In defence of cyclists

Chazz Michael Michaels

Chazz Michael Michaels wrote: »

To quote Andy Dufrane, how can you be so obtuse?

Anytime I come to a crossing, a minimum half of cyclists break the light. And you equate this with cars?

What planet are you on?

Every cyclist that approaches a junction can break the red light, if they are of the law breaking persuasion.

Once one car stops, all cars behind it have to stop also.

Here in Cork, I see far, far more cars breaking red lights than bikes. Most of these are speeding through just after the lights have gone red, but on many occassions I see cars go through solid red lights.

Was very nearly killed my self one day at a t junction near my house. Lights went green for me, I started to roll forward, looked both ways and lo and behold there comes a car barreling through the red light at about 80km/h. This is a very, very regular occurence at this particular junction.

How many motorists obey speed limits? I would hazard a guess that it is as small or smaller than the percentage of cyclists obeying red lights.

Do I call for ridiculous, unenforceable laws to be created to combat these problems? No. I would just like if more effort was put into policing the ones that already exist. Same should apply to transgression of the rules of the road by cyclists.

Chips Lovell

Chazz Michael Michaels wrote: »

Because it is too difficult... Durh

I've yet to hear of one guard failing to stop someone on a bike if they wanted to. Talk to any cop. They'll tell you that policing cyclists isn't really a priority for them.

rubadub

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

almost hit by a cyclist outside Trinity getting to Dame Street (green man), saw 3 more breaking the lights turning from Dame Street to George's Street.
This bugs me so much. If the light is red then you can't effing go through it, end of story.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

If a pedestrian crosses a road in a manner which endangers drivers, cyclists or other pedestrians, he or she should also be held responsible.

Jaysus, if 4 cyclists bug you SO much you must be a raging lunatic with all the pedestrians in that area breaking the lights/law. Its one of the worst areas I have ever seen for dangerous 'jaywalking', have you ever tried to count them? it'd be near impossible there's so many.

Sean Quagmire wrote: »

cyclist wankers.

I mutter that every single time one gets near me on the road.

Oh the irony...

Stark

Chazz Michael Michaels wrote: »

To quote Andy Dufrane, how can you be so obtuse?

Anytime I come to a crossing, a minimum half of cyclists break the light. And you equate this with cars?

What planet are you on?

All it takes is one car to stop and everyone behind him gets stuck (most of the time, I have had people overtake me to go through a red light). When you stop on a bicycle, would-be law breakers just go around you. Guaranteed when the light goes red, you'll have one or two cars drive through until someone decides to stop, happens to me all the time when I get a green man. Then the idiots look at you like you're in the wrong.

Here's a video someone made on the N11:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPh0XMi5OKE

This sort of thing goes on all the time but people only see what they want to see and what backs up their prejudices.

Deleted User wrote:

Here in Cork, I see far, far more cars breaking red lights than bikes. Most of these are speeding through just after the lights have gone red, but on many occassions I see cars go through solid red lights.

What I find funny is that people find the "light just went red, close your eyes and put your foot through the floor" version of red light breaking more acceptable than someone pulling up to a red light, having a look round to see that the way is clear, then proceeding. "Oh but the former isn't a hard red"

Stark

Stark wrote: »

This sort of thing goes on all the time but people only see what they want to see and what backs up their prejudices.

Yup. No shortage of confirmation bias in this thread.

SerialComplaint

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Strawman? That's not "obstructing", "obstructing" would be stopping in the middle of the road or in ayellow box while the traffic jam mounts behind you, or driving miles under the speed limit and causing a tailback.

The speed limit isn't a target. It's a speed limit. The idea of a 'tailback' in any urban setting is laughable. Cyclists don't cause tailbacks in cities. That's the cars that your thinking of. Any delay behind a cyclists will be a matter of 5-10 seconds. But many car drivers seem to think it is compulsory to overtake the cyclist, even when the cyclist is hammering on a some speed.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Just to clarify something - I'm not talking about one or two cyclists going through a light which has just turned red, I'm talking about blatant ploughing through a light which has been red for ages, without stopping or even slowing down, and when they could have seen the red a mile away.
Literally just deciding "red light? Not for me"

There's no grey area whatsoever, it's blatant and deliberate light breaking. When done at a busy pedestrian crossing it could be lethal.

