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

If all cyclists waited at the red light...

1356712

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 15,704 ✭✭✭✭RayCun


    why not have a bell on your bike?


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,735 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    Incidentally, this is the radio show that was about obeying the law:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01m5jkl

    I might have a listen now and see if I can find a philosophical reason to justify myself.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,735 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    RayCun wrote: »
    why not have a bell on your bike?

    I now have a bell on all three of my bikes. I just couldn't be bothered before, and no-one was enforcing it, and it isn't all that important.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,735 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    RayCun wrote: »
    why not have a bell on your bike?

    The UK law, apparently, used to be that you had to ring the bell continuously when you were cycling. At least, so they said on The Unbelievable Truth on BBC Radio 4.

    (I don't get all my information from British light entertainment shows, honestly.)


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,344 ✭✭✭NUTLEY BOY


    Some go too far !

    I was cycling up the slip road towards UCD from Donnybrook. The marked cycle lane is actually covered by the traffic lights i.e the traffic lights are to your left as you cycle.

    I stopped on red. About three other cyclists came from behind and cruised straight ahead. The next guy came galloping through - intending to go straight ahead - and zipped diagonally across the junction to go around the tail end of about 20 students coming from UCD towards the Montrose Hotel and who were crossing legitimately.

    The apprehension of being rear ended by a fellow cyclist makes me feel some days like Fr. Ted praying that God will please turn the traffic light green :)


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,514 ✭✭✭OleRodrigo


    Saw (and heard) some guy with cow bells dangling from his top tube on Capel St bridge the other morning.

    Thought I was hearing things.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,735 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    Yeah, if there's no passing room to my right (cargo bike is quite wide), I sometimes have to half-turn round as I'm braking and say "I'm stopping" so I don't get rear-ended.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,830 ✭✭✭doozerie


    tomasrojo wrote: »
    But what about when cycle tracks were mandatory to use. Did everyone here use them? Or does everyone have a bell on their bike? I mean, if you are doing something that has a high likelihood of killing or seriously injuring people, it's different from not having a legally mandated device for going "ping".

    (This is just a general point. People shouldn't break red lights, which is more the subject of this thread.)

    It's a fair point, essentially we all pick and choose the laws that we consider important to one extent or another. And it could be argued that the decision to, say, not have a bell on your bike, is the thin end of a wedge that leads to people chipping away at their sense of responsibility to the point that they choose to ignore laws that many people would consider far more serious.

    Personally, my angle on that is to distinguish between laws that (in my opinion) pose dangers to me and others, and those that don't. The line between the two is subjective but for me having a bell offers no real benefits as my voice is bother faster to deploy, louder, and requires no movement of my hands away from my brakes.

    In the case of bike lanes, I generally use them when they are a painted lane as part of the road (except for those that bring me up the inside of left-turning traffic when I'm going straight on e.g. Lombard Street East), but I generally don't use those shared with footpaths and instead opt to remain on the road where I am part of traffic and where other traffic should be watching for my presence as much as they'd watch for any traffic.

    More generally, I just try to avoid putting myself in situations where my presence is likely to be unexpected. The risks of things going wrong increase dramatically the more you take other road users by surprise by behaving in an unpredictable way. For that reason, I opt not to break red lights, ride on the footpath, etc.

    The rules of the road are far from perfect, but they are at least a stab at defining a reasonable set of common rules for our behaviour on the roads, that if followed should reduce the number of those scenarios where people are taken by surprise. I don't want to be the equivalent of that tree that "just appeared in front of my car, yer honour!", or the cyclist that "appeared out of nowhere and hit me, garda!", etc.

    There is obviously no way to absolutely guarantee your own safety (or absolutely eliminate your danger to others) on the roads, but there certainly are many behaviours that can increase the risk for everyone.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,735 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    OleRodrigo wrote: »
    Saw (and heard) some guy with cow bells dangling from his top tube on Capel St bridge the other morning.

