Are Bikers being a bit naive protesting over this

Bigus

"Are Bikers being a bit naive protesting over this"

I think after reading all the stuff in this thread i could start a new thread with

Just Plain "are bikers Naive full stop"

Personally I think the "protest was very counterproductive"

I also think it was a shame that none of the bikers on RTE seemed to know exactly what they were protesting about.


Also with the current biker attitudes eg "everybody should drive a moped for a year "

and " nobody's goin to tell me what to wear" ....

the only thing the protesting Bikers are doing is encouraging the powers that be to maybe consider a total ban on motorised two wheeled transport altogether at some point in the future ,,,depending on road death stats.

Anyway Glad i asked the question in the first place and now I have a lot less respect for Bikers in General with one or two exceptions

Paparazzo

Bigus wrote: »

"Are Bikers being a bit naive protesting over this"

I think after reading all the stuff in this thread i could start a new thread with

Just Plain "are bikers Naive full stop"

Personally I think the "protest was very counterproductive"

I also think it was a shame that none of the bikers on RTE seemed to know exactly what they were protesting about.


Also with the current biker attitudes eg "everybody should drive a moped for a year "

and " nobody's goin to tell me what to wear" ....

the only thing the protesting Bikers are doing is encouraging the powers that be to maybe consider a total ban on motorised two wheeled transport altogether at some point in the future ,,,depending on road death stats.

Anyway Glad i asked the question in the first place and now I have a lot less respect for Bikers in General with one or two exceptions

Sorry we disappointed you Bigus

davoxx

Bigus wrote: »

Also with the current biker attitudes eg "everybody should drive a moped for a year "

you do know that a full b license allows you to drive a moped without a test?

or do you honestly think that having experience on a moped is a bad thing?

Jak O Shadows

Bigus wrote: »

Anyway Glad i asked the question in the first place and now I have a lot less respect for Bikers in General with one or two exceptions

I know how you feel, car drivers disappoint me everyday, you get used to it.

galwaytt

Paparazzo wrote: »

How much safer is it? I'd love to see a survey done that will tell me how much safer these high viz yolks are.
Would you get your car sprayed day-glow Orange like a dyno-rod van? Suppose it was for free?

So, all we need to do, to prove hi-viz won't make any difference, is to phone Dyno Rod and ask if they've ever had an accident in the van.

If 'yes' - even fluoro-coloured Transit's won't save you........and so we can move on.

Yes ?

I attended the demo in Eyre Square yesterday, and it was great. Not a negative example anywhere. And stickers on the bikes, by the organiser's, urging good discipline, manners, etiquette.

I had a placard I held up, I had my 11yr old and 8 yr old hold their 'Hands of my Honda' placard's - they ride CR50's..........and I spent time explaining to my 11yr old why it was important we stood - in the rain- for something like this.

Then I get home and see it on the news and some KNOBHEAD doing burnouts in Kildare Street. Whoever you are, do us a favour and don't turn up on any more event's - moron's like you are the EXACT reason laws like those proposed get dreamed up in the first place. You're a liability.

beatman91

Bigus wrote: »

"Are Bikers being a bit naive protesting over this"
I also think it was a shame that none of the bikers on RTE seemed to know exactly what they were protesting about.

If I was you I wouldn't believe everything you see on TV, that short RTE video showed exactly what the producers wanted everyone to see. They could have used any footage they wanted and they hand picked the clips which made the people look like idiots.

I'd say in the crowd you had people from every walk of life, from unemployed people to engineers, to doctors, builders etc... Like I said before some knew what this was about and some didn't but what I can say is that at least a group made a stand. This was not organised as well as it could have been. A lot of people moan and complain in this country and create facebook websites . Whatever you may think about what you saw on the news. I have to say, these people took a day out of their lives to protest and show they have a voice. That is more then most of the people in this country have done in a long time

daenerysstormborn3

As I have posted already, the RTE crew asked that guy along with many others to do a burnout. They wanted something eye catching to put with their news report.

