Irish Times article: Time to clamp down on the lawless world of cyclists

Highway_To_Hell

Linky

ThisRegard

That 'journalist' is an idiot, another from the mutually exclusive school of thought that you're either a motorist or cyclist, you can't be both. While his point is ultimately right, the way he gets there is the woe of me being a poor mototist path, I've read a few of his articles and he's a tit for the sake of it.

Lumen

Patrick Logue, a young loner on a crusade to champion the cause of the innocent, the helpless, and the powerless in a world of cyclists that operate above the law.

07Lapierre

€10 Million for a cycle lane? :rolleyes:

buffalo

He's written guff like this before. He's an eejit who should be ignored - it baffles me that he's given a weekly column.

eightyfish

Terrible article.

Can't believe the Dublin Cycling Campaign really said that cyclists who cycle on the footpaths must be “too scared to cycle on the road” though. Does seem like a rather stupid thing to say that is just bound to provoke anti-cyclist types.

07Lapierre

Heres another article in the same paper. Maybe we should introduce these two journalists to each other.

Lumen

eightyfish wrote: »

Can't believe the Dublin Cycling Campaign really said that cyclists who cycle on the footpaths must be “too scared to cycle on the road” though. Does seem like a rather stupid thing to say that is just bound to provoke anti-cyclist types.

But it is probably true.

eightyfish

Lumen wrote: »

But it is probably true.

I don't really believe that. If you're too scared to cycle on the road, then don't cycle. Cycling on the road is not dangerous if done properly as we all know - so anyone doing this is a once-off cyclist.

I see what you mean, but I think it's a really bad excuse, or whatever, for people cycling on the path.

doozerie

eightyfish wrote:

Can't believe the Dublin Cycling Campaign really said that cyclists who cycle on the footpaths must be “too scared to cycle on the road” though. Does seem like a rather stupid thing to say that is just bound to provoke anti-cyclist types.

From a quick search, they did actually say it, here:

Further, provision by Ireland's esteemed roads designers of cycle lanes on footpaths, through parks and along riverbanks is surely enough to confuse even the most law-abiding cyclist? Our view is that footways are for pedestrians only and since the bicycle is classed as a vehicle in both Irish and international law it belongs wholly on the road. If some riders choose to cycle on the footway it is likely that they are too scared to cycle on the road - the policy response to this fear is to make the roads safe for all users.

I still find it a stupid thing to say, but in the context of that paragraph it just seems badly phrased rather than expressing a view that supports cyclists cycling on footpaths. Muppets like Patrick Logue will pounce on such careless editing though and use it to fuel like-minded people who either have no views of their own or already have some prejudiced views cast in stone which invariably paint themselves as victims. They are not interesting in anything constructive like a discussion as that would involve some effort on their part.

buffalo

On a vaguely related note of cyclist articles in the online print media,

Record and ridicule: Female cyclists expose sexist idiots online

I've had my top pulled down when I've stopped at traffic lights and been asked if I put in as much effort in the bedroom – but at least I can deal with it on my blog, 101 ****

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/green-living-blog/2010/aug/18/cycling-sexist-abuse-female

Lumen

eightyfish wrote: »

I don't really believe that. If you're too scared to cycle on the road, then don't cycle. Cycling on the road is not dangerous if done properly as we all know - so anyone doing this is a once-off cyclist.

I see what you mean, but I think it's a really bad excuse, or whatever, for people cycling on the path.

The difficult bit is "done properly". There are lots of people (particularly kids) who can't be bothered with doing it properly.

It is undoubtably more stressful cycling on busy roads if you don't know what you are doing, or if you are cycling at night with no lights.

Around where I live, there are plenty of wide, empty footpaths where it is possible to cycle slowly without ever risking hitting a pedestrian.

I'm not justifying it - the law is the law - but I can empathise.

