Cyclists

You are missing something...there are idiots using all modes of transport. There is also a lack of enforcement of laws in this country and that’s not just applicable to cyclists.

probably moved from the troll-fest that is AfterHours....
OP will be disappointed as there wont be as many trolls in here ........

greenspurs wrote: »

probably moved from the troll-fest that is AfterHours....
OP will be disappointed as there wont be as many trolls in here ........

It was my initial thought too.

average_runner wrote: »

But how many serious injuries occured in daylight?

I don't know, how many?

pomgh wrote: »

The RSA have on radio and TV highlighted to give cyclists space on the road, cycle lanes, but have not once highlighted to cyclists that they like other vehicle users to have working lights on their bikes between the hours of dusk to dawn especially now that we are again in these dark evenings.

This is probably a fair observation. Granted, I can't say I watch TV with ads much any more, but it does seem to me that advisories with this in mind are pretty thin on the ground.

Part of the problem is that the RSA are too focussed on hi-vis rather than lighting. There is no excuse these days for riding without lights, especially in urban areas. Good, USB-rechargeable lights don't cost very much and modern dynamo lights, like you get on Dublin Bikes, aren't noisy and painful like friction dynamos used to be.

But the RSA still persist on telling people to wear hi-vis like it's some substitution for lights, and every now and again handing out pathetic lights to 50 people that will end up in the bin once the batteries run out.

A series of ads aimed at all road users, especially around this time of year, would be a good idea. Even during the day, it can be dark enough to need lights and rain is a disaster, yet you see all sorts of road users with lights either off or not working. You generally don't see any ads about this.

The Gardaí are to blame also for not implementing the law for they will stop a car user

They won't though. You see people driving around with one light or no lights, all the time. It seems to have gotten way worse in urban areas, I don't know what it is.

No word of a lie, I've heard of more people being stopped for cycling without lights than stopped for a broken headlight. Neither are things the Gardai seem to give much focus on.

buffalo wrote: »

I don't know, how many?

That's why I am asking. We always seem to refer to deaths, but forget about the life changing injuries etc.

My brother was unconscious for over two weeks after an accident on his bike. He eventually recovered but the stress our family went through, will he/ or not make it.

But this is the cycling forum, not the motoring forum. Let the motorist have there own debate there.

Cycling without lights is against the law and just because people break debateably worse laws that is not a good argument.

As per other comments even 1 death is too much.

Why not have a discussion without bringing cars into it?

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

The question isn't whether the point is valid.

The question is, of all the issues on the road that need action, where abouts on the priority list of all valid issues is this one?

I don't think it is in the top 20. I'm not sure it is in the top 50.

I often wonder why the creativity and motivation of many motorists in coming up with ideas to 'fix' cycling and cyclists is not applied to fixing the real danger on the roads - the motorists who kill three or four people each week and maim many more.

Didn't we just have this discussion a day or two ago?

incentsitive wrote: »

The funny thing is, I bought 2 brilliant quality rechargeable USB lights for about 20 quid. I've had them for a few years now and they are as good as the day I bought them.
Its not like the cost of the lights is prohibitive, you don't even have the cost of batteries!
There is no excuse for not having lights!

Just like there is no excuse for speeding, for walking across roads in front of cars, for not tying shoelaces, for being lazy....people are people. They don't all behave the same.

On my route home in the evening (half five/sixish heading south from Dublin city centre towards D16) there are a gratifyingly large number of cyclists with ok to good lights. Much better than I remember. Guess the range of cheaper, good lights is making a difference.

Before dawn yesterday morning Mercian Pro and myself were 'on the road'.

We were passed by a motorist in darkness with no lights on. At the next set of lights MP tapped on his window to tell him. He responded "I know".

I’m predominantly a cyclist but for the last few weeks I’ve been forced to use the car everyday and TBH I can see why some get upset at people on bikes.
But these are not cyclists. They are piss heads with their hands down their bags hiding drugs and men cycling home from a day on the building site and after having a few pints.
Woman who won’t wear a helmet as it will mess their hair.
Men who want to talk on the phone while on the bike and going against the traffic.

If these are cyclist, then we need to start calling people on mopeds and Honda 50’s bikers and dominos pizza drivers rally drivers.

So OP,you are posting in the wrong place as we here are proper cyclists for the most part.

at1withmyself wrote: »

But this is the cycling forum, not the motoring forum. Let the motorist have there own debate there.

Cycling without lights is against the law and just because people break debateably worse laws that is not a good argument.

As per other comments even 1 death is too much.

Why not have a discussion without bringing cars into it?

I'm a motorist, like most cyclists. So I can talk about the dangers of motoring on any thread, subject to usual moderation rules. The more interesting question is why so many people are so dedicated to 'fixing' cyclists and cycling, but they seem to run out of ideas before they start when it comes to fixing the motorists who kill 3 or 4 people each week.


It's like a doctor finding a patient bleeding out due to an amputation, and giving them a sticking plaster.

cletus wrote: »

There are good and bad drivers, just like there are good and bad cyclists, but you can't discount bad behaviour on a bike by saying "but they're not real cyclists"

I agree.



The best way to differentiate the bad cyclists from the bad drivers is to highlight that the bad drivers kill 3 or 4 people each week, while the bad cyclists don't.

Cycling forum = fix cycling forums

Motoring forums = fix motoring forums

I can see the difficulty here alright, tis very confusing

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I'm a motorist, like most cyclists. So I can talk about the dangers of motoring on any thread, subject to usual moderation rules. The more interesting question is why so many people are so dedicated to 'fixing' cyclists and cycling, but they seem to run out of ideas before they start when it comes to fixing the motorists who kill 3 or 4 people each week.


It's like a doctor finding a patient bleeding out due to an amputation, and giving them a sticking plaster.

buffalo wrote: »

So would you disqualify the use of one statistic in favour of another that apparently doesn't exist?

It's not all about deaths certainly, but it's all we have at present to indicate patterns and trends, unless you care to produce some more detailed data?

I never disqualify any stat. Just asked simple question.

The problem is ENFORCEMENT or should I say lack of enforcement. People don’t use lights because the RSA give out free “immunity”vests!

We have cycle lanes on the roads, cycle paths on the pavements which assume cyclists act like pedestrians. We have motorists who see any cyclists as a tax evading freeloader who can’t afford a car, so shouldn’t be on the road!

In short no wonder people are confused!

I hope their descent lights!

https://www.facebook.com/186031000051/posts/10161042261685052/

at1withmyself wrote: »

Cycling forum = fix cycling forums

Motoring forums = fix motoring forums

I can see the difficulty here alright, tis very confusing

The difficulty is that you've just made that up. It's not part of the forum rules for either forum.


Certainly, the cycling forum has frequent discussions about keeping cyclists safe. By and large, this involves getting motorists to comply with the law.

Deleted User wrote: »

Unfortunately there are a few cases who persist in chancing their arm after dark - no reflective gear or lighting rendering them almost invisible to the motorist. The rest of us then suffer cheap labelling i.e. "pesky cyclists". The Gardaí haven't the easiest job on their hands enforcing the law, but something has to give.

The best way to avoid the rest of us suffering is to point out how ridiculous any kind of collective responsibility is.


Do the rest of motorists suffer 'pesky drivers' labelling because of the few idiots driving round with no back lights because they don't know how their DRLs work?

average_runner wrote: »

But you are forgetting the bigger problem. If we allow one group away with something, all the other groups will behave the same way. Thats human behaviour.

Great, so let's stop motorists from getting away with routinely breaking speed limits and red lights, and then cyclists will certainly follow. The bigger problem is the motorists that kill and maim.

average_runner wrote: »

So we need to treat all the same which in turn will make the roads safer for all and save lives.

I don't think that's how policing works.

incentsitive wrote: »

That's a lame enough argument though in fairness too. I mean, if I am cycling home from work and am lit up properly, get hit by a car through no fault of my own, that's the car's fault.
Conversely, if I have no lights on and a black jacket and a car driver knocks me off and kills me, do you think the vast majority of car drivers would not be completely traumatised by that, regardless of right/wrong?
The old "oh they are much worse because they can kill more people" is a lame argument.
It is up to everybody to behave on the roads.

If I'm a pedestrian with no lights and a black jacket crossing the road and a car driver knocks me off, who are we going to blame?

Mike1961 wrote: »

The best way to avoid the rest of us suffering is to point out how ridiculous any kind of collective responsibility is.

Do you sincerely believe that, should we not acknowledge others on the road at all?[/quote]
My point about collective responsibility was about the ridiculous suggestion that the actions of some law breaking cyclists give all cyclists a bad name.

The easiest way to prove how ridiculous it is is to suggest that the motorists who killed 3 or 4 people this week give all motorists a bad name.

I'm not sure I get your point about 'acknowledging'?

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I was making the point that certain people will utilise idiotic cyclists as cannon-fodder to make a blanket assumption that all cyclists are a menace on the road.

Yes, I get that some people will make that assumption. And I suggest that we challenge their assumption rather than play along with their game.

Ask them what they, as a motorist are doing about the 3 or 4 people killed by motorists each week. See how long it takes for them to work out that collective responsibility doesn't work.