Cyclists, Go use the footpad.

dade

Ciaran500 wrote: »

But isn't the cycle lane the left most lane so you should be giving right of way..

in a lot of the cycle lanes i encounter the left hand lane and cycle lane are one. by that i mean the cycle lane takes up part of the left hand lane. a good example is at Donneycarny church in Dublin 3 and also the bottom of the Malahide road at Fairview. if you come from Fairview onto the Malahide road the cycle lane and left hand lane are one and the same in that the left hand lane is too small to accommodate a car without it entering the cycle lane. so in this case who has the right of way?

Ciaran500 wrote: »

Of course, but the original post was complaining about the very common scenario were a motorists goes past a cyclist then takes a left turn, cutting the cyclist up.

well people who do that shouldn't be on the road in my opinion

oeb

Don't listen to these cyclist loving hippies OP! I have a much better solution. If you were to drive on the footpath(d) you will avoid all the problems. No more unsafe overtaking, you will zip right through rush hour traffic, and pedestrians leave a smaller dent than a bicycle does!

twinytwo

Mossy Monk wrote: »

Cyclists are road users too. It is illegal for them to cycle on a footpath. Before you overtake the cyclist be sure there is no oncoming traffic and then the worry about hitting traffic on the right is gone.

you obviously dont live in the country i take it??.. with the state of the roads etc how exactly are you expected to overtake??.. when they are doddering along.. also not having lights/reflective clothing on at night but if the driver hits them(becasue they are blacker than the night) the driver is in the wrong.

Ciaran500

twinytwo wrote: »

also not having lights/reflective clothing on at night but if the driver hits them(becasue they are blacker than the night) the driver is in the wrong.

You sure about that?

We're legally required to have lights and reflectors so I doubt a motorist would take all the blame in that scenario.

oeb

twinytwo wrote: »

you obviously dont live in the country i take it??.. with the state of the roads etc how exactly are you expected to overtake??.. when they are doddering along.. also not having lights/reflective clothing on at night but if the driver hits them(becasue they are blacker than the night) the driver is in the wrong.

The driver is only in the wrong if they are driving without due care and attention.

Stark

twintytwo wrote:

you obviously dont live in the country i take it??.. with the state of the roads etc how exactly are you expected to overtake??

Most drivers in this country manage to overtake cyclists without major difficulty. It seems the ones who can't are the ones who get frustrated and start moaning how those pesky cyclists are a menace and should be taken off the road.

Wagon

Cyclists are ****. I met a fair few **** in my life, and all of them can ride a bike. End of thread.

Stark

What about the ones who are too young to masturbate?

oeb

Stark wrote: »

What about the ones who are too young to masturbate?

They are not **** yet. Duhh

twinytwo

Stark wrote: »

Most drivers in this country manage to overtake cyclists without major difficulty. It seems the ones who can't are the ones who get frustrated and start moaning how those pesky cyclists are a menace and should be taken off the road.

on the main roads yes... but once you begin to head "to the middle of nowhere" country... they dont seem the need to stop the bike thus your left doddering along at 5 miles an hour and cant overtake unless you wish to drive half up the ditch

Wagon

Stark wrote: »

What about the ones who are too young to masturbate?

You're really asking two questions there. But if you're too young to masturbate then you shouldn't be cycling a bike. There should be a cycling test or something, and to pass you have to have a successful **** (popping cork and all) in front of a panel of edudicators...

4zn76tysfajdxp

We don't have footpaths in the middle of the country.

/thread.

Kold

Hahahaha Footpad! Do you say Fah'der instead of father? And have no idea whatsoever how to pronounce 'th'?

