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

Cyclists

2456712

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 24,937 ✭✭✭✭Wishbone Ash


    cletus wrote: »
    .., but you can't discount bad behaviour on a bike by saying "but they're not real cyclists"
    But what's the point 'preaching to the converted' here?


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,460 ✭✭✭at1withmyself


    Cycling forum = fix cycling forums

    Motoring forums = fix motoring forums

    I can see the difficulty here alright, tis very confusing

    I'm a motorist, like most cyclists. So I can talk about the dangers of motoring on any thread, subject to usual moderation rules. The more interesting question is why so many people are so dedicated to 'fixing' cyclists and cycling, but they seem to run out of ideas before they start when it comes to fixing the motorists who kill 3 or 4 people each week.


    It's like a doctor finding a patient bleeding out due to an amputation, and giving them a sticking plaster.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,809 ✭✭✭cletus


    But what's the point 'preaching to the converted' here?

    Sorry, I don't understand what you mean


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 480 ✭✭ewc78


    But this is the cycling forum, not the motoring forum. Let the motorist have there own debate there.

    Cycling without lights is against the law and just because people break debateably worse laws that is not a good argument.

    As per other comments even 1 death is too much.

    Why not have a discussion without bringing cars into it?[\b]

    That particular poster (andrewjrenko)is incapable of doing that




  • Unfortunately there are a few cases who persist in chancing their arm after dark - no reflective gear or lighting rendering them almost invisible to the motorist. The rest of us then suffer cheap labelling i.e. "pesky cyclists". The Gardaí haven't the easiest job on their hands enforcing the law, but something has to give.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 12,839 ✭✭✭✭average_runner


    buffalo wrote: »
    So would you disqualify the use of one statistic in favour of another that apparently doesn't exist?

    It's not all about deaths certainly, but it's all we have at present to indicate patterns and trends, unless you care to produce some more detailed data?

    I never disqualify any stat. Just asked simple question.


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,839 ✭✭✭✭average_runner


    The question isn't whether the point is valid.

    The question is, of all the issues on the road that need action, where abouts on the priority list of all valid issues is this one?

    I don't think it is in the top 20. I'm not sure it is in the top 50.

    I often wonder why the creativity and motivation of many motorists in coming up with ideas to 'fix' cycling and cyclists is not applied to fixing the real danger on the roads - the motorists who kill three or four people each week and maim many more.

    But you are forgetting the bigger problem. If we allow one group away with something, all the other groups will behave the same way. Thats human behaviour.

    So we need to treat all the same which in turn will make the roads safer for all and save lives.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,199 ✭✭✭07Lapierre


    The problem is ENFORCEMENT or should I say lack of enforcement. People don’t use lights because the RSA give out free “immunity”vests!

    We have cycle lanes on the roads, cycle paths on the pavements which assume cyclists act like pedestrians. We have motorists who see any cyclists as a tax evading freeloader who can’t afford a car, so shouldn’t be on the road!

    In short no wonder people are confused!


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,953 ✭✭✭bilbot79


    It's the time of year. About a month from now they'll all have bought new lights etc


  • Registered Users Posts: 436 ✭✭incentsitive


    The best way to differentiate the bad cyclists from the bad drivers is to highlight that the bad drivers kill 3 or 4 people each week, while the bad cyclists don't.
    That's a lame enough argument though in fairness too. I mean, if I am cycling home from work and am lit up properly, get hit by a car through no fault of my own, that's the car's fault.
    Conversely, if I have no lights on and a black jacket and a car driver knocks me off and kills me, do you think the vast majority of car drivers would not be completely traumatised by that, regardless of right/wrong?
    The old "oh they are much worse because they can kill more people" is a lame argument.
    It is up to everybody to behave on the roads.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,481 ✭✭✭Fighting Tao


    I think the Boards needs a 'The Visible Invisible Ninja Cyclist' super thread at this stage.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,199 ✭✭✭07Lapierre




  • Registered Users Posts: 32,370 ✭✭✭✭rubadub


    If we allow one group away with something, all the other groups will behave the same way. Thats human behaviour.
    .
    no we/they do not!!!! FFS pedestrians get away with breaking red lights all the time, when is the last time you heard of one been prosecuted for jaywalking!! Do articulated truck drivers "behave the same way" as them!~ bizarre BS nonsense. What sort of moronic mind thinks people will behave the same walking/jogging/running/bicycle/moped/bus

    So we need to treat all the same which in turn will make the roads safer for all and save lives.
    the gardai thankfully quite obviously disagree with you, thanks be to christ. Ludicrously ignorant comments if you actually bothered your hole to actually think about it. Quite worrying stuff.


  • Registered Users Posts: 27,983 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Cycling forum = fix cycling forums

    Motoring forums = fix motoring forums

    I can see the difficulty here alright, tis very confusing


    The difficulty is that you've just made that up. It's not part of the forum rules for either forum.


    Certainly, the cycling forum has frequent discussions about keeping cyclists safe. By and large, this involves getting motorists to comply with the law.



    Unfortunately there are a few cases who persist in chancing their arm after dark - no reflective gear or lighting rendering them almost invisible to the motorist. The rest of us then suffer cheap labelling i.e. "pesky cyclists". The Gardaí haven't the easiest job on their hands enforcing the law, but something has to give.


    The best way to avoid the rest of us suffering is to point out how ridiculous any kind of collective responsibility is.


    Do the rest of motorists suffer 'pesky drivers' labelling because of the few idiots driving round with no back lights because they don't know how their DRLs work?
    But you are forgetting the bigger problem. If we allow one group away with something, all the other groups will behave the same way. Thats human behaviour.
    Great, so let's stop motorists from getting away with routinely breaking speed limits and red lights, and then cyclists will certainly follow. The bigger problem is the motorists that kill and maim.

    So we need to treat all the same which in turn will make the roads safer for all and save lives.

    I don't think that's how policing works.
    That's a lame enough argument though in fairness too. I mean, if I am cycling home from work and am lit up properly, get hit by a car through no fault of my own, that's the car's fault.
    Conversely, if I have no lights on and a black jacket and a car driver knocks me off and kills me, do you think the vast majority of car drivers would not be completely traumatised by that, regardless of right/wrong?
    The old "oh they are much worse because they can kill more people" is a lame argument.
    It is up to everybody to behave on the roads.
    If I'm a pedestrian with no lights and a black jacket crossing the road and a car driver knocks me off, who are we going to blame?




  • The difficulty is that you've just made that up. It's not part of the forum rules for either forum.


    Certainly, the cycling forum has frequent discussions about keeping cyclists safe. By and large, this involves getting motorists to comply with the law.







    The best way to avoid the rest of us suffering is to point out how ridiculous any kind of collective responsibility is.


    Do the rest of motorists suffer 'pesky drivers' labelling because of the few idiots driving round with no back lights because they don't know how their DRLs work?


    Great, so let's stop motorists from getting away with routinely breaking speed limits and red lights, and then cyclists will certainly follow. The bigger problem is the motorists that kill and maim.




    I don't think that's how policing works.


    If I'm a pedestrian with no lights and a black jacket crossing the road and a car driver knocks me off, who are we going to blame?

    Do you sincerely believe that, should we not acknowledge others on the road at all?


  • Registered Users Posts: 27,983 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Mike1961 wrote: »

    The best way to avoid the rest of us suffering is to point out how ridiculous any kind of collective responsibility is.


    Do you sincerely believe that, should we not acknowledge others on the road at all?[/quote]
    My point about collective responsibility was about the ridiculous suggestion that the actions of some law breaking cyclists give all cyclists a bad name.

    The easiest way to prove how ridiculous it is is to suggest that the motorists who killed 3 or 4 people this week give all motorists a bad name.

    I'm not sure I get your point about 'acknowledging'?




  • My point about collective responsibility was about the ridiculous suggestion that the actions of some law breaking cyclists give all cyclists a bad name.

    The easiest way to prove how ridiculous it is is to suggest that the motorists who killed 3 or 4 people this week give all motorists a bad name.

    I'm not sure I get your point about 'acknowledging'?

    Fair enough, I assumed you were dismissing the concept of collective responsibility. You seized on my "rest of us" remark, and then somehow equated this with fatalities caused by motorists. That's quite the leap, I was making the point that certain people will utilise idiotic cyclists as cannon-fodder to make a blanket assumption that all cyclists are a menace on the road.


  • Registered Users Posts: 27,983 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    I was making the point that certain people will utilise idiotic cyclists as cannon-fodder to make a blanket assumption that all cyclists are a menace on the road.

    Yes, I get that some people will make that assumption. And I suggest that we challenge their assumption rather than play along with their game.

    Ask them what they, as a motorist are doing about the 3 or 4 people killed by motorists each week. See how long it takes for them to work out that collective responsibility doesn't work.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 22,584 CMod ✭✭✭✭Steve


    Yes, I get that some people will make that assumption. And I suggest that we challenge their assumption rather than play along with their game.

    Ask them what they, as a motorist are doing about the 3 or 4 people killed by motorists each week. See how long it takes for them to work out that collective responsibility doesn't work.

    "Us and them"

    It's always the other side's fault.

    If you want collective responsibility then you have to remove the terms 'cyclist' and 'motorist' from the discussion and replace them with 'road user'.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Used to be you'd get Garda stopping cyclists for no lights. These days never. That's the problem.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 8,037 ✭✭✭buffalo


    beauf wrote: »
    Used to be you'd have Garda. These days never. That's the problem.

    FYP.


  • Registered Users Posts: 27,983 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Steve wrote: »

    It's always the other side's fault.

    If you want collective responsibility then you have to remove the terms 'cyclist' and 'motorist' from the discussion and replace them with 'road user'.
    The data shows clearly exactly who is responsible for road deaths. In a strong majority of cases, it is a motorist.


  • Registered Users Posts: 27,983 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    beauf wrote: »
    Used to be you'd get Garda stopping cyclists for no lights. These days never. That's the problem.

    I saw one doing just that in Ranelagh last week.

    Probably the same one that was stopping cyclists breaking red lights there in the summer.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 22,584 CMod ✭✭✭✭Steve


    The data shows clearly exactly who is responsible for road deaths. In a strong majority of cases, it is a motorist.

    Can you cite that data please.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    I saw one doing just that in Ranelagh last week.

    Probably the same one that was stopping cyclists breaking red lights there in the summer.

    Garda overtime is ridiculous...


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,460 ✭✭✭at1withmyself


    The data shows clearly exactly who is responsible for road deaths. In a strong majority of cases, it is a motorist.

    This thread is supposed to be about bike lights, not who kills most on the road. You can't help yourself polluting the thread with the same drivel as every other thread about cycling, I give up.


  • Registered Users Posts: 436 ✭✭incentsitive


    This thread is supposed to be about bike lights, not who kills most on the road. You can't help yourself polluting the thread with the same drivel as every other thread about cycling, I give up.

    I was just about to make just that point. The old "they kill more people" argument is ridiculous. Of course they kill more, there are more of them on the road and the manner of their vehicle means that they have a larger vehicle which is more dangerous. Should we ban lorries because they are even bigger?

    I think the OP is more about people taking personal responsibility than about cyclists v car drivers v lorry drivers v speedboat drivers. The "oh they are worse, they kill more people" attitude is tired and a lame argument. Bike weight is about 10% that of the human (guess, if even) on it, of course a car is going to kill more people by their very nature.

    And I think most people are in agreement - the small minority of cyclists who don't have lights need to get them and stop giving us all a bad name, and the Gardai need to start enforcing the law (yes, for all road users!)! End of thread.

    But sure hey, it only takes 1 poster to drag the debate down to "them v us".


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,481 ✭✭✭Fighting Tao


    I think the OP is more about people taking personal responsibility than about cyclists v car drivers v lorry drivers v speedboat drivers. The "oh they are worse" attitude is tired and a lame argument.

    Indisagree. I think the OP was an attempt to start a cyclist bashing thread.
    And I think most people are in agreement - the small minority of cyclists who don't have lights need to get them and stop giving us all a bad name, and the Gardai need to start enforcing the law (yes, for all road users!)! End of thread.

    This is true as has been repeatedly emphasised on Boards in countless threads. It would be near impossible to find a cyclist on Boards that will defend people with no lights.


  • Registered Users Posts: 436 ✭✭incentsitive


    Hmmm....maybe its how we read it Fighting Tao! I don't think he was. I think he was just making the point.

    Out of curiousity, has anybody ever challenged a cyclist on it? I have done it and won't again.

    Now I would wonder if lights, helmets, high-vis, etc should be exempt from VAT for example (maybe they are already?). But its hardly the 20 quid it costs which is the barrier to people doing it.

    You won't find a cyclist who will defend one with no lights, but you will find somebody ready to jump in with the "drivers are worse" attitude!


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,481 ✭✭✭Fighting Tao


    Hmmm....maybe its how we read it Fighting Tao! I don't think he was. I think he was just making the point.

    Out of curiousity, has anybody ever challenged a cyclist on it? I have done it and won't again.

    Now I would wonder if lights, helmets, high-vis, etc should be exempt from VAT for example (maybe they are already?). But its hardly the 20 quid it costs which is the barrier to people doing it.

    You won't find a cyclist who will defend one with no lights, but you will find somebody ready to jump in with the "drivers are worse" attitude!

    I've only said it to a woman on a Dublin bike and she thanked me. I did ask a guy to signal before manoeuvring a few weeks ago as he decided he wanted to turn right as I was overtaking him. He threw a curse my way. It's not worth engaging with some people.

    All safety equipment should be VAT exempt. Although I don't think it would make a difference as lights can be bought quite cheaply. I don't think it will change the mentality of someone who chooses to cycle without them.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement