In defence of cyclists

SerialComplaint

intellectual dosser wrote: »

If a pedestrian doesnt check and there is a cyclist coming, there is a good chance the pedestrian could be killed.
If a cyclist doesnt check and there is a pedestrian coming, there is a good chance the pedestrian could be killed.

Any pedestrian with common sense is going to check, but I cant say the same for the cyclists on my own experience.

But they don't - they just walk out in front of cyclists regularly, while focusing on their phone or their iPod or their mates.

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

Kiith wrote: »

To be fair though, i see cyclists breaking the rules far more often then any other road users. So it's no surprise people see them in a bad light.

You must have been wearing blinkers if you don't notice speeding drivers, texting drivers, phoning drivers, surfing drivers, kids-in-the-front-seat drivers, no-brake-light drivers, baldy-tyre drivers - and then there's just the bad drivers.

rubadub

seamus wrote: »

In a cyclist/pedestrian collision, I would rather be the pedestrian.

+1 because I am thinking of typical collisions or near collisions that I have seen. Reading posts like these

magicbastarder wrote: »

in a head-on collision between a cyclist and a pedestrian, it's reasonable to assume that the bike will hit the pedestrian first, followed by the cyclist.

Colmustard wrote: »

you don't want to hit a person with a charging metal weapon, you may or may not kill them, but you will certainly7 injure them.

they are only talking situations with cyclists going full belt and lashing head on into pedestrians. I wonder what % of pedestrian/cyclist "collisions" are like this though. Many near misses I have had & seen are pedestrians walking out infront or alongside cyclists, often idiots walking with the flow of traffic on cycletracks. The pedestrian would often probably only have experienced a light brushing of the cyclists body, not head on. While the cyclist losing balance can experience a worse injury, falling from a moving bike (or stationary bike) and getting tangled in the bike falling more awkwardly than somebody on foot who fell. Often the cyclist has braked heavily at this stage seeing the danger, so there is not much momentum.

I have no doubt many drivers have had crashes swerving away from pedestrians stepping out infront of them.

hatrickpatrick

Whatever about roads, pavements are for pedestrians. If I have to jump out of the way to avoid one more f*cking cyclist in Dun Laoghaire I'll be sure to stick my leg out and knock him off it.

There's nothing wrong with cycling, but for God's sake follow the law. The same laws which apply to cars apply to you, with regard to red lights and staying off the damn footpath!

And don't start the "cars break the law too" BS, in my year of walking up Dame Street every morning I've seen 3 cars breaking the lights at pedestrian crossings, while cyclists ploughing through a green man is a daily occurrence.

hatrickpatrick

SerialComplaint wrote: »

You must have been wearing blinkers if you don't notice speeding drivers, texting drivers, phoning drivers, surfing drivers, kids-in-the-front-seat drivers, no-brake-light drivers, baldy-tyre drivers - and then there's just the bad drivers.

Regardless, I rarely have to dive out of the way to avoid them breaking the pedestrian lights or driving on a crowded footpath. I have never seen a driver cutting the corner via the footpath at the George's Street / Dame Street junction, yet I'm very seriously considering finding a new route to college because of the scourge of cyclists doing just that, on a daily basis.

kincsem

FatherLen wrote: »

i dont have a problem with cyclists and i will always give them a wide birth while driving but when i am walking and they cycle on the footpath, that really pisses me off.

And in my cycle today there were walkers in the cycle lane. They are always in the cycle lane.

baztard

On westland row in Dublin this morning, I saw a double decker bus pulling over to stop at the bus stop at the side of the road. In doing so he had to cross the bike lane. Fair enough, except the bloody driver never bothered checking his left mirrors and blissfully nearly squashed a cyclist in the process.

Yer man on the bike must have got some shock when he realised that 10 tonne bus edging in towards him wasn't gonna stop!

You need your feckin wits about you!

RacoonQueen

kincsem wrote: »

And in my cycle today there were walkers in the cycle lane. They are always in the cycle lane.

You'd think the big white bikes painted on them would be a dead giveaway that it's not for walking wouldn't ya?

Chinasea

Cyclists on footpaths is becoming a bit of an Urban Myth tbh.

