How are more people not killed on our Roads

Jakey Rolling · 10-11-2018 10:07am

paw patrol wrote: »

enough attention isn't given to survivor statistics.
Many survivors live very limited lives after brain damaged or in a wheelchair, unable to work, living on state support

This is my bugbear - the RSA and media are continually celebrating the reduction in deaths on our roads, but there's no mention of those left with life-changing injuries.

As said earlier, advances in vehicle safety and medical care may be making accidents more survivable but has the accident rate actually gone down?

Improvements in road infrastructure should help bring accident rates down, but we have more road users and more distractions due to the ubiquitous use of mobile phones while walking/cycling/driving.

I'd be more interested to see a breakdown of numbers of reported accidents, deaths AND serious injuries year by year.

Dravokivich · 10-11-2018 10:23am

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Just for the record, it is more than 15 years since a cyclist killed a pedestrian here in Ireland. In that time, motorists have killed more than 4,000 people.

Check out the case reported in the press recently of the cyclist with lights, hi-vis and helmet who was knocked down and killed by a bus driver cutting a corner on the wrong side of the road.

Pedestrian steps out into traffic, the motorist can't always be to blame. People need to cop on and be more responsible with the use of the roadways. Regardless of the death statistics.

AndrewJRenko · 10-11-2018 10:42am

Jakey Rolling wrote: »

I'd be more interested to see a breakdown of numbers of reported accidents, deaths AND serious injuries year by year.

The KSI (killed, seriously injured) states are all avaoiable on the RSA website.

But can we stop calling them 'accidents' please? Gardai, RSA and pretty much any professional working in this area don't talk about 'accidents'. They talk about collisions or crashes.

The 'accident' terminology was brought about in the early days of cars by the motor industry to get their customers off the hook for killing people. It is designed to make crashes seem unavoidable, like a natural phenomenon.

In fact, the reverse is true - the vast majority of crashes and road deaths are completely avoidable. If we'd just slow down, put the phones down, put the pints/drugs down, we could make huge headway into our road death figures.

dudara wrote: »

We’ve largely fixed the non-wearing of seat belts, we’ve largely fixed drunk driving, and excessive speeding isn’t too common either.

Not so sure about 3rd one - the vast majority of motorists break speed limits (while simultaneously whinging about cyclists who break red lights - go figure). Keep an eye on the Garda Twitter feed for the people they catch every day doing horrendous speeds. I don't do much driving outside of the city, but when I do, I am dangerously overtaken by drivers driving at dangerous speeds multiple times.

dudara wrote: »

The next thing that needs to get stamped out is mobile phone use. It’s fricking unbelievable how many people have a phone in their hand while driving. I honestly don’t understand these people’s major malfunction. For me it should be akin to drunk driving, if you’re caught, you lose your license for 3 months min.

It's a huge problem, and the Gardai have basically given up on enforcing it. Along with those actively phoning and texting, I've noticed a trend of some drivers who basically just hold the phone in their hand at the wheel ALL the time. They're not looking at it, or on a hands-free call - but it's like they're afraid to put it down - FOMO. They keep it in a place that disables their ability to respond safely to an emergency, and where notifications will cause the maximum distraction.

AndrewJRenko · 10-11-2018 10:45am

Dravokivich wrote: »

Pedestrian steps out into traffic, the motorist can't always be to blame. People need to cop on and be more responsible with the use of the roadways. Regardless of the death statistics.

Every motorist is explicitly required by law to be able to stop within the distance they can see to be clear. Every motorists should be driving in a way that expects people to step out into traffic. They should be noting the presence, location and direction of those pedestrians. They should be noting the parked cars that the pedestrians may step out from.

There is a huge responsibility in taking a tonne or two of metal out on a public road at 20-150 kmph. If they'd just put the phones away, they would probably notice these things.

Pinch Flat · 10-11-2018 10:49am

imme wrote: »

Cyclists shouldn't be going out of their way to kill pedestrians.
I'm not saying that that's what you're saying.

Cyclists should be respectful of pedestrians and vice versa.

Thing is though, last time a pedestrian was killed by a bike was 2003.

Agree though on being respectful towards pedestrians - basic manners is missing in a lot of cases.

jon1981 · 10-11-2018 10:58am

Look this comes to do a basic fact, which road user can cause death? A motorist end of.

A speed limit is not there just to piss drivers off, its there because if there is an "accident" , the possibility of death will be greatly reduced.

Most drivers don't even obey the 50km limit...

Btw i own and drive a car but also cycle daily.

On Tuesday when we had the shocking weather, the surface water was unreal and made the cycle lanes in Dublin unusable. I took the centre lane in slow moving traffic with a 30kph limit to protect myself from a) unseen potholes in the deep water and b) to prevent some driver drowning me.

But of course i was still beeped from behind despite being in the centre lane for no more than 20 seconds.

What the **** is wrong with people.

AndrewJRenko · 10-11-2018 11:00am

imme wrote: »

Murder isn't the only result of cyclists using footpaths that they shouldn't be on for example.

Murder isn't really appropriate here as it implies premeditation. Motorists do kill three or four people each week here, but they don't murder them.

Cyclists certainly should be respectful of pedestrians indeed, though let's not exaggerate the dangers to pedestrians from cyclists. Motorists kill about one pedestrian each week on the roads on average, just for context. I've never seen any study that shows injuries caused to pedestrians by cyclists are a significant issue - have you?

And yes, vice versa is important too. One cyclist was killed as the result of the actions of a pedestrian in the Phoenix Park in recent years.

imme wrote: »

Cyclists without any lights is plain crazy.
It is akin to dicing with death.

To have the bike taken away until they turn up with lights is the only answer.

During the week i saw a young couple in urban Dublin on a busy road during lighting up time.

They looked like South Americans.
They had no lights, were wearing dark clothing, cycling 2 abreast.
Traffic lights no problem, they can go through red lights, which they proceeded to do.

They were beeped out of it but kept going as if they had a date with destiny or death!

The amount of 'self employed' cycling slaves who deliver for food delivery companies who cycle without any lights is frightening.

Great that you managed to see all these 'invisible' cyclists! Certainly, it's not clever or legal to be cycling without lights after dark, but let's not over-exaggerate the risk.

All but one of the relatively low number of cyclists killed on the roads last year were killed in daylight. I can't recall any case of cyclist death resulting from lack of lights in living memory, can you?

And let's not miss the significant number of motorists out there with one broken headlight, or one or two broken brake lights, or no back lights at all because they don't know how their DRLs work.

Dakota Dan · 10-11-2018 11:19am

YFlyer wrote: »

Did say scumbag as well.

So many presumptions with little facts.

lalababa · 10-11-2018 11:30am

The big reason for the reduction in deaths
Is the new smartphone safe driving app.
All the young ones and some of the oldies have it...it is all the rage. You have to hold it in front of you facing the road ahead , it
Automatically sizes up dangerous situations and gives warnings in good time. You can be blissfully happy Facebooking or snapchatting away ('coz these social app. are clearly good for you) and if a collision is imminent your screen goes flashing red with a warning sirens and it promts you to return your eyes to the road. There is a cheaper version that just has a real time video of the road in the bottom right-hand corner.
Deaths are reducing but I wonder are serious collisions?
Also having a crash of ANY type will probably hit one hard in the pocket re insurance.
As for the guards..... enforcement.....hhhmmmmm...no resources...no appetite.

punisher5112 · 10-11-2018 11:46am

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Every motorist is explicitly required by law to be able to stop within the distance they can see to be clear. Every motorists should be driving in a way that expects people to step out into traffic. They should be noting the presence, location and direction of those pedestrians. They should be noting the parked cars that the pedestrians may step out from.

There is a huge responsibility in taking a tonne or two of metal out on a public road at 20-150 kmph. If they'd just put the phones away, they would probably notice these things.

Yes it states that but not much use to driver and pedestrian when they are walking correctly only then to change direction 10feet from a moving vehicle.

I've been there and unfortunately had the experience of knocking a person down and bad at that.

It was low speed, I had already reacted to her change in movement and sounded the horn but to no avail.
She never once stopped or looked or reacted at all.

She was somehow able to be saved even though they thought that wasn't possible.

I will have to live with that due to her behavior.

Farfromhome02 · 10-11-2018 12:08pm

I often think the same thing with some of the clowns on the road

The same clowns are usually the ones that cause an accident and walk away from it and some other poor sod gets the short end of the stick

Always expect the unexpected
Case in point I came across cattle on dark backroads not far from home,was almost impossible to see them till the last 20ft,could have ended badly for somebody

zell12 · 10-11-2018 12:10pm

Farfromhome02 wrote: »

Always expect the unexpected
Case in point I came across cattle on dark backroads not far from home,was almost impossible to see them till the last 20ft,could have ended badly for somebody

Oh I know
They forgot to dress in hi-vis and put a torch on their heads.

mikemac2 · 10-11-2018 12:15pm

93% of drivers believe they are above average

Farfromhome02 · 10-11-2018 12:16pm

zell12 wrote: »

Oh I know
They forgot to dress in hi-vis and put a torch on their heads.

Your onto something there,high Viz for livestock,Great idea

AndrewJRenko · 10-11-2018 1:07pm

Farfromhome02 wrote: »

Always expect the unexpected
Case in point I came across cattle on dark backroads not far from home,was almost impossible to see them till the last 20ft,could have ended badly for somebody

It's a great example of why drivers need to drive in a manner that allows them to stop within the distance they can see to be clear.

punisher5112 wrote: »

Yes it states that but not much use to driver and pedestrian when they are walking correctly only then to change direction 10feet from a moving vehicle.

I've been there and unfortunately had the experience of knocking a person down and bad at that.

It was low speed, I had already reacted to her change in movement and sounded the horn but to no avail.
She never once stopped or looked or reacted at all.

She was somehow able to be saved even though they thought that wasn't possible.

I will have to live with that due to her behavior.

What's this 'walking correctly' all about? People change their mind all the time, pedestrians, cyclists and motorists. You need to expect the unexpected. Your low speed was probably the factor that saved her life, which is why we need more lower speed limits and more enforcement.

Farfromhome02 wrote: »

Your onto something there,high Viz for livestock,Great idea

You'd be amazed what people will come up with to push responsibility away from motorists onto their victims.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/11758512/Cows-should-wear-fluorescent-jackets-and-strings-of-lights-at-night-council-says.html

soups05 · 10-11-2018 1:49pm

i love how so many posters want to point the finger at the motorist. It is easy to find yourself in a position where you are completely in the right but still have an accident. many time I have driven around Dundalk and crossed over a zebra crossing, only to be forced to stop 5/10 feet later when some idiot walks out without looking right into the road.
Now if I hit the said idiot then I am at fault, they get a (huge) claim and my insurance goes up. If I stop and the guy behind me hits me, then I have to go through the annoyance of claiming from him for my repairs. Meanwhile the idiot walks away to do it again the next time.
If stop in time and the guy behind me stops in time then the idiot walks away and two drivers are left shaken or maybe just a little pissed off.

my point is that there is always idiots who will walk out on the road, and more idiots who will defend them by saying expect the unexpected.If every car driver were to travel at a slow speed and brake for every idiot who MAY walk out in front of them then no traffic would ever move far in this country.

how about a new solution? dash cams become mandatory, if a person walks out and there is time to avoid them, great. but if not, fk em, they pay for the repairs to car and no big payday for them. lets try that and see how many would be too lazy to cross safely then.

or perhaps leave things as they are, but allow mad max style rams on the front.....same effect.

AndrewJRenko · 10-11-2018 2:11pm

soups05 wrote: »

i love how so many posters want to point the finger at the motorist. It is easy to find yourself in a position where you are completely in the right but still have an accident. many time I have driven around Dundalk and crossed over a zebra crossing, only to be forced to stop 5/10 feet later when some idiot walks out without looking right into the road.
Now if I hit the said idiot then I am at fault, they get a (huge) claim and my insurance goes up. If I stop and the guy behind me hits me, then I have to go through the annoyance of claiming from him for my repairs. Meanwhile the idiot walks away to do it again the next time.
If stop in time and the guy behind me stops in time then the idiot walks away and two drivers are left shaken or maybe just a little pissed off.

my point is that there is always idiots who will walk out on the road, and more idiots who will defend them by saying expect the unexpected.If every car driver were to travel at a slow speed and brake for every idiot who MAY walk out in front of them then no traffic would ever move far in this country.

how about a new solution? dash cams become mandatory, if a person walks out and there is time to avoid them, great. but if not, fk em, they pay for the repairs to car and no big payday for them. lets try that and see how many would be too lazy to cross safely then.

or perhaps leave things as they are, but allow mad max style rams on the front.....same effect.

