In defence of cyclists

mossyc123

not even wrong wrote: »

The vitriol and ranting about reckless cyclists is totally out of proportion to the damage/injuries they actually cause, and is a classic example of psychological projection by motorists attempting to rationalise the wholesale carnage caused by their chosen means of transportation.

What about the wholesale improvement the motor vehicle has made to human mobility over the last 100 or so years?

desertcircus wrote: »

Except it wasn't simply selective quoting, but a serious point. Everybody ranting about how dangerous all the cyclists in Dublin are is missing the fact that all that lunatic behaviour by all those insane cyclists has resulted in virtually zero actual damage, which means that either the lawbreaking is nowhere near as dangerous or nowhere near as widespread as you think. Meanwhile, the damage done by cars is glossed over, because people don't usually survive a car crash caused by recklessness and thus don't bring up the dangers - and their grieving relatives all drive, so drivers as a group don't get blamed.

The benefits of the motor vehicle far outweigh the damage it does... if you ever do get knocked down on your travels I hope your fortunate enough to have an ambulance or passing motorist give you a lift to the hospital... a "backer" from one of your cycling buddies mightn't do the job very efficiently!

Badly Drunk Boy

mossyc123 wrote: »

*I'd also argue that the private car has no place in these areas either, but that's another debate.

It may be another debate but if it happened, the streets would be extremely empty. Loads of room for cyclists. Nice one!!!

Briain O Loinsigh

People who sit in traffic all day ,breathing in a concoxion of car fumes and whatever else are doing themselves no favours. The car was a marvellous invention ,just like the cigarette was when it was invented ,time to move on ,it's a balancing act

mossyc123

Badly Drunk Boy wrote: »

It may be another debate but if it happened, the streets would be extremely empty. Loads of room for cyclists. Nice one!!!

Commercial vehicles and public transport gets preference... then cyclists!

Cabaal

Born to Die wrote: »

Do cyclists pay road tax and insurance for their bicycles?

Given motorists don;t pay ROAD TAX i don't see how this is even a question?, anyone that pays any tax contributes towards the up keep of raods and services.

For the record motorists pay MOTOR TAX, this is no in anyway ring fenced for roads and instead is used the same as any tax on things like education, health etc.

As for insurance, you pay this to a private company not to the government.

Darkglasses

I almost agree with people when they say they will respect cyclists when cyclists respect the ROTR. But what I really think is that cyclists deserve respect when they do respect the ROTR.

Similarly, I don't think cyclists should be expected to use the cycle lanes when people in general don't respect cycle lanes. They are: A car park, a taxi stop-off area, a jogging lane, a glass bottle dump, a run-off area for general debris, a waiting area for pedestrians crossing the road, a delivery zone, a bus stop, and so on.

EDIT: And how could I forget, a pathway to instant death up the inside of a HGV.

Chain_reaction

MickySticks wrote: »

If they want to be treated with respect then stop cycling in the middle of the road and get out of the fucking way!

I don't cycle much but as a rule of thumb isn't this only done when a driver isn't giving a cyclist any room and being a bit dodge...


Maybe it's your driving thats the problem...

facemelter

mossyc123 wrote: »

You could make the argument that cycling on a public road in a busy city is a pretty selfish act on a micro level at least.


.

...No you couldn't. Imagine if everyone cycled , or took the bus , No traffic huge amounts of space in town , people who a car that can hold five people in to town on their own and then give out about cyclists taking up space in their lanes !!!!!!!!! :mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:

nomdeboardie

Big Steve wrote: »

I My main problem is that when they get to a red light and stop they don't stay in the cycle lane or side of the road. They stop ahead of all the cars vans trucks etc but they plant themselves in the middle of the lane so they're blocking you and any other traffic when the light goes green.

If they should not do this, then why do "advanced stop lines/boxes" go all the way across the lane(s)? (Not that you can even see these boxes most of the time for cars stopped illegally in them :rolleyes:)

nomdeboardie

Big Steve wrote: »

Simple use hand signals. Problem solved. Then at least We know which direction we are going. I will admit there is a lot gob****es that don't use their indicators in their cars either. but cyclists use their hand signals a lot less that motorists use their indicators

Hand signals for "straight ahead"? Would motorists even recognise such? Would they be able to see them if the cyclist is hugging the side of the road?

Update: I see my 2nd sentence reiteraties a point made by "not even wrong" just below the quote, but no harm to repeat the message!

nomdeboardie

nomdeboardie wrote: »

Hand signals for "straight ahead"? Would motorists even recognise such? Would they be able to see them if the cyclist is hugging the side of the road?

The hand signal for straight ahead looks a bit too much like a Nazi salute for my comfort.

nomdeboardie

mossyc123 wrote: »

Where there is no space and at busy areas (Dame St for example) cyclists should just hop off the bike and walk*... The stress and delay that cyclists cause to motorists, public transport and pedestrians in these areas is pretty significant.

*I'd also argue that the private car has no place in these areas either, but that's another debate.

Cool :cool: Let me condense that for you:

Where there is no space and at busy areas (Dame St for example) cars have no place. The stress and delay they cause to cyclists, public transport and pedestrians in these areas is pretty significant.

Deleted User

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkitdcG8RPs

Deleted User wrote: »

The hand signal for straight ahead looks a bit too much like a Nazi salute for my comfort.

44leto

This thread went very retarded.
A rant between cyclists and motorists. In the end we are all equal road users.

stoneill

Born to Die wrote: »

Do cyclists pay road tax and insurance for their bicycles?

Nobody pays road tax.
You may pay motor tax - you may even pay green tax on top of duty on fuel, but nobody has ever paid road tax.

44leto

Ireland in comparison to our continental brother have very low bicycle usage. Which is why they introduced the Bike to work scheme which IMO was the best policy introduced by the Greens, probably even that government.

I got a 1500 euro bike for I think 800euro and I have loved it since the day I got it. I am shocked I am so into it.

But the benefits to the economy as a whole from increasing bike usage are huge. Obvious things like cleaner cities, less carbon emissions, less spent on fuel imports, then the secondary benefits that do add up, a healthier population, less obesity, more fitness etc.

I say again I think our cycling network is good and again I say it is not perfect but getting there. Us cyclists should complain more especially when the lanes are a danger to us like pot holes, or obstructions.

But for those that don't or cant commute by bike there are some great cycles around this city, the coast road (its not complete yet but getting there), the canals are lovely and the Phoenix park.

Try it you may like it and you will lose a lot of your car fat.

mossyc123

facemelter wrote: »

...No you couldn't. Imagine if everyone cycled , or took the bus , No traffic huge amounts of space in town , people who a car that can hold five people in to town on their own and then give out about cyclists taking up space in their lanes !!!!!!!!! :mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:

Well I just did make the argument but you choose to selectively quote me.

Bicycles can't go as fast as motorized vehicles. Therefore they aren't the preferred method of transport for a lot of people. As bicycles use the same space as motorized vehicles oftentimes bicycles cause motorized vehicles to be delayed and preventing them from reaching there full potential for transportation. Hence, cycling in busy city streets is preventing another from progressing for your own convenience, a selfish act.

A cyclist choosing to hold up a bus (even if it's only half-full) is the prime example of this, something that unfortunately happens everyday.

IMO, bicycles and motorized vehicles should be kept completely seperate, they are operating at 2 completely different levels of performance and simply cannot share the same space.

With the price of fuel increasing all the time, more and more people are going to be cycling. It's definitely time for defined, seperate cycles lanes alongside the road network, particularly in Dublin City.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgCqz3l33kU

No further comment.

mossyc123

mossyc123 wrote: »

Well I just did make the argument but you choose to selectively quote me.

Bicycles can't go as fast as motorized vehicles. Therefore they aren't the preferred method of transport for a lot of people. As bicycles use the same space as motorized vehicles oftentimes bicycles cause motorized vehicles to be delayed and preventing them from reaching there full potential for transportation. Hence, cycling in busy city streets is preventing another from progressing for your own convenience, a selfish act.

A cyclist choosing to hold up a bus (even if it's only half-full) is the prime example of this, something that unfortunately happens everyday.

IMO, bicycles and motorized vehicles should be kept completely seperate, they are operating at 2 completely different levels of performance and simply cannot share the same space.