The organisation of this was all over the place. The forums, the clubs and MAG did their best to get the information out there but in fairness there was no information available in the newspapers or any other media outlet and that wasn't the fault of MAG - I tried my best to get something in the papers but was turned down. Hopefully now that people know what it's all about the next stage of protests will be bigger, better and more organised.

galwaytt

pixiebean22 wrote: »

As I have posted already, the RTE crew asked that guy along with many others to do a burnout. They wanted something eye catching to put with their news report.

The organisation of this was all over the place. The forums, the clubs and MAG did their best to get the information out there but in fairness there was no information available in the newspapers or any other media outlet and that wasn't the fault of MAG - I tried my best to get something in the papers but was turned down. Hopefully now that people know what it's all about the next stage of protests will be bigger, better and more organised.

I'm sorry, but I disagree - they should have refused to do the burnout. TV crew gave you rope, and ye took it.

As for the organisation, dunno about Dublin, but the Galway thing was well run, marshalled, GTC bikes, support van(s) etc.

And surely MAG's raison d'etre is to do Press ????

krissovo

pixiebean22 wrote: »

As I have posted already, the RTE crew asked that guy along with many others to do a burnout. They wanted something eye catching to put with their news report.

I cringed when I seen this on the news:o This is so counter productive so how can bikers gain credibility with actions like this on the media? Mainstream media will always support the majority so this is only ammunition for "non bikers" and that lad took the bait hook line and sinker.

beatman91

I agree. I am personally pissed off with RTE for doing that, obviously it's the guy on the bike that's an idiot for taking the bait but do you not think there is something wrong with RTE cameraman going around and asking people to brake the law?

Kev.OC

After reading all 17 pages of this argument/debate/discussion (quite a lot of it regurgitated) there is a lot more to it than "yes to this, no to that".

In my opinion, it's driver training. I've been driving for 5 or 6 years, and the sheer lack of discipline i see in the roads on a daily basis is simply shocking.

Now, apparently it came in recently that you need 10 or 12 lessons before you take your test, but in my experience this is both long-overdue and badly needed.

I'm currently in the middle of the IBT. For those that don't know it's a compulsory 16 hour course (including time in a classroom) that you have to do before you can ride a bike on the road. Once i have this passed, i've to wait 6 months before taking the test. And after that my licence is restricted for 2 years. This is a good thing. It gives new riders time to build their skill and their confidence.

This should also apply to learner drivers. If nothing else they'll get some experience under their belt. As someone pointed out earlier, it's not right that some 17 year old from a well-off family could pass his/her test and hop straight into a 3.2L BMW M3 (granted, more likely pre-recession than now). But i think perhaps a restricted licence might be one possible solution to try and improve road safety.

As a car driver (and hopefully a soon to be motorbike rider), personally i think that the biggest difference could be made by education. It's not enough to be able to reverse around a bend and start moving from a slope. People should be brought into a classroom and be made more aware of other road users and how their driving affects those around them, told what to look out for in some of the grey areas of everyday motoring.

Europe can bring in all these measures to try and make the roads safer, and yes, maybe they're unfairly targeting bikes, and yes, maybe cars will eventually follow, but ultimately the key to reducing accidents lies with increasing the competency of all road users, regardless of the mode of travel they choose to avail of.

daenerysstormborn3

galwaytt wrote: »

I'm sorry, but I disagree - they should have refused to do the burnout. TV crew gave you rope, and ye took it.

As for the organisation, dunno about Dublin, but the Galway thing was well run, marshalled, GTC bikes, support van(s) etc.

And surely MAG's raison d'etre is to do Press ????

I wasn't protesting in Dublin.

I didn't say they couldn't or wouldn't do press, i don't speak for MAG. It's fairly difficult to do press when the press have no interest until after the fact. I tried to get even a small piece in a few neespapers and was refused and told there would be no interest.

