Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

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

1242527293046

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,841 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    Pretty sure that's fine. I have had members of the public tick me off for it though.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,277 ✭✭✭km991148


    tomasrojo wrote: »
    Pretty sure that's fine. I have had members of the public tick me off for it.

    ye.. I have been known the odd time to get off and push across traffic lights (very rarely ride through reds) and get some looks from other pedestrians doing the same 'jaywalk' as me..

    Never thought much of it before.. but may be good excuse to take 40euro!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,636 ✭✭✭✭whisky_galore


    tomasrojo wrote: »
    But what are "cycling circles"? It's not a confraternity. You can't issue an edict to the regional chapters, who pass it on to the members. It's just a big, disparate population of people who sometimes use bikes, many of whom don't even know many other people who ever use a bike.



    Off-topic, chances of you getting caught are pretty good in urban areas, where it is more strictly enforced. The amount of it going on in rural areas is hard to know.

    I don't mean a formal organisation, like every motorist isn't a motorhead or a member of the AA. Aren't motorists just as 'disparate'?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    tunney wrote: »
    As its been said before its all in the enforcement. It will be big for a week or two and then back to nothing.

    Not even that - a lot of Guards I've spoken to roll their eyes to heaven when you mention the impending arrival of the FCNs. They reckon they'll be plagued with people complaining to go ticket cyclists.

    My brother - a Gaurd - was telling me recently how one of his colleagues was 'accosted' by a taxi driver demanding that the cyclists who had just broken a red light right in front of him be pursued and ticketed.........thing is, said Garda was in the middle of arresting a dealer who he had just chased after he was seen slapping a 'client' around! I think the driver concerned was genuinely bemused as to why the Guard wasn't off to chase the cyclists!

    I'd say there'll be some enforcement on the lack of lights come October and other than that, unless you either break a light or cycle on the footpath in a very reckless fashion the Guards won't be bothering.

    I wonder how soon after the 1st of August there'll be a thread started by someone who got a ticket and is feeling aggrieved - like the ones that occasionally crop in motors regarding speeding?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,841 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    I don't mean a formal organisation, like every motorist isn't a motorhead or a member of the AA. Aren't motorists just as 'disparate'?
    No, very different. Most people who habitually use cars know many, many people who habitually do the same; maybe even most people they know are habitual car-users. Most are members of motoring organisations (if only for breakdown service and so on).

    The problem with the analogy is also that drink-driving is very clearly morally wrong, if you look at how many people are killed or injured by it. Red-light jumping, in contrast, is mostly harmless, just very irritating. It's harder to persuade people that it's not just a peccadillo to indulge in it.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,245 ✭✭✭check_six


    One odd thing I have only just realised is that ll the media coverage regarding these fines seem to be strongly suggesting that the offences rather than the method of penalty are completely brand new.

    Would I be free therefore to go on a rampage between now and the end of the month and claim that the laws don't apply till August? Blaming the media, naturally, when I was caught?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,584 ✭✭✭✭tunney


    I don't mean a formal organisation, like every motorist isn't a motorhead or a member of the AA. Aren't motorists just as 'disparate'?

    I'm a member of the AA. Does this mean I part of a close net community that discusses the dos and don'ts of motoring?

    I'm not a member of Motorsport Ireland.

    Motorsport Ireland versus AA - which one do YOU think is a "motoring circle"?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,584 ✭✭✭✭tunney


    Jawgap wrote: »
    Not even that - a lot of Guards I've spoken to roll their eyes to heaven when you mention the impending arrival of the FCNs. They reckon they'll be plagued with people complaining to go ticket cyclists.

    My brother - a Gaurd - was telling me recently how one of his colleagues was 'accosted' by a taxi driver demanding that the cyclists who had just broken a red light right in front of him be pursued and ticketed.........thing is, said Garda was in the middle of arresting a dealer who he had just chased after he was seen slapping a 'client' around! I think the driver concerned was genuinely bemused as to why the Guard wasn't off to chase the cyclists!

    I'd say there'll be some enforcement on the lack of lights come October and other than that, unless you either break a light or cycle on the footpath in a very reckless fashion the Guards won't be bothering.

    I wonder how soon after the 1st of August there'll be a thread started by someone who got a ticket and is feeling aggrieved - like the ones that occasionally crop in motors regarding speeding?

    To be honest the only thing stopping me breaking red lights was having to take time off work to go to court.
    If I saved 3 minutes each way on my commute thats 30 minutes a week.