With the price of fuel increasing all the time, more and more people are going to be cycling. It's definitely time for defined, seperate cycles lanes alongside the road network, particularly in Dublin City.

Such utter nonsense. The thing that delays motor vehicles when driving in the city is....wait for it..... other motor vehicles.

Bicycles have a faster average speed than cars in city traffic. Sure, cars might go faster than the bike for a short while beween ques of traffic but soon they run into the back of a que of traffic and the bike will catch up, pass them, get through the lights on the first green, while the motorist waits in the que for the lights to go green another 3 or 4 times before they finally get to move off.

If you are held up by a bike between traffic lights, think for a moment. Where would you be if you were able to get past the bike straight away? You would be at the back of the next traffic que a few seconds earlier, saving yourself a grand total of zero seconds.

This is something I see regularly when out cycling. Just today I was riding down college road at around 40kph when some genius decides that he needs to get past me right now. No matter that we are approaching a speed bump and there's a bus coming the other way. He flakes it around me, then suddenly realises he's about to hit the speed bump way too fast, and is now heading for a head on with the bus. So he cuts in front of me (I had anticipated his retardness, so was already on the brakes), slams on his brakes, hits the speed bump at about 45 kph and sends sparks flying from his sump. Bus driver did not look impressed.

Where did all this drama get him? That's right, to the back of a que of cars at a red light 200 metres down the road, where I passed him and never saw him again.

Every bike on the road means one fewer car in the que in front of you at the lights. More ppl on bikes actually makes for faster average speeds for motor vehicles too, although some motorists apparently lack the mental capacity to see how that works.

yore

bb1234567 wrote: »

Most definitely not, just last month one morning around 9am or so, the green man at the pedestrian crossing went off and all the pedestrians began to cross the road and some cyclist speeds through the solid red light and hits this guy!The man was ok and wasnt hit full on, he seemed quite shocked,but he still ended up on the ground.Lots of people came over to him to help and see if he was alright. It was a close one,Could have been badly injured, and what if it was a child?? could have ended very badly.Now the cyclist was very apolagetic but still, Ive seen this happen many times before, cyclist running red lights,not indicating left or right,no respect for the rules of the road really, very dangerous. They dont seem to think the rules of the road apply to them, so maybe when these cyclists show a little respct to the rules of the road and other pedestrians we and the motorists will start to show a little respect back to them too. Dont act like the cyclists are always the victims in these situations...

What does this have to do with the way cyclists are treated by motorists?
Are you saying that because some cyclist broke the law means that it is acceptable (or maybe approprate) for motorists to take revenge and bully cyclists off the road.

If cyclists were banned from roads and had to use just footpaths constantly, then that incident could have still happened.


To repeat, the fact that a cyclist broke a red light and hit a pedrestrian does not give motorists carte blanche to disrespect or endanger cyclists on the road.

As an analogy, A friend of mine got knocked down by a van a few years ago while crossing the road on her estate. The van came flying around the corner and the driver then hit the accelerator instead of the brake and clipped her. So a van knocked down somebody. Articulated lorries are bigger than vans. That incident can not be used as a justification for an articulated lorry refusing to obay the rules of the road to bully anyone in a car or van!

toexpress

I had a cyclist come into the side of my car by coming up on the inside of me as I was turning left one morning on the way into work. Other cars started honking despite the fact that I had a green light, was indicating and he was on the INSIDE of me. Cyclists are evil

bad2dabone

For me cycling makes the most sense, it's 26 minutes commute versus an hour plus in the car, the bike runs on fat and saves me money, the car runs on money and is slow in the city.

The King of Moo

toexpress wrote: »

I had a cyclist come into the side of my car by coming up on the inside of me as I was turning left one morning on the way into work. Other cars started honking despite the fact that I had a green light, was indicating and he was on the INSIDE of me. Cyclists are evil

Note the difference.

I had a driver nearly kill me as I was going through a junction because he turned left without indicating.
But I'd never say drivers are evil.

44leto

The King of Moo wrote: »

Note the difference.

I had a driver nearly kill me as I was going through a junction because he turned left without indicating.
But I'd never say drivers are evil.

Its great for keeping the weight down alright. It lifts your mood as well, there is nothing more stressful then stuck in traffic.

toexpress

The King of Moo wrote: »

Note the difference.

I had a driver nearly kill me as I was going through a junction because he turned left without indicating.
But I'd never say drivers are evil.

Well I didn't notice any insurance to cover the cost of the damage to my car but if I had caused damage with my car once in my driving lifetime I have insurance to cover it

Darkglasses

toexpress wrote: »

I had a cyclist come into the side of my car by coming up on the inside of me as I was turning left one morning on the way into work. Other cars started honking despite the fact that I had a green light, was indicating and he was on the INSIDE of me. Cyclists are evil

Another argument against cycle lanes and keeping cyclists to the left at all costs.

I'm a cyclist only, and really the only thing I can honestly say I don't like on the road is dangerous road users, regardless of by what means they are travelling, bike, car, bus, truck, or horse.

yore

toexpress wrote: »

Well I didn't notice any insurance to cover the cost of the damage to my car but if I had caused damage with my car once in my driving lifetime I have insurance to cover it

Cool. You have insurance. So if you knock me down you can pay for my hospital costs. That makes everything ok. I won't mind at all.
And sure driving with your eyes closed for a joke, or while talking with your mobile up to your ear is fine too. And driving at 50 miles an hour along an icy road. Sure who cares if you cause damage man. You're insured for that sh1t :rolleyes:

mossyc123

Deleted User wrote: »

Such utter nonsense. The thing that delays motor vehicles when driving in the city is....wait for it..... other motor vehicles.

Mostly bicycles though as they lack the potential to accelerate to the same speed as a car...

Bicycles have a faster average speed than cars in city traffic. Sure, cars might go faster than the bike for a short while beween ques of traffic but soon they run into the back of a que of traffic and the bike will catch up, pass them, get through the lights on the first green,

In theory...

while the motorist waits in the que for the lights to go green another 3 or 4 times before they finally get to move off.

What are you on about here. Some new system of traffic management?

Lights go green, I go.

Nice
If you are held up by a bike between traffic lights, think for a moment. Where would you be if you were able to get past the bike straight away? You would be at the back of the next traffic que a few seconds earlier, saving yourself a grand total of zero seconds.

Ahead of the delaying obstruction, travelling at greater speed and therefore reducing my overall journey time. It really is that simple.

This is something I see regularly when out cycling. Just today I was riding down college road at around 40kph when some genius decides that he needs to get past me right now. No matter that we are approaching a speed bump and there's a bus coming the other way. He flakes it around me, then suddenly realises he's about to hit the speed bump way too fast, and is now heading for a head on with the bus. So he cuts in front of me (I had anticipated his retardness, so was already on the brakes), slams on his brakes, hits the speed bump at about 45 kph and sends sparks flying from his sump. Bus driver did not look impressed.

Where did all this drama get him? That's right, to the back of a que of cars at a red light 200 metres down the road, where I passed him and never saw him again.

Sorry for your trouble... a prime example as to why bikes and cars don't mix!

Every bike on the road means one fewer car in the que in front of you at the lights. More ppl on bikes actually makes for faster average speeds for motor vehicles too, although some motorists apparently lack the mental capacity to see how that works.

A road network packed with cyclists riding 5 or 6 abreast would prevent a motorized vehicle from reaching any sort of a speed.

44leto

Darkglasses wrote: »

Another argument against cycle lanes and keeping cyclists to the left at all costs.

I'm a cyclist only, and really the only thing I can honestly say I don't like on the road is dangerous road users, regardless of by what means they are travelling, bike, car, bus, truck, or horse.

Excellent post and that really is the crux of it.

Thread/

nomdeboardie

mossyc123 wrote: »

Bicycles can't go as fast as motorized vehicles. Therefore they aren't the preferred method of transport for a lot of people. As bicycles use the same space as motorized vehicles oftentimes bicycles cause motorized vehicles to be delayed and preventing them from reaching there full potential for transportation. Hence, cycling in busy city streets is preventing another from progressing for your own convenience, a selfish act.

A cyclist choosing to hold up a bus (even if it's only half-full) is the prime example of this, something that unfortunately happens everyday.