I cycle occassionaly on the path out of sheer necessity as I think most other cyclists do (and there are few). One hard core anti cyclist in work asked me why or when it was necessary that I would do such a thing. The man has never cycled in Dublin, if so he would know what I meant.

Colmustard

This has turned into a moronic thread, motorists verse cyclists, cyclists verse pedestrians, the thing is we are all pedestrians. As a pedestrian I have had some hairy experiences with cyclists and motorists, as a cyclist, I openly admit I did break a light at a pedestrian crossing, just missing an old man, I stopped and went back and cringed an apology, he was understandably angry, I just didn't see the light, which is no excuse. As a motorist I am wary of cyclists and there basic unpredictability and do give them a wide berth, but I am wary of them being one and knowing what a lot of us cyclists are like. I am also wary of pedestrians, because as a pedestrian I know what the average Irish jaywalker pedestrian is like, because I jaywalk, we all do in this country,

What I am saying is nobody is perfect, but we don't want to hurt each-other or be an inconvenience to each other either, all we have to do is be considerate and you wont be with the intransigence shown in this thread.

Renn

Chinasea wrote: »

Cyclists on footpaths is becoming a bit of an Urban Myth tbh.

I cycle occassionaly on the path out of sheer necessity as I think most other cyclists do (and there are few). One hard core anti cyclist in work asked me why or when it was necessary that I would do such a thing. The man has never cycled in Dublin, if so he would know what I meant.

Lol.

Go down Nassau Street at any time and you'll see a cyclist bombing it along the footpath. When do you need to cycle on it? Unable to hop off it and walk on the footpath like everybody else?

hardCopy

Chinasea wrote: »

Cyclists on footpaths is becoming a bit of an Urban Myth tbh.

I cycle occassionaly on the path out of sheer necessity as I think most other cyclists do (and there are few). One hard core anti cyclist in work asked me why or when it was necessary that I would do such a thing. The man has never cycled in Dublin, if so he would know what I meant.

Wut?

I cycle all the time, in Dublin. It's never necessary to cycle on the path, that's what roads are for.

I'm always defending cyclists against stupid generalizations, but cyclists who use the path do the rest of us no favours.

JuliusCaesar

SerialComplaint wrote: »

It's time to speak up against 'shoaling' cyclists like this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9_yLn_Oegg

This is totally hilarious. The guy (yourself, SerialComplaint?) gets upset because he overtook the same cyclist three times. He overtook him easily with loads of room on the road.

So what? You weren't in difficulty. The guy wasn't impeding you in any way.





:rolleyes:

Gongoozler

Chinasea wrote: »

Cyclists on footpaths is becoming a bit of an Urban Myth tbh.

I cycle occassionaly on the path out of sheer necessity as I think most other cyclists do (and there are few). One hard core anti cyclist in work asked me why or when it was necessary that I would do such a thing. The man has never cycled in Dublin, if so he would know what I meant.

I dunno where you live, but in Dublin there are constantly cyclists on the paths. Though thinking about taking up cycling to work lately myself, I can see why people feel the need to do this in the city centre, I'm very afraid of the traffic. Drivers are fcuking crazy. And bad at driving. But I would never cycle on a small path, never if it's busy, and definitely wouldn't 'ding' anyone to get out of my way :mad:

hatrickpatrick

magicbastarder wrote: »

in arguments like this, it's common to hear that cyclists should be subject to the same penalties as motorists for violations of road law; which is nonsense, as no-one is suggesting that pedestrians should be subject to these penalties too.
it's too often argued (or implied) that cyclists are equivalent to car drivers in these debates; in a continuum from pedestrians to cyclists, to car drivers, to HGVs, cyclists would be much closer to pedestrians than they are to cars.

and this doesn't even begin to touch on laws which cyclists are supposed to follow which would place them (and other road users) in greater danger if they follow them, than if they ignore them.
roads are designed for cars, with allowances for cyclists bolted on generally as an afterthought.

