Gardi to tackle cycle menaces

Undercover Elephant

washiskin wrote: »

Ok, I have one - happened just last night in fact.

I was heading into town at around 9.20pm and had taken Whitworth Rd.. The lights at the junction of Drumcondra Rd / Dorset St are set back a few meters so that Busses etc. can swing around the left turn safely; the lights change and I'm moving forward and had just reached the centre of the left lane when out of the corner of my eye I spot this feckin' moron on a white mountain bike hurtling towards me from Binns Bridge - through the red light. He had to brake so hard that the back of the bike practically wrapped itself around his neck. No lights, no helmet and a hoodie over his head so he had no hope of seeing the traffic on either side of him either.
Now there would have been quite a pause between the lights on Drm Rd / Dor St. turning red & me reaching the centre of the lane because of the way the junction is and I would have been going no more that 10-15kmph and but he paid no heed to the red lights & kept on going.
I would have loved to hear his explaination for nearly ending up in the rear driver's side door and if he had hit me....well I reckon he would have seriously injured himself, if not worse.

So ... what you're saying is that despite the cyclist breaking several rules and riding idiotically, no one was hurt and no damage was done?

frankythefish

i reckon all cyclists using our roads should have to undergo an intelligence test before getting on the roads. there really are some proper lemons going around on those 2 wheeled objects

charlietheminxx

This is a circular argument. It's so frustrating to read.

Most cyclists are grand.

Some cyclists are dangerous eejits who put themselves and others at risk.. That's not conjecture, it's a fact. So people telling stories aren't generalising all cyclists, they're just saying it happens, and it's a frequent occurence. Some drivers are woeful, but the fact that there are bad drivers out there DOES NOT condone these cyclists disobeying the rules of the road because drivers do. Of all the arguments I'm seeing here, this keeps coming up, and to be honest it's the most immature attitude to road safety. It's sickening.

magicbastarder

charlietheminxx wrote: »

Some cyclists are dangerous eejits who put themselves and others at risk.. That's not conjecture, it's a fact. So people telling stories aren't generalising all cyclists, they're just saying it happens, and it's a frequent occurence. Some drivers are woeful, but the fact that there are bad drivers out there DOES NOT condone these cyclists disobeying the rules of the road because drivers do. Of all the arguments I'm seeing here, this keeps coming up, and to be honest it's the most immature attitude to road safety. It's sickening.

no-one is arguing that there are not stupid cyclists out there.
the problem is that people are claiming it's a clampdown on cyclists which will make the difference to road safety; but this will have marginal impact on incidents, and potentially deter people from cycling.
it obviously will have positive effects, but the effort involved may be better spent on other road safety issues. like removing all the cyclist-hostile cycle facilities, like badly designed cycle lanes.

it's a point i find myself repeating a lot these days - cyclists are between pedestrians and motorists on a continuum, which would continue on to HGVs. i'd place cyclists nearer pedestrians than cars on that continuum, but there is a large body of opinion which would place them on the same level as cars, which i'd have big issues with. but it's that view which creates a lot of friction like in the threads above.

Cookie_Monster

washiskin wrote: »

Ok, I have one - happened just last night in fact.

I was heading into town at around 9.20pm and had taken Whitworth Rd.. The lights at the junction of Drumcondra Rd / Dorset St are set back a few meters so that Busses etc. can swing around the left turn safely; the lights change and I'm moving forward and had just reached the centre of the left lane when out of the corner of my eye I spot this feckin' moron on a white mountain bike hurtling towards me from Binns Bridge - through the red light. He had to brake so hard that the back of the bike practically wrapped itself around his neck. No lights, no helmet and a hoodie over his head so he had no hope of seeing the traffic on either side of him either.
.

nice story, should have just squashed him and done everyone a favour. One less menace for us all to deal with

seamus

charlietheminxx wrote: »

So people telling stories aren't generalising all cyclists, they're just saying it happens, and it's a frequent occurence.

And the sky is blue and birds sing. People expending their energy pointing out the obvious - that some people who use the roads are retards - is usually known as whinging and it serves no purpose.

Whinging about "you know what I saw a cyclist do today", is frequently used as justification for abusing all cyclists, or for violence against cyclists. This is the reason that the "car drivers do it too" argument comes up to counter it - because attacking all cyclists on the basis of the actions of some cyclists is retarded. The point is that the mode of transport is irrelevant. Some people are idiots and ignore the rules of the road. We know this, why the need to separate them into categories of idiots, why not just moan about all idiots?

Myrddin

About time the cyclists are made responsible as any other road user for disregarding rules.

frankythefish

i think in truth we should be thankful that these 'innocent' cycling folk are cycling and not driving a vehicle

Undercover Elephant

charlietheminxx wrote: »

This is a circular argument. It's so frustrating to read.

It would be less frustrating if you read it properly.

Given that:
- some cyclists are idiots
- some drivers are idiots
- most road injuries are caused by drivers
- most car-bike collisions are caused by drivers
- very few injuries are caused by cyclists

(These are not opinions, they are empirical, verifiable facts.)

... then, given limited Garda resources, cracking down on bad cycling rather than bad driving is irrational.

magicbastarder

EnterNow wrote: »

About time the cyclists are made responsible as any other road user for disregarding rules.

why, though? why should a cyclist face the same penalty as a car driver for breaking a red light, when a car breaking a light is many times more dangerous than a cyclist doing it?
is it not fair to suggest that the penalty is commensurate with the danger of the manouevre?

edit: i read your post first as 'as responsible', which would imply a similar level of punishment; re-reading, you may not have been implying that.

Myrddin

magicbastarder wrote: »

why, though? why should a cyclist face the same penalty as a car driver for breaking a red light, when a car breaking a light is many times more dangerous than a cyclist doing it?
is it not fair to suggest that the penalty is commensurate with the danger of the manouevre?

edit: i read your post first as 'as responsible', which would imply a similar level of punishment; re-reading, you may not have been implying that.

Well if a cyclist breaks a red light & gets hit by a car...is that not classed as dangerous?

Cyclists can & do also cause severe enough injury to people especially the elderly if they break lights. Yes drivers also do the same, no denying that.

I've no input on the punishment for doing so, but rules are rules & are there for everyone, including cyclists. The fact is, the standard of road use, not just driving, is appalling in Ireland.

I was stopped at a junction yesterday, & a cyclist came up behind my car, overtook me on the right, & proceeded to turn right at the junction, entering the other side of the junction travelling down the road in the wrong side of the road. That kind of nonsense should be punished, no matter what method of transport used.

BostonB

EnterNow wrote: »

About time the cyclists are made responsible as any other road user for disregarding rules.

By that you mean the its about time the law was enforced.

Myrddin

BostonB wrote: »

By that you mean the its about time the law was enforced.

Exactly

BostonB

magicbastarder wrote: »

and jaywalking? you'd be happy to be fined for jaywalking?

What has that got to do with anything? If you want to discuss jaywalking you might be best starting a new thread?

Jawgap

magicbastarder wrote: »

why, though? why should a cyclist face the same penalty as a car driver for breaking a red light, when a car breaking a light is many times more dangerous than a cyclist doing it?
is it not fair to suggest that the penalty is commensurate with the danger of the manouevre?

edit: i read your post first as 'as responsible', which would imply a similar level of punishment; re-reading, you may not have been implying that.

Speaking as a keen cyclist, I'd say no - you break the law you pay the penalty, if you don't like it then don't cycle or stick to the rules. Secondly, it should be a fixed penalty and it should be a meaty one (€250) at that.

There is a tiered element to it already - if I jump a red light on my bike I get fined, if I do it in the car I get fined and get points.

If the penalty is to be be commensurate with the danger, who decides what's dangerous and what's not? I could jump a light when the danger is minimal but the outcome could be severe, and get a lesser penalty compared to someone who is completely reckless but hurts no one.

BostonB

EnterNow wrote: »

...I was stopped at a junction yesterday, & a cyclist came up behind my car, overtook me on the right, & proceeded to turn right at the junction, entering the other side of the junction travelling down the road in the wrong side of the road. That kind of nonsense should be punished, no matter what method of transport used.

For sure. Numerous times a day I see drivers going through the light as it turns red. I also see them queue jumping constantly going up the wrong side of the road, then making a right turn, or even jumping in at the top of a queue. No enforces that either. Blocking yellow boxes etc. 10~15 years a go there was a much higher Garda presence on the streets, and you'd see people pulled over on a regular basis and speed cameras say on the quays a couple of times a month.

These days I see almost no enforcement, for months at a time. Seeing a Garda enforcing the law is a quite rare sight for me.

Slurryface

steve9859 wrote: »

Yet another 'this thing happened to me the other day and therefore all cyclists are ****s' post.

Another " anyone who recounts a negative experience of cyclists ia a liar" retorts!:mad:

charlietheminxx

Undercover Elephant wrote: »

It would be less frustrating if you read it properly.

Given that:
- some cyclists are idiots
- some drivers are idiots
- most road injuries are caused by drivers
- most car-bike collisions are caused by drivers
- very few injuries are caused by cyclists

(These are not opinions, they are empirical, verifiable facts.)

... then, given limited Garda resources, cracking down on bad cycling rather than bad driving is irrational.

I never said it was AS dangerous, or that it should be cracked down on instead of bad driving. It should be enforced as well, rather than the law just being ignored.

But it IS dangerous, and all dangerious behaviour on our roads should be cracked down on. Motorists and cyclists alike.

Slurryface

BostonB wrote: »

For sure. Numerous times a day I see drivers going through the light as it turns red. I also see them queue jumping constantly going up the wrong side of the road, then making a right turn, or even jumping in at the top of a queue. No enforces that either. Blocking yellow boxes etc. 10~15 years a go there was a much higher Garda presence on the streets, and you'd see people pulled over on a regular basis and speed cameras say on the quays a couple of times a month.

These days I see almost no enforcement, for months at a time. Seeing a Garda enforcing the law is a quite rare sight for me.

Then how do you explain the hundreds of thousands of moterists that have penalty points?????
Oh yea , you can't, can you?
Perhaps a visit to Specsavers would aid your ability to see!:D

babaracus

charlietheminxx wrote: »

I never said it was AS dangerous, or that it should be cracked down on instead of bad driving. It should be enforced as well, rather than the law just being ignored.

But it IS dangerous, and all dangerious behaviour on our roads should be cracked down on. Motorists and cyclists alike.

Car drivers kill 250-300 people a year, cyclists kill nobody (but themselves).

Now if you had limited resources as the Garda Traffic Corps do which sector would you crack down on? Every minute spent dealing with an errant cyclist is a minute less dealing with car drivers who kill people. To satisfy who? Those with a bee in their bonnet about cyclists.

Undercover Elephant

charlietheminxx wrote: »

I never said it was AS dangerous, or that it should be cracked down on instead of bad driving. It should be enforced as well, rather than the law just being ignored.

But it IS dangerous, and all dangerious behaviour on our roads should be cracked down on. Motorists and cyclists alike.

No one is arguing that the law should not be enforced. The point is that the campaign targets the less dangerous behaviour. This doesn't make sense.

Suppose I am a Traffic Corps inspector. I have 10 "spare" gardai available today, who I can station anywhere. What should I have them doing?

SerialComplaint

frankythefish wrote: »

i think in truth we should be thankful that these 'innocent' cycling folk are cycling and not driving a vehicle

Strangely enough, many of them mad cyclists do drive vehicles and do pay 'road' tax.

cournioni wrote: »

It is every bit as dangerous when cyclists break red lights and knock pedestrians over! You very rarely see motorists at it

Bwaaahaahaa, you're joking right? Come with me to any major junction in Dublin, and watch cars fly through amber lights, and 2-3 cars fly through red lights at the end of every cycle. It happens ALL the time. You should see the looks on the faces of the red-light-jumping motorists as I start cycling into their path having got my green light, though.

Spook_ie wrote: »

How many get killed/injured/scared by cyclists not yielding to pedestrians, as the figures aren't ( don't seem to be logged anywhere ) available we'll have to go by anecdotal evidence, which seems to point to the fact that cyclists are a load of unruly, law unto themselves thugs that think they are a cut above other road users because " We are cyclists and we matter more than other road users"

Do you drive with blinkers on? You seem to only see faults relating to one particular group of road users.

BostonB

EnterNow wrote: »

Exactly

I don't have a problem with that. But just to be aware it won't have any significant effect on accidents with cyclists.

Myrddin

BostonB wrote: »

I don't have a problem with that. But just to be aware it won't have any significant effect on accidents with cyclists.

It might, if it deters some of them from breaking lights, speeding on the footpath, or traveling on the wrong side of the road. Much the same way road laws deter me from breaking the rules.

Either way, proper law enforcement can't be criticized because 'it won't have an affect'. It's the law, we're all bound by it...even cyclists.

charlietheminxx

Undercover Elephant wrote: »

No one is arguing that the law should not be enforced. The point is that the campaign targets the less dangerous behaviour. This doesn't make sense.

Suppose I am a Traffic Corps inspector. I have 10 "spare" gardai available today, who I can station anywhere. What should I have them doing?

You could put them on busy roads where they can stop both motorists and cyclists who are breaking the law? It's not like they're using separate roads

BostonB

Slurryface wrote: »

Then how do you explain the hundreds of thousands of moterists that have penalty points?????
Oh yea , you can't, can you?
Perhaps a visit to Specsavers would aid your ability to see!:D

I'd guess most of them are minor speeding infractions caught by camera's. So I looked it up.

speeding is the most common road traffic offence in Ireland with almost 180,000 speeding fines issues last year – 43% of the total offences committed by motorists.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/kfcwkfcwgbau/rss2/

BostonB

EnterNow wrote: »

It might, if it deters some of them from breaking lights, speeding on the footpath, or travelling on the wrong side of the road. Much the same way road laws deter me from breaking the rules.

Either way, proper law enforcement can't be criticized because 'it won't have an affect'. It's the law, we're all bound by it...even cyclists.

Its not criticism of enforcement.

Its the disparate focus on the least cause (if any) of accidents, (to cyclists and pedestrians) rather than the biggest cause of accidents.

Undercover Elephant

charlietheminxx wrote: »

You could put them on busy roads where they can stop both motorists and cyclists who are breaking the law? It's not like they're using separate roads

And, what? Stop each one committing any offence, no matter how trivial? If so, I wouldn't necessarily disagree with this, but it is entirely inconsistent with the message of the latest crackdown.

BostonB

Its a bit like a crackdown enforcing the law on say 3 white cars, with the statistic saying red cars are more likely to be in an accident.

charlietheminxx

That's exactly what I meant. Not to focus on one risk as such, but to enforce the rules for everyone. It might encourage everyone to toe the line a bit more.

magicbastarder

EnterNow wrote: »

Either way, proper law enforcement can't be criticized because 'it won't have an affect'. It's the law, we're all bound by it...even cyclists.

of *course* ineffectual law enforcement should be subject to critical enquiry.
if a law, or enforcement of a law, is ineffectual, why should we push garda resources into it?

magicbastarder

BostonB wrote: »

What has that got to do with anything? If you want to discuss jaywalking you might be best starting a new thread?

i brought up jaywalking because people in general do not have an issue with what is an illegal practice on roads. most motorists here would be extremely put out if someone fined them for jaywalking; i was getting back to the 'clamp down on the other sort of road user' attitude which prevails.

Slurryface

BostonB wrote: »

I'd guess most of them are minor speeding infractions caught by camera's. So I looked it up.



http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/kfcwkfcwgbau/rss2/

Thank yopu for DISPROVING your own earlier allegation that there is no Garda enforcement against motorists these days.
i take it you will now have the decency to withdraw that statement.

Myrddin

BostonB wrote: »

Its not criticism of enforcement.

Its the disparate focus on the least cause (if any) of accidents, (to cyclists and pedestrians) rather than the biggest cause of accidents.

Your implying cyclists don't endanger themselves & in doing so, others. I see recklessness every day from motorists, pedestrians and yes, cyclists too. I'm a motorist, but I'm not closed minded enough to blanket all cyclists as a 'menace'. Of course they're not, a lot of them are well mannered road users who don't take chances. However, like a lot of other motorists I see, a lot of cyclists are reckless beyond belief, casual disregard for rules & other road users, & endanger themselves and others.

It's there to see every day on the roads. But yes, I agree, cyclists due to the small nature/mass & road presence of a bike isn't going to cause too much damage in an accident. But cars do, which is all the more reason for cyclists to be careful, thats all I'm saying

magicbastarder wrote: »

of *course* ineffectual law enforcement should be subject to critical enquiry.
if a law, or enforcement of a law, is ineffectual, why should we push garda resources into it?

Because if it saves even one life, its a resource worth investing, no?

Undercover Elephant

charlietheminxx wrote: »

That's exactly what I meant. Not to focus on one risk as such, but to enforce the rules for everyone. It might encourage everyone to toe the line a bit more.

That's one approach. Another is (2) to try to direct your intervention where it's likely to make the biggest safety impact. A third is (3) to pick a specific issue for a day or two and blitz it unannounced.

The Gardai would probably claim they are doing (2), but if so, they are doing it wrong. What they are in fact doing in this campaign - if they ever actually get around to doing it - is wrongly identifying cycling as being unreasonably dangerous, wrongly identifying the cause of dangers to cyclists as law-breaking by cyclists, blaming the victims, and ignoring much more significant issues.

Tomk1

steve9859 wrote: »

Yet another 'this thing happened to me the other day and therefore all cyclists are ****s' post.

Reading washiskin's post, I do not interpret your conclusion, my interpretation is that washiskin was more concerned with the future well-being of the cyclist.

But the point of this thrend is the laws of the road for all vehicles being enforced to all vehicles.

In order to drive a car you have to know & abide by the rules of the road, proof by having a valid driving-licence.
No such proof of/or accountability for a cyclist to know the rules of the road, never mind proof of abiding by those rules. Complete ignorrence could be claimed, how can a cyclist be fined for breaking a law if they are not legally required to know that law.

It's illegal to drive a motor-vehicle without a valid licence/ID on your person, IMO this should apply to all road vehicles inc bicycles, so repeat offenders can be weaned out.

Maybe one way to reduce the cyclists that spoil the broth & the sale of stolen bikes is a compulsary form of digital ID's like QR-Code (similar implementation to a licence no), a CCTV should be able to pick up a QR-code so no more anonymity to break the law.

-a Biped

Undercover Elephant

Tomk1 wrote: »

No such proof of/or accountability for a cyclist to know the rules of the road, never mind proof of abiding by those rules. Complete ignorrence could be claimed, how can a cyclist be fined for breaking a law if they are not legally required to know that law.

What are you talking about? Ignorance of the law has been no defence since the time of Strongbow.

steve9859

Slurryface wrote: »

Another " anyone who recounts a negative experience of cyclists ia a liar" retorts!:mad:

um....where did I call you a liar?

magicbastarder

Tomk1 wrote: »

It's illegal to drive a motor-vehicle without a valid licence/ID on your person, IMO this should apply to all road vehicles inc bicycles, so repeat offenders can be weaned out.

Maybe one way to reduce the cyclists that spoil the broth & the sale of stolen bikes is a compulsary form of digital ID's like QR-Code (similar implementation to a licence no), a CCTV should be able to pick up a QR-code so no more anonymity to break the law.

would i have had to apply for a licence to cycle to school when i was 12?

steve9859

Tomk1 wrote: »

It's illegal to drive a motor-vehicle without a valid licence/ID on your person, IMO this should apply to all road vehicles inc bicycles, so repeat offenders can be weaned out.

Won't happen. I posted a link yesterday with evidence from a number of countries and cities (including ones with much higher cycling levels that Ireland) that have considered and in some cases tried compulsory insurance and / or licencing schemes. And they have all found that they don't work, are impossible to police and impossible to legislate for. What about kids with bikes....what about those that only use their bike in the park...what about old and second hand bikes. No government will open that can of worms...would cost a fortune! Better off spending the money on building the infrastructure to keep bikes and cars apart in the city.

magicbastarder

EnterNow wrote: »

Because if it saves even one life, its a resource worth investing, no?

my point was that *if* the same effort - which might have saved one life - could have been concentrated elsewhere and reduced road fatalities by two lives (obviously any attempt at putting figures to this would be a hand waving exercise), should we concentrate on that itself.

some figures i found - in 2010, there were five cyclist fatalities in ireland, which was a big reduction on a decade or two earlier (may be due to falling numbers of cyclists); would a concerted campaign concentrating on cyclists which reduced fatalities by 20% divert garda resources away from other traffic duties, which could lead to a minor upswing in road fatalities?

i've found an article from june which states that road fatalities in the first five months of the year stood at six, so 2010 may have marked a low point for fatalities.

this is an interesting quote from that article:
"In fact, there is data to show that while 10 per cent of pedestrians are likely to die on impact with a vehicle travelling at 30km/h, this jumps to a whopping 80 per cent if the vehicle is travelling at 50km/h. Similar results would pertain to cyclists."

BostonB

EnterNow wrote: »

Your implying cyclists don't endanger themselves & in doing so, others. I see recklessness every day from motorists, pedestrians and yes, cyclists too. ....

Because if it saves even one life, its a resource worth investing, no?

My point is it makes sense to do the thing that has the biggest impact with the least resources. Also if the point of the campaign is improving the safety of cyclists and pedestrians, then why pick something that has the least impact on that, but takes more resources.

BostonB

magicbastarder wrote: »

i brought up jaywalking because people in general do not have an issue with what is an illegal practice on roads. most motorists here would be extremely put out if someone fined them for jaywalking; i was getting back to the 'clamp down on the other sort of road user' attitude which prevails.

I don't think there is a charge of jaywalking in this country. So its not illegal AFAIK. There is a charge for crossing near a pedestrian lights and not using them. There was a whole discussion on this a while back. No point digging all that up here. It needs its own thread.

magicbastarder

3 out of 4 cycling fatalities in Dublin have been caused by left-turning HGVs

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/health/2012/0619/1224318189169.html
this is not down to cyclists breaking red lights (or breaking any laws, probably). this is a cyclist education & assertiveness issue.

i would suspect that this number has fallen since the HGV ban, however.

Monty Burnz

Slurryface wrote: »

It aint illegal to park on a cycle lane in many cases.

And here we begin to see the problems that cyclists face in getting around Dublin safely.

BostonB

Slurryface wrote: »

Thank yopu for DISPROVING your own earlier allegation that there is no Garda enforcement against motorists these days.
i take it you will now have the decency to withdraw that statement.

What you quoted was...

BostonB wrote: »

...These days I see almost no enforcement, for months at a time. Seeing a Garda enforcing the law is a quite rare sight for me.

BostonB

magicbastarder wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/health/2012/0619/1224318189169.html
this is not down to cyclists breaking red lights (or breaking any laws, probably). this is a cyclist education & assertiveness issue.

i would suspect that this number has fallen since the HGV ban, however.

+1 a TV campaign telling people not to cycle up the inside of HGV or buses at junctions would have more effect on accidents.

monument

I'm all for better enforcement of around the issue of cyclists on footpaths, the idiots with no lights in the dark, and those breaking red lights.

But any step up in enforcement should also target cars with broken light(s) which there is more and more of travelling around Dublin these days, it should target cars illegally parked on footpaths and cycle paths which is widespread, and it should target motorists blocking cyclists advance stop lines, ped crossings and whole junctions.

I'd be also very wary of saying just because cyclists don't kill or injury any/many people does not mean some cyclist don't need to behave better. Aggressive behaver by cyclists towards pedestrians can be just as bad as aggressive behaver by motorists towards cyclists.

cournioni wrote: »

It is every bit as dangerous when cyclists break red lights and knock pedestrians over!

While I strongly disagree with cyclists breaking red lights especially when they blindly or otherwise fly across a busy junction, it's not "every bit as dangerous". Larger vehicles have a far higher potential to hurt and kill people -- it's basic physics back up by real word hard stats.

That not to say bicycles are never dangerous -- just that they are less so than cars, vans and trucks.

cournioni wrote: »

You very rarely see motorists at it, yet you almost always see cyclists breaking red lights where pedestrians have the right of way.

Where do you live? Because where ever you live sounds a lot different than the rest of the country where motorist break red lights all the time.

EnterNow wrote: »

About time the cyclists are made responsible as any other road user for disregarding rules.

What other road users are you taking about?

The 75%+ of motorist who break the speed limit in general or 90%+ who break the 30km/h limit? Those stats are survey detection rates, not the amount who are caught.

Or the pedestrians who jay-walk all over the place?

Spook_ie wrote: »

How many get killed/injured/scared by cyclists not yielding to pedestrians, as the figures aren't ( don't seem to be logged anywhere ) available we'll have to go by anecdotal evidence, which seems to point to the fact that cyclists are a load of unruly, law unto themselves thugs that think they are a cut above other road users because " We are cyclists and we matter more than other road users"

Regarding those killed on the road -- it's highly unlikely that many people killed on the road are not recorded in official stats and if people are it is as likely that people killed by motorists are also not recorded.

And regarding those injured/scared -- research by the HSE has shown that the garda / RSA stats underestimate all injuries and generally scaring people is not record. This applies to motorists, including motorists injuring or scarring other motorists.

cournioni wrote: »

Yeah, just as dangerous as breaking red lights and cycling on footpaths knocking people over. At least motorists stick to the road.

Motorists stick to the road?! :eek:

AGAIN: Where you live must be different to the rest of Ireland where motorists parking on footpaths is rampant.

Undercover Elephant

monument wrote: »

Motorists stick to the road?! :eek:

I can't find any Irish statistics, but certainly in the UK a pedestrian on the footpath is over 100x more likely to be killed by a car than a bike.

Off the top of my head, I can think of two people mown down on the footpath next to the Malahide Road*. No one seems to be able to come up with a single Irish case of pedestrian killed by cyclist on the footpath (or, indeed, at all).


EDIT - actually five mown down, in an incident in November 2009. One killed, one seriously injured, two with minor injuries, one unharmed.

cournioni

seamus wrote: »

The irony.

Very good seamus, a two word retort. How about being constructive and actually coming up with some suggestions of how to solve the problem of "cycle menaces" as the thread title suggests.