Meanwhile on the Roads...

Kind a is - you're not supposed to cross within 15m of a crossing.

This is 100% why we don't have camera enforcement - even the speed cameras are píss poor. I can only think the politicians feel the RSA isn't arms length enough to get away with it (if we're to assume the RSA is anyway functioning!).

It's been said many times here and elsewhere that having the RSA in charge of licensing and NCTs, deriving their income from that, as well as road safety are incompatible. The poor driving of ever bigger vehicles is the biggest threat to safety, but why would it be in their interest to curb that? One of the car brained muppets in the comments on the article (I've no idea why I do this to myself - surprisingly there was only a tangential swipe at cyclists) suggested having garages able to issue NCT certs, which is a strangely similar bad idea.

I do the hop off bit at this junction:

As well as turning right heading inbound on rathmines road and wanting to get on to the south circular eastbound.

I joined the civil service a while ago, and I can see how difficult (nigh, impossible) it is to change the organisational culture and perspective once its become entrenched. I fundamentally don't see how the RSA can be reformed without a root and branch reform of the org culture, new executives, and even new managers who receive education in road safety fundamentals.

That won't happen, but if a new agency is created, it will disrupt the culture even if it takes over some of the old employees.

As Sinead O’Sullivan in a recent column pointed out, the single greatest challenge in terms of road safety in this country is the absence of a clear line of ownership.The RSA is responsible for a range of important road safety levers including road safety education, driver education, driver testing and licensing and vehicle standards.However, it has no say in terms of roads policing nor legislative reform nor the courts process, where lacunas remain in terms of the recording of licencing details of disqualified drivers persist, to name but one issue.

As someone with more than a passing interest in road safety (and who studied aspects of it in economics), it's a bit worrying to see a narrative coming out that the real failings with the RSA are to do with their lack of a responsibility for other areas - rather than failing to perform in the areas they are currently responsible for.

https://www.reddit.com/r/ireland/comments/1prsjub/just_seen_this_on_the_walk_home_to_smithfield_in/

This happened on dame st recently too

https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/car-smashes-into-front-of-busy-dublin-city-centre-convenience-store-1833558.html

And this a few years ago on georges st

https://www.fm104.ie/news/fm104-news/car-crashes-into-georges-st-building/

But it's cyclists on footpaths are the real terror out there appaz

Have a look up, there, that's his point flying overhead.

Which bit of ' footpaths not meant for cars or bicycles ' are you struggling with. Don't be in such a rush to be a smartass.

One would think they would at least campaign within the bounds of the current legislation. There is no legal requirement to be bedecked in hi-vis so by focusing on it they are lending credence to the cop out every motorist uses for 'not seeing' a victim when in court.

In one of the links above even though the motorist plead guilty to careless driving their solicitor still pointed out the lack of hi-vis on the cyclist. As it's not a legal requirement it should play no part in any court case.

They, along with the guards and the legal system, are actually a bloody danger to road safety, but none of them seem to be able to see the wood from the trees.