Are Bikers being a bit naive protesting over this

BlackBlade

http://survivalskills.wordpress.com/2011/06/21/new-anti-motorcycle-legislation-sweeps-europe/

Bababa

EU scum. Will have to pay by weight to do a sh1t soon.

Paparazzo

two wheels good wrote: »

There is a lot of nonsense and misleading information posted in this thread.

From Mag Ireland
http://www.magireland.org/2011/campaigns/right-to-ride-on-the-eu-regulations/

There is no EU proposal to ban bikes over seven years old from urban centers. This was in fact a domestic French proposal.

There is no EU proposal for mandatory high viz. Again, this is a domestic French proposal.

The real issue are
Anti-tampering, Type approval, and road side diagnostics

Would anyone care to take to time to elaborate on the detail of how home servicing and modifications will be banned? And how this will mean more profit for the corporates, more work for the dealers and less for the small bike shops. (Sorry, I don't have the time.)

And how the proposed rules could mean a device (I think of it as something like a tachograph) installed on the motorcycle which would allow law enforcement officers to check how the vehicle had been ridden.
I wonder how the car drivers contributing to this thread would feel about that?

BTW As already mentioned, the poster promoting the protest "was very poorly put together and puts across the wrong message."

I read on an english site, that basically road side diagnostics was to tell if your bike has a fault. Basically, the same thing that's already in some bikes already. Like you get a light on the dash if your brake light is out.

BlackBlade

Paparazzo wrote: »

I read on an english site, that basically road side diagnostics was to tell if your bike has a fault. Basically, the same thing that's already in some bikes already. Like you get a light on the dash if your brake light is out.

if only!

it will tell!!!!

speed
RPM
emissions
GPS location

also they want all these timed ie. speeding for x time
but leads to other questions like!
if this thing is measuring how long you are revving and what emissions you but out then its only a matter of time before you are taxed on it!

two wheels good

Paparazzo wrote: »

I read on an english site, that basically road side diagnostics was to tell if your bike has a fault. Basically, the same thing that's already in some bikes already. Like you get a light on the dash if your brake light is out.

I've failed to find any source saying On-Board Diagnostics would be what I described as "like a tachograph". I found many comments along those lines but not a definitive source. I want to withdraw that earlier statement. I don't want to add to the misinformation.

Some of the detailed amendments to the proposals (Here) make it sound like it will be a quite complex system. This and ABS on every motorcycle >125cc is going to mean significant price increases.

FizzyCola

Ive read through all of the posts and it seems that there are some good arguments from both sides. Im a biker and I am going to protest.

The main problem is that there seems to be a lack of understanding from bikers and car drivers as to what excatly these possible new rules will actually mean.

I think a lot of the car only users here dont understand the problem the bikers have with the rules. Lights on is a good one, my bike doesnt allow for the lights to be turned off but my 2 previous bikes did but I always had them on. I hardly never see a bike without there lights on and thats good. The problem with this rule is that it forces blame onto the rider in the event of an accident.

I dont wear a high viz vest but my jacket and pants have reflective strips, I also stapled yellow high viz strips to my bag which also has a big reflective panel. I dont wear high viz jackets because I think they look crap and they are quite cumbersome and I dont need some yoke flapping around distracting me. Also anytime I see a bike I notice the lights and what type of bike they are riding before I notice if they have a high viz on. Often high viz is blocked by a bag or often by the riders positioning especially on sportsbikes. The only time ive noticed that high viz makes a rider more visible is on more upright bikes.

I am against a rule for mandatory high viz even though I think wearing high viz is a good option as it will push blame onto the rider.

ABS seems to be a big problem. Bikers dont like it and car drivers that dont understand what riding a bike is like and how they work seem to apply the theory that if it works for cars, surely it will work for bikes.

The 7 year rule is ridiculous.

