Cyclists should do a theory test!

Colser

Ranchu wrote: »

Would a theory test really help though? Look at the state of car drivers on roundabouts. No one has a jot what they're supposed to be doing and these gimps have passed a test.

To be fair roundabouts can be a little more difficult to negotiate than a basic red traffic light than cyclists seem to have difficulty with...

Cork Lass

Grayson wrote: »

I can see little jimmy on his 6th birthday opening his present. It's a bike. Then his dad sits down with him and helps him study for the theory test.

Actually, why not? We teach our kids to be safe in every other aspect of their lives so why not this?

machiavellianme

Spook_ie wrote: »

Actually 0g CO2 emissions motor tax is Group A0 which is €120 per year

Nicely pointed out.
But where is the motor on a bike?

RainyDay

Colser wrote: »

To be fair roundabouts can be a little more difficult to negotiate than a basic red traffic light than cyclists seem to have difficulty with...

OK then, let's focus on how drivers routinely blow through red lights:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=92964191&postcount=597

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

The trouble for me is, while you're right about a car collision damaging a pedestrian more than a bicycle collision, the latter is far, far more likely to happen to pedestrians who obey the rules because of (a) cyclists on the footpath and (b) cyclists who break red lights.

I've had many more near misses with cyclists over the last few years than with cars, generally because when I'm walking on the footpath a car is highly unlikely to mount the pavement with no warning (at the very least, you can hear it coming) and secondly, because in four years of college I've never seen a car sail through a light which has been red for a long time with a green man, but I see cyclists do it every day. Cars do sometimes speed up to get a light which has just turned red, but I'm talking about a light which is about to go green again having been a green man for the last minute or so. Many cyclists just ignore red lights full stop - and worse than that, not just red lights but crowds of people.

DareGod wrote: »

Cyclists breaking red lights is an epidemic at this stage. I see cyclists do it ten times more than I see cars do it, and as a pedestrian they've almost mowed me down a number of times. Who do they think they are, exactly? And I speak as a pedestrian, a cyclist and a driver.

In fairness, this is probably correct. A higher percentage of cyclists break red lights a higher percentage of time than motorists. But if you want to look at law-breaking on the roads, lets look at the big picture.

What percentage of motorists routinely break the speed limits? [Hint: Just about every single motorist]. What percentage of motorists routinely use the phone to make call or to text or to FB or tweet? [About one in five, based on my own observations in Dublin]. What percentage of motorists routinely drive with a missing brake light or rear light? [About one in twenty, based on my own observations]. What percentage of motorists routinely fail to indicate when turning? [About one in three, based on yada yada yada].

So if you want to look at which group of road users breaks the law most frequently, I don't think you should be focusing on cyclists.

And then if you want to be strategic, let's take a look at who causes injury on the roads. Motorists kill 200+ each year, and maim thousands of others. Cyclists don't.

rubadub

Colser wrote: »

a basic red traffic light than cyclists seem to have difficulty with...

And do you think a theory test will help that?

Maybe burglars should be made do a theory test to tell them what they are doing is illegal, maybe they are unaware what they are doing is illegal.

I expect 99.9% of cyclists are fully aware they are breaking the law, as do the gardai who do not enforce the law in many cases.

Conversely it seems many pedestrians are unaware about the laws they break. In many threads where I mention "jaywalking" type laws you often get a few posters saying there are not "jaywalking" type laws in Ireland at all -which just shows how rife it is, and how unenforced. A few months ago I saw people dangerously illegally crossing the road in Dame street in front of about 4 gardai, who did nothing.

micar

mojesius wrote: »

I frequently get 'tutted' at by other cyclists behind me for stopping at a red light. No, the green man doesn't include you. Your light is still red.

Also, wearing headphones while cycling should be banned.

Please don't pull in front of me at the lights when I recently overtook you. You're clearly cycling at a slower pace than I am.

I should have gone to to ranting and raving forum but fcuk it

I could have written this. Points 2 and 3 seriously wreak my head.

tipparetops

Cyclists have no business on roads where the speed limit is over 50kph.
And any parent who let's their child cycle on their own, should have social services at the door.

Captain Chaos

tipparetops wrote: »

Cyclists have no business on roads where the speed limit is over 50kph.

Then why are there cycle lanes on such roads all over Dublin. Right beside me is a road with a 60kps limit with a cycle lane wide enough for a bus, it's as wide as the driving lane, and they pay no road tax.