AstraMonti

Yet a large number of the same cyclists are not too scared or confused to speed around our city without helmets

I stopped reading there, the guy is obviously a troll. :rolleyes:

eightyfish

Lumen wrote: »

particularly kids

True. I used to cycle on the path as a kid. I think that's kind of accepted - kids aren't in the venn diagram of the people who get all hot and bothered about "cyclists".

Lumen wrote: »

Around where I live, there are plenty of wide, empty footpaths where it is possible to cycle slowly without ever risking hitting a pedestrian.
I'm not justifying it - the law is the law - but I can empathise.

Well I've done it, very occasionally, though mostly just to skip lights at corners and only ever at walking speed. I'd be on and off the path in 20 seconds. So I've done it, but I don't condone it.

As doozerie said above I just think it was a not-fully-thought-through-thought that was seized on by the journalist vulture.

beans

Poor grammar too. Shame this is what passes for content in one of our national broad-sheets. This country really has gone to pot.

kenmc

beans wrote: »

This country really has gone to pot.

Wishful thinking. Ppl would be much mellower if that were the case.

Chips Lovell

He seems to be publishing them at six monthly intervals.

I actually agree with his general point, that cyclists should be done more often for road traffic offences.

Having said that, he goes about it in a cackhanded manner. First of all, cyclists are not a homogenous group. Those too scared to cycle on the road are not the same people blasting through traffic lights.

Secondly, the cops have started clamping down. There have been several posts here about how people have seen the cyclists being pulled over. One poster has gotten a summons for no lights. Another was told he'd be getting one for red light jumping.

As for cyclists on the footpad, I'm of the opinion that if you're not comfortable cycling on the road, you shouldn't be on a bike. It's kind of like a motorist who drives everywhere at 15kph because they're frightened of going faster.

Jk_Eire

speed around our city without helmets and with brakes that don’t work: I’m presuming the brakes don’t work since surely a cyclist couldn’t be so scared of other traffic that they would intentionally race through a red light?

The same fearful cyclists can often been seen heading the wrong way up one-way streets, turning without using hand signals, not using lights when it is dark, and, in some instances, cycling home after a few pints.

While some of his article is sensationalist, I have to say that I see most of the above on a very regular basis on my cycle to work through the city.
Some I see every single day.
He's not talking about the average boards.ie cycling forum poster who may bit a little bit more bike safe and experienced.

It's the inexperienced folk he's talking about, and there are a hell of a lot of them out there.

eightyfish

el tonto wrote: »

the footpad

OT, but I LOL every time I read that on this forum.

doozerie

I also share the view that cyclists should be penalised for road traffic offences. People like Logue though use a valid issue as an opportunity to throw in their own bias and vent at others. They generate such emotive responses to the views that they've layered on top that the original issue itself gets burned up in the flames and the end result is a lot of pissed off people but no progress on raising awareness of the actual problem.

As already mentioned by others, it's a shame that such badly written emotive ****e gets published in the first place. If an issue is worth discussing/raising, and this one is, they should assign it to a proper journalist and not an indignant child.

CramCycle

I agree that the law should be inforced across the board but just to point out one or two flaws in a clear attempt to incite motorist hatred against cyclist.

I’m presuming the brakes don’t work since surely a cyclist couldn’t be so scared of other traffic that they would intentionally race through a red light?

I'm presuming cars late at night suffer a brake failure rate of about 1 in 4 judging by the number of RLJing I see occuring every night on the way home from work

The same fearful cyclists can often been seen heading the wrong way up one-way streets, turning without using hand signals, not using lights when it is dark, and, in some instances, cycling home after a few pints.

See several cars/delivery vans going up one way streets the wrong way to save 5 minutes when it's quiet enough, I personally have never given out about it nor do I condone it, but if we're going to go by the letter of the law here.

See several cars that don't use indicators (or rear view mirrors). You notice this alot more on a bicycle then you would in a car, I think.

