Gardai to clamp down on unsafe cyclists

dekbhoy

Raam wrote: »

We ain't children no more.

the nit picking on boards today is becoming nothing short of ridiculous..... correct we are not children no more but sometimes we need to revert back to when we where kids in order to justify something .driving on a narrow road with hardly enough room for both cyclist and motorist i reckon the safest thing to do is use the pathway as carefully as possible , just as our mothers thought us

dekbhoy

dekbhoy wrote: »

the nit picking on boards today is becoming nothing short of ridiculous..... correct we are not children no more but sometimes we need to revert back to when we where kids in order to justify something .driving on a narrow road with hardly enough room for both cyclist and motorist i reckon the safest thing to do is use the pathway as carefully as possible , just as our mothers thought us

Suuure, lets all cycle down the footpath at 40kph, terrorising pedestrians and eventually being wiped out by a car exiting a driveway.

Raam

dekbhoy wrote: »

the nit picking on boards today is becoming nothing short of ridiculous..... correct we are not children no more but sometimes we need to revert back to when we where kids in order to justify something .driving on a narrow road with hardly enough room for both cyclist and motorist i reckon the safest thing to do is use the pathway as carefully as possible , just as our mothers thought us

Buy this book and have a read of it

Raam

Deleted User wrote: »

Suuure, lets all cycle down the footpath at 40kph, terrorising pedestrians and eventually being wiped out by a car exiting a driveway.

Sounds like my morning commute. Well, apart from the car exiting the driveway bit.

Lumen

dekbhoy wrote: »

the nit picking on boards today is becoming nothing short of ridiculous..... correct we are not children no more but sometimes we need to revert back to when we where kids in order to justify something .driving on a narrow road with hardly enough room for both cyclist and motorist i reckon the safest thing to do is use the pathway as carefully as possible, just as our mothers thought us

It's not nitpicking, you're completely wrong.

Cycling on the footpath is annoying, dangerous and illegal. It is not necessary to leave the road when cycling on a bike.

If a car cannot pass, the driver should wait until a safe overtaking opportunity arises.

droidus

dekbhoy wrote: »

the nit picking on boards today is becoming nothing short of ridiculous..... correct we are not children no more but sometimes we need to revert back to when we where kids in order to justify something .driving on a narrow road with hardly enough room for both cyclist and motorist i reckon the safest thing to do is use the pathway as carefully as possible , just as our mothers thought us

Next time you find yourself in this situation, forget your mothers advice. Instead, look over your shoulder, signal right, look over your shoulder again, and if the way is clear, move into the primary position (centre of the lane) until the road widens enough for traffic to overtake you safely. A little wave of appreciation to the motorist behind when you move back to the left is recommended.

Cycling on the pavement - though sometimes tempting, is illegal, ill advised, dangerous, and encourages motorists to think that cyclists shouldnt be on the road...

Doctor Bob

jaqian wrote: »

What a load of sexist drivel. Its like something from a 1950s B-Movie.

Depressing, isn't it? The article was definitely sexist in broad terms (women can't ride safely), but what I found far more odious was the line about the woman in question having both a handbag and a briefcase in her basket- maybe I'm over-reacting*, but to my mind that carries the snide implication that the female of the race species can't be both a worker and a woman. Why didn't they just title the article Get back to the kitchen and be done with it?

*I've been discussing feminism a bit recently [in the real world], so my sexist radar is on high alert.

kona wrote: »

What about Metrosexual men? Are they indecisive?

Ooh, good question. Let me have a think... Um, maybe? No, actually, maybe not? Oh this is harder than I thought it would be. Leave it with me for a minute...
:P

07Lapierre

dekbhoy wrote: »

the nit picking on boards today is becoming nothing short of ridiculous..... correct we are not children no more but sometimes we need to revert back to when we where kids in order to justify something .driving on a narrow road with hardly enough room for both cyclist and motorist i reckon the safest thing to do is use the pathway as carefully as possible , just as our mothers thought us

No..the safest thing to do is to move out slightly and ensure that the traffic behind you has to wait until they can safely overtake.

Cycling on the path is stupid and illegal. If you not comfortable/confident enough to cyle on such narrow roads, and you feel you must mount the footpath, then you should dismount and WALK.

Doctor Bob

dekbhoy wrote: »

correct we are not children no more but sometimes we need to revert back to when we where kids in order to justify something

...such as, say, flawed logic? :rolleyes:

You can say what you like in response. I'll have my fingers in my ears and be chanting 'Na na na na na. I can't hear you!!' over and over until you go away.

oflahero wrote: »

Get in!

