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

Cycling on paths and other cycling issues (updated title)

1356775

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 813 ✭✭✭CaSCaDe711


    Far too many moans in the world nowadays moaning and moaning over stuff that's not as serious as they try to make it out to be. Moan moan moan, trying to get some sort of following online. Try to enjoy life, lighten up a bit, look at the positive things, and maybe have a look at what else is happening in the world, it might help you get some perspective :rolleyes:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,823 ✭✭✭✭Strumms


    Article 13 of the 1997 Regulations (Road Traffic Act) makes it an offence to cycle on a footpath unless you are entering or exiting a property.

    https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/travel_and_recreation/cycling/cycling_offences.html

    The only people I see cycling on paths in my area are small kids occasionally , which isn’t a big problem...

    If anyone’s argument is “well sorry, the roads are not safe enough for a cyclist the way people are driving, but I’m happy to cycle on a path actively endangering every, adult, child, pensioner, person with a disability because, well just because I think the roads are too dangerous for a cyclist..” you need to stop cycling and get the bus, a car or get walking... because if you hit me or a loved one with your bike you’ll end up picking the frame of said bike, out of your rectum.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,666 ✭✭✭✭MJohnston


    SeanW wrote: »
    But hey, this is SO relevant to the topic of lawbreaking cyclists on footpaths :rolleyes:

    What exactly *is* relevant to this topic? If it’s just another thread to whine without retort, then it sounds like the topic would be best placed in After Hours.

    As is, where does this topic go? A bunch of smarmy, condescending posts that do not attempt to understand the why of cycling on footpaths is really a completely pointless thread.

    So, SeanW, as you are so concerned with topicality, what would you suggest this thread choose to try and elucidate or illuminate?


  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 40,327 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    Strumms wrote: »
    Article 13 of the 1997 Regulations (Road Traffic Act) makes it an offence to cycle on a footpath unless you are entering or exiting a property.

    https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/travel_and_recreation/cycling/cycling_offences.html
    There's a man that cycles around here every day on the paths and keeps doing it despite my complaints.
    I've even complained to An Post about him but they do nothing.
    Strumms wrote: »
    If anyone’s argument is “well sorry, the roads are not safe enough for a cyclist the way people are driving, but I’m happy to cycle on a path actively endangering every, adult, child, pensioner, person with a disability because, well just because I think the roads are too dangerous for a cyclist..” you need to stop cycling and get the bus, a car or get walking... because if you hit me or a loved one with your bike you’ll end up picking the frame of said bike, out of your rectum.
    I don't think anyone has made the defence of roads are unsafe so its ok for cyclists to endanger people on a footpath. Maybe you can show us where this was suggested.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,484 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Qrt wrote: »
    Tbh loads of people don’t know how to Road cycle because they weren’t taught. The Irish version of the bikeability scheme was stopped in 2009 and afaik hasn’t been reimplemented...

    I only know because I missed out by a year

    Most local authorities fund cycle training for schools under the Cycle Right scheme;

    http://www.cyclingireland.ie/page/programmes/cycle-right/cycle-right1
    Hurrache wrote: »
    Ha ha ha ha ha ha [deep breath] ha ha ha ha ha.

    Repeat.


    Someone should tell him the correct term for the omnipotent cycling lobby is 'BigCycling'.

    J_E wrote: »

    Some cyclists are not just lazy, they're outright dangerous. We know this and nobody would deny that unless they were being genuinely ignorant. There are cases for using the path though, in a way that is considered and the 'best case' for a bad situation.
    Lazy? Do you reckon the drivers of the 60% (iirc) of car journeys that are under 4km are lazy?

    SeanW wrote: »
    Thank you for proving the points I've been making on this board for a long time now. :pac: Which is quite simply that when motorists do things that threaten other road users, they usually do so by doing things other than speeding (like cutting people off, stopping on pedestrian crossing etc).
    That's a bit of a leap there, from one particular video of one particular incident to 'proving' what motorists 'usually do'. I'm not quite sure that one video justifies your claim. There are also several decades of research into the causes of road deaths, showing that speeding is one of the top three causes of road deaths.

    SeanW wrote: »
    Thanks for that :D Not that it even proved anything anyway because it was a strawman argument and a thread hijacking. No-one here will defend reckless drivers, but they were not the topic of the thread (until the thread was hijacked).
    I was told earlier that the topic of the thread was the obstructions on the pavement that cause difficulties for pedestrians. Is that not the topic? Are you now the sole arbiter of topic creep?

    SeanW wrote: »
    And yet, Ireland remains one of the safest countries in the world to be a road user. The facts on this are clear and irrefutable.

    Because they're meaningless. Ireland is one of the safest countries in the world to be a road user.

    What does this have to do with anything? Facts don't care about "who they reassure" they're just that. Facts.

    Any increase is unfortunate, but the facts remains that Ireland is one of the safest countries in the world to be a road user.


