Two cyclists injured – Indo comments section

2RockMountain

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

LOL. And you're equating this with racism?

You've led a very sheltered life if you think gobs***es on Twitter mean you're an oppressed minority.

Just to be clear - I didn't equate anything with racism. I did point out that if these threats were made against a race group, they would be illegal.

HivemindXX wrote: »

Idle threats for the most part no doubt.

Most likely, yes. Though the UK has seen relatively frequent deaths and serious injuries to cyclists in circumstances where lack of care is clearly an issue.

Any my point stands, that if these threats were made on Twitter against gay people or black people, Twitter would take action. But it's OK to hate on cyclists apparently.

Weepsie

wotswattage wrote: »

For balance, you have the likes of these comments appearing in the comments of the article too:

I would say that is a far fairer argument though. Dublin is small, it's very easy (mobility and intellectual impairments aside) to traverse without the need of getting into a big metal box. There are quite frankly too many cars, or at least too many people in cars on their own. They moan about cyclists holding them up, when most of the time it's a car, or truck holding them up.

Jawgap

2RockMountain wrote: »

Do you include daily death threats and wishes of harm as 'bee in their bonnet'? Do you include daily biased attribution of illegal activities as 'bee in their bonnet'?

People wittering about delinquent cyclists are on the same plane as people wittering about dog fouling or littering......a lot of over emotive rhetoric spouted but when it comes down to it they're just happy to see such offenders caught and punished with a modest fine.

MediaMan

The problem with the rabble-rousing invective against cyclists is not that is causes the easily led to go out and murder cyclists. It's that it causes them to go out and perform punishment passes, shout abuse, honk horns and generally make life more difficult for cyclists.

The very slight upside of all this is that since they are focused on cyclists, even if in a negative way, they are unlikely to knock one down "because they came out of nowhere".

arse_jackeen

Chuchote wrote: »

Certainly true. Often enough when I and a crowd of other cyclists wait at a red light, someone – always, in my experience, a male between 16 and 30 – races through on a bike with an air of self-entitlement.

The difference is that many drivers don't see the 10 cyclists waiting for the lights to change, but only see the one narcissist, and use him as an example of what knob-ends 'cyclists' are.

And there's an awful lot of driversplaining around.

I agree with your comment except that in my daily cycling commute, it's not 10 to 1 waiting for the lights, it's often the reverse.

Chuchote

arse_jackeen wrote: »

I agree with your comment except that in my daily cycling commute, it's not 10 to 1 waiting for the lights, it's often the reverse.

I think it's often a question of people being like sheep; if one person sails through, others follow; if one person stops, most also stop.

Eponymous

Taxuser1 wrote: »

Leigh anois go curamach an text "my pet hate as a cyclist and motorist is the throwing out of an arm (indicating) and moving out without looking over shoulder to see if there's oncoming traffic (car or bike or peloton)"

I cycle quite fast. Someone who does a manoeuvre without looking behind to see what's coming up behind them puts me in danger because I might not be able to react in time but to counteract that I know there are cyclists who will move off so I take this into account. Just like a motorist does. It's frowned upon in track cycling yet the commuter because they've ears are entitled to do this ? That's absolutely ridiculous.

Even the safe cross code starts with Look.

Surely if you're travelling too fast to react in time, you're putting yourself in danger?

Yes, said cyclist should look first, but more importantly as a motorist or cyclist you should be aware of what's happening up ahead and anticipate so as to be able to react. This means travelling at an appropriate speed.

Lepet1

I believe the cyclist in Howth who "crashed into a parked car" was actually doored by said car.

Chuchote

Lepet1 wrote: »

I believe the cyclist in Howth who "crashed into a parked car" was actually doored by said car.

Anyone told the Indo?

Lepet1

Chuchote wrote: »

Anyone told the Indo?

Dunno, only heard about it today from a mutual.

tomasrojo

Chuchote wrote: »

Anyone told the Indo?

... who will change it to "was in a collision with a parked car".

Mercian Pro

The odd thing about the Indo featuring this is that cyclists being knocked off their bikes is a regular occurrance and is generally never covered by the press. There was no mention anywhere (thankfully) of my two serious collisions despite the fact that I was hospitalised on both occasions. Was it a no-news day when they printed this story? Does the Indo suddently think the vulnerability of cyclists needs to be highlighted or did someone in the ambulance service or A&E decide to call the newsdesk?

The real story should be the scandalous lack of any reliable data on collisions that result in injury to cyclists and pedestrians. Garda statistics vary greatly from hospital records and the RSA figures are different again. The fact that there are no agreed definitions of what constitutes a minor or major injury typifies the current mess.

Dermot Illogical

It's silly season in the news cycle. Pretty much anything can end up being printed in August.

Mercian Pro wrote: »

Was it a no-news day when they printed this story? .

Chuchote

Ace cub reporter.