Stark

twinytwo wrote: »

on the main roads yes... but once you begin to head "to the middle of nowhere" country... they dont seem the need to stop the bike thus your left doddering along at 5 miles an hour and cant overtake unless you wish to drive half up the ditch

Anytime I've driven in the country, I've usually been waved on by cyclists when it's safe to overtake (they can see further ahead than I can). Things are much safer and pleasant when people actually work with each other instead of being assholes.

daveharnett

Lumen wrote: »

1. Cyclists have a right to use the road.

I'll concede that from some points of view, cyclists have as much right to the road as motorists. From a Darwinian point of view, not so much. My rule is this: if something weighs >1 tonne more than you, try to stay out of it's way.

Lumen wrote: »

2. Cycling on the footpath is illegal

Have you heard the expression "better to be tried by twelve than carried by six"? How many gardai do you really think would object to you not delaying them unnecessarily?

Lumen wrote: »

2. Cycling on the footpath is often dangerous.

I don't think that the OP was advocating that this strategy be employed on O Connell St. I think it was more aimed at where it isn't dangerous.



I've been a cyclist for a lot longer than I've been a motorist. I always used the footpath where it quiet, for my own safety and the convenience of faster traffic.

Smart Bug

Cyclists are footpad fascists who should be run over by people like me, in our shoes.

Dinter

Kold wrote: »

Hahahaha Footpad! Do you say Fah'der instead of father? And have no idea whatsoever how to pronounce 'th'?

Yeah I thought footpads were muggers.

Is the thread about how cyclists are meant to steal money off people to buy cars?

Ross_Mahon

I cycle along the path all the time, i don't like the idea of getting a bang of a car, The only time i use the road is if there's a cycle lane on the side of it.

A Garda shouted at me because i was using the path, "Sorry RoboCop!" *Cycles faster*

Dave!

It's certainly a pain in the arse, but it's also a pain when you're walking on the path and some nonce is bombing it along on his bike and you nearly get killed by them.

It's a lose-lose really

Let's just ban bikes!

Thomas_S_Hunterson

Ross_Mahon wrote: »

I cycle along the path all the time, i don't like the idea of getting a bang of a car, The only time i use the road is if there's a cycle lane on the side of it.

It's all well and good...until you smack into a baby and it dies.

Ross_Mahon

Sean_K wrote: »

It's all well and good...until you smack into a baby and it dies.

Or Cars pulling out of their driveways.

Stark

Ross_Mahon wrote: »

I cycle along the path all the time, i don't like the idea of getting a bang of a car, The only time i use the road is if there's a cycle lane on the side of it.

Why, is a painted line supposed to protect you from getting a bang off a car or something? As long as drivers can see you, you're perfectly safe cycling along the side of a road. Most accidents happen at junctions and cycling on the footpath isn't going to help you there.

Ross_Mahon wrote: »

A Garda shouted at me because i was using the path, "Sorry RoboCop!" *Cycles faster*

He was right to. I don't think there's an excuse for anyone over the age of 12 to be cycling on the footpath.

Ross_Mahon wrote: »

Or Cars pulling out of their driveways.

Indeed, you're far more likely to be hit by a car pulling out of a driveway when cycling on the footpath.

Dragan

Sean_K wrote: »

It's all well and good...until you smack into a baby and it dies.

People who choose to own a baby, much like any other pet, need to be responsible for it.

No babies on the paths please, it takes ages to get the gunk out of the spokes.

Stark

To quote that Monkey Dust cartoon: "Do not worry; he is biodegradable".

Silenceisbliss

OP, you're a dick.

I cycle to work every day and it's dickheads like you who are responsible for me getting ignored quite dangerously and nearly knocking me down on a daily basis. get it in your head that cyclistare obliged to use the roads and we are FOOKING VULNERABLE AND FOOKING BRITTLE!!!

you can bang against a car and youl get a little scratch or a dent. you get impatient and dangerously overtake a cyclist and bang against him, the cyclist is gonna get hurt. to say the least.

I hate stupid ass ignorant car drivers who dont pay attention to cyclists. dangerous asswipes.

while youre in your nice warm cosy car burning fuel, were in the cold and in the rain not burnign fuel.

/rant over

Bambaata

Deleted User wrote: »

don't see cyclists paying "cycle tax"..

and the point of my post is that it's still dangerous. In europe, they have cycles lanes on footpads in the middle of cities like.. that in my opinion is a much better option.

I presume someone has already highlighted this but it's motor tax you pay. Not Road tax. Cyclists don't pay motor tax because bikes dont have motors. Bikes with motors are known as "motorbikes". Ads by Google, in tomorrows lessen we will learn the safe cross code.

kodute

I agree with the OP, its much better for everyone...

Terry

Silenceisbliss wrote: »

OP, you're a dick.

I cycle to work every day and it's dickheads like you who are responsible for me getting ignored quite dangerously and nearly knocking me down on a daily basis. get it in your head that cyclistare obliged to use the roads and we are FOOKING VULNERABLE AND FOOKING BRITTLE!!!

you can bang against a car and youl get a little scratch or a dent. you get impatient and dangerously overtake a cyclist and bang against him, the cyclist is gonna get hurt. to say the least.

I hate stupid ass ignorant car drivers who dont pay attention to cyclists. dangerous asswipes.

while youre in your nice warm cosy car burning fuel, were in the cold and in the rain not burnign fuel.

/rant over

Banned.

the_syco

Deleted User wrote: »

and the point of my post is that it's still dangerous. In europe, they have cycles lanes on footpads in the middle of cities like.. that in my opinion is a much better option.

There are cycle lanes in Dublin. It's just that people in cars park on them, forcing cyclists to cycle on the road.

randylonghorn

Wagon wrote: »

Cyclists are ****. I met a fair few **** in my life, and all of them can ride a bike. End of thread.

Ah, dude, haven't you figured out how to **** yet?

I can understand your frustration / jealousy so, really I can, but there are some sites on the 'net will give you some hints ... after that 'tis really just trial and error!

Wagon wrote: »

There should be a cycling test or something, and to pass you have to have a successful **** (popping cork and all) in front of a panel of edudicators...

0_o

Well, I guess that would be another way for you to learn how ... sounds a wee bit pedobear-ish though, tbh ...

twinytwo wrote: »

on the main roads yes... but once you begin to head "to the middle of nowhere" country... they dont seem the need to stop the bike thus your left doddering along at 5 miles an hour and cant overtake unless you wish to drive half up the ditch

There's no requirement on cyclists to "stop the bike" every time a car comes up behind them, even on a country road. Have a small bit of patience, for God's sake.

That said, I know many cyclists will pull in and stop on a narrow / quiet country road, and I commend them on their courtesy ... but it's not an automatic requirement just because you think you own the road!

Ross_Mahon wrote: »

I cycle along the path all the time, i don't like the idea of getting a bang of a car, The only time i use the road is if there's a cycle lane on the side of it.

A Garda shouted at me because i was using the path, "Sorry RoboCop!" *Cycles faster*

Well, if I had been that Guard, I would have followed you, confiscated the bike, and left you to walk ... and let you figure out if you liked the idea of getting "a bang" from a bike, from others with as little courtesy or respect for the law as yourself.

Dave! wrote: »

It's certainly a pain in the arse, but it's also a pain when you're walking on the path and some nonce is bombing it along on his bike and you nearly get killed by them.

It's a lose-lose really

Let's just ban bikes!

Let's just ban cars ... >_>

/ducks

Nah, not serious, but honestly, why do some people feel that just because they drive a car, all others ... pedestrians, cyclists, public transport users, etc. ... should just automatically clear the road and genuflect as they pass?

To the best of my knowledge, ownership of a car doesn't come with automatic divinity thrown in!

Ponster

Kold wrote: »

Hahahaha Footpad! Do you say Fah'der instead of father? And have no idea whatsoever how to pronounce 'th'?

Actually the OP is probably not a native English speaker and picked up 'footpad' from Irish people unable to properly pronounce their 'th's.