Capt'n Midnight

RayM wrote: »

The very same applies to car drivers. Most don't even know how to indicate properly on roundabouts. Failure to indicate correctly should be a penalty points offence.

It is.

Driving without reasonable consideration 2 points

But enforcement here is abysmal. Have you ever seen anyone avoid driving on hatched lines when queuing to turn right ? That's one penalty point.



Also

Contravention of rules for use of mini roundabouts

Failure to turn left when entering a roundabout

Failure to obey requirements at junctions,
e.g. Not being in the correct lane when turning onto another road

machiavellianme

Captain Chaos wrote: »

Then why are there cycle lanes on such roads all over Dublin. Right beside me is a road with a 60kps limit with a cycle lane wide enough for a bus, it's as wide as the driving lane, and they pay no road tax.

Nor do you, or anyone else in Ireland. There's no such thing.
Plus there's a mandate to reduce carbon emissions by 2020. The provision of cycle lanes helps meet that.

ThisRegard

Captain Chaos wrote: »

Then why are there cycle lanes on such roads all over Dublin. Right beside me is a road with a 60kps limit with a cycle lane wide enough for a bus, it's as wide as the driving lane, and they pay no road tax.

You personally know every cyclist and how many cars they own?

I pay "road tax" on two cars. When I'm on my bike I deserve more of the road than all the crusty proles with one car

RainyDay

tipparetops wrote: »

Cyclists have no business on roads where the speed limit is over 50kph.

Why's that now? Are most motorists incapable of carrying out a simple overtaking manoevre?

tipparetops wrote: »

And any parent who let's their child cycle on their own, should have social services at the door.

Nice victim blaming. I don't hear any huge clamour for drivers who kill other road users to be dealt with harshly round here.

Chips Lovell

mojesius wrote: »

Please don't pull in front of me at the lights when I recently overtook you. You're clearly cycling at a slower pace than I am.

Yep. And you wouldn't believe the number of cyclists who'll complain about this but do the exact same thing themselves to motorists, obliging them to overtake them again after the lights turn.

Vast majority of cyclists on the road are clueless muppets.

Then again, so's the majority of motorists.

RainyDay

Captain Chaos wrote: »

Then why are there cycle lanes on such roads all over Dublin. Right beside me is a road with a 60kps limit with a cycle lane wide enough for a bus, it's as wide as the driving lane, and they pay no road tax.

Where is this road with the gigantic cycle lane?

machiavellianme

tipparetops wrote: »

Cyclists have no business on roads where the speed limit is over 50kph.
And any parent who let's their child cycle on their own, should have social services at the door.

What about cyclists who are travelling over 50kph? It's not unthinkable on the flat.
Plus, if you think that a child cycling alone is an offence worthy of having intervention on your family, then you must've lived a sheltered life. How many of us or our parents would've been spoken to by "social services" if that were the case? There are kids out there who need help but you'd rather waste time on some trivial issue?

namloc1980

Captain Chaos wrote: »

Then why are there cycle lanes on such roads all over Dublin. Right beside me is a road with a 60kps limit with a cycle lane wide enough for a bus, it's as wide as the driving lane, and they pay no road tax.

Drivers don't pay road tax either.

Captain Chaos

RainyDay wrote: »

Where is this road with the gigantic cycle lane?

The Howth Road from Raheny village, all the way to the sea front. It's 50/50 for bikes and cars all the way. Buses have to use part of the lane as they can't fit in the driving lane alone. The road is essentailly split into 3 equal thirds. The driving lane towards the sea front is the centre of the road while traffic coming the other way have the same space on the right as the cycle lane on the left.

RainyDay

Captain Chaos wrote: »

The Howth Road from Raheny village, all the way to the sea front. It's 50/50 for bikes and cars all the way. Buses have to use part of the lane as they can't fit in the driving lane alone.

I don't see any bike lines big enough for a bus.

https://goo.gl/maps/FU80d

Would you like to be more specific, or maybe share a link to a map location?

Captain Chaos

namloc1980 wrote: »

Drivers don't pay road tax either.

Yes they do it's just not called what it's used for, it's indirect taxation that's creamed off as needed.

Clearlier

I continue to be surprised at the level of vitriol directed towards cyclists. The number of adults on bikes who are not also licenced motorists is trivial.

A lot of the issues that cyclists face revolve around design. Urban streets should be designed first for pedestrians, then cyclists/scooter users and finally cars.

As a basic rule of thumb priority should be given to the slower moving person/vehicle but consideration should be given to all road users by all road users.

