SeanW wrote: » So would the governments' tax take ... by a much larger degree.
jelenka wrote: » leaving no room to overtake them.
SeanW wrote: » If you have a bicycle, you pay no transport related taxes on it.
No Pants wrote: » Cyclists pay no tax? When did the Revenue make this massive change and how come no one told me? Was it in the newspapers or something? * Runs off to buy buy a bike *
gramar wrote: » I've seen various studies that state that anywhere between 40-60% of accidents involving both cars and bicycles are caused by cyclists so why don't they have insurance to cover the damage caused by their actions? That makes no sense to me.
jelenka wrote: » I don't mind cyclists on the road, I'd say more of them are vigilant and don't break the rules, but i absolutely hate it when 2 cyclists cycle next to each other having a chat, leaving no room to overtake them.
carlmango11 wrote: » Tough sh*t. Bikes were around longer than cars. And the reason they don't pay tax is because bikes do practically 0 damage to roads. If everyone cycled the road maintenance bill would plummet.
Scruffy...The Janitor wrote: » At risk of recycling an extremely extensively made point at this stage: Motor tax =/= Road tax
No Pants wrote: » Cyclists pay no tax? When did the Revenue make this massive change and how come no one told me? Was it in the newspapers or something?
seamus wrote: » You know what they say about assumptions. Never assume any other road user is going to do anything until they've started doing it. Observe. There's a cyclist to your left, bearing down on the two in front of him. The most likely possible outcomes of this situation are:
Irishcrx wrote: » I'll probably get bashed by the fitness fanatics on here , but I have a serious pain my ass with cyclist entitlement when I'm driving to work in the morning. Twice in the last week I've been forced to swerve into an outer lane and nearly collide with another car because someone was cycling to far on the inside on the road , they ask all motorists to be aware of cyclists and that's fine, but cyclists also need to be aware of motorists and the danger they are causing in busy morning periods. It's also grinds my gears that they slow down my trip into work by 5-10 minutes everyday by taking up the lanes , slowing down traffic , slowing down crossing lanes and they have free use of the roads while the rest of us have to pay for them. Surely with the ammount of cyclists now they should be paying something to use the public roads even a flat fee of €30 a year or something. Don't even get me started on breaking red lights or cycling out in front of cars , I know there's laws taking action against this now but from what I see it hasn't really stopped it.
gramar wrote: » There should be a requirement to show knowledge of rules of the road but above all to have insurance. Many accidents are caused by cyclists either hitting off cars, colliding with pedestrians etc etc I've seen various studies that state that anywhere between 40-60% of accidents involving both cars and bicycles are caused by cyclists so why don't they have insurance to cover the damage caused by their actions? That makes no sense to me.
dubscottie wrote: » Really? So that means I dont need to bother with tax on my motorbike anymore as I am ALREADY paying motor tax on my car? I can see that working if I get stopped..
padraig.od wrote: » I was just mocking the clumsy phrasing. Cyclists damaging cars, come on!
hatrickpatrick wrote: » If people aren't old enough to drive, they're not old enough to be on the road at all.
Irishcrx wrote: » they have free use of the roads while the rest of us have to pay for them.
hatrickpatrick wrote: » Now, a question for those who feel this is a silly suggestion: Why should cyclists not be subject to the same regime motorists are, in which there's a system in place to deal with crappy drivers in the form of penalty points?
blackwhite wrote: » See, posts like this don't help the debate at all. There are bad drivers, and there are bad cyclists. Trying to pretend that, in any given incident, that cyclists are never in wrong is patently stupid and only serves to harden the extremes on both sides of the argument. When I cycle, I'm always annoyed by the amount of drivers who don't realise that cyclists are more vulnerable than they are and try to squeeze past when there isn't a sufficient gap, tailgate, and open car doors without looking (among other things). When I drive, I'm always shocked by the number of cyclists who don't realise how vulnerable they are, and will do stupid things like run red lights (including at this junction this morning, causing traffic coming from both directions to have to emergency brake), like swerving from one lane to another without hand signals or checking if there's someone already in the lane or cycle the wrong way down one-way streets. In short, SOME motorists need to realise how easy it is for a cyclist to get hurt, avoid doing stupid things that could result in someone being hurt and show a bit of consideration for others. And, SOME cyclists need to realise how easy it is for cyclists to get hurt, avoid doing stupid things that increase the chance of they themselves, and others, getting hurt, and show both consideration for other road users and a sense of responsibility for their own safety.
_Kaiser_ wrote: » While I don't agree with most of the OP's point, it is a bit mad that anyone can go down to Halfords, buy a bike, and set off among busy traffic without any knowledge of the rules of the road, testing, or even insurance to cover themselves if anything happens! No doubt all the cycling heads will be along shortly to say that it works fine in Europe etc and that's true.. but we don't have the public transport or cycling infrastructure that cities like Amsterdam do. Like it or not we are a very car dependent country - even more so if you live outside Dublin. .
looksee wrote: » There are arguments on both sides of this, there are also some rubbish car drivers who are a menace on the roads. However yesterday on a narrowish road that has a good bit of traffic there was a tail-back of cars because two cyclists - in team outfits so they were obviously experienced cyclists - were cycling side by side, one just right of the hard shoulder line and the other just left of the centre line. They did not seem to be in any hurry and it would have been far more appropriate for them to be in single file, just as a gesture to let the traffic have a reasonable chance of passing. As it was the outer cyclist was ideally placed to complain about cars coming too close to him as they overtook. Many cyclists are reasonable and try and give traffic every opportunity to pass, but the situation I described was just a sense of entitlement giving all cyclists a bad name.
kylith wrote: » When should they start paying, OP? From the age of 6 or so, when they start cycling to school? Do you have any other ideas to discourage people from taking exercise? Just think how much slower your commute would be if all those cyclists were in cars instead. And he could well have been so far out on the road because it was too dangerous to cycle closer to the footpath.
Irishcrx wrote: » I expected the bikes to stay in the cycle lane while there was traffic moving to the side of them. What am I meant to do stay behind every single bike that's to the left of me??
BeerWolf wrote: » Here here, 'tearing' through the roads on this beast of a bike: LINK
padraig.od wrote: » Man that happened to me recently. I speeding down the road, minding my own business and some damn cyclist smashed into my windscreen.
Irishcrx wrote: » I had to swerve to avoid him because no I didn't expect him to come flying out of the cycle lane and into the middle of the road to overtake two other bikes, I expected the bikes to stay in the cycle lane while there was traffic moving to the side of them.
What am I meant to do stay behind every single bike that's to the left of me??
carlmango11 wrote: » Tough sh*t. Bikes were around longer than cars.
ellejay wrote: » I think they should be Licensed, made to do a theory test on rules of the road and driving etiquette. Their selfishness on the roads infuriate's me.
