Road rage against cyclists is it just me?

22-07-2013 12:06AM

CramCycle wrote: »

No problem with it.
Why not wait?
Oddly enough, the greateryour potential to harm others on the road due to the damage you could do, the stupider the risks you seem to take?

I won't show respect to someone who behaves like that on the road, I will show you respect when you follow the rules of the road because you have earned it, and for no other reason.

So you have no problem with me crossing the street on a red man, but you do have a problem with a cyclist breaking a red light? Even though my approach to these situations is identical, i.e. have a good look around, and if there's no cars/pedestrians and it's safe to do so (using common sense judgment obviously) then proceeding with caution.

These are both very similar, yet you have no problem with one, but you do with the other.

Seems a bit inconsistent, almost like you have a chip on your shoulder.

Don't let your bitterness consume you

dogsears · 22-07-2013 12:10AM

Quote:
as for the guy here earlier that said he moves out to the road when he hears a car coming is just stupid altogether. I mean if im coming around a bend and all of a sudden a cyclists is right in front of me then i might not have enough time at all to stop but at least if your cycling against the kerb or bush etc then i could at least possibly have enough space to get around you without going across the other side of the road and causing an accident of some kind.

CramCycle wrote: »

Your going round to fast, you have no idea on any blind corner what is around it, you should be able to stop in the space you can see, therefore you should never be driving so fast that hitting a cyclist cycling in the middle of the lane is an issue. I am not having a dig but it is worth realising. At least if the cyclists is in out a bit you will see them earlier, hopefully hit the brakes and nothing will happen, rather than seeing them almost too late, getting brave and attempting an overtake on a bend which could leave you facing an oncoming lorry.

He has a point though doesn't he? If instead of referring to himself he referred to a typical motorist, would the point be more clear that the risk comes from what they might do rather than what they should do. So that the scenario where a car comes round the bend too fast to avoid the cyclist who's a bit out in the lane i.e. not close in to the verge is at least plausible and worth taking into account.

I don't think its great to have to go in by the verge (although I don't seem to suffer from anything like the amount of bad driving as others) but I think the point is valid in a practical sense.

The Bishop Basher · 22-07-2013 12:11AM

worded wrote: »

I was beeped at in the centre years ago and I didn't know whether it was an impending crash or a warning. It was totally unnecessary and Either way he was being an arsehole and it really shook me.

I ate him out of it and asked him when was the last time he was on a bike? I also called him a fat b*stard.

He will think twice before getting unnecessarily Agressive with cyclists.

A Motor cyclist friend of a friend was once gently rammed / nudged twice at two red lights in a row by the same motorist. The same motorist was tail gaiting him as well. He is a passive giant but took exception and got off his Motor bike and introduced his helmet to the fellows head. Problem solved. No reoccurance.

Relatively more people in sunnier counties have cycled and driven motorbikes than us and are savy to their weaknesses and needs. Over here we have had licence amnesties where dumbos are behind the wheels and other fat and or selfish car drivers that have long forgotten how vulnerable people are on two wheels.

Live and let live.

If this is how you behave on the road you should either figure out how to maintain a little decorum or stay off it altogether.

While there are no excuses for bad driving or cycling, there are equally no excuses for violent, threatening or intimidatory behaviour.

CramCycle · 22-07-2013 12:16AM

Kopparberg Strawberry and Lime wrote: »

if im cycling anywhere i stay most left as possible to avoid any trouble, its simple, why put yourself in harms way ?

Your inviting close overtakes, fair enough, it shouldn't matter but the truth is, you cycle close to the left, the driver behind you either thinks 1) I have enough space regardless of if he does or not, 2) some get the impression your pulling in to let them pass, like a car half pulling into the hard shoulder. IMO it causes dangers that weren't there before.

Deleted User wrote: »

So you have no problem with me crossing the street on a red man, but you do have a problem with a cyclist breaking a red light? Even though my approach to these situations is identical, i.e. have a good look around, and if there's no cars/pedestrians and it's safe to do so (using common sense judgment obviously) then proceeding with caution.

When you speed up at the amber, is that still proceeding with caution?

These are both very similar, yet you have no problem with one, but you do with the other.

Not really, I asked you, why not wait? it's the law, it's hardly a big issue to wait and it means that any other road users there which you may have missed, will know what to expect. I have no problem with you jaywalking, as if there is an accident, you will most likely come off the worse, not me. I have a problem with the other two as if there is an accident, I will come as badly or worse than you.