IMO, bicycles and motorized vehicles should be kept completely seperate, they are operating at 2 completely different levels of performance and simply cannot share the same space.

With the price of fuel increasing all the time, more and more people are going to be cycling. It's definitely time for defined, seperate cycles lanes alongside the road network, particularly in Dublin City.

I take the point that there may be some average delay for motor vehicles if you take a given situation +/- bicycles, although, as has been mentioned, a portion of the cyclists might otherwise be adding cars to the road, so the net effect might be either positive or negative on motorised transport speeds. So, yes, a completely seperate cycle lane system might be a good thing for everyone, but only if:
(1) It was wide enough to allow cyclists to pass each other safely, as cyclist speeds are much more variable than motor speeds
(2) It did not put cyclists at a disadvantage relative to motorised transport at junctions
(3) It was respected by pedestrians
(4) It was roperly maintained etc
Dream on :rolleyes:

hatrickpatrick

Over the last year, I've come to hate cyclists with a firey passion words can't describe.
I have to get the DART to Pearse and walk up Dame Street every morning for college.
Every single day without fail I am almost hit by a cyclist. Every single day. It happens either outside Trinity, or on Dame street crossing the road at George's Street.

The format is always the same:
--Wait at the lights
--Get a Green Man
--Cross
--Some w@nker of a cyclist decides a red light doesn't apply to them and ploughs into me.

Not only have I had near misses, but a friend of mine had her dog hit full on by a cyclist at the same junction, again in the middle of the road with a green man and reds all around. It's a miracle the dog wasn't injured.

Cyclists, if you want respect, don't break the f*cking lights. end of story.

mossyc123

mossyc123 wrote: »

Mostly bicycles though as they lack the potential to accelerate to the same speed as a car...

Really, really? Are you actually serious here or taking the piss? I can't tell. You think the reason for the several mile long tailbacks coming into Dublin every day are bicycles?

As for "lights go green, I drive off", how does that work out for you when there are 20 cars ahead of you at the lights?

facemelter

mossyc123 wrote: »

Well I just did make the argument but you choose to selectively quote me.

Bicycles can't go as fast as motorized vehicles. Therefore they aren't the preferred method of transport for a lot of people. As bicycles use the same space as motorized vehicles oftentimes bicycles cause motorized vehicles to be delayed and preventing them from reaching there full potential for transportation. Hence, cycling in busy city streets is preventing another from progressing for your own convenience, a selfish act.

A cyclist choosing to hold up a bus (even if it's only half-full) is the prime example of this, something that unfortunately happens everyday.

IMO, bicycles and motorized vehicles should be kept completely seperate, they are operating at 2 completely different levels of performance and simply cannot share the same space.

With the price of fuel increasing all the time, more and more people are going to be cycling. It's definitely time for defined, seperate cycles lanes alongside the road network, particularly in Dublin City.

Sorry I didnt mean to take what you said out of context, but its not selfish at all to cycle in a busy city ! bikes take up less space than cars on the road , when a car gets in your way on the road , (which happens alot more than bikes getting in the way ) you don't complain but when bike do its all the cyclists fault ?

and what could be considered more selfish is a car driven by one person taking up the space of five bikes!

I'll leave this here just for mossy. A pic that clearly shows how much more efficiently bikes and public transport use limited urban road space compared to single occupant cars.

http://randomdude.com/images/car-bus-bike.jpg

monkeypants

Meauldsegosha wrote: »

I rarely see one wearing a helmet or safety gear.

From reading a thread in the Cycling forum, I've learned that cycle helmets are subject to VAT in this country. They're considered luxury goods. That's the official position.

Kintarō Hattori

https://us.v-cdn.net/6034073/uploads/attachments/3379/202723.jpg

This bad boy was laid down in the last year. Like a lot of cycle lanes it starts and stops abruptly. Just to the left of the image is an entrance/exit to a McDonalds. A huge amount of cycle lanes suddenly appear from nowhere, often with the kerb up so high that you can't get onto it. They all too often end very abruptly- forcing you back onto the road in a dangerous manner.