BTW, one of the reasons for the discrepancy between what cyclists report about motorists and motorists report about cyclists is that when you're driving you interact with relatively few cars and when you're cycling you don't see that many other cyclists but as a cyclist you see a large number of cars and as a driver you see a whole lot of cyclists.

machiavellianme

Captain Chaos wrote: »

Yes they do it's just not called what it's used for, it's indirect taxation that's creamed off as needed.

So you would have cyclists, who are often the poorest in society (students, children etc) pay a direct taxation for the upkeep of the roads so that motorists can continue to enjoy them (while only contributing indirectly, if at all, themselves)?
This seems unfair. Remove the cars, trucks and buses from the roads and it will be a long time before the road falls into disrepair due to the volume of cyclists passing over. Remove the cyclists and the plight of motorists will only get worse,i.e. more cars on the road, increased congestion and potentially more accidents.

RainyDay

Captain Chaos wrote: »

Yes they do it's just not called what it's used for, it's indirect taxation that's creamed off as needed.

Motor tax comes nowhere near covering the cost of road infrastructure. Roads are subsidised from general taxation.

machiavellianme wrote: »

So you would have cyclists, who are often the poorest in society (students, children etc) pay a direct taxation for the upkeep of the roads so that motorists can continue to enjoy them (while only contributing indirectly, if at all, themselves)?

How did you work out that cyclists are often the poorest? Research from other countries shows cyclists having higher average income than motorists, therefore paying more income tax and consumption taxes.

machiavellianme

RainyDay wrote: »

Motor tax comes nowhere near covering the cost of road infrastructure. Roads are subsidised from general taxation.


How did you work out that cyclists are often the poorest? Research from other countries shows cyclists having higher average income than motorists, therefore paying more income tax and consumption taxes.

Other countries are different to Ireland, particularly in Europe where many capital cities are flat.
Look around. It's mostly people under 25 cycling, who typically don't have massive incomes. Sure, there's a few weekend warriors but not likely a significant portion (it's estimated to be less than 10%) of the cycling population. Of course there's those who have availed of the bike to work scheme but how many of those actually bike to work?

ThisRegard

Genuine question, do you have figures to back that up, as I don't see that.

Joe prim

Am I too late to say that they don't pay road tax?


(Just glanced back over the thread, i am too late, sorry about that, please disregard this post)

BTW, am I too late to say they should stay off the FOOTpath ?

Grandpa Hassan

These threads make me laugh as everyone gets so irate and wind each other up to a hatred of cyclists. And as a cyclist I sit here and know that nothing will ever be done to implement these ridiculous ideas. Pay 'road' tax? It's lsughable (at least it would be if road tax existed!).

In fact, us cyclists get a tax break in order to encourage more of us onto our bikes. The 'bike to work' scheme....effectively 40% off a bike, funded by the taxpayer. Thanks drivers!

Saipanne

Two type of cyclists, in my book. Both easy to spot.

1) The pro. This kind of cyclist obeys the rules of the road. Tends to have a flash bike and all the proper cycling gear. I rarely see this type breaking lights or flying down footpaths. This group forms the minority of cyclists.

2) The amateur. These people behave as if they are in a secret competition to be as reckless as possible. Tend to use those ridiculous looking Dublin Bikes or some piece of **** bone shaker. Often see them tearing down Grafton Street, as if one sudden movement by a child won't cause utter mayhem. These idiots form the majority of cyclists.

Chloris

RainyDay wrote:

Nice victim blaming. I don't hear any huge clamour for drivers who kill other road users to be dealt with harshly round here.

What are you on about. We're talking about cyclists using the road in a dangerous way. Obviously anyone who kills anyone should serve time in prison. Nobody is contending that.

kylith

RainyDay wrote: »

I don't see any bike lines big enough for a bus.

https://goo.gl/maps/FU80d

Would you like to be more specific, or maybe share a link to a map location?

Also, note the number of cars illegally parked in the cycle lane on the right, and it looks to me like that silver car on the left is encroaching on the cycle lane.

machiavellianme

ThisRegard wrote: »

Genuine question, do you have figures to back that up, as I don't see that.

Try the esri, I don't own any personal data that I can publish on this but saw some interesting stats at a workshop on same last year.

RainyDay

machiavellianme wrote: »

Other countries are different to Ireland, particularly in Europe where many capital cities are flat.
Look around. It's mostly people under 25 cycling, who typically don't have massive incomes. Sure, there's a few weekend warriors but not likely a significant portion (it's estimated to be less than 10%) of the cycling population. Of course there's those who have availed of the bike to work scheme but how many of those actually bike to work?

That's not what I see around Dublin. I see cyclists of all ages, professions and income. In fact, usage among students is fairly low. The last census showed that more secondary school girls were driving themselves to school than cycling to school. This is partly because of the naked agression to cyclists shown on this thread, and partly because the RSA are determined to make cyclists appear as a dangerous activity, with their emphasis on hi-vis.

Grandpa Hassan wrote: »

In fact, us cyclists get a tax break in order to encourage more of us onto our bikes. The 'bike to work' scheme....effectively 40% off a bike, funded by the taxpayer. Thanks drivers!

You're such a tease!

Saipanne wrote: »

Two type of cyclists, in my book. Both easy to spot.

1) The pro. This kind of cyclist obeys the rules of the road. Tends to have a flash bike and all the proper cycling gear. I rarely see this type breaking lights or flying down footpaths. This group forms the minority of cyclists.

2) The amateur. These people behave as if they are in a secret competition to be as reckless as possible. Tend to use those ridiculous looking Dublin Bikes or some piece of **** bone shaker. Often see them tearing down Grafton Street, as if one sudden movement by a child won't cause utter mayhem. These idiots form the majority of cyclists.

That wouldn't be my experience either. I see lots of 'pro' cyclists breaking lights etc, and some who don't, and same for the amateurs. The only correlation that I've noticed is that many of those who wrap up in helmets and hi-vis are some of the worst cyclists from a safety point of view. False sense of security, maybe?

ArmaniJeanss

tipparetops wrote: »

They should have a licence, insurance and tax. If they want to use the roads, they should pay for them.
And those pricks who get dressed up at the weekend, they are suffering a mid life crisis. Oddballs.

The wonderful news is that no government is going to grant your wish and force cyclists to be licensed or insured, or charge us a fee, or force us into particular lanes in the road or limit our access.

The opposite will happen in the next decade, more cycle lanes, cycle routes and greenways, expanded bikeshare schemes, bike priority traffic lights.
More and more cyclists on the roads, some whizzing past poor you stuck in traffic, others leisure cyclists meandering along.

Its going to be great, so deal with it.

Saipanne

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

The wonderful news is that no government is going to grant your wish and force cyclists to be licensed or insured, or charge us a fee, or force us into particular lanes in the road or limit our access.

The opposite will happen in the next decade, more cycle lanes, cycle routes and greenways, expanded bikeshare schemes, bike priority traffic lights.
More and more cyclists on the roads, some whizzing past poor you stuck in traffic, others leisure cyclists meandering along.

Its going to be great, so deal with it.

Do us a favour and keep off the footpaths. Unless there's a cycle path on there. Cheers.

The J Stands for Jay

Captain Chaos wrote: »

They should be able to be fined, mandatory to carry official national ID to use a bike and enforcement. Caught with no ID, dragged to the nearest station and fined.

All citizens are required to present papers and an official reason for travel to all officials, unless they own a mobile phone network or an oil distributor.

micar

As a person who cycles to work each day, there is one section on my daily 46km commute where I use the footpath. And, it's for my safety.

It's mobhi road in glasnevin. This road is split into 3 lanes. 2 lanes in the direction of the city and one outward lane. Although it does have 3 lanes, it was probably not designed for that. The road going northwards of the city (also a relatively steep hill) is so narrow in parts that for cyclists there is no room to pass out motorists or motorists to pass cyclists safely.

Also, there is a section at kerb which is about 6 inches wide with a deep narrow ridge. This is something you don't want to get your wheel stuck in as you'll end up coming off the bike. I have the scars in my elbow and shoulder from this happening between clontarf and Sutton.

moonlighting

I would gladly do a theory test or even pay a small tax if they implemented proper cycle lanes across the country, but that's never going to happen. I know there are some cycle lanes in city centers but there a mess and there's practically none in the county side. Cycling is great exercise and great for the environment but without the infrastructure its just dangerous.
I could be crazy here but i think the future is in cycling not electric cars.

Grandpa Hassan

moonlighting wrote: »

I could be crazy here but i think the future is in cycling not electric cars.

