Considering quitting the commute

Lumen

Mango Joe wrote: »

Lumen are you as rude to people in real life or do you just save it all up for when you are on here?

People respond to different things. Sometimes we need a hug and a bit of reassurance, sometimes we need to be called a worthless maggot in the style of Gunnery Sergeant Hartman.

I'm not sure I've been that rude, but there's a report post function if that feels right.

crosstownk

fat bloke wrote: »

A day or two on the bus is the best prescription to restore a healthy cyclo-commuting outlook.

I can't speak from a bus commute point of view but my alternative to cycling to work is to drive - about 25km on that damn M50. Some days I have wussed out due to weather only to end up stuck in a 'no reason' traffic jam on that infuriating motorway. Lately my tolerance for weather has increased and that's due, in the most part, to the horrible prospect of the M50.

OP, I don't use the same route as you but all of us have ropey or bothersome sections on our commute. We can choose to give in or we can soldier on and keep cycling. Do what you think you have to keep safe and if that means lighting yourself up like a Christmas tree, donning Hi-Vis and getting a camera then do it. If you can afford more time then maybe look at an alternative route if you can although that's easier said than done.

Do whatever it takes to make you feel safer but do your best not pack in the cycling commute. It's a great way to start the working day and something to look forward to at the end of the working day. You know you'll miss it if you stop.

If you do decide to stop commuting by bike then I'm pretty sure that whatever alternative mode of transport you choose will come up short on quality and enjoyment.

Keep the faith, billyhead. And best of luck no matter what you choose.

Lumen

crosstownk wrote: »

I can't speak from a bus commute point of view but my alternative to cycling to work is to drive - about 25km on that damn M50

My literal alternative is a motorbike; I now live too far from work to comfortably cycle every day, so alternate between the two.

It's a nice break for the legs but makes cycling seem very safe and relaxed by comparison.

So here's a practical tip for the nervous pedaller: scare the living shyte out of yourself on a motorbike then go back to the cycling. :pac:

crosstownk

Lumen wrote: »

My literal alternative is a motorbike; I now live too far from work to comfortably cycle every day, so alternate between the two.

I've a company car and it absolutely baffles colleagues that I choose to cycle 19km across the city (because it's sooooo dangerous) rather than use the fully expensed company car. It baffles them further when I tell them that my weekly goal is to put up more kms on the bike than the car.

magicbastarder

i live near DCU, and work in leopardstown. i've been using public transport to get to work for the last four years (since i moved to the current address). looking to get back on the bike for the commute heading into the winter, as it'll probably guarantee i'll get some time in the saddle during the week.

i have colleagues living on the DART line on the northside who continue to drive, despite the fact that there's a bus from blackrock station up to our office. baffles me.

CramCycle

ted1 wrote: »

Do you honestly think that drivers could spot the cameras?

I found that I seem to get a bit more clearance when I have one on. There are undoubtedly one or two people who get riled by them but to be honest, those people are the people who would have been riled anyway.

tomasrojo wrote: »

He's a healthy number two on my match-making page.

Your my number three.

I always looked at cycling as my choice, I have a license for almost every class of vehicle, I have a car which is taxed and insured (but rarely used) but the truth is, from a mental and physical well being point of view, it is almost essential.
I could walk, it would add two hours onto my day (minimum), if I was delayed in work, I would never make the creche, and I am not convinced I would have the energy to carry my shops home on foot. Two hours extra a day for me is not good for my mental health as it cuts the time with my kids to practically zero for 5/7th of the week.
I could drive, I would not have a huge amount more time lost but counting my insurance and tax as essentials, the cost of petrol and maintainence alone would be almost crippling for me. Inside of a year, I could easily buy two decent bikes out of it or put a fair dent into whatever I wanted too buy. I can pay for a social night out, I could get a nice present for my kids etc.
I could use PT. There are no direct routes through and by the time I walk to them and get them, and then walk the rest of the way, it is not far off just walking. A bit quicker but the cost, even with a tax saver ticket, would be ridiculous.
I like to think I have a choice about cycling. In the end, money wise, I probably don't save as much as I think but I save a bit but I am under no illusion, without cycling, I am poorer at my job (never seem to fully kick off when I drive or get a lift), my blood sugars are worse, I will not live as long, my kids will not likely see me as much, I would be mentally more unhappy, I would be physically a wreck, but thats just me though.
Unlike others in the thread, I don't actually care if someone else cycles or not. I think it is great if they do but to be honest and selfish, the OP not cycling is their choice and theirs alone. I think they are stupid in this regard (not actually) when I overlay my wants on them but I would never berate them over it.
My own advice, is to look at different routes, different cycling styles, have a try but in the long run, if you are unhappy or miserable cycling, and you feel that won't change, then try another way. In the end, pick the one that keeps you most content.

coolbeans

ted1 wrote: »

coolbeans wrote: »

Not always but if they don't they understand pretty quick when I point it out to them. I've had a few suggest I'm a vigilante but they don't hold the same opinion re dashcams in cars. We'll get there though, one knucklehead at a time. Keep on pedalling.

Surely if you reach a situation where you need to point out the camera it's to late as the event has passed

Good cycling awareness and experience serves me well in that I generally don't get into bother, not in the last fifteen years anyway. What puts me off more recently is utterly futile aggression that seems to be increasing and it's for this reason I've installed the cams. They don't prevent idiocy but they do record and once people realise they'll be held accountable behaviour changes dramatically and extremely quickly.
I just wanna be left alone on my way to work, free from harassment and the cams definitely help.

Kaisr Sose

I don't think cameras change behaviour, which is mostly impulsive, opportunist, selfish stuff, but they certainly record whatever it is. People may change their tune once they realise whatever happened has been recorded but thats after the fact and we are all wiser then. I will be getting cameras when I resume commuting.

coolbeans

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

I don't think cameras change behaviour, which is mostly impulsive, opportunist, selfish stuff, but they certainly record whatever it is. People may change their tune once they realise whatever happened has been recorded but thats after the fact and we are all wiser then. I will be getting cameras when I resume commuting.

Defends on visibility of the camera. I'd be surprised if a helmet cam didn't change behaviour as they're so obvious. I don't do helmet cams cos I don't wear a helmet most of the time.

_Brian

It's really hard to beat the attitude against cyclists.
We only cycle for leisure but fear for kids keeps us off the roads in dedicated cycle paths for that.

Few people I know and travel with really get angry when they come up behind cyclists. It doesn't make sense, they're giving out before they even need to slow down. Any I've spoken to just hate to see cyclists and explaining to wait and five 1.5m space passing just doesn't sink in. These are people who never sit on a bike so they don't realise or don't want to realise how volunerable cyclists are. Add to that attitude that everyone is in a rush and perpetually late it's no wonder it's tough for cyclists out there.

Kaisr Sose

coolbeans wrote: »

Defends on visibility of the camera. I'd be surprised if a helmet cam didn't change behaviour as they're so obvious. I don't do helmet cams cos I don't wear a helmet most of the time.

What I am attempting to say is that if a car passes and then turns left across your path, of pulls out from a junction in front of you (or more examples like this) the driver generally won't see a camera as they just are not paying that much attention to the cyclist. If a visible camera helps them to drive with more courtesy and care/attention, then I am all for visible cameras.

coolbeans

_Brian wrote: »

It's really hard to beat the attitude against cyclists.
We only cycle for leisure but fear for kids keeps us off the roads in dedicated cycle paths for that.

Few people I know and travel with really get angry when they come up behind cyclists. It doesn't make sense, they're giving out before they even need to slow down. Any I've spoken to just hate to see cyclists and explaining to wait and five 1.5m space passing just doesn't sink in. These are people who never sit on a bike so they don't realise or don't want to realise how volunerable cyclists are. Add to that attitude that everyone is in a rush and perpetually late it's no wonder it's tough for cyclists out there.

I'd be optimistic overall. The behaviour you've described is essentially irrational. Attitudes need to change but the message needs to be that cyclists don't hold people up or cause traffic jams. I drive about ten thousand miles a year and have never been late due to being held up a cyclist. I don't hang about either and my car would be quicker than most.

tomasrojo

CramCycle wrote: »

I always looked at cycling as my choice, I have a license for almost every class of vehicle, I have a car which is taxed and insured (but rarely used) but the truth is, from a mental and physical well being point of view, it is almost essential.

I remember someone explaining that barriers to cycling could be quite small and still put off a lot of people, because cycling just isn't woven into most people's lives the way driving is; that people can drop cycling without any real disruption. But, like your case, my household would require a big reorganisation if I didn't cycle. I bring the kids around in a cargo bike now (the school run wouldn't be possible any other way, I think), I do the weekly shop with a bike trailer, I bring home stuff from Ikea in another type of bike trailer. Even when I rent a car, I collect it using a folding bike.

