Advertisement
Please note that it is not permitted to have referral links posted in your signature. Keep these links contained in the appropriate forum. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055940817/signature-rules
https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055940817/signature-rules
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum
Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026
Cork SRR - Cyclist in Middle Lane
Comments
-
-
Great the way these topics turn into Cyclist bashing threads.. :rolleyes:
Always by the same posters. And the threads always bring up the same points again and again...
It's hilarious though! Keep the irrational funny stuff coming!
Cyclists with zero professional training, testing or insurance - Maybe the NCT should apply also, emissions testing etc? Insurance for kids on bikes...:D
Cyclists are becoming more and more of a nuisance lately - I think there was a meeting of Cycling Ireland where this was agreed on!
If bicycles were as numerous, heavy and fast as cars they'd be right up there in the stats - I don't wanna cycle a 2 ton bike that can do 120mph!
There's a reason why places like Holland and Germany have invested in dedicated and separated cycle infrastructure - Yes it was because of all the road deaths of cycle users by motorised vehicles, Hello! All on Youtube..
Oh... And they don't even pay MotorRoad Tax Joe!0 -
-
-
Great the way these topics turn into Cyclist bashing threads.. :rolleyes:
Always by the same posters. And the threads always bring up the same points again and again...
It's hilarious though! Keep the irrational funny stuff coming!
Cyclists with zero professional training, testing or insurance - Maybe the NCT should apply also, emissions testing etc? Insurance for kids on bikes...:D
Cyclists are becoming more and more of a nuisance lately - I think there was a meeting of Cycling Ireland where this was agreed on!
If bicycles were as numerous, heavy and fast as cars they'd be right up there in the stats - I don't wanna cycle a 2 ton bike that can do 120mph!
There's a reason why places like Holland and Germany have invested in dedicated and separated cycle infrastructure - Yes it was because of all the road deaths of cycle users by motorised vehicles, Hello! All on Youtube..
Oh... And they don't even pay MotorRoad Tax Joe!
You're talking about "typical responses" and then add loads of your own.
- An "NCT" for bikes might not be a bad thing really now that you've mentioned it.
- Insurance most definitely. As it stands any cyclist who damages a car or runs into a pedestrian can't really be held accountable. If they want to be seen as an equal road user, the same rules should apply to them .. including lane usage and red light adherence!
- Cyclists are putting themselves at more risk through a lack of some basic cop on vs "their rights" (as seen in the OP of this thread) and as described by others
- Idiots like yer man in that YouTube video above do cyclists no favours either.. muttering reg numbers to himself and berating motorists for perceived "injustices". He'll do that to the wrong car some day. Uploading it to YouTube to show what a "hero" he is is way out of line too0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
One of the reasons we do not pay insurance fees for bikes is because the possibility of the above scenario is very low (or an expensive damage made by cyclist to someone else's property). You just made that updr.fuzzenstein wrote: »The idea is, that if a cyclist runs down a pedestrian and he's badly injured, who's going to pay?
If someone gets paralysed and will need medical care for the rest of his life, where's the money coming from?
Or is it just tough luck on the guy who dared to get in the cyclists path?
. Secondly if there was pedestrian at fault, again - do you want pedestrians to be insured?
Secondly, insurance for bikes (and maybe NCT or "motor" tax) would put a lot of cyclists off the road back into their cars. That would increase the congestions on our already congested roads and would increase the risk of collisions and result in higher insurance premiums for everybody. I don't think it is something we are looking for.0 -
-
-
-
-
One of the reasons we do not pay insurance fees for bikes is because the possibility of the above scenario is very low (or an expensive damage made by cyclist to someone else's property). You just made that up. Secondly if there was pedestrian at fault, again - do you want pedestrians to be insured?
Secondly, insurance for bikes (and maybe NCT or "motor" tax) would put a lot of cyclists off the road back into their cars. That would increase the congestions on our already congested roads and would increase the risk of collisions and result in higher insurance premiums for everybody. I don't think it is something we are looking for.
It works both ways indeed.
Cyclist breaks red light (Yes I know, it never happens, but let's just assume this outlandish scenario is theoretically possible), runs down pedestrian, pedestrian falls, hits his/her head of a kerb and is now dead/paralysed.
This will costs millions. Who pays?
The same goes the other way round.
Pedestrian does not pay attention to cyclist, steps out in front of him, cyclist swerves, same end result.
Who pays for him when he becomes a vegetable?
Don't say it never happens, because pedestrians and cyclists do get killed and it's not always cars (though, of course it mostly is, but this is not an impossible scenario).
