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

Cycling on paths and other cycling issues (updated title)

18283858788125

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,875 ✭✭✭micar


    SeanW wrote: »
    Or how about cyclists on Sean O'Casey bridge? This poster found something like 41 in 46 minutes, at peak times when I used it, I could find 4 in the 1 minute or so that it would take me to cross.

    And there's plenty of signage to tell cyclists that it's illegal to cycle on the bridge, but more signage is often required to replace that which gets defaced/vandalised, most likely by people who don't like the law restricting cyclists from the bridge.

    You want to know why motorists aren't keen to take lectures on "obeying the law" from cyclists? It's because we have to put up with crap like this.


    I suppose the number of signs now in place has worked in the 9 years since the video was done as there's not one cyclist on the bridge from Google maps

    In those 9 years proper cycling infrastructure has been put in place and there's a wall between the cycle lane and the pedestrian area to the bridge.

    Cyclists on the bridge is likely to be less of an issue.

    If you scroll over to the right.....fairly play to the cyclist in high viz with a helmet who has stopped at the pedestrian crossing allowing a number of pedestrian to cross the cycle lane even though he's the one with the green light....quite responsible of him.


    Also ...... the other clip you put up is 8 years old........must have taken you ages to find those buried deep in the bowels of YouTube


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,848 ✭✭✭✭Thargor


    SeanW wrote: »

    Would video evidence suffice or does Google need to have caught them in the act?
    You need to go back 10 years on Youtube to find something that you claim is an epidemic that affects you every time you leave the house? Well done, is that why you didnt post for 2 days? Time well spent there :pac:


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


    You don't regard cycling on the footpath as a problem.

    As a pedestrian who has been hit twice in the last 18 months or so by cyclists on a footpath - I and others do regard it as a problem.

    As someone who’s been hit by a car and had to spend time in hospital and still have the scars, Cars are a much bigger problem. Cycling on the Pavement is illegal and inconsiderate. But it rarely leads to serious injury or death.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,624 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    micar wrote: »
    If you scroll over to the right.....fairly play to the cyclist in high viz with a helmet who has stopped at the pedestrian crossing allowing a number of pedestrian to cross the cycle lane even though he's the one with the green light....quite responsible of him.

    What was he supposed to do? Plough through them? I'm no fan of jaywalking but that's what you are supposed to do as a responsible road user.


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


    Spook_ie wrote: »
    Personal level none, reality ALL activities incur some degree of risk.

    Should we fence off or cover all areas of water, after all drowning claims 100+ lives per year, should we ban farmers from farming, after all 18 fatalities in 2019, you seem to be infering that a mythical figure of zero is attainable when it isn't.

    The main difference would be that people who drown generally drown as a result of their own actions, and farmers who die farming normally die as a result of their own actions.

    That's not normally the case with those who die on the roads.
    meeeeh wrote: »
    I posted an article about the accident that happened between child cyclist and older woman. Two other cyclists died in preceeding weeks, one went cycling into mountains and was found dead presumably after a fall. Another a man in his 60ies I think was hit by a train at night on protected railway crossing. The last one could be suicide and it's likely alcohol was involved. (A child was also injured but not killed after woman hit him on a road crossing).

    It's easy to make simplistic statements about road users and blame everything on the cars and car drivers. Because there are still relatively small numbers cycling it's easy to do that in Ireland but in reality you have to expect reasonably responsible behaviour from all road users.

    I don't recall hearing about the level crossing one. I'd be interested in hearing more details if anyone has any particular details.

    I did hear of a case in Wicklow where a cyclist came off during a steep descent. There was also a case maybe ten years ago where a cyclist cycled drunk on the M1 and was killed by a driver.

    So yes, there are cases where cyclists and pedestrians are responsible for their own deaths - but they are few and far between.

    Most road deaths are motorists killing themselves, other motorists and passengers. So it's hard to find a way to blame cyclists or pedestrians for those.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 11,624 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    Sorry I wasn't talking about accidents in Ireland. That's my mistake for being unclear and those accidents aren't exactly relevant for Ireland I mentioned them as what can happen even when cars are out of equation. How common self inflicted deaths are probably a bit depends about who cycles and why they cycle. When numbers increase you can get larger share of people cycling drunk or elderly/kid cyclists making a mistake.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,355 ✭✭✭Charles Babbage


    If you look closely, you can see the streams of blood dripping down the bridge from all the people that were maimed by those menacing cyclists.

