Those damn cyclists again!

missierex · 17-07-2014 11:53AM

magicbastarder wrote: »

yes, it is - but you're the danger. if you're driving around a blind bend, you don't drive so fast that you cannot stop in time for a stationary obstacle.

you're revealing more about your driving habits than those you're giving out about

So you expect all drivers to drive at 20/30mph on any road with a slight bend? Come on, get real.

OldNotWIse · 17-07-2014 11:53AM

CramCycle wrote: »

?

The point made was that her kid is allowed on the path because of his small size and inability to cycle on the road, and there was an implication that his bike wouldn't do any damage - I wondered what the situation was with momma bears bike also on the footpath. What's her excuse? Would her bike not do damage if it ploughed into someone?

jimgoose · 17-07-2014 11:53AM

Jawgap wrote: »

...Incidentally, is the bit on pg122 mandatory.....

I hope so. I teach it, anyway. Also, I recommend a few lessons in a HGV for anyone who wants their eyes opened vis-a-vis observation. :cool:

Chips Lovell · 17-07-2014 11:54AM

missierex wrote: »

So you expect all drivers to drive at 20/30mph on any road with a slight bend? Come on, get real.

This is why everyone should be made resit their driving test every five years.

jimgoose · 17-07-2014 11:55AM

missierex wrote: »

So you expect all drivers to drive at 20/30mph on any road with a slight bend? Come on, get real.

I expect all drivers to drive at speed that enables them to stop within the distance they can see to be clear. That's in the RotR as well.

OldNotWIse · 17-07-2014 11:56AM

Jawgap wrote: »

.......and as usual drivers / road users seem not to know that the RotR are not the law of the land, but you knew that anyway - sure haven't you read them,

Your obligation (including as a cyclist) is to follow Road Traffic Legislation

I must have missed the last chapter on pedantry :rolleyes:

But...does that change the fact that they shouldn't be breaking red lights??

Jawgap · 17-07-2014 11:56AM

missierex wrote: »

So you expect all drivers to drive at 20/30mph on any road with a slight bend? Come on, get real.

No, but if you've come around a corner and found yourself in a dangerous situation or having to emergency brake then you've come around it too quickly.

Defensive driving is a skill the vast majority of Irish drivers lack.

jimgoose wrote: »

I hope so. I teach it, anyway. Also, I recommend a few lessons in a HGV for anyone who wants their eyes opened vis-a-vis observation. :cool:

So if I don't look - have I committed an offence?

Jawgap · 17-07-2014 11:58AM

OldNotWIse wrote: »

I must have missed the last chapter on pedantry :rolleyes:

But...does that change the fact that they shouldn't be breaking red lights??

I suppose this is the closest we'll get to an admission that a lot of drivers don't know that the RotR are not the same as Road Traffic Legislation.

Repeating the driving test every few years might, indeed, help correct such knowledge deficits.......

magicbastarder · 17-07-2014 11:59AM

missierex wrote: »

So you expect all drivers to drive at 20/30mph on any road with a slight bend? Come on, get real.

you do realise that you've destroyed any credibility you may have had?

missierex · 17-07-2014 11:59AM

jimgoose wrote: »

I expect all drivers to drive at speed that enables them to stop within the distance they can see to be clear. That's in the RotR as well.

That is a given, but it still doesn't address my original issue that cyclists should not be cycling three abreast on a narrow, twisty road.

Chips Lovell · 17-07-2014 12:00PM

They shouldn't be cycling three abreast on any kind of road, not just narrow twisty roads.

OldNotWIse · 17-07-2014 12:01PM

Jawgap wrote: »

I suppose this is the closest we'll get to an admission that a lot of drivers don't know that the RotR are not the same as Road Traffic Legislation.

Repeating the driving test every few years might, indeed, help correct such knowledge deficits.......

I suppose this is as close as we will get to an answer to my question with respect to breaking red lights

TonyStark · 17-07-2014 12:02PM

missierex wrote: »

That is a given, but it still doesn't address my original issue that cyclists should not be cycling three abreast on a narrow, twisty road.

Why not report them to the Gardaí? It wouldn't be too hard to track down the offenders especially if they were with a club.

07Lapierre · 17-07-2014 12:02PM

OldNotWIse wrote: »

I suppose this is as close as we will get to an answer to my question with respect to breaking red lights

Breaking red lights is Illegal! We can't get any clearer than that.

missierex · 17-07-2014 12:03PM

magicbastarder wrote: »

you do realise that you've destroyed any credibility you may have had?

So every driver should drive like a snail to avoid arrogant cyclists who are breaking the law?

Yes, a driver should be prepared to stop at all times, and be aware of potential hidden dangers, but that does not mean that cyclists can do what they like.

jimgoose · 17-07-2014 12:05PM

Jawgap wrote: »

...So if I don't look - have I committed an offence?

In my car you have. "Right! Outta the car, drop and gimme 20!!" :pac:

Jawgap wrote: »

I suppose this is the closest we'll get to an admission that a lot of drivers don't know that the RotR are not the same as Road Traffic Legislation.

Repeating the driving test every few years might, indeed, help correct such knowledge deficits.......

Hardly. There's no such question in the Theory Tests or in the "oral" section of the practical. It doesn't do any harm to assume that the RotR are "gospel" in any event.

missierex wrote: »

That is a given, but it still doesn't address my original issue that cyclists should not be cycling three abreast on a narrow, twisty road.

I wasn't attempting to address that. That's a separate problem.

TonyStark · 17-07-2014 12:06PM

missierex wrote: »

Yes, a driver should be prepared to stop at all times, and be aware of potential hidden dangers, but that does not mean that cyclists can do what they like.

Agreed.

07Lapierre · 17-07-2014 12:07PM

missierex wrote: »

So every driver should drive like a snail slow down to avoid arrogant cyclists Human beings who are breaking the law?

Yes, absolutely!...nobody wants another human beings death on their conscience, even if they are arrogant. (being arrogant isn't illegal unfortunately)

Jawgap · 17-07-2014 12:07PM

OldNotWIse wrote: »

I suppose this is as close as we will get to an answer to my question with respect to breaking red lights

Not really - I think I've been consistent on this point......

Red lights mean stop.

.....the government should bring in the promised Regs that have been languishing in the DoT for the last year or more that would allow Guards to give out FCNs to these petty offenders......

......until then the Guards could use their existing powers to stop and summons them.

As for the practicalities - well if they have to seize bikes, so be it - it will be a valuable lesson.

As an aside, what will drivers do if they bring in the proposed 'left on red' for cyclists........there'll be blood vessels burstin' all over the place:)

magicbastarder · 17-07-2014 12:07PM

missierex wrote: »

So every driver should drive like a snail to avoid arrogant cyclists who are breaking the law?

speaking with my motorist's hat on, i do not drive around bends faster than is safe just for fear of hitting cyclists. it's the fear of hitting larger, heavier things than cyclists which slows me down.

this is not an issue limited to the context of cyclists. it's absolute basic road sense.

jimgoose · 17-07-2014 12:08PM

Jawgap wrote: »

...As an aside, what will drivers do if they bring in the proposed 'left on red' for cyclists........there'll be blood vessels burstin' all over the place:)

Wasn't the talk of American-style left-on-red from Leo The Rad-Cap back in February for all traffic?

Knasher · 17-07-2014 12:09PM

missierex wrote: »

So you expect all drivers to drive at 20/30mph on any road with a slight bend? Come on, get real.

The rules of the road require you to be able to stop within the distance you can see to be clear.

Chips Lovell · 17-07-2014 12:11PM

missierex wrote: »

So every driver should drive like a snail to avoid arrogant cyclists who are breaking the law?

Yes, a driver should be prepared to stop at all times, and be aware of potential hidden dangers, but that does not mean that cyclists can do what they like.

Even if groups of cyclists never cycled three abreast, you shouldn't be taking bends at such a speed that you won't be able to stop if you encounter something unexpected on the road. That could be a child who's run out, a broken down vehicle, animals, whatever...

missierex · 17-07-2014 12:15PM

Oscar Gateaux wrote: »

Even if groups of cyclists never cycled three abreast, you shouldn't be taking bends at such a speed that you won't be able to stop if you encounter something unexpected on the road. That could be a child who's run out, a broken down vehicle, animals, whatever...

I acknowledge the above, I was perhaps a little clumsy in my argument. I would like to add that I am in fact a very safe driver (despite what you may think), I have never hit anything or anyone, or almost hit anything or anyone, I most definitely intend to keep it that way

I am simply pointing out that I find it frustrating to be stuck behind a group of cyclists taking up half the road.

desertcircus · 17-07-2014 12:18PM

missierex wrote: »

So you expect all drivers to drive at 20/30mph on any road with a slight bend? Come on, get real.

Wait, you seriously think it's a crazy idea for drivers to be expected to drive with a basic regard for safety? What if there's a traffic jam around the corner, or a breakdown, or a child who's run onto the road, or a person on horseback, or...literally anything? You never travel so fast that you can't stop in the space ahead you can see to be clear. Are some people so reckless and sociopathic that they genuinely think that's an unfair imposition?

missierex · 17-07-2014 12:19PM

desertcircus wrote: »

Wait, you seriously think it's a crazy idea for drivers to be expected to drive with a basic regard for safety? What if there's a traffic jam around the corner, or a breakdown, or a child who's run onto the road, or a person on horseback, or...literally anything? You never travel so fast that you can't stop in the space ahead you can see to be clear. Are some people so reckless and sociopathic that they genuinely think that's an unfair imposition?

Please take the time to read my previous post.

RebelButtMunch · 17-07-2014 12:20PM

SeanW wrote: »

I pay tax on my road usage as a motorist. Cyclists to do not for their bikes. "Road tax" is fine, an accurate description of the tax, even if it is only applied to motorists.

Yeah a road tax. Pedestrians should pay 2c to cross the road.

magicbastarder · 17-07-2014 12:21PM

missierex wrote: »

I acknowledge the above, I was perhaps a little clumsy in my argument.

you were quite clear and repeated yourself several times.

i do know of someone (a friend of my uncle) who died about ten or fifteen years ago who hit the back of slow moving farm machinery on a bend. as i mentioned, this is not just about avoiding cyclists.

CramCycle · 17-07-2014 12:21PM

OldNotWIse wrote: »

Would her bike not do damage if it ploughed into someone?

Ploughed, with two kids on board? and going at a speed her other child could keep up with her?

missierex wrote: »

So every driver should drive like a snail to avoid arrogant cyclists who are breaking the law?

How about to avoid a tractor, a stalled car, another RTA that is blocking the road, generally to be safe an considerate of others.

missierex wrote: »

I acknowledge the above, I was perhaps a little clumsy in my argument. I would like to add that I am in fact a very safe driver (despite what you may think), I have never hit anything or anyone, or almost hit anything or anyone, I most definitely intend to keep it that way

Several people in my local used to drink and drive 20 years ago, not causing an accident does not make your driving safe, it just means you were lucky, nothing else.

I am simply pointing out that I find it frustrating to be stuck behind a group of cyclists taking up half the road.

It never annoys me, getting stuck behind buses probably adds an extra 33% onto my commute time every morning. It is what it is, no reason to be angry with the driver. I just leave earlier as its a reasonable expectation that there could be a vehicle on the road slower than me.

TonyStark · 17-07-2014 12:23PM

missierex wrote: »

I acknowledge the above, I was perhaps a little clumsy in my argument.

I am simply pointing out that I find it frustrating to be stuck behind a group of cyclists taking up half the road.

Just wait til its clear and use the other half of the road to overtake them safely. :-)

Those damn cyclists again!

Comments