CramCycle wrote: »

Your my number three.

Number one with a bullet. Well, one heart more than Lumen.

Chuchote

_Brian wrote: »

It's really hard to beat the attitude against cyclists.
We only cycle for leisure but fear for kids keeps us off the roads in dedicated cycle paths for that.

Few people I know and travel with really get angry when they come up behind cyclists. It doesn't make sense, they're giving out before they even need to slow down. Any I've spoken to just hate to see cyclists and explaining to wait and five 1.5m space passing just doesn't sink in. These are people who never sit on a bike so they don't realise or don't want to realise how volunerable cyclists are. Add to that attitude that everyone is in a rush and perpetually late it's no wonder it's tough for cyclists out there.

France cut its road deaths enormously some years back with a campaign of billboards asking "What will you do when you get there?" coupled with radio and TV and newspaper discussions of how people were losing the ability to be present in the moment.

Irish drivers don't enjoy the time in their cars. Their minds are projected into where they're going. They're not in the present moment, in control of their life and enjoying what's happening now. That's why they have to rush so much.

Can we have great faith in cameras? Will the Gardaí act on their evidence? In England, a motorist in a huge vehicle who clearly admitted to filming from his mobile phone as he drove, while shouting abuse at cyclists and coming too near to them, and who put the film from his phone online, has apparently not been prosecuted for his dangerous actions - even though the evidence came from his own phone and his own upload. I have no doubt it would be the same here - the George Hook attitude means that a cyclist does not have the same value as a driver; and after a brief flurry of prosecutions for mobile phone use in the car, it has again become almost ubiquitous. It's the most obviously dangerous action, but not the only one.

OP, if you have a hunch of something bad coming if you stay on the bike, get off it. You might think of writing a letter to the council, and to The Irish Times, explaining that you no longer feel safe cycling because of drivers' behaviour, and mentioning the roundabouts that are particularly dangerous.

Wishbone Ash

tomasrojo wrote: »

... Even when I rent a car, I collect it using a folding bike....

Now that's impressive! You must be pulling a serious trailer on that folding bike.

DanDublin1982

I completely understand where you are coming from OP. After a few near misses ive made some changes to my commute myself.

I'm lucky enough to live very near the grand canal Greenway so I now take that as far as I can on my commute. It means avoiding being on the road with cars for more than half of my commute and it lets me avoid a roundabout which was causing me issues. So I'm immediately feeling safer before I leave the house. A change of route just isnt an option for some but its whats kept me on the bike the last few weeks.

Chuchote

Deedsie wrote: »

It's hard to see attitudes changing unfortunately. Using a mobile phone while driving (texting or calling) kills people yet we see it every single day along with many other distractions that shouldn't be allowed when driving a car. Some people incredibly still won't wear seatbelts, some people still drive while intoxicated.

Not just some people, a quarter of people, one in every four has done so in the last six months, according to a self-reporting survey at the Bantry Show:

http://www.joe.ie/news/one-in-four-irish-farmers-admit-to-driving-after-three-pints-in-the-last-six-months/561214

Approximately one in four Irish farmers have admitted to driving after consuming three pints in the last six months.

According to an Irish Examiner/ ICMSA opinion poll, 23% of respondents admitted to driving after consuming two or three pints in the last six months, while more than one in five said that they would feel “safe enough” driving home after consuming up to four pints.

Deedsie wrote: »

An old man was parked in the cycle lane outside the Talbot hotel in Stillorgan on Friday afternoon, a load of cyclists had to get off the cycle lane and go into the bus lane to pass him. Most were school kids, I was probably the most experienced cyclist there so I decided to say something to the driver. As I approached he had his window down. Before I had even started talking he was roaring about how all cyclist run red lights. Here was a man parked in a mandatory cycle lane actively breaking the rules of the road accosting me for running a red light which I never do. He was forcing children out onto the road. As I said he was an old man and I didn't want to get into an argument with him so I just cycled on.

How can you deal with that attitude? It was incoherent babble but this man seemed to think he was getting one back on all those red light running cyclists. A hero for the motorist.