See several cars who don't turn on their lights at night till they are shouted at or beeped at by another road user/pedestrian. Some one once tole me this is for two reasons. One, the most obvious, they forgot and two, to improve fuel economy?!? Before I am lambasted for that last comment, I don't really drive anymore so I have no actual knowledge of this first hand.

Nobody is calling for unreasonable enforcement of the road traffic laws on cyclists – it is enough that motorists must suffer this through the NCT and inappropriate speed checks on dual carriageways.

Speed checks are inappropriate. OH, of course, I forgot how everybody I have ever met/seen/exists would obey the limit if we knew there were no enforcement of it EVER

Highway_To_Hell

opps, Friday on a wednesday :rolleyes:

I see no reason for cummuters to cycle on the path, I do on occasion have my kids on the path while I cycle along the road, but once we are in an area where there are a number of pedestrians We dismount and walk.

Moflojo

I wouldn't get too upset by this 'article', it can be found in the Motors section of today's print edition of the IT under the column title 'Rearview'.

'Nuf said.

CramCycle

Highway_To_Hell wrote: »

I do on occasion have my kids on the path while I cycle along the road

Perfectly legal to do so as well AFAIK children U16 can use footpaths. One of those rare examples where the law protects the more vulnerable elements of our society.

Moflojo wrote: »

I wouldn't get too upset by this 'article', it can be found in the Motors section of today's print edition of the IT under the column title 'Rearview'.

Still no excuse to anger the guy reading the paper as he is sitting on a yellow box in rush hour traffic while your paying attention to the road :rolleyes:

Jawgap

IT Motoring Editor: Paul? How are ye?

Paul: Grand, yourself?

IT Motoring Editor: Actually, I'm on a bit of a sticky wicket.......Gleaming Hell the goth car valeting service have pulled their ad this week so I was looking for 300 or so words to fill the spot. I've tried a few other proper reporters but they've got like proper assignments they're working on. Do you know anyone who might be able to help.

Paul: [sound of 30 seconds of furious tapping on the keyboard] Just sent you something there. How's that?

IT Motoring Editor: Grand. Thanks Paul......oh, and future reference the proper spelling of brakes is b-r-a-k-e-s. Cheers.




Of course all road users should be sanctioned appropriately for failing to abide by the road traffic laws, but I'm surprised at the Irish Times for publishing this - it's pretty poor journalism. Looks like it should be in the Indo, rather than the paper of record:)

Finally, am I the only one "confused by the design of cycle lanes"? I never know which side of the line to cycle on so I usually hedge my bets and cycle along the line!

Captain Havoc

That article was neither informative or entertaining, the biggest crime of all is that the writer is getting paid to write such drivel.

CheGuedara

eightyfish wrote: »

Terrible article.

+1 on the terrible article point, waste of ink in printing and time in reading

eightyfish wrote: »

Can't believe the Dublin Cycling Campaign really said that cyclists who cycle on the footpaths must be “too scared to cycle on the road” though.

Those people just need to get a better sign made by their mammie

Hail 2 Da Thief

What a bizarre line!

Nobody is calling for unreasonable enforcement of the road traffic laws on cyclists – it is enough that motorists must suffer this through the NCT and inappropriate speed checks on dual carriageways.

In the other article a previous poster linked to he compares Irish cyclists to Afghan extremists . What a fool!

Ant

Like others have said, Logue is a professional eejit so I just thought "Meh" when I saw his thoughtless and humourless rant. (Jawgap's post was much funnier).

I remember reading the Dublin Cycling Campaign's letter at the time and thinking that if you really felt roads were too unsafe, you'd be better off walking. The campaign does good work and generally advocates for greater enforcement of road safety regulations but I thought that statement came across as a bit too wishy-washy.

Jawgap

Ant wrote: »

Like others have said, Logue is a professional eejit so I just thought "Meh" when I saw his thoughtless and humourless rant. (Jawgap's post was much funnier).