There is no grey area or grey light. Amber means 'stop if it is safe to do so'. Red means stop. You seem to be implying that it is acceptable for one or two cars to sneak through on the red light. Don't expect anyone to take your concerns about cyclists and red lights seriously until you start taking all breaches of red lights seriously.

hardCopy

Chazz Michael Michaels wrote: »

I'm a pedestrian, and barely a week goes by where I don't have a near miss by some ****wit bombing it down a footpath on his bike, breaking red lights at a crossing, etc.

I have zero sympathy for the plight of cyclists.

I'm a pedestrian too, and a motorist and a cyclist.

Barely a journey goes by where I don't have some pedestrian walk out in front of my car or bike, it happens way more often when on the bike though since people have no fear of being hit by a bike.

Seriously, try cycling through a junction in the city centre when you have a green light but no cars immediately in front of you, dozens of people walking straight in front of the bike from both sides. Like Lemmings.

I still don't think all pedestrians are w*nkers and I still have sympathy for anyone who gets hit, because I'm not a d*ckhead.

Edit: For an extreme example try the Coastal Cycle Track along by Clontarf or Sutton on a nice day or the "Cycle Track" in Phoenix Park!

Chazz Michael Michaels

I am a dickhead, and I wish pain and suffering on every cyclists. Bar none.

facemelter

Chazz Michael Michaels wrote: »

I'm a pedestrian, and barely a week goes by where I don't have a near miss by some ****wit bombing it down a footpath on his bike, breaking red lights at a crossing, etc.

I have zero sympathy for the plight of cyclists.

I'm a cyclist and not a single time goes by that when I am cycling in town and I have a green light to pass through a junction. and dozens of pedestrians step blindly out in front of me , causing me have dangerous near misses . only last week a women and her child stepped out on to a road at a traffic light ( no green :mad: ). She was angry when I had to break hard and turn to avoid her ...... In the city centre if you're in a car or on a bike pedestrians are a nightmare.

SerialComplaint

smash wrote: »

I fail to see how you've come to this conclusion after an incident with 2 cyclists.

I didn't. I came to this conclusion based on your postings on this thread.

Chazz Michael Michaels wrote: »

To quote Andy Dufrane, how can you be so obtuse?

Anytime I come to a crossing, a minimum half of cyclists break the light. And you equate this with cars?

What planet are you on?

I didn't equate anything with anything. I simply pointed out the sheer bloody hypocrisy of inventing a 'grey area' (i.e. the first 10-20 seconds of red light) to accommodate those cars that sneak through on red while moaning about cyclists breaking the light.

But if you want to go down the 'equate' route, let's go. Which is more likely to cause serious injury - one car sneaking through on red or 20 cyclists sneaking through on red. How many pedestrians get killed by cyclists each year?

smash

SerialComplaint wrote: »

I didn't. I came to this conclusion based on your postings on this thread.

then you didn't read my posts.

I pass literally hundreds of cyclists a week and have only ever had an issue with 2 of them who didn't have the courtesy to allow traffic pass. It's the only time I've felt the need to to actually beep at a cyclist because of the length of time they caused the obstruction. Numerous posters have said they let traffic pass if they are causing a hold up.

So me beeping at 2 out of thousands of cyclists (who then tried to damage my car), to you or anyone else, means I'm inconsiderate or a bad driver then you've got your priorities up your arse!

Ray Palmer

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Ray Palmer wrote: »

What is so odd about you claiming cyclists are so dangerous not following the rules you seem to miss all the pedestrian breaking the lights.
As they break lights the most they should have licences and helmets too. The guards do not enforce cars breaking lights but you expect them to catch bikes.?
The basic issue is people want the rules enforced regardless of whether it is a real danger.