    The topic was lawbreaking cyclists. And the only counter seems to be "look, look, motorists, breaking speed limits in one of the safest countries in the world."
    You seem to have missed the connection between speeding and road deaths. Road deaths aren't 'unfortunate'. They are almost always the direct result of the actions of one or more road users - whether in terms of their driving or their maintenance or their training.

    Speeding isn't an academic, theoretical problem. it kills people with alarming regularity on our roads.

    SeanW wrote: »
    You can hijack as many threads as you want with whataboutery, it doesn't change any facts.
    Hopefully we can agree that the facts of the significant increase in pedestrian roads is an issue that needs to be addressed urgently.
    Casey78 wrote: »
    No, you just came on spouting your usual whataboutery nonsense that you are well known for on this board.
    Every thread that even dares mention anything about a cyclist doing something wrong you straight away bring up motorists. You're as predictable as they come.
    Go back and read the thread. Mr Babbage speculated on the reasons for low enforcement of traffic laws for cyclists. I speculated on the reasons for the low enforcement of traffic laws for motorists. That's how discussions go.

    If you have a problem with the post, you know where the report button is.
    1 sheep2 wrote: »
    It's so irritating to be misconstrued by these zealots. What I said was enraging is the whataboutery of those dismissing the misbehaviour of cyclists because of the behaviour of cars, which I had acknowledged in the very same post is frequently objectionable.

    The cycling lobby often use these death statistics as if they were of any relevance whatsoever. It's the equivalent of justifying juvenile anti-social behaviour on the basis that the death rate of such attacks is much lower. Given the relative improbability of a cyclist killing a pedestrian in a collision, the same principle would justify cycling anarchy.

    What these people are too ignorant to see is that a pedestrian never fears for their life on encountering a cyclist on the footpath. That's not the source of the gripe. It's the insecurity and irritation pedestrians feel that causes the anger. It's a pretty squalid mindset that assesses the morals of social interactions based only on death-rate.
    I don't think anyone misconstrued you at all. If anything, you were fairly well construed.

    Those death statistics would be fairly relevant to the families and friends of the two or three people killed by motorists on the road each week, including close to one pedestrian each week on average.

    As predicted when I saw the thread, yep, looooads of whataboutery, straight away. Drivers are assholes, too. We know.
    Yep, drivers are assholes, cyclists are assholes, pedestrians are assholes.

    Though just for context, cyclists and pedestrians aren't the ones killing a couple of people each week.
    Maybe you could, I dunno, start your own thread about cars parking on footpaths?
    Like I said above, if you have a problem with any of my posts, you know where the report button is.

    VanHalen wrote: »
    This debate started out about cyclists using the footpath meaning that social distancing is being ignored. What gets me is when cyclists do this and there is a perfectly good cycle path which they continue to disregard - not one littered with cars parked on it. The Grange Road from Baldoyle to the roundabout at Donaghmede. Cyclists (in both directions) refuse to use the cycle lane meaning I ( a pedestrian) have to walk out onto the cycle lane to avoid them. Only in Ireland!

    Do you think you might possibly have missed the elephant in the room when it comes to problems on pavements that impact social distancing, both in terms of frequency and impact?

    514768.png
    514769.png
    514771.png
    514772.png
    514773.png


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,085 ✭✭✭TaurenDruid


    Do you think you might possibly have missed the elephant in the room when it comes to problems on pavements that impact social distancing, both in terms of frequency and impact?

    Maybe you could, I dunno, start your own thread about cars parking on footpaths?


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 50,223 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    Do you think you might possibly have missed the elephant in the room when it comes to problems on pavements that impact social distancing, both in terms of frequency and impact?
    the main reason AndrewJRenko liked 'Star Wars: The Phantom Menace' was because cars have killed more people than that movie.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,882 ✭✭✭SeanW


    probably should leave this lie, it's a nice weekend, but this is looking at the situation from one angle and missing the wider picture.
    the 'reductio ad absurdum' response would be 'we don't need to take the sharks out of that swimming pool, because no one has been killed by a shark in it', and ignores the fact that people simply don't swim there because of the sharks.

    one of the pieces of the puzzle of why ireland is so safe is because of the preponderance of the default to the car as the mode of transport*, where you have all the safety systems of modern cars.
    it avoids the larger picture of 'what if we made cycling more attractive and popular', which might increase road deaths slightly but almost certainly have a greater counter effect of improved public health and fewer deaths as a result.

    *e.g. more female secondary students drive to school than cycle.
    My point is that the opprobrium directed at Irish motorists from certain quarters is for the most part both unwarranted, hypocritical and misguided.

    Unwarranted in the sense that Irish drivers are not bad by any international standard and the statistics bear that out, hypocritical in the sense that many of those dishing out the opprobrium are profligate lawbreakers themselves, and misguided in the sense that where there is some legitimate room for criticism, it is misdirected towards the wrong things.

    If Irish motorists were so uniquely horrible, generally speaking you would expect to see that reflected in road death statistics. But you don't.