GaryMunster

Bigus wrote: »

Personally I think the "protest was very counterproductive"

Also with the current biker attitudes eg "everybody should drive a moped for a year "

Anyway Glad i asked the question in the first place and now I have a lot less respect for Bikers in General with one or two exceptions

Grow a pair

turbodiesel

Eoin wrote: »

Are you for real? How many times do I have to say that I don't have particularly strong feelings either way?

Please have the common courtesy to read my posts properly. I can't see how much clearer I can be.



See above. What I'm wondering is why bikers don't voluntarily do so. From what I can tell, it seems to be an image thing.



Training on a moped as part of your driving lessons / license application procedure? Good idea. Being made drive one for a year isn't the least bit practical.


To clarify what I meant. I don't think it's a bad idea as such - it makes sense (although how it would tie in with a 10 year license could be tricky).

My point was that I bet that the vast majority of incidents are not because of physical eye sight issues, but observation.



Better education? Agreed again.

Now please - if you're going to respond, please don't just jump down my throat and read my posts thoroughly.

how about this.

I think compulsory one/two day training courses for all road users from cyclists & motorcyclists through to artic drivers on a five year cycle is what's needed.

Throw a ten euro levy on every road insurance policy or a cent on every litre of fuel and use it to fund enforced road training.

An hour on each bicycle/motorcycle(even as a passenger if they are unable to drive a bike)/Car/Van/Truck to see the viewpoint of all road users.

We are all sinners on the road.....

Thats if the governments both EU and Irish are genuine about tackling road accidents.

faceman

To throw in my 2c and I'm going to descend into a battle with anyone. I drive both bikes and cars.

The compulsory high Vis makes no sense really. During the day, it makes no difference, especially if you have your lights on (and most bikers do anyway)
I wear a Sam Brown at night and while again, its not really necessary I wear it on the off chance I come off the bike so that other motorists can see me.

I'm pro "always on" headlights but i believe it should be compulsory for all road users. At a minimum it should be compulsory on motorways.

The ban on bikes over 7 years wont pass, its something that local french authorities are pushing for but given most of every city in ireland is urban, it wont be considered.

Compulsory ABS sounds great but there is good argument against using ABS when driving over loose road surface or gravel. Aside from that though, I dont have an issue with this as long as I dont have to retrofit. (My CBS is fine thanks!)

The roadside diagnostics and NCT is a cash cow. Given the low level of fatalities related to mechanical fault with bikes and the low carbon emissions (The ACEM has written many reports on this already) then it shouldnt be necessary.

Jonybgud

faceman wrote: »

I drive both bikes and cars.

The compulsory high Vis makes no sense really.

I'm pro "always on" headlights.

The ban on bikes over 7 years wont pass.

Compulsory ABS sounds great but there is good argument against using ABS when driving over loose road surface or gravel.

as long as I dont have to retrofit.

The roadside diagnostics and NCT is a cash cow.

That pretty much sums it up for me as well.

KamiKazi

There is no need for compulsory high viz, it should be down to rider choice.

I moved to the UK a few months and the difference in cagers attitudes to bikers is staggering. I've yet to be SMIDSY'd, and when overtaking traffic well over 50% of drivers see you approaching and move to the left to let you by quicker.

Fair enough, I'm on a bright yellow sportsbike that puts out over 100dB when moving, but if you can't see me already a bit of high viz won't make a difference!

OBDs are just the beginning of complete nany stateism, who needs speed cameras when a quick check of your ECU tells the copper exactly what speed you've hit?

Type approval is a measure to help BMW grow in the EU bike market, nothing else.

KTRIC

KamiKazi wrote: »

There is no need for compulsory high viz, it should be down to rider choice.

I moved to the UK a few months and the difference in cagers attitudes to bikers is staggering. I've yet to be SMIDSY'd, and when overtaking traffic well over 50% of drivers see you approaching and move to the left to let you by quicker.

I've seen the same thing in NI. They're a lot more friendly to bikes there in general.

There's definitely some deep seated issues with bikers in Ireland that goes beyond "sorry I didn't see ya mate" :rolleyes:

simplybam

Ok, got a few points to make here. Firstly, here's a wee video that shows how useful high-viz gear is considering that car drivers don't care looking in the first place (and this is no exception, but a daily occurrence):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NayWH2nTNsg&feature=player_embedded

Secondly, even if there are cheaper options than buying all new high-viz biker gear, I'd have to wear it over my safety gear (which is already hot enough standing at a traffic light), and I really don't fancy getting cooked on my way to work and needing a shower first thing getting there.

Thirdly, if you watch any of the youtube videos of the protests last Sunday, you'll notice that almost every single bike has it's headlights on (because it's been standard on bikes for years) and there's no switch to turn 'em off.

In the end my issue is that I do a lot of work all over the country and I have a car and a bike. Whenever I have a job in Dublin I choose to use the bike, since it cuts my commuting time down by up to 75%, depending on the time of day. By cutting down my commuting time I'm also cutting down on the impact I make on the environment.
I don't believe I should be punished in any way for the mistakes of other motorists (are learner drivers being punished any more if they're involved in an accident with a full license holder, because they're learner drivers? That's exactly the kind of thing they're trying to do to bikers - blame 'em before the fact!).
Most other countries in Europe have had compulsory driving lessons for both motorcycle AND car drivers before obtaining a driver's license for years, and it certainly didn't hurt them.
If the EU really wants to make the roads safer for motorcycles they should implement the safer crash barriers for motorbikes (which Ireland voted AGAINST back in June of this year).

There are loads more points I could make here, but I give it a break now. If anyone wants to know more, let me know and I will continue.

Alkers

simplybam wrote: »

Ok, got a few points to make here. Firstly, here's a wee video that shows how useful high-viz gear is considering that car drivers don't care looking in the first place (and this is no exception, but a daily occurrence):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NayWH2nTNsg&feature=player_embedded

Secondly, even if there are cheaper options than buying all new high-viz biker gear, I'd have to wear it over my safety gear (which is already hot enough standing at a traffic light), and I really don't fancy getting cooked on my way to work and needing a shower first thing getting there.

Thirdly, if you watch any of the youtube videos of the protests last Sunday, you'll notice that almost every single bike has it's headlights on (because it's been standard on bikes for years) and there's no switch to turn 'em off.

In the end my issue is that I do a lot of work all over the country and I have a car and a bike. Whenever I have a job in Dublin I choose to use the bike, since it cuts my commuting time down by up to 75%, depending on the time of day. By cutting down my commuting time I'm also cutting down on the impact I make on the environment.
I don't believe I should be punished in any way for the mistakes of other motorists (are learner drivers being punished any more if they're involved in an accident with a full license holder, because they're learner drivers? That's exactly the kind of thing they're trying to do to bikers - blame 'em before the fact!).
Most other countries in Europe have had compulsory driving lessons for both motorcycle AND car drivers before obtaining a driver's license for years, and it certainly didn't hurt them.
If the EU really wants to make the roads safer for motorcycles they should implement the safer crash barriers for motorbikes (which Ireland voted AGAINST back in June of this year).

There are loads more points I could make here, but I give it a break now. If anyone wants to know more, let me know and I will continue.

That clip sums it up very well, this happens so often when on the bike.

daenerysstormborn3

simplybam wrote: »

Ok, got a few points to make here. Firstly, here's a wee video that shows how useful high-viz gear is considering that car drivers don't care looking in the first place (and this is no exception, but a daily occurrence):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NayWH2nTNsg&feature=player_embedded

Secondly, even if there are cheaper options than buying all new high-viz biker gear, I'd have to wear it over my safety gear (which is already hot enough standing at a traffic light), and I really don't fancy getting cooked on my way to work and needing a shower first thing getting there.

Thirdly, if you watch any of the youtube videos of the protests last Sunday, you'll notice that almost every single bike has it's headlights on (because it's been standard on bikes for years) and there's no switch to turn 'em off.