If a pedestrian crosses a road in a manner which endangers drivers, cyclists or other pedestrians, he or she should also be held responsible.
Are you defending cyclists breaking the lights or just indifferent to it? OR are you implying that running through pedestrian lights at full speed around corners such as that on George's street isn't dangerous? As I posted earlier in the topic, I witnessed a dog being hit in this way by a cyclist several weeks ago. The cyclist had absolutely no right to drive around that corner through a red light and could have seriously injured either the dog or its owner.

I don't see how people can defend such behavior?

It is really simple it is not as dangerous as you are suggesting. If it was there would much more accidents with cyclists. Your irritation is about breaking rules not actual danger. Speeding is the biggest danger then it is pedestrians not paying attention.

I do break lights but not through 4 way junctions or when people are crossing. safer for me and no danger to anybody.

derb12

I would love it if the Gardaí regularly stopped cyclists who break lights and imposed fines.
Unfortunately in this country we have a culture of cyclists breaking lights and pedestrians jay walking that will be hard to change.
One thing we could do is to make cycling made a mandatory part of the driving test. I am pretty sure that the idiots who skim past me on my bike with their wing mirror practically clipping me have never cycled in city traffic.

hardCopy

Ray Palmer wrote: »

It is really simple it is not as dangerous as you are suggesting. If it was there would much more accidents with cyclists. Your irritation is about breaking rules not actual danger. Speeding is the biggest danger then it is pedestrians not paying attention.

I do break lights but not through 4 way junctions or when people are crossing. safer for me and no danger to anybody.

I used to break the lights on a fairly regular basis, not flying straight through but moving off early to get a head start. I eventually decided to stop due to all the angry motorists complaining on here, on Newstalk and on Top Gear.

Cyclists need to take responsibility for our collective image. Cycling facilities won't improve just by recruiting more cyclists, we need the rest of the population to see the positives of increased bike usage.

hardCopy

derb12 wrote: »

I would love it if the Gardaí regularly stopped cyclists who break lights and imposed fines.
Unfortunately in this country we have a culture of cyclists breaking lights and pedestrians jay walking that will be hard to change.
One thing we could do is to make cycling made a mandatory part of the driving test. I am pretty sure that the idiots who skim past me on my bike with their wing mirror practically clipping me have never cycled in city traffic.

We have a culture of rampant abuse of road rules by all users on wheels and feet. Cycle commuting definitely changes your perception of the road.

Even with a bright front light, white bike, Fluorescent jacket and a white helmet some people just see straight through you. Cars will turn right across you assuming you're too slow to hit them or that you'll just slow down, taxis will cut you to pieces from every angle is they see a fare and overtake you with inches to spare, only to jam on immediately at a red light or turn left across you. I find myself giving out to other drivers when I'm a passenger as they just don't see or understand that there is a cyclist nearby.

Jester252

Cyclists not following the rules of the road cause trouble. I was heading into collage during the summer and at a junction my turn to cross came up. A truck pulled up and I started to cross just as I get past the truck a cyclist slam into my side and we both go flying through the air. I have a cut on my head, he has a twisted wrist and his bike is messed up. He gets up and begins to scream at me for been a ****ing fool and to watch where I'm going. He then tells me that I will be paying for a new bike. Luckly for me the truck driver starts yelling at him. What pissed me off that a cycle lane was put at the request of local cyclists. I know he was a cnut but now whenever I see cyclists run a red or up on a footpath I just what to push them off their bike

SerialComplaint

smash wrote: »

then you didn't read my posts.

I pass literally hundreds of cyclists a week and have only ever had an issue with 2 of them who didn't have the courtesy to allow traffic pass. It's the only time I've felt the need to to actually beep at a cyclist because of the length of time they caused the obstruction. Numerous posters have said they let traffic pass if they are causing a hold up.

So me beeping at 2 out of thousands of cyclists (who then tried to damage my car), to you or anyone else, means I'm inconsiderate or a bad driver then you've got your priorities up your arse!

It's not a question of my priorities. It's a question of your views, where you continue, even in this very post, to view cyclists as an obstruction.

smash

SerialComplaint wrote: »

It's not a question of my priorities. It's a question of your views, where you continue, even in this very post, to view cyclists as an obstruction.

