Pulled over by a bike cop...

thebullkf

The law compels you to use cycle tracks where provided. The ones provided frequently pass on the inside of left-turning traffic. You cannot legally leave the cycle track to go to the right of the left-turning traffic. You must pass on the inside, if you wish to keep within the law.

So you admit you break this law. Shame on you. I had such high hopes for you.

eh.... slow down ,pull up onto the path,do whatever it is you have to do legally and stay safe.
i never pass on the inside of any vehicle,whether i'm cycling,biking,driving.

tomasrojo

thebullkf wrote: »

eh.... slow down ,pull up onto the path,do whatever it is you have to do legally and stay safe.
i never pass on the inside of any vehicle,whether i'm cycling,biking,driving.

I'm still not clear how you proceed straight ahead at junctions where a cycle track leaves you on the left of left-turning traffic. How does slowing down, stopping or mounting the footpath help you get through the junction.

CramCycle

Alanstrainor wrote: »

Indeed, i can't wait. There's one in Rathfarnham, the stretch from the Rathfarnham Church to the crossroads at the Rathfarnham Wood estate and it is a disgrace of a cycle lane(it's an "on path lane"...the worst of them all!). In fact it no longer has enough markings to let you know it's a separate cycling lane! It has some dots of white paint on a path and that's it. I refuse to use it.

Also stops you making a turn down grange road due to the fact the cycle lane is 6 inches off the road that it is, a horrible place to cycle, also coming from Nutgrove they finally put an end of cycle lane up coming up to the junction at grange road but they forgot to make indications for traffic, so merging is a life or death gamble.

thebullkf wrote: »

so there was a cycle path there but you didn't use it..

dr ro wrote: »

Cycling outside people's driveways is more dangerous anyway.

To the best of my knowledge, much like driving a car, your always meant to take the safer option, I could be wrong.

Lastly, a few corrections had to be made to a few comments:

Keep_Her_Lit wrote: »

indeed, I suspect there may be a few everyone around here who can reach such speeds with both the wind and gradient against them!).

thebullkf wrote: »

you're not the only ones. but cyclists car drivers on the N11 are the most common law breakers on the roads.

i rarely see cyclists car drivers on the N11 stopped @ lights. seriously.

steve9859

I was stopped by a garda a few weeks ago cycling in the road on the way out to Swords rather than the cycle lane, which is basically the half of the pavement by the road.

I have done a bit of racing in the past, and use a good bike for my commute. When I explained that I was cycling in excess of 30 kph and that if i went on the cycle path and hit a child who had wandered into it at that speed, and seriously hurt them, then I would have to explain that the Garda had directed me into the cycle lane.

He accepted that argument immediately and agreed that the rule was stupid. Said I should cycle in the road if going at speed. So it seems like it is down to the individual garda

challengemaster

Bunnyhopper wrote: »

Jaysus but it's depressing to hear that, Highway_To_Hell. I hope the guards don't all start doing that. The sooner we get rid of that stupid law the better.

Actually enforcing the law in terms of cyclists? As a driver, I hope they do, tbh.

CramCycle

thebullkf wrote: »

pull up onto the path

do whatever it is you have to do legally

CONTRADICTION???

DirkVoodoo

Twice I've written replies now, twice I've deleted them before posting.

Some people just can't see reason, even if it walks up and slaps them in the face. Passing traffic by indicating right, looking and moving off is, to me, basic cycle craft. If you can't do that then you shouldn't be on the road. Maybe the footpath is the place for you, 15 km/hr sounds too fast though, slow down!

Good luck to ya!

michael196

i am a motorist and a cyclist, I always give as much room as posible to cyclists when in the car.


I am an assertive cyclist, I will assert a position on the road, I will pull into the center of the road when the side surface is poor,

I will assert at trafic lights by assuming my position ( Like a car)

I will punish negligent drivers who carelessly pull out in front of me , by immediatly overtaking them on the outside and reasserting my position.

I give way when the traffic needs to have space and there is juts no space for me. in that case i assume a car position and take up after a car like a following car.