... only to have it swiped from under me nose by 7 minutes by a newly-joined lurker! Rotter...

Gah! What a drag. If I spot that the sale has fallen through I'll let you know.

petethedrummer

07Lapierre wrote: »

If you not comfortable/confident enough to cyle on such narrow roads, and you feel you must mount the footpath, then you should dismount and WALK.

And if you're not comfortable overtaking a cyclist, leave the car at home and take the bus.

Raam

petethedrummer wrote: »

And if you're not comfortable overtaking a cyclist, leave the car at home and take the bus.

And if you're not comfortable taking the bus, get a taxi.

Raam

Raam wrote: »

And if you're not comfortable taking the bus, get a taxi.

And if you're not comfortable getting a taxi, stay at home.

SleepDoc

dekbhoy wrote: »

Look dont get petty , the boardwalk could easily be altered too suit one cyclist travelling either east or west bound ,it could be divided properly from a pedestrianised zone and not just a white line .

That's just a plain stupid idea. I note that,

-your dog had a vasectomy.
-you drive a BMW (says it all really).
-you drink 12 bottles of cider in order to get to sleep.

CramCycle

dekbhoy wrote: »

Where you ever a child , where did your mam tell you too cycle ..... rest my case

Kids are allowed cycle on the footpath for safety reasons.

Riding on the footpath
Generally speaking, people aged over 12 years are not permitted to cycle on the footpath. However, there are exceptions to this rule, including:

-An adult who is supervising a young child on their bike is allowed to ride on the footpath with them.
-Riding on the road may not be safe for some people with certain physical or intellectual disabilities. Riding on the footpath is allowed, so long as the person has a medical certificate that outlines their exemption.
Postal officers who are delivering mail are allowed to cycle on the footpath.
-When riding on the footpath, you must keep to the left whenever possible, and always give way to pedestrians.

Basically your mam told you to cycle on the footpath because you didn't have the intelligence/cop on to cycle on the road. Presumably your Mother thinks different now your an adult, although I have no proof of this

Lumen

SleepDoc wrote: »

I note that...

Ad hominem attacks and internet stalking add nothing to this debate.

SerialComplaint

dekbhoy wrote: »

Dont want this thread to turn into a motorist versus cyclist

So when you use terminology like "the tax paying motorist ", you're not trying to create division between two sides - no?

SleepDoc

You're quite right. However I'm not sure what kind of debate you can actually have with someone like this.

kona

dekbhoy wrote: »

Where you ever a child , where did your mam tell you too cycle ..... rest my case

My mammy also told me babies came from space.....

That Id go blind sitting too close to the TV.

Id have huge muscles if I ate my vegetables...

My mammy still thinks that I a Angel.

Momma sez that aligators are angry because they cant brush their teeth?


Now where is that waterboy Gif??

kona

dekbhoy wrote: »

Look dont get petty , the boardwalk could easily be altered too suit one cyclist travelling either east or west bound ,it could be divided properly from a pedestrianised zone and not just a white line .

Okaaaaay so what do you work as? a city planner? perhaps a civil engineer? a Architect? If you reckon it would be easy the use the boardwalk as a cycle lane(:D) then perhaps you should draw up a detailed report and present your conclusions to a politician or even Jooooooooooooooooooooooe Duffffffy!!!!

Doubtful.


Im not getting petty, They are all fairly obvious observations, that would need adressing if your genius masterplan is to be executed and your hailed as the Hero of motorists and cyclists.

So how would you separate the Pedestrians and cyclists? Perhaps Ice Hockey style Plexiglass? maybe a kerb? A wall?

DirkVoodoo

dekbhoy wrote: »

Where you ever a child , where did your mam tell you too cycle ..... rest my case

Lionel Hutz: Thank you, Dr. Hibbert. I rest my case.
Judge: You rest your case?
Lionel Hutz: What? Oh no, I thought that was just a figure of speech. CASE CLOSED.

petethedrummer

kona wrote: »

So how would you separate the Pedestrians and cyclists? Perhaps Ice Hockey style Plexiglass? maybe a kerb? A wall?

It wouldn't be Dekbhoy's problem anymore. He would have solved the Dekbhoy being held up for a few seconds problem and that's all that matters.

kona

petethedrummer wrote: »

It wouldn't be Dekbhoy's problem anymore. He would have solved the Dekbhoy being held up for a few seconds problem and that's all that matters.

How about we ban cars from the cities??

No more 30kmph limit
no more worrying about cyclists.

Harrybelafonte

No pavements where I'm from, cycled on the road since I was 6, not same as city fair enough, but you still needed cop on

Is he gone yet?

72hundred

dekbhoy wrote: »

absolutely not , only drive around 5000 km per year as work in Dublin city centre, its just this problem has come to my attention the lasy year or so.

Tim?

CheGuedara

Harrybelafonte wrote: »

Is he gone yet?

He's just finished off his cider and gone for a snooze

dekbhoy wrote: »

12 large botles of cider does it for me

dekbhoy

kona wrote: »

How about we ban cars from the cities??

No more 30kmph limit
no more worrying about cyclists.

ridiculous idea , in fact maybe cyclists should be banned from all main roads and pedestrian zones without a cycle track after all its the high tax paying motorist that pay for the roads in the first place not the cyclist ,sooner the better all modes of transport are paying some sort of tax or insurance .In fairness i dont know how the majority of cyclists are not up to their eyes in fines because they constantly break traffic lifghts and generally break the rules of the road, anyway im getting rail roaded here my OP was about female cyclists

Idleater

dekbhoy wrote: »

after all its the high tax paying motorist that pay for the roads in the first place not the cyclist

but but, I pay motor tax for 2 motorcycles and 1 motor car, and yet when I choose to leave all at home and take the bicycle out instead I am suddenly not a high tax paying motorist?

Raam

dekbhoy wrote: »

ridiculous idea , in fact maybe cyclists should be banned from all main roads and pedestrian zones without a cycle track after all its the high tax paying motorist that pay for the roads in the first place not the cyclist ,sooner the better all modes of transport are paying some sort of tax or insurance .In fairness i dont know how the majority of cyclists are not up to their eyes in fines because they constantly break traffic lifghts and generally break the rules of the road, anyway im getting rail roaded here my OP was about female cyclists

We really need more people like you in charge.

DirkVoodoo

dekbhoy wrote: »

... anyway im getting rail roaded here my OP was about female cyclists

Yes, you wouldn't want people to think you don't know what you're talking about. Do you not think talking about bad cyclists might make more sense than female cyclists. Unless of course there is a reason they might be naturally worse at handing a bike. I'm going to guess it's boobs. Boobs wobbling side to side would naturally make handling a bike a bit tricky. Maybe there should be a policy that women with larger boobs (or "breasts" for those who don't like the term) should have to ride bikes that are more stable: trikes. I rest my case. I mean, case closed.

DirkVoodoo

nereid wrote: »

but but, I pay motor tax for 2 motorcycles and 1 motor car, and yet when I choose to leave all at home and take the bicycle out instead I am suddenly not a high tax paying motorist?

No you become a free loading hippy. I hope to God you are not a woman, or you're really in for it!

dekbhoy

nereid wrote: »

but but, I pay motor tax for 2 motorcycles and 1 motor car, and yet when I choose to leave all at home and take the bicycle out instead I am suddenly not a high tax paying motorist?

Always gonna get the few who do both ,but lets be honest majority do one or the other and i speak for the majority of motorists.

droidus

Lets hope to god that isnt true.

Raam

dekbhoy wrote: »

Always gonna get the few who do both ,but lets be honest majority do one or the other and i speak for the majority of motorists.

When I wished that you were put in charge, I didn't think it would happen so fast.
I really hope this swift promotion does actually come with lots of power. Your ideas need to be implemented as soon as possible in order to sort this city and these errant cyclists out.

Bluefoam

dekbhoy wrote: »

ridiculous idea , in fact maybe cyclists should be banned from all main roads and pedestrian zones without a cycle track after all its the high tax paying motorist that pay for the roads in the first place not the cyclist ,sooner the better all modes of transport are paying some sort of tax or insurance .In fairness i dont know how the majority of cyclists are not up to their eyes in fines because they constantly break traffic lifghts and generally break the rules of the road, anyway im getting rail roaded here my OP was about female cyclists

I am a pedestrian, cyclist, motorcyclist & car driver.

I pay motor tax twice - should I not have the right to use the roads on my bike? I guarantee you that I am a much more aware driver than you & am amazed you can be so selfish as to think you have some sort of right over other road users. All road users have a right to use the roads and a reason for being there. I just can't get over the ignorant car drivers who are actually so insular and self absorbed to think that the roads are primarily there for their use. There is a simple rule of thumb, respect all road users and act in a responsible manner, give each other plenty of space - THERE IS NO RUSH! A cyclist in front of you is only going to take seconds off your journey time - get over it - and even if they were to take minutes off your journey time - get over it. Lifes too short to have a hernia over losing a few seconds off your trip to MacDonalds.

dekbhoy

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

Yes, you wouldn't want people to think you don't know what you're talking about. Do you not think talking about bad cyclists might make more sense than female cyclists. Unless of course there is a reason they might be naturally worse at handing a bike. I'm going to guess it's boobs. Boobs wobbling side to side would naturally make handling a bike a bit tricky. Maybe there should be a policy that women with larger boobs (or "breasts" for those who don't like the term) should have to ride bikes that are more stable: trikes. I rest my case. I mean, case closed.

if you werent so ignorant you might have seen where i said women in general dont have balance and are not really aware of their surroundings when negotiating situations , let me point out i am not sexist in fact i think women are wonderful, its just from experience they are very dodgy on bikes

DirkVoodoo

dekbhoy wrote: »

if you werent so ignorant you might have seen where i said women in general dont have balance and are not really aware of their surroundings when negotiating situations , let me point out i am not sexist in fact i think women are wonderful, its just from experience they are very dodgy on bikes

It looks like that shovel you were using earlier wasn't quite getting the job done. Here, try this:

dekbhoy

dekbhoy wrote: »

Always gonna get the few who do both ,but lets be honest majority do one or the other and i speak for the majority of motorists.

I'd say about 85-90% of the people in my cycling club drive as well as cycle. It's how people get to races in far off parts of the country. Even outside my club, the vast majority of people that I know that cycle, also drive. Do you know why this is? It's because virtually all of the adult population of this country drive.

Most cyclists are drivers.

Most drivers aren't cyclists.

CramCycle

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

It looks like that shovel you were using earlier wasn't quite getting the job done. Here, try this:

No, no, dig up, stupid!

carthoris

dekbhoy wrote: »

ridiculous idea , in fact maybe cyclists should be banned from all main roads and pedestrian zones without a cycle track after all its the high tax paying motorist that pay for the roads in the first place not the cyclist ,sooner the better all modes of transport are paying some sort of tax or insurance .In fairness i dont know how the majority of cyclists are not up to their eyes in fines because they constantly break traffic lifghts and generally break the rules of the road, anyway im getting rail roaded here my OP was about female cyclists

You *are* being railroaded. The reason is that the points you make are nothing new to someone who cycles and they have long been proven to be fallacies. So most people who are replying (and those who are not) probably consider this to be an attempt by you to get a reaction for your own entertainment.

If you are sincere then perhaps it is a a pity you are being railroaded as there could be some valuable enlightenment here for you.

In the meantime, consider that the roads are a shared resource, the only entity that owns them is the general public as it is the general public that pays for them out of a big pool of cash that comes from taxation of the general public not just motor vehicles. As it is a shared resource it is for the use of everyone and each person needs to be conscientious of, and considerate to the other users.

eightyfish

dekbhoy wrote: »

i said women in general dont have balance and are not really aware of their surroundings when negotiating situations , let me point out i am not sexist in fact i think women are wonderful

ahem, LOL.

it's mick

dekbhoy wrote: »

ridiculous idea , in fact maybe cyclists should be banned from all main roads and pedestrian zones without a cycle track after all its the high tax paying motorist that pay for the roads in the first place not the cyclist ,sooner the better all modes of transport are paying some sort of tax or insurance .In fairness i dont know how the majority of cyclists are not up to their eyes in fines because they constantly break traffic lifghts and generally break the rules of the road, anyway im getting rail roaded here my OP was about female cyclists

the point of motor tax in it's current form is expressly to discourage people from driving and encourage them to walk, drive or get a bus. it is definitely NOT there to establish amongst the car driving public (of which i am one) a sense of greater entitlement to the roads as you seem to think it is.

rubadub

If there are checkpoints I wonder if the gardai will say anything to all the mini marathon walkers out these days, 2 & 3 abreast walking on the cycletracks, of course with their back to the cyclists.

