Cyclists mega-thread (WARNING: Before posting you must read post #1)

magicbastarder

some of the lights you do see for sale - and being used - would barely qualify as a fairy light on a christmas tree. how about a regulation that to sell or use a light, it must meet a minimum standard?

uck51js9zml2yt

Sad thing is it's the motorists who are held to be at fault for hitting these idiots.

I cycle and drive.

LeinsterDub

Madisyn Chubby Someone wrote: »

Sad thing is it's the motorists who are held to be at fault for hitting these idiots.

I cycle and drive.

And rightly so they are the ones in control of a ton of metal

First Up

LeinsterDub wrote:

And rightly so they are the ones in control of a ton of metal

In all cases?

LeinsterDub

First Up wrote: »

In all cases?

In the vast majority of cases

loyatemu

anyone who cycles in the dark without lights is an idiot, and I say that as a regular cyclist and driver. You can buy LED lights in Dealz for €1.50 that are plenty bright - there's no excuse for not having any. A raggy old flourescent vest from when you worked on the sites in 1998 is not a substitute.

Professor Moriarty

LeinsterDub wrote:

And rightly so they are the ones in control of a ton of metal

You should start a petition to remove legislation forcing cyclists to use lights at night. Stupid law and only a fool would see any point to it.

Macy0161

RSA and Gards continually focus on builders jackets and helmets rather than lights. They're done promotion campaigns on commuter routes giving out lights that don't meet the minimum requirements ffs. Their focus should be on lights, and ideally introducing standards that the likes of Germany have which make things clear cut.

It is the same with pedestrians - torso height reflective strips is what they suggest and give out. They should be recommending ankle/ arm bands and a torch!

Just for the bit of whataboutery though, I think I'm averaging about 3 times an evening (car) commute this week where I've flashed cars coming the other way for having no lights. That's not counting the ones just on driving lights, the ones in the same direction with no lights or those with only one working headlight. Like everything, it's people that are the issue not their mode of transport.

Macy0161

RSA and Gards continually focus on builders jackets and helmets rather than lights. They've done promotion campaigns on commuter routes giving out lights that don't meet the minimum requirements ffs. Their focus should be on lights, and ideally introducing standards that the likes of Germany have which make things clear cut.

It is the same with pedestrians - torso height reflective strips is what they suggest and give out. They should be recommending ankle/ arm bands and a torch!

Just for the bit of whataboutery though, I think I'm averaging about 3 times an evening (car) commute this week where I've flashed cars coming the other way for having no lights. That's not counting the ones just on driving lights, the ones in the same direction with no lights or those with only one working headlight. Like everything, it's people that are the issue not their mode of transport.

devnull

I also had an accident this week because a car had no lights, breaking the speed limit, ignoring traffic lights and came right for me, I narrowly avoided the car by turning very quickly but damaged the bike and now can barely move or walk because of the fact I have wounds and bruises all over.

helimachoptor

I'm a cyclist and cycle from south city centre on the n11 for my commute home.

It's shocking, i posted in the cycling thread last week, there's a guy i see every day, cycles with hood up, no helmet, no lights, always in dark clothes, sometimes is on the phone and basically is too cool to have his hands on the bars.. well he came off the bike and luckily he wasnt seriously injured.

On monday he was doing the same thing.

I'd rather not be mangled by a bus or car or even hit by another person on two wheels so i'm well lit up.

Unfortunately people are stupid.

wtlltw

Macy0161 wrote: »

Like everything, it's people that are the issue not their mode of transport.

Exactly.

I do question the number of cyclists with empty child seats on the back running red lights. I wonder if they would do the same when they have their child with them!!

ED E

Macy0161 wrote: »

Like everything, it's people that are the issue not their mode of transport.

Nope. Enforcement is the issue.

helimachoptor

wtlltw wrote: »

Exactly.

I do question the number of cyclists with empty child seats on the back running red lights. I wonder if they would do the same when they have their child with them!!