I remember reading the Dublin Cycling Campaign's letter at the time and thinking that if you really felt roads were too unsafe, you'd be better off walking. The campaign does good work and generally advocates for greater enforcement of road safety regulations but I thought that statement came across as a bit too wishy-washy.

At the risk of having scorn heaped upon me in industrial quantities, I think the DCC do valuable work, but they seem to want to portray cyclists as victims, which I'm not sure is the most constructive approach.

This may sound quite strange, but I find Conor Faughnan's (the AA guy) arguments and points quite reasonable as regards cycling and road use - pity he's not minister for transport!

thirtythirty

I'd like to balance this "rubbish article" nonsense a bit. You're missing the point if you're just brushing it off as "anti-cyclist" propaganda as I think someone put it a few posts back.

I've been road cycling (a lot) for about 8 or 9 months now, and I understand where the article is coming from. Unfortunately, he's written it in such a way that it seems like it's meant to rile up a few people, but the general message is sound.

My observations:
- Cyclists who put themselves between vehicles and the roadside when there is no space. Particularly at lights where there is a bus stopped - many times i've been sitting at the back left corner of the bus, knowing the lights could go green anytime, only to have another cyclist squish past me and scooch down the side. More often than not the lights go green, and the vehicle has to make special arrangements to avoid crushing the cyclist.
- Cyclists who run red lights, when clearly there is a filter light on somewhere which is keeping lights from going green, meaning a last minute car could come sweeping round and take the cyclist out. It's absolutely not about "car jealousy" that they see cyclists moving on while they have to sit there.
- Cyclists who do not adjust their speed when there are curbside dangers, like people standing there. I've seen heads miss each other by inches because the cyclist made no effort to counter other people's movements or mistakes. And in many places the bike is definately travelling too fast for the potential dangers around.

Those would be my main three gripes tbh. There are of course other minor things, but nothing worth raising points about.

I'm just saying, as a vulnerable road user, I don't think cyclists can continue "playing the victim" as so often is the case. Just like motorists, there are good and bad cyclists, and i happen to think there should be some way of reducing the habits of bad cyclists, which would benefit us all. PARTICULARLY because cycling is definately gaining momentum (hey-yo!), and there are more and more, meaning increased bad habits by some.

tomasrojo

The Irish Times has caused enormous damage to this country by spending ten years cheerleading an outrageous and inane property bubble. I really am not over-concerned what their second-division writers think about cyclists, but I would like to see them address their own anti-social behaviour.

As for cycling on the footpath, it's generally wrong. However, it's also wrong when the local authorities paint a line on the footpath and "allow" you to cycle there. Footpaths are for pedestrians and these "facilities" are just muddying the water. If one wants to cycle on the footpath, one should at least slow down to a walking pace and give way to all pedestrians.

Chips Lovell

tomasrojo wrote: »

The Irish Times has caused enormous damage to this country by spending ten years cheerleading an outrageous and inane property bubble. I really am not over-concerned what their second-division writers think about cyclists, but I would like to see them address their own anti-social behaviour.

I wish the media were that powerful sometimes, I really do.;)

But I find it hard to believe that an entire generation of people lost the run of themselves and got mortgaged up to the hilt because the Irish Times told them to.

CramCycle

spottyelephant wrote: »

I'm just saying, as a vulnerable road user, I don't think cyclists can continue "playing the victim" as so often is the case. Just like motorists, there are good and bad cyclists, and i happen to think there should be some way of reducing the habits of bad cyclists, which would benefit us all. PARTICULARLY because cycling is definately gaining momentum (hey-yo!), and there are more and more, meaning increased bad habits by some.

I don't think anyone is playing victim here. It's just a really badly written piece. You had some good points but the article itself is severely biased (apparently car drivers don't brake the law or shouldn't be forced to obey it). If he could write with a bit more balance, like you hear an actual Journalist would sometimes do then it wouldn't get such a slating here.

