Cycling on paths and other cycling issues (updated title)

No, I've NEVER had a motorist directly aim their car at me. Never.

magicbastarder

SeanW wrote: »

Nobody is excusing red light jumping by motorists. Even "safe" RLJing by motorists in the first few seconds of the red phase is an inconvenience to pedestrians
But as we've seen, cyclist in our major cities tend to act very aggressively towards pedestrians, and have a holier-than-thou attitude to motorists who by and large are not terrible.

this thread keeps on giving. ever had someone drive a car at you - deliberately or carelessly - in a way that you get a nice adrenaline kick of 'oh ****, this could get very nasty very quickly'?
it happened me today. an SUV driver pulled out across in front of me without looking near sutton village, and seemed surprised that i was there, despite having been in view of her wing mirror for about five seconds before it happened.
regarding a situation with a cyclist where i've thought the same thing (as a pedestrian); it has happened me twice, that i can remember.

i've had people deliberately swerve their cars at me, whether for their own enjoyment or out of some sense of duty towards supposedly hated cyclists. it's not fun. it probably counts as assault.

Hurrache wrote: »

Have you really not realised it's been a joke of a thread for weeks now in which attitudes like yours have been openly mocked?

Oh that's what road victims were used for. Thanks for confirming.

And yes I noticed the mocking and knew exactly what it was about. And my point was it won't win you any friends. Funny thing is never actually overly commented on behaviour of cyclists and drivers, just on the motives of posters here. But mock away.

Have you really not realised it's been a joke of a thread for weeks now in which attitudes like yours have been openly mocked?

Hurrache wrote: »

Same to you, Laurel and Hardy have nothing on you.

Oh so it's a comedy. I'm glad it entertains you.

BTW I never claimed I'm particularly nice or good or righteous. (Neither I trust those who do.)

Same to you, Laurel and Hardy have nothing on you.

Hurrache wrote: »

You think this thread had reached the lowest depths and you come along and pathetically scrape the bottom, and other eejits thank it.

You don't notice the glee around when another person gets killed? The enthusiastic digging of the details and then using it to win arguments. There is a reason I tend not to read too many accident and crime reports or watch breeding videos. If those close to the victim want to use tell their story then fine but otherwise it's often just using dead people as pawns for cheap point scoring.

You might accuse me scrapping the bottom but maybe you and some here should look into the mirror every so often.

SeanW wrote: »

Because Andy hasn't been using other people's misfortune to push his agenda? Did you miss the part where he picked on some old people to score cheap points?

Grow the **** up.

Hurrache wrote: »

You think this thread had reached the lowest depths and you come along and pathetically scrape the bottom, and other eejits thank it.

Because Andy hasn't been using other people's misfortune to push his agenda? Did you miss the part where he picked on some old people to score cheap points?

07Lapierre

Cycling on the pavement is illegal. It’s annoying, it’s possibly antisocial and the Gardai give it the attention it deserves.

The End

[Deleted User]

meeeeh wrote: »

This is like insisting that people should use typewriters because computers make things too easy.

Not really. It's more like insisting that those people over there get to use the computer now because the other people over here have been hogging the computer for decades.

meeeeh wrote: »

Well he is happy when someone gets killed on the roads because it gives him more material here. So maybe...

You think this thread had reached the lowest depths and you come along and pathetically scrape the bottom, and other eejits thank it.

SeanW wrote: »

I'm not sure the poster is trolling. They could actually be deranged enough to be serious.

Well he is happy when someone gets killed on the roads because it gives him more material here. So maybe...

meeeeh wrote: »

This is like insisting that people should use typewriters because computers make things too easy. Anyway I'm certain our dog has two hamsters on a wheel operating her but even she would come up with more intelligent trolling.

Edit: I 'm talking about button nonsense.

I'm not sure the poster is trolling. They could actually be deranged enough to be serious.

This is like insisting that people should use typewriters because computers make things too easy. Anyway I'm certain our dog has two hamsters on a wheel operating her but even she would come up with more intelligent trolling.

Edit: I 'm talking about button nonsense.

Pinch Flat wrote: »

the hypocrisy is gas.

It would be if actually defended early-stage RLJing.

Thargor

SeanW wrote: »

How many more straw men are you going to beat up? Where did I defend any red light jumping motorist? :eek:

The bit where you called red light jumping by a motorist forcing pedestrians to wait on a green man as safe and only an inconvenience when its actually a major cause of fatal traffic accidents?

SeanW wrote: »

Anyone who has been a pedestrian in Dublin for more than 5 minutes will get a sense for the things they have to watch out for. Cyclists menacing them on the footpath and "negotiating" their way through pedestrians at junctions where they should be stopped on red. Motorists who force them to wait a few seconds at "green man" crossings by running a fresh red.

Why do you keep talking like these things are equivalent in any way? One is mildly annoying, the other results in death. Your bias is so ridiculous, the cyclist is "menacing" but the motorist is "just making them wait a few seconds".

SeanW wrote: »

Meanwhile things motorist have done that DO put me in danger ... well those have nothing to do with "breaking muh speed limits" so they are irrelevant according to some.

I have no idea what this means, there are no speed limits on bikes for obvious reasons, the time between fatal accidents caused by cyclists is measured in decades, breaking speed limits in a motor vehicle especially with cyclists and pedestrians around is extremely dangerous and the time between fatalities is measured in days.

Pinch Flat

Thargor wrote: »

So when a motorist jumps the red light its "safe" and just "inconvenient" to you the pedestrian and every other road user at the junction whose life they just risked for their own selfish convenience but when a cyclist does it even though nobody but themselves is put at risk its aggression? Sanctimonious hypocrisy indeed.

the hypocrisy is gas.

[Deleted User]

SeanW wrote: »

What use would motorist call buttons provide that would justify the enormous expense of installing them and the problems they would cause for every driver?

No more expensive than pedestrian buttons, surely? I'm not suggesting that everything should be changed overnight, but they could be replaced gradually over time, as junctions are being upgraded.

Why is it so unthinkable that drivers should have to do what others have to do every day? In the city centre particularly, there are way more pedestrians than drivers on the streets, so why shouldn't pedestrians get priority?

SeanW wrote: »

Your examples are all cherry picked. Most of us use the roads daily and see that most red light jumping by motorists is in the first few seconds of the red phase. No-one has denied that late stage RLJing by motorists occurs from time to time. It's just not the rule.

When you're haggling over whether motorists blew the red light by a large or a small margin, you've kinda lost already.

But the fact that I was able to record two incidents within 1km of each other over the course of the week would suggest that the late stage RLJing is perhaps not quite as 'exceedingly rare' as some have suggested.

How many more straw men are you going to beat up? Where did I defend any red light jumping motorist? :eek:

Anyone who has been a pedestrian in Dublin for more than 5 minutes will get a sense for the things they have to watch out for. Cyclists menacing them on the footpath and "negotiating" their way through pedestrians at junctions where they should be stopped on red. Motorists who force them to wait a few seconds at "green man" crossings by running a fresh red.

ANY observant pedestrian will be aware of what is going on. It should not happen, but that doesn't make it the crime of the century.

Meanwhile things motorist have done that DO put me in danger ... well those have nothing to do with "breaking muh speed limits" so they are irrelevant according to some.

Thargor

SeanW wrote: »

Nobody is excusing red light jumping by motorists. Even "safe" RLJing by motorists in the first few seconds of the red phase is an inconvenience to pedestrians like myself who have to stop and wait at the green man. And nobody is defending genuinely awful things like causing a fatal accident while driving disqualified or anything of the sort. Nobody.

But as we've seen, cyclist in our major cities tend to act very aggressively towards pedestrians, and have a holier-than-thou attitude to motorists who by and large are not terrible. So when one is both a regular pedestrian and a regular motorist (doing their best to be observant and respectful in both capacities) we tend to consider the sanctimonious hypocrisy to be mind-blowing.

So when a motorist jumps the red light its "safe" and just "inconvenient" to you the pedestrian and every other road user at the junction whose life they just risked for their own selfish convenience but when a cyclist does it even though nobody but themselves is put at risk its aggression? Sanctimonious hypocrisy indeed.

Yes, I don't like sanctimonious two-wheeled hypocrites. You got me. :rolleyes:

SeanW wrote: »

Nobody is excusing red light jumping by motorists. Even "safe" RLJing by motorists in the first few seconds of the red phase is an inconvenience to pedestrians like myself who have to stop and wait at the green man.

But as we've seen, cyclist in our major cities tend to act very aggressively towards pedestrians, and have a holier-than-thou attitude to motorists who by and large are not terrible. So when one is both a regular pedestrian and a regular motorist (doing their best to be observant and respectful in both capacities) the hypocrisy tends to be overwhelming.

You still struggling with your obsession too Sean?

You might get a group deal on counseling.

It's an obsession, there's no other explanation why days upon days you post the same thing and don't take this thread for the nonsense and stupidity of it that most others accepted a long time ago.

Thargor wrote: »

Jesus Christ can you not even think about it for a second? They're not the same thing. When a cyclist runs a red light nothing happens and if it does its only to themselves, when a driver runs a red light innocent people get killed, over and over again:

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/truck-driver-who-broke-red-light-and-killed-pedestrian-21-jailed-for-three-years-39295075.html

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/man-24-who-died-in-crash-was-disqualified-driver-1.4118640

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/two-year-sentence-for-driver-who-killed-cyclist-after-running-red-light-34827328.html

Its okay for me to point a water pistol at someone, its not okay to point a loaded shotgun at someone, they are not equivalent, is it that difficult to grasp?

Nobody is excusing red light jumping by motorists. Even "safe" RLJing by motorists in the first few seconds of the red phase is an inconvenience to pedestrians like myself who have to stop and wait at the green man. And nobody is defending genuinely awful things like causing a fatal accident while driving disqualified or anything of the sort. Nobody.

But as we've seen, cyclist in our major cities tend to act very aggressively towards pedestrians, and have a holier-than-thou attitude to motorists who by and large are not terrible. So when one is both a regular pedestrian and a regular motorist (doing their best to be observant and respectful in both capacities) we tend to consider the sanctimonious hypocrisy to be mind-blowing.

TaurenDruid wrote: »

Oh? If you're there every day, then you're perfectly placed to see the amount of red-light breaking from cars and cyclists, and you'll also notice that cars do it for a couple of seconds, while cyclists go through at any stage.

You're also well placed to head down to the corner of Stephen's Green to see the path-cycling, red-light breaking, cycling the wrong way down one-way streets and cycling on pedestrianised streets, all in the one place - I'm not even dragging you out of your way!

Did I mention that the Gardai's figures imply you may have some sort of issue in which you don't seem to register everything happening in front of you, or just an unhealthy fascination of cyclists?

I think I may have mentioned the Garda numbers before.

Thargor

Jesus Christ can you not even think about it for a second? They're not the same thing. When a cyclist runs a red light nothing happens and if it does its only to themselves, when a driver runs a red light innocent people get killed, over and over again:

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/truck-driver-who-broke-red-light-and-killed-pedestrian-21-jailed-for-three-years-39295075.html

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/man-24-who-died-in-crash-was-disqualified-driver-1.4118640

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/two-year-sentence-for-driver-who-killed-cyclist-after-running-red-light-34827328.html

Its okay for me to point a water pistol at someone, its not okay to point a loaded shotgun at someone, they are not equivalent, is it that difficult to grasp?

Pinch Flat wrote: »

I dunno. Was out and about yesterday in the car. Every junction bar none the car on front of me jumped the red. Two were across green lights for pedestrians. Three cars streamed through on a red at one junction. So late that the traffic coming the other way had to slow to let the last car pass. Red light jumping by motorists is almost normalised now to the extent that if you don't speed up when the light goes red, you run a real chance of being rear ended. Saw a few cyclists breaking reds ad well. At this stage all groups of road users are doing it. I don't know why motorists get so wound up about cyclists breaking reds, because you'll rarely see motorists crib about other motorists breaking reds

Because we motorists are also pedestrians and we are most likely to experience a cyclist jumping the red mid-cycle and a motorist jumping a red in the first few seconds.

As I said previously, I wish motorists would not jump red lights even at the beginning of the phase, because it means I have to delay my crossing by a few seconds when I get the green man, nevertheless that's what I tend to see more often than not. And among pedestrians, I'm likely not the only one.

Pinch Flat

SeanW wrote: »

What use would motorist call buttons provide that would justify the enormous expense of installing them and the problems they would cause for every driver?

Your examples are all cherry picked. Most of us use the roads daily and see that most red light jumping by motorists is in the first few seconds of the red phase. No-one has denied that late stage RLJing by motorists occurs from time to time. It's just not the rule.

I dunno. Was out and about yesterday in the car. Every junction bar none the car on front of me jumped the red. Two were across green lights for pedestrians. Three cars streamed through on a red at one junction. So late that the traffic coming the other way had to slow to let the last car pass. Red light jumping by motorists is almost normalised now to the extent that if you don't speed up when the light goes red, you run a real chance of being rear ended. Saw a few cyclists breaking reds ad well. At this stage all groups of road users are doing it. I don't know why motorists get so wound up about cyclists breaking reds, because you'll rarely see motorists crib about other motorists breaking reds