    Gene Frenkle at a loose end when not on tour.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,440 ✭✭✭cdaly_


    tomasrojo wrote: »
    Guess that was partly the rationale of these things (though not the damage to cars):
    x5LTs.jpg

    I don't think they made much difference, but I don't think anyone rigorously checked their efficacy.

    I suspect that they would give the impression that there was a car ahead with only one rear light working and so would prompt a wider overtake...


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,440 ✭✭✭cdaly_


    buffalo wrote: »
    Being inconvenienced does not allow for exceptions, though I'd argue being in danger does.
    tomasrojo wrote: »
    But what about when cycle tracks were mandatory to use. Did everyone here use them?

    No. Using buffalo's point above in justification but in reality just avoiding the inconvenience.

    OTOH, red light means stop.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭ xsyojhgt43f8z5


    What's the point of a cyclist waiting at a red light when he/she can see there's nothing coming?


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,704 ✭✭✭✭RayCun


    What's the point of a cyclist waiting at a red light when he/she can see there's nothing coming?

    What's the point of a driver stopping at a red light when they can see there's nothing coming?


  • Registered Users Posts: 31,001 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    RayCun wrote: »
    What's the point of a driver stopping at a red light when they can see there's nothing coming?

    Aside from the law, cars have forward facing blind spots. Bicycles don't.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭ xsyojhgt43f8z5


    The reason why cyclists ignore red lights is because the law is ridiculous. Why should you have to remain at a red light if it is obvious there is nothing coming?


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


    tomasrojo wrote: »
    But what about when cycle tracks were mandatory to use.

    If a bike lane was safe, I'd use it. If there was a danger of being taken out by a pedestrian or being dropped onto the road at a right angle, to me that's reason enough not to use it.

    Arguably I could slow right down when using the path or re-joining the road, and therefore it's only an inconvenience, but it's getting into semantics then.


    I have a bell on all my bikes, bar those adapted for racing. I got a new bike about two weeks ago, and I'm rather annoyed the bars are too wide for any of my bells, so I am currently a lawless rogue - apologies.


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


    The reason why cyclists ignore red lights is because the law is ridiculous. Why should you have to remain at a red light if it is obvious there is nothing coming?


    Why should drivers stop on orange when at least 4 cars can squeeze through before the sequence changes to green for cross traffic?

    If the law makes no sense campaign to change it, or put up with it.

    I think all road users should be allowed to turn left when clear to do so. Or roll through pedestrian lights if nobody around following a complete stop. Would I trust any Irish road user to follow those scenarios or new laws safely. Hell. No.


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


    Grassey wrote: »
    Why should drivers stop on orange....
    AMBER
    AMBER
    AMBER
    AMBER
    AMBER
    AMBER

    Apologies for being pedantic but that's one of my pet hates! :)


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,735 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    tomasrojo wrote: »
    The UK law, apparently, used to be that you had to ring the bell continuously when you were cycling. At least, so they said on The Unbelievable Truth on BBC Radio 4.

    (I don't get all my information from British light entertainment shows, honestly.)
    Under a law between 1888 and 1930 cyclists in Britain were ordered to ring their bells constantly in order to warn pedestrians where you were.
    https://www.comedy.co.uk/radio/the_unbelievable_truth/episodes/6/6/

    (I looked it up in case I'd imagined it.)


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,830 ✭✭✭doozerie


    The reason why cyclists ignore red lights is because the law is ridiculous. Why should you have to remain at a red light if it is obvious there is nothing coming?

    Of course. I, for one, take this mindset to the car with me. Empowered as I am by being an infallible cyclist the rest of the time (as a cyclist I can always see when someone is coming, obvs.), I scoff at red lights when driving too. And I never see anyone coming, especially when I am in a hurry I see no-one at all, it's a very curious thing.