Silly Irish people

RacoonQueen

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

Also a lot of cyclists would argue that most cycle lanes/paths are inherently dangerous, poorly designed and woefully maintained and would be happier (and safer) sharing the bus lane.

True, I've often had to dogde broken glass, massive puddles, potholes, drains which if you cycle over you'll end up with your saddle up your arse, hubcaps and other sorts of debris on cycle lanes. Often it's too late by the time you see it to even attempt to dodge. I always look behind me and put my arm out if I have to dodge something like that.

krudler wrote: »

More to this from a motorists pov

1. Red lights mean stop, that doesnt mean slow down, then pedal yourself into oncoming traffic making a nuisance of yourselves

2. my car is not a ****ing rest to lean up against/balance yourself/steady against while you drink from your little lucozade sport bottle fixed to the handlebar, next time someone does it I'm going to reverse over them

3.Cars have indicators, when they blink it means we're going in that direction, looking over your shoulder then veering off to the other side of the road is not indicating you want to turn

4.cycle shorts should never be worn by anyone, ever, you're not Lance Armstrong, just stop it.

5.Wearing a cycle helmet may be safe, but will never, ever, ever make you look anything other than a prat

6.Squeezing yourself through spaces between traffic annoys the **** out of everyone, bumping off cars and scratching them will get you killed one day, stop it

7. We have as much right to be on the road as you do. Stop acting like c**ts.

I don't do any of that except wear a helmet, which I'll continue to do. I don't really care if it makes me look like a prat.

BraziliaNZ wrote: »

leave cyclists alone. They aren't clogging the city with disgusting cars, and for that they should be respected and allowed cycle wherever they want. Eff off with your horrible polluting cars. I don't know how many 1000s of people I used to cycle past in Dublin every morning who were happy to clog up the roads in their cars and sit in traffic for 90 mins to travel 5k to work. Take your traffic frustration out on someone else, or get off your lazy fat polluting arses and cycle yourselves.

Sean_K wrote: »

Frankly I don't trust motorists to leave me enough room to maneuver around pot-holes so I have to make sure I always have enough room.

This is what I do, shortly after I began cycleing my uncle told me to do this, leave a good gap between myself and the footpath and force them out a bit further, which there is still plenty of space for them to do.

Sean_K wrote: »

As a cyclist, you are not enclosed in a big metal box. You develop good peripheral vision and can normally tell where cars are by the sound of them. Most cyclists will still take a look over their shoulder before cornering or changing lane.

This is why I don't listen to music on my bike. Anytime I see someone listening to music I just think "what a silly dangerous thing to do" My ears are the main thing that keep me safe on the roads.

dade wrote: »

so I'll ask it again. I am turning left, there is a bike behind me, the cyclist is a good distance behind me and i deem it as safe to turn (safe for me and safe for them) do i have the right of way or should i have to stop for the cyclist and allow them past first?

I did say 'cut us out' which would mean they turned while they were right beside me. This happened to me just the other day which is why I commented on it. I was near the front of the car, he was cutting accross MY lane, he should have waited for me to pass.

dade wrote: »

likewise I'm at a red light and and turning left and am at the light ahead of the cyclist when the light goes green who has right of way? the cyclist that has now come up behind me but is still a distance behind me or me? IMO i have right of way as i would if it was a car behind me. but I'm open to correction coz it's one area i don't recall ever being covered in driving lessons or on the test.

As I say, I said cutting us out, if there's a good distance of course you can turn, just like you could switch from the right lane of a road to the left lane if it was clear enough for you to do so.

The driver theory test states that once there is a cyclist beside your car, the cyclist has right of way.

Calibos

Can I say to all cyclists that you are all quite right about your rights, the **** you have to put up with on the roads from ignorant car drivers etc but could I just recommend that you put your 'Rights' to the side for a few moments when you are traveling straight ahead and you hear a lorry coming up behind. Yes you have a right to be there, yes you have right of way, yes the lorry should have indicated that he was turning left but remember, assume everyone else on the road is a moron. Stop or slow the bike when a lorry goes past until he has past the junction or done his non indicated turn left......

...........that way you don't get wrapped around his rear axle.

I'm sorry but I can't help but raise my eyes to heaven every time I hear of another cyclist wrapped around a truck axle after a lorry or bus turned left across their path.

Famous last words:

Humpf!! Its my right not to have to slow for the lorry, (Indignant tone) He's not turning if he's not indicatng......

Crunch, splatter, squelch, burst......

Ciaran500

Calibos wrote: »

I'm sorry but I can't help but raise my eyes to heaven every time I hear of another cyclist wrapped around a truck axle after a lorry or bus turned left across their path.

Have you ever cycled on a busy road?

ThuirtAnGabha

Is was you, op!

cyclopath2001

twinytwo wrote: »

on the main roads yes... but once you begin to head "to the middle of nowhere" country... they dont seem the need to stop the bike thus your left doddering along at 5 miles an hour and cant overtake unless you wish to drive half up the ditch

Perhaps the problem is the girth of your vehicle?

emeraldstar

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Perhaps the problem is the girth of your vehicle?

Great username.

SerialComplaint

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Perhaps the problem is the girth of your vehicle?

You mean the 'gird' of the vehicle, surely?

Quickfire

in a lot of the cycle lanes i encounter the left hand lane and cycle lane are one.

Húrin

Deleted User wrote: »

don't see cyclists paying "cycle tax"..

Motorists don't pay road tax either.

fletch... wrote: »

But roads are built for cars, cycle lanes for cyclists and fields for horses.
Hows about if i drive my car up the cycle lanes to avoid traffic?

Roads existed before cars did. They are made for anything capable of travelling on them. The only roads that can be really said to be 'for cars only' are motorways.

Besides, if a cycle lane ends, does that mean the bike journey must end?

swingking wrote: »

Few things about "some" cyclists.

1. Please use the cycle lanes when there are cycle lanes available to use. The other day I was driving along and some tosser thinks he would rather cycle on the road even though there was a perfectly good cycle lane beside him AND there was a footpath.

2. Please make yourselves visable at night. Road users don't have super powers to be able to see in the dark like they are wearing night vision goggles.

3. When the lights go red please stop. Just because you are not a chunk of metal does not mean you can zip through a red traffic light and carry on normally at a fast speed.

Also, the cyclist groups give out so much about not having enough safety when cycling in the city and how they fear for their lives. how many do you see wearing helmets. Do they not realise that as soon as they are thrown off their bikes they could fall on their unprotected heads and suffer brain damage.

1. Cycle lanes are usually not designed with the safety or convenience of cyclists in mind, and are often the place where glass and debris gets swept to so it's better not to use them. I'm not saying it's OK to carelessly cause congestion, but cycle lanes are no silver bullet solution that we are failing to embrace.

More often than not cycle lanes are used as parking spaces.

2. I agree completely.

3. Really depends on the light. Left turns on wide roads are cases where a turning cyclist poses no danger to anyone. Busy pedestrian crossings on the other hand are inexcusable places for cyclists to speed through.

4. Cyclists should not be placed in a position where they risk being thrown off bikes. The cyclist groups want prevention for the disease, while you merely want a cure. Also there is plenty of evidence that more helmets do not equal better safety.

Have you ever gone to Copenhagen in Denmark? There are loads of cyclists there and yet hardly any helmets, and still a great safety record. The reason is because planners take account of the fact that cyclists will be using the roads.

It's not our fault that Irish planners rarely take account of us.

Deleted User wrote: »

now honestly, which do you think is safer? road or empty footpath ( i think that's what i should call it )

forget legalities etc. which is safer?