I never said all cyclists are an obstruction, I said that cycling 2 a Brest can cause an obstruction, which they can. Many have said they would pull over if they caused a tailback. I had issues with 2 of them who wouldn't. They were clearly complete assholes and you still defend them because of the fact that I beeped, which is wrong!

SleepDoc

smash wrote: »

the fact that I beeped, which is wrong!

Yes, it was wrong to beep

smash

SleepDoc wrote: »

Yes, it was wrong to beep

Another one for the ignore list I guess.

SleepDoc

smash wrote: »

Another one for the ignore list I guess.

Just like the ROTR so.

John_Rambo

SleepDoc wrote: »

Just like the ROTR so.

They don't apply. He actually said this! I bet you he hasn't passed his test.

smash

Immature dumb asses.

KeithM89_old

smash wrote: »

nice trolling. I'll take back what I said earlier about you not being an idiot now.

smash wrote: »

Immature dumb asses.

Banned.

Mycroft H

smash wrote: »

Immature dumb asses.

Ahhh the hypocrisy

someone who has an opinion differing then mine - IGNORE

TehDagsBass

As a driver, and a cyclist, I hate cyclists. The majority I witness on the roads are utter gob****es and either cycle in a manner that is completely against the law, such as the special little man who cycled across my lane without indicating, carried on to cycle across the oncoming lane and onto the footpath so he could avoid the lights today, or one that risks themselves and everyone around them, like the other special people who overtake slower cyclists by pulling off the cycle lane and into the car traffic without even looking over their shoulder.

It's at the stage that if I heard of someone being injured or killed while on their bike, I'd be fairly confident it was their own fault.

Mycroft H

TehDagsBass wrote: »

It's at the stage that if I heard of someone being injured or killed while on their bike, I'd be fairly confident it was their own fault.

You would be quite wrong in thinking that.

There was eleven facilities involving cyclists between 2002-2006 in Dublin. All of these involved collisions with vehicles. 70% of accidents during these periods involved vehicles.

Just 7% of all the collisions in this period were where a cyclist was judged at fault.

Your opinion is the general blinkered biased of that of a typical motorist. Are you a taxi driver perchance?

http://www.traceysolicitors.ie/blog/cyclists-in-dublin-facts-figures-on-accidents/comment-page-1/

http://www.dublincycling.com/node/13

http://www.herald.ie/lifestyle/the-terrifying-road-toll-on-cyclists-3032396.html

http://www.dublincity.ie/RoadsandTraffic/RoadSafety/Documents/Road%20Safety%20Plan%20English%20Web%20Copy%20V5%200210.pdf

hardCopy

BX 19 wrote: »

You would be quite wrong in thinking that.

There was eleven facilities involving cyclists between 2002-2006 in Dublin. All of these involved collisions with vehicles. 70% of accidents during these periods involved vehicles.

Just 7% of all the collisions in this period were where a cyclist was judged at fault.

Your opinion is the general blinkered biased of that of a typical motorist. Are you a taxi driver perchance?

http://www.traceysolicitors.ie/blog/cyclists-in-dublin-facts-figures-on-accidents/comment-page-1/

http://www.dublincycling.com/node/13

http://www.herald.ie/lifestyle/the-terrifying-road-toll-on-cyclists-3032396.html

http://www.dublincity.ie/RoadsandTraffic/RoadSafety/Documents/Road%20Safety%20Plan%20English%20Web%20Copy%20V5%200210.pdf

Interesting reading, particularly this line "The next most common type is classified as “side swipes”, accounting for 15 per cent of collisions. These occur where a vehicle overtaking a cyclist or changing lanes hits the bicycle."

This might help to explain why it is not OK to "Slip past" a bicycle without crossing into the opposite lane. Please use care and attention when passing bikes, just like you would if overtaking a car.

John_Rambo

smash wrote: »

I had issues with 2 of them who wouldn't. They were clearly complete assholes and you still defend them because of the fact that I beeped, which is wrong!

