Cyclists on a Backroad

hatrickpatrick · 09-04-2013 04:28PM

Ray Palmer wrote: »

I don't know where you live but in urban traffic it certainly is a risk when 3-4 cars do it which is daily occurrence on certain lights. They start as amber gamblers and then are just breaking the lights.

I have seen cars hit and near miss people doing this pretty regularly just by Connelly and Busarus by the Luas so incredibly stupid on all fronts.

Try by Trinity college, Tara Street, George's Street. There is a fair list of risking locations due to everybody breaking the rules.

I'm talking about George's street actually. Never seen any car drivers break a pedestrian red light as blatantly as the cyclists do every single day.

Ray Palmer · 09-04-2013 04:36PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I'm talking about George's street actually. Never seen any car drivers break a pedestrian red light as blatantly as the cyclists do every single day.

How many have you seen hit people?

I have seen more cars hit people than bikes and near misses it has to be cars too.

Pedestrians are a good deal of the fault though and normally look sheepish when nearly hit and it is their fault.

I am talking all traffic lights rather than your personal hate of one junction that you always harp on about. :P

Mr_Spaceman · 09-04-2013 04:51PM

MAMILS - that's what they are. Fecking everywhere!

Middle Aged Men in Lycra for the uninitiated

Mycroft H · 09-04-2013 05:02PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I'm talking about George's street actually. Never seen any car drivers break a pedestrian red light as blatantly as the cyclists do every single day.

You should try sitting at the main N4 junction at palmerston. Never seen cars break red lights as blatantly in my life!

evilmonkee · 09-04-2013 05:06PM

Ray Palmer wrote: »

In bold not a rule of the road. So should we believe you know the majority of cyclists break the rules of the road?

Are you claiming you obey all the rules?

According to the RSA it is a rule:
A cycle track can also be a reserved part of a footpath or other area off the road. A cyclist must use a cycle track if it is provided.

http://www.rotr.ie/rules-for-pedestrians-cyclists-motorcyclists/cyclists/cyclists_cycling-safely.html

Mycroft H · 09-04-2013 05:13PM

evilmonkee wrote: »

According to the RSA it is a rule:
A cycle track can also be a reserved part of a footpath or other area off the road. A cyclist must use a cycle track if it is provided.

http://www.rotr.ie/rules-for-pedestrians-cyclists-motorcyclists/cyclists/cyclists_cycling-safely.html

The rule of mandatory use of cycle lanes was repealed recently thank god.

evilmonkee · 09-04-2013 05:17PM

BX 19 wrote: »

The rule of mandatory use of cycle lanes was repealed recently thank god.

If it was then I'm wrong.. but I just checked it on the website..

Ray Palmer · 09-04-2013 05:18PM

evilmonkee wrote: »

According to the RSA it is a rule:
A cycle track can also be a reserved part of a footpath or other area off the road. A cyclist must use a cycle track if it is provided.

http://www.rotr.ie/rules-for-pedestrians-cyclists-motorcyclists/cyclists/cyclists_cycling-safely.html

They brought in the law and then took it out. They just haven't updated the website. The RSA website is not the law it is just a guide and poorly maintained at that

Mycroft H · 09-04-2013 05:23PM

evilmonkee wrote: »

If it was then I'm wrong.. but I just checked it on the website..

See here

http://www.businesspost.ie/#!story/Home/News/Varadkar+abolishes+requirement+for+cyclists+to+use+cycle+lanes/id/19410615-5218-5085-7ae6-7b87b0401760

Ray Palmer · 09-04-2013 05:30PM

BX 19 wrote: »

See here

http://www.businesspost.ie/#!story/Home/News/Varadkar+abolishes+requirement+for+cyclists+to+use+cycle+lanes/id/19410615-5218-5085-7ae6-7b87b0401760

In fairness I think he admitted he was wrong and was going by the website.

Some delay in the update. Considering people rely on that information to get righteously indignant

Mycroft H · 09-04-2013 05:34PM

Ray Palmer wrote: »

In fairness I think he admitted he was wrong and was going by the website.

Some delay in the update. Considering people rely on that information to get righteously indignant

Ahh yea, just some link for reading. RSA should update their rules.

check_six · 09-04-2013 05:36PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

That doesn't endanger pedestrians, the green man isn't up until the lights have been red for several seconds. So any cyclist who waves trough crossing pedestrians at a green man had ample time to slow down and stop.

There are exceptions to this. On Mount St Lower coming from Merrion Sq (in dublin) there is a big junction. The line controlling traffic coming from Merrion Sq is a good 50m from the pedestrian crossing. It is possible to enter the junction just before the lights turn red for traffic and have the green pedestrian light showing by the time you reach the other side. This can be confusing for people.

The guidelines that cover this situation are
i) The vehicle that entered the junction before the light turned red must continue through to exit the junction
ii) Pedestrians must wait till the junction is clear before following the green man
iii) Don't run anyone down!

If I end up in this situation, on my bike, pedestrians do tend to leap out in front of me, not so much when I'm in the car. Either way, slowing down a bit tends to help all parties, although I do wonder if the pedestrians think I'm some kind of nut blasting through a red light.

If you want to find a motor vehicle equivalent of your crossing on George's St, you could do worse than the other pedestrian crossing a bit further down Mount St Lwr. It would appear to be strictly optional for many drivers. It's one of those crossings that are genuinely activated by the button. Inevitably, the button is pressed, the pedestrian crosses with a gap in traffic, and a while later road users are stopped waiting for a ghost to cross the road. This has led to lots of people just not bothering too much with the lights if they think they can get away with it. I have seen cars just going for it when there was a real life human crossing too, but this is rare (kind of frightening too, first car ignored the red, and the two behind just followed blindly, ped was pretty alarmed looking afterwards!).

(See attached pics for the spots I'm talking about)

endacl · 09-04-2013 05:41PM

Hey, how about this as a policy? It's not your road. It's ours. And 'you' are very much a part of 'us' once you're not a dick? These threads really should be merged into a single dustbin called 'don't be a dick on the road'. Then we can all get back to arguing over Atari jaguars and stuff.

furiousox · 09-04-2013 06:57PM

endacl wrote: »

Hey, how about this as a policy? It's not your road. It's ours. And 'you' are very much a part of 'us' once you're not a dick? These threads really should be merged into a single dustbin called 'don't be a dick on the road'. Then we can all get back to arguing over Atari jaguars and stuff.

Most of these threads descend into tedious bickering.
But this one....
No, this one's different.
I've a feeling this thread is going to resolve the cyclists vs motorists debate for good and we'll never ever see another cyclist vs motorist thread on boards again.

MajesticDonkey · 09-04-2013 07:52PM

As a cyclist myself, I generally don't break any rules or laws or whatever you want to call them. I don't live in a city and generally only cycle through small towns. I cycle at weekends, usually in a large group.

This is a completely stupid, useless debate...for a number of reasons. I like to think I'm a fairly open-minded person so I'll look at it from both sides.

It has been debated plenty of times before, on boards and plenty of other places. The last time I saw a thread like this in AH was probably under 6 months ago. Nothing has changed.

I have seen loads of cyclists (and I mean loads) break simple common sense, let alone rules or laws, including the common thing of cycling more than two-abreast. This mightn't be a rule or law, but it's something you expect people with common sense to abide by. Cycling anymore than two-abreast puts everyone's life in danger, from the other cyclists in the group, to other road users. There isn't a reason why you would want or have to cycle more than two-abreast.

My club only cycles two-abreast on wide roads, but these are not necessarily roads with a wide hard shoulder. Cycling two-abreast on roads with no hard-shoulder is often safer than cycling single file. The main reason being it saves drivers from overtaking on, what I commonly see, a continuous white line - coming up to a crest or on a bend on the road. The road is wide enough to pass out a two-abreast group of cyclists when it is clear to do so. What's the panic?

Regarding cycling lanes, drivers, being in cars, don't see the actual state of the majority of cycle lanes. As someone already mentioned, the majority of debris from the road is either blown or washed onto cycle lanes. Most towns place their sewage grates in cycle lanes for some unknown reason. Many drivers don't take notice of cycle lanes when making a turn. From the other point of view, obviously it's going to be frustrating in a driver is being held up by a cyclist in front of them when there is a cycle lane on their left. That's understandable, but not a reason to rage and go and wish the death of someone. Go play Call of Duty if you want to rage.

Red lights: cyclists should be punished for breaking red lights, as should any road user in my opinion. In New York, pedestrians can be fined over $100 for not using a zebra-crossing.

Cyclists are probably the most vulnerable of road users, bar pedestrians. I think drivers in general need to be more open to give cyclists the room they need. Hence the new ad by the RSA.

Someone also mentioned something about being held up because of the speed cyclists travel...maybe not so much in the cities, but in country areas, (i.e. my own club) cyclists often travel the same speed if not faster than a tractor. I don't see too many arguments about motorists and tractors.

You can keep arguing and debating this forever and nothing will change. People will also argue over what is a law and what is good ettiquite and that will never change either.

Basically what I think needs to be done by both sides:

Grow up.
Have a bit of patience.
Use common sense.
Stop arguing over semantics.

I genuinely couldn't believe this thread when I saw it today, over 30 pages of posts in a day! As I recently read on something, if you want to start an argument online, simply post your opinion and wait.

There's your /thread.

hatrickpatrick · 09-04-2013 08:08PM

Ray Palmer wrote: »

How many have you seen hit people?

I have seen more cars hit people than bikes and near misses it has to be cars too.

Pedestrians are a good deal of the fault though and normally look sheepish when nearly hit and it is their fault.

I am talking all traffic lights rather than your personal hate of one junction that you always harp on about. :P

I saw a slow old man's dog get hit when he was half way across a green man by a cyclist who had about half a minute to slow down and stop ages before he reached the set of lights. This wasn't on George's Street, it was up beside St Patrick's Cathedral (the road beside Francis Street, thw name of which always eludes me).

I've never seen a car hit someone when that person had a green man and every right to cross, nor when the car had about 15 metres or half a minute to see the person crossing,or the red light itself, and choose not to break the law.

furiousox · 09-04-2013 08:15PM

http://www.1800pocketpc.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/43_medium.jpg

endacl · 09-04-2013 08:16PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I saw a slow old man's dog get hit when he was half way across a green man by a cyclist who had about half a minute to slow down and stop ages before he reached the set of lights. This wasn't on George's Street, it was up beside St Patrick's Cathedral (the road beside Francis Street, thw name of which always eludes me).

I've never seen a car hit someone when that person had a green man and every right to cross, nor when the car had about 15 metres or half a minute to see the person crossing,or the red light itself, and choose not to break the law.

Its in bold and everything. A debate-clincher everytime.

What you saw was an accident caused by a dick. Who would have been a dick no matter the mode of transport.

GAAman · 09-04-2013 08:28PM

Anyone else misread the title as "Cyclists on a Blackboard"???

Jesus Christ · 09-04-2013 08:42PM

There was a bunch of these fluorescent forktards in my village last weekend, cycled onto the footpath and blocked all 15 or 20 feet of it while a couple of their kind went in to get whatever idiots consume. My 19 month old tried to avoid them by going out onto the road, I'd a good mind to demonstrate the domino effect on them. When done, they proceeded along the footpath to a junction rather than directly onto the road.

They're just buffoons when you get right down to it. Without mirrors, apparently.

endacl · 09-04-2013 08:44PM

Jesus Christ wrote: »

There was a bunch of these fluorescent forktards in my village last weekend, cycled onto the footpath and blocked all 15 or 20 feet of it while a couple of their kind went in to get whatever idiots consume. My 19 month old tried to avoid them by going out onto the road, I'd a good mind to demonstrate the domino effect on them. When done, they proceeded along the footpath to a junction rather than directly onto the road.

They're just buffoons when you get right down to it. Without mirrors, apparently.

By your village, do you mean Nazareth or Bethlehem? I thought you had a reputation as being more the live-and-let-live, forgiving type?

MajesticDonkey · 09-04-2013 08:46PM

endacl wrote: »

By your village, do you mean Nazareth or Bethlehem? I thought you had a reputation as being more the live-and-let-live, forgiving type?

endacl · 09-04-2013 08:48PM

MajesticDonkey wrote: »

Well, the beard is right, but I'd always pictured Jesus Christ as looking a bit more like one of the BeeGee's...

Grandpa Hassan · 09-04-2013 09:08PM

Jesus Christ wrote: »

There was a bunch of these fluorescent forktards in my village last weekend, cycled onto the footpath and blocked all 15 or 20 feet of it while a couple of their kind went in to get whatever idiots consume. My 19 month old tried to avoid them by going out onto the road, I'd a good mind to demonstrate the domino effect on them. When done, they proceeded along the footpath to a junction rather than directly onto the road.

They're just buffoons when you get right down to it. Without mirrors, apparently.

Such hate! Maybe you should get a hobby too

Jawgap · 09-04-2013 10:21PM

Jesus Christ wrote: »

There was a bunch of these fluorescent forktards in my village last weekend, cycled onto the footpath and blocked all 15 or 20 feet of it while a couple of their kind went in to get whatever idiots consume. My 19 month old tried to avoid them by going out onto the road, I'd a good mind to demonstrate the domino effect on them. When done, they proceeded along the footpath to a junction rather than directly onto the road.

They're just buffoons when you get right down to it. Without mirrors, apparently.

endacl wrote: »

By your village, do you mean Nazareth or Bethlehem? I thought you had a reputation as being more the live-and-let-live, forgiving type?

They weren't local..........and it was a local shop for local people.............

http://www.bbc.co.uk/comedy/content/images/2007/08/30/leagueofgentlemen2_396x222.jpg

endacl · 09-04-2013 10:33PM

Jawgap wrote: »

They weren't local..........and it was a local shop for local people.............

http://www.bbc.co.uk/comedy/content/images/2007/08/30/leagueofgentlemen2_396x222.jpg

Outta there lads! Big ring, no sitting down and everybody takes a turn up front!!

Oh, and two abreast.

Jawgap · 09-04-2013 10:37PM

endacl wrote: »

Outta there lads! Big ring, no sitting down and everybody takes a turn up front!!

Oh, and two abreast.

.......no stopping for lights (you don't have to) and keep tight to the apex of the corners even if it means going up on the path:D

endacl · 09-04-2013 10:43PM

Jawgap wrote: »

.......no stopping for lights (you don't have to) and keep tight to the apex of the corners even if it means going up on the path:D

Corners?!? We're drilling a line straight outta this mutha!!

Ericaa · 10-04-2013 01:08AM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I've never seen a car hit someone when that person had a green man and every right to cross, nor when the car had about 15 metres or half a minute to see the person crossing,or the red light itself, and choose not to break the law.

I have nearly been seriously injured/killed by someone who did what you said above in a car.

Ray Palmer · 10-04-2013 09:24AM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I saw a slow old man's dog get hit when he was half way across a green man by a cyclist who had about half a minute to slow down and stop ages before he reached the set of lights. This wasn't on George's Street, it was up beside St Patrick's Cathedral (the road beside Francis Street, thw name of which always eludes me).

I've never seen a car hit someone when that person had a green man and every right to cross, nor when the car had about 15 metres or half a minute to see the person crossing,or the red light itself, and choose not to break the law.

So the answer is no, you haven't seen a bicycle hit somebody. The worst is a guy hit a dog and it sounds like he was a díck. So all the dangers you have said have not actually happened!

Adding a particular set situation doesn't disguise that you actually don't have any personal experience of near fatal accidents caused by road users.

I have seen cars break lights and hit people, other cars and cyclists. Never saw a bike break lights and hit a person or a car. I am not some amazing oracle but if it was as dangerous as people suggest I would seem more cyclists hitting things.

Annoyances are not the same as dangers. Things I find annoying on the roads and law breaking aren't all dangerous but many are. Frustrated drivers are the biggest danger on the road. They speed, drive carelessly and bully other users. These people should be removed from the roads.

Cyclists on a Backroad

Comments