ALL bike riders know the risks of riding a bike. Some may push the limits at times and may make maneuvers that car drivers see as dangerous but a biker in all likely hood has calculated the risk of what they are doing and knows the capabilities of the bike and their riding. Often I will overtake a van, bus, truck or people carrier even if they are going at a nice pace as by doing so it gives me a better view ahead and allows me to see cars further up ahead braking,indicating at junctions and so on. It also allows me to see cars pulling out at junctions further up the road and gives them a better chance of them seeing me on my BRIGHT GREEN bike. I also like to get away from people who love to apply the brakes constantly as they go 1 mph over the 30 mph limit. So next time you see a biker carrying out a seamlessly pointless overtaking maneuver, think why is he doing it, it could be for more than the fun of it.

Ive had cars pull out in front of me quite a bit. Maybe once evry 2 weeks on average. Sometimes you get a few in a week and then not many for a while. Often I will anticipate them pulling out and have braked in plenty of time. At junctions I always look to see what way the driver is looking. Sometimes no amount of anticipation will save you. In 3 years of riding ive only had one where I really thought I was going into the side of the car. People on the side of the road stared in disbelief. On other occasions where they pulled out at the last second, quick reactions, good brakes,a highly maneuverable bike and a bit of decent bike control has saved me.

I appreciate bikes are hard to see and often when a bike comes behind me I struggle to see them at times when they pop in and out of view ( most likely avoiding manhole covers, white lines, gravel, horse ****, rocks, plastic bottles, potholes, puddles, spilled oil, coke cans etc). What really annoys me is when they didnt even realise what they had just done. As long as people acknowledge it and possibly learn from it I dont mind too much or when they laugh at you as happened last week to me when they looked in my direction and pulled out in front of me when I was about 20 feet away and then laughed at me as I raised my hand in a what the f***k sort of manner. Again I had anticipated and had scrubbed off some speed before I had to eventually brake to avoid them. Other cars even beeped at them.

As for loud exhausts, I have one, and I noticed cars are a lot more aware of me. They give me more space to filter and dont pull out in front of me as much. Loud pipes saves lives and I give a little wave to acknowledge that they made my life easier and to thank them for being a competent driver.

Riding a bike is more than getting from A to B for most riders. Its a way of life, a life style choice and there is a sense of being one big family as you greet the other bikers on your journey. There seems to be many bike haters in the thread and in the country as a whole but it only seems to come about when bikers put on the gear to go for a spin. A biker just wants to have fun and get home safe like everyone else, we are not all ghost rider or some wheelie loving machine, we are people too and dont just hate us because we ride a little fast at times, have loud exhausts and can get home in half the time. Dont prejudge bikers just because you cant see the face behind the helmet.


I love safety and dont need to be told by some non biking people how to ride my bike or what I should wear and what I can and cant do to my bike. Heres a little list of what I have done to improve my chances of not being hurt incase of an accident:

Helmet - 400 euro
Gloves - 80 euro for winter 30 euro for summer
Pants - Waterproof ones about 150 euro, leather ones 200 euro
Jacket - 180 euro
Boots - 250 euro

Riding a bike, FECKING PRICELESS

PlLEASE, bikers and not bikers take a few mins to take a look at these adds.

The last one is a bit funny too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9DD99mtI3Po&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cr17Dv7wN9Q

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cXCy6vw0dkI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AKqZfbH8WNU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvsnGQchHn0&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-7b5l62f14&feature=related

daenerysstormborn3

This thread is a perfect example of why these laws are being brought in and a minority are being targeted.

Wear hi viz so i can see you better - HOW ABOUT OPEN YOUR EYES AND EARS. You can't moan about loud exhausts and then trip yourself up saying you can't see bikes because you have the eyesight of an 80 year old.

The mandatory hi viz is a proposal being put forward by the rsa and they have just confirmed they will continue to push through the proposal.

If we are in a group of vulnerable road users then why aren't the rest of this group being subjected to yet more rules and regulations?

So according to the rsa i can hop on my bike with no PPE and just my hi viz and i'll be grand?! Another brainless scheme by the rsa.

How about posters on this thread spouting they know it all about bikes actually get out on a bike and experience what we have to put up with from the "oh so safe, deaf&blind" car/jeep/truck drivers and then come back here and tell us again it's all our fault.

