Journalism and cycling

tomasrojo

The piece is rather weird in not saying who the experts were, and what they said.

This kind of thing happens occasionally in all jurisdictions, and has been happening for well over a hundred years. Nobody has yet introduced a requirement for cyclists to have insurance. So what's so special about this case?

magicbastarder

i would wonder whether such a case would succeed if the pedestrian was injured by a cyclist who was found not to be negligent; in the above case, the cyclist was using the footpath illegally, but was the award based on that? or merely that the pedestrian was injured through no fault of their own, that the legality of the cyclist's actions was moot?

Tombo2001

rubadub wrote: »

another link if that is not working for people
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/pedestrian-who-sued-teen-cyclist-over-collision-settles-case-1.3361483


Pedestrians are also uninsured road users. I was knocked off by one who was illegally & recklessly crossing the road about a year ago, he strolled off not a bother, I limped away. If I had sued him I wonder if any "legal sources" would have said similar about "uninsured pedestrians".

There's a few odd things about this case. Firstly - on the face of it it's such a minor story you'd have to wonder why the Irish times is publishing it. Do they do similar every time a kid falls in a playground and breaks there wrist and gets a settlement,. No they don't. Second, it's presented as making some sort of precedent. It's clearly not a legal precedent as it's not a legal verdict. Third, see below. Why is it that when a pedestrian walks out in front of a cyclist, on a bike path, with the result that the cyclist is killed .... it's ruled as an accidental death. But here, in a similar but far less damaging accident, the cyclist is seen as legally to blame by all the commentators. ....anyone?
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/coroner-s-court/cyclist-died-after-collision-with-pedestrian-inquest-hears-1.3317745

magicbastarder

Tombo2001 wrote: »

Why is it that when a pedestrian walks out in front of a cyclist, on a bike path, with the result that the cyclist is killed .... it's ruled as an accidental death. But here, in a similar but far less damaging accident, the cyclist is seen as legally to blame by all the commentators. ....anyone?

well, the law is clear that cyclists should not use footpaths, and that if the cyclist had been obeying the law the collision would not have occurred.
in the case from the phoenix park, there's no such law that a pedestrian can't cross the cycle path, and common sense would tell you that such a law would be unenforceable anyway. so legal responsibility is much less clear cut.

Pinch Flat

Tombo2001 wrote: »

There's a few odd things about this case. Firstly - on the face of it it's such a minor story you'd have to wonder why the Irish times is publishing it. Do they do similar every time a kid falls in a playground and breaks there wrist and gets a settlement,. No they don't. Second, it's presented as making some sort of precedent. It's clearly not a legal precedent as it's not a legal verdict. Third, see below. Why is it that when a pedestrian walks out in front of a cyclist, on a bike path, with the result that the cyclist is killed .... it's ruled as an accidental death. But here, in a similar but far less damaging accident, the cyclist is seen as legally to blame by all the commentators. ....anyone?
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/coroner-s-court/cyclist-died-after-collision-with-pedestrian-inquest-hears-1.3317745

Because it’s a cyclist it’ll attract a lot of hysteria, clicks and traffic of the anti cycling lobby to the Irish Times site. Some quick statistics from the ITs website:

Cyclist hits guy on path and injures him - 137 comments

Drunk driver well over the limit kills someone and leaves two others with life changing injuries. Gets a slap on the wrist - 48 comments

Seems to be par for the course when it comes to cycling stories. Expect Joe Duffy or Ivan Yates to to a lengthy segment on this during the week, people will ring in with all sorts of stories about cyclists terrorising the road tax paying public.

tomasrojo

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/954368124480032769

Some discussion of "precedent" there. Doesn't look all that convincing to me, but no lawyer I.

Pinch Flat

tomasrojo wrote: »

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/954368124480032769

Some discussion of "precedent" there. Doesn't look all that convincing to me, but no lawyer I.

I’m no lawyer either but the only precedent surely is that they settled outside of court. It wasn’t a legal precedent in the sense that the court made a judgement in favour of the pedestrian.

It is a bit unsettling thought to think minors can be sued for this sort of thing. There’s plenty of kids of a similar age that use the paths around me - in fact one of them hit my son and tore a brand new jacket a few years back, but I didn’t need to bring it to a solicitor either.

tomasrojo

Not sure how I feel about suing minors in general. It does sound like a case of careless and illegal use of the footpath, so the only mitigating factor was his age.

magicbastarder

What is stopping women from cycling?

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-leicestershire-41737483?SThisFB

HivemindXX

magicbastarder wrote: »

What is stopping women from cycling?

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-leicestershire-41737483?SThisFB

I agree this is an issue but I disagree with quite a few of the points the author made. "Get off the road!" and similar abuse is directed at male cyclists too and just as much I'd bet. The anti-cyclist brigade actually seem to be more incensed by male cyclists in tight fitting clothes judging by the bizarre comments you often read on the subject.