Why should any cyclist have to stop, lift their bike over the kerb onto the path, and then stop again and lift it onto the road when a couple of pedestrians appear? The road is the place for cyclists, that's it.

Corruptedmorals wrote: »

Ha so? You should still stop when the light is red and not tear through crowds of pedestrians. Cycling from Leixlip would absolutely suck, I can see myself getting mangled on the N4 between Liffey Valley and Palmerstown now..

I use the Lower Road on the north side of the Liffey if I'm ever cycling between Dublin and Leixlip.

mp1972 wrote: »

11. Most of us try to be as safe as possible, every time WE go out on the roads, we take our lives into our hands. You lot break the rules of the road as do we. Everyone does it but you f**kers do it WAY more than us.

I have to disgree. Most cyclists in Dublin have a pretty cavalier attitude to the rules of the road. It's an extension of Irish jaywalking culture.

tech77

At least the OP learnt how to spell footpath from this thread.

tech77

ThuirtAnGabha wrote: »

Is was you, op!

^Oooh.. the ironing etc etc...

Húrin

mp1972 wrote: »

Of course I do, I nearly get killed about 10 times in the 20 minute cycle to/from work and I'm VERY careful on the roads.

This is ridiculous! If cycling seems too dangerous to you, try something else!
You are

1. exaggerating, or
2. doing it wrong, or
3. paranoid/oversensitive

mp1972 wrote: »

This is why I don't listen to music on my bike. Anytime I see someone listening to music I just think "what a silly dangerous thing to do" My ears are the main thing that keep me safe on the roads.

Radio on and windows closed is a standard set-up for motorists, so how is it any different for cyclists? (assuming headphones are not at ear-splitting volume!)

hot2def wrote: »

great.

in that case - they need a licencing (sp?) system and a number plate so they as road users can be held accountable for some of the ridiculous and illegal stuff they do.

This is a silly idea! Where is the precedent for this? Even in the countries with the best cycling infrastructure, this is not done.

RacoonQueen

Húrin wrote: »

This is ridiculous! If cycling seems too dangerous to you, try something else!
You are

1. exaggerating, or
2. doing it wrong, or
3. paranoid/oversensitive

Exaggerating maybe, but there is always at least one incident where a moron motorist does something stupid/dangerous. Some days you would get 10 some days you wouldn't. Motorists also seem oblivious to the difference between dry/wet/icy roads.

Húrin wrote: »

Radio on and windows closed is a standard set-up for motorists, so how is it any different for cyclists? (assuming headphones are not at ear-splitting volume!)

Because motorists have a big chunk of metal to protect them and thus don't need to hear everything that is going on around them. Like the sound of another cyclist coming up behind to overtake etc..

Ciaran500

Húrin wrote: »

This is ridiculous! If cycling seems too dangerous to you, try something else!
You are

1. exaggerating, or
2. doing it wrong, or
3. paranoid/oversensitive

Look in the cycling forum, there is a thread started in there every couple of days when someone nearly gets killed or has someone crash into them on the roads.

heybaby

I am a car owner and I also cycle most days of the week and it infuriates me to see cyclists breaking red lights, cycling on footpaths, cycling without a helmet, and cycling in the dark without lights. However cyclists are just as guilty of poor road usage as car drivers. The difference is that car drivers by virtue of the fact are driving a vehicle weighing a tonne or more at greater speeds are capable of doing some serious damage. It is an ongoing thing in this country that cyclists poor behaviour on the roads annoys car drivers and the opposite is also true, this will continue to be the case until the police enforce the law and apply common sense. By this I mean arresting cyclists who cycle on the path, cycle without lights which is tantamount to suicide and in my opinion is almost as bad as drink driving, arresting cyclists who break the lights, but also arresting drivers who break the lights, and (my pet hate) arresting drivers who speed. All road users need to slow the hell down, cyclists need to make themselves visible and resepect the rules of the road, likewise, car drivers need to respect a cyclists right of way where cycle lanes are concerned.