Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Time to ban rickshaws
Options
Comments
-
-
AndrewJRenko wrote: »But how am I to get my kitchen knife home from the shop if I can't carry it?
I'm pleased to hear your confirmation that Gardai can use discretion to implement the law. Dangerous cycling is an offence, so Gardai can charge rickshaw drivers who cycle dangerously with that offence any time they like. There is no need for banning to address this issue.
A long way off 100k (the number of uninsured drivers on our road) to be sure.
So that makes it OK then? Should an uninsured taxi driver be allowed on the road?0 -
You bring it home in a plastic bag. If you are seen recklessly running up and down grafton street around midnight brandishing a knife you will likely be done -whether or not there are any previous instances of people being injured by knife weilding lunatics running up and down grafton street.AndrewJRenko wrote: »But how am I to get my kitchen knife home from the shop if I can't carry it?
I said "Carrying a knife of a certain length in public can be decided to be illegal or not", even if in the bag you may be questioned.
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1990/act/12/enacted/en/print#sec9PART III
Offensive Weapons
Possession of knives and other articles.
9.?(1) Subject to subsections (2) and (3), where a person has with him in any public place any knife or any other article which has a blade or which is sharply pointed, he shall be guilty of an offence.
(2) It shall be a defence for a person charged with an offence under subsection (1) to prove that he had good reason or lawful authority for having the article with him in a public place.
(3) Without prejudice to the generality of subsection (2), it shall be a defence for a person charged with an offence under subsection (1) to prove that he had the article with him for use at work or for a recreational purpose.
If rickshaws were banned from the roads and you bought one you would have to get it delivered in a truck, then you would be free to use it on your own private land as you wish, just like the knife. Many may not want rickshaws banned from roads, just banning the use of them as unregulated taxis by tax dodgers. If this was the ban there would be very few people on them.0 -
No, absolutely not - no uninsured motor vehicle should be allowed on the road given the danger that they cause, and their track record of killing four or five people on the roads each week.Hilly Bill wrote: »So that makes it OK then? Should an uninsured taxi driver be allowed on the road?
And we have existing legislation that manages this - no need for any extra laws, we just need enforcement of existing law.You bring it home in a plastic bag. If you are seen recklessly running up and down grafton street around midnight brandishing a knife you will likely be done -whether or not there are any previous instances of people being injured by knife weilding lunatics running up and down grafton street.
I said "Carrying a knife of a certain length in public can be decided to be illegal or not", even if in the bag you may be questioned.
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1990/act/12/enacted/en/print#sec9
If rickshaws were banned from the roads and you bought one you would have to get it delivered in a truck, then you would be free to use it on your own private land as you wish, just like the knife. Many may not want rickshaws banned from roads, just banning the use of them as unregulated taxis by tax dodgers. If this was the ban there would be very few people on them.
I don't get it. You want to ban rickshaws because they are dangerous, but for knives, it is only dangerous activity that you want to ban. What's the difference?0 -
It's more the taxation & possible insurance thing I am concerned with. As said there are already laws which cover the danger aspects. I am not sure if laws cover the tax & insurance thing.AndrewJRenko wrote: »You want to ban rickshaws because they are dangerous
I expect many of the rickshaws with motors are technically uninsured motor vehicles, I imagine many have higher power engines than electric bikes are allowed to have. This article reckons most are motorised. So depending on the power most are possibly already banned.AndrewJRenko wrote: »No, absolutely not - no uninsured motor vehicle should be allowed on the road given the danger that they cause
http://www.herald.ie/news/we-cant-regulate-rickshaws-with-motors-says-council-chief-keegan-35414009.htmlDublin City Council chief Owen Keegan has admitted it will not be possible to regulate rickshaws because new legislation does not cover vehicles with motors.
In a letter seen by the Herald, Mr Keegan admitted that the new legislation as part of the Road Traffic Act 2016 overlooked that most rickshaws are motorised. He said legal advice given to the National Transport Authority (NTA) means it is unlikely the regulations will hold up in court without the type of vehicle being specified.While this has not yet been implemented, it would not work for the majority of rickshaws because the majority have an electric motor.
http://babylonradio.com/dublin-city-council-issues-warning-regarding-safety-rickshaws/Dublin city council issues warning for rickshaw users 1
BY NEHA KATOCH ON JUNE 9, 2017 BABYLON NEWS, MOST RECENT
The Dublin city council on Friday issued a public advisory notice warning people of the safety hazards of using unlicensed rickshaws. The vehicles, which are often motorised, are a popular form of transportation for late night partygoers and revellers in the city centre.
?Dublin City council wishes to advise members of the public, for their own safety and the safety of others, that rickshaws operating in Dublin City are not regulated by DCC or otherwise and that some rickshaw operators appear not to have public liability insurance,? said the council in the notice posted on its website.
It was reported earlier in the year that the council had hoped to ban the mode of transport entirely by the end of 2017. There have been a number of accidents in the past with people falling out of rickshaws and of collisions with other vehicles ? it?s a real worry because the combination of crowds and alcohol and narrow streets is very dangerous.
?Rickshaws are a real difficulty in in Dublin because they?re unregulated,? Green Party councillor Ciaran Cuffe told TheJournal.ie. ?We have written to the Department of Transport seeking such regulation and we?re still waiting for that to happen,? he added.
Chairman of the Dublin City Joint Policing Committee Daithi De Roiste hit out at rickshaws earlier this year, calling the city centre a ?free for all? at the weekends and demanding the issue be sorted. Last year, a woman was forced to have surgery after being launched out of a rickshaw and injuring herself.
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/dadoftwo-furious-after-rickshaw-crashed-into-car-and-cycled-off-its-going-to-cost-me-2k-35810198.htmlJune 10 2017 8:47 AM
A dad-of-two working as a taxi driver in Dublin fears he will now be almost ?2k out-of-pocket as a rickshaw driver who crashed into his car is refusing to pay.
Lee Li (37) was waiting at a set of traffic lights on Hatch Street when a rickshaw driver rear-ended his car and cycled off.
The incident happened on May 20 at around 2am and Mr Li has been trying to get the driver to pay him for the damage caused ever since.
Mr Li drove after the rickshaw driver when the accident happened, pulled him over and called gardai.
However, after initially saying he would fund the repairs, the rickshaw driver has not yet paid Mr Li.
?I have no idea what to do now as he hasn?t paid me, the guards say they can?t do anything as it?s to do with insurance and the Small Claims Court said they can?t take on the case as it involves a ?bicycle,?? Mr Li told Independent.ie.
The back bumper of his Toyota car was damaged in the incident. He has received a quote of ?1,500 for a new bumper and the cost of repairs.0 -
Advertisement
-
It's more the taxation & possible insurance thing I am concerned with. As said there are already laws which cover the danger aspects. I am not sure if laws cover the tax & insurance thing.
I expect many of the rickshaws with motors are technically uninsured motor vehicles, I imagine many have higher power engines than electric bikes are allowed to have. This article reckons most are motorised. So depending on the power most are possibly already banned.
AFAIK, there are no laws around these motorised bikes, so it is all a bit of a grey area. I wouldn't have a problem with any sensible law regulating them. Requiring rickshaws that carry passengers to have insurance would be a sensible option too - but no need for banning.
I wonder how many drivers were rear-ended by uninsured drivers that week? But did each minor fender bender get into the paper? Not a chance.
But if there's a chance of an anti-cycling story to further the George Hook agenda, it will definitely be published.
Why is that now?0 -
AndrewJRenko wrote: »AFAIK, there are no laws around these motorised bikes, so it is all a bit of a grey area.
Really?
http://www.garda.ie/Controller.aspx?Page=1728&Lang=1AndrewJRenko wrote: »I wouldn't have a problem with any sensible law regulating them. Requiring rickshaws that carry passengers to have insurance would be a sensible option too - but no need for banning.
Do you know a few post back you said that rickshaws should be lesser of Gardai priorities? So you want regulation now, just not the Gardai enforcing it?
I honestly don't see the point of Gardai at 2am going around to ask rickshaw drivers for their insurance. Revenue going around to see if they are paying tax etc etc. It is a massive waste of time and resources. Ban them for the simple reason regulation will waste resources.AndrewJRenko wrote: »I wonder how many drivers were rear-ended by uninsured drivers that week? But did each minor fender bender get into the paper? Not a chance.
If you got rear ended by an uninsured driver, do you know what happens? You can still get a payout from MIBI.
If Pedro on his rickshaw takes you out of it and is uninsured. Who pays out there? No one...0 -
That's about scooters, not bikes.wordofwarning wrote: »
I don't see the point of the Gardai going round at 2am to stop drunks beating the crap out of each other in Temple Bar, or knocking into pubs to catch people having lock-ins, or taking people to jail for not paying their TV licences. There are lots of pointless things that the Gardai do, but we don't generally go round banning stuff as a result.wordofwarning wrote: »Do you know a few post back you said that rickshaws should be lesser of Gardai priorities? So you want regulation now, just not the Gardai enforcing it?
I honestly don't see the point of Gardai at 2am going around to ask rickshaw drivers for their insurance. Revenue going around to see if they are paying tax etc etc. It is a massive waste of time and resources. Ban them for the simple reason regulation will waste resources.wordofwarning wrote: »If you got rear ended by an uninsured driver, do you know what happens? You can still get a payout from MIBI.
If Pedro on his rickshaw takes you out of it and is uninsured. Who pays out there? No one...
Well, if you've comprehensive insurance, as pretty much anyone with anything more than a junker car has, your insurance company pays out.
But that doesn't explain the press coverage - don't the press just love to cover the stories about the terrible cyclists.0 -
AndrewJRenko wrote: »That's about scooters, not bikes.
It is about anything that is mechanical or electrical propelled.
http://www.thejournal.ie/bike-engine-kit-legality-2421359-Nov2015/AndrewJRenko wrote: »There are lots of pointless things that the Gardai do, but we don't generally go round banning stuff as a result.
So you take back your point about the Gardai should not enforce regulations on rickshaws? Yes? No? You went off on a tangent, that I can't see what it added to the discussionAndrewJRenko wrote: »Well, if you've comprehensive insurance, as pretty much anyone with anything more than a junker car has, your insurance company pays out.
Oh, so I need to get fully compo insurance of when Pedro crashes his rickshaw into the back of me uninsured? You are totally missing the point... If an uninsured driver crashes into me, I am covered by the MIBI. They will payout.
When Pedro crashes into me, my insurer has to pay out as he is not a car.0 -
Eh no, that page (http://www.garda.ie/Controller.aspx?Page=1728&Lang=1) is about scooters. The hint would be in the title; "legal status of electric/battery powered scooters"wordofwarning wrote: »It is about anything that is mechanical or electrical propelled.
http://www.thejournal.ie/bike-engine-kit-legality-2421359-Nov2015/
So then you referenced a different article from two years ago, which does indeed report the gardai as saying that bikes with engines need insurance.
For the record, the Gardai don't make up or interpret the law, they enforce it. Laws are made by the Oireachtas and interpreted by the Courts.
To the best of my knowledge, there has been no prosecution of anyone with a mechanical bike or eBike for having no insurance. You can even get tax relief on an eBike through the Bike to Work scheme with no requirement to have insurance.
So the law is far from clear on this.
If you'd like me to say it again, I'm happy to; "I've no problem with their behaviour being dealt with, within the context of overall Garda resources and priorities".wordofwarning wrote: »So you take back your point about the Gardai should not enforce regulations on rickshaws? Yes? No? You went off on a tangent, that I can't see what it added to the discussion
And as for tangents, this whole thread is really a tangent when it comes to road safety. It is a solution looking for a problem.
We all pay for the MIBI payout through our insurers. And there are 100k uninsured cars on our streets. And they are just a bit bigger, heavier and faster than any rickshaw - just for context.wordofwarning wrote: »Oh, so I need to get fully compo insurance of when Pedro crashes his rickshaw into the back of me uninsured? You are totally missing the point... If an uninsured driver crashes into me, I am covered by the MIBI. They will payout.
When Pedro crashes into me, my insurer has to pay out as he is not a car.
But hey, let's get a bit of immigrant-bashing going here if that's your thing.0 -
Advertisement
-
AndrewJRenko wrote: »If you'd like me to say it again, I'm happy to; "I've no problem with their behaviour being dealt with, within the context of overall Garda resources and priorities".
In the past it appears you seem to believe, that the Gardai should not treat this a priority. So you want regulation and rules etc. What's the point if you don't see them as important enough to enforce them?
Would you finally like to admit there is no point regulating rickshaw drivers, as you don't think the Gardai should enforce the regs 'as they are not a priority'? You just want things to stay as is really.
Imagine if at 3am if the Gardai did not have to be dealing with rickshaw drivers if they were outlawed? It would not be a strain on Gardai resources, as the Gardai would not have deal with enforcing regs.AndrewJRenko wrote: »We all pay for the MIBI payout through our insurers. And there are 100k uninsured cars on our streets. And they are just a bit bigger, heavier and faster than any rickshaw - just for context.
I did not ask for context and it adds nothing to the discussion...
The point I was making is if you get hitted by an uninsured driver, you have recourse. If you get hit by a rickshaw driver, you are paying for it yourself. Your point about cars being heavier etc is not in the slightest bit relevant.AndrewJRenko wrote: »But hey, let's get a bit of immigrant-bashing going here if that's your thing.
Have you met an Irish rickshaw driver in the last 3/4 years?
I have no problem with immigrants at all if they respect the rules of the nation. I have a massive issue with people coming to Ireland paying no taxes, not following the rules of their visas(how do you know if a rickshaw driver is sticking to the rules of his visa with cash in hand?), selling drugs and being a general nuisance. But lets not up bring it up that someone is a guest in our nation and does not think the rules apply to them.0 -
The council are quick to act with this new Bleeperbike because it has the potential to impact on their revenue from Dublin Bikes. They can move quick when they want to.
http://www.thejournal.ie/bleeper-bikes-dublin-3448895-Jun2017/0 -
they've put out a threatening statement they havn't acted.The council are quick to act with this new Bleeperbike because it has the potential to impact on their revenue from Dublin Bikes. They can move quick when they want to.
http://www.thejournal.ie/bleeper-bikes-dublin-3448895-Jun2017/0 -
Some of these rickshaws could well be described as scooters. I cannot find a legal definition of rickshaw in Irish law.AndrewJRenko wrote: »Eh no, that page (http://www.garda.ie/Controller.aspx?Page=1728&Lang=1) is about scooters. The hint would be in the title; "legal status of electric/battery powered scooters"
This one does include "scooter" under "bicycle".
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1977/si/122/made/en/print" 'bicycle' means a mechanically propelled bicycle (including a motor scooter, a bicycle with an attachment for propelling it by mechanical power and a mechanically propelled bicycle used for drawing a trailer or sidecar) not exceeding 8 cwt. in weight unladen".
8cwt is ~400kg
The e-bike scheme limits them to 250W, and this is what I was getting at earlier, they are possibly using higher power engines. I cannot find a limit of 250W in Irish law, but I have read a lot about e-bikes and it seems most seem to think they are limited to 250W in the EU. Some US bikes were not available for sale here and they have EU models of the same bike with lower speed restrictions and smaller motors.AndrewJRenko wrote: »To the best of my knowledge, there has been no prosecution of anyone with a mechanical bike or eBike for having no insurance. You can even get tax relief on an eBike through the Bike to Work scheme with no requirement to have insurance.
There was a recent case of a guy being prosecuted for having a petrol motor attachment on his bike. I am not sure if any rickshaws have petrol motors.
Clare Daly did infer there was a 250W & 25km/hr limit
http://irishcycle.com/2015/07/08/transport-minister-questioned-on-powerful-electric-bicycles/Electrical assisted bicycles are currently restricted to 25km/h before the motor stops helping the user from going faster, but it seems there is lobbying for change in Ireland.
A growing number of European and other bicycle manufacturers are creating fast electric bicycles which can reach speeds of up to 40km/h with little effort.
A parliamentary question asked by Clare Daly TD (Dublin North, United Left) was told that minister has no current plan to increase the speed allowed. It is unclear who Daly was asking the question for.
Deputy Daly asked: ?To ask the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport if he has considered increasing the speed limits for electric pedelecs from 15 mph (25 km/h) and increasing the engine size to above 250 watts in view of the fact that the current limits were set in 1978.?
In reply, the minister for transport, Paschal Donohoe (Dublin Central, Fine Gael), wrote: ?I have no proposals at this time for amending legislation in relation to pedelecs (electrically assisted bicycles). I will however keep the matter under review.?
Electric bicycles can exceed 25 km/h if the user is pedaling hard, but it?s at that speed that the electric assistance should start to cut out. If the electric assistance continues or if the electric motor operates without the user peddling, the electric bicycle is then considered a normal mechanically propelled vehicle ? which requires a licence to use, and both vehicle registration and motor tax to operate on a public road. This law is followed nearly identically across the EU Member States.
There is no ?grey area? in the law, electrical bicycles which are rated over the allowed legal limits are not viewed as bicycles but should be treated as classes of electric scooters or mopeds.
this is the limitation on the cycle to work scheme.
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2008/act/25/enacted/en/print? pedelec ? means a bicycle or tricycle which is equipped with an auxiliary electric motor having a maximum continuous rated power of 0.25 kilowatts, of which output is progressively reduced and finally cut off as the vehicle reaches a speed of 25 kilometres per hour, or sooner if the cyclist stops pedalling;0 -
Do you have any more details of this? I'd be very interested to hear more.There was a recent case of a guy being prosecuted for having a petrol motor attachment on his bike.The council are quick to act with this new Bleeperbike because it has the potential to impact on their revenue from Dublin Bikes. They can move quick when they want to.
http://www.thejournal.ie/bleeper-bikes-dublin-3448895-Jun2017/expectationlost wrote: »they've put out a threatening statement they havn't acted.
Indeed, they haven't acted. They've threatened to act, and have quoted a section of an Act which doesn't seem to be directly relevant to me.
In relation to rickshaws, I understand that both DCC and the NTA got legal advice which confirmed that they have no power to regulate under existing legislation. Gardai can act under existing legislation, including dangerous cycling as appropriate.wordofwarning wrote: »In the past it appears you seem to believe, that the Gardai should not treat this a priority. So you want regulation and rules etc. What's the point if you don't see them as important enough to enforce them?
Would you finally like to admit there is no point regulating rickshaw drivers, as you don't think the Gardai should enforce the regs 'as they are not a priority'? You just want things to stay as is really.
To me, it's not a huge priority because rickshaw drivers don't kill and maim people, same as any cyclist doesn't kill or maim people. If anyone has a genuine concern about saving lives on our roads, the starting place is is obvious - get drivers to slow down, put their phones down, put their pints down. This is where Gardai should prioritise their activities.
That's not to say that Gardai shouldn't enforce existing laws on rickshaw drivers if/when they see offences being carried out. I've no problems with Gardai enforcing any existing laws, in proportion to the risk arising.
I don't want to see things staying as they are at all. I don't want to see 4 or 5 people being killed on the road each week. I don't want to feel that my life is in danger every time I cycle in traffic because some drivers think their text message or phone call is more important than my safety. Every hour Gardai spend chasing rickshaw drivers is an hour NOT spent reducing the death toll on our roads.