Don't let your bitterness consume you

LOL, no bitterness, I am in quite good humour today, bit too warm from the sun but overall, not that bitter.

CramCycle · 22-07-2013 12:23AM

dogsears wrote: »

He has a point though doesn't he? If instead of referring to himself he referred to a typical motorist, would the point be more clear that the risk comes from what they might do rather than what they should do. So that the scenario where a car comes round the bend too fast to avoid the cyclist who's a bit out in the lane i.e. not close in to the verge is at least plausible and worth taking into account.

I don't think its great to have to go in by the verge (although I don't seem to suffer from anything like the amount of bad driving as others) but I think the point is valid in a practical sense.

If your out from the verge, the motorist will see you sooner, simple geometry. If he is going so fast that he can't stop, the chances of him swerving out far enough from the edge of the road so as not too hit you and also avoid oncoming traffic without losing control are quite low. Particularly when he only sees you less than a second before he gets to you rather than maybe a couple of seconds more if you had been out a bit from the edge going round the bend.

That said thinking it through, are their many scenarios where the road is so bendy, and the cyclists so slow, and you so fast that you do not see the cyclist enter the corner before you get there and slow down accordingly? What if there was an accident on the bend and a pedestrian collapsed on the road, would you be driving slow enough to stop or with enough reaction time to avoid her and the potential oncoming traffic that could send your vehicle spinning over her body? Just asking.

Kopparberg Strawberry and Lime · 22-07-2013 12:23AM

CramCycle wrote: »

Your inviting close overtakes, fair enough, it shouldn't matter but the truth is, you cycle close to the left, the driver behind you either thinks 1) I have enough space regardless of if he does or not, 2) some get the impression your pulling in to let them pass, like a car half pulling into the hard shoulder. IMO it causes dangers that weren't there before.

no im not at all saying that, what i am saying is I personally will do my best to give you as much room as possible when over taking.

but what i am saying is if there is a situation where you as a cyclist is going around a bend and a car is going too fast and needs to overtake in an emergency situation then atleast they are able to closely overtake you for the sake of not hitting you and killing you but im not saying that they should only do close overtaking.

ozzy jr · 22-07-2013 12:38AM

Kopparberg Strawberry and Lime wrote: »

no im not at all saying that, what i am saying is I personally will do my best to give you as much room as possible when over taking.

but what i am saying is if there is a situation where you as a cyclist is going around a bend and a car is going too fast and needs to overtake in an emergency situation then atleast they are able to closely overtake you for the sake of not hitting you and killing you but im not saying that they should only do close overtaking.

Do you not think you'd be better off on a Motoring forum telling drivers to slow down, instead of coming on a cycling forum telling cyclists to get out of the way of speeding cars?

Ludikrus · 22-07-2013 01:01AM

Quick poll. Would cyclists be prepared to pay a road tax if it were introduced for cyclists?

-PornStar- · 22-07-2013 01:20AM

Ludikrus wrote: »

Quick poll. Would cyclists be prepared to pay a road tax if it were introduced for cyclists?

Why would it just be cyclists that have to pay tax to use the roads? Why single them out? Surely pedestrians would also have to pay road tax. And I cant see motorists being happy about forking out additional money for another tax.

CramCycle · 22-07-2013 01:26AM

Ludikrus wrote: »

Quick poll. Would cyclists be prepared to pay a road tax if it were introduced for cyclists?

You may want to start with something less vague, like price range, punishments for failure to comply, enforcement possibilities.

But to shorten that I already pay road tax as a cyclist

Kopparberg Strawberry and Lime · 22-07-2013 01:28AM

ozzy jr wrote: »

Do you not think you'd be better off on a Motoring forum telling drivers to slow down, instead of coming on a cycling forum telling cyclists to get out of the way of speeding cars?

i could tell all my friends and other posters etc that but i dont think every single motorist in the country is going to get the message,

they put RSA ads up for these things and they still get ignored, which is stupid yes,

but im saying for cyclists sake and saying to you all now that it would probably be better for avoiding an accident if you weren't going down the middle of the lane at 15-20 MP/h

-PornStar- · 22-07-2013 01:36AM

Kopparberg Strawberry and Lime wrote: »

i could tell all my friends and other posters etc that but i dont think every single motorist in the country is going to get the message,

they put RSA ads up for these things and they still get ignored, which is stupid yes,

but im saying for cyclists sake and saying to you all now that it would probably be better for avoiding an accident if you weren't going down the middle of the lane at 15-20 MP/h

I'm sorry. But you are completely wrong. Center of the lane is the safest place to cycle. You leave yourself room to maneuver, you are in a highly visible position, and it stops other road users from attempting dangerous overtaking.

