Cyclist near miss discussion

RainyDay

Patrick2010 wrote: »

I'm sorry but you keep making the same ridiculous point. This seems to assume that putting a guard or two at a junction checking cyclists means that these guards are being taken off traffic enforcement.
I'm sure its not an either/or situation and that they could be diverted from any other kind of garda work.

So what other Garda work would you divert the Gardai from? What other work is less important that fixing a problem with injuries to cyclists which doesn't show up in any road traffic data? Dealing with burglaries? Or rapes? Take your pick now.

Patrick2010 wrote: »

The reason we've reduced the death toll on our roads is because of the vast improvement on them from windy N class roads to excellent straight motorways (Dublin to Galway, Limerick, Cork etc) not because we have guards out there saving us from ourselves.

Chimaera wrote: »

A large part of the reduction, which no-one ever wants to acknowledge, is improved vehicle safety features. It doesn't fit with the 'Speed Kills' narrative the government want to maintain.

You're less likely to get into an accident in a given situation due to better brakes, tyres, driver aids, and if you do get into one, the accident is more survivable due to better design of the safety structure, airbags, seatbelts. An accident that would have killed you in car built 30 years ago is one you could walk away from now.

Another factor in the last 6-7 years is the reduction in traffic volumes due to the recession. Fewer cars on the road mean less accidents.

Certainly, the drop in road fatalities and injuries is multi-faceted. Enforcement and penalty points helped, advertising helped to change culture, the smoking ban and less people in less pubs helped, car safety helped, better road network helped. There is no simple answer.

beauf wrote: »

But there is a wider issue, of adjusting to increasing numbers of cyclists. So there has to be consideration that cyclists are not motorists so the same limitations may not be appropriate. But also that drivers job is much harder when there are lots of cyclists, and consistent behaviour (following rules) allows everyone to function better.

There is a point here all right, but the fact remains, that may cyclists (and drivers, and pedestrians) will break the rules. So then you have to decide the best way to prioritise the limited resources you have available for enforcement.

dr.fuzzenstein

RainyDay wrote: »

Thanks for the clarification. Research from the UK suggests that in the majority of cases where cyclists are injured, they are not at fault themselves.

Your proposal to divert enforcement resources from motorists (who kill 200+ each year and maim thousands of others) towards cyclists (who don't kill anyone else, and only injure a tiny number of themselves) will result in increased deaths and injuries overall. You're taking resources from a very real problem to solve a problem that doesn't exist. You will have blood on your hands.

As I said:

More enforcement is needed. Penalties need to be handed out. This goes for motorists and cyclists. The rules are there for a reason.
If anyone disagrees with this, just quote yourself and paste this as a reply, because that's the answer your getting to every "but! but! but!..." reply.

http://www.thejournal.ie/poll-should-rule-breaking-cyclists-be-fined-on-the-spot-368031-Feb2012/
Nifty poll inside that says it all

beauf

so spot fines for drivers on their mobile, amber gamblers and jaywakers and cyclists alike.

theyll be busy

RainyDay

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

As I said:



http://www.thejournal.ie/poll-should-rule-breaking-cyclists-be-fined-on-the-spot-368031-Feb2012/
Nifty poll inside that says it all

And as I said "Your proposal to divert enforcement resources from motorists (who kill 200+ each year and maim thousands of others) towards cyclists (who don't kill anyone else, and only injure a tiny number of themselves) will result in increased deaths and injuries overall. You're taking resources from a very real problem to solve a problem that doesn't exist. You will have blood on your hands."

There is a finite amount of resources available for enforcement. You're planning to divert a pile of them to fix a problem that doesn't exist. Not too clever (regardless of what the geniuses on the Journal poll think)

dr.fuzzenstein

beauf wrote: »

so spot fines for drivers on their mobile, amber gamblers and jaywakers and cyclists alike.

theyll be busy

That's the idea.
Otherwise it would be lawlessness, chaos and in general the sort of driving style found in Mumbai. The rules where put in place for everyone, they're not some kind of buffet that one can choose from, even though that is pretty much the attitude from everyone in Ireland, the land of self entitlement, where people do as they please and get pretty pissy and aggressive when pulled up about it.

beauf

If its not enforced or very little what's the difference

dr.fuzzenstein

beauf wrote: »

If its not enforced or very little what's the difference

Yes, I agree. In the end the reality is that enforcement is nil and unlikely to change any time soon, so in the meantime everyone carry on as they where.

RainyDay

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

That's the idea.
Otherwise it would be lawlessness, chaos and in general the sort of driving style found in Mumbai. The rules where put in place for everyone, they're not some kind of buffet that one can choose from, even though that is pretty much the attitude from everyone in Ireland, the land of self entitlement, where people do as they please and get pretty pissy and aggressive when pulled up about it.

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Yes, I agree. In the end the reality is that enforcement is nil and unlikely to change any time soon, so in the meantime everyone carry on as they where.

Though back here in the real world, people generally get on. Yes, compliance with all kinds of traffic law is quite poor. I deal with people who threaten my safety on a 1-1 basis. Some people seem to take things on board, so get 'pissy and agressive'. Ironically, I'm kind-of a zero-tolerance guy myself on this, so if I had a magic wand that would get everyone obeying most of the laws most of the time, that would be great.

