Rogue cyclists set to face on-the-spot fines MOD WARNING in first post

rp

I've just realized that if the guards have an accurate record of when lights are red, they could use Strava's Flyby feature to identify and prosecute offending cyclists.

seamus

tomasrojo wrote: »

I've never had a hi-viz cape of invincibility forced on me by campaigners or Gardaí. What is the protocol for declining?

Only once I've seen someone holding them out for cyclists to take as they passed. Which was probably not the safest thing to be doing in rush hour traffic. It's not like it was Le Tour.
Anyway, I just gave them the standard hand-up, "No thanks" decline as I passed.

rp wrote: »

I've just realized that if the guards have an accurate record of when lights are red, they could use Strava's Flyby feature to identify and prosecute offending cyclists.

Hear-say evidence. Inadmissible in court.

adrian522

rp wrote: »

I've just realized that if the guards have an accurate record of when lights are red, they could use Strava's Flyby feature to identify and prosecute offending cyclists.

GPS wouldn't be near accurate enough for this. If you zoom in enough on your strava map of a recent ride you will (likely) see that the track doesn't match where you were e.g the track shows you going alongside the road rather than along the road. It's accurate to about 10 meters, and as above is nowhere near good enough to base a conviction on.
For example, this is from this week, I cycled along the road here not cross country.

Tenzor07

rp wrote: »

I've just realized that if the guards have an accurate record of when lights are red, they could use Strava's Flyby feature to identify and prosecute offending cyclists.

Gardai: Strava Division

I can just see it now! Sure what else would they be doing? :rolleyes:

RainyDay

Audrina Clean Maple wrote: »

If its enforced and hurts their pockets

But you've noticed that it is not being enforced, right? And you've noticed that this new initiative will take some resources way from enforcement of law for motorists in order to hand misleading leaflets to cyclists?

Audrina Clean Maple wrote: »

yes. BTW , I cycle and drive.

Just like most cyclists.

droidus

adrian522 wrote: »

GPS wouldn't be near accurate enough for this. If you zoom in enough on your strava map of a recent ride you will (likely) see that the track doesn't match where you were e.g the track shows you going alongside the road rather than along the road. It's accurate to about 10 meters, and as above is nowhere near good enough to base a conviction on.
For example, this is from this week, I cycled along the road here not cross country.

Then the solution is clear, cyclists must be chipped - like dogs.

daragh_

Tenzor07 wrote: »

Gardai: Strava Division

That would make an excellent Police Procedural!

horsebox7

A somewhat derogatory reference to people being treated the same as dogs...

Anyway here is the latest leaflet regarding new fixed charge notices for cycling offences. I am a little confused with regard to points 4 & 7? They seem to mean the same thing as far as I can see?

Apparently a lot of motoring offences are dismissed in court for unpaid fixed charges if you do not receive the fixed charge notice in the post. I assume the same defence stands in relation to the latest fixed charges for cycling offences?

Does anyone have any idea how many prosecutions there were last year for cycling offences? I am struggling to find any data on this?

Thanks

Possedion

Hi VIZ, reflectors on a race bike... bit of a joke.

traprunner

I think I've gotten confused over the last few days. Under Irish law, what exactly do we need on bikes (lights, reflectors)? Also, is my road bike treated different than my hybrid because it could be used in a race?

galwaycyclist

traprunner wrote: »

I think I've gotten confused over the last few days. Under Irish law, what exactly do we need on bikes (lights, reflectors)? Also, is my road bike treated different than my hybrid because it could be used in a race?

You are required to have a red rear reflector, a white front lamp and red rear lamp. The rear lamp may flash but must not be less than 20 inches from the extreme rear of the bike - so attached to the rear carrier or incorporated into the rear mudguard or a similar arrangement.

You may have amber pedal reflectors but they are not compulsory. If you have reflectors facing the side they must be amber.

In my reading Irish law does not differentiate between types of bicycle on the basis of racing, mtb etc

Edit: Actually the front lamp is allowed to flash as well

Darkglasses

traprunner wrote: »

I think I've gotten confused over the last few days. Under Irish law, what exactly do we need on bikes (lights, reflectors)? Also, is my road bike treated different than my hybrid because it could be used in a race?

Although it may appear otherwise, the law itself hasn't changed, and it's summarised well in this thread - http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=88726862

poochiem

On my commute there's only two junctions where motors stay behind the stop line and don't enter the advanced stop line area or bike box. What's the point of them? They only give you a false sense of security. I read the UK figures for cyclists' deaths and injuries and 75% occurred at or near junctions, most of these were cyclist hit from behind by front of vehicle.

The traffic laws aren't enforced..in fact the enforcers don't even know them.

rp

I think if the bike was designed for the track, i.e., a fixie, you don't need a bell or a rear brake.

traprunner

galwaycyclist wrote: »

You are required to have a red rear reflector, a white front lamp and red rear lamp. The rear lamp may flash but must not be less than 20 inches from the extreme rear of the bike - so attached to the rear carrier or incorporated into the rear mudguard or a similar arrangement.

You may have amber pedal reflectors but they are not compulsory. If you have reflectors facing the side they must be amber.

In my reading Irish law does not differentiate between types of bicycle on the basis of racing, mtb etc

Edit: Actually the front lamp is allowed to flash as well

Darkglasses wrote: »

Although it may appear otherwise, the law itself hasn't changed, and it's summarised well in this thread - http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=88726862

Cheers for that. I'm sad about having to put reflectors on.