It's this sort of attitude that causes accidents. Impatience and aggressive driving coupled with an honest lack of knowledge of the ROTR gives people a false sense of "right"... "Everyone else is an asshole, I'm right". The guy says he never has an issue with cyclists but he comes across two that don't respect him and it ends up with beeping horns and who knows what else went on considering the cyclists fest aggrieved enough to react the way they did.

Stark

Okay, a bit of perspective. Yes, the "The ROTR that exist in my head along with Spiderbaby say that cyclists can't cycle two abreast" attitude that some motorists display is infuriating but equally, the cyclists in question were wrong to have retaliated the way they did.

nomdeboardie

Chazz Michael Michaels wrote: »

I'm a pedestrian ...

We're all pedestrians :cool::pac:

Wattle

Was walking down Willbrook Road in Rathfarnham on the path about two months ago. I turned to cross the road at the Yellow House and a cyclist literally brushed by me at top speed on the path. If I'd turned a millisecond earlier he would have ploughed straight into me and caused god knows what damage.

I've been both driver and cyclist in my time and the amount of reckless assholes in both categories is about equal I'd say.

SerialComplaint

smash wrote: »

I never said all cyclists are an obstruction, I said that cycling 2 a Brest can cause an obstruction, which they can. Many have said they would pull over if they caused a tailback. I had issues with 2 of them who wouldn't. They were clearly complete assholes and you still defend them because of the fact that I beeped, which is wrong!

I haven't defended the two cyclists who had a go at you at all. I haven't said anything about them - good, bad or indifferent. But it seems that you see this as a bit of a win/lose war. Everyone is either with you, or agin you. And anyone who points out the lack of consideration that you showed to two cyclists, and the sheer lunacy of beeping them and overtaking them just as you came up to the lights is seen as agin you.

Stark

Wattle wrote: »

Was walking down Willbrook Road in Rathfarnham on the path about two months ago. I turned to cross the road at the Yellow House and a cyclist literally brushed by me at top speed on the path. If I'd turned a millisecond earlier he would have ploughed straight into me and caused god knows what damage.

I saw a dog one day. It was shaggy.

Name Changed

Cyclists have every right to be on the road and are often ignored by drivers who think when driving their cars they always have the right of way, etc.

But cyclists, and most of from what I have seen, refuse to obey the rules of the road and blatantly go through red lights, etc.

It works both ways.

TehDagsBass

BX 19 wrote: »

Your opinion is the general blinkered biased of that of a typical motorist. Are you a taxi driver perchance?

Interesting, you managed to read the links that suited your argument, yet didn't read where I said I was also a cyclist.

I'll also state, I'm not claiming motorists are perfect, in fact I detest basically every other drive I meet on the roads due to how they carry on. Likewise, the majority of cyclists are arseholes, but they're arseholes with a bizarre sense of entitlement.

Redjeep!

TehDagsBass wrote: »

Interesting, you managed to read the links that suited your argument, yet didn't read where I said I was also a cyclist.

I'll also state, I'm not claiming motorists are perfect, in fact I detest basically every other drive I meet on the roads due to how they carry on. Likewise, the majority of cyclists are arseholes, but they're arseholes with a bizarre sense of entitlement.

But don't you see that the cyclists sense of entitlement is only a reaction to the attitude from some drivers that cyclists have no right to be on the road ?

Because of this attitude from drivers and the sense of vulnerability you have on a bike, there's always a tendency to be more assertive. for instance I don't EVER jump red lights but I will always put my own safety above a driver's inconvenience and so will take the primary position on the road and especially at roundabouts. this could give the impression of arrogance/ entitlement etc, but that's not the reason why I'm doing it.

endacl

smash wrote: »

Cycling two a breast and not moving to a single file to allow other road users pass is akin to people driving at 50kph in the overtaking lane of the M50. It's just manners to let people pass. Everyone has a right to the road, but your right is not an entitlement to use it as you please and to hold up others.

Cyclist agrees...

Pkiernan

Ever since I started carrying my Glock on my hip here in AZ, I haven't had a lick of bother in the cycle lane.

