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

Road Safety Authority: 2017 Road Deaths 186->158 but Cyclists 10->15

Options
1235»

Comments

  • Options
    #122
    Hrududu
    Registered Users Posts: 1,711 ✭✭✭Hrududu


    Just as a matter of interest how can we find out the details of those incidents? I'm always interested to see what happened but have no idea when or where to look. Would it be in news articles after an inquest or are they compiled somewhere together?


  • Options
    #123
    Mercian Pro
    Registered Users Posts: 2,275 ✭✭✭Mercian Pro


    CramCycle wrote: »
    It should be noted that this year, one of the fatalities involving a commercial vehicle and cyclist was the cyclists fault (the tourist), but none of the others appear to be. This was the only one where I know of the incident being the fault of the cyclist. The others (that I know of) where all the fault of the motorist involved.

    I am puzzled as to how you can categorically say this. In the interest of seeing what could be learnt from the circumstances of the 15 deaths, I have been reading the various published reports. None of these apportioned blame, nor should they, as neither inquests nor trials have yet happened. Unless you have insider access to the Garda Investigation files or the results of the forensic investigations, I cannot see how you can say who was at fault.
    Hrududu wrote: »
    Just as a matter of interest how can we find out the details of those incidents? I'm always interested to see what happened but have no idea when or where to look. Would it be in news articles after an inquest or are they compiled somewhere together?

    The inquests will hear the results of the various investigations carried out by An Gardaí and these may or may not be published depending on the level of interest of the news media. The inquest will attempt to determine how, when and where the death occurred but cannot consider or investigate questions of civil or criminal liability. If there is going to be a prosecution, the inquest will generally be adjourned without hearing the evidence and will be resumed after the trial.

    One would hope that the RSA has access to all of the facts and reports in order to learn from past incidents and influence future campaigns but I'm not sure whether they do or not. The sketchy nature of their annual reports (location, time of the day, day of the week, speed limit, type of road, age of victim) makes me suspect they don't.


  • Options
    #124
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,489 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    EDITED - part speculation


  • Options
    #125
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,489 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    Mercian Pro wrote: »
    I am puzzled as to how you can categorically say this. In the interest of seeing what could be learnt from the circumstances of the 15 deaths, I have been reading the various published reports. None of these apportioned blame, nor should they, as neither inquests nor trials have yet happened. Unless you have insider access to the Garda Investigation files or the results of the forensic investigations, I cannot see how you can say who was at fault.
    Based on the statements from her husband, reported in the papers. They state that she came around a sharp corner and collided with a trailer. Based on this I had made an assumption but this could be incorrect. Her husbands statement is here but it was incorrect of me to say it was her fault until a report comes out. It was not meant in a callous way, or a mean hearted way.
    http://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/husband-american-tourist-who-died-10626000
    One would hope that the RSA has access to all of the facts and reports in order to learn from past incidents and influence future campaigns but I'm not sure whether they do or not. The sketchy nature of their annual reports (location, time of the day, day of the week, speed limit, type of road, age of victim) makes me suspect they don't.
    Based on their focus for road safety campaigns, for any and all road users, they seem more focused on what they think are the main issues (via popular opinion) rather than anything based on analysis. I could of course be wrong.


  • Options
    #126
    1bryan
    Registered Users Posts: 815 ✭✭✭1bryan


    Hrududu wrote: »
    Just as a matter of interest how can we find out the details of those incidents? I'm always interested to see what happened but have no idea when or where to look. Would it be in news articles after an inquest or are they compiled somewhere together?

    like any court case (bar those held 'in-camera'), you are entitled, as a member of the public, to attend an inquest in the public gallery.

    They don't spare on the detail though so, certainly not for the faint-hearted.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #127
    tomasrojo
    Registered Users Posts: 11,744 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    2018 stats, cyclists down from 14 to 9.
    https://twitter.com/Cyclistie/status/1080064893737414656

    It's sort of good news, in the same way the higher than usual total was bad news at the end of 2017, but the usual warnings about calculating percentages on changes in small numbers apply.