    Your oft repeated proposition that anti social behaviour is acceptable so long as people don't die is morally bankrupt. A civilised society regulates behaviour short of death.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,848 ✭✭✭✭Thargor


    Your oft repeated proposition that anti social behaviour is acceptable so long as people don't die is morally bankrupt. A civilised society regulates behaviour short of death.
    Its not that people dont die, its that absolutely nothing happens and yet people get orders of magnitude more angry and excited about it than the exact same behaviour in other forms of transport that does have consequences (and not just death or injury, Dublin and the rest of our towns and cities are clogged up horrible place to walk around with literally no need for it), its a mystery long discussed on cycling forums as to why bicycles attract such irrational hatred. Its usually dismissed as whatboutery but it is a genuine mystery and the reason these threads go on so long.

    A good example often used is the comments on something like a Journal article where someone gets killed by a hit and run or drunk/distracted driver, it will attract 2-3 RIP comments and then be forgotten about, however a cyclist doing literally anything with no consequence will attract hundreds of enraged responses, and all cyclists will be grouped together and guilty by association in a way you'd never see with motorists, same for threads on here.


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


    Your oft repeated proposition that anti social behaviour is acceptable so long as people don't die is morally bankrupt. A civilised society regulates behaviour short of death.

    Can you point to a single example of when I made this particular proposition?


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,005 ✭✭✭TaurenDruid


    07Lapierre wrote: »
    As someone who’s been hit by a car and had to spend time in hospital and still have the scars, Cars are a much bigger problem. Cycling on the Pavement is illegal and inconsiderate. But it rarely leads to serious injury or death.

    And someone parking on a footpath or a cycling lane almost never leads to injury or death. But Andy will still post his photos, and it's still illegal, annoying, inconsiderate and shouldn't be done. Same as cycling on the footpath.


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


    And someone parking on a footpath or a cycling lane almost never leads to injury or death. But Andy will still post his photos, and it's still illegal, annoying, inconsiderate and shouldn't be done. Same as cycling on the footpath.

    Very true. If only there was some way of identifying the registered owners of those illegally parked cars?


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 47,983 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    i once did this on a bike. it was awful, six stitches in my chin and a new frame.

    https://twitter.com/AlanDub13/status/1282051123336163328


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


    And someone parking on a footpath or a cycling lane almost never leads to injury or death. But Andy will still post his photos, and it's still illegal, annoying, inconsiderate and shouldn't be done. Same as cycling on the footpath.

    The 'illegal, annoying, inconsiderate' bit is indeed the same. The frequency isn't the same.

    The frequency of parking on footpaths is in a totally different ballpark to the frequency of cycling on footpaths, probably something like a 50:1 ratio.

    And I suspect that the loudest complainers about cyclists on footpaths are also those who don't see any issue with the 'just for a few minutes' parking on footpaths and cycle lanes that is endemic, so endemic that it is used in advertising, without anyone in the car industry thinking that there is anything unusual about it.

    https://twitter.com/DublinPedaller/status/1282236371890036736?s=20

    That's the difference.


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


    i once did this on a bike. it was awful, six stitches in my chin and a new frame.

    https://twitter.com/AlanDub13/status/1282051123336163328

    Farking ell, here's the aftermath - driver taken to hospital with non-life-threatening injuries;

    taxo3irf49a51.jpg

    I'd love to hear his explanation to the insurance company. "The tractor came out of nowhere".

    The tractor and the car should definitely have had hi-vis - that might have prevented this incident.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,005 ✭✭✭TaurenDruid


    Thargor wrote: »
    Its not that people dont die, its that absolutely nothing happens and yet people get orders of magnitude more angry and excited about it than the exact same behaviour in other forms of transport that does have consequences (and not just death or injury, Dublin and the rest of our towns and cities are clogged up horrible place to walk around with literally no need for it), its a mystery long discussed on cycling forums as to why bicycles attract such irrational hatred. Its usually dismissed as whatboutery but it is a genuine mystery and the reason these threads go on so long.