Cyclists are road users, pedestrians are not. Cyclists should be bound by the rules of the road, which include no driving on footpaths, stopping at red lights, etc.
To suggest otherwise is lunacy. They are equivalent to car drivers in the sense that they are road users and they travel with enough speed to harm a pedestrian in the event of a collision, therefore the safety rules cars are subject to regarding speed, red lights etc should equally apply to cyclists.

magicbastarder

hardCopy wrote: »

I cycle all the time, in Dublin. It's never necessary to cycle on the path, that's what roads are for.

there are occasions where you have to essentially become a pedestrian. for example, if you're cyling southbound on the N11 and want to take a right at the junction just after john of god's. to do it on the road would generally involve increasing your speed to ~60kph - uphill - and crossing the bus lane and two lanes of traffic, moving at the same speed.
most people, i assume, opt to dismount and cross at the pedestrian crossing.

Flandria

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Whatever about roads, pavements are for pedestrians. If I have to jump out of the way to avoid one more f*cking cyclist in Dun Laoghaire I'll be sure to stick my leg out and knock him off it.

There's nothing wrong with cycling, but for God's sake follow the law. The same laws which apply to cars apply to you, with regard to red lights and staying off the damn footpath!

And don't start the "cars break the law too" BS, in my year of walking up Dame Street every morning I've seen 3 cars breaking the lights at pedestrian crossings, while cyclists ploughing through a green man is a daily occurrence.

Not the last green man to get ploughed in Dame Street I'm sure...:rolleyes:

magicbastarder

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

They are equivalent to car drivers in the sense that they are road users and they travel with enough speed to harm a pedestrian in the event of a collision, therefore the safety rules cars are subject to regarding speed, red lights etc should equally apply to cyclists.

fair enough so, let's issue fines based on the capacity to cause damage. given that a car carries about 20 times the kinetic energy or momentum of a cyclist travelling at the same speed, and that's as good a benchmark as any, let's levy fines commensurate with that danger.

what people forget that if you levy fines at the same level, which would entice cyclists to give up cycling and take up driving, it makes life more dangerous for everyone.
to repeat - fining cyclists in the interests of safety very possibly makes life more dangerous for all road users.
so you're left with a choice between what works and what people would like to see.

SerialComplaint

JuliusCaesar wrote: »

This is totally hilarious. The guy (yourself, SerialComplaint?) gets upset because he overtook the same cyclist three times. He overtook him easily with loads of room on the road.

So what? You weren't in difficulty. The guy wasn't impeding you in any way.

So you're stopped at traffic lights in your car, in a line of traffic waiting for the lights to go green. Another car drives up outside the line of traffic waiting at the lights and cuts in at the front of the line. When the light goes green, he takes off slowly, and the cars in the line of traffic have to overtake him to make reasonable progress.

The line of cars then line up at the next set of traffic lights. Our special friend drives up outside the line of waiting traffic and cuts in at the front of the line. When the lights go green, he moves off slowly, and the cars in the line of traffic have to overtake him to make reasonable progress.

The line of cars then line up at the next set of traffic lights. Our special friend drives up outside the line of waiting traffic and cuts in at the front of the line. When the lights go green, he moves off slowly, and the cars in the line of traffic have to overtake him to make reasonable progress.

But the guy wasn't impeding you in any way - right?

rab!dmonkey

somefeen wrote: »

Why do people get so worked up about cyclists? Tractors do things that annoy me, so do trucks, motorbikes, pedestrians, roadworks, people herding animals etc of course they do, we all have different needs on the road and they will all inevitably delay other road users.
Its someone on a bicycle, chill out ffs. I reckon most of the people who complain about other road users are actually just ****e drivers who can't overtake properly, can't match their speed to how far they can see, are to busy on the phone to react to slow moving vehicles appearing suddenly and just assume that everyone is going to adhere to the rules of the road.

Chill out, pay attention and you wont get pissed off with anyone, its much nicer.

I think it's because cyclists are more likely to be enjoying themselves, whereas everyone else is cooped up in a metal box, stewing in their own rage.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Whatever about roads, pavements are for pedestrians. If I have to jump out of the way to avoid one more f*cking cyclist in Dun Laoghaire I'll be sure to stick my leg out and knock him off it.

There's nothing wrong with cycling, but for God's sake follow the law. The same laws which apply to cars apply to you, with regard to red lights and staying off the damn footpath!