I wont be pushed to the edge when it is dangerous to do so. I think cars will respect an assertive cyclist more than one that they can just easily pass off.

sounds like an attitude I know, but i find myself getting angry and a little agressive when cars misbehave especially at the end of a long cycle as i am passing thru a city to my destination.

luckily never had an accident on a bike

seensensee

The garda's instruction to the OP must be seen in the wider context regarding traffic on the N11, the section mentioned has a max speed of 80 kph and at peak times the road is chockablock with fast moving traffic, little or no room for buses to overtake bicycles. Are we to expect the bus to slowdown to 30 kph (or slower) for every bicycle in the bus lane? No it's better to use the cycle lanes and footpaths if and when necessary.

thebullkf

fergalr wrote: »

What do you mean by this?

only what you said.:)

Would you not agree that if many of the cyclists start travelling by a different mode of transport, it will cost more to maintain the road network?
Surely this is almost self-evident?

A bicycle is responsible for hardly any congestion, and hardly any wear and tear on the roads.
Tens of thousands commute to work by bike in Dublin every day. If even a minority of them start taking the car, it'll cost more.

And many cyclists do also own cars, or are licensed drivers.

Furthermore, perception of safety is oft cited as a primary reason for not cycling.
If safety decreases, due to being forced to use unsuitable cycling facilities, then people will drive more.

If you disagree with this point, then I'd like to know why.

i agree largely to this.

100 people downloading a song is surely less bad than 5 murders, even though the law has been broken 20 times as commonly with the downloading? Surely you would agree?

this is a cycling discussion..seriously. murder.;)

How commonly the law is broken isn't nearly as important as what happens when the law is broken.

but its strictly resticted to individual intepretation.

The simple fact is that cyclists, even cyclists breaking the law, rarely cause serious injury or death, because the ways in which they break the law are much less dangerous than when car drivers do.

I say this as a driver and a cyclist.

I feel far more responsibility driving a car to make sure to obey all the laws, and to avoid any accident, than when I cycle a bicycle. The reason is that because if I make a mistake in traffic driving a car, I could kill a large number of people. If I make a mistake in traffic cycling a bicycle, I am only likely to kill myself.

It is right and proper to have more concern for situations in which we can kill or injure numbers of others, than in which we can only injure ourselves.

This should be obvious.
If someone wants to go rock climbing, and risk their own life, then let them. If someone wants to go boy-racing their new souped up car through the city, then it is much more serious, because they could run someone over.

I really think that anyone that cannot see this difference must be pretty crazy.

Thankfully, the Gardai and the justice system rationally recognises this difference. Penalties and enforcement for minor infractions on a bicycle are properly much less than on a car.



Perhaps you do not; but for the reasons I just mentioned, how common a crime is is not nearly as big a deal as the consequences of the crime.

One car driver running a rush hour red light, and narrowing missing taking out a couple of other cars, is obviously more serious than a cyclist making a left through a red into an empty road. The same number of offences have been committed, but surely the former is more serious than the latter?

they are two different scenarios:eek:

a biker/car turning onto same empty road is the same crime.
the punishment is way different

thebullkf wrote: »

well then-practise what you preach,cycle slower??

As I said, we do, of course, cycle slowly to try and make sure this doesn't happen.
But, fundamentally, I don't want to hit a four year old child, even cycling slowly.
This is not an abstract concern. It is a very real concern every day, every time children come out of school at around 15:00, in many areas.

It is simply far safer, for the children, in such situations, for the cyclist to self sacrificingly cycle on the road, and risk irrate drivers and traffic police both.

And, in fairness, most drivers are sensible enough that they do of course understand this.
It is very rare that a driver blows their horn at a cyclist avoiding a pavement of children - although I have seen it happen - and I would be shocked if a Garda enforced the law to the letter in such a circumstance.




Cheers.

good post but my jaysus...self sacrificing:D c'mon;)
i cede certain points, but tbh if cyclists get use of the road,they should be paying for it. i'll pay myself if need be.its unrealistic to expect thousands (as you put it) of daily cyclists,taking up road space that other users pay for-its gonna go the regulation route @ some stage.

i firmly believe that most people cycle to work because its in their own best interests,nobody elses,so whilst you masde some excellent points-i feel some where negated by the self serving cyclist public in general.
cyclists don't cycle on roads to avoid kids..they do it cos they can acheive greater speeds,on a better surface,with no other vehicle intereference, it suits them...and best of all.its gratis.

thebullkf

tomasrojo wrote: »

I'm still not clear how you proceed straight ahead at junctions where a cycle track leaves you on the left of left-turning traffic. How does slowing down, stopping or mounting the footpath help you get through the junction.

well then i'm afraid i can't help you. if you use the road-use the rules of the road.:)

DirkVoodoo

thebullkf wrote: »

i cede certain points, but tbh if cyclists get use of the road,they should be paying for it. i'll pay myself if need be.its unrealistic to expect thousands (as you put it) of daily cyclists,taking up road space that other users pay for-its gonna go the regulation route @ some stage.

Ah finally! Proof that arguing with you is a waste of time, thanks for that.

I almost forgot to pay my road tax this year as well, thanks for reminding me :rolleyes:

thebullkf

CramCycle wrote: »

CONTRADICTION???

NO!

thebullkf

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

Twice I've written replies now, twice I've deleted them before posting.

Some people just can't see reason, even if it walks up and slaps them in the face. Passing traffic by indicating right, looking and moving off is, to me, basic cycle craft. If you can't do that then you shouldn't be on the road. Maybe the footpath is the place for you, 15 km/hr sounds too fast though, slow down!

Good luck to ya!

@ TOMASROJO.:D

tomasrojo

but tbh if cyclists get use of the road,they should be paying for it.

Do you ever actually read the cycling forum? Ever?

tomasrojo

thebullkf wrote: »

@ TOMASROJO.:D

I don't really get what point you're making here.

And you still haven't told me how you legally manoeuvre straight through junctions while compelled to stay to the left of left-turning traffic.

thebullkf

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

Ah finally! Proof that arguing with you is a waste of time, thanks for that.

I almost forgot to pay my road tax this year as well, thanks for reminding me :rolleyes:

eh...whats with the roll eyes???

its a valid point. sure if thats the case why should motorcyclists pay road tax??

thebullkf

tomasrojo wrote: »

Do you ever actually read the cycling forum? Ever?

do you have clarity now?
you were a little unclear earlier.

gonna pick on something else now to avoid your last post.;)

thebullkf

tomasrojo wrote: »

I don't really get what point you're making here.

And you still haven't told me how you legally manoeuvre straight through junctions while compelled to stay to the left of left-turning traffic.

well again. i can't help you.

tomasrojo

thebullkf wrote: »

eh...whats with the roll eyes???

its a valid point. sure if thats the case why should motorcyclists pay road tax??

Search the past threads for "motor tax". It's been covered many, many times.

DirkVoodoo

thebullkf wrote: »

eh...whats with the roll eyes???

its a valid point. sure if thats the case why should motorcyclists pay road tax??

Oh man, you really aren't very clued in are you. I'll give you a hint:

thebullkf

tomasrojo wrote: »

Search the past threads for "motor tax". It's been covered many, many times.

thanks. but i'm good. i pay multiple road taxes.

cheers though.

thebullkf

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

Oh man, you really aren't very clued in are you. I'll give you a hint:

rhetoric my dear voodoo.

tomasrojo

thebullkf wrote: »

well again. i can't help you.

I'll take that as a concession that you don't keep to the letter of the law.

thebullkf

tomasrojo wrote: »

I'll take that as a concession that you don't keep to the letter of the law.

you take it whatever way you want.
i still can't help you.:)

DirkVoodoo

thebullkf wrote: »

rhetoric my dear voodoo.

Well, I'm not sure that makes any sense at all. So you believe that motor tax is in fact road tax, as such it in no way reflects the type or size of engine in your vehicle. So why the heck am I paying so much?

CramCycle

thebullkf wrote: »

NO!