I recommend you Paddys do the same.

Mycroft H

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iT4ZfthpfLY

I thought this might be useful for people to have a look at.

seamus

BX 19 wrote: »

iT4ZfthpfLY
I thought this might be useful for people to have a look at.

Just to be fair to this guy, while it might appear that he's occasionally being slightly anal and perhaps anti-car in his analysis, he also spends a considerable amount of time compiling videos of poor cycling and explaining best practice:

http://www.youtube.com/user/sillycyclists

Meauldsegosha

BX 19 wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iT4ZfthpfLY

I thought this might be useful for people to have a look at.

They are all British drivers. Irish drivers would never do anything like that.;)

Mycroft H

seamus wrote: »

Just to be fair to this guy, while it might appear that he's occasionally being slightly anal and perhaps anti-car in his analysis, he also spends a considerable amount of time compiling videos of poor cycling and explaining best practice:

http://www.youtube.com/user/sillycyclists

More, very anti bad road practice. Video is a good example of what not to do. Plus watch those slippery street corners. I've spun out on a few myself.

Just the thing for letting people know you're there! :eek::D

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTQSWtK65PE

Funkygreendogs

I am sick and tired of cyclists choosing to risk their lives and the lives of other road users by cycling out on the road when theres a path right beside them. The worst offenders are those cycling out on the Barna road, every single day they are cycling out on the middle of the road with no regard for anyone but themselves, theres a path right beside you. Why dont you cycle on the path? All of the other road users are forced to swerve dangerously out onto oncomming traffic to avoid you. Its understandable if you have no other option but to cycle on the road, but you must know that its not acceptable on this particular road, its literally just a matter of time until a car on the same side of the road as you comes around a blind bend and you are killed.

Please cycle on the path if there is one, you are only going to cause an accident, its too dangerous to expect all of the backed up line of cars to swerve around you onto the other side of the road, when all you have to do is move 1 foot to the left and onto the path.

Zzippy

Funkygreendogs wrote: »

I am sick and tired of cyclists choosing to risk their lives and the lives of other road users by cycling out on the road when theres a path right beside them. The worst offenders are those cycling out on the Barna road, every single day they are cycling out on the middle of the road with no regard for anyone but themselves, theres a path right beside you. Why dont you cycle on the path? All of the other road users are forced to swerve dangerously out onto oncomming traffic to avoid you. Its understandable if you have no other option but to cycle on the road, but you must know that its not acceptable on this particular road, its literally just a matter of time until a car on the same side of the road as you comes around a blind bend and you are killed.

Please cycle on the path if there is one, you are only going to cause an accident, its too dangerous to expect all of the backed up line of cars to swerve around you onto the other side of the road, when all you have to do is move 1 foot to the left and onto the path.

Are you serious or is this a wind up?

You do know its ILLEGAL to cycle on a footpath, right?

If you can't overtake safely, you wait until its safe to do so, don't "swerve around" a cyclist.

I suggest you read this thread

padi89

Because it's illegal, maybe you should try be more patient.

Sconsey

Ohhh, I'd asy you'll get flamed by all the cyclists by the end of the day. I bike and drive, and in fairness it does feel safer as a cyclist to ride on the footpath on that particular road but cyclists should not be on the footpath. Someone could easily start a thread complaining about 'bloody cyclists' on the footpath putting pedestrians at risk (and they'd be right to complain).

Bottom line is it's up to motorists to drive safely and expect the unexpected, it helps when the cyclists stick to the side of the road not the middle of it.

seamus

Are you serious?

It's illegal to cycle on the path, not to mention quite dangerous.

A cyclist riding on the road does not "force" anyone else to do anything. If a vehicle swerves out in front of oncoming traffic, that's because they're a dangerous driver, not because they've been "forced" to do anything.

Sponge Bob

Funkygreendogs wrote: »

Its understandable if you have no other option but to cycle on the road, but you must know that its not acceptable on this particular road, its literally just a matter of time until a car on the same side of the road as you comes around a blind bend and you are killed.

It is illegal to cycle on the path. Read your rules of the road again!