While many can be great an equal number of them are just useless and dangerous. I shall give you an example of one in Balbriggan:

It appears on the main road suddenly at a pedestrian crossing.
http://maps.google.ie/maps?q=Balbriggan&hl=en&ll=53.613163,-6.188908&spn=0.005493,0.013937&sll=53.401034,-8.307638&sspn=11.319764,28.54248&hnear=Balbriggan,+County+Dublin&t=m&z=17&layer=c&cbll=53.61328,-6.189056&panoid=_yez7yEEJKfx_zVRnUTYwQ&cbp=12,299.45,,0,23.07

It cuts across an entrance AND an exit from a petrol station.
http://maps.google.ie/maps?q=Balbriggan&hl=en&ll=53.613736,-6.189626&spn=0.005493,0.013937&sll=53.401034,-8.307638&sspn=11.319764,28.54248&hnear=Balbriggan,+County+Dublin&t=m&z=17&layer=c&cbll=53.613635,-6.189498&panoid=IXLAJYuhdG1yZMz7zo6q4w&cbp=12,303.08,,0,23.06

It cuts across an entrance/exit for police vehicles at a Garda station.
http://maps.google.ie/maps?q=Balbriggan&hl=en&ll=53.614137,-6.190099&spn=0.005493,0.013937&sll=53.401034,-8.307638&sspn=11.319764,28.54248&hnear=Balbriggan,+County+Dublin&t=m&z=17&layer=c&cbll=53.614205,-6.19018&panoid=MCRT8XZzZ2AMA9Hx7Tv01w&cbp=12,303.08,,0,23.06

It intersects a junction turning left so you have to stop (instead of being able to continue if you were on the road).
http://maps.google.ie/maps?q=Balbriggan&hl=en&ll=53.614945,-6.191043&spn=0.005493,0.013937&sll=53.401034,-8.307638&sspn=11.319764,28.54248&hnear=Balbriggan,+County+Dublin&t=m&z=17&layer=c&cbll=53.614873,-6.190959&panoid=OYmN7hfyQl4K9Jx8E8c9tA&cbp=12,311.06,,0,-0.33

It runs alongside many many houses going up the main street so the driveways come right up to the footpath/cycle lane.
http://maps.google.ie/maps?q=Balbriggan&hl=en&ll=53.615315,-6.191504&spn=0.005492,0.013937&sll=53.401034,-8.307638&sspn=11.319764,28.54248&hnear=Balbriggan,+County+Dublin&t=m&z=17&layer=c&cbll=53.615551,-6.191857&panoid=IE18SNB2bVHpV-lH1gphHQ&cbp=12,285.85,,0,2.2

Going up a hill it intersects with another left turning junction which has limited visibility for cars coming out of the estate. You're obstructed from view by a wall.
http://maps.google.ie/maps?q=Balbriggan&hl=en&ll=53.616008,-6.192545&spn=0.005492,0.013937&sll=53.401034,-8.307638&sspn=11.319764,28.54248&hnear=Balbriggan,+County+Dublin&t=m&z=17&layer=c&cbll=53.616131,-6.192727&panoid=KzUzpmBZPl71Fw-6HK5OVQ&cbp=12,285.85,,0,2.2

Finally it intersects another a T junction which is particuarly dangerous. If you stop and wait for the cars to clear it just causes hassle. Some folk kindly wait before turning left so you can move on but you need to factor into the equation cars coming down the road from your left, coming straight across the junction from your right and those coming down the hill and turning right....... so they just get annoyed with you for not moving.
http://maps.google.ie/maps?q=Balbriggan&hl=en&ll=53.616721,-6.193489&spn=0.005492,0.013937&sll=53.401034,-8.307638&sspn=11.319764,28.54248&hnear=Balbriggan,+County+Dublin&t=m&z=17&layer=c&cbll=53.61694,-6.193756&panoid=ZK_DszQJaaqDcVzbPc34VQ&cbp=12,327.84,,0,2.55


Just to add- we're not all bad cyclists. I don't break lights, nor do I weave amongst the traffic. Where a cycle lane isn't available or is unwise to use I position myself clearly on the road with the traffic and I give way when safe to do so. For long commutes I wear a Hi-viz jacket, helmet and have more than adequate lighting.

There are lots of bad pedestrians, motorists and cyclists on the road but equally there are lots of great road users too.

Daniel S

ejmaztec wrote: »

It's called motor tax because it hasn't yet dawned on the government that there is an un-tapped source of revenue in cyclists.

Sorry kids, Santa couldn't get you bikes for Christmas as the government would tax you... :rolleyes:


Cop on, why do you really think it's called motor tax?

facemelter

Deleted User wrote: »

I'll leave this here just for mossy. A pic that clearly shows how much more efficiently bikes and public transport use limited urban road space compared to single occupant cars.

http://randomdude.com/images/car-bus-bike.jpg

saw this a while ago and I was looking for it for this thread !!

mossyc123

facemelter wrote: »

Sorry I didnt mean to take what you said out of context, but its not selfish at all to cycle in a busy city ! bikes take up less space than cars on the road , when a car gets in your way on the road , (which happens alot more than bikes getting in the way ) you don't complain but when bike do its all the cyclists fault ?

and what could be considered more selfish is a car driven by one person taking up the space of five bikes!

Yeah, maybe it's just conditioning from years of knowing that cars will always be on the road.
However with the car you know that you'll be able to get up to speed and on your way pretty soon, the bike is a different story altogether, regardless of the traffic light theory I was told about earlier!
People cycling around the City Centre in such large numbers has only really caught on over the last few years... soon enough motorists will get used to it as just another part of driving in the City.
I'd personally prefer if bikes and cars had as little interaction on the road as possible... with the price of fuel that could happen soon enough though anyway!

mossyc123

Deleted User wrote: »

I'll leave this here just for mossy. A pic that clearly shows how much more efficiently bikes and public transport use limited urban road space compared to single occupant cars.

http://randomdude.com/images/car-bus-bike.jpg

Public transport?!

Have you read my posts?

Cyclists obstructing the Bus Lane is the example I gave as to why cycling is a selfish choice!!!

The tone of your posts suggest the vast majority of drivers are single occupancy in and out to work commuters who could just as easily cycle.
The reality of the situation is that not everyone works in a job that allows them the flexibility to cycle. Many, many people need their vehicles throughout the day in work.

Sales calls, meetings, different clients, deliveries... the bike just doesn't cut it for any of this stuff.

So, can any of those lads on the bikes;

-Give someone a lift to the airport
-Deliver goods to businesses
-Transport large numbers of people from home to work (52 bikes or 1 Dublin Bus?)
-Carry out emergency transportation to hospitals
-Transport tools necassary for construction work
-Transport files and documentation necassary for office work

One final point. In reality 5 bikes need a hell of a lot more space on the road then a single car.

Daniel S

mossyc123 wrote: »

So, can any of those lads on the bikes;

-Give someone a lift to the airport
-Deliver goods to businesses
-Transport large numbers of people from home to work (52 bikes or 1 Dublin Bus?)
-Carry out emergency transportation to hospitals
-Transport tools necassary for construction work
-Transport files and documentation necassary for office work

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-LO3szk9d4vQ/TZngISj7IyI/AAAAAAAABXM/JzTb12c0eLQ/s1600/Challenge_accepted.jpg

mossyc123

mossyc123 wrote: »

Public transport?!



The tone of your posts suggest the vast majority of drivers are single occupancy in and out to work commuters who could just as easily cycle.
The reality of the situation is that not everyone works in a job that allows them the flexibility to cycle. Many, many people need their vehicles throughout the day in work.

.

Yes, and those people could get where they're going faster if the people who don't need to drive walked, cycled or used public transport.

You just seem to be incapable of grasping that it is average speed that dictates how quickly you get from place to place in a city. You could fcucking teleport from one junction to the back of the queue at the next and you wouldn't save a single second, because you'd just end up waiting that much longer in the line of cars at the lights.

What decides how quickly you get to the top of the queue is the number of cars in the queue in front of you, which would be reduced if more people were walking, cycling or taking the bus.

How can you not get this? It is a very simple concept.

It is no coincidence that the cities in Europe that have the best transport systems are the ones that prioritise walking, cycling and public transport over driving.

As for five bikes taking up more space than a car- do you lack an understanding of simple geometry?

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

I'll leave this here just for mossy. A pic that clearly shows how much more efficiently bikes and public transport use limited urban road space compared to single occupant cars.

http://randomdude.com/images/car-bus-bike.jpg

A perfect illustration of why park-n-ride schemes should be developed and promoted in many towns and cities for commuters to use. Bikes for those already living in the towns, or for the "last mile" from where the bus stops.

Meauldsegosha

monkeypants wrote: »

Meauldsegosha wrote: »

I rarely see one wearing a helmet or safety gear.

From reading a thread in the Cycling forum, I've learned that cycle helmets are subject to VAT in this country. They're considered luxury goods. That's the official position.

Lots of products have VAT on them, does that mean we shouldn't use them?

The RSA recommend cyclists wear helmets and hi viz jackets. The bike-to-work scheme advises people to buy helmets and safety gear. So that's the official position

Would you let a children on a bike without a helmet because it has VAT on it and therefore a luxury?

sebastianlieken

toexpress wrote: »

I had a cyclist come into the side of my car by coming up on the inside of me as I was turning left one morning on the way into work. Other cars started honking despite the fact that I had a green light, was indicating and he was on the INSIDE of me. Cyclists are evil

I had a driver switch lane at the last second before a set of traffic lights one time, he must have had a blindfold on because I was stoped in the left lane at the lights with a hi vis jacket in broad daylight. He drove straight into me, braked and stopped on my foot with his front left tyre. I started shouting and cursing at him to reverse.... He stillhad his blindfold on, and a set of earplugs too it seemed. As did his wife beside him. So I start knocking on the windows shouting that he is parked on my foot and to bloody reverse. still nothing. So I start beating his car bonnet with serious force. He gets out (big fella) and starts striding towards me intimidatingly saying "what are you on about, i'm not on your foot!". I'm far more pissed off and rise to challenge screaming at him to reverse the f*ck off my foot. He walks around car, see's he's on my foot, is reduced to a panicing little gobsh1te, runs back to the drivers seat saying "sorry sorry sorry sorry!!!", reverses in a panic. He needed visual confirmation that he was on my foot before he would reverse.

Drivers are.... retarded.

karl_m

sebastianlieken wrote: »

He needed visual confirmation that he was on my foot before he would reverse.

I hope you sued that arsehole.
I was cycling into the City Centre, going over a bridge over the Liffey. It was Wednesday, the road going adjacent the four courts, had a row of cars,(mainly taxis) parked in front on the cycle path. I indicated that I was going onto the road to avoid the first car. I looked behind me and the car behind slowed to let me go. As I went onto the road to ride forward, the car behind speeds up and clips me, I go straight into the back of the taxi. The car that clipped me drived off.

I just want to know, was the parked cars in the wrong, by law, for parking on the cycle path or is that allowed?

Paparazzo

Hatred of cyclists is the one thing that brings the rest of the road users together. Car drivers, van drivers, pedestrians, truck drivers, bus drivers, motorcyclists, taxi drivers all have one thing in common. They all hate cyclists.
In fact, I reckon a good percentage of cyclists hate cyclists.

Spanish students are the only group I can think of that generates as much universal hate

saa

Tonyandthewhale wrote: »

While the rest of your post is quiet reasonable and non-retarded, at this I just have to say 'facepalm.'

When its not appropriate derp.

Dyr

Paparazzo wrote: »

Hatred of cyclists is the one thing that brings the rest of the road users together. Car drivers, van drivers, pedestrians, truck drivers, bus drivers, motorcyclists, taxi drivers all have one thing in common. They all hate cyclists.
In fact, I reckon a good percentage of cyclists hate cyclists.

Spanish students are the only group I can think of that generates as much universal hate

Pretty much, cyclists are the pigeons of the transport world, two wheeled gicknahs

Fizzlesque

Bambi wrote: »

Pretty much, cyclists are the pigeons of the transport world

---

Indeed we are.

However, as I typed that, my mind suddenly presented me with a reminder of how much I love cycling; and it far outweighs caring what someone I don't know has decided to feel about me. The joy of being out and about on a bike is well worth the small price of being hated by some.

Doesn't stop us from being the pigeons of the transport world, all the same. I like that analogy, for some currently unknown reason.