Read your posts again and you will in fact find that they are indeed contradictory unless you are a child (under 16), accompanying one, an OAP, have some form of mental or physical disability, or there is an obvious obstruction to the flow of traffic as to the best of my knowledge these are the only times you can:

pull up onto the path

CramCycle

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

So you believe that motor tax is in fact road tax, as such it in no way reflects the type or size of engine in your vehicle. So why the heck am I paying so much?

i pay Road tax and don't drive a car anymore, it comes out of my wages every month and goes into a big well of cash that the government does what they want with, alas my road tax is not nearly enough to cover the cost of Irelands roads but then again, i doubt MOTOR TAX would cover it either.

No offence to thebullkf but

levitronix

I never knew there was rules for cycling a bike on the rules of the road book , the first two are great !!! haha

Keep both hands on the handlebars except when signalling or changing gears.
Keep both feet on the pedals

fergalr

thebullkf wrote: »

good post but my jaysus...self sacrificing:D c'mon;)

Rhetoric, my dear thebullkf.

thebullkf wrote: »

rhetoric my dear voodoo.

thebullkf wrote: »

i cede certain points, but tbh if cyclists get use of the road,they should be paying for it. i'll pay myself if need be.its unrealistic to expect thousands (as you put it) of daily cyclists,taking up road space that other users pay for-its gonna go the regulation route @ some stage.

This is a very different point.
Instead of now arguing that the law should be blindly obeyed, you have moved to arguing that cyclists do not pay for the road, therefore should not use it. Fair enough, you are entitled to put forward a different argument.


But, indeed, we do not pay a 'cycle lane tax', so perhaps we are morally obligated not to use those either? That is confusing.

Also, are you saying that the ~50% of citizens that do not pay income tax should be denied access to services? Very randian. In this state people frequently use services that they do not pay directly for.
And have you paid your specific pavement tax recently? No? Do you feel guilty as a pedestrian?

And what happens when you need to walk along a country road with no pavement? Perhaps its best to drive the car short distances, because the car has paid for it, in some bizarre sense?

Should cyclists that also have cars, and thus have paid motor tax, thus be allowed cycle? But cyclists that have not paid motor tax, shouldn't?

What about people that take the bus? They don't pay road tax, and, you'll have to concede, the bus does go on the roads. Some of the bstrds even have state provided free bus passes!!

Presumably people with cars that have bigger engines, and thus pay higher motor tax, are then allowed drive on the roads more often?

What a bizarre world people that think like this must live in.

thebullkf wrote: »

i firmly believe that most people cycle to work because its in their own best interests,nobody elses,so whilst you masde some excellent points-i feel some where negated by the self serving cyclist public in general.
cyclists don't cycle on roads to avoid kids..they do it cos they can acheive greater speeds,on a better surface,with no other vehicle intereference, it suits them...and best of all.its gratis.

Well, if it gets the average person to where they are going quicker, in addition to making the morning walk to school safer for children, and the commute safer for cyclists, then thats an added bonus that its faster as well as safer?

thebullkf wrote: »

...and best of all.its gratis.

Ah, if only it was...

rp

tomasrojo wrote: »

Search the past threads for "motor tax". It's been covered many, many times.

The same reason drinkers should pay "pub tax"...

Lumen

senordingdong

Why do cyclists hate using cycle lanes?

Is it just because of the condition the Irish ones are in?

rp

CramCycle wrote: »

i pay Road tax and don't drive a car anymore, it comes out of my wages every month and goes into a big well of cash that the government does what they want with, alas my road tax is not nearly enough to cover the cost of Irelands roads but then again, i doubt MOTOR TAX would cover it either.

You are right it doesn't: nearly all western countries exist with a "motoring deficit", that is, the cost to the state of providing and maintaining roads and the associated services, including costs incurred through traffic, accidents, etc., exceeds revenue taken in from the motoring sector. Hence the need to pillage the general tax coffers to build roads. It is true that Ireland, with it's EU-illegal VRT takes in proportionally more tax from motoring sources, but not enough, and other hidden costs can be laid at the motorists feet (oil imports contribute to the balance of payments deficit).
Bottom line: despite Top Gear rhetoric, car usage is subsidised by the tax payer.

rp

senordingdong wrote: »

Why do cyclists hate using cycle lanes?

