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 all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
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

Journalism and cycling

1…5152545657…201

Comments

  • #2652
    plodder
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,402 ✭✭✭plodder


    tomasrojo wrote: »
    I haven't been following the case, as it's too depressing, but the Guardian article linked suggests he tried to go around the back of her to avoid her and she stepped backwards into his path.
    That should have helped his case I suppose, and is an "accidental" element to it then. The other thing is he wasn't actually convicted of manslaughter only causing bodily harm. The jury heard all the evidence and that's what they decided. So, unless he had a particularly incompetent lawyer, I'd be happy enough with it.


  • #2653
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 50,181 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    Moflojo wrote: »
    That was me, and it's still my favourite cartoon.
    *cough*
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=103731005&postcount=1881


  • #2654
    tomasrojo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,804 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    plodder wrote: »
    That should have helped his case I suppose, and is an "accidental" element to it then. The other thing is he wasn't actually convicted of manslaughter only causing bodily harm. The jury heard all the evidence and that's what they decided. So, unless he had a particularly incompetent lawyer, I'd be happy enough with it.

    Very true. I don't think anyone is arguing that he got an unfair trial in the context of what he was charged for.


  • #2655
    NyOmnishambles
    Registered Users Posts: 897 ✭✭✭NyOmnishambles


    RayCun wrote: »
    When a motorist hits a bike or a pedestrian, does a mechanic check over their car to make sure it would pass the NCT?

    They do
    The Guards will seize the vehicle and check the brakes, tyres and maintenance and ensure the car is roadworthy
    If not they will get charged with that


  • #2656
    Moflojo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,006 ✭✭✭Moflojo


    magicbastarder wrote: »
    *cough*
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=103731005&postcount=1881

    Stop copying me.


  • #2657
    ThisRegard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 27,833 ✭✭✭✭ThisRegard


    Moflojo wrote: »
    Stop copying me.

    Well you guys just disproved the theory anyway. You should have been best friends.


  • #2658
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,452 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    RacoonQueen wrote: »
    edit: please note, I do not normally watch this morning, just off work today and it was on when I turned tv on :pac:

    Sure, we believe you. What did you think of yer one on Jeremy Kyle today?


  • #2659
    Chuchote
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,368 ✭✭✭Chuchote


    plodder wrote: »
    I think that depends on the exact circumstances. There seems to be some suggestion that he expected her to get out of his way, rather than him stopping or avoiding her. The prosecution seemed to make a case that he could have stopped if he had a front brake (and was prepared to use it).

    They might be if they didn't take action to avoid the pedestrian.

    He really had two choices - try and avoid her or throw himself off the bike.

    The Indo article is revolting, but I feel great sympathy for the driver, as I'm sure others here do.


  • #2660
    ford2600
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,457 ✭✭✭ford2600


    Moflojo wrote: »
    That article is really, really f**ked up! You'd swear 'Martin', the driver, was the victim of the collision! The real victim is barely given status as a human being in the entire article. I think it's genuinely outrageous to present a fatal collision entirely from the perspective of the person who did the killing.

    The sight distance with full beam headlights of a non luminous body is 120m.

    If Martin was doing 55km/h, he would have had about 7.8 secs to see Deceased.

    Yet "he barely saw him" or "he knew he hit something". Which is it Martin.

    That throw distance calculation is iffy with good data; can't see how they had an accurate impact point here.

    What a crock of sh1t of an article. Free pass to mow someone down and put it all on a dead man.

    *of course it's prudent to use torch on unlit roads but a motorist can't sidestep his duty of care; or maybe he can and did


  • #2661
    Doeshedare
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 153 ✭✭Doeshedare


    I commute by bike sometime, by car mostly and I leisure (or train) cycle at weekends. My non cycling family and friends complain that cyclists hold up traffic to which I reply cyclists are traffic. So the headline in this got going

    "After Kim Briggs’s death, cyclists must realise that they are traffic too":https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/aug/24/kim-briggs-cyclists-traffic-bike-charlie-alliston

    Comments have gone mad but not much more than the usual mud slinging


  • Advertisement
  • #2662
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 50,181 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    the grauniad staff has picked this as their top comment:

    I've ridden a bike most of my life. I commuted by bike, in London, Yorkshire and the North East, for many years. At no time I have ever been in doubt that I am "traffic". My problem has been getting drivers to acknowledge that I am traffic, and entitled to the same consideration as they expect for themselves.

    Of course cyclists need to obey the law and exercise due care. But cyclists kill roughly one pedestrian per year, it's exotically rare. Drivers kill over one hundred cyclists, and well over one thousand pedestrians, every year, and it is extremely difficult to secure a conviction. Cycling UK couldn't even get a woman convicted of dangerous driving after she had run into a cyclist from the rear, in broad daylight, with no defence other than that she hadn't noticed him. Charlie Alliston was certainly foolish to be riding a brakeless track bike, but does anyone imagine that had the unfortunate victim stepped out in front of a car travelling at 18 mph, the driver of that car would have been convicted of anything? No chance.


  • #2663
    Pinch Flat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,767 ✭✭✭Pinch Flat


    Caught the tail end of a radio piece on radio 1 this morning, around before 8am. The chief executive of the RSA going on about kids safety and encouraging cycling to school. Must listen back to the pod cast.

    Anyway, the RSA will be given our free hi-vis to any school children if anyone's interested. They're some sort of magic shield if kids are cycling to school. I think I heard her say they'd given out 1,000,000 free hi-vis vests to date. Now that it would appear virtually every school kid in the country has one, maybe this phase of the operation is complete?

    So perhaps they can now start on driver education - getting people to slow down, stop passing dangerously and irresponsibly. Rather than the gardai handing out hi-vis, do you think we'll see them stop motorists periodically and advise them they're approaching a school and perhaps slow down a bit?


  • #2664
    Weepsie
    Site Banned Posts: 20,686 ✭✭✭✭Weepsie


    There was a bit of veiled cyclist bashing too, stating the obvious as in they must obey the ROTR as if there are bandit cyclists out there causing grief to all road users. Not much of a mention on driver behaviour other than telling them to be careful. I imagine the RSA spokesperson (I think they said it was their head person) is handsomely paid.


  • #2665
    Grassey
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,393 ✭✭✭Grassey


    Pinch Flat wrote: »

    So perhaps they can now start on driver education - getting people to slow down, stop passing dangerously and irresponsibly. Rather than the gardai handing out hi-vis, do you think we'll see them stop motorists periodically and advise them they're approaching a school and perhaps slow down a bit?

    I'm certain that if all drivers wore high vis and helmets there would be zero daily accidents on the m50. Surely lack of high vis must be the reason that with 3 lanes of cars travelling in the same direction at roughly the same speed rear endings occur as they couldn't possibly see the car in front?


  • #2666
    plodder
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,402 ✭✭✭plodder


    Chuchote wrote: »
    He really had two choices - try and avoid her or throw himself off the bike.
    At the time yes, but the case was about more than that; like he had a choice about using a track bike on the public street.
    The Indo article is revolting, but I feel great sympathy for the driver, as I'm sure others here do.
    Revolting doesn't begin to describe that. Imagine how the family of the barely acknowledged deceased man must feel. I can't say exactly what I think of it, or I'd be getting into defamation territory unfortunately.


  • #2667
    mr spuckler
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,121 ✭✭✭mr spuckler


    ford2600 wrote: »
    The sight distance with full beam headlights of a non luminous body is 120m.
    I have automatic headlights, so they were on full lights when I was travelling on this part of the road, but they never picked up that gentleman

    of the several cars i've driven which have had automatic lights, none of them turn on the full lights automatically. i'd definitely be questioning that statement from the driver.


  • #2668
    ford2600
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,457 ✭✭✭ford2600


    mr spuckler wrote: »
    of the several cars i've driven which have had automatic lights, none of them turn on the full lights automatically. i'd definitely be questioning that statement from the driver.

    That feature, is on my car but I've never used it; I usually read manual when I'm getting ready to sell car and learn all these wonderful things:rolleyes:

    I read article again
    *they don't mention Deceased by name.
    *he saw him/didn't see him and yet knew he was crossing the road?
    *It seems to be the N5 he was traveling on; at 30 odd mph and unlucky to kill someone.
    *Throw distance calculations are very dependent on initial conditions at impact; the shape of the front of vehicle, pedestrian posture and movement, height and area of impact being key. No idea what model Garda used, or how much he could have known about initial conditions.Given all momentum was westward, any clothing, shoes, car debris would have moved that way on impact also. I'd loved to know where the 19m throw distance came from. The driver doesn't mentioning braking pre accident so brake marks would be off limited value (if they were present at all, given abs and wet night).
    *the lack of empathy and blaming of Deceased is staggering


  • #2669
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,452 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Weepsie wrote: »
    There was a bit of veiled cyclist bashing too, stating the obvious as in they must obey the ROTR as if there are bandit cyclists out there causing grief to all road users. Not much of a mention on driver behaviour other than telling them to be careful. I imagine the RSA spokesperson (I think they said it was their head person) is handsomely paid.
    Pinch Flat wrote: »
    Caught the tail end of a radio piece on radio 1 this morning, around before 8am. The chief executive of the RSA going on about kids safety and encouraging cycling to school. Must listen back to the pod cast.

    Anyway, the RSA will be given our free hi-vis to any school children if anyone's interested. They're some sort of magic shield if kids are cycling to school. I think I heard her say they'd given out 1,000,000 free hi-vis vests to date. Now that it would appear virtually every school kid in the country has one, maybe this phase of the operation is complete?

    So perhaps they can now start on driver education - getting people to slow down, stop passing dangerously and irresponsibly. Rather than the gardai handing out hi-vis, do you think we'll see them stop motorists periodically and advise them they're approaching a school and perhaps slow down a bit?

    Dreadfully dissapointing - pure victim-blaming by the RSA

    Here's the download: http://www.rte.ie/cspodcasts/media.mp3?c1=2&c2=16951747&ns_site=test&ns_type=clickin&rte_vs_ct=aud&rte_vs_sc=pod&rte_mt_sec=radio&rte_mt_prg_name=morningireland&rte_vs_sn=radio1&rte_mt_pub_dt=2017-08-25&title=RSA%20makes%20safety%20a%20priority%20as%20children%20go%20back%20to%20school&c7=http://podcast.rasset.ie/podcasts/audio/2017/0825/20170825_rteradio1-morningireland-rsamakessa_c21224124_21224139_232_/20170825_rteradio1-morningireland-rsamakessa_c21224124_21224139_232_.mp3&r=http://podcast.rasset.ie/podcasts/audio/2017/0825/20170825_rteradio1-morningireland-rsamakessa_c21224124_21224139_232_/20170825_rteradio1-morningireland-rsamakessa_c21224124_21224139_232_.mp3

    No mention of drivers on their phones or speeding or illegal parking

    And she couldn't resist the temptation to throw in the 'respect traffic signals' canard which has zero impact on road deaths.


  • #2670
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,452 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    mr spuckler wrote: »
    of the several cars i've driven which have had automatic lights, none of them turn on the full lights automatically. i'd definitely be questioning that statement from the driver.

    Dreadful article, but I interpreted that as meaning that the car would go from no lights to side lights to head lights automatically - not head lights to full beams.


  • Advertisement
  • #2671
    Chips Lovell
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,269 Mod ✭✭✭✭Chips Lovell


    Grassey wrote: »
    Surely lack of high vis must be the reason that with 3 lanes of cars travelling in the same direction at roughly the same speed rear endings occur as they couldn't possibly see the car in front?

    In fairness, it's tricky enough trying to send a text and keep an eye on the traffic in front of you.


  • #2672
    mr spuckler
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,121 ✭✭✭mr spuckler


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    Dreadful article, but I interpreted that as meaning that the car would go from no lights to side lights to head lights automatically - not head lights to full beams.

    except that he says clearly that his full lights were on because he was using automatic lights.
    ford2600 wrote: »
    *they don't mention Deceased by name.
    *the lack of empathy and blaming of Deceased is staggering

    those 2 points in particularly left me feeling incredibly cold after reading it


  • #2673
    Tenzor07
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,999 ✭✭✭Tenzor07


    Article in the Indo also, nice victim blaming for sure! Passive-aggressive from Murdock!

    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/80000-schoolstarting-kids-to-receive-free-hivis-vests-this-year-36067964.html
    "Cycling has got much more popular and we are delighted to see that. It's a healthy activity. We need to make sure people feel safe and we have a number of measures there. We want to do as much as possible for cyclists," she said."

    "It is important to mention that cyclists have a responsibility to adhere to the rules of the road and to respect traffic signals and other vulnerable users such as pedestrians out in the city as well."


  • #2674
    Borderfox
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,263 ✭✭✭✭Borderfox


    Will these hi-vis vests work?


  • #2675
    Moflojo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,006 ✭✭✭Moflojo


    Tenzor07 wrote: »
    Article in the Indo also, nice victim blaming for sure! Passive-aggressive from Murdock!

    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/80000-schoolstarting-kids-to-receive-free-hivis-vests-this-year-36067964.html

    Note the words Murdock actually uses, as they're quite telling:
    We need to make sure people feel safe...

    She's saying the RSA's job is about the perception of safety, rather than actually campaign for a safer environment. She should be concerned with making people safe, not just making them feel safe.


  • #2676
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 50,181 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    Moflojo wrote: »
    She's saying the RSA's job is about the perception of safety, rather than actually campaign for a safer environment.
    i think you're reading too much into just one word.


  • Advertisement
  • #2677
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,452 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Borderfox wrote: »
    Will these hi-vis vests work?

    They will work to create the impression that the RSA is actually doing something about saving lives on the road. They will not save lives on the road.


  • #2678
    Chuchote
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,368 ✭✭✭Chuchote


    Snorted at the TV tonight as even the army were in hi-viz while clearing up after the floods in Donegal. It would make you re-imagine the great battles of history if they'd all been wearing hi-viz.

    o-NAPOLEON-BONAPARTE-facebook.jpg


  • #2679
    RobertFoster
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,227 ✭✭✭RobertFoster


    Chuchote wrote: »
    Snorted at the TV tonight as even the army were in hi-viz while clearing up after the floods in Donegal. It would make you re-imagine the great battles of history if they'd all been wearing hi-viz.

    o-NAPOLEON-BONAPARTE-facebook.jpg
    Certain contingents have been donning hi-viz since at least 1690 :pac:


  • #2680
    papu
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,357 ✭✭✭papu


    426184.JPG


  • #2681
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 50,181 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    is that napoleon doing his 'you shall leave this much distance while overtaking me' gesture?


  • Advertisement
  • #2682
    papu
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,357 ✭✭✭papu


    magicbastarder wrote: »
    is that napoleon doing his 'you shall leave this much distance while overtaking me' gesture?

    426184.JPG

    Un point à cinq mètres


  • #2683
    I love Sean nos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,360 ✭✭✭I love Sean nos


    Barmy stuff from the UK: there's a tunnel that's part of the national cycling network, but cycling in it is banned.

    Now they want to open it to cycling and there's a bit of a ruckus. A councillor performed a survey:
    Cllr Woods, representing Canary Wharf ward, ran a survey on August 1 which found 191 cyclists unlawfully riding through the tunnel in just 50 minutes, while 152 walked and eight ran with their bikes. There were 274 pedestrians in that time, including 31 children, as well as five mums with prams and one wheelchair disabled.
    Default_Size_16_1x1.gif
    “Cyclists are their own worst enemy,” Cllr Woods added. “A small number of red-light dodgers abuse the system in the streets and we fear they’ll continue cycling in the tunnel.”
    So that's 351 people on bikes and 274 on foot.

    Why not ban the people not on bikes?


  • #2684
    HivemindXX
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,208 ✭✭✭HivemindXX


    That's a little confusing. The council wants to allow cyclists to use the tunnel and Woods seems to have shown that they are already using it, a lot, with no problems. He then goes off on some irrelevant tangent complaining about cyclists.

    Based on this statement which seems to be at cross purposes to his apparent goal I'm confident Woods is in fact his own worst enemy. Good on him. Idiots like that need to be resisted. It's a lot more efficient if they do it themselves.


  • #2685
    Chuchote
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,368 ✭✭✭Chuchote


    Irish Times letter by Lous O'Flaherty of Santry:

    https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/traffic-congestion-in-the-capital-1.3199760
    Traffic congestion in Dublin will not be resolved until measures are undertaken to remove the vast number of free all day parking spaces in the city centre. Some are available to employees of private companies but many are the preserve of TDs , Senators, civil servants, gardaí­and employees of CIÉ and Dublin City Council. Among these are the people who decide what form of public transport should be available for the rest of us.
    Did I hear someone muttering “turkeys and Christmas”?


  • #2686
    Chuchote
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,368 ✭✭✭Chuchote


    Separately, a long piece by a lawyer from a few days ago about the prosecution of the London cyclist involved in a fatal collision with a pedestrian:

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2017/aug/23/motorist-would-not-have-landed-cyclists-wanton-and-furious-driving-charge
    Motorist would not have landed cyclist's 'wanton and furious driving' charge
    Martin Porter
    Charlie Alliston should have had a front brake but 18mph is a cautious speed and double standards are at work here

    Wednesday 23 August 2017

    A heavy-handed prosecution against a cyclist for manslaughter has failed but a charge of “wanton and furious driving” has succeeded.

    In 2016 more than 400 pedestrians were killed on UK roads. Each a terrible tragedy to those involved and almost all avoidable. One of these casualties, Kim Briggs, died after a collision between herself and a teenage cyclist, Charlie Alliston.

    She was extraordinarily unfortunate. Research indicates that 10% of pedestrians struck by a motor vehicle at 20mph are killed. A rider on a lightweight bike will have less than one 10th the mass and therefore kinetic energy and momentum of an average car, and the speed of impact was said by the prosecution to be “up to 14mph”.

    Yet tragically the unsuccessful efforts of Briggs and Alliston to avoid each other led to her death from a brain injury. This is a very rare occurrence and has received much publicity. We are inured to the 400 or so pedestrian deaths linked to motorised traffic but not to the vanishingly rare occasions that are linked to bicycles.

    It is no coincidence that the one death of a pedestrian involving a cyclist is the one case where a manslaughter charge has followed. This is reported to be a first. It is also one of the few cases where wanton and furious driving has been charged. These are both offences triable only in the crown court and were no doubt selected in preference to summary offences (triable by magistrates) due to the perceived seriousness of the offending and its consequences.

    Alliston could have been charged with one or more of the lesser offences of breaching the Construction and Use Regulations, of dangerous cycling or of careless cycling. Prosecutors appear to have wished to get around the fact that parliament has not legislated for causing death by careless or dangerous cycling offences.
    (snip)


  • #2687
    Borderfox
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,263 ✭✭✭✭Borderfox


    A piece on Pat Kenny on Newstalk shortly about the driver that collided with the pedestrian in Meath that wasn't wearing hi viz :(


  • #2688
    check_six
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,245 ✭✭✭check_six


    Borderfox wrote: »
    A piece on Pat Kenny on Newstalk shortly about the driver that collided with the pedestrian in Meath that wasn't wearing hi viz :(

    Coming up in 5 minutes. Still not sure how the angle that "My lights don't illuminate the space in front of my car, but I was driving in the dark anyway." is any kind of explanation or excuse for what happened.


  • #2689
    Borderfox
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,263 ✭✭✭✭Borderfox


    http://www.msn.com/en-ie/news/newsireland/death-on-a-rural-irish-road-i-knew-id-hit-someone-but-there-was-no-body-on-the-road/ar-AAqDlkE?li=AAaxjhv


  • #2690
    Borderfox
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,263 ✭✭✭✭Borderfox


    Straight road
    under speed limit according to forensics
    Familiar road
    Lights on
    Hits pedestrian without seeing them
    Sends pedestrian 19m into field


    Im missing something on this, it doesn't add up


  • #2691
    Pinch Flat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,767 ✭✭✭Pinch Flat


    It's becoming common place for motorists to say "where's your hi-vis", when they've nearly collided with me in Dublin city center. Had this a few times. Never mind my 100 lumen strobes that I have on the bike 365 days of the year. A bit of hi-vis would have peaked their attention more.

    As a car centric country, the blame has to squarely be placed in the injured persons lap. So pedestrians. cyclists were at fault because they couldn't bee seen. There's almost a complete absence of a narrative about night driving, how to scan the roads, make sure you can see properly.

    What's also interesting is that a car mounts the pavement, barrel rolls and takes out 6 pedestrians, some of which are critically injured, a in a parallel story last week. There's almost a media blackout on the story. Can you imagine the outrage if someone cycled a biker recklessly down Grafton Street and hit 6 pedestrians - The media would go into melt down such would be the frenzy. But no, in a car centric society, sure he was going a bit fast or whatever and this is almost acceptable as a consequence.


  • Advertisement
  • #2692
    check_six
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,245 ✭✭✭check_six


    Borderfox wrote: »
    Straight road
    under speed limit according to forensics
    Familiar road
    Lights on
    Hits pedestrian without seeing them
    Sends pedestrian 19m into field


    Im missing something on this, it doesn't add up

    How do they calculate the speed of the car on impact when the car didn't brake? The driver reckoned he was going 80-90kph, forensics said 50kph. They can only roughly guess the position of the man, surely? This would make the speed calculation only very vague.


  • #2693
    mr spuckler
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,121 ✭✭✭mr spuckler


    Borderfox wrote: »
    Straight road
    under speed limit according to forensics
    Familiar road
    Lights on
    Hits pedestrian without seeing them
    Sends pedestrian 19m into field

    Im missing something on this, it doesn't add up

    i fully agree, even listening to him speaking just now it doesn't sound / feel right. at that speed and if he had full lights on i can't see how he'd have failed to pick him out sooner, even if it was just before impact.

    i strongly believe btw that people walking on dark roads like that should wear reflectives or carry a torch to flash at oncoming cars so no problem with that part but the rest of it is just odd. and tragic.


  • #2694
    Borderfox
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,263 ✭✭✭✭Borderfox


    Nice bit of victim blaming with the added dig against cyclists too

    No idea how forensics came up with those figures


  • #2695
    ford2600
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,457 ✭✭✭ford2600


    check_six wrote: »
    Coming up in 5 minutes. Still not sure how the angle that "My lights don't illuminate the space in front of my car, but I was driving in the dark anyway." is any kind of explanation or excuse for what happened.

    Wow.

    We still don't have his name.

    I've interviewed a lot of driver's over the years. A driver underestimating his speed is really rare; like never.

    Muphet of a Garda. I wonder did he base calculation on rest position of car?

    A 730d doing 35mph on a national primary road....there would be a line of cars behind.

    Lights are useless it seems. Hi vis is the only thing to see here


  • #2696
    check_six
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,245 ✭✭✭check_six


    The piece on the radio added up to "wear hi-vis". I missed a bit of it, but as far as I could tell there was no mention of lights on the car at all. If you can't see where you are going, surely you should proceed with high caution, not just plough on because you "know the road"?


  • #2697
    RayCun
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,704 ✭✭✭✭RayCun


    Pinch Flat wrote: »
    It's becoming common place for motorists to say "where's your hi-vis", when they've nearly collided with me in Dublin city center. Had this a few times. Never mind my 100 lumen strobes that I have on the bike 365 days of the year. A bit of hi-vis would have peaked their attention more.

    It wouldn't, of course.

    People don't like to think that they're in the wrong.
    Was there nearly a collision?
    Maybe it was someone's fault.

    Was the cyclist not wearing high-vis/a helmet/breaking a light/going too fast/too slow/too far out/in lycra/wearing earphones/on the road when there's a bike lane? Then it was their fault.

    Was the cyclist doing none of those things?
    Well then, it was nobody's fault - "sorry mate, I didn't see you", hey, no harm done, right?


  • #2698
    TheChizler
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,474 ✭✭✭TheChizler


    check_six wrote: »
    Coming up in 5 minutes. Still not sure how the angle that "My lights don't illuminate the space in front of my car, but I was driving in the dark anyway." is any kind of explanation or excuse for what happened.
    Was watching something very similar on one of those UK cop shows at the weekend. There was a hit and run with a guy cycling who was unfortunately killed. Straight piece of road on an overpass (night time). The man hadn't been wearing high vis and they couldn't find a reflector or lights on his (mangled) bike. They only found the driver the next morning after her father saw the damage to her mini (bonnet and windscreen caved in) and convinced her to call the police.

    No charges were pressed as he hadn't been wearing high vis or lights and the paramedic thought he could smell alcohol on him. Yes it's incredibly stupid to cycle without lights, but there was no mention of the responsibility of the person driving to drive at a safe speed or anything. Not to mention leaving the scene knowing she'd hit something. Full blame lay on the poor man who was killed. The police were even saying "the poor girl who hit him".


  • #2699
    I love Sean nos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,360 ✭✭✭I love Sean nos


    TheChizler wrote: »
    They only found the driver the next morning after her father saw the damage to her mini (bonnet and windscreen caved in) and convinced her to call the police.
    They really need to come down like a hammer on hit and run drivers in both this country and over there.


  • #2700
    Chuchote
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,368 ✭✭✭Chuchote


    Broadsheet (dunno if it counts as journalism) has a piece about parking in cycle lanes:

    http://www.broadsheet.ie/2017/08/28/hows-my-parking/#comments


  • Advertisement
  • #2701
    tomasrojo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,804 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    TheChizler wrote: »
    The police were even saying "the poor girl who hit him".


    There are profound psychological forces at play in all these responses to road deaths. It probably has very little to do with the subjects ostensibly under discussion (hi-viz, whatever), and more to do with defence mechanisms, such as "this will never happen to me because I do X", or "this wouldn't be my fault, were I in the driver's place, because these people do Y: if fact, were it to happen *I*'d be the real victim".

    (And that's on top of guilt for unsustainable lifestyles and in-group/out-group bias. Not all of these apply to everyone, but usually more than one applies, so it's a powerful emotional response, which allows people to mostly ignore the humanity of the deceased.)


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement