SeanW wrote: » First of all, if you fined every RLJing footpath riding cyclist the same as the standard motoring fine €80 you could probably pay off the national debt.
If I did not carry registration plates, the first gard that saw my car would stop me.
Cyclists begin to respect red lights and pedestrian areas like motorists do.
Jawgap wrote: » So, your logic seems to be motorists ( or mor correctly vehicle owners) pay, cyclists don't? That being the case some vehicle owners pay more, a lot more, than others so shouldn't they get priority? And what about motorists (reps, van & bus drivers etc) who pay no tax on the vehicle they drive - I don't the driver of the 46a pays much in the way of tax on his bus......
Baron Kurtz wrote: » Come on. Read the whole thread. This little nugget of clarification has been established countless times in the thread.
Feisar wrote: » That would be my understanding, if I'm on the motorway and want to overtake I'll check the outside lane to ensure there isn't someone coming up faster than me and the way is clear. If it is not I wait till they pass and then overtake the vehicle in from of me. Surely it's the same for cyclists?
blackwhite wrote: » NO. Like every other situation on the road, if you want to leave one lane and join another then you must give way to any traffic already in the lane. TBH, when people get the rules of the road so badly wrong it's no wonder that threads like this go round and round and round and round.
roadrunner16 wrote: » Apart from all the other stuff you said one thing stand out and I'm going to get in knocked for saying this but It boils my blood hearing motorists get it wrong... Yes cyclists don't pay road tax ...... in fact motorists don't pay road tax ....no one pays road tax .... its called Motor tax .... my bike dosen't have an effing motor !!!! Money for roads is taken from general taxation !!!!
SeanW wrote: » I didn't say any of that, I just think the fact that only motorists pay ROAD usage TAX should be properly noted. I object to silly "corrections" about the use of the term ROAD TAX because at best its inoffensive slang, at most, an accurate description of the basis of the tax - i.e. a tax a motorist must pay to use the road.
SeanW wrote: » First of all, if you fined every RLJing footpath riding cyclist the same as the standard motoring fine €80 you could probably pay off the national debt. Simple, use the same rules as apply for motorists. If "don't care about the rules of the road" and run red lights, I'll get tagged by red light cameras, that take my registration and apply penalty points, up until I get enough points to lose my license. My insurance would also go up exponentially during the time. Cyclists could be subject to the same rules.
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.
Buzz Killington the third wrote: » There's no reasoning here. If a cycle lane can hold one bike in width and a cyclist decides to overtake the guy in front it is not "cycling 2 abreast", it's a fecking overtaking manoeuvre in which they have to leave the cycle lane and in doing so they should indicate and be aware that there are cars driving on the road beside them!
Caliden wrote: » lack of space
Jawgap wrote: » It wouldn't really because people would just ignore it. +1 on adding something to the school curriculum on road use / road safety.
BFDCH. wrote: » Does the motorist have a right of way here? is it not the same as any other road user, in that the person further ahead on the road has right of way, the driver behind should only over take when it is safe to do so
TonyStark wrote: » They didn't they overtook a cyclist, therefore there were 2 abreast in lane. it would seem the motorist was trying to overtake both.
gramar wrote: » Here's one:http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2011/05/20/136462246/when-bikes-and-cars-collide-whos-more-likely-to-be-at-fault
Bio Mech wrote: » No which is why my post was phrased as a question. Hence the ? I was asking why they don`t leave enough room on the inside. Lack of space would have been an answer. But as you seem to know perhaps you can tell me.
Oscar Gateaux wrote: » Nobody's obliged to leave adequate room for cyclists to pass on the inside. Hammering on someone's roof is a dick move. Would the same cyclists be apologetic if a motorist beeped at them because they couldn't get past them?
Jawgap wrote: » So, should people who pay more tax get better or greater access? What about that portion of general taxation that goes towards building and maintaining roads? Or should 'road tax' not just be raised until it covers the full cost of roads, and that portion of the health budget attributable to traffic collisions? Maybe road tax raised should only be spent in the counties in which it is raised?
seamus wrote: » The end has to justify the means. What problem will registration of bicycles solve, and how will that offset the obvious costs and implementation issues that it brings.
How do you propose that you enforce this obligation to have a registration plate on bicycles, and how is it easier to enforce than the rules of the road? What makes you think that a person who doesn't care about the rules of the road is going to give two craps about having a plate on his bike?
cournioni wrote: » What fuel do cyclists pay tax on?
Buzz Killington the third wrote: » Because they didn't indicate. They left the cycle lane to overtake another cyclist which forced the driver to swerve.
Caliden wrote: » You're familiar with the junction then?
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.
cournioni wrote: » What fuel do cyclists pay tax on? If you're talking about food, food is 0%.
They're not paying tax on their emissions either seeing as you're going down that road. Methane is one of the biggest destroyers of the ozone don't you know?
Joking aside, the fact is that cyclists are still not paying tax even though cycle lanes are becoming more prevalent on our roads. I believe they should make a contribution.
Bio Mech wrote: » Why don't you try to leave adequate room to pass you on the inside? If only you were aware of past instances where you failed to do so. Oh wait yes your post above.