Imagine if at 3am, the Gardai (and the doctors and the fire brigade) did not have to be dealing with drunks if they were outlawed. Drunks would not be a dtrain on Gardai or medical resources, as the Gardai and doctors would not have to deal with drunks.wordofwarning wrote: »Imagine if at 3am if the Gardai did not have to be dealing with rickshaw drivers if they were outlawed? It would not be a strain on Gardai resources, as the Gardai would not have deal with enforcing regs.
If you want to save Garda resources by banning things, let's start with drunks for a real impact, not a non-issue like rickshaws.
Yes, I know you didn't ask for it, and I know you want to avoid awkward questions and issues about the real dangers on our roads. But you're not going to get away with it.wordofwarning wrote: »I did not ask for context and it adds nothing to the discussion...wordofwarning wrote: »The point I was making is if you get hitted by an uninsured driver, you have recourse. If you get hit by a rickshaw driver, you are paying for it yourself. Your point about cars being heavier etc is not in the slightest bit relevant.
I know well the point that you're making, bigging up a non-issue Trump style to stir up hatred tinged with a little bit of racism. I know you want to avoid the reality of many drivers and many people being injured by uninsured drivers each week, and being killed in serious cases. I know you want to avoid the reality that MIBI payments are paid by everybody, not from the magic money tree.wordofwarning wrote: »Have you met an Irish rickshaw driver in the last 3/4 years?
I have no problem with immigrants at all if they respect the rules of the nation. I have a massive issue with people coming to Ireland paying no taxes, not following the rules of their visas(how do you know if a rickshaw driver is sticking to the rules of his visa with cash in hand?), selling drugs and being a general nuisance. But lets not up bring it up that someone is a guest in our nation and does not think the rules apply to them.
Yes, I have met an Irish rickshaw driver. These ones were on RTE News last week, but I guess you'd want to ban them.
http://cyclingwithoutage.ie/
It is interesting that you have a huge problem with a tiny number of immigrants who apparently sell drugs and break visa rules, but we don't hear you ranting much about the 100k Irish people driving uninsured cars.0 -
AndrewJRenko wrote: »
To me, it's not a huge priority because rickshaw drivers don't kill and maim people, .....
I don't want to see things staying as they are at all. I don't want to see 4 or 5 people being killed on the road each week......
Dude honestly just admit you don't want regulations for rickshaws as you don't think the Gardai should enforce them. You think they have bigger fish to fry, so don't bother with regulating or enforcing rickshaws in your opinion.
You keep going around and around and around about how you want regulation ,but the gardai should not enforce it
Maybe when someone flies out of a rickshaw, cracks their head on the kerb and dies we can go and regulate them then. Because you seem to think only when people are dying that rules should be enforced...AndrewJRenko wrote: »
Yes, I know you didn't ask for it, and I know you want to avoid awkward questions and issues about the real dangers on our roads. But you're not going to get away with it.
It was not an awkward fact or question. It was completely irrelevant to the discussion. You want to talk about everything but rickshaw drivers.AndrewJRenko wrote: »I know you want to avoid the reality of many drivers and many people being injured by uninsured drivers each week, and being killed in serious cases. I know you want to avoid the reality that MIBI payments are paid by everybody, not from the magic money tree.
I want you to acknowledge that uninsured drivers when they cause damage, the injured party can still get claim from the MIBI. The source of those funds irrelevant. If a rickshaw crashes into me, I can't claim from anyone other than my insurer. Yes I can sue the broke student, who is driving the rickshaw, but you can't get blood from a stone. I am paying for incident I did not cause.AndrewJRenko wrote: »It is interesting that you have a huge problem with a tiny number of immigrants who apparently sell drugs and break visa rules, but we don't hear you ranting much about the 100k Irish people driving uninsured cars.
Dude, I don't know if you have not realised, the discussion is on rickshaws and the problems associated with it. Why would I want to discuss uninsured drivers, it is not relevant to rickshaws?
Im sorry if I am not outraged about an issue that is not relevant in the slightest to the discussion, which you keep deflecting to as clearly has no justification for rickshaws being permitted ...:rolleyes:0 -
It was mentioned in several threads in the cycling forum, he was pissed rotten. I should have said that as my comment might sound like he was solely done for having the motor. But it sounds like they could effectively be done for uninsured driving.AndrewJRenko wrote: »Do you have any more details of this? I'd be very interested to hear more.
Cyclist on motorised bike banned for three years for drink cycling
It if was motorised and above 250W and/or not pedal assist but throttled then you could possibly put in a claim, as its an uninsured motor vehicle. Maybe something like this has to happen before we see a clampdown.wordofwarning wrote: »I want you to acknowledge that uninsured drivers when they cause damage, the injured party can still get claim from the MIBI. The source of those funds irrelevant. If a rickshaw crashes into me, I can't claim from anyone other than my insurer.0 -
more here,might want to split thread http://irishcycle.com/2017/06/17/bleeperbike-to-delay-launch-of-dublins-first-stationless-bike-share/AndrewJRenko wrote: »Do you have any more details of this? I'd be very interested to hear more.
Indeed, they haven't acted. They've threatened to act, and have quoted a section of an Act which doesn't seem to be directly relevant to me.
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1993/act/14/section/71/enacted/en/html
Unauthorised signs, caravans, vehicles, etc. on public roads.
71.?(1) (a) Any person who, without lawful authority or the consent of a road authority?
(i) erects, places or retains a sign on a public road, or
(ii) erects, places or retains on a public road any caravan, vehicle or other structure or thing (whether on wheels or not) used for the purposes of advertising, the sale of goods, the provision of services or other similar purpose,
shall be guilty of an offence.
placing something for the purpose of some service versus that something being the service....?0 -
Dude, I'd be quite happy to see regulations for 'taxi' rickshaws, and I'd be quite happy to see appropriate enforcement, in line with overall Garda priorities (with stopping motorists from killing four or five people each week as a much higher priority).wordofwarning wrote: »Dude honestly just admit you don't want regulations for rickshaws as you don't think the Gardai should enforce them. You think they have bigger fish to fry, so don't bother with regulating or enforcing rickshaws in your opinion.
If there were an option for most of the regulation to be done by the Taxi Regulator's team, that could be away to avoid the strain on Garda resources. Mind you, it would put some kind strain on the Taxi Regulator resources who would also have bigger fish to fry. And the Regulator tend to rely on Gardai for serious enforcement activities too.
As I said, I've no problem with regulation, Dud. But if you think that one death is a reason for an enforcement crackdown, let's see the instant crackdown on the speeding/phoning motorists that kill four or five people each week on the roads.wordofwarning wrote: »You keep going around and around and around about how you want regulation ,but the gardai should not enforce it
Maybe when someone flies out of a rickshaw, cracks their head on the kerb and dies we can go and regulate them then. Because you seem to think only when people are dying that rules should be enforced...
Dude, we don't have an anti-rickshaw police force, so when comes to resources and priorities for enforcement, all these other issues are relevant. I know it's awkward that they don't suit your argument, but that doesn't change the facts.wordofwarning wrote: »It was not an awkward fact or question. It was completely irrelevant to the discussion. You want to talk about everything but rickshaw drivers.
Actually, that's not true. The MIBI only kicks in when you can prove that driver was uninsured. If damage is caused by an unknown driver, there is no cover. If damage is caused by any cyclist, there is no cover. If damage is caused by a shopping trolley, there is no cover. If damage is caused by a parent pushing a buggy, there is no cover.wordofwarning wrote: »I want you to acknowledge that uninsured drivers when they cause damage, the injured party can still get claim from the MIBI. The source of those funds irrelevant. If a rickshaw crashes into me, I can't claim from anyone other than my insurer. Yes I can sue the broke student, who is driving the rickshaw, but you can't get blood from a stone. I am paying for incident I did not cause.
That's why comprehensive insurance is generally a good idea if you have anything better than a clunker car, Dude.wordofwarning wrote: »Dude, I don't know if you have not realised, the discussion is on rickshaws and the problems associated with it. Why would I want to discuss uninsured drivers, it is not relevant to rickshaws?
Dude, we don't have an anti-rickshaw police force, so when comes to resources and priorities for enforcement, all these other issues are relevant. I know it's awkward that they don't suit your argument, but that doesn't change the facts.wordofwarning wrote: »Im sorry if I am not outraged about an issue that is not relevant in the slightest to the discussion, which you keep deflecting to as clearly has no justification for rickshaws being permitted ...:rolleyes:
Dude, we don't have an anti-rickshaw police force, so when comes to resources and priorities for enforcement, all these other issues are relevant. I know it's awkward that they don't suit your argument, but that doesn't change the facts.
Interesting, thanks for the updates - seems to be a bit of a legal mess out there at the moment.It was mentioned in several threads in the cycling forum, he was pissed rotten. I should have said that as my comment might sound like he was solely done for having the motor. But it sounds like they could effectively be done for uninsured driving.
Cyclist on motorised bike banned for three years for drink cycling
It if was motorised and above 250W and/or not pedal assist but throttled then you could possibly put in a claim, as its an uninsured motor vehicle. Maybe something like this has to happen before we see a clampdown.0 -
I see that you got the " 3 or 4 motorists" comment in again.0
-
Advertisement
-
Hilly Bill wrote: »I see that you got the " 3 or 4 motorists" comment in again.
Which comment do you mean? The "speeding/phoning motorists that kill four or five people each week on the roads" comment?0 -
Ye,0
-
Hilly Bill wrote: »Ye,
Yes, you're correct so. I did mention "speeding/phoning motorists that kill four or five people each week on the roads" again.0 -
AndrewJRenko wrote: »
As I said, I've no problem with regulation, Dud. But if you think that one death is a reason for an enforcement crackdown, let's see the instant crackdown on the speeding/phoning motorists that kill four or five people each week on the roads.
Not even a road death from a rickshaw justifies a crackdown? Im trying to see method to your madness, but there is none at all...
Dude, by saying you want regulation, you just don't think it should be enforced means really you dont want regulation. Stop trying to make it seem rational and logical, as it is not in the slightest. You don't want regulation and refuse to admit it
for enforcement, all these other issues are relevant. I know it's awkward that they don't suit your argument, but that doesn't change the facts.AndrewJRenko wrote: »Dude, we don't have an anti-rickshaw police force, so when comes to resources and
[/QUOTE]
Speeding is dreadful, drink driving is dreadful etc etc etc. Do you know what pisses a ton of Dubliners and I? The amount of rickshaws on pedestrian streets. I hate walking down Grafton St late at night, as I don't know if a speeding rickshaw driver will take me out of it. I don't like walking around Dublin 2 and someone shouting at me do I want a ride.
We don't have a serious issue with drink driving between the canals, nor do we have an issue with speeding as most of Dublin City is gridlocked pretty much 24/7. So I am not buying your BS argument, that rickshaws should be permitted, as the Gardai should focus on other issues in the City.
Yes drink driving and speeding might be an issue in Donegal or Kerry, so therefore based 'on facts' Dublin should not ban rickshaws...
Since you are wild about 'the facts'...Here is an 'awkward fact' which completely undermines your 'argument', only 12 people died on Dublin roads in 2012, which is one a month.
Your whole argument of rickshaws should not regulated due to Gardai having better things to do seems ridiculous considering see few people die of traffic related accidents in Dublin. Also when only 12 people die per year in Dublin due to traffic accidents, your whole point of one people dying due to a rickshaw is grand seems totally ridiculous as that single person dying is a whopping 8% increase in road deaths for the year.0 -
Well, the method is, Dude, one death in a blue moon vs four deaths every week - or in mathematical terms 1:200, or in percentage terms 0.5% - that's the significance of one death (that hasn't yet happened) vs the carnage on our roads that you want to take resources away from.wordofwarning wrote: »Not even a road death from a rickshaw justifies a crackdown? Im trying to see method to your madness, but there is none at all...
Dude, I'm not going to go round in circles repeating myself. My position is clear. You can try to misrepresent it as often as you want to try to suit your argument, but that doesn't change my position.wordofwarning wrote: »Dude, by saying you want regulation, you just don't think it should be enforced means really you dont want regulation. Stop trying to make it seem rational and logical, as it is not in the slightest. You don't want regulation and refuse to admit it
I'm not so sure there are a ton of Dubliners out there that share your opinion. I wouldn't be out on Grafton St at 2am very frequently, but when I have been, I don't see the chaos and mayhem that seems to exist in your own head. There is far more chaos and mayhem coming from the drunks and the fast food places than the rickshaw heads, but we don't have many calls for banning them.wordofwarning wrote: »Speeding is dreadful, drink driving is dreadful etc etc etc. Do you know what pisses a ton of Dubliners and I? The amount of rickshaws on pedestrian streets. I hate walking down Grafton St late at night, as I don't know if a speeding rickshaw driver will take me out of it. I don't like walking around Dublin 2 and someone shouting at me do I want a ride.wordofwarning wrote: »We don't have a serious issue with drink driving between the canals, nor do we have an issue with speeding as most of Dublin City is gridlocked pretty much 24/7. So I am not buying your BS argument, that rickshaws should be permitted, as the Gardai should focus on other issues in the City.
Yes drink driving and speeding might be an issue in Donegal or Kerry, so therefore based 'on facts' Dublin should not ban rickshaws...
Since you are wild about 'the facts'...Here is an 'awkward fact' which completely undermines your 'argument', only 12 people died on Dublin roads in 2012, which is one a month.
Your whole argument of rickshaws should not regulated due to Gardai having better things to do seems ridiculous considering see few people die of traffic related accidents in Dublin. Also when only 12 people die per year in Dublin due to traffic accidents, your whole point of one people dying due to a rickshaw is grand seems totally ridiculous as that single person dying is a whopping 8% increase in road deaths for the year.
Some interesting selective use of statistics there. Why base your entire argument on the 2012 statistics, and not the more recent larger statistics? And more importantly, why base your entire argument on the mythical death in a rickshaw that hasn't actually happened? It's not really a sound basis for legislative change.0 -
AndrewJRenko wrote: »Well, the method is, Dude, one death in a blue moon vs four deaths every week - or in mathematical terms 1:200, or in percentage terms 0.5% - that's the significance of one death (that hasn't yet happened) vs the carnage on our roads that you want to take resources away from.
There is one road death per month in Dublin. You keep banging on about the 3/4 deaths per week in Ireland. Under your logic, should we start moving Dublin based Gardai to Kerry/Donegal to deal with the road deaths there?
Dude, I'm not going to go round in circles repeating myself. My position is clear. You can try to misrepresent it as often as you want to try to suit your argument, but that doesn't change my position.
I know you keep bringing up the 3/4 road deaths per week despite one death a month happening in Dublin. But you are the one not misrepresenting the state of road deaths...
Some interesting selective use of statistics there. Why base your entire argument on the 2012 statistics, and not the more recent larger statistics? And more importantly, why base your entire argument on the mythical death in a rickshaw that hasn't actually happened? It's not really a sound basis for legislative change.[/QUOTE]
I has an interesting use of stats? You would call the non-stop mentioning of 3/4 road deaths per week despite only one a month occurring in Dublin as an interesting use of facts. If you are so concerned about stats, what year and what article did you use for your figure of 3/4 deaths per week?
I am not basing my entire argument on misleading national stats to make my point like you.0 -
wordofwarning wrote: »There is one road death per month in Dublin. You keep banging on about the 3/4 deaths per week in Ireland. Under your logic, should we start moving Dublin based Gardai to Kerry/Donegal to deal with the road deaths there?
Dude, I'm not going to go round in circles repeating myself. My position is clear. You can try to misrepresent it as often as you want to try to suit your argument, but that doesn't change my position.
I know you keep bringing up the 3/4 road deaths per week despite one death a month happening in Dublin. But you are the one not misrepresenting the state of road deaths...
Some interesting selective use of statistics there. Why base your entire argument on the 2012 statistics, and not the more recent larger statistics? And more importantly, why base your entire argument on the mythical death in a rickshaw that hasn't actually happened? It's not really a sound basis for legislative change.
I has an interesting use of stats? You would call the non-stop mentioning of 3/4 road deaths per week despite only one a month occurring in Dublin as an interesting use of facts. If you are so concerned about stats, what year and what article did you use for your figure of 3/4 deaths per week?
I am not basing my entire argument on misleading national stats to make my point like you.
We only have one Garda force dude. We don't have Dublin Gardai and rickshaw Gardai and Kerry Gardai. It is one force, one pile of resources that the Commissioner allocates. What is this obsession with road deaths in Dublin? Sure you might as well just look at road deaths for Grafton Street or for 2am or whatever.
Any Gardai allocated to enforce your beloved rickshaw ban will mean reduced resources available to cut the death toll on our roads. It is a solution looking for a problem to solve.0 -
I just have to un-follow this thread now because it's turned into a personal row between two posters and if I read the word fcuking Dude one more time I'll have to pull my hair out.0
-
Personally I'd like to see them banned. They don't add anything to the city and have zero regulation.AndrewJRenko wrote: »So you have no issue of the drivers who kill four or five people on the roads each week?
In terms of all the problems we have on our roads, where does this rickshaw issue come on your priority list of things to be fixed?AndrewJRenko wrote: »I prioritise issues by their impact. No-one has been killed by rickshaw in the 20-ish years they've been operating in Dublin. There hasn't been any substantiated report of serious injuries.
That's why it is a minor issue. If there is an issue in drug-dealing, then by all means, enforce that law fully. If there is an issue with Revenue fraud or social welfare fraud, then by all means, enforce those laws fully.
But let's not exaggerate risk beyond what the data clearly shows.
Kind of an idiotic argument. Rickshaws are fine because cars kill people. We should concentrate 100% on deaths and ignore everything else.
Here's a situation you'd probably be happy with. Your house is broken into, all your stuff is taken and your place is trashed. Guy is still in the house loading stuff into a van. You call the police. They tell you there's been 10 murders so far this year, do you honestly think your poxy stolen TV is more important? Do you like murder? Because that's what your saying if you expect police to put resources into your break in rather than the murders.
See? Absolutely dumb argument you're making.0 -
Advertisement
-
Sorry about that, dude. I didn't realise that calling someone dude repeatedly was slightly annoying. I won't do it again, dude.I just have to un-follow this thread now because it's turned into a personal row between two posters and if I read the word fcuking Dude one more time I'll have to pull my hair out.
I'd guess that the people who use them might have a different view, but you're certainly entitled to your own view.Personally I'd like to see them banned. They don't add anything to the city and have zero regulation.
Your 'absolutely dumb' situation is the reality of normal operations for those who provide emergency services. The reality is, that if you get a call about the burglar at the van outside, and the one Garda car for the district is dealing with a knife attack on a wife separated from her husband, you do indeed have to tell the burglar's victims to hang on and wait.Kind of an idiotic argument. Rickshaws are fine because cars kill people. We should concentrate 100% on deaths and ignore everything else.
Here's a situation you'd probably be happy with. Your house is broken into, all your stuff is taken and your place is trashed. Guy is still in the house loading stuff into a van. You call the police. They tell you there's been 10 murders so far this year, do you honestly think your poxy stolen TV is more important? Do you like murder? Because that's what your saying if you expect police to put resources into your break in rather than the murders.
See? Absolutely dumb argument you're making.
I've seen a couple of stories from people who have had exactly that situation - burglars in the house and Gardai unable to respond. It is not pretty, but it happens.
That's the reality of prioritising with limited resources.0
Advertisement