CramCycle · 22-07-2013 01:43AM

Kopparberg Strawberry and Lime wrote: »

i could tell all my friends and other posters etc that but i dont think every single motorist in the country is going to get the message,

You'll be very disappointed to find that not every cyclist in the country uses the cycling forum on boards.ie, in fact, I imagine, it may be quite a shock to realise that if you put the number of cyclists using this forum over the number of cyclists in total, and multiply it by 100 it will be quite a bit shy of 100%. The same with the motoring forum.

The only way to get the message out to 100% of road users, is to have greater enforcement campaigns but correcting myself, a campaign is the wrong idea, a greater enforcement permanently on the roads, our roads, greater funding for the AGS, for the system in general, more speed cameras, more checkpoints and then, unfortunately, through punishment, the general public will learn (for the wrong reason but with the same effect) that speeding is wrong.

Everyone would be safer, not just cyclists if all road users obeyed the law and drove in a predictable manner.

Lumen · 22-07-2013 08:00AM

Kopparberg Strawberry and Lime wrote: »

but what i am saying is if there is a situation where you as a cyclist is going around a bend and a car is going too fast and needs to overtake in an emergency situation then atleast they are able to closely overtake you for the sake of not hitting you and killing you but im not saying that they should only do close overtaking.

The only reason that the car would be in that position is because the driver is a dangerously incompetent idiot.

Your question therefore becomes "how should I cycle in order to positively influence the behaviour of dangerously incompetent idiots?".

The answer to which is "cycle a couple of feet out from the kerb".

magicbastarder · 22-07-2013 08:02AM

Ludikrus wrote: »

Quick poll. Would cyclists be prepared to pay a road tax if it were introduced for cyclists?

based on what, though? obviously not on engine size or fuel usage; and if you scaled it to be proportional to wear and tear on the roads, it'd cost more to administer than it would take in, because it'd be a matter of a couple of euro per cyclist per year.
what age would it kick in?
i got my first bike around age 5, and started cycling to school when i was 12. if people had to pay to allow their kids to do that, it'd discourage people from getting into cycling at a young age, let alone taking it up later in life.

TinyExplosions · 22-07-2013 08:36AM

Ludikrus wrote: »

Quick poll. Would cyclists be prepared to pay a road tax if it were introduced for cyclists?

I just paid 200 quid in Road Tax (well, that's what all motorists seem to want to call it), so I'm covered for the year I think...

steamengine · 22-07-2013 08:53AM

Kopparberg Strawberry and Lime wrote: »

Anyone could be going too fast, i could slow down i dont mind or whatever but that doesnt mean every other person in a car is going to do the same for you, you have to account for any idiot on the road bby car/bike/bus etc.

if im cycling anywhere i stay most left as possible to avoid any trouble, its simple, why put yourself in harms way ?

its a person on a bike, not the easiest of things to miss driving down a road when thats exactly what your looking at anyway so any decent driver will see you.

That is also what the Rules of the Road states in the section on Cycling Safety: - "Make sure you keep to the left". That's what I do and for the same reasons as you.

longshank · 22-07-2013 08:59AM

Ludikrus wrote: »

Quick poll. Would cyclists be prepared to pay a road tax if it were introduced for cyclists?

Ye that really makes sense BTW Scheme tax break to buy a bike but a new tax to use it.
There will never be any disincentive to cycling.
Inactive people are up there with bankers when it comes to cost to the tax payer!

No Pants · 22-07-2013 09:00AM

The problems I have with keeping in close to the left, in no particular order, are:

Inferior road surface
Potholes/road defects
Glass
Litter
Bits of cars
Manholes
Sunken gratings

Those last two are a favourite of Fingal Coco. They like to place them right on the cycling line, sometimes on corners.

couerdelion · 22-07-2013 09:13AM

No Pants wrote: »

Those last two are a favourite of Fingal Coco. They like to place them right on the cycling line, sometimes on corners.

The road towards Blanchardstown from Kilshane Cross is a great example of this. Must be a contender for the worst road in Ireland.

magicbastarder · 22-07-2013 09:19AM

i think that was neglected because of the new N2/N3 interconnector road. which is littered with speculative roundabouts; three of the first four you meet (coming from the N2) actually don't form junctions, they're just dropped into a straight road.

No Pants · 22-07-2013 09:21AM

couerdelion wrote: »

The road towards Blanchardstown from Kilshane Cross is a great example of this. Must be a contender for the worst road in Ireland.

I agree. It's so bad that I won't cycle or drive it. I come out from Brackenstown, so if I'm on the bike and heading that direction, I cut through St. Margaret's and cross the old N2 at Ward (Cross) Roundabout. The ride on the car is rather harsh, so at Kilshane Cross, I turn right and head for the Ward.
I emailed the Department of Transport about this road after Fingal Coco declined to respond. This was part of their reply:

"However, in order to be of assistance, I have made enquiries with Fingal County Council and I understand that surface restoration/road reconstruction works for this road have been included in the Council’s 2013 programme of works. While a start date has not, as yet, been finalised, it is proposed that the works will take place during late Summer/early Autumn. Up to the commencement of the works, any essential road maintenance will be undertaken by the Council’s Operations Department."

I'll email them now and see if there's a confirmed date for this work.

ThisRegard · 22-07-2013 09:49AM

magicbastarder wrote: »

i think that was neglected because of the new N2/N3 interconnector road. which is littered with speculative roundabouts; three of the first four you meet (coming from the N2) actually don't form junctions, they're just dropped into a straight road.

Their logic being that the land is zoned for industrial and commercial use, so when all these companies decide to set up in the area the road infrastructure is there.

But it's a pain in the ass to driver anyway, the roundabouts are quite tight so you have to slow right down, not a bad thing, but if there's a car beside you more often than not they want to take the racing route and try drive in to the side of you, despite the road markings making it obvious where you should be.

Beasty · 22-07-2013 10:27AM

No Pants wrote: »

Those last two are a favourite of Fingal Coco. They like to place them right on the cycling line, sometimes on corners.

Drynham Road heading away from Swords has a decent enough road surface but is absolutely peppered with manholes and grates placed at various places across the lane forcing you to weave in and out (particularly if wet, but even if not with the sunken ones). There are places where you cannot avoid moving to the right side of the traffic lane (I don't mean into the oncoming lane) if you want to minimise the risk of hitting a sunken cover or completely losing grip in the wet. Whoever decided to put all that ironmongery into the road without planning some kind of common access to the underground services (or at least keeping them to a certain line in the roiad) really does need their head examining.

Kav0777 · 22-07-2013 10:36AM

TinyExplosions wrote: »

I just paid 200 quid in Road Tax (well, that's what all motorists seem to want to call it), so I'm covered for the year I think...

I paid €360... does that mean I can cycle further out from the kerb?

Surveyor11 · 22-07-2013 10:39AM

Kav0777 wrote: »

I paid €360... does that mean I can cycle further out from the kerb?

That means you can cycle 3' 6" from the kerb. I pay €626 'road tax', so I can cycle 6' 2.6" from the kerb. At least that's the way I think it works.:pac:

fat bloke · 22-07-2013 10:42AM

Surveyor11 wrote: »

That means you can cycle 3' 6" from the kerb. I pay €626 'road tax', so I can cycle 6' 2.6" from the kerb. At least that's the way I think it works.:pac:

In your faces then. I pay nearly 700 quid.

Spent a couple of years paying 1246 euro. I was entitled to cycle towards oncoming traffic in the right lane

TinyExplosions · 22-07-2013 10:54AM

Kav0777 wrote: »

I paid €360... does that mean I can cycle further out from the kerb?

You've a bigger engine... does that mean you're fatter than I am?

No Pants · 22-07-2013 11:03AM

fat bloke wrote: »

Spent a couple of years paying 1246 euro. I was entitled to cycle towards oncoming traffic in the right lane

I'm paying €1600+ on two cars. I'm on the opposite footpath.

Kav0777 · 22-07-2013 11:04AM

TinyExplosions wrote: »

You've a bigger engine... does that mean you're fatter than I am?

"Does this tax make my bum look big?"

Road rage against cyclists is it just me?

Comments