You could get off the bike, start filming him on your phone and say "You are blocking a legal cycling lane and endangering children; I am now making a citizen's arrest."

guanciale

OP
I hope things improve for you. If I had seen this message two years ago or more I may have said htfu/cycle assertively/own the lane/ yada yada yada. Back then I commuted thru the Phoenix Park and up the quays.

I moved and now live in Lucan. My commute had changed a lot and my attitude toward cycling and commuting has changed. I know have roundabouts, M50 flyovers /merging lanes to deal with. I see my commute much differently now. Generally I try to take less direct routes that actively avoid these. Easier going in relative to going home.
Roundabouts for cyclist are unnerving. Some are so large or have trees planted in the centre so that a car is unlikely to see you until very late. In general I believe that they are unsuitable for cyclists on busy roads. I avoid the M50 flyover like the plague - lots use it safely. It stresses me out no end and I don't cycle for stress.

My advice is that if possible look for different routes. I take up to three different routes to get into work depending on various factors.

The infrastructure we face in my belief has a bearing on how stressful/pleasurable our commute is. Surprisingly I wouldn't have believed that a few years ago. Glad I do now.

Chuchote

Would it be worth making a series of complaints to the Broadcasting Standards Commission (or whatever it's called) every time a radio presenter makes or encourages statements that put cyclists' lives at risk?

2RockMountain

coolbeans wrote: »

Defends on visibility of the camera. I'd be surprised if a helmet cam didn't change behaviour as they're so obvious. I don't do helmet cams cos I don't wear a helmet most of the time.

I don't think many drivers study cyclists closely enough to pick out a camera from a distance. It's hard enough to get them to actually see you, let alone see one smallish device.

However, I do think there is a longer-term benefit, particularly for commercial drivers. If they start to realise that there is a decent chance that a video of their speeding/light-breaking/phoning/texting will find its way to their employer within a day or two, they will change their behaviour. If they hear on the van-drivers gossip forum about one or two mates who got fired when 'ratted out' by one of those 'vigilante cyclists' (who all break red lights, don't you know), they will change their behaviour.

Deedsie wrote: »

An old man was parked in the cycle lane outside the Talbot hotel in Stillorgan on Friday afternoon, a load of cyclists had to get off the cycle lane and go into the bus lane to pass him. Most were school kids, I was probably the most experienced cyclist there so I decided to say something to the driver. As I approached he had his window down. Before I had even started talking he was roaring about how all cyclist run red lights. Here was a man parked in a mandatory cycle lane actively breaking the rules of the road accosting me for running a red light which I never do. He was forcing children out onto the road. As I said he was an old man and I didn't want to get into an argument with him so I just cycled on.

How can you deal with that attitude? It was incoherent babble but this man seemed to think he was getting one back on all those red light running cyclists.

You did deal with that attitude. Despite his guff/denial/defensiveness/subject-changing, there is a reasonable chance that, the next time he needs to collect someone from the Talbot, he'll take the 1 or 2 minutes extra that it takes to drive into the car park instead of waiting in the cycle lane. Certainly, if he faced with a sweaty, red-faced cyclist at his window every time he parks in a cycle lane, he will change his behaviour.

Lumen

2RockMountain wrote: »

I don't think many drivers study cyclists closely enough to pick out a camera from a distance. It's hard enough to get them to actually see you, let alone see one smallish device.

However, I do think there is a longer-term benefit, particularly for commercial drivers. If they start to realise that there is a decent chance that a video of their speeding/light-breaking/phoning/texting will find its way to their employer within a day or two, they will change their behaviour. If they hear on the van-drivers gossip forum about one or two mates who got fired when 'ratted out' by one of those 'vigilante cyclists' (who all break red lights, don't you know), they will change their behaviour.

After witnessing incidents recently of people continuously (like, for 5 minutes) using their smartphones one-handed whilst driving at 80kph up the N11 into Dublin, I have been tempted to get a small helmet cam, but it just feels wrong somehow.

Am I really going to spend my free time collating and sending video evidence to the gardai? Regardless of the moral case, or whether I can be arsed to do it, I don't really want "cyclists" to be perceived as amateur enforcers of road traffic law.

2RockMountain

Chuchote wrote: »

Would it be worth making a series of complaints to the Broadcasting Standards Commission (or whatever it's called) every time a radio presenter makes or encourages statements that put cyclists' lives at risk?