Lumen

el tonto wrote: »

I wish the media were that powerful sometimes, I really do.;)

But I find it hard to believe that an entire generation of people lost the run of themselves and got mortgaged up to the hilt because the Irish Times told them to.

Ah right, the old "no-one pays us any heed so we're not to blame" excuse. Which might wash, except that the same people argue the critical importance of a free press in a democracy.

Either the media has power, or it doesn't. With power comes responsibility.

I'm with tomasrojo. Lynch 'em all for treason.

Jawgap

Bring back the Irish Press and the Evening Press! Dev wouldn't have let this happen.

This is what happens with free education - everyone gets to read the Irish Times and becomes middle-class wannabes and amateur property developers. The church has a lot to answer for to.......we should've been left in our ignorance.......at least we were happy then.

Chips Lovell

Lumen wrote: »

Ah right, the old "no-one pays us any heed so we're not to blame" excuse. Which might wash, except that the same people argue the critical importance of a free press in a democracy.

Either the media has power, or it doesn't. With power comes responsibility.

I'm with tomasrojo. Lynch 'em all for treason.

It's a bit of a leap to equate a free press with a propaganda machine capable of brainwashing hundreds of thousands of consumers.

CheGuedara

Jawgap wrote: »

Bring back the Irish Press and the Evening Press! Dev wouldn't have let this happen.

This is what happens with free education - everyone gets to read the Irish Times and becomes middle-class wannabes and amateur property developers. The church has a lot to answer for to.......we should've been left in our ignorance.......at least we were happy then.

You forgot they took our jobs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLni3wbndls

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLni3wbndls

Stupid Youtube tags...

poochiem

Lumen wrote: »

Ah right, the old "no-one pays us any heed so we're not to blame" excuse. Which might wash, except that the same people argue the critical importance of a free press in a democracy.

Either the media has power, or it doesn't. With power comes responsibility.

I'm with tomasrojo. Lynch 'em all for treason.

Don't lynch them, just make them cycle to work.

Irish Times used to be a decent paper, a fine one on occasion. I haven't even read the article, I'm like a Daily Heil reader getting offended by something I haven't seen. *opens article*

Lumen

el tonto wrote: »

It's a bit of a leap to equate a free press with a propaganda machine capable of brainwashing hundreds of thousands of consumers.

I have no particular opinion on the power of the media.

I just think that when considering the development of the great Irish property bubble, a person might ask themselves whether they helped or hindered the stupidity, and that that question ought to press more heavily on those paid to commentate on the state of the nation.

I also think that those who consider themselves sufficiently bright and articulate to fill column inches a national broadsheet should exhibit a level of intelligence and perceptiveness in their writing slightly above pond scum.

Idleater

Lumen wrote: »

a person might ask themselves whether they helped or hindered the stupidity

aah the aul "if you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem" angle.

I think that the lack of planet-x's being talked about here of late is a direct result of you not being a mod any more. Don't try to convince me that it's something got to do with exchange rates or carbon costs...

monument

In fairness to the Dublin Cycling Campaign, this is what was publiched in the letters section of The Irish Times.

Madam, – The Dublin Cycling Campaign decries lawbreaking by rogue cyclists, particularly the worst infraction for a cyclist – failing to respect pedestrians’ right to peaceful enjoyment of their journeys. As vulnerable road users, cyclists must surely show exaggerated respect for those even more vulnerable.

The Campaign calls for better enforcement of all road traffic rules, particularly of speed limits in urban areas and of dangerous overtaking, defined as passing within 1.5m of a cyclist.

The fact is that road users’ obedience to rules is proportionate to the effort spent on enforcement. It’s credible that busy gardaí enforce rules more vigilantly against motorists simply because motor vehicles kill and bicycles, by and large, do not.

