magicbastarder wrote: » any particular hotspots for it? (i'm curious if mobhi road features because the cycle lanes there are a mess. or phibsboro.)
ecoli3136 wrote: » I'm sorry but the above is as specific as I will be about my route.
ecoli3136 wrote: » Just to ask a question, if the state of a cycle lane in a busy urban area is so bad that people don't want to use them, why don't they just walk, including getting off and walking on the footpath where they are not happy to use the road?
meeeeh wrote: » I was never harassed on a bike in my life (I grew up somewhere else but I don't think attitude towards women is worse in Ireland.) I'm also not particularly frightened where I cycle however I did see some teenage girls cycling the other day and their skills were worse than my seven year olds. That can't be blamed on harassment but on lack of initiative to actually learn cycle properly. However I said they don't want to be associated with certain cycling groups not that they don't want to cycle. Just to add I'm not excusing harassment which I find despicable and I was a victim of some serious stuff im my teens and twenties but I never thought that was good enough excuse not try or do something.
TaurenDruid wrote: » If this were facebook or whatsapp, this would be where I'd insert the gif of the guy seated on a plane, doing the massive eyeroll and facepalm. While Spook_ie is perfectly capable of answering for themselves, I'm gonna go out on a limb here and guess that Spook_ie is probably talking about the Twitter users who called the I.T. article author a ****?
ecoli3136 wrote: » Whether you think cyclists shouldn't cycle dangerously on footpaths has nothing to do with how often I see this happen. The lengths you will go to avoid answering my question are extraordinary. There's no trick or threat in it. Cyclists. Should. Not. Cycle. Dangerously. On Footpaths. Strictly, they shouldn't be cycling on footpaths at all, but I'm not addressing what is merely obnoxious behaviour. That said, I have no problem answering your question. I walk to and from work every day Mon - Fri (rain or shine). It's about 40 minutes, from the Dublin 9 area to the North Side of the Quays. Between this and walking around the area in which I live, I'd say I experience or see an incident of a cyclist cycling at a speed on a footpath that risks injury to a pedestrian (and themselves probably) in the event of a collision about 2 or 3 times a week on average. Generally not in the city centre itself. Along the route. I'm not counting cyclists who go through pedestrian lights that are against them when pedestrians are trying to cross with the lights in their favour. I'm not counting young kids on bikes, and I'm not counting cyclists who cycle relatively slowly on footpaths, but if you don't get out their way they'll cycle into you.
magicbastarder wrote: » some of the footpaths are so narrow that walking a bike along it, if they're any way busy, could be a faff. also, if the cycle lanes are so bad that the only alternative is walking, we're debating the wrong thing.
AndrewJRenko wrote: » Are you counting cyclists cycling with no pedestrians near them?
AndrewJRenko wrote: » If you reckon that a post is off topic, you should report it to the moderators and let them decide.
ecoli3136 wrote: » I walk to and from work every day Mon - Fri (rain or shine). It's about 40 minutes, from the Dublin 9 area to the North Side of the Quays.
magicbastarder wrote: » OK; not sure why; i live near DCU so the above would be (would have been?) my main route towards the city.
ecoli3136 wrote: » Do you not see how odd that sounds? If the footpath is too narrow to walk a bike on it then how does that make it ok to cycle a bike on it?
ecoli3136 wrote: » No. You have to read my posts to understand them.
Hurrache wrote: »
boardise wrote: » Great to see you're a stickler for correct procedure Andy ol' chum. We can assume you are similarly eager that cyclists obey correct procedure regarding illegal cycling on footpaths i.e they don't do it and they don't defend it being done. Progress at last. Welcome to the club of decent citizens who stand for properly regulated use of public roads and footpaths . I thought you'd never come around but fair play to you -you've belatedly seen the light ...proper procedure is yer only man.
AndrewJRenko wrote: » Why did Spook_ie and you use the plural - users, abusers?
Abuse But then there was the abuse. I was called a c**t. I was told that I had “proven” that I was anticyclist by failing to condemn the behaviour of motorists (I did); that I wanted someone to hate and had decided to demonise cyclists; perhaps most ludicrously of all, that I was condoning child abuse.
Stark wrote: » https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/harassment-adds-more-danger-for-women-cycling-in-dublin-1.4093485 A few stubborn people will plough through sure. But plenty will find dealing with **** regularly just too exhausting and will end up not bothering.
Spook_ie wrote: » Because to my non paranoid mind this Suggests multiple tweets likely from more than one twitter account.
AndrewJRenko wrote: » Only one of those points is abuse though. The rest are just people who have a different opinion to Brian.
Zebra3 wrote: » Jaysus, child abuse is now in the thread. :rolleyes:
meeeeh wrote: » You consider someone accusing you of condoning child abuse a difference of opinion? If you were accused of something like that would it be a difference of opinion to you? Do you think child abuse is something we can deal lightly with. But then again I'm not surprised.
AndrewJRenko wrote: » Well, yes. I'm not saying it is right. I'm not saying it is nice. I'm not saying that I agree with it. But it doesn't seem to me to be abuse in itself.
meeeeh wrote: » I'd prefer to be called a cu*t. You can't throw that kind of allegation around lightly. Anyway what ever the accusation they won't win many people on your side.
AndrewJRenko wrote: » Who said it was thrown around lightly? Unless we can see the context, we don't really know.
Thargor wrote: » 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.
SeanW wrote: » Not sure where you're getting your data from. According to data provided by Andrew, we'd lost 18 pedestrians on the roads up to the end of May, double the usual of 9. While such an increase is of course a matter of concern, it's not "1 or 2 every week" like you claim. Source: https://www.meathchronicle.ie/2020/05/27/road-deaths-up-9-double-number-of-pedestrians-killed-this-year-from-2019/ Again, where in Sam Hill are you getting your data? The last year for which statistics were published, 2018, we lost 149 people on the roads. That's a major reduction on previous decades and is a low unmatched since the 1940s.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_road_traffic_accidents_deaths_in_Republic_of_Ireland_by_year And as for air quality, Irish air quality, again is also very good.http://waqi.info/#/c/53.28/-8.226/6.7z So, no, the idea that all us horrible Irish motorists are killing everybody is bullcrap. Further, I never said Irish motorists were perfect, just good. But it's funny how defending people against baseless bullcrap is "psychopathic" while picking on old people and using their misfortune to score cheap points (like Andy did) is ... perfectly fine? Would you care to explain that?
Spook_ie wrote: » The context would appear to have been in a discussion about cyclists, do you not think it weird that (assumed) cyclists throw accusations in that vein around ?
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w1.vanillicon.com/v2/14c64318899f842b6017cd62ee423490.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://www.boards.ie/applications/dashboard/design/images/banned.png)
