

I have no doubt that the driver who let their car roll away could have caused something worse. But I'm also certain that they didn't do it on purpose, and I'd expect they'll be reflecting carefully on their actions. They're a human being who made one silly mistake. Unlike some of the two-faced hypocrites jumping down their throat.

average_runner

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Just ever so slightly vague there. What do you reckon the pass rate would be for your beloved 'safest drivers in the world' if a mandatory retest was brought in tomorrow?

Do you think we'd get over 50%?

Your earlier comment was the best argument for mandatory retesting of drivers that I've heard in a long time.

Funnily enough I doubt 50% of the population would know the rules of the road that applies them, ie walkers, cyclists, motorists

[Deleted User]

SeanW wrote: »

I'm saying it's a lot of bullcrap for no reason.

Just ever so slightly vague there. What do you reckon the pass rate would be for your beloved 'safest drivers in the world' if a mandatory retest was brought in tomorrow?

Do you think we'd get over 50%?

Your earlier comment was the best argument for mandatory retesting of drivers that I've heard in a long time.

Agree.. building houses in the countryside where their are no pavements, no local train stations, no bus routes means that the only way people can get around is by car (unless they are keen cyclists!). Every house built means two more cars on the road! It’s madness.

unfortunately there are still some bizarre examples of planning being granted; this is a recently completed small estate (10 houses) i pass occasionally on the bike, and it's a couple of km from the nearest town, no paths of any description provided (and they'd be economically unviable anyway). i just don't get the notion of wanting to live in the countryside, while living in a housing estate?

https://www.google.com/maps/@53.4703172,-6.3758863,243m/data=!3m1!1e3

This is Paris... TODAY! WOW

https://twitter.com/peterkinvara/status/1273888253683412993?s=21

TaurenDruid

07Lapierre wrote: »

Sometimes Motorists and cyclists break The law intentionally and as a matter of routine. But there’s no getting way from the fact that us motorists must bear greater responsibility for road safety because cars are the ones that kill people.

In my opinion a lot of the issues that people have with cyclists would be solved if we had better cycling infrastructure. With better cycle lanes, their would be no need for cyclists to cycle on the pavement (yes I know some still would). With better cycling infrastructure, their would be more people cycling, which means less cars in our roads...but as we’ve seen during the last few weeks, less cars on our roads resulted in more speeding and no reduction in road deaths. None of the road deaths were cyclists or the result of a collision with cyclists. These are facts. You may not like it but cars are the problem when it comes to road safety.

Yes, this. I mean there are definite problems with the type of urban planning we (don't) have - large suburbs of low-density housing spread out over large areas and ribbon housing in the countryside - compared to, say, urban France or the Netherlands, that don't lend themselves to cycling being an easy option for many, but we can't solve that.

What we can do, however, is put in proper cycling infrastructure wherever possible, where it would benefit everyone - pedestrian, motorist and public transport users included. It always astounds me when a new housing development goes up and it might or might not have a cycling lane included, but still never has a segregated cycling lane. It should surely be a requirement for any new planning permission.

Unfortunately, what happens here is someone posts a genuine grievance about one particular thing that's annoying them - and cyclists on footpaths are annoying, inconsiderate and dangerous! - but the zealots jump in with whataboutery, further alienating people who would otherwise be supportive.

oh duh. i forgot about him.
(to be honest, i was wondering if pinch flat was also a term used in jazz!)

Duckjob

magicbastarder wrote: »

<scratches head about the jazz fan reference>

So was I

After a quick bit of googling I found this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thelonious_Monk

Hurrache

SeanW wrote: »

Pretty much every single post from your side has been "cyclists aren't the ones killing 2 or 3 people a week, ergo our profligate lawbreaking doesn't matter" yet when I suggest that an OAP isn't a horrible monster for letting their car roll onto some rocks, just a human being who made a silly mistake - quite literally hurting nothing/nobody but the drivers ego - that's bad?

There's been some blatant hypocrisy in this thread, but that was absolutely mind-blowing.

If someone does an Evil Knievel off a cliff on a bike it's likely only themselves they'll pancake. If they did it in a car the risk to others is much much larger.

Also, profligate

The gardai back that up.

SeanW wrote: »

There seems to be a common thread on here. Two wheels good. Four wheels bad.

I've 2 sets of 4 wheels. I remain a good person.

SeanW wrote: »

There seems to be a common thread on here. Two wheels good. Four wheels bad. Cyclists break the law - intentionally - as a matter of routine. Jumping red lights. Menacing pedestrians on the footpath. Disregarding lane direction controls. And in so doing, they present much more danger to pedestrians than some motorist returning to cruising speed when they leave a town as opposed to crawling through the countryside for 1/2 mile for no reason (Andy's 98%). But to listen to some here, Irish motorists who are generally among the world's safest, are the ONLY problem, and they need to be regulated to mind-blowingly absurd extremes.

I have no doubt that the driver who let their car roll away could have caused something worse. But I'm also certain that they didn't do it on purpose, and I'd expect they'll be reflecting carefully on their actions. They're a human being who made one silly mistake. Unlike some of the two-faced hypocrites jumping down their throat.

Sometimes Motorists and cyclists break The law intentionally and as a matter of routine. But there’s no getting way from the fact that us motorists must bear greater responsibility for road safety because cars are the ones that kill people.

In my opinion a lot of the issues that people have with cyclists would be solved if we had better cycling infrastructure. With better cycle lanes, their would be no need for cyclists to cycle on the pavement (yes I know some still would). With better cycling infrastructure, their would be more people cycling, which means less cars in our roads...but as we’ve seen during the last few weeks, less cars on our roads resulted in more speeding and no reduction in road deaths. None of the road deaths were cyclists or the result of a collision with cyclists. These are facts. You may not like it but cars are the problem when it comes to road safety.

Yes, some apologies may be in order.

This thread so far has struck me as a circlejerk between little Andy and his merry band of two-faced (or two-wheeled?) hypocrites. If there is wider water between AJR and some other posters that I did not recognise, I apologise for that.

TaurenDruid

SeanW wrote: »

Pretty much every single post from your side has been "cyclists aren't the ones killing 2 or 3 people a week, ergo our profligate lawbreaking doesn't matter" yet when I suggest that an OAP isn't a horrible monster for letting their car roll onto some rocks, just a human being who made a silly mistake - quite literally hurting nothing/nobody but the drivers ego - that's bad?

There's been some blatant hypocrisy in this thread, but that was absolutely mind-blowing.

In fairness to LaPierre, it's pretty much Andy and the jazz fan who are in the "Sure it's grand if cyclists break the law, hurting nobody but themselves"/"ALL MOTORISTS ARE EVIL SCUM!" camp.

"So what if a cyclist is on the path? Doing no harm to anyone. Motorists kill people, you know."

"OMG LOOK, a CAR! Parked on THE FOOTPATH!"

"Cyclists don't break red lights. And when they do, it's only to escape cars. CARS! THEY KILL PEOPLE YOU KNOW!"

There seems to be a common thread on here. Two wheels good. Four wheels bad. Cyclists break the law - intentionally - as a matter of routine. Jumping red lights. Menacing pedestrians on the footpath. Disregarding lane direction controls. And in so doing, they present much more danger to pedestrians than some motorist returning to cruising speed when they leave a town as opposed to crawling through the countryside for 1/2 mile for no reason (Andy's 98%). But to listen to some here, Irish motorists who are generally among the world's safest, are the ONLY problem, and they need to be regulated to mind-blowingly absurd extremes.

I have no doubt that the driver who let their car roll away could have caused something worse. But I'm also certain that they didn't do it on purpose, and I'd expect they'll be reflecting carefully on their actions. They're a human being who made one silly mistake. Unlike some of the two-faced hypocrites jumping down their throat.

SeanW wrote: »

Pretty much every single post from your side has been "cyclists aren't the ones killing 2 or 3 people a week, ergo our profligate lawbreaking doesn't matter" yet when I suggest that an OAP isn't a horrible monster for letting their car roll onto some rocks, just a human being who made a silly mistake - quite literally hurting nothing/nobody but the drivers ego - that's bad?

There's been some blatant hypocrisy in this thread, but that was absolutely mind-blowing.

My side? I don't speak for any "side". An OAP that lets a car roll away is a danger to themselves and everyone else. The case your referring to, the fact that no one was hurt was pure luck, so yes it's bad.

Pretty much every single post from your side has been "cyclists aren't the ones killing 2 or 3 people a week, ergo our profligate lawbreaking doesn't matter" yet when I suggest that an OAP isn't a horrible monster for letting their car roll onto some rocks, just a human being who made a silly mistake - quite literally hurting nothing/nobody but the drivers ego - that's bad?

There's been some blatant hypocrisy in this thread, but that was absolutely mind-blowing.

SeanW wrote: »

I thought that was your line - cyclists break every law in the book as a matter of routine, but we should let them get on with it because they're not hurting anyone? We shouldn't inconvenience cyclists by taking them off the footpaths?

Or did I read literally of your posts wrong?

Nope...I've been pretty consistent.

We need better enforcement of the ROTR for all road users.
Cycling on the pavement is illegal.

I've said this quite a lot.