    I defy anyone who says otherwise to go to China, Vietnam, India or parts of Africa and come back and tell us that Irish drivers are uniquely awful. Literally, try crossing a street in Vietnam when there is an unending stream of motorcycles and crossing is like playing Frogger, or try being a motorcyclist in China where everyone treats you like a lower life-form and drives like they're trying to kill you.


    Someone should tell him the correct term for the omnipotent cycling lobby is 'BigCycling'.
    More like "hypocrites".
    That's a bit of a leap there, from one particular video of one particular incident to 'proving' what motorists 'usually do'. I'm not quite sure that one video justifies your claim. There are also several decades of research into the causes of road deaths, showing that speeding is one of the top three causes of road deaths.
    It bears out my own experience as a daily pedestrian in Dublin City. Every time motorists have done something that put me in danger, speed was not involved. Things like blocking pedestrian crossings so that me and 20 or 30 other pedestrians have to shimmy between bumpers in the 10 seconds you have the "green man".

    Speed? 0 kph. As a pedestrian, within reason, I don't care what speed the motorists around me are doing, as long as they obey traffic controls (red lights, yield, pedestrian crossing controls etc). As a pedestrian, every time a motorist has done something to put me in danger, speed had nothing whatsoever to do with it. Other things create danger too, like footpaths not wide enough for the pedestrians (Baggot St. is a great example) or city junctions with no facilities for pedestrians at all.
    I was told earlier that the topic of the thread was the obstructions on the pavement that cause difficulties for pedestrians. Is that not the topic? Are you now the sole arbiter of topic creep?
    Re-read the thread title and the first post. Quite a drift from "Cycling on paths" to "Motorists speed"
    Speeding isn't an academic, theoretical problem. it kills people with alarming regularity on our roads.
    In a country like Ireland, it largely is.
    Hopefully we can agree that the facts of the significant increase in pedestrian roads is an issue that needs to be addressed urgently.
    Except your own link shows that this is little more than a statistical variance.
    60 people have been killed in 56 fatal collisions up to the 27th May 2020, compared to 55 deaths in 48 fatal collisions up to 27th May 2019.
    So ... an increase of 5 - and you don't even identify the cause of those fatalities (the driver(s) involved in those cases might not have been speeding). While unfortunate, it does not change the underlying trend. Ireland remains one of the safest countries in the world to be a road user.

    I'm sorry that the reality does not correspond to your bias, but it just doesn't. I don't how else I can slice this for you.


  • Posts: 2,799 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]








    Do you think you might possibly have missed the elephant in the room when it comes to problems on pavements that impact social distancing, both in terms of frequency and impact?

    514768.png
    514769.png
    514771.png
    514772.png
    514773.png

    If this was other than isolated evidence there would be no space for cyclists

    Note: the thread is not about how many people are killed 🀔


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 50,223 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    SeanW wrote: »
    My point is that the opprobrium directed at Irish motorists from certain quarters is for the most part both unwarranted, hypocritical and misguided.
    i would agree wholeheartedly that the vast majority of motorists are reasonable people.
    but when i'm driving, it's other motorists i need to watch out for most.
    when i'm cycling, it's motorists i need to watch out for most.
    when i'm walking, it's motorists i need to watch out for most.

    motorists (and i know this comes across as inflammatory language) have brought a gun to a knife fight. the balance of power is so skewed, it's absurd. and this is the crucial part, which is more important than the point i've just made - road design is frequently skewed entirely in the motorist's favour, to the detriment of other road users.

    that's why cyclists often get their backs up about threads like this; because many people (and i'm not including you in this) will cast all cyclists as being from the same mould, and address their complaints to people who simply don't post here, who don't 'self identify' as cyclists and generally act sensibly. but they're the ones who often have their safety threatened, and then open up boards and see nonsense like what's in the OP of this thread. such is life. i'm not trying to cast light on the topic that opened this thread (yes, it annoys me too), just on the idea that's frequently promulgated that most cyclists are lawless and dangerous.

    i'm somewhat tipsy, so the above probably is somewhat disjointed.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,877 ✭✭✭John_Rambo


    I've been a habitual pedestrian recently (new baby, walks, go to f*****g sleep etc... ) I'm also a keen motorist and I cycle a little bit for short runs.

    I don't come across many cyclists on the footpath and when I rarely do they don't bother me, the pace they go by me and the distance they give me is fine.

    I don't see it as being a big issue in comparison to the antics of other road/path users (or path users that shouldn't be on the path). The Gardai are obviously of the same opinion. Bigger fish to fry.


  • Registered Users Posts: 107 ✭✭1 sheep2


    Hurrache wrote: »
    Ha ha ha ha ha ha [deep breath] ha ha ha ha ha.

    Repeat.

    It's validating to see the sheer lack of class from those asserting the right of cyclists to impinge on pedestrians.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,279 ✭✭✭Chiparus


    Bless your eyesight that you can see them spewing germs.
    But yes, it's illegal, germs or not, but no-one is bothered doing anything to put a stop to it.

    its not illegal.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,903 ✭✭✭micar


    There's a man that cycles around here every day on the paths and keeps doing it despite my complaints.
    I've even complained to An Post about him but they do nothing.

    I don't think anyone has made the defence of roads are unsafe so its ok for cyclists to endanger people on a footpath. Maybe you can show us where this was suggested.

    You mean the postman?? You actually made a complaint.

    So you want the postman to, leave his bike at the pillar, deliver mail to one house, hop on the bike, check the road for on coming traffic, off the driveway back into the road, spin to the driveway of your neighbour, back onto the driveway, leave the bike against the pillar and deliver the mail.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 50,223 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    Chiparus wrote: »
    its not illegal.
    this is article 13 from the 1997 law:
    "13 Driving on Footway

    13. (1) Subject to sub-articles (2) and (3), a vehicle shall not be driven along or across a footway.

    (2) Sub-article (1) does not apply to a vehicle being driven for the purpose of access to or egress from a place adjacent to the footway.

    (3) A reference in sub-article (1) to driving along or across a footway, includes s reference to driving wholly or partly along or across a footway."
    http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1997/si/182/made/en/print#article13

    also, the above mentions this lest there be confusion:
    "(5) A reference to a vehicle in these Regulations shall, unless otherwise specified, mean a mechanically propelled vehicle (other than a mechanically propelled wheelchair) and a pedal cycle."

    if you know of any superseding law, it'd be interesting to see it.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,310 ✭✭✭Pkiernan


    Footpaths are for pedestrians. Not for parking on, not for cycling on. That's the law. Unfortunately, rarely enforced. I see and pass cyclists on the footpath every day on the way to work (pre-covid), been hit by them twice in the last year and had a couple more near misses (why would you cycle while looking at your phone?! Oh, deliveroo, yeah, rules of the road, red lights and common sense don't apply to you...)

    Problem is some cyclists are lazy. Yes, you could get from George's Street to Baggot Street cycling legally - but actually following one-way streets? Nah, I'll just cycle on the footpath instead, it's not like I'm a car! (And even then, I often see cyclists cycle the wrong way down the one-way road that is Stephen's Green North).

    Which kinda gives the lie to the whole "It's not safe to be on the road!" argument...

    As predicted when I saw the thread, yep, looooads of whataboutery, straight away. Drivers are assholes, too. We know.

    I struggle as to why you would accept a someone hitting you while you are walking.
    Would you not shove them off the bike?


  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 40,327 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    micar wrote: »
    You mean the postman?? You actually made a complaint.

    So you want the postman to, leave his bike at the pillar, deliver mail to one house, hop on the bike, check the road for on coming traffic, off the driveway back into the road, spin to the driveway of your neighbour, back onto the driveway, leave the bike against the pillar and deliver the mail.
    Apologies. Obviously some people need to see a smiley go to realise sarcasm :rolleyes:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,903 ✭✭✭micar


    Apologies. Obviously some people need to see a smiley go to realise sarcasm :rolleyes:


    Ok.........to be fair I'm sure they have had complaints.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,484 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    1 sheep2 wrote: »
    It's validating to see the sheer lack of class from those asserting the right of cyclists to impinge on pedestrians.
    Can you point to a single post here that asserts the rights of cyclists to impinge on pedestrians please?
    If this was other than isolated evidence there would be no space for cyclists
    Isolated evidence? Seriously? Would you like me to post a similar set of photos today? And tomorrow? And the next day? If you think this is isolated, I'd suggest that you never drive a car because you clearly have a serious problem with observation.

    Check out these sets of photos from Twitter:

    https://twitter.com/search?q=%23makewayday&src=typed_query&f=image
    https://twitter.com/search?q=%23freethecyclelanes&src=typed_query&f=image


    Note: the thread is not about how many people are killed ��
    OK, should we focus on those injured instead? You'll find the stats for those seriously injured by motorists on the RSA website.
    SeanW wrote: »
    My point is that the opprobrium directed at Irish motorists from certain quarters is for the most part both unwarranted, hypocritical and misguided.

    Unwarranted in the sense that Irish drivers are not bad by any international standard and the statistics bear that out, hypocritical in the sense that many of those dishing out the opprobrium are profligate lawbreakers themselves, and misguided in the sense that where there is some legitimate room for criticism, it is misdirected towards the wrong things.

    If Irish motorists were so uniquely horrible, generally speaking you would expect to see that reflected in road death statistics. But you don't.

    I defy anyone who says otherwise to go to China, Vietnam, India or parts of Africa and come back and tell us that Irish drivers are uniquely awful. Literally, try crossing a street in Vietnam when there is an unending stream of motorcycles and crossing is like playing Frogger, or try being a motorcyclist in China where everyone treats you like a lower life-form and drives like they're trying to kill you.
    Why would you think that international comparisons are relevant? It really doesn't matter in the slightest how good or bad things are in other countries.

    The relevant comparison is to compare against the option of not killing two or three people each week.

    SeanW wrote: »
    More like "hypocrites".
    Yeah, bloody hypocrites killing one person each decade, while improving public health, avoid toxic emissions and reducing traffic chaos. Who the hell do they think they are?

    SeanW wrote: »
    It bears out my own experience as a daily pedestrian in Dublin City. Every time motorists have done something that put me in danger, speed was not involved. Things like blocking pedestrian crossings so that me and 20 or 30 other pedestrians have to shimmy between bumpers in the 10 seconds you have the "green man".

    Speed? 0 kph. As a pedestrian, within reason, I don't care what speed the motorists around me are doing, as long as they obey traffic controls (red lights, yield, pedestrian crossing controls etc). As a pedestrian, every time a motorist has done something to put me in danger, speed had nothing whatsoever to do with it. Other things create danger too, like footpaths not wide enough for the pedestrians (Baggot St. is a great example) or city junctions with no facilities for pedestrians at all.

    Again, your own personal experience isn't a great yardstick for measuring safety, given the ever-present risk of confirmation bias.

    If you want to understand safety, have a look at several decades of research from safety authorities in Ireland and abroad showing that speeding is one of the top three causes of road deaths.
    SeanW wrote: »
    Re-read the thread title and the first post. Quite a drift from "Cycling on paths" to "Motorists speed"
    I read all the posts, not just the first one, and I respond to issues brought up by others. If you think I'm off-topic, you know where the report button is. Please stop back-seat moderating.
    SeanW wrote: »
    In a country like Ireland, it largely is.

    Except your own link shows that this is little more than a statistical variance.

    So ... an increase of 5 - and you don't even identify the cause of those fatalities (the driver(s) involved in those cases might not have been speeding). While unfortunate, it does not change the underlying trend. Ireland remains one of the safest countries in the world to be a road user.

    I'm sorry that the reality does not correspond to your bias, but it just doesn't. I don't how else I can slice this for you.
    I can only imagine that families and friends of the increased number of road victims might have a different view to you on the relevance of these stats. I'm not sure that being told that your dead father/brother/mother/child is a statistical variance is going to give much comfort.

    You're right in that we don't know if speeding is an issue in these deaths. Speeding is just one of the main driver behaviours that result in road deaths, but it's certainly not the only one.


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


    More whataboutery from Andrew lol.
    I think he's a bot.


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


    Pkiernan wrote: »
    I struggle as to why you would accept a someone hitting you while you are walking.
    Would you not shove them off the bike?

    That's what I'd be doing.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,909 ✭✭✭Charles Babbage


    I will at absolutely no point tell him to not use a footpath if he feels it is safer. .


    The only lawful and moral thing you can tell him is that if he wishes to use the footpath that he gets off the the bike and walks. Anything else is encouraging loutery.


    Can you point to a single post here that asserts the rights of cyclists to impinge on pedestrians please?


    see above.



    This thread is like all the others, replete with whataboutery with a variety of posters trying redirect into discussion of other road issues. These issues may warrant discussion but they should not be allowed derail this thread and in a properly moderated forum they would not be.

    It is a bit like going into a thread on wife-beating, and arguing that it is a minor thing compared to murder. Of course, those who oppose wife beating are not in any way promoting murder but the the point is to derail the discussion.



    Can I suggest that people argue the point and stop talking about extraneous matters. Yes, motorists are guilty of many things, but however many such things there are it does not entitle cyclists to threaten pedestrians. If someone bullies you that you not give you the right to bully someone else to make you feel better.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,085 ✭✭✭TaurenDruid


    Pkiernan wrote: »
    I struggle as to why you would accept a someone hitting you while you are walking.
    Would you not shove them off the bike?

    Once was on the footpath by the Dodder, along by the hotel in Ballsbridge as you cross from the RDS. (Can't remember the name - Herber Park Hotel, maybe?) Leinster match finished, there are literally hundreds of fans walking on this path towards Ballsbridge. Two cyclists are weaving in and out of the pedestrians, at maybe 15kmh, heading against the flow. I didn't move out of the way, guy hits my not insubstantial shoulder, guy and his bike ended up in a bush. I kept walking.

    Second time was on the footpath between the LUAS track and road on Stephen's Green North. Guy can see me angling towards the road (because yes, I was going to jaywalk!) and speeds up, presumably to get past on the flat kerb rather than go around behind me on the cobbles? He hits my elbow and bounces onto the road. He shouts something at me over his shoulder about not getting out of his way, did I not see him - but keeps on cycling. Two other pedestrians tell him to go **** himself and stay off the path.

    (Stand at the corner of Grafton Street and Stephen's Green any rush hour morning, post covid, to see hundreds of examples per hour of cyclists on footpaths, ignoring pedestrian lights, and cycling the wrong way down one-way streets. (Cue Andrew with his stat about number of drivers breaking red lights...))

    Another incident (with no collision this time) was the footpath on Baggot St outside Toners, when it still had the scaffolding. Woman cycling through the scaffolding towards me takes offence at being told to get off the effing footpath, and starts shouting "Don't you swear at me!" Again, other pedestrians tell her to get of the effing footpath.

    This isn't complex. Are you over 12 (or is it 15?) Don't cycle on the footpath.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,484 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Casey78 wrote: »
    More whataboutery from Andrew lol.
    I think he's a bot.
    I think I'm not.
    (Stand at the corner of Grafton Street and Stephen's Green any rush hour morning, post covid, to see hundreds of examples per hour of cyclists on footpaths, ignoring pedestrian lights, and cycling the wrong way down one-way streets. (Cue Andrew with his stat about number of drivers breaking red lights...))
    Sure - here you go. 88% of red light jumping at the Luas red light camera was by motorists, not cyclists.
    http://kerrycyclingcampaign.org/but-all-drivers-break-the-lights/
    see above.
    If you're referring to Seth's posts, you might want to review the conditions he set out for his child about using the footpath which militate against infringing on pedestrians.


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


    Oh look another whataboutery post from Andrew.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 50,223 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    This isn't complex. Are you over 12 (or is it 15?) Don't cycle on the footpath.
    there's no age mentioned in the law. i suppose by default it does not apply to kids because they're too young for the law to apply to them.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,484 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Casey78 wrote: »
    Oh look another whataboutery post from Andrew.

    Oh look another deflecting post from Casey.


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


    Oh look another deflecting post from Casey.

    Yes im the one deflecting not you ha ha.

    You'd give the DUP up the north a run for their money with the amount of whataboutery you go on with.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,085 ✭✭✭TaurenDruid


    Sure - here you go. 88% of red light jumping at the Luas red light camera was by motorists, not cyclists.
    http://kerrycyclingcampaign.org/but-all-drivers-break-the-lights/

    A) Your stats are wrong.

    B) This post isn't about jumping red lights, by cyclists or by motorised vehicles, but when I'm posting in a thread that is actually about that, I'll point out what else is wrong with your stats apart from the misquoted number. This is not that thread, though.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,484 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Casey78 wrote: »
    Yes im the one deflecting not you ha ha.
    The whole thread is about deflecting.
    Casey78 wrote: »
    You'd give the DUP up the north a run for their money with the amount of whataboutery you go on with.
    I know, it's terrible to have to be reminded of the CARnage caused by cars on the road and paths instead of the mild irritation caused by cyclists.
    A) Your stats are wrong.
    You'd better take that up with the National Transport Authority because it was their camera that counted the red light jumpers.
    B) This post isn't about jumping red lights, by cyclists or by motorised vehicles, but when I'm posting in a thread that is actually about that, I'll point out what else is wrong with your stats apart from the misquoted number. This is not that thread, though.
    You brought up the topic of jumping red lights. Don't open the door if you don't know what's behind it.


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


    A) Your stats are wrong.

    B) This post isn't about jumping red lights, by cyclists or by motorised vehicles, but when I'm posting in a thread that is actually about that, I'll point out what else is wrong with your stats apart from the misquoted number. This is not that thread, though.

    I'm not sure he is understanding that last line, its certainly not hitting home to him that this thread is about cyclists on footpaths and not about motorists killing thousands of people in Ireland every hour.
    Maybe he's been knocked off his bike too many times by all these wannabe murderous motorists everywhere :)


  • Registered Users Posts: 15 Rogerrabit


    Maybe those who cycle on footpaths just want to annoy ordinary folk because as we are all aware cycling interferes with your libido and as a result of sexual frustration they want to upset happy healthy walkers.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,909 ✭✭✭Charles Babbage


    Rogerrabit wrote: »
    Maybe those who cycle on footpaths just want to annoy ordinary folk because as we are all aware cycling interferes with your libido and as a result of sexual frustration they want to upset happy healthy walkers.


    No, just the the motorists who park on the footpath or whatever they are only interested in themselves and don't give other people any consideration at all.


  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 40,327 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    Rogerrabit wrote: »
    Maybe those who cycle on footpaths just want to annoy ordinary folk because as we are all aware cycling interferes with your libido and as a result of sexual frustration they want to upset happy healthy walkers.
    So the best "argument" that you can put forward was written by a child? :rolleyes:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,484 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Casey78 wrote: »
    I'm not sure he is understanding that last line, its certainly not hitting home to him that this thread is about cyclists on footpaths and not about motorists killing thousands of people in Ireland every hour.
    Maybe he's been knocked off his bike too many times by all these wannabe murderous motorists everywhere :)

    Again, if you believe any of my posts are off-topic, feel free to use the report button. I haven't raised any new topics here, I've just responded to others.

    Certainly, having multiple drivers passing me on each journey with a mobile phone in their hand does create a degree of frustration, I'll give you that.
    No, just the the motorists who park on the footpath or whatever they are only interested in themselves and don't give other people any consideration at all.


    I'm not sure if you were trying to be sarcastic or not, but you've pretty much hit the mail on the head here.
    Rogerrabit wrote: »
    Maybe those who cycle on footpaths just want to annoy ordinary folk because as we are all aware cycling interferes with your libido and as a result of sexual frustration they want to upset happy healthy walkers.

    I'm not sure where you got that idea from;

    https://edrxcare.com/how-does-cycling-affect-libido-and-sexual-health/

    But if you want healthy....
    https://www.bbc.com/news/health-39641122


  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 40,327 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    The only lawful and moral thing you can tell him is that if he wishes to use the footpath that he gets off the the bike and walks. Anything else is encouraging loutery.
    Ok then, I'll bite.
    Is it "encouraging loutery" to tell a 5 year old to cycle on the footpath using the advice re pedestrians that I previously gave?
    What about an 8 year old? Or should they cycle on the road?
    What about a twelve year old? Is it encouraging loutery for them to cycle on a path when traffic is dangerous?
    What about a 13 year old?
    15?
    17?
    At what age does it does it change from being ok to let's kids cycle on the path to become loutery?


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


    Again, if you believe any of my posts are off-topic, feel free to use the report button. I haven't raised any new topics here, I've just responded to others.

    I have no interest in reporting anyone on an internet forum, the mind boggles why anyone would want to be so childish to do such a ridiculous thing.

    Anyway...have you anything to say about cyclists cycling on footpaths without posting gibberish whataboutery nonsense about motorists?


  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,088 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    1 sheep2 wrote: »
    It's not the biggest thing in the world. I grant that cyclists are much more exposed to errant motorists than pedestrians are to cyclists on footpaths. But it's really quite unpleasant as a pedestrian to come upon a cyclist on the footpath - it feels both intimidating and rude. And it's endemic. It's not acceptable that pedestrians are confined to footpaths and cars to roads, yet cyclists can pick and choose, deciding on which laws to follow.

    LOL... cars are confined to roads... yet, it doesn't take long traveling around urban areas in Ireland before you find cars on footpaths, cycle paths, cycle lanes, and even on top of grass verges etc.

    It also says a lot that it's pedestrians, cyclists, but cars.... since when has Ireland had any driverless cars? It's easier to brush over wrong doing when you're not thinking about the humans involved.

    1 sheep2 wrote: »
    Of course, cycling lobbyists on twitter are in complete denial about all this.

    Hmm... "cycling lobbyists on twitter" and "I'm a cyclist too" is the type of phrases used by anti-cycle path people in the UK and Cork council people who don't campaigners calling for action on cars parking in cycle lanes and inaction by the council.
    1 sheep2 wrote: »
    This thread is insane. Mixture of some cyclists denying that cyclists break the rules and others blithely justifying why they break the rules.

    It's insane... that (a) much of anything on this thread can be seen as "some cyclists denying that cyclists break the rules", (b) that you expect in a thread about something that you won't get people explaining why that something happens, or (c) you misunderstanding the words being posted by others due to your perspectives on these type of issues.

    1 sheep2 wrote: »
    You will find few more hostile to errant motorists than I am. In the last three days, I have banged on the back of a car that cut across me while I was crossing on a green light, confronted two people who were stopped on a pedestrian crossing, and reprimanded someone who had stopped in a cycle lane causing a cyclist to have to go around them. Your preconception of me is wrong.

    You'll find that people's perceptions of you is based on what you have said and your focus and way of talking about things.
    1 sheep2 wrote: »
    Such whataboutery is enraging. It is near impossible to criticise cyclists without having it said that motorists are worse. The end result of that logic is absurd. 'But what about truck drivers...'

    That's really poor coming from the person who thinks "that pedestrians are confined to footpaths and cars to roads, yet cyclists can pick and choose, deciding on which laws to follow". Engaging with an issue and then calling it "whataboutery" when you're clearly loosing the argument is a bad look.

    Also: Truck drivers are a type of motorists. And truck drivers are expected by law to follow higher standards due to the extra danger of what they drive.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 480 ✭✭ewc78


    So then, cyclists on footpaths eh...anyone got an opinion on that?
    Lol....


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,909 ✭✭✭Charles Babbage


    I'm not sure if you were trying to be sarcastic or not, but you've pretty much hit the mail on the head here.


    Well then, the thread can conclude with the conclusion that cycling on paths is an ignorant and inconsiderate act which is not in anyway justified by other inconsiderate acts and which should be subject to effective legal sanction where at all possible.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,088 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    MarkY91 wrote: »
    Obviously aimed at teenagers and adults flying past at 20mph but ok..let's focus on 5 year olds with their training wheels...

    The more I hear apparent adults give out about cycling on footpaths, the clearer and clearer it is that a significant amount of what they are talking about is (1) children / families / older people, or (2) gurriers.

    When walking around Dublin with a pram was my main form of transport for about 6 months or more, I interacted with the latter a good bit but never had much of an issue with them because they and I, 99% of the time, slowed down and stopped where there was a need to.

    From listening to people who have poor experiences with the latter it's usually people who for different reasons won't leave well enough alone (which is understandable). But that's the thing about challenging people, a lot of people don't like to be told what to do. You'll get similar reaction telling anybody what to do even if you are in the right. I've gotten abuse and even false claims spread after I challenged motorists, that's just an example.


  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,088 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    micar wrote: »
    This is crutical

    As a person who goes to work each day by bike, there is a section on my way home where i cycle on the footpath.

    It's uphill and takes about 90 seconds.

    Why use the footpath and not the road?

    Simply.......I don't feel safe sharing the road with motorists. The outbound lane is just about the width of a Dublin bus.

    More likely it was originally 1 inbound and 1 outbound lane. The addition of a bus lane reduced the lane widths.


    When i come across a pedestrian, I give them plenty of room.

    If needed I'll hold back and pass them at the driveway sections.


    https://maps.app.goo.gl/4eLHcrsQDCiUDFwVA

    If you're going north of Griffith Avenue, I'd highly recommend going via Glasnevin Hill and the lower half of Ballymun Road (ie past the Botanic Gardens and then pass the Met office).

    It's not a perfect way or anything and there's still tricky bits at times depending on the time of day and parking etc, but I found it far better than your way, especially north of the Tolka.


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


    My 13 year old son and his mates have taken to the bikes during the current restrictions. Great to see them getting some exercise and fresh air. I've no problem with him cycling the 3km or so from our house to the Phoenix park, on the condition he stays on the paths. The roads are full of impatient and irresponsible drivers who will quite easily put him needlessly at risk to get ahead or to a red light a few seconds earlier.

    Once this behaviour changes, I might consider letting him out on the road


  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 40,327 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    Well then, the thread can conclude with the conclusion that cycling on paths is an ignorant and inconsiderate act which is not in anyway justified by other inconsiderate acts and which should be subject to effective legal sanction where at all possible.
    What legal sanction would you suggest for "an ignorant and inconsiderate" five year old?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,008 ✭✭✭skallywag


    Rogerrabit wrote: »
    Hi cycling in footpaths is very dangerous for pedestrians especially now with this virus pandemic. Every day I witness these events cyclists on the footpaths spewing out germs as they cycle past pedestrians less than two feet from them. If any of these cyclists have the virus the pedestrians have no chance they will pick up the disease. Why do the police allow this carry on. They should be protecting the elderly instead of turning a blind eye to this outrageous carryon. What do yo think out there in Ireland the country whose population do not know how to wear a facemask.

    Nice post from your shiny new account OP.

    Grow up.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,857 ✭✭✭✭average_runner


    Rogerrabit wrote: »
    Hi cycling in footpaths is very dangerous for pedestrians especially now with this virus pandemic. Every day I witness these events cyclists on the footpaths spewing out germs as they cycle past pedestrians less than two feet from them. If any of these cyclists have the virus the pedestrians have no chance they will pick up the disease. Why do the police allow this carry on. They should be protecting the elderly instead of turning a blind eye to this outrageous carryon. What do yo think out there in Ireland the country whose population do not know how to wear a facemask.

    Probably a little bit over the top and the gardai have more important things to do.

    Kids on footpaths is ok, some parents need to cycle with them on footpaths is ok, they arent going fast.

    If everyone plays ball we can work it out like it does in most cases.

    OP you are more likely to get the virus when u stop to chat on the footpath and block it for everyone else.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,909 ✭✭✭Charles Babbage


    Pinch Flat wrote: »
    My 13 year old son and his mates have taken to the bikes during the current restrictions. Great to see them getting some exercise and fresh air. I've no problem with him cycling the 3km or so from our house to the Phoenix park, on the condition he stays on the paths. The roads are full of impatient and irresponsible drivers who will quite easily put him needlessly at risk to get ahead or to a red light a few seconds earlier.

    Once this behaviour changes, I might consider letting him out on the road

    Do you think it is wise to give out the message that he should just do what he likes and screw everyone else. It is wholly unnecessary, you could walk 3km in half an hour.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,734 ✭✭✭J_E


    Rogerrabit wrote: »
    Maybe those who cycle on footpaths just want to annoy ordinary folk because as we are all aware cycling interferes with your libido and as a result of sexual frustration they want to upset happy healthy walkers.

    Are you just here to troll, so?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,479 ✭✭✭✭Thelonious Monk


    Why is there so much hype about this lately? Is it not a great thing that people are out on bikes in any capacity? Has anyone been injured by cyclists on footpaths?
    Why don't people go nuts ringing radio shows about illegally parked cars absolutely everywhere? There are 7 outside my house right now illegally parked, just strewn around the place.
    There have been 18 pedestrians KILLED, yes KILLED, by people driving cars this year - but this doesn't seem to bother anyone?
    Why isn't Pat Kenny going nuts about this?
    Seriously, get your priorities right, bikes are not a danger to anyone.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,479 ✭✭✭✭Thelonious Monk


    Do you think it is wise to give out the message that he should just do what he likes and screw everyone else. It is wholly unnecessary, you could walk 3km in half an hour.

    It's harmless. People have an irrational hatred of cyclists in this country for some reason. People are not going to stop cycling on footpaths any time soon so suck it up, it causes no harm to anyone.
    And the only people I see on footpaths are usually adults with tiny kids, to get away from cars.
    There are far bigger things to worry about.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement