Boards.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more x
Post Reply  
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
04-10-2016, 14:21   #46
12 sprocket
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 382
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chuchote View Post
@Billgirlylegs You haven't been looking at the statistics. The Road Safety Association, scarcely a cyclist-friendly group, did a big study (25,000+ cyclists) of how many cyclists go through red lights recently: 1 in 8 was the number. Nothing like the numbers you're claiming.




http://irishcycle.com/2016/05/26/onl...ish-junctions/
http://www.independent.ie/life/motor...-34743099.html

How many cars go through? My own, amateur, estimate would be that three or four cars tend to zip through after the lights have gone red on most light-changes. And this is really dangerous.

A cyclist (say 150kg of human on a 15kg bicycle) who goes through a red light is endangering only himself or herself (if that) in virtually all cases; usually s/he has checked that there's nothing coming. A car (say 2 tons) is a weaponised metal projectile, and going much faster. If it hits you, you're going to be badly hurt.

Some figures on cars hitting people:

  • If someone is hit by a car at 65kph they are 90% likely to be killed
  • If someone is hit by a car at 50kph they are 50% likely to be killed
  • If someone is hit by a car at 30kph they are 10% likely to be killed
"How many cars go through? My own, amateur, estimate would be that three or four cars tend to zip through after the lights have gone red on most light-changes. And this is really dangerous."

Yes it is really dangerous ..Especially for a gob****e of a cyclist who cycles through on the red!.........
12 sprocket is offline  
Advertisement
04-10-2016, 14:55   #47
Carawaystick
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: exiled in North Co. Dublin
Posts: 8,266
The IT had a terrible article on an analysis of motorbike deaths,where they throw in confusing stats, victim blaming and non-sequiturs.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/irela...tudy-1.2815259

Headline : One in three motorcyclists who died in crashes had drunk alcohol
29% had - close enough

but now the voodoo begins
Quote:
Originally Posted by IT
Of those, 29 per cent had consumed alcohol before their crash and 71 per cent of those were over the current blood/alcohol limit (almost half were four times over the limit)
The use of 71% of 29% to inflate the issue, instead of saying 20% were over the current Blood alcohol limit.
The study covers a period when most of the time the blood alcohol limit was higher. It tries to smear people who if they did something now which would be illegal with something that may or may not have been illegal when they did it.

Another shoddy weasle statement
Quote:
Originally Posted by it
The analysis found that in 86 per cent of motorcycle fatal crashes, the motorcyclist was culpable, or partly culpable,
With no definition of partly culpable given. If someone is 49% culpable does that excuse the more culpable person?

Lastly, the researcher looked at the causes of 887 fatal collisions, but the article focuses only on 93 of them.
Carawaystick is offline  
04-10-2016, 14:59   #48
Chuchote
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 5,324
Quote:
Originally Posted by 12 sprocket View Post
"How many cars go through? My own, amateur, estimate would be that three or four cars tend to zip through after the lights have gone red on most light-changes. And this is really dangerous."

Yes it is really dangerous ..Especially for a gob****e of a cyclist who cycles through on the red!.........
Well, typical day, today I was crossing the street, wheeling my bicycle, in Rathmines. The pedestrian light was flashing amber, giving me right of way. Several cars drove at me; one taxi stopped (thank you), others whipped past in front of my wheel. Sneering at cyclists doesn't make it true; loud doesn't mean right.

Dear God, that Paddy Logue article is dim:

Quote:
Patrick Logue: Cyclists need to stop peddling excuses for rule-breaking
The cycling lobby does itself no favours by engaging in tribal finger-pointing in an effort to excuse bad cycling behaviour
There was a gesture used in the 1950s to symbolise that an idea was utterly drippy, it was like slowly shaking water off the fingers of one hand, allied with eye-rolling. That's the effect that kind of piece has on any sensible reader.
Chuchote is offline  
04-10-2016, 15:12   #49
magicbastarder
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 21,651
Quote:
Originally Posted by 12 sprocket View Post
"How many cars go through? My own, amateur, estimate would be that three or four cars tend to zip through after the lights have gone red on most light-changes. And this is really dangerous."

Yes it is really dangerous ..Especially for a gob****e of a cyclist who cycles through on the red!.........
what do you mean - the motorists breaking the red is dangerous for cyclists who have broken the red?
magicbastarder is online now  
(3) thanks from:
04-10-2016, 15:18   #50
tomasrojo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Dublin
Posts: 9,294
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carawaystick View Post
The IT had a terrible article on an analysis of motorbike deaths,where they throw in confusing stats, victim blaming and non-sequiturs.
I suspect a lot of the confusion is because they're quoting or paraphrasing the RSA, who are terrible at statistical analysis, partly because they can't stop mixing up analysis with campaigning and moralising.

The analysis part of their brief should be taken off them and given to someone who doesn't see everything as PR.

Quote:
Ms Martin spent months pouring over 867 fatal crash reports
Spell check is not enough.
tomasrojo is offline  
Advertisement
04-10-2016, 15:23   #51
NiallBoo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 1,497
Quote:
Originally Posted by 12 sprocket View Post
Yes it is really dangerous ..Especially for a gob****e of a cyclist who cycles through on the red!.........
if a cyclist has also broken the red then they won't be in danger from a motorist who has because they'll be traveling in the same direction.

The danger is to crossing pedestrians, motorists and especially cyclists that have just gotten a green light( bikes are usually quicker off the mark)...and of course, the luas.

It also means that designers have to allow a painful amount of dead time between changes to stop these people from causing crashes.

Last edited by NiallBoo; 04-10-2016 at 15:35.
NiallBoo is offline  
Thanks from:
04-10-2016, 15:32   #52
magicbastarder
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 21,651
a motorist breaking a red is not dangerous to a cyclist breaking the same red; but at many (most?) junctions, the motorist breaking the red is dangerous to those driving through a green light, rather than other road users breaking a red.
magicbastarder is online now  
04-10-2016, 15:46   #53
Roadhawk
Registered User
 
Roadhawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 853
Look, the red light/green green light laws could not be clearer. Stop on red go on green. There is no satisfactory explanation for anyone on any mode of transport who decides to break a red light. Level of risk depending on what mode you are using is not a factor...ever.
Roadhawk is offline  
04-10-2016, 15:51   #54
Roadhawk
Registered User
 
Roadhawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 853
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chuchote View Post
Well, typical day, today I was crossing the street, wheeling my bicycle, in Rathmines. The pedestrian light was flashing amber, giving me right of way.
Does a flashing amber give a pedestrian right of way at a pedestrian crossing? I would have thought so at a zebra crossing but not a pedestrian crossing.
Roadhawk is offline  
Advertisement
04-10-2016, 15:56   #55
Orinoco
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,492
I love the way the thread has proved its own point. Here we are talking about cyclists breaking red lights again.

As accurately observed above, imagine if ANY conversation about cars / investment in roads was immediately hijacked by people going on about speeding all the time. Absurd.
Orinoco is offline  
04-10-2016, 15:57   #56
NiallBoo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 1,497
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadhawk View Post
Does a flashing amber give a pedestrian right of way at a pedestrian crossing? I would have thought so at a zebra crossing but not a pedestrian crossing.
Flashing amber means that a motorist/cyclist may proceed only if the crossing is clear.

The pedestrian still has right-of-way until it becomes a red man on the pedestrian crossing.

I suppose you could say that the crossing is essentially a zebra-crossing while it's flashing amber.

Although zebra crossings are different to light-controlled crossings.
NiallBoo is offline  
Thanks from:
04-10-2016, 15:57   #57
Roadhawk
Registered User
 
Roadhawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 853
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deedsie View Post
I agree, cyclists defending this is ridiculous. The same for cycling on a one way street. It doesn't matter what the rules are in different countries. Respect the laws of the country you are in.

Dont break red lights. Its not that complicated.
Exactly, its quite simple but must apply for all modes of transport. Im fully aware that some cars will squeeze an amber or early red (which is still illegal) however it not as blatant as a deliberate act to jump the lights at any stage.
Roadhawk is offline  
04-10-2016, 16:00   #58
NiallBoo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 1,497
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadhawk View Post
Im fully aware that some cars will squeeze an amber or early red (which is still illegal) however it not as blatant as a deliberate act to jump the lights at any stage.
...It's every bit as blatant. In spite of what people might tell themselves about it supposedly not harming anyone, they know damn well they're breaking the red.
NiallBoo is offline  
(4) thanks from:
04-10-2016, 16:00   #59
Weepsie
Moderator
 
Weepsie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 5,984
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orinoco View Post
I love the way the thread has proved its own point. Here we are talking about cyclists breaking red lights again.

As accurately observed above, imagine if ANY conversation about cars / investment in roads was immediately hijacked by people going on about speeding all the time. Absurd.
Ive often thought about starting such absurd topics in the motoring threads and whatnot.
Weepsie is offline  
04-10-2016, 16:03   #60
Orinoco
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,492
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadhawk View Post
Exactly, its quite simple but must apply for all modes of transport. Im fully aware that some cars will squeeze an amber or early red (which is still illegal) however it not as blatant as a deliberate act to jump the lights at any stage.
How is it not? You are just making excuses now.

I thought you were serious about road safety, with all your 'red lights are not confusing' talk. Clearly not.
Orinoco is offline  
(3) thanks from:
Post Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Remove Text Formatting
Bold
Italic
Underline

Insert Image
Wrap [QUOTE] tags around selected text
 
Decrease Size
Increase Size
Please sign up or log in to join the discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



Share Tweet