But diverting enforcement resources to fix a problem that doesn't exist is not a good idea.

dr.fuzzenstein

RainyDay wrote: »

Though back here in the real world, people generally get on. Yes, compliance with all kinds of traffic law is quite poor. I deal with people who threaten my safety on a 1-1 basis. Some people seem to take things on board, so get 'pissy and agressive'. Ironically, I'm kind-of a zero-tolerance guy myself on this, so if I had a magic wand that would get everyone obeying most of the laws most of the time, that would be great.

But diverting enforcement resources to fix a problem that doesn't exist is not a good idea.

I can only blame my German upbringing...

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

ardmacha wrote: »

It isn't, Cyclists are not required to have licences nor do their vehicles have identifying numbers. They can do what they like, and do.

Licensing has absolutely nothing to do with it.

Sticking a number plate on a bike, while I don't oppose of, will not change the attitudes of most cyclists.

You can see it has little effect with motorised vehicles. They can do what they like, and do.

monument

I'd just like to point out that I cycle daily, and I'd support on-the-spot fines for cycling offences such as breaking red lights, cycling on footpaths, and cycling when dark without lights. And I'm far from alone, the majority of posters on the cycling board seem to agree with fixed charge notices as a better solution than the current setup.

Sure, I'm wary that there's the potential for misuse of such fines, but that's not a good enough reason to have no fines at all.

The current system of having only the choice to let somebody off with a warning or drag them to court is arcane, wasteful and makes the cycling punishment greater than that for a similar motoring offense. These's no middle ground and where a Garda feels he or she should choice the court option it's overly a waste of court, Garda, and even the offender's time.

It means the fine is likely to be higher than for a similar motoring offense and there's the extra penalty of having to travel to court and spending half a morning or day there rather than being at work / college / home minding the children / whatever.

dr.fuzzenstein

monument wrote: »

I'd just like to point out that I cycle daily, and I'd support on-the-spot fines for cycling offences such as breaking red lights, cycling on footpaths, and cycling when dark without lights. And I'm far from alone, the majority of posters on the cycling board seem to agree with fixed charge notices as a better solution than the current setup.

Sure, I'm wary that there's the potential for misuse of such fines, but that's not a good enough reason to have no fines at all.

The current system of having only the choice to let somebody off with a warning or drag them to court is arcane, wasteful and makes the cycling punishment greater than that for a similar motoring offense. These's no middle ground and where a Garda feels he or she should choice the court option it's overly a waste of court, Garda, and even the offender's time.

It means the fine is likely to be higher than for a similar motoring offense and there's the extra penalty of having to travel to court and spending half a morning or day there rather than being at work / college / home minding the children / whatever.

One could argue that it is lessening the punishment for cyclists. Instead of court, solicitor, taking a day off, potentially being handed a big fine and the hassle of it all, a nice ,easy ticket with very little hassle.
Lucky bastards!

Iwannahurl

Benjamin Magnificent Stooge wrote: »

Licensing has absolutely nothing to do with it.

Sticking a number plate on a bike, while I don't oppose of, will not change the attitudes of most cyclists.

You can see it has little effect with motorised vehicles. They can do what they like, and do.

There are lots of laws, but not enough enforcement.

It's a cultural issue, to a significant degree. The same applies to policing, imo. Mind you, I have also been made aware of situations where AGS enforced road traffic law, only to be reprimanded by a judge asking whether they had anything better to do. The same judge routinely parks on double yellow lines right in front of the courthouse...

visual

Bike by law should have red reflector to rear, bell and if used when dark red light to rear and white light to front.

I doubt there is many bikes used for commute or those who think they are in tour De France race.

The amount of times I seen some idiot with all the latest cycling gear riding the middle of the road deliberately causing obstruction to other road users is unreal even worse when there is a group then opposite side of the road seems fair game too.

RainyDay

visual wrote: »

Bike by law should have red reflector to rear, bell and if used when dark red light to rear and white light to front.

That's true. I'm seeing less 'ninja' (unlit) cyclists this year than usual - maybe the Aldi/Lidl effect?

visual wrote: »

I doubt there is many bikes used for commute or those who think they are in tour De France race.

This sentence seems unfinished. Did you mean to say something more?

visual wrote: »

The amount of times I seen some idiot with all the latest cycling gear riding the middle of the road deliberately causing obstruction to other road users is unreal

This article might help you understand why cyclists seem to cycle 'in the middle of the road' (which is usually actualy about 1m out from the kerb or parked cars).
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/active/recreational-cycling/10604525/Cycling-advert-ban-why-cyclists-must-take-the-middle-of-the-lane.html

Dempsey

Cyclist's not obeying the rules of the road, not using hi vis equipment and going the opposite direction on cycle paths drive my nut in. They can do all the brain dead stuff yet a motorist will be in the wrong if there is a accident.

keithclancy

Dempsey wrote: »

Cyclist's not obeying the rules of the road, not using hi vis equipment and going the opposite direction on cycle paths drive my nut in. They can do all the brain dead stuff yet a motorist will be in the wrong if there is a accident.

In my experience its the environment is the problem.

The roads in Ireland for cycling are terrible. Set up in a way that they hinder the flow of motorised vehicles and make it easy to get into a dangerous situation on a bike.

Don't think its the car or bike riders fault in general.