Provision by Ireland’s road designers of cycle lanes on footpaths, through parks and along riverbanks is surely enough to confuse even the most law-abiding cyclist? Our view is that footways are for pedestrians only and since the bicycle is classed as a vehicle it belongs wholly on the road. If some riders cycle on footpaths it is likely they are too scared to cycle on the road – the policy response to this fear is to make the roads safe for all users. Cycling is a fast-growing transport mode, set to increase exponentially, so these issues must be quickly and properly resolved.– Yours, etc,

WILL ANDREWS, Chair,

Dublin Cycling Campaign,

Pearse Street, Dublin 2.

Chips Lovell

Lumen wrote: »

I have no particular opinion on the power of the media.

I just think that when considering the development of the great Irish property bubble, a person might ask themselves whether they helped or hindered the stupidity, and that that question ought to press more heavily on those paid to commentate on the state of the nation.

I can agree with this. I think the question should be asked.

For the best part of a decade, there was vast sums of money being poured into property advertising. Any newspaper that didn't carry it would be buried by its competition and, in most cases, upset its shareholders.

As for the accompanying copy in property sections, most of it was pretty fluffy, simply detailing some of the more eyecatching houses on sale. It rarely passed any judgement either way of the value of the property on sale.

The economic commentary in most papers could hardly be characterised as cheerleading. Yes they carried the views of economists who worked for the banks and estate agents, but they also carried reports from the Central Bank, the ESRI and economists like UCD's Morgan Kelly on how things were overheating. Journalists are neither experts (their job is by and large to report what experts say) nor are they clairvoyants.

That's not to say the media is entirely blameless. But I find it hard to equate that with shameless cheerleading.

The main reason I'm interested in this though is that there has been a bit of a blame game going on. Banks, politicians, the media have all been blamed for wrecking the economy. But none of it would have been possible had the general public not eagerly jumped on board.

monument

And the comment on confusion about footpath cycling is all too right given these following types of things all around the place, which are marked on footpaths often with no legal bases, the councils seem to be acting beyond their powers in many cases, but who's going to stop them?:

Lumen

el tonto wrote: »

The main reason I'm interested in this though is that there has been a bit of a blame game going on. Banks, politicians, the media have all been blamed for wrecking the economy. But none of it would have been possible had the general public not eagerly jumped on board.

Neither I nor any of my friends or family have been "recapitalised" from public funds. None of us are paid to regulate, legislate, or commentate*.

Some of us have mortgages, some (not me) have multiple mortgages. None are in default.

So if members of the public are to blame, it's not anyone I know.

apologies for off-topic ranting
* ok, so maybe one of my friends is, so it's all his fault

Chips Lovell

Lumen wrote: »

Neither I nor any of my friends or family have been "recapitalised" from public funds. None of us are paid to regulate, legislate, or commentate*.

Some of us have mortgages, some (not me) have multiple mortgages. None are in default.

So if members of the public are to blame, it's not anyone I know.

apologies for off-topic ranting
* ok, so maybe one of my friends is, so it's all his fault

Nothing happens in isolation. If the public wasn't eagerly buying, we wouldn't have had a massive amount of construction and an insane level of lending.

The public is also responsible for electing those who legislate.

Lumen

el tonto wrote: »

Nothing happens in isolation. If the public wasn't eagerly buying, we wouldn't have had a massive amount of construction and an insane level of lender.

The public is also responsible for electing those who legislate.

Your argument conflates direct and indirect personal responsibility.

Also, the "if X did not do Y, then Z would not have happened, therefore X is responsible for Z" argument is logically weak, along the lines of blaming a rape victim because "she was asking for it".

Chips Lovell

Lumen wrote: »

Your argument conflates direct and indirect personal responsibility.

Also, the "if X did not do Y, then Z would not have happened, therefore X is responsible for Z" argument is logically weak, along the lines of blaming a rape victim because "she was asking for it".