In the country you can add horses into the mix. No sane rider would ever go out without being insured. I'm sure 50 years ago people laughed at the idea of being insured on a horse, but now it's essential.
As for bike training:
In Germany we did bicycle training, the schoolyard was turned into a mini traffic system with lights and signs and everything, we did practice runs and had to pass a test. It only makes sense to me.
Incidents like described in the OP only make a point for more regulation and the reaction of a lot of cyclists only will ensure it happens sooner rather than later.0 -
Bicycle training - absolutely yes. But here in Ireland we do not have compulsory driving lessons with professional instructors, never mind cycling training! Yes, I know it is mad, but true. So before we go into that, we should introduce any professional driving training. For drivers in particular and I believe you agree on this.dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »It works both ways indeed.
Cyclist breaks red light (Yes I know, it never happens, but let's just assume this outlandish scenario is theoretically possible), runs down pedestrian, pedestrian falls, hits his/her head of a kerb and is now dead/paralysed.
This will costs millions. Who pays?
The same goes the other way round.
Pedestrian does not pay attention to cyclist, steps out in front of him, cyclist swerves, same end result.
Who pays for him when he becomes a vegetable?
Don't say it never happens, because pedestrians and cyclists do get killed and it's not always cars (though, of course it mostly is, but this is not an impossible scenario).
In the country you can add horses into the mix. No sane rider would ever go out without being insured. I'm sure 50 years ago people laughed at the idea of being insured on a horse, but now it's essential.
As for bike training:
In Germany we did bicycle training, the schoolyard was turned into a mini traffic system with lights and signs and everything, we did practice runs and had to pass a test. It only makes sense to me.
Incidents like described in the OP only make a point for more regulation and the reaction of a lot of cyclists only will ensure it happens sooner rather than later.
Going back to the issue of insurance for cyclists - no, and no again, and the reason is in my previous post, i.e. bike insurance = less people on bikes = more cars = more accidents = A lot higher cost to the society in general. The single fatal accident you described caused by a cyclist is not something happens often (or ever?). Hundreds of people die in car accidents every year in Ireland and thousands are injured. There were no pedestrians killed by cyclists or seriously injured...
And, in a civilised country, like Germany (which I like when it comes to motoring, and we all should learn from) there is no insurance for cyclists. And it is due to common sense
. 0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
Or drive home after failing a testNo idea, but at present drivers (and cyclists) do not get any sort of compulsory professional training in Ireland, which is the case in most civilised countries.
BTW, I do not know about any other country in EU that allows you to drive a car without a proper licence. You have been deemed unfit to get a license yet you can head off home by yourself in the car! 0 -
-
Bicycle training - absolutely yes. But here in Ireland we do not have compulsory driving lessons with professional instructors, never mind cycling training! Yes, I know it is mad, but true. So before we go into that, we should introduce any professional driving training. For drivers in particular and I believe you agree on this.
Going back to the issue of insurance for cyclists - no, and no again, and the reason is in my previous post, i.e. bike insurance = less people on bikes = more cars = more accidents = A lot higher cost to the society in general. The single fatal accident you described caused by a cyclist is not something happens often (or ever?). Hundreds of people die in car accidents every year in Ireland and thousands are injured. There were no pedestrians killed by cyclists or seriously injured...
And, in a civilised country, like Germany (which I like when it comes to motoring, and we all should learn from) there is no insurance for cyclists. And it is due to common sense.
Agreed, but you don't get that here.
The cyclist in the OP did not exactly display common sense and a lot of people defended him to the hilt because he has a legal right to be there, so it's fine and common sense doesn't come into it.
It annoys me when people say they will only do something if forced by law to do so and only not do something if it is illegal to do so.
This attitude come across over and over and over again, especially in the motoring section and from all sides, not pointing at any one group here.
Add to this the blame and compo culture and one can only assume that common sense is dead and people only look to the law and not common sense as to what they can and cannot do.
If the government outlawed breathing, the problem would sort itself in 5-10 minutes, but sadly that isn't going to happen.0 -
Donnelly117 wrote: »Or drive home after failing a test You have been deemed unfit to get a license yet you can head off home by yourself in the car!
Yeah, I know madness. Did not want to touch that subject. 0 -
dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »Agreed, but you don't get that here.
The cyclist in the OP did not exactly display common sense and a lot of people defended to the hilt him because he has a legal right to be there, so it's fine and common sense doesn't come into it...
All grand...
But I was pointing out the common sense of not having insurance for cyclists, which is stupid idea and would be counterproductive. 0 -
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement