Indo: 'outrage' over cyclists not using bike lane

DirkVoodoo

Comments being hilarious and scary in equal measure, more education is needed from the likes of the RSA. No one's journey is that important.

Funny how any time I'm driving, what seems to hold me up more than anything is other drivers, I don't think I've ever lost more than a few seconds due to cyclists "clogging up the roads". But sure they are an easy target for the entitled and the irate.

This idea that the roads belong to the automobile is deeply entrenched in the public consciousness, it will take a long time to shift.

As cyclists, we all need to do our part: obey the law, don't give the idiots an excuse (not in this case as no law was being broken!). As winter approaches, I'm actually amazed at how few lights I see on bikes. One ninja the other night was only visible as his silhouette was highlighted by a car parked up facing against me.

Firedance

biZrb wrote: »

The road is on the way to/from Richmond Park, its quite narrow, so I understand why he's annoyed as cyclists can 'hold up' cars as its difficult to overtake them. But it doesn't give him an excuse to break the law just cause he wanted a rant. You can see the path and cycle path to the left, the path is covered with leaves and the cycle path is free of leaves, anyone walking along that path will have to use the cycle path, not exactly safe for pedestrians. Most of the cyclists coming to/from Richmond Park are serious cyclists so won't exactly be slow going along Priory Lane. I'm a cyclists and car driver so see if from both sides but side with the cyclists, of course

Just on this, I recently had a car pass me (too close) and then pulled in on the road leaving me no room to pass them back when they got stuck in traffic about 50m later :rolleyes: I got past them anyway and went onto the cycle lane once it started (it's one of the good ones!). Anyway, the road we are now on is very long and has about 4 sets of traffic lights. Between heavy traffic and being stopped at the lights I got to my destination faster than she did. Traffic in the city does not often leave cars in a position to get somewhere quickly. Drivers need to realise there are plenty of other things on the road to hold them up, such as other cars(!) and traffic lights and stop blaming cyclists. In that video they all ended up at a red light yes? So what, really, is his issue?

Chuchote

Funny thing is that the London police don't seem to be taking any action on this; one of the Standard commenters said she or he had reported the mobile phone use.

jive

Firedance wrote: »

So what, really, is his issue?

His brain or lack thereof.

biZrb

Firedance wrote: »

n that video they all ended up at a red light yes? So what, really, is his issue?

I totally agree, but he's an idiot so can't see that! Those lights can take quite awhile to change so its likely you'll get caught at them anyway.

Chuchote

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

As cyclists, we all need to do our part: obey the law, don't give the idiots an excuse

No. As humans, we need to do our part. Cyclists are not a group.

Tenzor07

More comedy Gold!

LINK

Carawaystick

Why are we commenting on an irish newspaper reporting about something happening in England?

equivariant

Carawaystick wrote: »

Why are we commenting on an irish newspaper reporting about something happening in England?

It was the Brits fault?! Back before Cromwell Ireland was a paradise for cyclists

Jawgap

Tenzor07 wrote: »

More comedy Gold!

LINK

ah sure the pedestrians use them anyway, we might as well do away with the fiction - and save the paint!

Tenzor07

Jawgap wrote: »

ah sure the pedestrians use them anyway, we might as well do away with the fiction - and save the paint!

The jogger/pedestrian/pram walker/glass and stone collection point/temporary parking spot/roadworks sign/lampost lane?

Chuchote

equivariant wrote: »

It was the Brits fault?! Back before Cromwell Ireland was a paradise for cyclists

It was a Scot who invented the pneumatic tyre, and a Dub who ripped him off on the profits. Patriotism!

newwan

That guy with the camera is a retard. He should be given his few penalty points for using a phone behind the wheel. ..

Such an idiot.

07Lapierre

Good example of bad cycle lanes being worse than no cycle lanes!

I know there not perfect but I think the cycle lanes that are simply painted on an existing road are best. At least cyclists are then seen as "legitimate traffic" and the cycle lanes are "seen" to be used by cyclists.

DirkVoodoo

07Lapierre wrote: »

Good example of bad cycle lanes being worse than no cycle lanes!

I know there not perfect but I think the cycle lanes that are simply painted on an existing road are best. At least cyclists are then seen as "legitimate traffic" and there "seen" to be used by cyclists.

I agree! The ones on the rock road make me feel pretty safe and if I need to turn right or avoid pedestrians, I can.

Contrast that with the N11 and the off-road lanes/paths. I just use the bus lane.

07Lapierre

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

I agree! The ones on the rock road make me feel pretty safe and if I need to turn right or avoid pedestrians, I can.

Contrast that with the N11 and the off-road lanes/paths. I just use the bus lane.

I've come to the conclusion that most shared cycle lanes/paths only make sense if you get a puncture and have to walk home while pushing your bike!

Don't Chute!