    A good example often used is the comments on something like a Journal article where someone gets killed by a hit and run or drunk/distracted driver, it will attract 2-3 RIP comments and then be forgotten about, however a cyclist doing literally anything with no consequence will attract hundreds of enraged responses, and all cyclists will be grouped together and guilty by association in a way you'd never see with motorists, same for threads on here.

    Largely explained by cognitive bias. You see what you want to see.

    Even on this one thread - supposed to be about cycling on footpaths - there are now far more photos of cars parked on footpaths than there are of cyclists cycling on them. There are YPLAC facebooks and twitters for the UK and Ireland, a 'Dublin's parking clowns' facebook, and so on.

    There are literally tens of posts on this thread alone condemning motorists - as a block - for the behaviours of some.

    It's an odd sort of person who clicks in to random Journal stories on fatalities to offer an 'RIP' on stories where they don't know the person or their family.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,005 ✭✭✭TaurenDruid


    The 'illegal, annoying, inconsiderate' bit is indeed the same. The frequency isn't the same.

    The frequency of parking on footpaths is in a totally different ballpark to the frequency of cycling on footpaths, probably something like a 50:1 ratio.

    And I suspect that the loudest complainers about cyclists on footpaths are also those who don't see any issue with the 'just for a few minutes' parking on footpaths and cycle lanes that is endemic, so endemic that it is used in advertising, without anyone in the car industry thinking that there is anything unusual about it.

    https://twitter.com/DublinPedaller/status/1282236371890036736?s=20

    That's the difference.

    Speculate, estimate and cast aspersions all you like, when it suits you. Bring out the pedantry rulebook when it doesn't... :rolleyes:


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


    Speculate, estimate and cast aspersions all you like, when it suits you. Bring out the pedantry rulebook when it doesn't... :rolleyes:

    Are you suggesting that there are more cyclists cycling on pavements than vehicles parked on pavements?


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,624 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    It's an odd sort of person who clicks in to random Journal stories on fatalities to offer an 'RIP' on stories where they don't know the person or their family.

    I must say I find that odd too and kind of insincere.

    Anyway I'm not defending parking on the sidewalks but moving on a sidewalk is different to being stationary for obvious reasons. I'm sure that car ploughing through pedestrianised area would face a lot more condemnation than car parked in the same area.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,005 ✭✭✭TaurenDruid


    Are you suggesting that there are more cyclists cycling on pavements than vehicles parked on pavements?

    I think my words were perfectly clear.


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


    I think my words were perfectly clear.

    Perfectly clearly casting aspersions while avoiding any specifics, yes, they were.


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 873 ✭✭✭Casey78


    Speculate, estimate and cast aspersions all you like, when it suits you. Bring out the pedantry rulebook when it doesn't... :rolleyes:

    Don't be wasting your time replying to him would be my advice, anyone that reads his posts can see what he's like.
    I don't take anything he says seriously,he has proven himself to be a hyprocrite numerous times on here. I just skip past his posts now.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,848 ✭✭✭✭Thargor


    Largely explained by cognitive bias. You see what you want to see.

    Even on this one thread - supposed to be about cycling on footpaths - there are now far more photos of cars parked on footpaths than there are of cyclists cycling on them. There are YPLAC facebooks and twitters for the UK and Ireland, a 'Dublin's parking clowns' facebook, and so on.

    There are literally tens of posts on this thread alone condemning motorists - as a block - for the behaviours of some.

    It's an odd sort of person who clicks in to random Journal stories on fatalities to offer an 'RIP' on stories where they don't know the person or their family.
    Because one is a chronic issue affecting every street and town in the country on a daily basis that we have to suffer the effects of every day through massively increased traffic jams and general lower quality of life for everyone and the other is a rare annoyance that affects literally nobody as evidenced by people having to go back 10 years on YouTube to find examples. Bit of cognitive bias yourself there that you can't figure this out for yourself.