  • Options
    #128
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,448 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    tomasrojo wrote: »
    2018 stats, cyclists down from 14 to 9.
    https://twitter.com/Cyclistie/status/1080064893737414656

    It's sort of good news, in the same way the higher than usual total was bad news at the end of 2017, but the usual warnings about calculating percentages on changes in small numbers apply.


    Worrying increase in the number of pedestrian deaths - would be good to get behind these figures.


  • Options
    #129
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 75,453 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    Worrying increase in the number of pedestrian deaths - would be good to get behind these figures.

    As usual, the changes have absolutely no statistical significance (be it for pedestrians or cyclists). No doubt this year's "low" figure for cyclists will be jumped upon as soon as a similar figure is reached before the end of this year, or the next.

    Clearly any death is a tragedy, but the figures for cyclists are so low I think we should be grateful that cycling remains so relatively safe within Ireland


  • Options
    #130
    ford2600
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,457 ✭✭✭ford2600


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    Worrying increase in the number of pedestrian deaths - would be good to get behind these figures.

    It was about 50 10 years ago.

    Without checking 40ish has been normal for a while from memory.

    While I can understand, on some level, cnutish behaviour towards cyclists but the distain shown to pedestrians leaves me a little baffled. Literally every motorist is a pedestrian or an even more vulnerable road user.

    Where I currently live two of the most aggressive drivers are parents of young children. . When you have that level of selfishness I'm always surprised the number isn't higher.

    The assumption of priority, without any basis in law, on roads with no footpaths, car parks etc is pretty deeply ingrained in your average motorist.

    I just checked CSO.

    Jesus 2001-2007 was bleak. 4 years over 80 killed with 64 being lowest


  • Options
    #131
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,466 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    ford2600 wrote: »
    The assumption of priority ... in car parks
    this is one which i've always found baffling.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #132
    doozerie
    Registered Users Posts: 4,830 ✭✭✭doozerie


    ford2600 wrote: »
    Where I currently live two of the most aggressive drivers are parents of young children. . When you have that level of selfishness I'm always surprised the number isn't higher.

    The assumption of priority, without any basis in law, on roads with no footpaths, car parks etc is pretty deeply ingrained in your average motorist.

    I've had similar experiences tying both of those things together. On more than one occasion when collecting my daughter from primary school we've been walking towards a car blocking most of the footpath, which drove towards us, still on the footpath, as the driver sought out a lower section of kerb to drive back onto the road.

    The drivers are always parents of other kids in the school, they seem entirely willing to drive over other kids and parents in their enthusiasm to get going having collected their own kids.

    People are bizarre. And all too often, completely irresponsible arseholes as and when it suits them. :(


  • Options
    #133
    ED E
    Registered Users Posts: 36,166 ✭✭✭✭ED E


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    Worrying increase in the number of pedestrian deaths - would be good to get behind these figures.

    Inquests for 2018 will sit in late 2019 and early 2020 if we're lucky so that kinda of review can only be done in 2021. Dangerous junction? Let another 5 die before recommendations can go to the LA to change it. Who cares eh?

    Need to get the Coroners courts down to 6 month timeframes, no reason why it couldnt be done.


  • Options
    #134
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,489 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    People = Sh1t

    It's not a pure math equation as it is not all people, nor at all times, but statistically, all people are Sh1t. Accepting this fact or not is what defines whether you are better than everyone else or not. Regrettably, years of this BS means I am starting to accept it, which means I am falling further into the not category.


  • Options
    #135
    silverharp
    Registered Users Posts: 17,847 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    Beasty wrote: »
    As usual, the changes have absolutely no statistical significance (be it for pedestrians or cyclists). No doubt this year's "low" figure for cyclists will be jumped upon as soon as a similar figure is reached before the end of this year, or the next.

    Clearly any death is a tragedy, but the figures for cyclists are so low I think we should be grateful that cycling remains so relatively safe within Ireland

    safe relative to what?

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



  • Options
    #136
    tomasrojo
    Registered Users Posts: 11,744 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    magicbastarder wrote: »
    this is one which i've always found baffling.

    Plus the way it's apparently ok to ignore one-way signs in car parks. Such weird behaviour. And unlike some roads, there are plenty of pedestrians walking with no footway, and it's one place you're quite likely to have children walking.


  • Options
    #137
    ford2600
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,457 ✭✭✭ford2600


    ED E wrote: »
    Dangerous junction? Let another 5 die before recommendations can go to the LA to change it. Who cares eh?

    Every road fatality for the last 10 years or so has been investigated immediately by a specially trained Engineer from NRA/TIL who attend often at same time as Garda Forensic team.

    The investigator has a number of councils in their brief and as such will have a working relationship with local road engineer from ongoing road safety projects/audit work.

    Their brief is to investigate if road infrastructure in anyway contributed to accident and if so design it out.

    I'm not sure how you could improve element of process.

    Stupid usually raises it's head when some dim councillor fancies a bit of road design input, usually have way through construction.

    My in law has done it for a decade.. A few years back there was a fatality where a driver emerged from minor road onto a fast road at a junction where visibility was horrific owing to old house.

    A month or two later I noticed all the new signs/road markings and I asked why not knock old house/make very minor road one way. Demolition was laughed as was road closure when design report recommended it. Every time it's dumb **** councillors


  • Options
    #138
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,448 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    doozerie wrote: »
    I've had similar experiences tying both of those things together. On more than one occasion when collecting my daughter from primary school we've been walking towards a car blocking most of the footpath, which drove towards us, still on the footpath, as the driver sought out a lower section of kerb to drive back onto the road.

    The drivers are always parents of other kids in the school, they seem entirely willing to drive over other kids and parents in their enthusiasm to get going having collected their own kids.

    People are bizarre. And all too often, completely irresponsible arseholes as and when it suits them. :(
    It's the endemic blocking of pedestrian crossing sections of junctions that bugs me. They just push, push, push forward with no consideration of others, and when they 'get stuck' in the junction, they blame the car ahead for stopping - like it was a total surprise that the car ahead stopped in heavy traffic in the city centre at rush hour.


  • Options
    #139
    Lumen
    Registered Users Posts: 31,013 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    CramCycle wrote: »
    This was the only one where I know of the incident being the fault of the cyclist.
    That's a bit of a tough judgement. She fell off going round an unsigned/unmarked downhill hairpin.


  • Options
    #140
    07Lapierre
    Registered Users Posts: 8,219 ✭✭✭07Lapierre


    Happy new year everyone! 😡

    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/new-law-on-drivers-overtaking-cyclists-abandoned-1.3745451?mode=amp


  • Options
    #141
    terrydel
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,881 ✭✭✭terrydel


    07Lapierre wrote: »
    Happy new year everyone! ��

    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/new-law-on-drivers-overtaking-cyclists-abandoned-1.3745451?mode=amp

    This is bloody baffling. Isn't this law enforced elsewhere? I know we are a banana 'republic' but surely if other countrys can make the law work, why cant we?
    I bet the response to this will be more 'them and us' media inspired ****e, with the motorists thinking 'we've won' and some will undoubtedly celebrate by passing closer than ever.
    Its not exaggerating to say this decision will directly lead to someone dying.

    And we've plenty of laws that are considered impossible/highly difficult to enforce and yet are still in place.
    Why is this one different? In any case, if a motorist hits a cyclist on the side or from behind while overtaking, its not ****ing difficult to prove they weren't giving a the cyclist the required gap. So unenforceable my foot.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #142
    Macy0161
    Registered Users Posts: 9,288 ✭✭✭Macy0161


    ford2600 wrote: »
    While I can understand, on some level, cnutish behaviour towards cyclists but the distain shown to pedestrians leaves me a little baffled. Literally every motorist is a pedestrian or an even more vulnerable road user.
    If I have time, I might have a look at how the total of vulnerable road users stacks up. Are there blips within categories, but what's the overall?

    We did a fair amount of walking as a family this christmas period - our house is only a couple of hundred meters from the footpath. The lack of respect from many motorists is shocking - close passes, not slowing, not indicating, expecting us to give way. This is on top of the amount of distracted driving. And the speed is even more noticable on foot, and with children - mainly within a supposed 50km/hr limit.

    In theory, our children are old enough to walk to school on their own. And they would if we had a footpath, but at the moment it feels way too much of a risk.

    I really feel the only way to change motorist attitudes is presumed liabilility.


  • Options
    #143
    07Lapierre
    Registered Users Posts: 8,219 ✭✭✭07Lapierre


    terrydel wrote: »
    This is bloody baffling. Isn't this law enforced elsewhere? I know we are a banana 'republic' but surely if other countrys can make the law work, why cant we?
    I bet the response to this will be more 'them and us' media inspired ****e, with the motorists thinking 'we've won' and some will undoubtedly celebrate by passing closer than ever.
    Its not exaggerating to say this decision will directly lead to someone dying.

    And we've plenty of laws that are considered impossible/highly difficult to enforce and yet are still in place.
    Why is this one different? In any case, if a motorist hits a cyclist on the side or from behind while overtaking, its not ****ing difficult to prove they weren't giving a the cyclist the required gap. So unenforceable my foot.

    I find this bit baffling! .....

    " the Road Safety Authority said it had found limited evidence to support the implementation of minimum passing distance legislation."


  • Options
    #144
    punisher5112
    Registered Users Posts: 24,647 ✭✭✭✭punisher5112


    There are laws there and the minimum distance isn't actually needed as if anyone passes too close or clips or hits the cyclist it's dangerous driving or at the very least driving without due care and attention.

    Plenty of ways to be prosecuted.


  • Options
    #145
    Macy0161
    Registered Users Posts: 9,288 ✭✭✭Macy0161


    It was never just about prosecution, it was about changing mindset. The message now is that it's unprosecutable - the only thing the majority of motorists fear is penalty points - they've effectively made it a free for all.


  • Options
    #146
    buffalo
    Registered Users Posts: 8,054 ✭✭✭buffalo


    punisher5112 wrote: »
    There are laws there and the minimum distance isn't actually needed as if anyone passes too close or clips or hits the cyclist it's dangerous driving or at the very least driving without due care and attention.

    Plenty of ways to be prosecuted.

    Has anyone ever been prosecuted for either of those offences after passing too close to a cyclist? (In a case where they didn't kill or drastically injure them.)


  • Options
    #147
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,489 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    Macy0161 wrote: »
    It was never just about prosecution, it was about changing mindset. The message now is that it's unprosecutable - the only thing the majority of motorists fear is penalty points - they've effectively made it a free for all.

    Wasn't it funny how much more space many motorists were given when they half assedly listened to the half assed reports on the radio about 1.5m being law and penalty points would apply. None of this is what happened but awareness had been raised and most Joe Soaps I chatted to thought it was law.

    Now they have half assed reports on the radio about it no longer being law because it cannot be enforced, again not even close to what is happening, and they will be back to normal thinking, well if it was really dangerous, they'd have a law for that.

    We can all stand here and say they do have laws for it already, but if a driver doesn't realise that what they are doing is dangerous driving then the law is pointless in this case. The law should at its very core be a deterrent to things that we morally or socially shouldn't do anyway.


  • Options
    #148
    tomasrojo
    Registered Users Posts: 11,744 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    I wasn't emotionally invested in the MPL, though I would have liked to have seen it, but I had a feeling it would turn out this way. There are very few things Ross will do any work to implement. He's as lazy as sin and vain as a peacock, so all he really wants is outcomes that can be achieved by simple public announcements, which has the double advantage of getting him media coverage.


  • Options
    #149
    punisher5112
    Registered Users Posts: 24,647 ✭✭✭✭punisher5112


    buffalo wrote: »
    Has anyone ever been prosecuted for either of those offences after passing too close to a cyclist? (In a case where they didn't kill or drastically injure them.)

    People have and even in the UK.

    There is all sorts the cops can still do.

    Of course education is still needed and people in vehicles have to be aware how much can go wrong if dealing with a vulnerable cyclist.

    I see so my dithering along and I honestly don't know how they don't actually drag the cyclist down the road but they seem to get away with it.

    Even some of the cyclists do Bevin a different world they don't even notice the car within and inch of clipping them.


Advertisement