Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Near Misses Thread Volume 2 (So close you can feel it)

1…2930323435…69

Comments

  • #932
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 42,873 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    VonLuck wrote: »
    Where did I say there was an excuse for the dangerous overtake? I explicitly said the driver was in the wrong!
    Point taken but your post was suggesting that the cyclist should be going slower and you refer to the cycle path beside the OP. Neither of which are really relevant in terms of a prick driver putting someone in danger.
    VonLuck wrote: »
    They totally have the right, but that won't stop drivers being pissed off as a result. You might think "so what", but an angry driver is more likely to perform risky manoeuvres like in the video. I'd prefer to be alive instead of right.
    This is solely down to the driver but is fuelled by misinformation about cycle lanes and a vast misunderstanding about the legal obligations of various road users.
    Post edited by CramCycle on


  • #933
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 42,873 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    doughef wrote: »
    You fly boys craic me up !!

    Just obey the rules / be where your meant to be and all will be ok.
    We can’t pick and chose which rules apply to us.

    Stay safe
    You really need to re-read the rules of the road because you're quite incorrect in your understanding of them.
    Post edited by CramCycle on


  • #934
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 42,873 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    kennethsmyth wrote: »
    There is also a risk on cycle path, going on and off or someone/something stepping onto it. At some point of mitigation of risk it becomes that you are not actually living and have zero experiences due to reducing risk. Cycling on road is normal, drivers need to expect cyclists and so long as the cyclists are not taking the mick then there should be no frustration between either party.
    That in itself is a problem.
    I've challenged drivers for stupid passes only to be told how I was "all over the road" despite me travelling in a straight line.
    People frequently see what they want to see!
    Post edited by CramCycle on


  • #935
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 52,341 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    it's quite easy and simple to boil down; if you feel more comfortable and safer on the road, use the road. if you feel more comfortable and safer on the cycle path, use the cycle path.

    quite often it's safer to not use the cycle path. IMHO.
    Post edited by CramCycle on


  • #936
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 52,341 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    Eamonnator wrote: »
    Are you seriously using a fictional character to back up an argument?
    i'm just trying to wrap my head around quoting someone using the past tense for something they say in the 24th century.
    Post edited by CramCycle on


  • Advertisement
  • #937
    cletus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,381 ✭✭✭cletus


    doughef wrote: »
    Hi guys

    Just wondering if there is something in the charter about posting pictures of peoples cars, with the registration clearly visible .

    Is this not against GDPR regulations ?

    Is the reg not clearly visible while he's driving around the road?

    There's no expectation of privacy when in a public place

    Edit: multiple people in ahead of me
    Post edited by CramCycle on


  • #938
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 52,341 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    doughef wrote: »
    Yes, but capturing it and posting it to social media platform without consent might be against the regulations?
    under the law or under social media regulations? i can't see either having anything to say on the matter. if you take a video in a public place of an occurrence in a public place, it's legal to upload it to social media.
    and regarding the car reg being visible. that's the point of a car reg, it legally must be visible.
    doughef wrote: »
    Also .. these drivers are being accused of acting illegally without their knowledge.
    Surely that’s against the regulations/ law ?
    if they're being incorrectly accused of acting illegally - for example, if the video had been edited to misrepresent the situation - then i suspect you could be right. however, if it's a straight unedited clip, it's a bit more straightforward.
    Post edited by CramCycle on


  • #939
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 52,341 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    doughef wrote: »
    I do feel there is cause for concern if we can openly accuse people of acting illegally without their consent ?
    but we can do that anyway.
    i could accuse you of being a criminal, without evidence, by posting that (just using plain text); but we don't remove the ability of users to post anything, based on them thus having that capability.

    if there is a case where there's a genuine concern that someone has been accused of something in the wrong, that's dealt with as and when it happens.
    Post edited by CramCycle on


  • #940
    buffalo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,161 ✭✭✭buffalo


    Weepsie wrote: »
    No. People are not identifiable by a car registration plate. Also, driving your car on a public road, you are allowed be filmed/photographed etc.

    Youtube would have a hell of a time cleaning stuff up if it was remotely a problem.

    What people think GDPR covers, and reality are often a mile apart.

    youTube took a video of mine offline because it featured a registration plate and apparently the driver claimed this was PII. There was no appeals process.
    Post edited by CramCycle on


  • #941
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 52,341 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    buffalo wrote: »
    youTube took a video of mine offline because it featured a registration plate and apparently the driver claimed this was PII. There was no appeals process.
    curious how the driver found it.

    anyway, given the number of dashcam videos on youtube, they could have their hands full if people started doing this in any sort of numbers. how would they verify you *are* the owner of the car you claim is depicted?
    Post edited by CramCycle on


  • Advertisement
  • #942
    buffalo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,161 ✭✭✭buffalo


    magicbastarder wrote: »
    curious how the driver found it.

    anyway, given the number of dashcam videos on youtube, they could have their hands full if people started doing this in any sort of numbers. how would they verify you *are* the owner of the car you claim is depicted?

    Indeed, I asked the same question, but there was no meaningful engagement from the faceless bureaucratic automatons.

    edit: I also asked why the reg was considered PII, but also no answer to that.
    Post edited by CramCycle on


  • #943
    buffalo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,161 ✭✭✭buffalo


    VonLuck wrote: »
    All I was trying to say is that it is generally safer to use dedicated lanes, even if shared, but you may have to compromise on speed as a result.

    I'm not sure that's true when it comes to the Irish experience.

    We have so few fully dedicated lanes that you usually end up being put back on the road at junctions. Junctions are the most likely place for a cyclists to be in a collision IIRC.

    When you stay on the road, you can take the lane and position to prevent a left hook from all but the most determined/****ty drivers. When you're off-road, you're out of sight, out of mind for a lot of drivers. Often you'll be put back on the road on the inside of left-turning traffic, which of course is a dangerous place to be at the best of times, but probably far worse when a driver hasn't seen you ahead of them on the road at any point.
    Post edited by CramCycle on


  • #944
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 52,341 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    the problem in ireland is that generally those dedicated lanes are put in precisely where it's easy to (i.e. where there's space anyway); they attempt to fix problems where they don't really exist, and don't address problems where they do exist.
    and because they usually make no attempt to re-engineer how junctions are designed, which is where the vast majorit of risk exposure happens, they actually often make things worse.

    cf. the famous cycle path where the N11 meets foster's avenue. or further on, at donnybrook bus station.
    Post edited by CramCycle on


  • #945
    MojoMaker
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,490 ✭✭✭MojoMaker


    Now you're getting it VonLuck. So if you were to guess, which one of those is the OP?
    Post edited by CramCycle on


  • #946
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,904 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    VonLuck wrote: »
    All I was trying to say is that it is generally safer to use dedicated lanes, even if shared, but you may have to compromise on speed as a result.

    This might be true if said lanes were well designed but very often they're not. So for example here where if you're taking the last exit the cycle lane leaves you on the inside of left turning traffic, or here where the cycle lane abrubtly stops forcing you to rejoin a busy road with a single lane in the direction you're travelling, or here where they've painted in cycle lanes where there isn't actually any space for them. Don't get me wrong, I think there's some solid cycling infrastructure out there too but there is some that is downright dangerous.
    Post edited by CramCycle on


  • #947
    Duckjob
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,859 ✭✭✭Duckjob


    Another problem with some cycle paths is lack of safe accessibility. By that I mean in some cases getting on to the path while operating within the typical traffic environment could itself be a risky maneuvre.

    I tried to point out this concept over on C&T in a thread where certain posters were complaining about people on bikes not using the 100m stretch of cycle path up to the royal canal at North Strand Marino.

    I was explaining that if i'm doing 35-40kph in the bus lane towards the canal, with a 14 tonne double decker bus behind me in the bus lane, hot on my heels ( a common enough real world scenario) , the last thing I can do safely is slow my speed in the bus lane down to the 15-20kph which would be necessary to make the somewhat tight turn into the cycle path, over a kerb (where if I get the angle wrong and end up hitting the floor on the bus lane I'm dead), to enter a fairly confined space where people are walking. Therefore, in such instances its simply safer to continue on the bus lane at the speed I'm going up to the lights.

    Needless to say my explanations fell on deaf ears with certain posters who, despite having no experience of cycling that stretch themselves, still felt qualified to reject the experiences of someone who cycles it regularly, and make their pronouncements that use of the bike lane is safer.
    Post edited by CramCycle on


  • #948
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 42,873 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    Wildly Boaring wrote: »
    Not a near miss but an angry man

    Cycle paths both sides of road white this morning so I cycled up the road (the inhumanity)

    Got lifted out of it by angry little chubby fella
    There can be a fair bit of agression outside Intel (where your pic was taken).
    The road is now has a different route & layout to the above image. They've introduced a new crossroads and any traffic behind you coming from the roundabout (where your image was taken) must get to the red lights of that junction before you.
    The cycle paths are shared footpaths had you taken it, then at the point where you are forced to rejoin the road (just further on) may well have a car parked in it (usually waiting for someone to leave the Intel construction site).
    It is common to see cars waiting in both the bus stop areas and also on the footpath/cyclepath.
    I actually emailed Intel about it last week and received a response soon afterwards about how they had notified the gardai and would be working with the gardai to help prevent it going forwards.
    As for the chubby git, they're just angry at being a chubby git!
    Post edited by CramCycle on


  • #949
    Skrynesaver
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,110 ✭✭✭Skrynesaver


    VonLuck wrote: »
    All I was trying to say is that it is generally safer to use dedicated lanes, even if shared, but you may have to compromise on speed as a result.

    I've been hospitalised off a bike twice, on both occasions I was on Irish dedicated cycling infrastructure.

    Once a car turned through a traffic lane and a cycle lane without checking for cyclists and once when the lane was not treated and I lost it on black ice.

    I no longer use Irish cycling infrastructure as it is, to generalise, a series of under maintained, poorly designed obstacle courses.
    Post edited by CramCycle on


  • #950
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 52,341 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    still remains my favourite* cycle path:

    https://www.google.com/maps/@53.2753161,-6.1902165,3a,75y,237.86h,81.36t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spw6lbAXTuTO9f7qQttDd-Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

    *not my favourite
    Post edited by CramCycle on


  • #951
    Stark
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,176 ✭✭✭✭Stark


    Funny thing is the people saying that's perfectly fine are the same people moaning about cyclists on the footpad.
    Post edited by CramCycle on


  • Advertisement
  • #952
    Stark
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,176 ✭✭✭✭Stark


    ED E wrote: »
    Mine:
    https://goo.gl/maps/1ontSWk5YdJAH2bX6

    The guy on the phoenix park thread who keeps saying that cyclists and pedestrians using the Park should just use the dirt trails to avoid the traffic would see nothing wrong with that :pac:
    Post edited by CramCycle on


  • #953
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 52,341 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    breezy1985 wrote: »
    All its missing is yield signs at every driveway
    i was blown at many times for not being on the cycle path; i'd often have been doing 40 along that stretch too. combining it and the one in the opposite direction, you've pretty much got the full house of bad cycle path design. poles in the middle of the cycle path, having to yield to traffic from side roads, rollercoaster from the cycle path being dipped for private driveways, etc. etc.
    Post edited by CramCycle on


  • #954
    MojoMaker
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,490 ✭✭✭MojoMaker


    ED E wrote: »
    Mine:
    https://goo.gl/maps/1ontSWk5YdJAH2bX6

    Is that an old photo? I think that stretch has moved on a good bit in recent years. One of the few cycle tracks I enjoy using to its full potential!
    Post edited by CramCycle on


  • #955
    hesker
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,569 ✭✭✭hesker


    https://goo.gl/maps/zk6D6EW4TrDzAxES8

    Only one of my favourites. Sheer genius of forethought
    Post edited by CramCycle on


  • #956
    radia
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 360 ✭✭radia


    I like this one: https://goo.gl/maps/uVB5MVnBPN9XbXsq7

    Not content with having cyclists bouncing up and down on a rollercoaster created by driveways, they felt the need to build a special little mini-hill into the cycle track for no apparent reason at all. The road beside it is flat.
    Post edited by CramCycle on


  • #957
    hesker
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,569 ✭✭✭hesker


    CramCycle wrote: »
    The pavement blocked by the wall, which admittedly was there before the pavement but I mean, really, it is concreted on top and hardly of any historical significance that justifies it putting pedestrians in danger.

    No, I mean the cycle lane that goes around the signpost on the inside putting you in a blind spot for drivers and then immediately throws you onto the road into their path.

    I always go on the outside taking the lane.
    Post edited by CramCycle on


  • #958
    Skrynesaver
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,110 ✭✭✭Skrynesaver


    VonLuck wrote: »
    Do you mean that the driver hopped the kerb into the cycle lane? There's not much that can be done about that unfortunately beyond punishing the driver. I don't know if I'd blame the cycling infrastructure, but look, I don't know the details so I can't comment.

    No kerb, truck pulled ahead of me and he turned right behind it and through me, avoided breaking my skull by breaking my wrist.
    Post edited by CramCycle on


  • #959
    Stark
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,176 ✭✭✭✭Stark


    I thought it was to raise the footpath to the height of the back gardens of those houses.
    Post edited by CramCycle on


  • #960
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 52,341 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    radia wrote: »
    I like this one: https://goo.gl/maps/uVB5MVnBPN9XbXsq7

    Not content with having cyclists bouncing up and down on a rollercoaster created by driveways, they felt the need to build a special little mini-hill into the cycle track for no apparent reason at all. The road beside it is flat.
    was the footpath already at that height before the cycle path was added?
    the whole road stinks of doing nothing more strenuous than lashing some paint down, i had always assumed there was no actual engineering or construction undertaken with the addition of the cycle path?
    Post edited by CramCycle on


  • Advertisement
  • #961
    hesker
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,569 ✭✭✭hesker


    radia wrote: »
    I like this one: https://goo.gl/maps/uVB5MVnBPN9XbXsq7

    Not content with having cyclists bouncing up and down on a rollercoaster created by driveways, they felt the need to build a special little mini-hill into the cycle track for no apparent reason at all. The road beside it is flat.

    I’d hazard a guess that the ramp or embankment provides structural support for the wall and removing it would not be a great idea. Coupled with the tree roots probably.
    Post edited by CramCycle on


Advertisement