Cyclists, rules of the road, a bit of cop on!

Ray Palmer · 09-02-2013 10:49PM

Spook_ie wrote: »

So because someone else breaks the law it should mean we're all allowed to break the law, intersting concept of government, oh yeah that's it Rule of Anarchy

Not what I said. Common sense has a lot to do with it. I just am not denying breaking the rules and explained the logic. It isn't dangerous just against the rules. It makes the journey safer

Spook_ie · 09-02-2013 11:05PM

Ray Palmer wrote: »

Not what I said. Common sense has a lot to do with it. I just am not denying breaking the rules and explained the logic. It isn't dangerous just against the rules. It makes the journey safer

No it's the first step towards anarchy where people do whatever they feel benefits themselves rather than society.

I could save several euro a day by not having to stop at red lights and having to start off again, but I don't do that because I actually don't believe in an anarchist regime on the road.

ballygowan1 · 09-02-2013 11:05PM

I'd say the amount of taxis breaking red lights far exceeds the amount of bicycles doing it.

Spook_ie · 09-02-2013 11:20PM

ballygowan1 wrote: »

I'd say the amount of taxis breaking red lights far exceeds the amount of bicycles doing it.

It's not a question of who or how many, it's a question of people breaking the law, I don't therefore I don't expect to have to contend with numerous others breaking the red lights when I have a green, regardless of if they are on bikes, taxis, rickshaws, horseback or whatever.

Perhaps it's time we put registrations on ALL vehicles ( yes bicycles to ) and made use of red light camera technology, or would cyclists still be saying "No Red Lights and traffic laws shouldn't apply to us, we're bicycles and we're green and we don't need no friggin laws"

opti0nal · 09-02-2013 11:47PM

Spook_ie wrote: »

Perhaps it's time we put registrations on ALL vehicles ( yes bicycles to ) and made use of red light camera technology, or would cyclists still be saying "No Red Lights and traffic laws shouldn't apply to us, we're bicycles and we're green and we don't need no friggin laws"

What do motorists say to themselves when they, break the law?

Instead of red light cameras, let's have ones that start recording on amber. Too many drivers don't stop on amber as required by law.

galwaycyclist · 09-02-2013 11:49PM

Spook_ie wrote: »

3 I'm not really sure what you're trying to say there but the state has a duty of care to its inhabitants, or would you prefer that we resorted to a state of anarchy

.

Correct. The state theoretically has a duty to all citizens. Instead of fulfilling that duty, the "state" chose to pander to the car lobby and prioritise policies where a blind eye was turned to road user behaviour and an emphasis was put on personal self protection. The "arms race" model of "road safety". In essence a form of state facilitated lassaiz faire anarchy on our roads.

The result was that by the end of the 1990s, Ireland had the distinction of having the highest child pedestrian death rate in Western Europe.

This problem was "solved" not by making our roads safer but by withdrawing children from the public roads environment and putting them into cars.

During the current economic crisis the proportion of children walking and cycling to school has continued to fall despite record fuel prices.

The side effect of this is a contribution to record levels of child obesity and associated illnesses.

As to my preferences I have pointed out that other measures such as speed enforcement and regulations that address the causes of crashes are more remunerative. Or does the idea of obeying the law in your car make you so uncomfortable that you,have to pretend no-one has mentioned it?

galwaycyclist · 10-02-2013 12:16AM

Spook_ie wrote: »

1 You're still throwing this 4% around like some Holy Grail without any corroboration. I could as easily say that the reduction in road deaths in 1979 was due to the election of Margaret Thatcher as PM of UK

A better place to look would be the 1979 fuel crisis

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1979_energy_crisis

There was queuing at the petrol stations and if I recall correctly the national speed limit was reduced as a fuel economy measure. And yet although we also brought in compulsory seatbelts, deaths among car users actually increased.

John_Rambo · 10-02-2013 12:20AM

srumball wrote: »

guess im just still angry at the way he reacted hitting the car and abusing my gf.

She liked it.

DieselPowered · 10-02-2013 01:49AM

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

please give a citation that shows backs that up

A citation to show that most cyclists in Dublin break red lights?

Walking as a pedestrian in Dublin city center over the last 15 years, I don't know how many times I've been cut off and clipped by bicycles going through red lights while crossing at green lights on a pedestrian crossing.

Secondly, while an active user also of a bicycle in Dublin City Centre, I approach and stop at red lights while other cyclists just come up and keep going as if they don't exist...:mad:

MrCreosote · 10-02-2013 02:30AM

DieselPowered wrote: »

A citation to show that most cyclists in Dublin break red lights?

Walking as a pedestrian in Dublin city center over the last 15 years, I don't know how many times I've been cut off and clipped by bicycles going through red lights while crossing at green lights on a pedestrian crossing.

Secondly, while an active user also of a bicycle in Dublin City Centre, I approach and stop at red lights while other cyclists just come up and keep going as if they don't exist...:mad:

No no- he wants it in scientific talk:

"Red light jumpers: A Fifteen year prospective observational study by DieselPowered

Number of time nearly hit at crossing: I don't know
Total number of cyclists approaching crossings over 15 years: I don't know.

These data prove that the majority of cyclists jump red lights.
Furthermore there is a strong probability that they do not pay road tax, although further studies are needed to confirm this."

hedzball · 10-02-2013 02:32AM

shower of ***** ..

I see things on a 2 wheels with an engine road tax and insurance that scare me..

a bit of cop on is right.

Canis Lupus · 10-02-2013 02:48AM

DieselPowered wrote: »

A citation to show that most cyclists in Dublin break red lights?

Walking as a pedestrian in Dublin city center over the last 15 years, I don't know how many times I've been cut off and clipped by bicycles going through red lights while crossing at green lights on a pedestrian crossing.

Secondly, while an active user also of a bicycle in Dublin City Centre, I approach and stop at red lights while other cyclists just come up and keep going as if they don't exist...:mad:

Cycling as a cyclist in many different capitals I don't know how many times I've been cut off and clipped by pedestrians crossing the road on the red man or just randomly walking out into the road without looking :mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad: (have I put in enough angry faces?) hold on :mad::mad::mad::mad: There that should be enough.

DieselPowered · 10-02-2013 03:02AM

MrCreosote wrote: »

No no- he wants it in scientific talk:

"Red light jumpers: A Fifteen year prospective observational study by DieselPowered

Number of time nearly hit at crossing: I don't know
Total number of cyclists approaching crossings over 15 years: I don't know.

These data prove that the majority of cyclists jump red lights.
Furthermore there is a strong probability that they do not pay road tax, although further studies are needed to confirm this."

Stand on any junction or pedestrian crossing during the day or night in Dublin and watch for yourself how many bikes jump red lights. I'm not going to prove anything other then discuss personal circumstances. It doesn't need reasoning or proof apart from the obvious.
Q.E.D.

Canis Lupus · 10-02-2013 03:13AM

DieselPowered wrote: »

Stand on any junction or pedestrian crossing during the day or night in Dublin and watch for yourself how many bikes jump red lights. I'm not going to prove anything other then discuss personal circumstances. It doesn't need reasoning or proof apart from the obvious.
Q.E.D.

As long as we can count how many pedestrians jaywalk and how many cars also break the lights

DieselPowered · 10-02-2013 03:18AM

Canis Lupus wrote: »

As long as we can count how many pedestrians jaywalk and how many cars also break the lights

Sure....but sticking with the curent thread discussion, its about cyclists, rules of the road and an bit of cop on

Maybe new thread needed to discuss cars breaking red lights, pedestrians jaywalking etc.

fasttalkerchat · 10-02-2013 03:27AM

Cars are a mode of transport sometimes used as a toy.
Bikes are toys sometimes used as a mode of transport.
Bikes are so slow and cause so many problems that if they had an engine they would be banned... can you take a quad on a road? No.

DieselPowered · 10-02-2013 03:31AM

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

.. can you take a quad on a road? No.

You can actually take a quad on a road, but thats another discussion, another thread

fasttalkerchat · 10-02-2013 03:44AM

DieselPowered wrote: »

You can actually take a quad on a road, but thats another discussion, another thread

You have to put indicators on it etc. and I think it has to be able to reach a certain speed... basically it would have to be a lot more advanced than a push bike.
There is a UK exception for farm use up to 1.5km... not sure if there's one in Ireland.

fasttalkerchat · 10-02-2013 03:45AM

Out of interest, who agrees that a cyclist should legally have to pull over to allow traffic to flow if they are creating a tailback of 10 cars or more?

hardCopy · 10-02-2013 03:46AM

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

Out of interest, who agrees that a cyclist should legally have to pull over to allow traffic to flow if they are creating a tailback of 10 cars or more?

Not me

Out of interest, has there ever been a tailback of more than ten cars behind a cyclist?

BostonB · 10-02-2013 03:51AM

lima wrote: »

Eh it's still breaking the law and dangerous, no matter how many excuses people have for it.

You were replying to a post that wasn't making an excuse but explaining why cyclists do jump light and not get injured. Which was in response to a someone asking why cyclists do it and not fear getting injured.

Cungi wrote: »

....why do a lot of cyclists break red lights?

I really don't get it. If i'm driving a car there is no way i'll jump a red light incase i get smashed out of it. Do these cyclists not care about what would happen if they were hit?....

lima Answer me this. If you're so sure its dangerous, why do some countries allow it.

BostonB · 10-02-2013 03:52AM

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

Out of interest, who agrees that a cyclist should legally have to pull over to allow traffic to flow if they are creating a tailback of 10 cars or more?

Why limit that to a cyclist. why not a truck, tractor, slow driver in a car? How would they its 10 cars and not 9?

How would they enforce that?

fasttalkerchat · 10-02-2013 04:04AM

BostonB wrote: »

Why limit that to a cyclist. why not a truck, tractor, slow driver in a car? How would they its 10 cars and not 9?

How would they enforce that?

A car would be pulled over by the guards to see if they're drunk, unable to drive or the car is not roadworthy... on a motorway or dual carriageway its an offence.
I find that tractors are very accommodating to road vehicles but yea, it could be extended to them too.

At the minute enforcement would mean pulling them over and handing a fine - personally I'm not in favour of licences to cycle so that's all.

BostonB · 10-02-2013 04:06AM

lima wrote: »

....Creating a bad rep for all cyclists, even the ones such as myself who has respect for the law.

lima wrote: »

....By the sounds of it you probably break the law by going through the red lights such as in my example. Next time I see you do that I'll punch you off your bike :mad:

You're ok with assault, but have a problem with people breaking red lights?

BostonB · 10-02-2013 04:10AM

Maybe it was posted before but there was a UK study done on breaking red lights...

http://smellslikeglue.com/2012/12/28/infographics-cycling-through-red-lights/

http://radwagon.co.uk/2012/01/red-light-jumping-vs-speeding-cars.html

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/businessandpartners/traffic-note-8-cycling-red-lights.pdf

I'm not a fan of breaking red lights. Its gets glass in your tyres. But its just creates bad feeling. Also you're never in a rush on a bike. Its going to take the same time regardless.

BostonB · 10-02-2013 04:15AM

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

A car would be pulled over by the guards to see if they're drunk, unable to drive or the car is not roadworthy... on a motorway or dual carriageway its an offence.
I find that tractors are very accommodating to road vehicles but yea, it could be extended to them too.

At the minute enforcement would mean pulling them over and handing a fine - personally I'm not in favour of licences to cycle so that's all.

Its an offense to hold up 10 cars exactly?

Its simply common sense. Both not to hold up traffic, and also not to have a bit of patience if you're held up for a couple of minutes. Unfortunately many seem to be lacking both.

Canis Lupus · 10-02-2013 04:46AM

What happens if it's 9 cars and a motorbike being held up? I don't know, this is all a bit confusing.

P.Walnuts · 10-02-2013 05:01AM

BostonB wrote: »

Why limit that to a cyclist. why not a truck, tractor, slow driver in a car? How would they its 10 cars and not 9?

How would they enforce that?

Easy, you get off you bike in the middle of the road, get the traffic behind you to stop so you can count them, if there is 10 or more cars behind you you go to the side and let them pass, if 9 or less get on your bike and continue...simple!

Spook_ie · 10-02-2013 06:57AM

opti0nal wrote: »

What do motorists say to themselves when they, break the law?

Instead of red light cameras, let's have ones that start recording on amber. Too many drivers don't stop on amber as required by law.

Amber....An amber light means that you must not go beyond the stop line or, if there is no stop line, beyond the light. However, you may go on if you are so close to the line or the light when the amber light first appears that stopping would be dangerous.

Red....A red light means "stop". If the light is red as you approach it, you must not go beyond the stop line at that light or, if there is no stop line, beyond the light.

Perhaps this might be a clue to why so many cyclists run red lights because they haven't a bulls notion of the R of the R, yet another indication for registration/insurance and training for cyclists maybe?

Spook_ie · 10-02-2013 07:13AM

BostonB wrote: »

Maybe it was posted before but there was a UK study done on breaking red lights...

http://smellslikeglue.com/2012/12/28/infographics-cycling-through-red-lights/

http://radwagon.co.uk/2012/01/red-light-jumping-vs-speeding-cars.html

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/businessandpartners/traffic-note-8-cycling-red-lights.pdf

I'm not a fan of breaking red lights. Its gets glass in your tyres. But its just creates bad feeling. Also you're never in a rush on a bike. Its going to take the same time regardless.

Seems to be around the 1 in 5 mark that were noted (16% according to infographics site) do people see 16% of cars jumping lights is the question?

Cyclists, rules of the road, a bit of cop on!

Comments