And don't start the "cars break the law too" BS, in my year of walking up Dame Street every morning I've seen 3 cars breaking the lights at pedestrian crossings, while cyclists ploughing through a green man is a daily occurrence.

Every cyclist who comes to the light can decide to obey it or not. Only the motorist at the front of the queue has that opportunity.

opti0nal

Kiith wrote: »

To be fair though, i see cyclists breaking the rules far more often then any other road users. So it's no surprise people see them in a bad light.

82% of motorists break speed limits on urban arterial roads, add to that wrong way around roundabouts, not stopping on amber, illegal overtaking and illegal parking and I think you'll approach 100%.

You're obviously not seeing this, and you're not being fair.

opti0nal

rab!dmonkey wrote: »

Every cyclist who comes to the light can decide to obey it or not. Only the motorist at the front of the queue has that opportunity.

+1 - in my observation, most drivers who should & could stop at an amber light - don't. This might explain motorist obsession about 'cyclists breaking red lights', as they obviously don't want to raise awareness of widespread amber light offenses.

hardCopy

opti0nal wrote: »

rab!dmonkey wrote: »

Every cyclist who comes to the light can decide to obey it or not. Only the motorist at the front of the queue has that opportunity.

+1 - in my observation, most drivers who should & could stop at an amber light - don't. This might explain motorist obsession about 'cyclists breaking red lights', as they obviously don't want to raise awareness of widespread amber light offenses.

"amber", yeah right, for most drivers in Dublin the idea seems to be that you can continue through the lights until about 2 seconds after it turns red.

magicbastarder

i love arguments from motorists that cyclists should pay road tax. i'd be happy to.
an engineer once explained to me that a vehicle does damage to the road proportional to the third power of the weight per wheel - so if you double the weight, the road damage goes up by a factor of eight.
so a bike puts 40KG say, per wheel, onto the road. a car, maybe 320KG. cube that difference, and it's a factor of about 500 in the difference.
i'd be more than happy to pay that level of road tax.

General General

Single file, motherfu.c.kers. & look over your shoulder before you roll your stupid looking ass into the middle of the road to overtake another cyclist or do that wobbly look-how-much-effort-I-am-putting-in thing you do.

hardCopy

General General wrote: »

Single file, motherfu.c.kers.

Why so?

magicbastarder

is that a boast or a complaint?

rab!dmonkey

General General wrote: »

Single file, motherfu.c.kers.

Originally Posted by S.I. No. 294/1964
Driving two abreast
29.—(1) A pedal cyclist shall not, save when overtaking other pedal cyclists (and then only if to do so will not endanger other traffic or pedestrians) drive a pedal cycle on a roadway in such a manner as to result in more than two pedal cycles driving abreast.

(2) Pedal cyclists on a roadway shall cycle in single file when overtaking other traffic.

Please read the thread before posting.

General General

General General wrote: »

Single file, motherfu.c.kers. & look over your shoulder before you roll your stupid looking ass into the middle of the road to overtake another cyclist or do that wobbly look-how-much-effort-I-am-putting-in thing you do.

Go and have a read of the rules of the road like a good lad.

General General

hardCopy wrote: »

Why so?

Well, going double file is the equivalent of my pulling out in front of the cyclist, putting on the brakes & making sure I slow the hell down so much that I obstruct the cyclist.

General General

General General wrote: »

Well, going double file is the equivalent of my pulling out in front of the cyclist, putting on the brakes & making sure I slow the hell down so much that I obstruct the cyclist.

Read the thread. This argument has been torn to shreds at least 20 times by now.

It really is time for this thread to die.

hardCopy

General General wrote: »

hardCopy wrote: »

Why so?

Well, going double file is the equivalent of my pulling out in front of the cyclist, putting on the brakes & making sure I slow the hell down so much that I obstruct the cyclist.

Sounds pretty dangerous, but I suppose I'd have to look, signal and overtake at the next safe opportunity.

It's called knowing how to drive, you should try it sometime.