By consistantly buying property at values that were ridiculous by almost any measure and re-electing a government that seemed disinclined to call a halt to the madess, I think it's reasonable to assume that the general public gave its rubber stamp to what was going on. Both directly fed into the system that ultimately collapsed. It's not as if the public were unwitting outsiders.

Calling that logically weak and in the same sentence using the rape analogy is bit cheeky.

tomasrojo

It's a fair point that the Irish Times is not uniquely to blame for the property bubble, but it failed to be an independent and considered voice in Irish life. In fact, it because hopelessly dependent on revenue from its property supplement and this very significantly affected both how it reported on the state of the property market, and how it placed new items inside the newspaper. It became a vested interest, and behaved accordingly.

It did indeed publish commentary by Morgan Kelly reasonably prominently ... but in 2006, when the bursting of the bubble was just a few months away. It did report on ESRI reports and such like, but these reports themselves were also hopelessly in thrall to the notion that property was not greatly overvalued, and that Ireland was such a productive economy that prices that were extremely high by international standards were maintainable. It was quite noticeable that any negative commentary on the state of the property market was pushed far back into the paper, but positive reports were either headlined on the front page of the main paper, or on the front page of the property supplement.

Most bizarrely, they ran an editorial on the subject of property trends in which they made it abundantly clear that they did not understand how percentages work. Something along the lines of: property prices rose 100% between 2002 and 2006, but have only eclined by 40% between 2006 and 2008, meaning that prices have to fall by another 60% before we are back to 2002 prices. But percentage rises and percentage falls are not equivalent.

This is not what you expect from a quality newspaper. Or from anyone writing about financial matters.

As owner of myhome.ie they changed the way the put prices into webpages so that page-scraping scripts used by irishpropertywatch.com could not gather information on house price drops, claiming that the information, freely available to anyone who accessed myhome.ie, was commercially sensitive. This runs directly counter to their notion that they favour freedom of information where it is in the public interest.
http://irishpropertywatch.wordpress.com/2007/10/08/recent-developments-at-myhomeie/

So, to sum up, they made themselves heavily dependent on an unsustainable revenue stream, and then tried to persuade their readers that house prices would not fall, and then withdrew obfuscated data from in the public domain when the data were making it clear that prices were falling.

So cycling on the footpath is pretty small beer really. (Cycling on the footpath is still wrong.)

Lumen

el tonto wrote: »

By consistantly buying property at values that were ridiculous by almost any measure and re-electing a government that seemed disinclined to call a halt to the madess, I think it's reasonable to assume that the general public gave its rubber stamp to what was going on. Both directly fed into the system that ultimately collapsed. It's not as if the public were unwitting outsiders.

The public were witting but not directly responsible. None of the parties offered an alternative view. I voted SF, for the sake of personal irony.

el tonto wrote: »

Calling that logically weak and in the same sentence using the rape analogy is bit cheeky.

It was that or something related to "good germans".

doozerie

On my commute home this evening I saw a car turn onto Memorial Road, heading north against the one-way traffic (Memorial Road is the northern side of the bridge here). Luckily for her there was no traffic in the leftmost lane at the time, which she was occupying, which is actually quite unusual there. A few cars blew their horns to warn her so she pulled further to her left against the kerbing separating the traffic lane from the cycle lane. I thought she was going to turn around but instead she drove half onto the cycle lane and continued to drive northwards towards Busaras with her left wheels in the cycle track (with a cyclist stuck behind here) and her right wheels in the one-way traffic lane (forcing oncoming traffic to pull out to avoid her).

I crossed to the southside of the bridge and saw a Garda on a bicycle sitting there so I stopped and told him. He didn't exactly spring into action (has he never seen an episode of TJ Hooker - the faintest whiff of a crime should lead to screeching tyres and blaring sirens) but he said he'd take a look and headed over.

I thought the whole thing was kind of ironic in light of Logue's moaning article - a car driver driving the wrong way up a one-way street ignoring laws applying to both the road and a cycle lane, and being pursued by a Garda on a bicycle.