    Is my time worth the odd €40 fine - definitely.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,245 ✭✭✭check_six


    tomasrojo wrote: »
    No, very different. Most people who habitually use cars know many, many people who habitually do the same; maybe even most people they know are habitual car-users.

    I'd go along with this. Go to any event and strike up a conversation about the traffic on the way there, getting stuck behind a tractor, etc. You will get a group of people expressing an opinion. Talk about the cycle there, and you're going to get blank expressions. Even bleedin' "drive-time" radio has the likes of yer man ranting and raving about other road users to 100,000 listeners (or whatever the number is) many of whom are driving while listening.

    Much more of a community for motorists.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    tunney wrote: »
    To be honest the only thing stopping me breaking red lights was having to take time off work to go to court.
    If I saved 3 minutes each way on my commute thats 30 minutes a week.

    Is my time worth the odd €40 fine - definitely.

    Hmmmm.......never looked at it that way:)

    Looking at my strava and comparing elapsed and moving times, there is a definite economic argument to be made for being a bit more flexible around red lights!


  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 3,620 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    tunney wrote: »
    To be honest the only thing stopping me breaking red lights was having to take time off work to go to court.
    If I saved 3 minutes each way on my commute thats 30 minutes a week.

    Is my time worth the odd €40 fine - definitely.

    So what you are trying to say is the €40 fixed penalty notice has given an incentive to break the lights?

    That's an interesting way to look at it.


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,371 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    I can't make sense of that logic, you only ended up in court if there was a drive (ie you really should have seen the gardai standing en masse at the corners),if you were blatantly dangerous and risk oblivious as you sailed through (in front of a Garda) and more importantly, in the majority of cases, only if you were a d1ck when pulled over about it. Yes sir, no sir, three bags full sir and you were on your way with a warning.

    If anything else the court date and fine was a tax on stupidity and pratty behaviour.

    Now the Garda has an easy way to deal with it so if time permits, they can look better on paper, most won't unless your being stupid as above but some will. There will definitely be more people fined than went to court but seeing it as an encouragement to break lights, not a hope. At best its an encouragement to be more aware of your surroundings, and less stupid which if nothing else, is a benefit.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,268 ✭✭✭✭uck51js9zml2yt


    Jawgap wrote: »
    Hmmmm.......never looked at it that way:)

    Looking at my strava and comparing elapsed and moving times, there is a definite economic argument to be made for being a bit more flexible around red lights!

    There is also am argument for not breaking a red light which has the potential to get you killed and destroy both your families lives and the lives of the driver and his/ her family.
    The amount of times I've hesitated going through a green light only to see some suicidal idiot breaking a red on his bike/car and potentially causing a crash...won't call it an accident as the person breaking the red is guilty of reckless endangerment.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    There is also am argument for not breaking a red light which has the potential to get you killed and destroy both your families lives and the lives of the driver and his/ her family.
    The amount of times I've hesitated going through a green light only to see some suicidal idiot breaking a red on his bike/car and potentially causing a crash...won't call it an accident as the person breaking the red is guilty of reckless endangerment.

    :eek:

    Lots of things have the potential to get you killed, I don't jump lights, but I reckon even if I did I doubt the increase in risk would even be measurable.


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,371 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    Jawgap wrote: »
    :eek:

    Lots of things have the potential to get you killed, I don't jump lights, but I reckon even if I did I doubt the increase in risk would even be measurable.

    Same here, I don't do it but if I did, presuming I looked around and wasn't a muppet, I doubt it would increase my risk by any measurable factor.

    My main reason for being against RLJing is the idiocy of some who currently do it and think they are safe enough (both motorists and cyclists). If Irish road users increased the median of common sense over the next few years, my opinion on whether it should be allowable in certain situations could change dramatically.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    CramCycle wrote: »
    Same here, I don't do it but if I did, presuming I looked around and wasn't a muppet, I doubt it would increase my risk by any measurable factor.

    My main reason for being against RLJing is the idiocy of some who currently do it and think they are safe enough (both motorists and cyclists). If Irish road users increased the median of common sense over the next few years, my opinion on whether it should be allowable in certain situations could change dramatically.

    Yeah, belting through a four-way junction at full tilt is indeed suicidal, but having a look and going if it's clear (or slipping around the corner) is completely different.

    Generally I don't do it around the city because of all the other idiots and because it's a bad habit to get into - can't honesty say I'm as scrupulous at 0630 coming through Balbriggan (even at the lights there at the Garda station);)

    But if economic considerations were a factor my calculation would be based on

    40P > TR

    where

    40 is the amount of fine in Euros
    P is the probability of getting caught
    T is the amount of time saved by jumping lights
    R is my hourly fee rate

    At any given red light, if 40P is greater than TR then it makes economic sense to obey the lights. However, if TR > 40P then there's a clear economic incentive to bowl on through :D

    It will be interesting to plot P over the next few months!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,383 ✭✭✭✭rubadub


    The only way to get people back into line is, like drink driving, make it socially unacceptable within cycling circles to break the law.
    I perceive dangerous cycling to be socially unacceptable to people. Breaking the law is certainly not though, as its often done in a safe or benign manner, or often more safe than obeying the law, people doing acts which are not what the law actually set out to prevent.

    e.g. if a pedestrian is being chased by a mugger or big dog and illegally crosses at a red man on a totally empty road, then this is illegal, but I don't think its socially unacceptable and I would hope the gardai would not prosecute them or that people would frown upon the act.

    I cannot think of a similar instance where being over the drink driving limit would not be an act that the law set out to prevent. Unless some obscure technicality existed e.g. a guy with 1 pint going out to his car to open the boot and could somehow be done.

    If there was an absolute zero tolerance on drink driving I think many cases would be socially acceptable, e.g. eating a meal with a dash of red wine added to it with trace alcohol left in it. Technically illegal but not what the law set out to prevent.


  • Registered Users Posts: 159 ✭✭Buchaill_Mor


    I am waiting on the YouTube video of George Hook holding Roco the Courrier's handlebars while shouting at the top of his voice some guff about citizens arrest. As an aside , anyone else spot George Wednesday evening stopped in the pedestrian crossing outside the College of Surgeons residence in his Brown Mercedes E class waiting on traffic that had already cleared while eyeing up some young ladies, preventing pedestrians with buggies crossing at that point? Reckon that is a regular occourance.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,245 ✭✭✭check_six


    As an aside , anyone else spot George Wednesday evening stopped in the pedestrian crossing outside the College of Surgeons residence in his Brown Mercedes E class waiting on traffic that had already cleared while eyeing up some young ladies, preventing pedestrians with buggies crossing at that point?

    Well no, but one of the evenings this week he did claim to have got a bike on the BTW scheme which quite surprised me.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,371 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    check_six wrote: »
    Well no, but one of the evenings this week he did claim to have got a bike on the BTW scheme which quite surprised me.

    He lets the facade slip sometimes, I can't believe he hates people he does not know as much as he claims, he'd be dead from the stress if that was the case. It's a job, being a crank gets him paid, nothing more.


  • Registered Users Posts: 46 Terry5135


    cjt156 wrote: »
    Perhaps if we all try to stick to the laws pertaining to our chosen mode of transport we won't all seem so pig headed and hateful.

    Whatchya reckon? Now com'ere give us a hug!

    Accepted and thanks for the hug. I certainly did not mean for that to be as offensive as it apparently was. My apologies for that.

    Remember Dustin Hoffman's run in with a taxi in "Midnight Cowboy"? I've had those. I've stopped on foot in front of cars that were attempting, consciously or not, to bully me into hurrying along. I know the rules of the road. You can't start (in a car) from a stopped position at a corner to make a turn and run down a pedestrian. lol. It's against the law to murder people. I've seen others get into these body language arguments with drivers and I'm certainly as bad as any of them.

    But then, remember a few years ago when there was such a road rage incident between a pedestrian and a driver and the driver did exactly that? That is, he just murdered the pedestrian. It was really shocking for me.

    About 35 years ago, I was on a motorbike and while making a right turn on a boulevard with a few lanes turning right, and I made a poor turn, drifting outside my own lane. A car came up fast from behind, also turning right, and nearly broadsided me with a side swipe. At the next light, I pulled up next to him and said, 'you nearly killed me back there'. His response, 'I was in my lane'. I couldn't believe my ears. I said, 'Yes, you were, and I made a poor turn and was in the wrong. That makes it ok to run over me?'

    About 10 years later, I was driving. From Ranelagh to Rathmines, incidentally. A car was parked on the far side of the street where there really wasn't room for a parked car. A bus was coming from the opposite direction, about equidistant from the car. Normally, for good manners, I would defer passage to the oncoming car. But I could see that the bus was not hesitating, that he, in my projection, was using the mighty muscle of bus steel to bully his way ahead of me, even though, strictly speaking, the car was in HIS lane, not mine. So I accelerated to get there first (it was still pretty slow, we were both well within speed limits) and we both had to stop. He rolled down his window, so I did mine, fully expecting him to give out. But he didn't. He very calmly asked me, almost deadpan, as though quietly concerned for me, "Are you trying to commit suicide?" I had to laugh, at me, at the situation. It was priceless. I said back to him, "You have a point there, no question," and then laughed again.

    It was not a serious incident. There was no road rage on anyone's part. But the incongruity of it all that made me laugh was, in part, he was right of course, what good do my legal rights do me if I'm dead (to exaggerate the consequences).

    In actuality, I drive extremely carefully around cyclists. I always have. I despise drivers who fly by cyclists within inches, regardless of whether those drivers are within their rights, within the limit, within their lane. I'm very well aware of poorly thought out limits (and they are) and of how holes or fissures in a poorly kept road can cause a cyclist to suddenly swerve, momentarily out of control, or worse, actually take a spill. I know all the glib answers about keeping concentration, about watching the road, etc, etc. I also know life and habit and routine and what that does to concentration. I give cyclists a much wider berth than is required. Much. And I virtually never pass a cyclist at the same time as a car is going to pass coming the other direction - on a highway, that is, or a two lane street.

    I started to legally drive almost 50 years ago. I came here just over 35 years ago and spent a decade+ without a car. I cycled a lot, had two cycles stolen, and decided that for primary transportation, the weather here made cycling too difficult. (I'm sorry I stopped, actually - I'd be much healthier now if I hadn't.) When I took up driving again, I had to get an Irish license. (I'm an Irish citizen, too.) To do that, I took a block of 3 lessons from a very good driving instructor. I did that for a few reasons: a) to get practice with a manual transmission; b) to get the use of the car for the test; c) to become more familiar with a few counter intuitive differences in rules of the road; and d) to learn and practice starting from a stopped position on an up-slope in a manual transmission.

    Once, when about to make a near turn, i.e., a left turn, the instructor asked me why I kept glancing at the left side mirror and over my shoulder. For cyclists suddenly appearing, I said. She didn't challenge the answer, she appeared to like it.

    I had heard how strict the testers were. When I took the test, he took me around a corner and had me pull over on a fairly steep up-slope. Then after stopping, he said, ok, go ahead. But a cyclist was behind me. They don't talk, those testers, lol. So, without a word, I just waited for the cyclist to pass, to forestall any possible error that would have me rolling back. But as I waited, the cyclist was getting tired on the hill and going slower and slower. I waited and I waited, silence causing tension to build in me. Then the hill finally defeated the cyclist entirely and he dismounted, to walk his cycle up. And I waited. Finally, uncomfortable in the silence, I said, "I'm just waiting for the cyclist to clear." He just said, "As you should." Fine. But it was too late and when I finally was clear to go, I popped the clutch slightly and had the accelerator down too hard, so I squealed away from the curb and probably left a bit of rubber on the road. I was absolutely certain I'd failed at that point, so I then relaxed and started to gab, drive normally (ie, without too much conscious overthinking). He said nothing. I even made a right turn into a left lane which turned out to be a left turn only lane, so I quickly moved to the right, looking carefully and signally the whole way. But I didn't think he'd like that either.

    As it turned out, he passed me. On the way in, he said, "I don't know why you're depressed, you passed the test." I was surprised, pointed out the terrible launch up the hill. He shrugged, "everyone gets nervous, makes mistakes, but it's obvious you know very well how to drive".

    But it's obvious to me I'm not going to last here. The mods are over-moderating. And now I'm talking about them, which in their minds will be worse. There is no power worse than small power. I think they should have let things play out, see how it went. But really? An almost dead thread? How about a Greek conversation that started thousands of years ago?, lol. I've seen it with community organization and "voluntary" contributions - voluntary doesn't mean you can say no and they're worse than the government. I've seen rent allowance officers in 3 counties and they're much worse, in general with exceptions, than the national social protection officers. I'm too old to go to primary school. Especially with hall monitors who have a heavy hand to justify their existence. I don't much care for threats over minor infractions. It's rude. But in this era, it's world wide. My dogs would have been shot by cops ten times over in America, so I'm thankful I'm here.

    I came because I kept getting notices in my mailbox which seemed very inviting. But no need to explain them. I also came because I saw the article about fines for cyclists. And because of the Greek situation. But it's clear I'm not going to last. So, I'll just hold my breath, carry on, and wait for the axe. It won't be long coming, I suspect.