It's not so much posters pointing fingers at motorists as data pointing fingers at motorists. 75% of road deaths are motorists killing other motorists and passengers. Or maybe they have seen the RSA Speed Survey shows that 82% of motorists break speed limits. Or maybe they have seen the Aviva pan-european survey showing that Irish motorists are 2nd from bottom of the league table for mobile phone abuse. So it's fairly easy to see where the root cause lies.

Yes, there will always be idiots who walk out on the road. And there will always be idiot cattle round the next bend. And there will always be idiots who already crashed their car round the next bend. And there will always be idiot cyclists getting blown round by the wind or hitting large potholes.

That's why you need to expect the unexpected, and meet your legal obligation to be able to stop within the distance you can see to be clear.

Dravokivich · 10-11-2018 3:22pm

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Every motorist is explicitly required by law to be able to stop within the distance they can see to be clear. Every motorists should be driving in a way that expects people to step out into traffic. They should be noting the presence, location and direction of those pedestrians. They should be noting the parked cars that the pedestrians may step out from.

There is a huge responsibility in taking a tonne or two of metal out on a public road at 20-150 kmph. If they'd just put the phones away, they would probably notice these things.

I can't see through things. I'm never on my phone. If I'm watching every pedestrian, I'm not watching the road and other vehicles.

Dakota Dan · 10-11-2018 3:34pm

Farfromhome02 wrote: »

I often think the same thing with some of the clowns on the road

The same clowns are usually the ones that cause an accident and walk away from it and some other poor sod gets the short end of the stick

Always expect the unexpected
Case in point I came across cattle on dark backroads not far from home,was almost impossible to see them till the last 20ft,could have ended badly for somebody

The same happened me on an N road in darkness, the only way I spotted them in the distance is that they were Whitehead cattle if they were angus all black it would have taken longer to see them. The same night there was a motor bike behind me good job he was a steady biker and saw my warning lights unlike a lot of bikers.

punisher5112 · 10-11-2018 4:07pm

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

It's a great example of why drivers need to drive in a manner that allows them to stop within the distance they can see to be clear.

What's this 'walking correctly' all about? People change their mind all the time, pedestrians, cyclists and motorists. You need to expect the unexpected. Your low speed was probably the factor that saved her life, which is why we need more lower speed limits and more enforcement.

You'd be amazed what people will come up with to push responsibility away from motorists onto their victims.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/11758512/Cows-should-wear-fluorescent-jackets-and-strings-of-lights-at-night-council-says.html

Ok wow wasn't expecting a high horse wannabe....

I meant she was walking along the footpath, walking same direction I was traveling, there was a pedestrian lights which were green 15 feet or actually less from where she decided to change direction, head down, no distractions of a phone or ear phones and I done everything I could to avoid.

Even the person standing at the crossing couldn't believe it, as she was nearly hit by her when she went flying in the air.

I was reading the road and pedestrians also and had anticipated anyone crossing but not when you are given no warning what so ever so you poster been such a smart keyboard warrior I do hope it never happens to you.

People walk out, run out, cycle out, make terrible choices and mistakes but that is it mistakes as in in most cases it wasn't deliberate.....

On the lower speed part it make well be good at times but people really need to be clued in whether walking, cycling or driving.

Estates etc yes it's a good idea but some places it's nuts altogether.

MadDog76 · 10-11-2018 6:12pm

Motorists, Cyclists and Pedestrians are receiving well deserved criticism for doing stupid/dangerous things on the road yet only the posts criticising the Cyclists are being disputed....... says it all really.

orourkeda1977 · 10-11-2018 6:35pm

This is a question I often ask myself.

The standard of driving is beyond chronic.

AndrewJRenko · 10-11-2018 9:17pm

MadDog76 wrote: »

Motorists, Cyclists and Pedestrians are receiving well deserved criticism for doing stupid/dangerous things on the road yet only the posts criticising the Cyclists are being disputed....... says it all really.

Except that's not true - the main dispute being discussed at present, in the post immediately above yours, for example, has nothing to do with cycling.

And you're right to say that motorists, cyclists and pedestrians all do stupid and dangerous things. But just for context, only one of those three groups kills three or four people each week.

Harry Palmr · 10-11-2018 9:25pm

The truth is Ireland is one of the safest countires in the world, in fact outside of northern Europe most driving is abdominal.

Jimbob1977 · 10-11-2018 9:28pm

Harry Palmr wrote: »

The truth is Ireland is one of the safest countires in the world, in fact outside of northern Europe most driving is abdominal.