I agree. City planning will become cycle focussed. Dublin will eventually follow London in taking away entire lanes and devoting them 100% to cycles (works on the Embankment in London are underway and even taxi drivers have capitulated in their opposition to it)

Drivers here are all just raging against the dying of the light

hatrickpatrick

leftfinger wrote: »

ive been hit by a car twice in my life.

the first was many years ago as a child i was crossing the road on a green mad and a car struck me lucky they were not able to slow down enough in time to only really knock me onto the ground. i was able to get up and walk away from it.

the second time only occurred a few weeks ago while cycling i was clipped by a wing mirror or a car the car stopped for a moment and then just went on his/her way

i was also again luckily to have walked away from that but my bike was damaged and cost me 200 euro to fix.

ive never been hot by a cyclist maybe its different here in limerick but i hardly ever see someone cycling on the path.
i do see them running lights and cycling down the wrong side of the road alright.

but i also see cars speeding through pedestrian crossings in the mornings so they dont have to wait while the lollipop lady is letting the kids cross.

In Dublin city centre it's the exact opposite. Cars rarely do blatantly dangerous rule breaking but most cyclists act as if pedestrian lights don't exist at all and footpaths are just part of the road. Particularly around the quays.

i can think of ways that would help with these problems

1. better education for everyone
2. mandatory driving retest every 10 years or less
3. more garda on the street to enforce the laws


a theory test for cyclists what a silly idea when are you going to give people the test when they are 7 years old?

Why should someone who's 7 years old be allowed to cycle on the roads, when they're legitimately too young to drive? There's a reason we have age limits for things like that.

mikemac1

If every single cyclist you spot on your city commute decided to ditch the bike and drive the same route as you than your commute time would increase.

Many cyclists have cars at home but chose not to use them for work commutes.

They are doing car drivers a favour tbh.

tritium

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

In Dublin city centre it's the exact opposite. Cars rarely do blatantly dangerous rule breaking but most cyclists act as if pedestrian lights don't exist at all and footpaths are just part of the road. Particularly around the quays.

Sorry but you have to be fcuking kidding there.

Why should someone who's 7 years old be allowed to cycle on the roads, when they're legitimately too young to drive? There's a reason we have age limits for things like that.

Unfortunately there's no special provision for them to be allowed do otherwise as I understand it -would be delighted to be wring on this

inforfun

A **** cyclist is more than likely also **** at driving a car.
And the other way around.

I dont even dare to cycle here anymore

Changing vehicle doesnt make you all of a sudden perfectly aware of the rules of the road.

kylith

moonlighting wrote: »

I would gladly do a theory test or even pay a small tax if they implemented proper cycle lanes across the country, but that's never going to happen. I know there are some cycle lanes in city centers but there a mess and there's practically none in the county side. Cycling is great exercise and great for the environment but without the infrastructure its just dangerous.
I could be crazy here but i think the future is in cycling not electric cars.

Many cycle lanes are just taken from lanes on the road so it is impossible for cars to not be in the cycle lane. Many Irish roads are too narrow for cycle lanes and cars to be properly separated and even when the road is wide enough you have to deal with things like the left-turning lane for cars going over the straight-ahead lane for bikes, which is downright dangerous, imo. Cycle paths on footpaths often go over driveways and are used as footpath extensions by pedestrians. Cycle paths on footpaths are, imo, both frustrating and dangerous for all because you have to constantly expect a pedestrian to step in front of you so it's impossible to get up any kind of speed. I definitely agree that it would be a step in the right direction to move toward totally removing cars from city centres via better bike lanes, better public transport links, and cheaper/free parking on the outskirts.

RainyDay

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

In Dublin city centre it's the exact opposite. Cars rarely do blatantly dangerous rule breaking but most cyclists act as if pedestrian lights don't exist at all and footpaths are just part of the road. Particularly around the quays.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Bwaahaahaa. You need to get real.
Have a look at these vids;
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=92964191&postcount=597

And this one

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vc5VGuJvOVk

And this one

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWC8sT06Zi0

Would you like me to keep going, or do you get the point that just about every time a light goes red in Dublin, 1 or 2 or 3 drivers break the red light.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Why should someone who's 7 years old be allowed to cycle on the roads, when they're legitimately too young to drive? There's a reason we have age limits for things like that.

Do you often see 7 year olds driving on the roads?

And if you think that 18 is a good age limit for cycling, be prepared to get rush hour traffic to increase as the remaining (mostly boy) students who do cycle to school get back into Mammy's car.

Chloris wrote: »

What are you on about. We're talking about cyclists using the road in a dangerous way. Obviously anyone who kills anyone should serve time in prison. Nobody is contending that.