    Thanks for your post. And especially for the hug. :-)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,526 ✭✭✭✭Darkglasses


    As you seem to be well aware - discussing moderation on thread is against the rules of the site. You've received an in-thread warning here already, either start following the rules or you will have your access removed.


  • Registered Users Posts: 46 Terry5135


    As you seem to be well aware - discussing moderation on thread is against the rules of the site. You've received an in-thread warning here already, either start following the rules or you will have your access removed.

    Sure, Darkglasses, no prob.


  • Registered Users Posts: 46 Terry5135


    I am waiting on the YouTube video of George Hook holding Roco the Courrier's handlebars while shouting at the top of his voice some guff about citizens arrest. As an aside , anyone else spot George Wednesday evening stopped in the pedestrian crossing outside the College of Surgeons residence in his Brown Mercedes E class waiting on traffic that had already cleared while eyeing up some young ladies, preventing pedestrians with buggies crossing at that point? Reckon that is a regular occourance.

    Love that story. Good one. I don't think eyeing young ladies is especially germane, lol. Why smear a guy who so effectively and constantly smears himself.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,584 ✭✭✭✭tunney


    I am waiting on the YouTube video of George Hook holding Roco the Courrier's handlebars while shouting at the top of his voice some guff about citizens arrest.
    Any person can arrest someone who they have reasonable cause is in the act of committing or has committed an "arrestable" offence, that is one punishable by more than 5 years in prison.[20] The arrest can only be effected if the arrestor has reasonable cause that the person will attempt to avoid apprehension by Gardaí and the arrestor delivers the person to Garda custody as soon as is practicable.

    Thats just George committing a crime himself, possibly assault.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,383 ✭✭✭✭rubadub


    http://www.independent.ie/life/matt-cooper-brands-george-hook-a-criminal-on-ireland-am-31349256.html
    In an interview with Mark Cagney and Sinead Desmond, keen cyclist Matt came head-to-head with George, who said he “hates cyclists with a passion” and classed them all as “criminals”.

    Matt was quick to interject, pointing out George’s previous traffic offences, stating:
    “He [George] goes on about criminals, George, you’re the criminal. You’ve got a string of road traffic offence convictions.

    “I found three last night when I was searching the internet over a short period of time. There was a Judge who said that you were close to being, what was the phrase that was used? A ‘serial traffic offender’ and you were in court a number of times for breaking the speed limit. Speed is the most dangerous thing on the road.”
    Maybe George will turn himself in if he did get a bike on the BTW scheme. If he claims he's not using it then its tax fraud.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,912 ✭✭✭galwaycyclist


    rubadub wrote: »
    http://www.independent.ie/life/matt-cooper-brands-george-hook-a-criminal-on-ireland-am-31349256.html


    Maybe George will turn himself in if he did get a bike on the BTW scheme. If he claims he's not using it then its tax fraud.

    I believe George maybe doing something on this issue on this evenings "Right Hook" show.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,841 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    I believe George maybe doing something on this issue on this evenings "Right Hook" show.
    He's in a hole ... spade in hand ... next stop, Australia! (His opinions are more mainstream there anyway.)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,561 ✭✭✭Eamonnator


    I believe George maybe doing something on this issue on this evenings "Right Hook" show.

    Thanks for the warning.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    ......so it begins.

    The poster for the FCNs seems to suggest hi-viz and helmets are compulsory

    355975.jpg


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,121 ✭✭✭buffalo


    That is a terrible quality poster.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    I'm probably being dense, but what's the difference between 4 & 7?


  • Registered Users Posts: 39 samvimes


    Are Helmets now to be enforced? I was under the impression that they were not required by law? I've been wondering how these penalty notices are to be applied to the likes of the Dublin bike scheme users


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Jawgap wrote: »
    I'm probably being dense, but what's the difference between 4 & 7?
    :D

    Who in the actual fnck produced that poster?

    4 & 7 are supposed to refer to breaking normal lights and breaking bike-only lights (such as on the grand canal), but someone decided to put their own interpretation on the poster.

    I wonder if that was produced by someone trying to be a good helpful citizen rather than by the RSA or Gardai?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    seamus wrote: »
    :D

    Who in the actual fnck produced that poster?

    4 & 7 are supposed to refer to breaking normal lights and breaking bike-only lights (such as on the grand canal), but someone decided to put their own interpretation on the poster.

    I wonder if that was produced by someone trying to be a good helpful citizen rather than by the RSA or Gardai?