I think a big part of it is that you are more likely to die or be injured if you use them. Not much of a reason I know, but people are funny that way...

Lumen

senordingdong wrote: »

Why do cyclists hate using cycle lanes?

It's the cycling equivalent of being required to drive behind a man waving a red flag.

senordingdong

Lumen wrote: »

It's the cycling equivalent of being required to drive behind a man waving a red flag.

It makes you angry and makes you want to charge?

Lumen

senordingdong wrote: »

It makes you angry and makes you want to charge?

Not that sort of red flag, this sort.

Cabaal

thebullkf wrote: »

eh...whats with the roll eyes???

its a valid point. sure if thats the case why should motorcyclists pay road tax??

The very fact your posted that shows how very very very clueless you are

First off, its MOTOR TAX
Second off, its a MOTOR bike

Bloody trolls, go back to your hole under the bridge now will you
:rolleyes:

Even if you don't own a car you still pay for the roads through your wages or when you buy something (VAT),

senordingdong

Lumen wrote: »

Not that sort of red flag, this sort.

So... because you feel that cycle lanes, like other road cycling rules are a hunderence?

Hungrycol

Lumen wrote: »

Admitedly Motor Tax's official name is Road Licence Tax so calling it Road Tax is probably closer to the mark. Personally I dont care, you can call it "I hate Cyclist Tax" and I couldnt give a hoot.

Lumen

senordingdong wrote: »

So... because you feel that cycle lanes, like other road cycling rules are a hunderence?

They're slow, dangerous and full of glass.

The "why don't you use the cycle lanes?" question is often born of a combination of ignorance (if the asker had tried to use them the question would not need to be asked) and selfish intolerance ("get out of my way cyclist").

Lumen

Hungrycol wrote: »

Admitedly Motor Tax's official name is Road Licence Tax

?

motor tax
About 58 results

road tax
About 26 results

road licence tax
Your search did not match any documents.

stuf

Hungrycol wrote: »

Admitedly Motor Tax's official name is Road Licence Tax so calling it Road Tax is probably closer to the mark. Personally I dont care, you can call it "I hate Cyclist Tax" and I couldnt give a hoot.

it might have been 50 years ago but not any more - it's called Motor Tax

http://www.environ.ie/en/LocalGovernment/MotorTax/

senordingdong

Lumen wrote: »

They're slow, dangerous and full of glass.

The "why don't you use the cycle lanes?" question is often born of a combination of ignorance (if the asker had tried to use them the question would not need to be asked) and selfish intolerance ("get out of my way cyclist").

Hey, easy now, I politely asked becasue I didn't know.

rp

Hungrycol wrote: »

Personally I dont care, you can call it "I hate Cyclist Tax" and I couldnt give a hoot.

By any other name it would smell as sweet, but the point being made is that this tax is a general taxation mechanism, like VAT, or tax on booze, and not a specific road-use toll (you have that, on the M50/M3/...), so it is no more relevant to this discussion than claiming "I drank eight pints last night, I've paid to use the road!"

Lumen

senordingdong wrote: »

Hey, easy now, I politely asked becasue I didn't know.

That's why I wrote "the question is often born of..." rather than "you are ignorant and selfish". No offence intended.

Besides, there's nothing wrong with ignorance per se. We are all ignorant of almost everything.

Raam

levitronix wrote: »

Keep both hands on the handlebars except when signalling or changing gears.

Gah! How the hell are we expected to celebrate commuter race wins? A wry smile?

senordingdong

Lumen wrote: »

That's why I wrote "the question is often born of..." rather than "you are ignorant and selfish". No offence intended.

Besides, there's nothing wrong with ignorance per se. We are all ignorant of almost everything.

I see.

So what makes cycle lanes slow?

I can see clearly why many are dangerous.
Also, isn't it illeagal to cycle on the footpath? (this amuses me because many cycle lanes are on foot paths now)

Coronal

Raam wrote: »

Gah! How the hell are we expected to celebrate commuter race wins? A wry smile?

You're not meant to be acknowledging them at all