I gave it serious consideration in this case, but never quite got round to it;

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=101104570&postcount=65

I also intended to write directly to Liz O'Donnell about her 'cyclists must wear hi-vis' nonsense, but haven't quite got round to that either.

Chuchote

The law on hate speech (a law that was won by long and hard work) defines it as speech calculated to arouse hatred of ethnic groups. But the kind of hate speech that's now endangering cyclists, a specific body of road users, is exactly the same kind that has been used against racial groups:

• calling people 'vermin',
• encouraging others to 'teach them a lesson' if they won't be caught,
• claiming that 'the majority of cyclists' break traffic laws and using this claim as justification for dangerous behaviour towards all cyclists.

It's time to stop this in Ireland. Too dangerous.

2RockMountain

Lumen wrote: »

I don't really want "cyclists" to be perceived as amateur enforcers of road traffic law.

Genuine question - why not?

I'm gone way past worrying about perceptions. I just want to not be killed by some Tweeting idiot.

Lumen

2RockMountain wrote: »

Genuine question - why not?

I'm gone way past worrying about perceptions. I just want to not be killed by some Tweeting idiot.

Me neither, but I prefer that responsibility to sit with the appropriate authorities.

Chuchote

A campaign to get all TDs to cycle at least some of the time might be more to the point than cameras. It would be one way of getting decent cycleways and road surfaces, etc. It would also mean that they'd have a cyclist's-eye view of how many people use their mobiles while driving, and this would make the law on phones and driving more likely to be enforced.

It would also be good for their representation of the voters; cyclists stop and chat to people, drivers seldom do.

Wishbone Ash

Lumen wrote: »

...Regardless of the moral case, or whether I can be arsed to do it, I don't really want "cyclists" to be perceived as amateur enforcers of road traffic law.

+1

mrcheez

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

I don't think cameras change behaviour

Wrong. Since I put my SJ4000 under my saddle in clear view I've noticed a considerable rise in drivers giving a wider berth.

The very day my camera was taken off the saddle I got 5 close pass-bys.

I wonder can you get a bag cover that's says "smile for the camera"?

CramCycle

Chuchote wrote: »

Can we have great faith in cameras? Will the Gardaí act on their evidence? In England, a motorist in a huge vehicle who clearly admitted to filming from his mobile phone as he drove, while shouting abuse at cyclists and coming too near to them, and who put the film from his phone online, has apparently not been prosecuted for his dangerous actions - even though the evidence came from his own phone and his own upload.

This would appear to be against the norm there though. The Police tend to react quite quickly to anything with some publicity. Several districts have active campaigns against such behaviour and the Met even have a division to deal solely with dashcam and helmet cam footage AFAIK.

Chuchote wrote: »

Would it be worth making a series of complaints to the Broadcasting Standards Commission (or whatever it's called) every time a radio presenter makes or encourages statements that put cyclists' lives at risk?

Might be worth starting a thread with instructions on how ot do it easily and quickly. Kind of like those letter campaigns where they basically give you the letter and all you have to add is the specific details. You could thten use the thread to get other peoples views on whether there is something worth reporting.

Lumen wrote: »

Am I really going to spend my free time collating and sending video evidence to the gardai? Regardless of the moral case, or whether I can be arsed to do it, I don't really want "cyclists" to be perceived as amateur enforcers of road traffic law.

I never done this while I had a helmet cam. I copied the film over to a HD and unless there was something specific, i never looked at it again. It was timestamped so great for a variety of reasons. Gardai ever ask for people in an area on a certain date, I could in theory just hand them the video. A few times I have reported issues to the gardai and told them I had helmet cam footage as well, mostly they never needed it, they just asked would a word with the driver, mentioning the footage , be enough.. They won't take edited footage (or they shouldn't), in case it was biased. The only one I was ever disappointed I never followed up further with was the 133 driver who admitted on film that he was trying to hit me to show me the danger of cycling. Really should have pushed that, the Garda never came back to me, Dublin Bus would not respond and I just got left filled with annoyance.

mrcheez

I posted this several times in other threads: yes camera footage is accepted as evidence and yes it can be used toward a prosecution. I was congratulated on the quality of the "cctv" (as they called it) when I handed in a DVD with the raw footage to the gardai who were able to bring the case to the courts as a result. I was told that in no uncertain terms that had I not got this footage nothing could be done.

Important tip: where possible get the drivers face on video to secure the prosecution.