RobertFoster

poochiem wrote: »

On my commute there's only two junctions where motors stay behind the stop line and don't enter the advanced stop line area or bike box. What's the point of them? They only give you a false sense of security. I read the UK figures for cyclists' deaths and injuries and 75% occurred at or near junctions, most of these were cyclist hit from behind by front of vehicle.

The traffic laws aren't enforced..in fact the enforcers don't even know them.

Have you a link to those UK figures? It was my understanding that the majority of fatalities at junctions were from getting getting crushed by (large) left turning vehicles. I've also read that getting rear-ended happens very infrequently, but I don't remember where I read it (I think it was seamus).

rp wrote: »

I think if the bike was designed for the track, i.e., a fixie, you don't need a bell or a rear brake.

Yep. Have a look at the Irish Cycling Legislation thread Darkglasses mentioned. Fixed gear bikes require only one brake, and racing bikes in general don't require bells.

tomasrojo

traprunner wrote: »

Cheers for that. I'm sad about having to put reflectors on.

Only the red rear reflector required.

tomasrojo

The bell requirement is never going to be enforced. It's not in the new FPN regime and no Garda is going to risk the wrath of a judge for bringing you to court over it. If they even knew it was a requirement to begin with.

roverrules

tomasrojo wrote: »

The bell requirement is never going to be enforced. It's not in the new FPN regime and no Garda is going to risk the wrath of a judge for bringing you to court over it. If they even knew it was a requirement to begin with.

Is there a law about using things other than bells on cycles they may decide to enforce instead?

tomasrojo

roverrules wrote: »

Is there a law about using things other than bells on cycles they may decide to enforce instead?

For the purpose of alerting other road users? Don't think so. There aren't really all that many legal stipulations on equipment for people who want to make a trip on a bike. I hope it remains that way.

CramCycle

rp wrote: »

I think if the bike was designed for the track, i.e., a fixie, you don't need a bell or a rear brake.

To or from a race was my understanding, simply being a race bike means nothing. Neither does being fixed other than you only need one brake (and your legs do not count).

Jawgap

The "High Visibility Patrol" has started - cyclists without hi-viz will be ticketed!!!

https://twitter.com/gardatraffic/status/623972859594047488

I think that girl in the second photo was let off with a warning because she was wearing yellow

LpPepper

tomasrojo wrote: »

Only the red rear reflector required.

Are reflectors really necessary? I have one light on bars, one on fork and one on front of the helmet. I then have one red under the seat and one on rear of the helmet... Surely I couldn't be fined for not having a flimsy reflector ?

mojesius

Sorry if it has been answered but do you have to wear high vis in daylight now?

CramCycle

LpPepper wrote: »

Are reflectors really necessary? I have one light on bars, one on fork and one on front of the helmet. I then have one red under the seat and one on rear of the helmet... Surely I couldn't be fined for not having a flimsy reflector ?

Luckily nearly all bike lights have reflectors inside of them so thats fine

Pinch Flat

mojesius wrote: »

Sorry if it has been answered but do you have to wear high vis in daylight now?

No!

Darkglasses

Walking through Wexford Town's pedestrianized main street this afternoon I saw some childminders in charge of a couple of children each. Every single one of the children had a big adult-size high viz vest on, and each one locked and leashed to one of the adults. Maybe it's my inner teenager talking, but life's a bit stupid sometimes.

Pinch Flat

Darkglasses wrote: »

Walking through Wexford Town's pedestrianized main street this afternoon I saw some childminders in charge of a couple of children each. Every single one of the children had a big adult-size high viz vest on, and each one locked and leashed to one of the adults. Maybe it's my inner teenager talking, but life's a bit stupid sometimes.

Same with my 8 year old on his first beaver hike last year - in the fields a few miles from our house, and half a mile from a main road. I mentioned it on the hivis threads and someone mentioned it was an easy way of keeping count of the kids. I see in central Dublin as I work near merrion square - so loads of kids on school tours etc

I dunno, there was 3 or 4 beaver leaders and about 20 kids. Is it really necessary? Hi vis is becoming omni present. The general consensus seems to be if there's any risk perceived - put on hi vis and it'll be grand.

I've just come back from holidays in Austria and Germany - spent plenty of time around gorges, high alpine walks, fast flowing rivers and lots of bikes interacting with pedestrians and cars in towns and cities around the region - I struggled to see a single hi vis. And life seemed to be proceeding pretty normal without a massive body count

rp

CramCycle wrote: »

To or from a race was my understanding, simply being a race bike means nothing. Neither does being fixed other than you only need one brake (and your legs do not count).

Nah, I think us hipsters are good, S.I. No. 190/1963 sez:

• Every pedal cycle (other than a cycle constructed or adapted for use as a racing cycle) while used in a public place shall be fitted with an audible warning device ....
• Where at least one wheel of the cycle is incapable of rotating independently of the pedals [...] the cycle shall be equipped with one braking device

lennymc

adrian522 wrote: »

GPS wouldn't be near accurate enough for this. If you zoom in enough on your strava map of a recent ride you will (likely) see that the track doesn't match where you were e.g the track shows you going alongside the road rather than along the road. It's accurate to about 10 meters, and as above is nowhere near good enough to base a conviction on.
For example, this is from this week, I cycled along the road here not cross country.

Were you drunk??