There was a guy on George Hook today who said he was walking down by Sandymount this morning and decided to challenge cyclists on the footpath. He said he challenged nine of them on his journey with varying responses. Hook then told him "there is one thing you can do, if you have a walking stick you can hit them". To which yer man said well I was using one to stop them.
Now, while obviously a lot of cyclists behave very badly is it really acceptable for a national broadcaster to be saying things like this? I find Hook and his hate talking about cyclists gets a lot of idiots riled up and it's only a matter of time before someone is seriously hurt or worse.
I'm starting to get quite worried about all of this ignorant anti cyclist propaganda going around

Keep_Her_Lit

"Video showing cyclists riding next to bike lane causes outrage". Is this an incident of significant national importance? Does it warrant a prominent place on the Indo's home page?

While the Indo's circulation figures certainly support its claim to being a National newspaper, the increasing reliance on this kind of moronic, click-bait drivel really highlights the dire situation in which our print media now find themselves.

This kind of stuff used to pi$$ me off. But now I think it's almost better to race around their chavvy website clicking on as much of this crap as possible in order to accelerate their inevitable demise into a well deserved oblivion. Oh, and lest I give any impression to the contrary, the Righteous Times is every bit as bad, just in its own snooty, pretentious way.

Meanwhile, let's continue to enjoy our cycling!

Daroxtar

Every problem has a solution

ted1

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

I agree! The ones on the rock road make me feel pretty safe and if I need to turn right or avoid pedestrians, I can.

Contrast that with the N11 and the off-road lanes/paths. I just use the bus lane.

I feel safer in the N11 then the rock road. Also cyclists travel much slower on the rock road.

Firedance

07Lapierre wrote: »

Good example of bad cycle lanes being worse than no cycle lanes!

I know there not perfect but I think the cycle lanes that are simply painted on an existing road are best. At least cyclists are then seen as "legitimate traffic" and the cycle lanes are "seen" to be used by cyclists.

I was only thinking this very thing yesterday! On the north quays from the PP to O'Connell Street these exist every now and again and they are by far the safest part of those quays! I'd nearly campaign for these to be put on every road as it would stop motorists encroaching on our (limited) space.

Chuchote

Firedance wrote: »

I was only thinking this very thing yesterday! On the north quays from the PP to O'Connell Street these exist every now and again and they are by far the safest part of those quays! I'd nearly campaign for these to be put on every road as it would stop motorists encroaching on our (limited) space.

Dream on, baby

Carawaystick

07Lapierre wrote: »

I know there not perfect but I think the cycle lanes that are simply painted on an existing road are best. At least cyclists are then seen as "legitimate traffic" and the cycle lanes are "seen" to be used by cyclists.

Bus lanes without cycle lanes are better, you can then cycle 2 abreast and have a chat...

Bigus

AlreadyHome wrote: »

I don't understand - why are the media even bringing a viewpoint to the public's attention when the guy is using slurs like 'gay', 'retarded', making dangerously close passes at cyclists - all while driving using a phone? He's utterly discredited.

It's like printing an interview with a randomly selected inebriated thug outside a chippy at three in the morning...

Plus he's driving a land rover Defender in a town / urban setting , typical of some of these asses, small Mickey syndrome I'd say.

Chuchote

Bigus wrote: »

Plus he's driving a land rover Defender in a town / urban setting , typical of some of these asses, small Mickey syndrome I'd say.

Landscape gardener, apparently. Maybe you can pile trees on top or something.

KingBrian2

Don't Chute! wrote: »

There was a guy on George Hook today who said he was walking down by Sandymount this morning and decided to challenge cyclists on the footpath. He said he challenged nine of them on his journey with varying responses. Hook then told him "there is one thing you can do, if you have a walking stick you can hit them". To which yer man said well I was using one to stop them.
Now, while obviously a lot of cyclists behave very badly is it really acceptable for a national broadcaster to be saying things like this? I find Hook and his hate talking about cyclists gets a lot of idiots riled up and it's only a matter of time before someone is seriously hurt or worse.
I'm starting to get quite worried about all of this ignorant anti cyclist propaganda going around

He is just giving his intolerant views. George does not like cyclists with a passion.

tomasrojo

Don't Chute! wrote: »

There was a guy on George Hook today who said he was walking down by Sandymount this morning and decided to challenge cyclists on the footpath. He said he challenged nine of them on his journey with varying responses. Hook then told him "there is one thing you can do, if you have a walking stick you can hit them". To which yer man said well I was using one to stop them.
Now, while obviously a lot of cyclists behave very badly is it really acceptable for a national broadcaster to be saying things like this? I find Hook and his hate talking about cyclists gets a lot of idiots riled up and it's only a matter of time before someone is seriously hurt or worse.
I'm starting to get quite worried about all of this ignorant anti cyclist propaganda going around

Hook is STILL doing this stupid ****?

Chuchote

Thought Hook had retired. Interesting. If someone took this advice and assaulted a cyclist from the car, could they cite Hook as a co-defendant if the injured cyclist sued?

paddy no 11

Chuchote wrote: »

Thought Hook had retired. Interesting. If someone took this advice and assaulted a cyclist from the car, could they cite Hook as a co-defendant if the injured cyclist sued?

Incitement to hatred surely

endacl

I think we've reached that point...

Any chance of boards setting up a sister site where all these pointless cyclist/driver threads could be redirected?

talktoyourselves.ie perhaps?