Flyin Irishman

From what I've seen alot of non-bikers view on the protests is that "bikers have no common sense, most of these proposals are clearly good, and will improve safety"

I dont question that having your headlights on, and wearing hi-viz will make any biker more visible, and therefore safer. But I will fight tooth and nail to ensure that it is not forced upon us. Im strongly pro-choice, and feel that it should be our right to choosewhen we should wear hi-viz, or turn on our headlights.

I also think that these proposals show a remarkably poor set of priorities for "bikers safety" if they want to make Hi-Viz, OBD and ABS mandatory, yet there is no mention of wearing protective gear. Which would really make bikers safer?

Please Kill Me

pixiebean22 wrote: »

This thread is a perfect example of why these laws are being brought in and a minority are being targeted.

Wear hi viz so i can see you better - HOW ABOUT OPEN YOUR EYES AND EARS. You can't moan about loud exhausts and then trip yourself up saying you can't see bikes because you have the eyesight of an 80 year old.

The mandatory hi viz is a proposal being put forward by the rsa and they have just confirmed they will continue to push through the proposal.

If we are in a group of vulnerable road users then why aren't the rest of this group being subjected to yet more rules and regulations?

So according to the rsa i can hop on my bike with no PPE and just my hi viz and i'll be grand?! Another brainless scheme by the rsa.

How about posters on this thread spouting they know it all about bikes actually get out on a bike and experience what we have to put up with from the "oh so safe, deaf&blind" car/jeep/truck drivers and then come back here and tell us again it's all our fault.

Agreed!! Also, I have a bike that's 2001. I keep it mint, regularly serviced, cleaned every other week etc. If this stupid law about 7 year old bikes comes in, what am I supposed to do?? Stop it out the road a few miles and push it home?? I can't believe one retard actually agreed with this!!! :rolleyes:

daenerysstormborn3

The ban on bikes over 7 years is a domestic French proposal but if it's brought in there, it's only a matter of time before other EU countries follow suit and Ireland always want to be top of the class.

barone

they major gripe from bikers is the non tampering with their bikes rule, be the same if checks done on starlet/civic etc up and down the country


yes im friends with quite a few bikers, they have no prob with hi viz,or lights on

davoxx

sorry if this was posted before, but can someone link the text here, i can't find it in the thread (i did look over the last 12 page)

daenerysstormborn3

It's all in the thread in the motorbikes forum.

davoxx

pixiebean22 wrote: »

It's all in the thread in the motorbikes forum.

yeah i kinda though of that after i posted ... it was stickied ... thanks.

simplybam

It's pretty much all been said and countered, but anyway, here's my 2 cents worth.

I ride a 29 year old bike in perfect condition and am looking after it to keep it safe and sound. I always drive with headlights on - still had a good few near misses with cars pulling out in front of me (and I ride within the speed limits in the city).

My biker clothing is black with reflective piping and I don't see why I should spend a few hundred euro to replace all my gear (which already cost me a few hundred) with dayglo stuff - since the proposal is for full-sleeve high-viz and not just a vest to put over my combo.

And I certainly can't afford to spend a fortune on retro-fitting ABS or OBD on my bike, which would also take away from it's original classic status (since she's a vintage next year).

BlackBlade

simplybam wrote: »

It's pretty much all been said and countered, but anyway, here's my 2 cents worth.

I ride a 29 year old bike in perfect condition and am looking after it to keep it safe and sound. I always drive with headlights on - still had a good few near misses with cars pulling out in front of me (and I ride within the speed limits in the city).

My biker clothing is black with reflective piping and I don't see why I should spend a few hundred euro to replace all my gear (which already cost me a few hundred) with dayglo stuff - since the proposal is for full-sleeve high-viz and not just a vest to put over my combo.

And I certainly can't afford to spend a fortune on retro-fitting ABS or OBD on my bike, which would also take away from it's original classic status (since she's a vintage next year).

thats it the cost and then the effect on the value etc would kill a lot of bikes!
the brakes on my bike cost over £2000 (thats a lot in €) that would kill me to scrap 2k worth of brakes to fit something more expensive that doesnt work as good! :rolleyes:

flyingsnail

simplybam wrote: »

It's pretty much all been said and countered, but anyway, here's my 2 cents worth.

I ride a 29 year old bike in perfect condition and am looking after it to keep it safe and sound. I always drive with headlights on - still had a good few near misses with cars pulling out in front of me (and I ride within the speed limits in the city).

My biker clothing is black with reflective piping and I don't see why I should spend a few hundred euro to replace all my gear (which already cost me a few hundred) with dayglo stuff - since the proposal is for full-sleeve high-viz and not just a vest to put over my combo.

And I certainly can't afford to spend a fortune on retro-fitting ABS or OBD on my bike, which would also take away from it's original classic status (since she's a vintage next year).

you could just buy a long sleeve vest (Link and Link). And I thought that ABS and OBD was only for new builds??

daenerysstormborn3

flyingsnail wrote: »

you could just buy a long sleeve vest (Link and Link). And I thought that ABS and OBD was only for new builds??

Why? Why should anyone be forced to wear something and to take responsibility for the driving of other road users? I didn't know blind people were allowed obtain a driving licence

ABS and OBD are only for new builds which will just serve to increase the already exorbitant prices of motorbikes.

flyingsnail

pixiebean22 wrote: »

Why? Why should anyone be forced to wear something and to take responsibility for the driving of other road users?

I was simply offering an alternative. simplybam implied he would have to replace all of is biker gear at a cost of a couple of hundred. I was just pointing out the long sleeve vest as a much cheaper alternative. But if it becomes law, then yes you should be forced to comply with the law.

I didn't know blind people were allowed obtain a driving licence

As far as I know they are not, and if they were no amount of hi viz would solve that.

ABS and OBD are only for new builds which will just serve to increase the already exorbitant prices of motorbikes.

As will the new safety features being mandated for cars, it's not as if motorbikes are being singled out.

Eoin

pixiebean22 wrote: »

Why? Why should anyone be forced to wear something and to take responsibility for the driving of other road users?.

You see, this is the mindset that I don't really understand. No, it's not your fault if a car driver isn't looking out properly. But you're going to come out worse if something (God forbid) happens, no matter who was at fault.

As I said earlier, I don't get why people don't wear this stuff voluntarily. The very mature arguments made about looking "gay" or a "muppet" didn't sway me.

daenerysstormborn3

flyingsnail wrote: »

I was simply offering an alternative. simplybam implied he would have to replace all of is biker gear at a cost of a couple of hundred. I was just pointing out the long sleeve vest as a much cheaper alternative. But if it becomes law, then yes you should be forced to comply with the law.

As far as I know they are not, and if they were no amount of hi viz would solve that.


As will the new safety features being mandated for cars, it's not as if motorbikes are being singled out.

Oh really? Why is it then that these new measures for cars are being suggested for not until 2014?

Same happened with the IBT, bikes got singled out months ahead of cars.

There's just no reasoning with some people :rolleyes:

daenerysstormborn3

Eoin wrote: »

You see, this is the mindset that I don't really understand. No, it's not your fault if a car driver isn't looking out properly. But you're going to come out worse if something (God forbid) happens, no matter who was at fault.

As I said earlier, I don't get why people don't wear this stuff voluntarily. The very mature arguments made about looking "gay" or a "muppet" didn't sway me.

And WHAT difference will hi viz make to that situation? Would it not make more sense in that scenario that the EU make mandatory fully armoured PPE? And also, where are the proposals to "force" other road users to change the way they handle these situations? Oh yes, there are none because bikers are being singled out again.

I couldn't care less if it looks gay or makes me look like a muppet, am I a 12 year old schoolboy? No, therefore looking gay or like a muppet isn't really something I worry about.

I don't appreciate being forced to dress a certain way because other road users can't look where they're going. How about forcing road users to undergo eye tests every year considering the big problem here is that they can't seem to see everything on the road?

Eoin

Would it not make more sense in that scenario that the EU make mandatory fully armoured PPE?

I've no doubt we'd see exactly the same arguments though about being made wear something.

And WHAT difference will hi viz make to that situation?

I'd expect the idea is that bikers are more visible.

And also, where are the proposals to "force" other road users to change the way they handle these situations? Oh yes, there are none because bikers are being singled out again.

You're missing my point. If I was a vulnerable road user, I'd take the initiative and try and mitigate the risk myself, rather than rely on every single other road user adhere to the laws (that are already in place).

I've no particularly strong feelings either way about it if I'm honest, I just don't really understand the mentality. And I have to say, I can see a lot of false silly arguments being thrown out (eye tests etc).

daenerysstormborn3

Eoin wrote: »

I've no doubt we'd see exactly the same arguments though about being made wear something.

I'd expect the idea is that bikers are more visible.

You're missing my point. If I was a vulnerable road user, I'd take the initiative and try and mitigate the risk myself, rather than rely on every single other road user adhere to the laws (that are already in place).

I've no particularly strong feelings either way about it if I'm honest, I just don't really understand the mentality.

Yeah more visible while we're rolling around on the ground without any PPE, that's a top notch idea.

How are you not a vulnerable road user? Are you invincible or something? Everyone is a vulnerable road user considering the standard of driving in this country. A truck could plough through your car (or whatever you drive) and wipe you out just as easily as you could run over a pedestrian.

If everyone is so aware of how vulnerable bikers are how about they actually open their eyes when out driving and show some courtesy towards these vulnerable road users and not cut them up at any given opportunity

How is suggesting eye tests silly? Are bikers the only ones who should have to continuously go to extra expense to make everybody else's life easier and remain on the road? How about for once something be put in place to change the way people see bikers?

Ratchet

EU was talking about sharing responsibility\safety by all road users so maybe we should just go full hula bula so nobody feels left out

pink hi viz for learners
green for full driving license holders
red for couriers on two wheels
orange for chaotic cyclists that cant hear a plane coming thx to mighty ipod

and make all cages automatic in name of safety so people can focus more on driving .....it will also help few others that cant drive in straight line while changing gears

Eoin

pixiebean22 wrote: »

How are you not a vulnerable road user? Are you invincible or something? Everyone is a vulnerable road user considering the standard of driving in this country. A truck could plough through your car (or whatever you drive) and wipe you out just as easily as you could run over a pedestrian.

I would say I am less vulnerable than bikers (especially if car drivers are as bad as the bikers are saying).

Last week I was cut up by someone pulling into the driving lane ahead of on the M50 to take the Dundrum exit. I'd we were no more than a few feet away at one stage doing 100km/h. If I had been hit, I may not have walked away from it, but I reckon unless I was really whacked into, it wouldn't have been a worst case scenario. If that car has as much clipped the front wheel of a bike, I suspect that it would have been a considerably more severe outcome.

That's what I meant by vulnerable user, and I think it's probably quite obvious. I'm not really interested into getting into pedantic empty arguments.

pixiebean22 wrote: »

If everyone is so aware of how vulnerable bikers are how about they actually open their eyes when out driving and show some courtesy towards these vulnerable road users and not cut them up at any given opportunity

I'm not sure if you're deliberately ignoring the point I am trying to make at this stage. Yes, it would be just great if every other driver was as courteous and observant as they should be. But until they are, I'd take every chance I can to increase my odds. Not being at fault is not the same as not paying the price.

And for what it's worth, I am particularly conscious about checking mirrors, blindspots and so on.

How is suggesting eye tests silly?

Because I think that it's an observation issue, not a physical eye sight one. And I bet you do too.

mb1725

Eoin wrote: »

Not being at fault is not the same as not paying the price.

Very true.

beatman91

Weather your pro or against this , the question we need to ask is; Do we need to have everything legislated?

I think soon we will be better off living in a communist country as they will have more freedom. With the last set of laws they brought in about compulsory lessons before you can take a full licence test, this will naturally kill off biking as no young person will spend that kind of money on a bike licence when they can have a car licence for less.

All I want say is be careful what you ask for, as you might just get it. And don't worry when the EU are finished destroying bikers they will go after something that matters to you.

mb1725

From Kildare Street protest, this guy might feature in a new RSA/ EU poster campaign!

beatman91

This guy is there representing himself, and just like any protest you will get people doing mad things.