Tonyandthewhale

General General wrote: »

Single file, motherfu.c.kers

Yeah, I hate when cars don't know to drive in single file. I had some gobshite try to over-take me today in heavy traffic today in a car while I was on the bike. He pulled out to over take me but didn't have room to pull in front of me so he just drove half in the wrong lane for a few 100metres before giving up and pulling back behind me into the line of traffic.

Colmustard

magicbastarder wrote: »

i love arguments from motorists that cyclists should pay road tax. i'd be happy to.
an engineer once explained to me that a vehicle does damage to the road proportional to the third power of the weight per wheel - so if you double the weight, the road damage goes up by a factor of eight.
so a bike puts 40KG say, per wheel, onto the road. a car, maybe 320KG. cube that difference, and it's a factor of about 500 in the difference.
i'd be more than happy to pay that level of road tax.

But potential damage to a road by a vehicle does not determine the rate of motor tax (There is no such thing as "road" tax)

But I to do not think cyclists should pay motor tax or bicycle insurance. There isn't even a case for it, we are not a motorised vehicle. Plus the government needs to encourage more cyclists, not less.

General General

So Irish legislation looks like it's a little nuts. I'm so, so sorry.

Mycroft H

Motor tax on a bicycle? Are my legs motors now?

magicbastarder

General General wrote: »

So Irish legislation looks like it's a little nuts. I'm so, so sorry.

yep, it seems to ignore the notion that a motorist who paid €10,000 for his six foot wide vehicle seems to want a greater right to the road than two cyclists taking up four or five foot of the road.

hardCopy

magicbastarder wrote: »

hardCopy wrote: »

I cycle all the time, in Dublin. It's never necessary to cycle on the path, that's what roads are for.

there are occasions where you have to essentially become a pedestrian. for example, if you're cyling southbound on the N11 and want to take a right at the junction just after john of god's. to do it on the road would generally involve increasing your speed to ~60kph - uphill - and crossing the bus lane and two lanes of traffic, moving at the same speed.
most people, i assume, opt to dismount and cross at the pedestrian crossing.

I don't know that particular junction very well, but I would say you should either:

Walk the bike,

Pull in to the curb until the lights go red and position yourself to the right,

Or, when you're comfortable enough in traffic, start to manoeuvre early and make your way to the right and turn when the lights change.

An experienced cyclist should be able to use the road in most cases, when that's not possible, hop off the bike and become a pedestrian. Cycling on the path is risky and plays up to all the negative notions that people have about cyclists.

Colmustard

BX 19 wrote: »

Motor tax on a bicycle? Are my legs motors now?

Sometimes on some sessions mine feel like finely tuned engines, but mostly they are just legs.

General General

magicbastarder wrote: »

yep, it seems to ignore the notion that a motorist who paid €10,000 for his six foot wide vehicle seems to want a greater right to the road than two cyclists taking up four or five foot of the road.

"In principle, cyclists may not ride more than one abreast. Some countries however introduced exceptions to this rule; for instance, cyclists may ride two abreast where the carriageway is wide enough, where cycle traffic is heavy, on cycle tracks, etc."

from:

http://ec.europa.eu/transport/road_safety/specialist/knowledge/pedestrians/special_regulations_for_pedestrians_and_cyclists/traffic_rules_and_regulations_for_cyclists_and_their_vehicles.htm

magicbastarder

generally speaking, and i drive in urban and rural contexts fairly equally, i only ever come across cyclists riding two abreast in rural situations, and it's a method of preventing rash overtaking manouevres by cars.

hardCopy

magicbastarder wrote: »

General General wrote: »

So Irish legislation looks like it's a little nuts. I'm so, so sorry.

yep, it seems to ignore the notion that a motorist who paid €10,000 for his six foot wide vehicle seems to want a greater right to the road than two cyclists taking up four or five foot of the road.

One of the few inconveniences they face despite causing all of our traffic problems, most of our road deaths and a sh1t tonne of pollution.

Heaven forbid they should show a bit of patience when someone decides to get of their ass, stop contributing to those problems and make life easier for everyone else.