They control the steering wheel with their stomachs ?

wakka12 · 10-11-2018 9:45pm

Wow thats very low. Is that figure including pedestrians and cyclists struck by cars?

Skylinehead · 10-11-2018 10:29pm

Crumple zones, airbags and high-strength steel in key areas are probably the big reason, at least in collisions.

That's how far we've come in 20 years.

10-11-2018 11:15pm

The lack of patience on the roads is incredible. I was stopped at a red light earlier today in the left lane turning left. A straight only green arrow appeared for cars going straight while the red remained for cars turning left. The red remains for cars turning left as there are pedestrian lights around the corner.

The car behind me started beeping me like crazy. I looked in my mirror and a man and woman were literally screaming all kinds of abuse at me. I pointed to the red light but they just didn't seem to grasp it.

Eventually the full Green came on and I proceeded. So basically, I was beeped at and screamed at for following the rules of the road.

A learner probably would of panicked and just drove.

punisher5112 · 10-11-2018 11:52pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

The lack of patience on the roads is incredible. I was stopped at a red light earlier today in the left lane turning left. A straight only green arrow appeared for cars going straight while the red remained for cars turning left. The red remains for cars turning left as there are pedestrian lights around the corner.

The car behind me started beeping me like crazy. I looked in my mirror and a man and woman were literally screaming all kinds of abuse at me. I pointed to the red light but they just didn't seem to grasp it.

Eventually the full Green came on and I proceeded. So basically, I was beeped at and screamed at for following the rules of the road.

A learner probably would of panicked and just drove.

That's totally normal behavior see it all the time....

Even better the green man comes on away they go.....

Earlier on Camden St.... Taxi sitting on pedestrian crossing creaping further and further....

Orange man is lit but it ain't a flashing orange for us as it stays red.... He boots it and then a bus who seen him do this guessed it was time to go.

Don't be sheep and follow, read the road yourself, stay well back and if you get heated take a chill pill.

MadDog76 · 11-11-2018 7:49am

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Except that's not true - the main dispute being discussed at present, in the post immediately above yours, for example, has nothing to do with cycling.

And you're right to say that motorists, cyclists and pedestrians all do stupid and dangerous things. But just for context, only one of those three groups kills three or four people each week.

Attempting to dispute my point whilst simultaneously proving it....... ironic.

Mena Mitty · 11-11-2018 8:24am

TheQuietFella wrote: »

I was on a bus to Cork recently and just as the driver was preparing to pull into his bay a female pedestrian was taking a short cut through it! She just stepped from the footpath and walked across!

Yer humble drunken pedestrian staggering out in front of traffic is another beaut. I've always pitied the door driver who sends this person to their maker.

They spend the rest of their life asking themselves 'what if' and 'if only'

AndrewJRenko · 11-11-2018 9:55am

MadDog76 wrote: »

Attempting to dispute my point whilst simultaneously proving it....... ironic.

The real irony is attempting to prove your point using a post made after you made your point. Presumably, this is because you've realised that the posts made before you made your point don't actually support your point.

AndrewJRenko · 11-11-2018 9:56am

Mena Mitty wrote: »

Yer humble drunken pedestrian staggering out in front of traffic is another beaut. I've always pitied the door driver who sends this person to their maker.

They spend the rest of their life asking themselves 'what if' and 'if only'

How often does this happen?

Mena Mitty · 11-11-2018 10:05am

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

How often does this happen?

I don't have statistics for you. I do know two people this happened to.

erica74 · 11-11-2018 10:13am

The thing with anyone using our roads is that a lot of people just want to place blame "well, that driver should have been doing x or y", "that cyclist didn't do x or y" but blame and responsibility is irrelevant when you're injured or dead. Thinking "ah well, the other driver was at fault" won't mend your broken leg.
If everyone paid attention, took less stupid risks and wasn't so selfish then the roads might be safer.

One comment I would make about cyclists and pedestrians is that they don't use mirrors when they are switching direction because they obviously don't have mirrors. You can't attach mirrors to pedestrians but I think mirrors on bicycles might be helpful and protect one of the more vulnerable groups on the road. If cyclists had mirrors it might make lane switching safer for them and other road users.

punisher5112 · 11-11-2018 10:26am

erica74 wrote: »

The thing with anyone using our roads is that a lot of people just want to place blame "well, that driver should have been doing x or y", "that cyclist didn't do x or y" but blame and responsibility is irrelevant when you're injured or dead. Thinking "ah well, the other driver was at fault" won't mend your broken leg.
If everyone paid attention, took less stupid risks and wasn't so selfish then the roads might be safer.

One comment I would make about cyclists and pedestrians is that they don't use mirrors when they are switching direction because they obviously don't have mirrors. You can't attach mirrors to pedestrians but I think mirrors on bicycles might be helpful and protect one of the more vulnerable groups on the road. If cyclists had mirrors it might make lane switching safer for them and other road users.

You can get glasses with mirrors and bikes can be fitted with them also.

There are a few going about with them on their bikes

erica74 · 11-11-2018 10:58am

punisher5112 wrote: »

You can get glasses with mirrors and bikes can be fitted with them also.

There are a few going about with them on their bikes

And more should follow suit, I think they're a great idea.

Shenshen · 11-11-2018 11:33am

erica74 wrote: »

And more should follow suit, I think they're a great idea.

I've tried some on my bike, they're utterly pointless. They are far too small to see anything in them, and it's impossible to put them at an angle that will allow you to just glance at them and actually see the road behind you.

I'd rather cyclists actually kept looking behind before changing direction (as motorcyclists are obliged to do, too), not fix tiny mirrors and assume that because you see nothing in them means nothing's behind you. It would be a very dangerous false sense of security.

Shenshen · 11-11-2018 11:35am

MadDog76 wrote: »

Attempting to dispute my point whilst simultaneously proving it....... ironic.

How so? The point being argued is that the party capable of doing the most damage carries the most responsibility.

amcalester · 11-11-2018 11:48am

Shenshen wrote: »

I've tried some on my bike, they're utterly pointless. They are far too small to see anything in them, and it's impossible to put them at an angle that will allow you to just glance at them and actually see the road behind you.

I'd rather cyclists actually kept looking behind before changing direction (as motorcyclists are obliged to do, too), not fix tiny mirrors and assume that because you see nothing in them means nothing's behind you. It would be a very dangerous false sense of security.

I’d have to agree, a lifesaver look is way more useful/safe.

Those mirrors might also make drivers assume the cyclist ahead can see them when the cyclist can’t.

Drivers already pass helmet wearing cyclists closer than non-helmet wearing ones, the same could happen with mirrors.

Graces7 · 11-11-2018 12:15pm

I dread getting behind cyclists on our narrow winding roads when it is impossible to pass them and they are moving side to side as they strive to keep going uphill.. There is nowhere to pull in..

erica74 · 11-11-2018 1:41pm

Shenshen wrote: »

I've tried some on my bike, they're utterly pointless. They are far too small to see anything in them, and it's impossible to put them at an angle that will allow you to just glance at them and actually see the road behind you.

I'd rather cyclists actually kept looking behind before changing direction (as motorcyclists are obliged to do, too), not fix tiny mirrors and assume that because you see nothing in them means nothing's behind you. It would be a very dangerous false sense of security.

Would there be more than one type of mirror to test out before writing them off? I don't understand why anyone wouldn't at least trial something that may make their road use safer.
All road users should perform a lifesaver before changing direction.

erica74 · 11-11-2018 1:48pm

amcalester wrote: »

Drivers already pass helmet wearing cyclists closer then non-helmet wearing ones, the same could happen with mirrors.

Is that a fact?

road_high · 11-11-2018 1:52pm

Ireland has made massive strides in road safety. Back in the 70s- up to late 90s there was consistently 500/600 killed every year on our roads and a sense of despair that we couldn’t bring it down much. The opening of the new motorway network and other road improvements had a massive impact as did the fall of drink driving and car safety advancements

amcalester · 11-11-2018 2:39pm

erica74 wrote: »

Is that a fact?

Not in every case obviously but a University of Bath study did find that motorists give less space when overtaking to cyclists wearing helmets.

23% more vehicles passed with 1 meter when a helmet is worn than when not worn.

1 meter being the advised minimum space to leave when passing a cyclist.

Take from that what you will.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/strange-but-true-helmets-attract-cars-to-cyclists/

AndrewJRenko · 11-11-2018 3:18pm

road_high wrote: »

Ireland has made massive strides in road safety. Back in the 70s- up to late 90s there was consistently 500/600 killed every year on our roads and a sense of despair that we couldn’t bring it down much. The opening of the new motorway network and other road improvements had a massive impact as did the fall of drink driving and car safety advancements

Absolutely true, though let's not lose sight of the three to four deaths on the road every week. That's about 150 families each year with one or two empty seats at the dinner table this Christmas. And it is largely avoidable.

Mena Mitty wrote: »

Yer humble drunken pedestrian staggering out in front of traffic is another beaut. I've always pitied the door driver who sends this person to their maker.

They spend the rest of their life asking themselves 'what if' and 'if only'

Mena Mitty wrote: »

I don't have statistics for you. I do know two people this happened to.

RSA published research in October showing that half of pedestrians killed had taken alcohol. It got a load of press coverage, with many jumping on the victim-blaming bandwagon. Unfortunately, other details of the research got less coverage - that half
of culpable drivers failed to observe before the fatal pedestrian collision, and that quarter of culpable drivers were speeding.

http://www.rsa.ie/en/Utility/News/2018/Road-Safety-Authority-research-reveals-older-pedestrians-at-greatest-risk/

AndrewJRenko · 11-11-2018 3:28pm

Graces7 wrote: »

I dread getting behind cyclists on our narrow winding roads when it is impossible to pass them and they are moving side to side as they strive to keep going uphill.. There is nowhere to pull in..

Are we focusing on road deaths here, or are we going to list every minor annoyance on the road? I often wonder why people single out cyclists in scenarios like this, and don't seem to worry so much about getting stuck behind tractors or tankers on narrow winding roads with no room to overtake. As a cyclist, I get stuck behind cars, vans and trucks all the time in the city, but I don't make a song and dance about it. I just wait for a safe opportunity to get past.

MikeyTaylor · 11-11-2018 4:00pm

We must be doing something right.

AndrewJRenko · 11-11-2018 4:02pm

erica74 wrote: »

Would there be more than one type of mirror to test out before writing them off? I don't understand why anyone wouldn't at least trial something that may make their road use safer.
All road users should perform a lifesaver before changing direction.

Would you consider trialling a motoring helmet?

About half of all head injuries occur in vehicles, compared to about 2% on bikes, even with airbags and seatbelts etc. So motoring helmets have great potential to save lives and eliminate or reduce injuries. They've got to be worth a shot given that they should make road use safer, right?

erica74 wrote: »

The thing with anyone using our roads is that a lot of people just want to place blame "well, that driver should have been doing x or y", "that cyclist didn't do x or y" but blame and responsibility is irrelevant when you're injured or dead. Thinking "ah well, the other driver was at fault" won't mend your broken leg.
If everyone paid attention, took less stupid risks and wasn't so selfish then the roads might be safer.

One comment I would make about cyclists and pedestrians is that they don't use mirrors when they are switching direction because they obviously don't have mirrors. You can't attach mirrors to pedestrians but I think mirrors on bicycles might be helpful and protect one of the more vulnerable groups on the road. If cyclists had mirrors it might make lane switching safer for them and other road users.

There is a serious danger in taking the 'everyone needs to be responsible' approach. While it is factually correct to say that everyone needs to be responsible, it is in danger of missing the point. 75% of road deaths are motorists killing other motorists and passengers. If we want to reduce road deaths, that is the best place to start. This article explains the dangers of false equivalence.

https://www.roadbikerider.com/views/1194-correcting-the-false-equivalencies-in-the-cars-vs-cyclists-debate

If we could wave a magic wand and fit a mirror to every bike tomorrow, the likely outcome on road deaths is zero change. At best, it might save one or two lives. By contrast, if we could wave a magic wand and fit a speed governor to every car/van/truck to keep them under the speed limit, we would probably cut our road deaths in half, something like 50-80 road deaths saved. That would be 50-80 families less going through Christmas without a loved one.

If we actually want to reduce road deaths, we need to focus on the drivers that are killing three or four people each week. Anything else is a distraction.

pablo128 · 11-11-2018 4:25pm

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Are we focusing on road deaths here, or are we going to list every minor annoyance on the road? I often wonder why people single out cyclists in scenarios like this, and don't seem to worry so much about getting stuck behind tractors or tankers on narrow winding roads with no room to overtake. As a cyclist, I get stuck behind cars, vans and trucks all the time in the city, but I don't make a song and dance about it. I just wait for a safe opportunity to get past.

You have some neck. You made the thread 'motorist v cyclist from the start. Like you usually do.:rolleyes:

How are more people not killed on our Roads

Comments