Rogue cyclists set to face on-the-spot fines MOD WARNING in first post

Eamonnator wrote: »

We appear to be at cross purposes.
As I stated in an earlier post, you must, at all times. have a rear reflector on a bike, which must be red.
This is completely different to reflective material.

Without being pedantic but the word material implies to me a reflective object be it clothing or a plastic reflector. Why would anyone have material in the form of clothing attached to a bike?

OldBean wrote: »

Er.

Read the full post.....
Yawn.......

tomasrojo wrote: »

You said strips of reflective material. That usually means rolls of Scotchlite or something like that. A reflector is denoted by the term "reflector" not "strips".

Oh lord god....
I give up

Read the rules of the road it might prevent an accident or two

Leave the legal jargon to the barristers and the solicitors

Even allowing you the dubious hairsplitting about a reflector being a "strip of reflective material", you still state that a white reflective entity of some sort at the front of the bike is a legal requirement, which is not true.

pedro_colnago wrote: »

My point is if People drove as per the rules of the road there would never be actually be an accident. The vast majority of accidents are caused by driver (human) error. New laws or streamlined application of old laws won't unfortunately prevent people doing stupid things. It may prevent an idiot cyclist from going out on the road in the dark without taking sensible precautions as regards to reflectors or lights tho

A cyclist who goes out on the road in the dark without lights is stupid, but they are at least as dangerous to themselves as to others. Unfortunately, we don't seem to be able to rely on self preservation even in this situation. The law is already on the statute book. The introduction of FPNs backed by a high profile campaign might get through to them, either by appealing to their idea of self preservation, or via the deterrence effect. The stick and the carrot, so to speak.

In this specific topic, I am primarily thinking about a cycling travelling along a footpath at speed, or travel the wrong way down a 1-way street, or weaving through a junction as pedestrians cross at a green light.
Walk along Stephens Green towards Leeson Street and Earlsfort Terrace junction during any rush-hour morning, and you will see dozens of examples of the above. They are more dangerous to pedestrians (not implying they will come off unscathed free in a collision).
These people are already beyond the stage where we can rely on them to adhere to the rules of the road out of their own volition.
The appeal to self preservation is less strong here, if FPNs boost the deterrent effect of the existing laws, I am in favour.

So, my support for FPNs is based on the proposition that there is a range of activities (illegal, of various degrees of risk) susceptible to the deterrent effects of the law and police enforcement.

Now, below a certain level of enforcement and garda presence, the deterrent effect of any law is next to none. And instead we are relying on people to adhere to the rules of the roads thanks to the little policeman inside their heads. But if we don't have that, we've in trouble regardless. FPNs are a step in the right direction if backed up by everything else. I don't see how they can have a negative effect on enforcement or garda resourcing.

And please (this is not directed at Pedro but to boards in general) do not respond to my post describing cyclists breaking the law with whataboutery about all the laws broken by motorists or pedestrians, or skateboarders, or pilots, aviation or nautical. You've already lost the argument by abdication if you go down that route. My examples stand no matter how many counter examples are proposed.

This thread is 37 pages long, so forgive me if it's already been asked / answered....
But has anyone seen or heard of someone that got an on the spot fine for breaking a red light?

M.J.M.C wrote: »

This thread is 37 pages long, so forgive me if it's already been asked / answered....
But has anyone seen or heard of someone that got an on the spot fine for breaking a red light?

Do a search. There was a thread on here a few months back.

Beasty wrote: »

As already mentioned by Jep no-one has received an on the spot fine for cycling through red lights as the law is not in place for them to be issued (in Ireland anyway). Plenty have been taken to court for the offence though (which is presumably what you are alluding to)

http://m.independent.ie/irish-news/five-cyclists-a-week-face-court-for-lawbreaking-29762693.html

Five a week according to the indo

Somewhat relevant, from the UK, but from last year. Only saw it today.

Cyclists should not be fined for mounting the pavement to escape dangerous sections of road, a transport minister has told police amid claims officers are ignoring official advice.

Robert Goodwill urged police not to penalise cyclists for moving off the road at congested junctions after complaints £50 fines are being handed out too readily.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/road-and-rail-transport/10577958/Let-cyclists-go-on-pavements-if-roads-are-dangerous-minister-tells-police.html

At the same time, we have mixed results from allowing police discretion (penalty points, for example).