nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Cyclists should do a theory test!

lickme

A lot of cyclists have no concept of the rules of the road and are getting more and more agressive. There acting like they have the right of way the whole time, weaving in and out of traffic, breaking red lights, not adhering and not looking for possible dangers ahead. Stricter and harsher penalties are needed for them. A piece of advice playing chicken with cars will not work well in the long run for ye. Should be made do some sort of simulation test or something. They are some decent cyclists but most are idiots.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Spook_ie

CramCycle wrote: »

Actually motorists get a license for that privilege, mainly due to the increased risk that is there from operating a motorised risk, hence different tests for different vehicles.

Cyclists do not need a license as it has been shown that the risk is so low as to not warrant it.

It is a privilege, don't ever forget that but not one paid for, one that is earned.

No they pay for it and require a license

CramCycle

CramCycle wrote: »

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/348943/vfm-assessment-of-cycling-grants.pdf

http://www.ecf.com/wp-content/uploads/ECF_Economic-benefits-of-cycling-in-EU-27.pdf

I am just going to quote myself so spook doesn't miss these really clear cut documents on economic benefits of cycling to an economy where infrastructure has been added.

smash

CramCycle wrote: »

Actually motorists get a license for that privilege, mainly due to the increased risk that is there from operating a motorised risk, hence different tests for different vehicles.

Cyclists do not need a license as it has been shown that the risk is so low as to not warrant it.

It is a privilege, don't ever forget that but not one paid for, one that is earned.

It is paid for. Owning a license on it's own does not grant a motorist a right to use the road, the right is only granted once Motor tax is paid for the specific vehicle the motorist is using. Thus, paying to use.

Spook_ie

CramCycle wrote: »

I am just going to quote myself so spook doesn't miss these really clear cut documents on economic benefits of cycling to an economy where infrastructure has been added.

So do you not think that if it's so beneficial that cyclists should contribute towards that €1 spend rather than relying on the rest of society, in particular the 10% tax take that the motorists of Ireland are paying

mathie

smash wrote: »

It is paid for. Owning a license on it's own does not grant a motorist a right to use the road, the right is only granted once Motor tax is paid for the specific vehicle the motorist is using. Thus, paying to use.

So should we ask pedestrians to have a license / pay to cross the road?

smash

mathie wrote: »

So should we ask pedestrians to have a license / pay to cross the road?

Why would we do that? That would be daft... they're not using a road, they're just crossing it.

CramCycle

Spook_ie wrote: »

So do you not think that if it's so beneficial that cyclists should contribute towards that €1 spend rather than relying on the rest of society, in particular the 10% tax take that the motorists of Ireland are paying

Let me clarify this then, and please state it loud and clear, your belief is that cyclists, in no way contribute towards the general tax fund. That is what you are saying, bottom line, that every cyclist you pass and every cyclist that pass you by, in no way contributes towards the general tax fund.

That's what it sounds like you are saying, just to make it clear, in case I misunderstand what you are saying.

ThisRegard

smash wrote: »

Paying for the provision of roads is not the same as paying to use the roads. Motorists pay for that privilege, cyclists don't.

Because there's no requirement for a cyclist to pay to use the road. But they certainly pay towards the building and upkeep of them, as do other people who don't even live in the state.

Spook_ie

CramCycle wrote: »

Let me clarify this then, and please state it loud and clear, your belief is that cyclists, in no way contribute towards the general tax fund. That is what you are saying, bottom line, that every cyclist you pass and every cyclist that pass you by, in no way contributes towards the general tax fund.

That's what it sounds like you are saying, just to make it clear, in case I misunderstand what you are saying.

Let me CLARIFY it for you again.

When you are using your cycle on a cycle lane you are NOT contributing to it, unlike when a motorist is using the road they ARE contributing to it

ThisRegard

Spook_ie wrote: »

than relying on the rest of society, in particular the 10% tax take that the motorists of Ireland are paying

LOL, do you even read over what you post ? Cyclists are the rest of society. There's no separate tax bucket for cyclists, and the rest of society.

smash

ThisRegard wrote: »

Because there's no requirement for a cyclist to pay to use the road. But they certainly pay towards the building and upkeep of them, as do other people who don't even live in the state.

I never suggested otherwise. Only that cyclists don't pay for usage and motorists do. For each vehicle they own.

Sure the government would change it to a pollution tax but then they couldn't tax zero emissions vehicles.

Spook_ie wrote: »

Let me CLARIFY it for you again.

When you are using your cycle on a cycle lane you are NOT contributing to it, unlike when a motorist is using the road they ARE contributing to it

Stop, you'll lose the argument for all of us...

Spook_ie

ThisRegard wrote: »

LOL, do you even read over what you post ? Cyclists are the rest of society. There's no separate tax bucket for cyclists, and the rest of society.

LGF

mathie

Spook_ie wrote: »

Let me CLARIFY it for you again.

When you are using your cycle on a cycle lane you are NOT contributing to it, unlike when a motorist is using the road they ARE contributing to it

... because you're paying for petrol?

ThisRegard

smash wrote: »

Stop, you'll lose the argument for all of us...

That ship has long since sailed (not before paying all it's necessary port and docking taxes of course)

Pinch Flat

Spook_ie wrote: »

Let me CLARIFY it for you again.

When you are using your cycle on a cycle lane you are NOT contributing to it, unlike when a motorist is using the road they ARE contributing to it

Interesting concept. So by using their car they're contributing (presumably through vat and duty on the fuel?). I presume this is offset against the 1% impact on Gdp that traffic jams cause?

Knasher

Spook_ie wrote: »

LGF

The LGF is funded by motor tax and directly from the exchequer (among others).

Anyone who contributes to the LGF is therefore also contributing to the maintenance of (non-national) roads.

omahaid

smash wrote: »

Paying for the provision of roads is not the same as paying to use the roads. Motorists pay for that privilege, cyclists don't.

I hate to point out the obvious but motor vehicles are taxed because they use the road. This is not the same as paying. The government tax me on my income, I don't pay them. The tax exists because of the exponentially greater damage caused by cars compared to cyclists to the road network.

check_six

smash wrote: »

If you want to go down the low hanging fruit route then go to the quays in Dublin where there's a 30kmph speed limit and you'll clock a lot of cyclists breaking it.

mathie wrote: »

Speed limits don't apply to bikes.

Spook_ie wrote: »

They probably will when they pedestrianise College Green, change in local byelaws will make it legal and a simple doppler detector to enforce it with a cyclewarden dishing out tickets

Don't forget to ensure all bikes in Ireland are fitted with a calibrated speedometer to get this to work. Seems straightforward?

Spook_ie

Pinch Flat wrote: »

Interesting concept. So by using their car they're contributing (presumably through vat and duty on the fuel?). I presume this is offset against the 1% impact on Gdp that traffic jams cause?

And we come back, ever so neatly to investing in public transport not cycling infrastructure

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=95818677&postcount=571

Spook_ie

check_six wrote: »

Don't forget to ensure all bikes in Ireland are fitted with a calibrated speedometer to get this to work. Seems straightforward?

Why would they need a speedometer, calibrated or otherwise, a doppler radar with a sign saying slow down, with a second dopple up the street with a cycle warden should do the job neatly enough

Tenzor07

Spook_ie wrote: »

Let me CLARIFY it for you again.
When you are using your cycle on a cycle lane you are NOT contributing to it, unlike when a motorist is using the road they ARE contributing to it

Classic!

Build the "M50 of cycle lanes", high speed, no traffic signals, all over Dublin city and ill stick a bicycle tax disc on my lycra'd behind!

:pac:

mathie

Spook_ie wrote: »

Why would they need a speedometer, calibrated or otherwise, a doppler radar with a sign saying slow down, with a second dopple up the street with a cycle warden should do the job neatly enough

So doppler radars and doppler radars with cycle wardens every 100? 200 metres?
Seems legit.

Tenzor07

Spook_ie wrote: »

Why would they need a speedometer, calibrated or otherwise, a doppler radar with a sign saying slow down, with a second dopple up the street with a cycle warden should do the job neatly enough

Great idea!

The Gardai Bicycle police, I can see it now, ChiPs Patrol... (Cyclists Have Police )

arthur daly

Tax and insurance too

jmayo

ThisRegard wrote: »

As soon as you started your post, I could see right through to what you were getting at, you couldn't be more transparent.

God bless your eyesight and my missed typing ...

Pinch Flat wrote: »

Top drawer rant - they're getting better.

You missed shaving our legs. Sometimes we'll shave each others.

I coudln't give a flying fook what you do to each other so long as you don't do it in the middle of the road.

RainyDay wrote: »

Yes, it's great that even though they've already paid motor tax for the car in their driveway, they aren't clogging up the road.

Ah yes the old "I pay tax gives me the right to ..."

Would you also be arguing that paying income tax gives you a right to ... let's see... maybe free water, free tv, free refuse collection ?

BTW I don't think cyclists shoudl be raod tax or bike tax.
Just obey some rules and don't think you can act the prat.

RainyDay wrote: »

Man, you seem to spend a scary amount of time studying cyclists, and particularly studying their clothing. Can I suggest that you concentrate on how other road users are driving, rather than what they are wearing?

Maybe if you get stuck behind a cyclist out in the middle of the road going at about 5mph and you had shag all chance of passing them you would also get a long detailed look at their lycra clad ar** as well.

Trust me it is not what I want to be doing, but something I have often found myself forced to endure for far too long.
BTW some of those ar**es are not hard to miss.
And I may not be just talking about the part in the saddle.

There appears to be a certain class of person (guys in particular) who have taken to wandering around the countryside probably subconciously reminiscing about the days when they chased around pretending to be Kelly or Roche.
I have usually found the cop out excuse to doing as they want to be "excercise and fitness".
Now it appears to be "well I have a car and pay road tax so I can do what I want on the roads"
I pay road tax, but does it mean I wander down the centre of the road when out for a walk ?

I would love to know how many of our sporting cyclists would be on complaining about farmers and their tractors clogging up the roads and holding them up when they are driving.

Spook_ie

mathie wrote: »

So doppler radars and doppler radars with cycle wardens every 100? 200 metres?
Seems legit.

Why would you need them every 200 meters, you put a radar activated sign at the start with a warning that you are cycling too fast for the following area, and a random cycle warden with a hand held pulling in cyclists that are ( arbitrary figure inserted ) 10% above the advised limit

Pinch Flat

Spook_ie wrote: »

And we come back, ever so neatly to investing in public transport not cycling infrastructure

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=95818677&postcount=571

Around in circle in other words, like the rest of your arguments.

Did you hear back from the minister of finance yet? I'd say they're always interested to hear about novel revenue generating ideas

smash

omahaid wrote: »

I hate to point out the obvious but motor vehicles are taxed because they use the road. This is not the same as paying. The government tax me on my income, I don't pay them. The tax exists because of the exponentially greater damage caused by cars compared to cyclists to the road network.

But even to use your logic, then cyclists should pay a tax in order to use them too. Especially since they cause exponentially greater damage to cycle lanes than any other road user. No?

But even after the fact that motor vehicles cause more damage to the road network than anyone else, motor tax for the most part does not cover road maintenance. In fact, a good chunk of it went in to Irish water last year.

Spook_ie

Pinch Flat wrote: »

Around in circle in other words, like the rest of your arguments.

Did you hear back from the minister of finance yet? I'd say they're always interested to hear about novel revenue generating ideas

I think you'll find it's your post that's circularised it

Tenzor07

smash wrote: »

But even to use your logic, then cyclists should pay a tax in order to use them too. Especially since they cause exponentially greater damage to cycle lanes than any other road user. No?
But even after the fact that motor vehicles cause more damage to the road network than anyone else, motor tax for the most part does not cover road maintenance. In fact, a good chunk of it went in to Irish water last year.

Stop trying to make sense with mature reasoned logical and practical points!

It has no point in forum threads/posts like this!