    I'm just back from Galway for the first time since lockdown, 3 or 4 badly parked cars at the bottom of college road creating a traffic jam 3km long, same all over town and out Salthill, buses not able to turn and having to sit through multiple red light sequences, everything slowed to a crawl with cars trying to creep by each other because of cars all over the footpaths and dumped everywhere but apparently its whataboutery and cognitive bias if you point this out to someone saying bicycles are worse or whining about the time a cyclist came too close to them...


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,005 ✭✭✭TaurenDruid


    Thargor wrote: »
    Because one is a chronic issue affecting every street and town in the country on a daily basis that we have to suffer the effects of every day through massively increased traffic jams and general lower quality of life for everyone and the other is a rare annoyance that affects literally nobody as evidenced by people having to go back 10 years on YouTube to find examples. Bit of cognitive bias yourself there that you can't figure this out for yourself.

    Exactly. Cognitive bias, massive exaggeration, and now accusing me of lying? "Affects literally nobody" - sorry, this "nobody" has had been hit - twice - by cyclists in the last 18 or so months. And had one complain about swearing when I told them to get off the ****ing path when they cycled at me through scaffolding!


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,628 ✭✭✭SeanW


    Exactly. Cognitive bias, massive exaggeration, and now accusing me of lying? "Affects literally nobody" - sorry, this "nobody" has had been hit - twice - by cyclists in the last 18 or so months. And had one complain about swearing when I told them to get off the ****ing path when they cycled at me through scaffolding!
    Ah yes, but when the cyclists hit you and screamed at you, you were not wearing a helmet cam so that you could post it on YouTube. And the Google Maps van didn't catch them in the act! And Thargor "doesn't see" cyclists on footpaths. So it mustn't have happened :rolleyes:


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,005 ✭✭✭TaurenDruid


    SeanW wrote: »
    Ah yes, but when the cyclists hit you and screamed at you, you were not wearing a helmet cam so that you could post it on YouTube. And the Google Maps van didn't catch them in the act! And Thargor "doesn't see" cyclists on footpaths. So it mustn't have happened :rolleyes:

    Not to mention all of the footpaths are full of cars, so I couldn't have been on one in the first place, and nor could the bike that didn't hit me!


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,848 ✭✭✭✭Thargor


    Exactly. Cognitive bias, massive exaggeration, and now accusing me of lying? "Affects literally nobody" - sorry, this "nobody" has had been hit - twice - by cyclists in the last 18 or so months. And had one complain about swearing when I told them to get off the ****ing path when they cycled at me through scaffolding!
    There must be something wrong with you if you're getting hit by bikes on a regular basis tbh, who else does that happen to ever? I would say you're probably lying about that yes or exaggerated it and now can't back down, its pretty clear from your comment history you have major issues with cycling anyway, which makes your accusations against others about cognitive bias slightly embarrassing to read.
    SeanW wrote: »
    Ah yes, but when the cyclists hit you and screamed at you, you were not wearing a helmet cam so that you could post it on YouTube. And the Google Maps van didn't catch them in the act! And Thargor "doesn't see" cyclists on footpaths. So it mustn't have happened :rolleyes:
    I never said it never happens, that would be ridiculous, I just said in 9 years of commuting into town and out again ever day on a bike I've never seen it apart from a few kids. Remember you were so happy your YouTube trawl managed to find evidence to support your claims but then people pointed out the videos were 10 years old so probably not the common occurrence you make it out to be? Would you like me to show you how easy it is to find a current example of your dreaded 'footpath hogging' on Streetview or Twitter or with my own camera? Or 10 examples? They won't involve bicycles though for some strange reason. Why not take a crack at it yourself?


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,628 ✭✭✭SeanW


    Thargor wrote: »

    There must be something wrong with you if you're getting hit by bikes on a regular basis tbh, who else does that happen to ever? I would say you're probably lying about that yes or exaggerated it and now can't back down, its pretty clear from your comment history you have major issues with cycling anyway, which makes your accusations against others about cognitive bias slightly embarrassing to read.
    Firstly, I'm inclined to believe the poster as I myself have had a number of near-misses with red light jumping cyclists. But as pedestrians don't usually wear helmet cams, I did not capture these incidents on video. Nor was the Google Street View cam on the scene at the exact moment(s). [sarcasm]So that must mean these incidents did not happen :rolleyes:[/sarcasm]
    I never said it never happens, that would be ridiculous, I just said in 9 years of commuting into town and out again ever day on a bike I've never seen it apart from a few kids. Remember you were so happy your YouTube trawl managed to find evidence to support your claims but then people pointed out the videos were 10 years old so probably not the common occurrence you make it out to be? Would you like me to show you how easy it is to find a current example of your dreaded 'footpath hogging' on Streetview or Twitter or with my own camera? Or 10 examples? They won't involve bicycles though for some strange reason. Why not take a crack at it yourself?
    I only spent a few minutes looking for video examples because I concluded that no amount of evidence would be sufficient, ergo I chose not to waste time on a fools errand. As you continue to remind us, I have been proven to be correct.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,005 ✭✭✭TaurenDruid


    Thargor wrote: »

    There must be something wrong with you if you're getting hit by bikes on a regular basis tbh, who else does that happen to ever? I would say you're probably lying about that yes or exaggerated it and now can't back down, its pretty clear from your comment history you have major issues with cycling anyway, which makes your accusations against others about cognitive bias slightly embarrassing to read.

    So yes, you are accusing me of lying. Well, **** you, then. No point trying to have a civil conversation with you, if all you can do is resort to that.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,848 ✭✭✭✭Thargor


    SeanW wrote: »
    Firstly, I'm inclined to believe the poster as I myself have had a number of near-misses with red light jumping cyclists. But as pedestrians don't usually wear helmet cams, I did not capture these incidents on video. Nor was the Google Street View cam on the scene at the exact moment(s). [sarcasm]So that must mean these incidents did not happen :rolleyes:[/sarcasm]
    Amazing that 2 of the most active anti-cycling posters on Boards live lives of constant cyclist related danger like this, maybe it does actually happen and isnt all lies like it seems.

    If it is happening with this level of regularity though I would strongly urge you to have another read of the rules of the road and the safe cross code or ask someone to help you as somethings definitely not right there, imagine if everybody was getting knocked down by bicycles twice every 18 months with multiple near misses in between? Anarchy.
    SeanW wrote: »
    I only spent a few minutes looking for video examples because I concluded that no amount of evidence would be sufficient, ergo I chose not to waste time on a fools errand. As you continue to remind us, I have been proven to be correct.
    Ah right that must be the reason (lol).

    Are you sure you wont give Streetview a go though like you were asked? If you want proof that cars are "footpath hogging" the way you claim bicycles do every time you're out and about its an absolute bonanza of evidence, you could easily use it for bikes if they're even worse...


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,005 ✭✭✭TaurenDruid


    Thargor wrote: »
    Amazing that 2 of the most active anti-cycling posters on Boards live lives of constant cyclist related danger like this, maybe it does actually happen and isnt all lies like it seems.

    If it is happening with this level of regularity though I would strongly urge you to have another read of the rules of the road and the safe cross code or ask someone to help you as somethings definitely not right there, imagine if everybody was getting knocked down by bicycles twice every 18 months with multiple near misses in between? Anarchy.

    Ah right that must be the reason (lol).

    I've been hit twice while on the footpath by cyclists. One young prick ended up in bushes for his trouble. The other wasn't a serious impact, cos I saw it was going to happen and braced. That's two in 18 months. I've never been knocked down by a bike. Nor did I ever say I was.

    Several near misses at lights. The rules of the road are for all road users, and are crystal clear: "Stop on red." Not all cyclists do. This is the bit where if we were talking about cars breaking reds, Andy would pull a figure from the air... a "study" that only publishes some of the data collected, and, hmm, yes, is several years old. Guess that's ok for pro-cyclist stuff, though.

    A couple of "extra" near misses in the last while, too, as I now don't get out of the way of cyclists, when they cycle towards me on their phone. They're going slow, though, and seem to retain enough peripheral permission to realise there's an obstacle ahead. The reason I'm no longer avoiding them and jumping out of their away? Might be something to do with attitude I see here, where I - a person with friends and family who cycle and who has repeatedly said they support better, separated cycling infrastructure - can get called an exaggerating liar cos it doesn't suit your cyclists-are-all-saints-narrative.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement