Cycling on paths and other cycling issues (updated title)

boardise wrote: »

Could I not be injured , lose my footing and hit my head , be thrown out on to the road.? I fail to see how you or anybody can make light of this issue and dismiss it so cavalierly. It's not just discourteous - it's downright dangerous.
.

Do you think we should focus on issues where people could theoretically get hurt, or the issues where people actually do get hurt and indeed killed - such as the killing of close to one pedestrian each week on average?

Almost 100 pages and 1500 posts and what's been achieved......I'd say nothing.

boardise wrote: »

Are you being serious -why would I not be concerned and annoyed that without any warning a cyclist can fly past me from behind on a footpath -which has been a regular occurrence.

Could I not be injured , lose my footing and hit my head , be thrown out on to the road.? I fail to see how you or anybody can make light of this issue and dismiss it so cavalierly. It's not just discourteous - it's downright dangerous.

But I have to say now , having seen the calibre of some of the posts from the 'cycling lobby' on this thread -I can see where the boorish and anti-social behaviour emanates from.

You could also get a trial with Liverpool FC but worrying about the highly unlikely seems a bit pointless doesn't it?

ecoli3136 wrote: »

Cycling on pavements has become an absolute blight around me (Dublin, supposedly "respectable" if not outright "well-to-do" area).

They do it whether or not there are cycle lanes, at a decent clip, and rely on pedestrians getting out of their way to avoid collisions. Just no regard for anyone else. I'd love to say I am sure they're the small minority giving others a bad name but that is not my impression.

Anyway, nothing will be done about it. It's just a symptom of widespread deterioration in manners and decent behaviour.

Wait for the "but, but, but ... whatbaout, whatabout, whatabout, whatabout evil lawbreaking motorists." This might not take long.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Do the 98% of drivers that break urban speed limits give the other 2% of good drivers a bad name too?

BOOM! 6 minutes that must a personal record for near-immediate deflection :rolleyes:

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Yes but you weren't injured! I'm sick hearing these stories of how cyclists could have killed or hurt people. That just doesn't happen. Show me the statistics for this?
There have been 2 cases or something in the last 10 or 20 years where a cyclists and pedestrian were in an accident, and any time this comes up it is the only incidents people can ever find on the internet when people are going on about how dangerous cyclists are.
They are not dangerous and no one harmed you, so chill out.

Pedestrians in our major cities learn early that they'll have to negotiate with two-wheeled lawbreakers. That's why you don't have more death and injury. We are usually able to avoid you. That doesn't make cyclists paragons of virtue. Just two-wheeled hypocrisy.

SeanW wrote: »

Wait for the "but, but, but ... whatbaout, whatabout, whatabout, whatabout evil lawbreaking motorists." This might not take long.


BOOM! 6 minutes that must a personal record for near-immediate deflection :rolleyes:

Pedestrians in our major cities learn early that they'll have to negotiate with two-wheeled lawbreakers. That's why you don't have more death and injury. We are usually able to avoid you. That doesn't make cyclists paragons of virtue. Just two-wheeled hypocrisy.

Why do you think so many of them die when vehicles mount the footpath?
You would have thought they would learn eh?

SeanW wrote: »

how horrible motorists are for lawbreaking :rolleyes: and how motorists need to be subject to a whole load of absurd new regulations, because, reasons.

Because they're killing people every week, Einstein. In the most horrific way imaginable. Cyclists and pedestrians are not harming anyone.

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Because they're killing people every week, Einstein. In the most horrific way imaginable.

At among the lowest rates of any country in the world. Ireland is comfortably in the bottom 20 for road fatalities by every relative measure.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate

If Irish drivers were uniquely horrible and deserving of all the opprobrium, our road fatality statistics would bear that out. They don't.

Cyclists and pedestrians are not harming anyone.

Neither do, by far, the vast, vast, majority of motorists. But hey, keep up the hypocrisy.

SeanW wrote: »

At among the lowest rates of any country in the world. Ireland is comfortably in the bottom 20 for road fatalities by every relative measure.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate

If Irish drivers were uniquely horrible and deserving of all the opprobrium, our road fatality statistics would bear that out. They don't.

Neither do, by far, the vast, vast, majority of motorists. But hey, keep up the hypocrisy.

I see you're from the Trump school of statistics.

SeanW wrote: »

Where is this Trump school of statistics?

Do they teach students how Irish road fatality figures are among the lowest in the world, provably so, by every relative measure?

So if it's not a big deal that a few people die every week on our roads, and it doesn't bother you and you don't think anything should be done about it, why do people on footpaths bother you, when there's no proof that they are harming anyone?

Why do I keep biting...

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

They are not dangerous and no one harmed you, so chill out.

They are ****ing dangerous! Sure, there's only been two fatalities for pedestrians in the last few years caused by cyclists, but there have been plenty of near misses as well as actual impacts and collisions. People have mentioned them on this thread. Do they get reported, even by the person hit? No!

The bottom line is it's inconsiderate, dangerous, and illegal.

Nobody here is really complaining about kids on the path or someone on a commute using a footpath by a stretch of dangerous road.

Most of us who are complaining are doing so about the habitual footpath-cyclists who are doing so cos it's more convenient than finding an alternate to the one-way street, they're lazy, or in a hurry to make their next pickup/delivery, or "sure the pedestrians will get out of my way."

There are decent cyclists and I'm all for decent, segregated cycling infrastructure, but your consistent defence and excusing of footpath cycling in all circumstances really paints you, and by extension the cycling lobby, in a really bad light. Cop on.

TaurenDruid wrote: »

And pedestrians. And other cyclists. But whatevs, you've already said you pretty much don't care about the law being broken as long as nobody is killed, so that's grand, eh.

The next time you see a 5 year old cycling on the footpath, follow them home and when you have their address...dial your local Garda station and report them for "riding a bicycle without reasonable consideration".

Come back and tell us what the Guards say.

FYI, a cyclist can be fined for "riding a bicycle without reasonable consideration".

There has been only 1 pedestrian fatality in the last 15+ years as a result of a collision with a cyclist. That occurred earlier in the year.

The other fatality in recent years resulted in the death of the cyclist.....perhaps that's the other death you were referring to.

Spook_ie wrote: »

I'm not the one saying I have more chance of winning the lottery

Yes and?

SeanW wrote: »

This may come as a shock but most of us do actually spend time outside our "tin can" cars. Most of us are also routine pedestrians. As pedestrians on the streets/footpaths, we have get the F@#% out of your way, or else. Online, we have to read to heaps of bile and opprobrium for having the temerity to drive a car.

Where should I start?

Maybe it could be that every time a pedestrian has come onto this thread to share their experiences dealing with cyclists, one of you has almost immediately jumped down their throat with: BuT MoToRiStS AnD MuH SpEeD LiMiTs!!!! In a recent case, it took Andy only 6 minutes to jump down a pedestrians' throat with his usual whataboutery. Beyond that, it's 3 things:

1. That the bile and opprobrium is not just unwarranted, according to the evidence, but that the data pretty conclusively refutes the bullcrap emanating from Andy and his circlejerk.
2. That a pedestrian cannot even share stories of things that MOTORISTS do that threaten pedestrians - if they don't involve speed - because these things contradict the facile, single-minded narrative of "BUT MOTORISTS ARE KILLING EVERYBODY BY PLAYING ZOOM ZOOM!"
3. The fact that the people talking trash about Irish motorists and accusing people of lawbreaking are singularly, and in the most spectacular fashion imaginable, wholly and completely unqualified to accuse ANYONE of lawbreaking. Seriously, the absolute hypocrisy of an Irish cyclist accusing anyone of lawbreaking is mind-blowingly spectacular.

Your claim that the only reason pedestrians in Ireland arent being killed and injured by cyclists (zero) at the same rate as they are by motorists (1-2 per week) is because they've adapted and all learned to leap out of the way of impending death at the last second is probably the stupidest answer to a post Ive ever seen in 12 years of posting on Boards.ie or the internet in general, congratulations.

Your claim that the hundreds of people killed by cars in this country every year (not including the thousand or so killed by air pollution) is meaningless and excellent and to be celebrated by international standards makes you sound like a psychopath.