Mycroft H

General General wrote: »

"In principle, cyclists may not ride more than one abreast. Some countries however introduced exceptions to this rule; for instance, cyclists may ride two abreast where the carriageway is wide enough, where cycle traffic is heavy, on cycle tracks, etc."

from:

http://ec.europa.eu/transport/road_safety/specialist/knowledge/pedestrians/special_regulations_for_pedestrians_and_cyclists/traffic_rules_and_regulations_for_cyclists_and_their_vehicles.htm

Exactly, our RTA By laws have an exception in them for this situation

magicbastarder

Colmustard wrote: »

But potential damage to a road by a vehicle does not determine the rate of motor tax (There is no such thing as "road" tax)

that's almost the point, though. car tax is usually relatively arbitrarily levied - with the move to emissions based tax being a step in the right direction - but if you want to level a tax which works on both cyclists and motorists, there's not much by way of common measurement which works on both.

steve9859

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I'm very seriously considering finding a new route to college because of the scourge of cyclists .

melodramatic much?!!!

General General

BX 19 wrote: »

Exactly, our RTA By laws have an exception in them for this situation

Fair point, I'm just highlighting that it's not ridiculous to think that single file would be appropriate when there are cars building up behind the cyclists in question.

Clearly, Irish motorists depend solely on the courtesy of the cyclists, which I will readily admit is usually forthcoming (& appreciated) bar a rare few (two of which I recently had to put up with, which frankly annoys more out of fear of some bizarre development of the scene).

At least I know now to get pissed off with the government about 2 abreast...

Now, what's the legislation on the wobbling-your-ass-in-the-middle-of-the-road-up-the-hill-like-you-are-in-the-tour-de-france?

SerialComplaint

baztard wrote: »

On westland row in Dublin this morning, I saw a double decker bus pulling over to stop at the bus stop at the side of the road. In doing so he had to cross the bike lane. Fair enough, except the bloody driver never bothered checking his left mirrors and blissfully nearly squashed a cyclist in the process.

Yer man on the bike must have got some shock when he realised that 10 tonne bus edging in towards him wasn't gonna stop!

You need your feckin wits about you!

It's not just when pulling in that DB drivers play their games;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xN-nLMHD_KQ

steve9859

SerialComplaint wrote: »

It's not just when pulling in that DB drivers play their games;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xN-nLMHD_KQ

Good post. Gives an idea of what we have to deal with. DB drivers aren't the worst...I think their training is actually ok. It is the coaches from down the country that are the worst offenders....especially on the Quays

I wear a helmet cam in London. It sure shuts up the black cabbies who have just done a u turn in a busy street and given out about you being in their way! They absolutely hate them!

Mycroft H

SerialComplaint wrote: »

It's not just when pulling in that DB drivers play their games;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xN-nLMHD_KQ

I've had several run ins with dublin bus at that exact spot. Keep well out. In fact here (and many other places) would be an ideal place to cycle two abreast to prevent that daft and dangerous overtaking.

hatrickpatrick

magicbastarder wrote: »

fair enough so, let's issue fines based on the capacity to cause damage. given that a car carries about 20 times the kinetic energy or momentum of a cyclist travelling at the same speed, and that's as good a benchmark as any, let's levy fines commensurate with that danger.

what people forget that if you levy fines at the same level, which would entice cyclists to give up cycling and take up driving, it makes life more dangerous for everyone.
to repeat - fining cyclists in the interests of safety very possibly makes life more dangerous for all road users.
so you're left with a choice between what works and what people would like to see.

How would it makes life more dangerous for anyone if we start fining cyclists for breaking red lights and/or driving on the footpath?

If they're so addicted to breaking these laws that the only alternative is to take up driving, then fair enough - as I said, I feel far safer in the vicinity of cars on Dame Street than cyclists. I have never seen a car driving up onto the pavement at the George's Street junction in order to avoid having to slow down or stop, and I have rarely seen cars breaking these pedestrian lights.

Surely given the above it would be far safer for these people to be driving cars, if that would at least make them feel that the law actually applies to them?

rab!dmonkey

I ignore those advisory cycle lanes whether I'm driving or cycling. They're almost never wide enough to allow for proper road placement and they give motorists the impression that they can overtake safely by simply staying out of the dashed lane. By keeping left while driving (i.e.: in the advisory cycle lane) I give motorists going in the opposite direction more room to safely overtake cyclists on their side.