Last year on the Rock road, i overtook a cyclist with a hi-viz and in writing "Pregnant cycle please be careful"
She had no lights (it was summer so maybe didnt feel the need)
no helmet

And then went through several red lights at busy enough junctions, she stopped at one set and i asked her should she really be going through lights if she's pregnant "ill be fine" was her reply.

Dope.

Macy0161

ED E wrote: »

Nope. Enforcement is the issue.

Wouldn't need enforcement if people complied! But lack of enforcement is an issue that applies to every road user group imo.

LeinsterDub

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

You should start a petition to remove legislation forcing cyclists to use lights at night. Stupid law and only a fool would see any point to it.

Why would I want to do that. Clearly people should be lit up at night.

Red Kev

Hi Viz doesn't show up that well in orange flourescent street lighting either. Something people need to take account of as well.

jimmycrackcorm

Madisyn Chubby Someone wrote:

Sad thing is it's the motorists who are held to be at fault for hitting these idiots.

I think this is an alternative fact. You could argue that every accident involving a vehicle and pedestrian is the same when the circumstances would always be examined.

CPTM

I must say I think the majority of people are used to whatever routine they follow on a bicycle and they don't think about whether they are lit up enough or not. The old "I did this yesterday and lived" coding in the brain switches off the awareness over time so it just doesn't register.

I was once someone who cycled in a high-viz jacket thinking I was the good lad, being all clear with my high-viz.

Last year a set of lights came with a new bike and I must say I'd never cycle in the dark without them now. The idea would be as strange as cycling with closed eyes and a pair of scissors in my hand.

Yes, that is the best example I could think of. I'm sticking to it.

FitzElla

The only thing that will get people to change is enforcement. Put a few guards out 1 evening a week for a few weeks in the winter and hand out tickets and people won't be long changing their tune. Run a publicity campaign in advance to warn cyclists and then follow it up. Ideally this would be done when it starts getting dark or when the hour goes back.

Anyone who cycles at night without lights has a deathwish and I say that as both a cyclist and a motorist.

uck51js9zml2yt

LeinsterDub wrote: »

And rightly so they are the ones in control of a ton of metal

So a cyclist wears dark clothes, has no lights and it's the driver's fault he can't see him...The mind boggles!

Macy0161

Madisyn Chubby Someone wrote: »

So a cyclist wears dark clothes, has no lights and it's the driver's fault he can't see him...The mind boggles!

Whatever about automatically blaming a driver, I don't think it can be taken that it automatically clears them either.

cython

Macy0161 wrote: »

....
Just for the bit of whataboutery though, I think I'm averaging about 3 times an evening (car) commute this week where I've flashed cars coming the other way for having no lights. That's not counting the ones just on driving lights, the ones in the same direction with no lights or those with only one working headlight. Like everything, it's people that are the issue not their mode of transport.

I actually had to laugh at one car that passed me on the commute into work this morning. I was coming to the end of a bus lane before a roundabout and pulling out having after checking the shoulder as usual, and despite having heard a car behind me still had to look twice to be sure it was there because dull conditions and a lack of headlights on a beige car meant it was less visible than it should have been. Deliberately made a pointing gesture at my own rear light as they were passing me and lo and behold they flicked on their own lights! As has been said before, idiots and indeed errors arise across all modes, and very few people are in a position to say they have never erred......

magicbastarder

cython wrote: »

very few people are in a position to say they have never erred......

i was once driving through the phoenix park at night, in my mum's old rover metro, and the lights flickered briefly. i pulled in, and switched them off. big mistake, only the parking lights would come back on. so i had to drive through the park essentially tailgating other drivers.

turned out a fuse had blown.

cerastes

Deedsie wrote: »

http://blog.wheelies.co.uk/stvzo-approved-bike-lights/

Minimum Standard of bicycle light in Germany.

The problem with these exceptionally bright front lights is that there is nothing to limit where these are being pointed, ie up in your face. I see many cyclists on cycling lanes moving contra to the flow of other traffic and Im not sure its allowed, and for the reason that its unrealistic to have anyone checking cyclists lights contra flow cycling should be limited to contra flow lanes (buses etc) and I dont think there are that many of them.

Macy0161

cerastes wrote: »

The problem with these exceptionally bright front lights is that there is nothing to limit where these are being pointed, ie up in your face.

As far as I'm aware, the german standard does have limits to the beam width. But you can say the same about all the poorly aligned car headlights (and those blinding xenon bulbs or whatever the feck they are). Extreme's at either end of the scale are an issue.

Professor Moriarty

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Why would I want to do that. Clearly people should be lit up at night.

You've changed your mind? Good.

uck51js9zml2yt

Macy0161 wrote: »

Whatever about automatically blaming a driver, I don't think it can be taken that it automatically clears them either.

Why not?
Its night time, the road poorly lit or unlit. Cycclist has no lights and thus breaking the law and cant be seen.
How is it the drivers fault?

Macy0161

Madisyn Chubby Someone wrote: »

Why not?
Its night time, the road poorly lit or unlit. Cycclist has no lights and thus breaking the law and cant be seen.
How is it the drivers fault?

Or it could be night time, a really well lit area that despite lack of lights cyclists could or should've been seen by the motorist.

LeinsterDub

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

You've changed your mind? Good.

I never claimed people should not be lit up.

cerastes

Macy0161 wrote: »

As far as I'm aware, the german standard does have limits to the beam width. But you can say the same about all the poorly aligned car headlights (and those blinding xenon bulbs or whatever the feck they are). Extreme's at either end of the scale are an issue.

, but when a cyclist is approaching you on a cycle lane on the same side as you or even if they are on a cycle path or the path facing you, they are shining that straight in the face of on coming traffic

Roadhawk

n97 mini wrote: »

I've been driving in south Dublin after dark a lot lately and I'm astonished at the number of cyclists with no lights. So I decided to do a count the other night. 12 out of 20 had none at all and only around 4 had full front and rear lights.

I'd well believe it. I see roughly the same numbers on a daily basis. Any time i do a count there are always more than half without lights. I find it worse during the winter because of the dark mornings and evenings. I really cannot understand why so many people cycle without lights.

n97 mini wrote: »

Last night I nearly hit one with no lights cycling across a junction in Donnybrook (he broke a red light too, another common phenomenon). So I decided to contact the ministers for transport and justice as enforcement seems to be absent.

Be careful out there. The last thing you want to do is hit a cyclist. As a motorist you have a higher duty of care. (supposedly)

07Lapierre

Roadhawk wrote: »

Be careful out there. The last thing you want to do is hit a cyclist Person. As a motorist you have a higher duty of care. (supposedly)

ted1

amcalester wrote: »

I see the same fella each evening dressed in all black with no lights on his bike, surely only a matter of time until he comes a cropper.

The irony in your post is that you SEE him every day

Sam Russell

ted1 wrote: »

The irony in your post is that you SEE him every day

Well, he may SEE him just at the last second and not SEE him coming.

'He came out of nowhere' type of thing.

Slunk

What's with the gangs of kids who think its cool to cycle up the quays in a group taking over three lanes. Seen the same thing in cabra. Doing a wheely into oncoming traffic. Cheeky ****ers soon **** themselves when you don't slow down.

magicbastarder

i'm just jealous i can't wheelie as well as they can.

amcalester

ted1 wrote: »

The irony in your post is that you SEE him every day

Usually it's when I'm out for a jog or walking so I have longer to see him than a motorist would.

I also have less to be aware off.

And it's not really ironic, I see him every day but he would be easier to see if he was lit up.

monument

Slunk wrote: »

What's with the gangs of kids who think its cool to cycle up the quays in a group taking over three lanes. Seen the same thing in cabra. Doing a wheely into oncoming traffic. Cheeky ****ers soon **** themselves when you don't slow down.

You might **** your self when you get the bill for hitting them because you did not slow down.

uck51js9zml2yt

Macy0161 wrote: »

Or it could be night time, a really well lit area that despite lack of lights cyclists could or should've been seen by the motorist.

Answer the question and stop twisting it.

hytrogen

I do take great pride in hurtling abuse towards these ninja cyclists from the other cycle lane, especially when they're fashioning their Beats by Dre, black bomber jacket, stupid stupid skinny jeans and ridiculous hair! It's a shame so many seem to be foreign and don't understand what I'm saying..

Macy0161

Madisyn Chubby Someone wrote: »

Answer the question and stop twisting it.

My answer is every situation and circumstance is different, so no I don't think someone driving a car hitting someone on a bike without lights means an automatic free pass for the person driving the car. It may do depending on the circumstances.

Using your logic, the poster earlier saying he deliberately doesn't slow down for someone on a bike, who is clearly breaking several laws, but who they have seen nonetheless, should get an automatic pass because of what the person on the bike is doing. I don't think that's right, and wouldn't expect a court to find it to be right either. One road user being in the wrong, doesn't make the other road user in, or within, their rights, especially given the relative consequences of any collision.

Hilly Bill

monument wrote: »

You might **** your self when you get the bill for hitting them because you did not slow down.

It would be money well spent.

Roadhawk

Hilly Bill wrote: »

It would be money well spent.

Not really...

uck51js9zml2yt

Macy0161 wrote: »

My answer is every situation and circumstance is different, so no I don't think someone driving a car hitting someone on a bike without lights means an automatic free pass for the person driving the car. It may do depending on the circumstances.

Using your logic, the poster earlier saying he deliberately doesn't slow down for someone on a bike, who is clearly breaking several laws, but who they have seen nonetheless, should get an automatic pass because of what the person on the bike is doing. I don't think that's right, and wouldn't expect a court to find it to be right either. One road user being in the wrong, doesn't make the other road user in, or within, their rights, especially given the relative consequences of any collision.

If I see them I can avoid them but it's where they are clearly unseen due to their illegal activity and then being blamed for hitting them is where I have issue.

Almost got run down by a cyclist in pearse at this morning who thought lights didn't apply to her as she ploughed through people crossing the road legally.

TheQuietFella

hmmm wrote: »

If the guards can put a checkpoint on the M50, it shouldn't be too hard to stand in the cycle lane on the quays and pull over every cyclist who does not have lights.

And those who don't cycle in the cycle lane!

magicbastarder

what would the guards charge them with?

Roadhawk

magicbastarder wrote: »

what would the guards charge them with?

Riding a bicycle without reasonable consideration

TheQuietFella

magicbastarder wrote: »

what would the guards charge them with?

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/travel_and_recreation/motoring_1/driving_offences/driving_offences.html


Fixed charge offences
A system of fixed charge driving offences operates in Ireland which allows the driver of a vehicle who has been detected of committing certain offences under the Road Traffic Acts to pay a fixed charge or fine as an alternative to going to court to answer the driving offence. View a list of fixed charge only offences (pdf).
The Minister has the power to declare any summary (or minor) offence under the Road Traffic Acts 1961-2011 to be fixed charge offences. A person has 28 days from the date of the issue of the fixed charge notice to pay the fine. If it is not paid within 28 days, the charge is increased by 50% and if it is still unpaid after a further 28 days then court proceedings are initiated.
If you receive a fixed charge notice for a driving offence and you were not the driver of the vehicle you must return the notice to the Garda Fixed Charge Processing Office (see 'Where to apply' below) and include the details of the person who was driving (including his/her driving licence number) in the form attached to the fixed charge notice for that purpose. The Gardaí will then issue a fixed charge notice to the driver of the vehicle. The registered owner of the vehicle is the person to whom the fixed charge notice will be sent if the driver of the vehicle was not identified at the time the offence was detected, (e.g. detected by a speed camera or if a car was parked illegally). If the registered owner was not the driver he/she is still obliged by law to notify the Gardaí of who the driver of the vehicle was at the time of the offence.

I note it states vehicle and essentially they are not the same but the same rules should apply!

magicbastarder

tough one to make that stick, it's an easy argument that the explanatory note in the act says it's permissible.