I'm talking about victim-blaming - that anyone who takes a child out on the road is somehow negligent. We've seen calls on this thread for extra training, and now you want those parents who do take their kids out on the road to prepare them for independent travel reported to social services? See the problem yet?

Clearlier wrote: »

I continue to be surprised at the level of vitriol directed towards cyclists.

This is a very interesting question. The vitriol towards cyclists in verging on racist in nature. Small minded people see fault only in cyclists, and don't see the many faults in drivers (despite the fact that the road safety stats show clearly which road user group is a danger to others).

So why the vitriol - simple jealously at seeing cyclists breeze past in traffic while they are stuck in the queue?

Grandpa Hassan

Nice one RainyDay. Just shows how blind drivers are to the danger that they pose. The behaviour is so prevalent now that it is just accepted as the norm. I think that's why they don't see it. And professional drivers are the worst....taxis and buses

roadrunner16

tipparetops wrote: »

They should have a licence, insurance and tax. If they want to use the roads, they should pay for them.
And those pricks who get dressed up at the weekend, they are suffering a mid life crisis. Oddballs.

Assuming you're a driver ? how do you pay for the roads more than cyclists ?

Clearlier

RainyDay wrote: »

This is a very interesting question. The vitriol towards cyclists in verging on racist in nature. Small minded people see fault only in cyclists, and don't see the many faults in drivers (despite the fact that the road safety stats show clearly which road user group is a danger to others).

So why the vitriol - simple jealously at seeing cyclists breeze past in traffic while they are stuck in the queue?

I think that it's more likely to do with personal experience. As I hinted at in my earlier post when I cycle I see drivers do dumb things on pretty much every journey I make but I rarely see cyclists do anything wrong. When I drive I see cyclists doing dumb thing all over the place but rarely see cars do much wrong.

The above is because when I cycle I move at a similar speed to most cyclists so I don't encounter very many and when I drive I move at the speed of the traffic around me so I only see the behaviour of a few drivers. I doubt that my experience is unique hence why so many drivers think that most cyclists are bad and many cyclists think that most drivers are bad.

Edit to add that most (adult) cyclists are drivers and have some appreciation of the stupid things that cyclists do but most driver are not cyclists and have a limited appreciation of the dumb things that drivers do.

Capt'n Midnight

dubscottie wrote: »

There is a video on the cycling forum of cars "breaking lights". In that video, Had the cars stopped, There would have been a pile up behind them.

You can go through a amber turning to red light if it would be unsafe to stop.. Ie slamming on the anchors.

Cyclists do it day in day out.. €100 a pop and a Garda would collect €20,000+ in fines in an hour at the junction of Harolds Cross Rd/Rathgar Ave.

LOL we could have saved hundreds of millions on NRA three lane upgrades if we prosecuted motorists who refuse to move in to empty lanes to their left.

Look at any of the RSA free speed surveys. at one stage 99% of motorists in free flowing traffic in interurban 50Km/h zones broke the speed limit. Average speed cameras would pay for themselves in no time.

RDM_83 again

Grandpa Hassan wrote: »

I agree. City planning will become cycle focussed. Dublin will eventually follow London in taking away entire lanes and devoting them 100% to cycles (works on the Embankment in London are underway and even taxi drivers have capitulated in their opposition to it)

Drivers here are all just raging against the dying of the light

I really don't think London is a place to emulate in terms of cycling, did a lot of cycling around Dublin currently cycling around London, there is probably a higher number of cyclists here but the experience is considerably worse, maybe the new big lanes they are building will be better but the lanes they make a big deal about now are pretty poor in many parts and there is really few of them, add to that you also have the added phenomenon here of cyclists that are aggressive to other cyclists and they allow artics during the day.
The reason the opposition is low to the lanes is because there is so many deaths,cycle past at least two ghost bikes a day and this week 2 people died.

anncoates

mikemac1 wrote: »

Since tax is based on emissions the correct rate is zero

What about righteous emissions? The exchequer could make millions of euro from cyclists.

PeadarCo

anncoates wrote: »

What about righteous emissions? The exchequer could make millions of euro from cyclists.

So your asking for a poll tax. We've about 4.5 million odd in the country and pretty much everyone will make a "righteous" statement and some point during the year, whether its Cyclists/Drivers/Pedestrians/Fianna Fail/Fianna Gael/Sinn Fein/Denis O Brian/Man United/Liverpool/etc are the Devil incarnate/Hitler/criminal/God/perfect/ etc. Sounds a very easy way to raise money.