-K2-

dekbhoy wrote: »

ridiculous idea , in fact maybe cyclists should be banned from all main roads and pedestrian zones without a cycle track after all its the high tax paying motorist that pay for the roads in the first place not the cyclist ,sooner the better all modes of transport are paying some sort of tax or insurance .In fairness i dont know how the majority of cyclists are not up to their eyes in fines because they constantly break traffic lifghts and generally break the rules of the road, anyway im getting rail roaded here my OP was about female cyclists

Taking that logic further, you should ban buses as well, seeing that most of the people on board aren't paying motor tax either.

kenmc

petethedrummer wrote: »

You're obviously a rubbish driver so........

dekbhoy wrote: »

absolutely not , only drive around 5000 km per year .

The jury rests m'lud, does less km a year than any of blorgs' bikes. No wonder he's not comfortable around other traffic.

And I never thought I'd see the day when I thank Kona, but for once, just once, I agreed with him.....

jaqian

72hundred wrote: »

Tim?

I was just thinking the same thing

SleepDoc

dekbhoy wrote: »

if you werent so ignorant you might have seen where i said women in general dont have balance and are not really aware of their surroundings when negotiating situations , let me point out i am not sexist in fact i think women are wonderful, its just from experience they are very dodgy on bikes

I bet that being such a charmer and a grade A catch that women go weak at the knees around you. Which might explain the whole balance thing.

kona

dekbhoy wrote: »

ridiculous idea , in fact maybe cyclists should be banned from all main roads and pedestrian zones without a cycle track after all its the high tax paying motorist that pay for the roads in the first place not the cyclist ,sooner the better all modes of transport are paying some sort of tax or insurance .In fairness i dont know how the majority of cyclists are not up to their eyes in fines because they constantly break traffic lifghts and generally break the rules of the road, anyway im getting rail roaded here my OP was about female cyclists

EPIC FAIL at the aul Sarcasm there ted. I was being sarcastic obviously cars wont be banned from cities LOL


Also you know, as a little experiment, the next time you are sitting in a metal box on the M50 waiting for the few thousand other metal boxes in front to move. Perhaps observe what the signs say about who funds the upgrade works.

It doesnt say "Funded for by the high motor tax, paying motorist"

Its says part funded for by the EU Development fund. There is no way in hell that motortax alone can pay for the entire network of roads in this country.

Your argument is stupid, most the money that funds the tarmac you lay claim to is mostly funded by Mr. Heinrich Muller from Dusseldorf and Ms. Ana Sanchez from Madrid. Not some sexist Irish driver.

eightyfish

Deleted User wrote: »

Maybe if you cut back on the cider you could wrap your head around this concept a bit more readily.

As much as I agree that the poster in question is wrong, this is OTT, IMO. Commenting on something he posted on another thread is not fair.

eightyfish

eightyfish wrote: »

As much as I agree that the poster in question is wrong, this is OTT, IMO. Commenting on something he posted on another thread is not fair.

Fair enough, I retract that statement.

eightyfish

Some letters in the Times on this.

Madam, – Having read Seán Mac Connell’s frightfully misogynistic Irishman’s Diary (April 28th), I would like to suggest that Mr MacConnell is the one who knows nothing about women or bicycles, not Patrick Kavanagh.

Mr Mac Connell’s piece is insulting and harks back to a time in which women were considered liabilities in Ireland. If Mr Mac Connell wishes to avoid being hit by bicycles, I suggest he look both ways on the road, as we are instructed to do from infancy, and wake up to the Ireland in which he now lives. We are no longer a country that can support open sexism in a national newspaper and if Mr Mac Connell is upset by this, I suggest he goes back to the time of his comrade Kavanagh and leave the rest of us to live our lives.

While he may be “getting too long in the tooth, short in the leg and grey in the head to be dealing with young ones on bikes”, I am too sick of misogyny and ill-informed opinions to be reading the banal thoughts of a sexist while enjoying my daily newspaper. – Yours, etc,

BRIDGET FITZSIMONS,
Oakley Road,
Ranelagh, Dublin 6.

Madam, – I’m sure many readers were nodding in agreement on reading Seán Mac Connell’s Irishman’s Diary on April 28th. It is only a matter of time before a pedestrian is even more seriously injured than he was, by an errant cyclist.

Perhaps some of the “Don’ts” for cyclists in the Rules of the Road could be displayed at the bike stations – particularly “Don’t ever cycle against the flow of traffic on one-way streets”.

In the meantime, we had better always look both ways when crossing one-way streets – to be sure to be sure! – Yours, etc,

HILARY CARR,
Dale Road,
Stillorgan,
Co Dublin.