In the end my issue is that I do a lot of work all over the country and I have a car and a bike. Whenever I have a job in Dublin I choose to use the bike, since it cuts my commuting time down by up to 75%, depending on the time of day. By cutting down my commuting time I'm also cutting down on the impact I make on the environment.
I don't believe I should be punished in any way for the mistakes of other motorists (are learner drivers being punished any more if they're involved in an accident with a full license holder, because they're learner drivers? That's exactly the kind of thing they're trying to do to bikers - blame 'em before the fact!).
Most other countries in Europe have had compulsory driving lessons for both motorcycle AND car drivers before obtaining a driver's license for years, and it certainly didn't hurt them.
If the EU really wants to make the roads safer for motorcycles they should implement the safer crash barriers for motorbikes (which Ireland voted AGAINST back in June of this year).

There are loads more points I could make here, but I give it a break now. If anyone wants to know more, let me know and I will continue.

Well said, particularly that point.

I use a road everyday which has a long stretch with these barriers down the centre and there has been 100s of accidents and the evidence of these accidents is still very obvious because they haven't bothered to repair the death traps.

I was driving home from work last Friday, overtaking a car and a guy in a Jeep threw a full 1.5 litre bottle of coke out his window at me, on purpose (as was clearly evident by the laughter of him and his passengers). The bottle smacked into my helmet and fell down between my arms onto the tank and then my legs, at which point I was terrified it would go under the back tyre of the bike. When this happened I was driving along the stretch of road with these wire barriers. I was fine obviously but aside from the accident he may have caused I would've come off seriously worse if I had ended up wrapped around those barriers.

I hate them! :mad:

seanybiker

simplybam wrote: »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NayWH2nTNsg&feature=player_embedded

I know him. Sound chap. Can take a corner fairly good on that vmax and all.

He was lucky in that vid

Kev_ps3

pixiebean22 wrote: »

Well said, particularly that point.

I use a road everyday which has a long stretch with these barriers down the centre and there has been 100s of accidents and the evidence of these accidents is still very obvious because they haven't bothered to repair the death traps.

I was driving home from work last Friday, overtaking a car and a guy in a Jeep threw a full 1.5 litre bottle of coke out his window at me, on purpose (as was clearly evident by the laughter of him and his passengers). The bottle smacked into my helmet and fell down between my arms onto the tank and then my legs, at which point I was terrified it would go under the back tyre of the bike. When this happened I was driving along the stretch of road with these wire barriers. I was fine obviously but aside from the accident he may have caused I would've come off seriously worse if I had ended up wrapped around those barriers.

I hate them! :mad:

Jesus, did you get his reg? I would have beat the guy to death:mad:

KamiKazi

pixiebean22 wrote: »

Well said, particularly that point.

I use a road everyday which has a long stretch with these barriers down the centre and there has been 100s of accidents and the evidence of these accidents is still very obvious because they haven't bothered to repair the death traps.

I was driving home from work last Friday, overtaking a car and a guy in a Jeep threw a full 1.5 litre bottle of coke out his window at me, on purpose (as was clearly evident by the laughter of him and his passengers). The bottle smacked into my helmet and fell down between my arms onto the tank and then my legs, at which point I was terrified it would go under the back tyre of the bike. When this happened I was driving along the stretch of road with these wire barriers. I was fine obviously but aside from the accident he may have caused I would've come off seriously worse if I had ended up wrapped around those barriers.

I hate them! :mad:

I would have left the fvcker in a wheelchair! :mad::mad:

daenerysstormborn3

No, I was overtaking him on a 2+1 road and the road was just narrowing back into a single lane so rather than cause an accident I just drove on. It was lashing so couldn't even see the reg in my mirrors.

Ah sure, alive to tell the tale but who knows how many bikers he's pulled that stunt on and will continue to do so for his own entertainment.