    I'd argue that everyone else should just ignore red lights too but while I'm infallible (proven above, by my saying it, like) I just don't trust the rest of ye.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,174 ✭✭✭Thinkingaboutit


    Stopping at lights is a good idea, even with the risk of being rear ended by a bicycle (some woman cyclist once at lights, lwr Kimmage Rd-Sundrive Rd junction, she didn't have brakes, so I directed her urgently to Wolf Cycles). A person will miss motorised metal boxes gunning it to get through a junction, or some other hazard. There are some places where stopping at lights can mean contending with HGVs and others in a hurry on roads with very little spaces, so perhaps some might see the argument there for a California Stop / outpacing the lights policy at some spots with a clear view of the junction.


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


    RayCun wrote: »
    why not have a bell on your bike?
    Serious answer on this from me is that

    1. I don't have any space left on my bars - put 38cm bars on the commuter, so when I have a light on it, I have just about enough space for my hands.

    2. I don't see the point. But that's my personal style than anything. If I beep the horn when driving more than once a year, that would be exceptional. I can't recall any time when a bell would have been of use.


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


    seamus wrote: »
    Serious answer on this from me is that

    1. I don't have any space left on my bars - put 38cm bars on the commuter, so when I have a light on it, I have just about enough space for my hands.

    2. I don't see the point. But that's my personal style than anything. If I beep the horn when driving more than once a year, that would be exceptional. I can't recall any time when a bell would have been of use.

    Why bother with the horn on the car so?
    The law may be an ass, but it is the law.


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,704 ✭✭✭✭RayCun


    seamus wrote: »
    2. I don't see the point. But that's my personal style than anything. If I beep the horn when driving more than once a year, that would be exceptional. I can't recall any time when a bell would have been of use.

    I rarely use either horn or bell, but I have found the bell useful sometimes on shared paths - one side of the path is for bikes, the other side for pedestrians, and sometimes people spill over. People recognise the sound of a bike bell and move automatically, while if I say "excuse me" or something like that, they turn around to look, then move.


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


    seamus wrote: »
    Serious answer on this from me is that

    1. I don't have any space left on my bars - put 38cm bars on the commuter, so when I have a light on it, I have just about enough space for my hands.

    2. I don't see the point. But that's my personal style than anything. If I beep the horn when driving more than once a year, that would be exceptional. I can't recall any time when a bell would have been of use.

    Stick it under your saddle so. :pac:

    More seriously, a bike bell shouldn't be used in the same manner as a car horn, so the comparison isn't really relevant.


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


    ^^
    I do get all of that. Just pointing out why I haven't bothered my hole going to get one. I've never bought a bike with a bell on it, and never felt any inclination to fit one; never felt like I was missing anything.

    Maybe I'll stick my daughter's pink princess one on to see how I feel about it and whether I actually do use it...


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,822 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    I saw a funny one this morning along the canal , all the lights were red at the junction for pedestrians to cross, one cyclist was inching his way across the lights and a second one was crossing his path at speed and had to hit the breaks. it just looked odd as neither one was in the right and how they didn't spot each other earlier was beyond me

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭ xsyojhgt43f8z5


    Why can't lights be computerised and allow you to drive/ cycle on with care when no traffic is coming?


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,735 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    RayCun wrote: »
    I rarely use either horn or bell, but I have found the bell useful sometimes on shared paths - one side of the path is for bikes, the other side for pedestrians, and sometimes people spill over. People recognise the sound of a bike bell and move automatically, while if I say "excuse me" or something like that, they turn around to look, then move.

    They're handy for going around blind corners on narrow cycle facilities too. Or coming out of alleyways and driveways. I don't think they're vital, but they are somewhat useful when you're around pedestrians. And they can actually be heard in cars.

    I have to say though that while having one might be the law, it's never enforced. So if they're not that important (and they're not) and no-one ever enforces the law, I don't see how the sentiment "well, they're the law and that's that. You should just get one" applies. What difference will it make if you don't? You'll never be made to get one, or face any punishment for not having one.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,359 ✭✭✭jon1981


    Why can't lights be computerised and allow you to drive/ cycle on with care when no traffic is coming?

    They can but it's expensive. Given the state of alot of the roads and lack of cycle lanes or quality lanes I don't think computerised traffic lights will be top of the priority list.


Advertisement