    It popped upon the Garda Twitter feed

    https://twitter.com/gardatraffic/status/623796681851674624

    So I assume it's official.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,526 ✭✭✭✭Darkglasses


    That is such a sh!te poster, gah.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    What's not to like?

    All the stereotypes are there - including the idea that you have to be in full Lycra to ride a bike!

    Wouldn't have the same impact if it showed Mrs Miggins going to the pie shop on her high nelly in flowing skirts.

    The image of the Lycra-lout must be seated into the public imagination :D


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,157 ✭✭✭✭Alanstrainor


    I was handed that flyer yesterday by gardai stopping all cyclists crossing the Samuel Beckett bridge yesterday at 5ish.


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,371 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    seamus wrote: »
    :D

    Who in the actual fnck produced that poster?

    I wonder if that was produced by someone trying to be a good helpful citizen rather than by the RSA or Gardai?

    You can tell it was produced by the RSA for many reasons including but not limited too:
    - factually incorrect
    - no proofreading for errors
    - over emphasis on helmets and hi vis
    - not run by someone with knowledge of the legislation


    It also has lance armstrong riding a poorly fitting and cheap MTB , all very confusing


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,103 ✭✭✭mathie


    It looks like a baboon shat it out on MS Paint.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,383 ✭✭✭✭rubadub


    The "reasonable consideration" is the big worry. We have all heard stories of pig ignorant gardai stopping people in the past and asking where there helmets or hi viz is, thinking it was the law. Now these gardai will see this sign and think it is the case. But the "reasonable consideration" gives them a chance to save face, since when the cyclist says

    "eh its not the law to have a helmet, can you please state the the law regarding helmets?"

    -"don't get schmart with me bucko, because you have no helmet I don't think you are cycling with reasonable consideration so I am doing you for that"

    It's like the incredible vague public order offence law that came in a few years back, which allowed them to do you for all sorts.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,121 ✭✭✭buffalo


    CramCycle wrote: »
    It also has lance armstrong riding a poorly fitting and cheap MTB , all very confusing

    Judging by the Europcar shorts and yellow jersey, I'm going to challenge that it's Thomas Voeckler? Maybe the 2011 Tour?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,887 ✭✭✭traprunner


    rubadub wrote: »
    The "reasonable consideration" is the big worry. We have all heard stories of pig ignorant gardai stopping people in the past and asking where there helmets or hi viz is, thinking it was the law. Now these gardai will see this sign and think it is the case. But the "reasonable consideration" gives them a chance to save face, since when the cyclist says

    "eh its not the law to have a helmet, can you please state the the law regarding helmets?"

    -"don't get schmart with me bucko, because you have no helmet I don't think you are cycling with reasonable consideration so I am doing you for that"

    It's like the incredible vague public order offence law that came in a few years back, which allowed them to do you for all sorts.


    Yep, it's a catch all revenue stream.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    traprunner wrote: »
    Yep, it's a catch all revenue stream.

    I seriously doubt this will be revenue generative.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,460 ✭✭✭lennymc


    Jawgap wrote: »
    I seriously doubt this will be revenue generative.

    I seriously doubt it will be enforced


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,887 ✭✭✭traprunner


    Jawgap wrote: »
    I seriously doubt this will be revenue generative.

    €40 a pop. Guard sees a cyclist not using a bike lane even though it's full of pot holes...that could be classed as cycling without reasonable consideration.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,584 ✭✭✭✭tunney


    traprunner wrote: »
    €40 a pop. Guard sees a cyclist not using a bike lane even though it's full of pot holes...that could be classed as cycling without reasonable consideration.

    No because there is no requirement to use them.

    Presuming like FPN there will be an appeals process


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    traprunner wrote: »
    €40 a pop. Guard sees a cyclist not using a bike lane even though it's full of pot holes...that could be classed as cycling without reasonable consideration.

    Take from that €40 the cost of administering each fine, the cost of prosecuting the minority who decline to pay and the cost of following up on dodgers, etc

    That's even before you look at the opportunity cost of having a Guard monitor a cycle lane.

    It'll be periodically enforced, but it won't be a revenue stream for the Guards, I reckon most Guards will run a mile from having to routinely issue these tickets.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,204 ✭✭✭elfy4eva


    traprunner wrote: »
    €40 a pop. Guard sees a cyclist not using a bike lane even though it's full of pot holes...that could be classed as cycling without reasonable consideration.

    Want to get back into cycling but this stuff is putting me right off.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    lennymc wrote: »
    I seriously doubt it will be enforced

    I seriously doubt you're wrong.


Advertisement