Cuddlesworth

simplybam wrote: »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NayWH2nTNsg&feature=player_embedded

You came out fast into the roundabout through a gap that a car could not have. And yet you seem surprised that the cars pulled out. Your road positioning in the second clip could have been better, you should have been much further to the right of the road to allow both you and other cars better visibility. Also you were travelling a little too fast for the conditions.

No matter how hard you try you can't change other peoples driving, so change your own.

davoxx

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

You came out fast into the roundabout through a gap that a car could not have.

i disagree here. true he did 'squeeze' onto the roundabout. but it was clear for him to do so and we can not tell if there was a 'gap'. traffic for his right was empty (i presume).

but vehicles approaching the roundabout need to give way to vehicles on the roundabout and vehicles to the right.

those cars should have slowed down, preparing to stop on approach to the roundabout. they did not seem to care that there were vehicles to their right.

anyway that is my opinion ... feel free to disagree

Cuddlesworth

davoxx wrote: »

i disagree here. true he did 'squeeze' onto the roundabout. but it was clear for him to do so and we can not tell if there was a 'gap'. traffic for his right was empty (i presume).

but vehicles approaching the roundabout need to give way to vehicles on the roundabout and vehicles to the right.

those cars should have slowed down, preparing to stop on approach to the roundabout. they did not seem to care that there were vehicles to their right.

anyway that is my opinion ... feel free to disagree

Both the Micra and the Van before it, braked before leaving the roundabout and he pulled out hard and fast just after the Micra(who was braking at the time). A car could never have done that and a car is what other drivers plan for when approaching a roundabout. It wouldn't have helped that the Van had blocked their view of him as they approached.

What the cars should have done is in essence irrelevant. You can only change your own actions to minimize the risk.

davoxx

i can't make out the brake lights on the van and micra (my screen is not the best). though them braking does not make a difference to me.

the two cars approaching the roundabout made no attempt (based on the few scenes i can see) to stop or brake. they seemed to go for it, if it was a truck/bus, they would have slowed down :pac:

they should not be 'planning for a car' and if their view was blocked .. they know what to do ... slow down and prepare to stop.

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

What the cars should have done is in essence irrelevant.

i feel it is relevant, as they will be the ones causing the accident. they may or may not be in the majority of blame though.

but to me this is the problem of incompetent drivers. they drive badly and their errors are absorbed by the competent drivers, but eventually their errors will cause an accident.

just because a car can not pull away fast enough does not mean you pull out in front of a vehicle ...


this is one more reason why everyone should have to drive a moped before getting a full license ...

Cuddlesworth

davoxx wrote: »

i can't make out the brake lights on the van and micra (my screen is not the best). though them braking does not make a difference to me.

It places perspective on their actions.

davoxx wrote: »

the two cars approaching the roundabout made no attempt (based on the few scenes i can see) to stop or brake. they seemed to go for it, if it was a truck/bus, they would have slowed down :pac:

Most people at roundabouts in traffic "go for it". Anticipating that is what makes you a good driver.

davoxx wrote: »

they should not be 'planning for a car' and if their view was blocked .. they know what to do ... slow down and prepare to stop.

Once again, what they do doesn't matter. Their surrounded by A pillars, crash absorption bars and steel. He isn't. If he wants to hit them or get hit, then discuss the finer merits of their driving he is more then welcome to. If he wants to avoid getting hit, then he should assume a level of responsibility for his driving. We all should.

davoxx wrote: »

i feel it is relevant, as they will be the ones causing the accident. they may or may not be in the majority of blame though.

but to me this is the problem of incompetent drivers. they drive badly and their errors are absorbed by the competent drivers, but eventually their errors will cause an accident.

just because a car can not pull away fast enough does not mean you pull out in front of a vehicle ...


this is one more reason why everyone should have to drive a moped before getting a full license ...

I like the way you are pushing for "bike training" for all but happily refuse to believe that current bikers don't need it.

Also, a incompetent driver in a car is a incompetent driver on a bike. It won't make a difference.