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
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/

Should traffic laws be further enforced for cyclists?

12467…11

Comments

  • #92
    -K2-
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 393 ✭✭-K2-


    dearg lady wrote: »
    maybe I amn't very good at gettin my point across, I think you might be right there, but it's something I stand by and have discussed at length with people who do agree with me. I know there's none on this thread but that's life!
    I do protest re laws I disagree with and will continue to do so. For the time being I'll continue to live as before. Just to be clear, my not complying with laws hasn't ever endangered or infringed on anyone else. It's a personal choice.

    Have you heard of confirmation bias? Perhaps if you considered the opinions of others who don't agree with you then you might arrive at a more informed conclusion.


  • #93
    Nanazolie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 868 ✭✭✭Nanazolie


    You think the coast is clear so you just cycle (or drive) through the red light. Until someone comes unexpected. It happened to me at a car park entrance that cut the cycle lane. In fairness to the driver, the bushes were quite high, she couldn't have seen me coming from behind them. But there was a stop sign, and she ignored it, thinking there was no one on the cycle lane. My bike was destroyed, and I still bear a large scar on my left arm, not to mention a bump on my hip that will never go.
    I can't see the benefits of jumping red lights. Each is a mere minute, sometimes less. Will waiting an extra minute make your life shorter, or less fulfilled?

    There is also something seriously wrong with the assumption that rules are for dumbheads who can't drive / cycle properly because they can't make their own judgement, and that you only obey them because you are afraid of being hit in the pocket. Hurting a child who impredictably run across the road or causing a collision in the incoming traffic doesn't seem to be a deterrent for these people.


  • #94
    dearg lady
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,091 ✭✭✭dearg lady


    -K2- wrote: »
    Have you heard of confirmation bias? Perhaps if you considered the opinions of others who don't agree with you then you might arrive at a more informed conclusion.
    lol, sorry that was very poorly written on my part! of course I have spoken with people who disagree with me, and having heard all they have to say, i still feel the same way.
    I would suggest that there is confirmation bias in play with many posters :)


  • #95
    godihatedehills
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 370 ✭✭godihatedehills


    why have red lights at all? what a waste of money.

    everyone should just decide when they think it's safe to go.


  • #96
    dearg lady
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,091 ✭✭✭dearg lady


    Nanazolie wrote: »
    There is also something seriously wrong with the assumption that rules are for dumbheads who can't drive / cycle properly because they can't make their own judgement, and that you only obey them because you are afraid of being hit in the pocket. Hurting a child who impredictably run across the road or causing a collision in the incoming traffic doesn't seem to be a deterrent for these people.

    I don't think anyone has said that.. :confused:


  • Advertisement
  • #97
    Undercover Elephant
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 465 ✭✭Undercover Elephant


    Davyhal wrote: »
    And there are plenty of crimes in the country more serious than traffic/road related crimes that they could be dealing with as well, I just think that everyone should obey the rules of the road, no excuses of "ah, its not that bad in this situation" sort of attitude. The law is there, follow it!
    No one (well almost no one) is saying you shouldn't follow the law. The topic of the thread is "should traffic laws be further enforced for cyclists?". If you want to argue that it should, then you should tell us where you will divert resources away from in order to do it.

    But that said ... there are some situations where the application of the letter of the law would be downright stupid, and we are all safer by not following it as long as we do it in a predictable way.

    Until a few years ago it was illegal to use your hazard warning flashers while moving, as is commonly done on motorways to warn of slow traffic ahead. Somehow I can't see the uniform disregard of that rule as a breakdown in civilised society. Quite the opposite, in fact.


  • #98
    dearg lady
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,091 ✭✭✭dearg lady


    godihatedehills wrote: »
    why have red lights at all? what a waste of money.

    everyone should just decide when they think it's safe to go.

    I read an article on this in Time years ago. road signs, lights etc were removed from a town in (I think) Holland. It was very successful at the time, but I would like to see soem updates on it, and also don't know how well it would translate to larger cities.


  • #99
    Undercover Elephant
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 465 ✭✭Undercover Elephant


    godihatedehills wrote: »
    why have red lights at all? what a waste of money.

    everyone should just decide when they think it's safe to go.
    I assume you are joking, but there's actually a serious case to be put forward for this, in urban areas off the main arteries.

    There was an experiment in Bristol where they turned the traffic lights off to see what would happen. And were amazed to see that no one got hurt and journey times were reduced. I'm not at my home computer so don't have the link to hand, sorry.


    EDIT - might be this, but I am not allowed access in work hours: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9mzfN5i7ds


  • #100
    Captain Havoc
    Moderators, Sports Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 11,393 Mod ✭✭✭✭Captain Havoc


    dearg lady wrote: »
    I read an article on this in Time years ago. road signs, lights etc were removed from a town in (I think) Holland. It was very successful at the time, but I would like to see soem updates on it, and also don't know how well it would translate to larger cities.

    I think it was Norway or Sweden but I think there's far too many traffic lights. I saw another youtube video of lights down in London and there were no pile ups. The Parade lights in Kilkenny were down often in while the work was being done to the Mayor walk and again, no accidents. Traffic lights cause really bad traffic and in a lot of cases a roundabout would be far more ideal.

    https://ormondelanguagetours.com

    Walking Tours of Kilkenny in English, French or German.



  • #101
    dearg lady
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,091 ✭✭✭dearg lady


    Undercover Elephant wrote: »
    No one (well almost no one) is saying you shouldn't follow the law.
    Undercover Elephant wrote: »
    But that said ... there are some situations where the application of the letter of the law would be downright stupid, and we are all safer by not following it as long as we do it in a predictable way.

    contradicting yourself somewhat there no?
    You make a very interesting point re predictableness


  • Advertisement
  • #102
    Jawgap
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,296 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    Not sure about "further" enforcement, but there should certainly be better enforcement - which does not equate to harsher or more frequent punishment for ne'er do wells!


  • #103
    godihatedehills
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 370 ✭✭godihatedehills


    It was just sarcasm, you can't honestly be advocating removing all the traffic lights from the city??! My point was that you can't be above the law, otherwise everyone should be allowed flout that law.


  • #104
    coolbeans
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,129 ✭✭✭coolbeans


    godihatedehills wrote: »
    It was just sarcasm, you can't honestly be advocating removing all the traffic lights from the city??! My point was that you can't be above the law, otherwise everyone should be allowed flout that law.

    When I lived in Maynooth the village lights failed for a few days and traffic flowed more freely than it did before. That's no excuse to break the lights when they are functioning though.

    @dearg lady, your implication, although not deliberate is that those of us who obey the rules are a little dimmer than you are. I'm not inclined to agree. I'll reiterate, if everyone adopted your attitude, the result would be chaotic.


  • #105
    Nanazolie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 868 ✭✭✭Nanazolie


    dearg lady wrote: »
    I don't think anyone has said that.. :confused:

    If you think that you can break the rules because you can make your own judgement in assessing a danger, you imply that people who obey the rules at all times are dumbheads. And if you only stick to the rules because you are afraid of being fined, then your motivation is not the security of every road user, but your own pocket. The lady who knocked me off my bike was making a judgement based on what she could see, which turned out to be the wrong one. No one was around to fine her should she break the stop sign, otherwise she would have duly stopped.


  • #106
    Undercover Elephant
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 465 ✭✭Undercover Elephant


    godihatedehills wrote: »
    It was just sarcasm, you can't honestly be advocating removing all the traffic lights from the city??!
    No, I'd say about 10-15% of them do a useful job.

    My point was that you can't be above the law, otherwise everyone should be allowed flout that law.
    Agreed - assuming the same circumstances.


  • #107
    ROK ON
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,831 ✭✭✭ROK ON


    godihatedehills wrote: »
    why have red lights at all? what a waste of money.

    everyone should just decide when they think it's safe to go.
    dearg lady wrote: »
    I read an article on this in Time years ago. road signs, lights etc were removed from a town in (I think) Holland. It was very successful at the time, but I would like to see soem updates on it, and also don't know how well it would translate to larger cities.
    Captain Havoc wrote: »
    I think it was Norway or Sweden but I think there's far too many traffic lights. I saw another youtube video of lights down in London and there were no pile ups. The Parade lights in Kilkenny were down often in while the work was being done to the Mayor walk and again, no accidents. Traffic lights cause really bad traffic and in a lot of cases a roundabout would be far more ideal.

    We have way too many lights in this country IMHO. For example, for folks that know the Dublin northside, there are 13 sets of lights in the 1km between the new bridge at Blackhall Place and the Tesco at the top of Manor St.
    I was in a taxi a few years back and a taxi driver said that the company that was responsible for putting in all of the traffic lights were a big donator to one Ray Burke. As a txi driver told me this I assume it was Gospel truth.


  • #108
    HivemindXX
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,208 ✭✭✭HivemindXX


    Around the time the Luas went in there was frequent problems with the traffic lights at Suir Road bridge. There were no accidents because nobody (except cyclists) was moving.

    I'd be interested to see an experiment where all the traffic lights were turned off in Dublin, but I'd want to see it from a different city. However it worked in other cities in Dublin I suspect we'd some roads become impassable to pedestrians and a massive increase in fender benders and road rage.


  • #109
    dearg lady
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,091 ✭✭✭dearg lady


    coolbeans wrote: »
    @dearg lady, your implication, although not deliberate is that those of us who obey the rules are a little dimmer than you are. I'm not inclined to agree. I'll reiterate, if everyone adopted your attitude, the result would be chaotic.

    well my genuine apologies for implying that, that is honestly not what I meant. We all see ridiculous rules around us all the time, I just like to push people to question it more.
    Anyways, i've gone way off topic, got caught up in the discussion, sorry OP!


  • #110
    Cookie_Monster
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 24,636 ✭✭✭✭Cookie_Monster


    Lumen wrote: »
    Meme reference, for the uninitiated.

    Cyclists, Go use the footpad

    LOL, what a great thread full of so many idiots posting ridiculousness

    as for the rest of this:
    train_wreck-with-fire.jpg
    :D


  • #111
    blorg
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,995 ✭✭✭✭blorg


    dearg lady wrote: »
    I'm sure there's more that I can't think of, will add to it after my cycle home! :P
    Stopping in front of Advanced Stop Lines (e.g. on the red boxes for cyclists in front of the stop line.) Well over 50% of motorists do this, and it is entirely illegal, 2 penalty points, and utterly unenforced.


  • Advertisement
  • #112
    Lumen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,484 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    blorg wrote: »
    Stopping in front of Advanced Stop Lines (e.g. on the red boxes for cyclists in front of the stop line.) Well over 50% of motorists do this, and it is entirely illegal, 2 penalty points, and utterly unenforced.

    Haven't checked the law here, but in the UK it is not illegal to stop past the ASL, it is only illegal to cross the ASL when the light is red.

    Similarly, it is not illegal to stop in a box junction if you're turning right and only obstructed by oncoming traffic.

    I await correction.


  • #113
    HivemindXX
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,208 ✭✭✭HivemindXX


    Well, I believe it's illegal to cross the stop line when the light is amber "unless it would be unsafe to do so". Funny how such a seemingly innocent clause effectively cancelled the entire rule.

    I think you are correct about yellow boxes. Although I believe the actual yellow box is just highlighting where the junction is for those less than attentive people or those who are apt to conveniently forget the rules when it suits them. Every 'yellow box' rule is simply a junction rule that applies to every junction whether there is a yellow box or not.

    As as aside I saw a particularly exotic maneuver by a car on the way in to work this morning. Two lanes, one straight ahead and one right turn only. Light is green for straight ahead, red for left. Car in left turn lane pulls out in front of me and moves in to straight ahead lane. The driver didn't indicate and left it until I was almost adjacent but I wasn't too suprised at that. They then shot down the straight ahead lane and turned left right in front of me (without indicating), cutting across the line of cars stopped at the red light and proceeding through the junction breaking the red light.


  • #114
    Cookie_Monster
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 24,636 ✭✭✭✭Cookie_Monster


    HivemindXX wrote: »

    As as aside I saw a particularly exotic maneuver by a car on the way in to work this morning. Two lanes, one straight ahead and one right turn only. Light is green for straight ahead, red for left. Car in left turn lane pulls out in front of me and moves in to straight ahead lane. The driver didn't indicate and left it until I was almost adjacent but I wasn't too suprised at that. They then shot down the straight ahead lane and turned left right in front of me (without indicating), cutting across the line of cars stopped at the red light and proceeding through the junction breaking the red light.

    The "I'm too important to wait with the likes of you plebs" manoeuvre. See that the odd time alright, it was endemic when I was over in the UAE


  • #115
    Chips Lovell
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,277 Mod ✭✭✭✭Chips Lovell


    On the issue of speeding, looks like there's been a big upsurge in the numbers being done, according to today's Irish Times:
    The number of drivers getting penalty points for speeding this year is expected to far surpass 2010 with motorists in counties Clare, Kerry, Longford, Limerick and elsewhere already surpassing last year’s totals.

    The sharp increase follows the introduction of more than 600 privately operated speed cameras around the country.

    Almost 96,000 drivers have received penalty points on their licences for speeding from January to June this year. The figure is already over 70 per cent of the total for all of 2010, which was just over 131,000.


  • #116
    Nanazolie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 868 ✭✭✭Nanazolie


    About time....

    Rules I want inforced for cyclists:
    Stop at red lights (all of them)
    Wear high vis jackets / bands
    have front and back lights (back should be flashing)
    No cycling on footpaths. Cyclists can use footpaths but must dismount
    No counter-traffic cycling
    No smoking, eating, reading, texting (or making calls). You need both hands for a reason.


    Improvments I want for cyclists:
    • Separate cycle lanes that actually make sense. I see many lanes that stop abruptly at junctions, or disappear mid-road. Along Fairview Park, they repainted a portion of the lane after the works (the lane is on the footpath) and mixed it up with the pedestrian lane, for that portion only so it's on the left at first and then on the right. It confuses the pedestrians and cyclists.
    • A system that allows cyclists to join a main road at a V junction. Eg: you cycle on a one lane road that merges with another road from the left. You suddenly end up in the middle of the 2 lanes road while you were on the left hand side of the one lane road before. What's best then? Cross the left lane to reach the left hand side of the road? Stay in the middle?
    • A system that allows cyclists to turn right on 2 lane roads when the cycle track is on the left hand side of the road. Eg: you cycle on the left hand side of a 2 lane road, the left lane goes straight while the right lane turns right. You need to take the right turn, how do you proceed? Cycle in the middle of the road? Extend your right arm to indicate and pray that the cars behind you will stop? Dismount and cross the road on foot?


  • #117
    Lumen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,484 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    Nanazolie wrote: »
    Wear high vis jackets / bands

    LOL


  • #118
    monkeybutter
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,149 ✭✭✭monkeybutter


    Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »
    In fairness that study was done on one of the lowest and most controversial speed limits in the country. Do you think they'd get the same results on an average stretch of road?


    9 out of 10 drivers speed, I have to speed just to keep up, that's in the 50k zone that is most cities, main roads are prolly 50/50. Try driving around at 50k, you will have a queue behind you, same if you do 80k out in the country.

    9 out of 10 speed up on amber.

    the 1 out of 10 who don't are all in the blue rinse category.

    It's hard to spot an irish pedestrian who doesn't jay walk, save on the really dangerous spots, but college green area is a great example of this. Even when there are pedestrian lights within a couple of feet people will jay walk rather than use them.

    Jumping red lights at crossroads is plain dangerous given the speed people are pegging round in their cars, breaking a red to go left when there are no pedestrians should just be legalised.


  • #119
    Chips Lovell
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,277 Mod ✭✭✭✭Chips Lovell


    Nanazolie wrote: »
    About time....

    Rules I want inforced for cyclists:
    Stop at red lights (all of them)
    Wear high vis jackets / bands
    have front and back lights (back should be flashing)
    No cycling on footpaths. Cyclists can use footpaths but must dismount
    No counter-traffic cycling
    No smoking, eating, reading, texting (or making calls). You need both hands for a reason.

    There is no legal requirement to wear high viz jackets or bands. And flashing lights are technically illegal. Although the government has said it will legistlate to allow for them.


  • #120
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 78,477 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »
    And flashing lights are technically illegal. Although the government has said it will legistlate to allow for them.
    I think flashing lights are not illegal as such, but are not "legal" either!

    You are not committing an offence if you have a flashing light on during daytime, or in conjuction with a "legal" steady state one at nighttime


  • Advertisement
  • #121
    Cookie_Monster
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 24,636 ✭✭✭✭Cookie_Monster


    Nanazolie wrote: »
    About time....

    Rules I want inforced for cyclists:
    Stop at red lights (all of them) valid
    Wear high vis jackets / bands don't be ridiculous, no need at all for that
    have front and back lights (back should be flashing) valid, but no need for specifically flashing
    No cycling on footpaths. Cyclists can use footpaths but must dismount valid too, though I do this a little bit in places
    No counter-traffic cycling why not, plenty of places when bus can do it and it's legall do able should the councils actually decide to provide for it on roads
    No smoking, eating, reading, texting (or making calls). You need both hands for a reason. :rolleyes:
    I also want all the above apart for the jacket and being able to eat/smoke enforced for motorists, here's hoping...
    Nanazolie wrote: »
    Improvments I want for cyclists:
    • Separate cycle lanes that actually make sense. I see many lanes that stop abruptly at junctions, or disappear mid-road. Along Fairview Park, they repainted a portion of the lane after the works (the lane is on the footpath) and mixed it up with the pedestrian lane, for that portion only so it's on the left at first and then on the right. It confuses the pedestrians and cyclists.
    • A system that allows cyclists to join a main road at a V junction. Eg: you cycle on a one lane road that merges with another road from the left. You suddenly end up in the middle of the 2 lanes road while you were on the left hand side of the one lane road before. What's best then? Cross the left lane to reach the left hand side of the road? Stay in the middle?
    • A system that allows cyclists to turn right on 2 lane roads when the cycle track is on the left hand side of the road. Eg: you cycle on the left hand side of a 2 lane road, the left lane goes straight while the right lane turns right. You need to take the right turn, how do you proceed? Cycle in the middle of the road? Extend your right arm to indicate and pray that the cars behind you will stop? Dismount and cross the road on foot?
    all three of those are unneeded, proper use of roads and lanes and signalling are all that are required to safely deal with each point. Simple, no costly rebuilds required, no pointless unenforced laws required.


Advertisement