Taking umbrage at "keep pedaling, nearly there" is probably misplaced too. As a male cyclist I've both given and received that exact comment from and to other male cyclists. I think that's just friendly encouragement and there is too much being read in to it.

Claims that roads simply aren't safe is misleading. Some roads are dangerous but cycling on the roads in general is quite safe and the statistics back this up.

It is very disappointing that more women don't feel cycling is a good solution to them although my own perception is that the percentage commuting and doing sportives is increasing a lot.

Here's a similar piece from The Guardian last week about teaching refugees in Berlin how to cycle. Perhaps this highlights the difference in attitudes between non-cyclists in Germany and the UK but cycling seems to be a completely positive experience for these people.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2018/jan/16/the-feeling-of-freedom-empowering-berlin-refugee-women-through-cycling

ED E

HivemindXX wrote: »

I agree this is an issue but I disagree with quite a few of the points the author made. "Get off the road!" and similar abuse is directed at male cyclists too and just as much I'd bet. The anti-cyclist brigade actually seem to be more incensed by male cyclists in tight fitting clothes judging by the bizarre comments you often read on the subject.

This may not be a popular opinion but IME women can take such heckling/harassment to heart a bit more. Dont know what the source is, maybe its the slagging lads throw around from a young age, maybe something else. If a motorist yells at me I'll tell them where to shove it where female counterparts stay quiet (maybe the smarter move) but keep it with them longer.

Just my 2c.

magicbastarder

ED E wrote: »

This may not be a popular opinion but IME women can take such heckling/harassment to heart a bit more.

there's a difference between a bloke being heckled by another bloke, and a woman being heckled by a bloke, so i guess that women do have cause to dislike/fear such heckling more than men do.

re the 'keep going!' comments, i've been known to use them; sometimes when passing other cyclists on uphills, where i feel it'd be impolite to pass someone without acknowledging their presence, especially as i would not be zipping past them at high speed. context is key, i guess.

one anecdote - my wife decided to take up jogging a few years ago. we live very near a decent sized public park, and she stopped jogging because of some of the remarks she was getting. i would be surprised if i'd gotten a single remark if i was jogging in the same park.

eeeee

ED E wrote: »

This may not be a popular opinion but IME women can take such heckling/harassment to heart a bit more. Dont know what the source is, maybe its the slagging lads throw around from a young age, maybe something else. If a motorist yells at me I'll tell them where to shove it where female counterparts stay quiet (maybe the smarter move) but keep it with them longer.

Just my 2c.

I would simply refer you to the thousands of years of subjugation and discrimination of women. Reframe the above mentioned comments within that framework.
Also see the massive amounts of assault and physical and sexual violence perpetrated upon women by men daily and you can see how the same comments don't land the same with women and men.

As a woman on a bike it's largely ok, I do get shouted at a lot in the summer usually, when you're less covered up. That's ****. You do get underestimated by other cyclists daily (everyone gets shoaled, but women get shoaled a whole lot more).
I think more women don't cycle because of the danger aspect and the aggression on the road. The gear doesn't help either I guess, and whilst I personally don't mind it I know plenty who don't. Different strokes.

Also my female friends who cycle tend to have shyttier bikes, heavy, slow (I had one myself for 15 years) and it doesn't enamour them to cycling as a pleasurable thing. They also get recommended these heavy pieces of shyte too. I used to. Still do if I don't get talking first :pac:

I do think more women will cycle as it becomes more normalised in time.

magicbastarder

i think i mentioned before about the time my wife was shopping for a bike and the shop assistant in one place in the city centre listened to her questions, and delivered his answers to me. and when she said she didn't want a woman's bike - as from what she could see, the main brands she was looking at didn't make one in her size (she's 5'11" and has a 36" inside leg with similarly long arms), the shop assistant again turned to me to explain that, quote, 'women have skinny little shoulders' so need women's bikes. she was taller than him by about two inches.

CramCycle

nee wrote: »

As a woman on a bike it's largely ok, I do get shouted at a lot in the summer usually, when you're less covered up. That's ****. You do get underestimated by other cyclists daily (everyone gets shoaled, but women get shoaled a whole lot more).

My co worker has cycled the ****tiest of bikes since I have known her and for probably 7 years before that. She recently got an average commuter on the bike to work. I would have called it a lump of dead weight but it was a huge improvement, mudguards, changing gears, functioning brakes.

Every morning she comes in and some male tosser in cycling has pre judged her and jumped ahead of her at lights, she recounts the number of near heart attacks she has witnessed by lads on racing bikes offended that she has overtaken them. Or the ones who have glanced at her and decided they are faster and moved in front of her at the lights, so she cannot overtake them due to traffic on their right. A member of one of the RAI teams was so incensed at her being faster he overtook her by undercutting a roundabout to get in front.

She does this in jeans and a shirt during the summer and a t shirt and trackies in winter.

She has no interest in cycling past commuting, lucky for those in Sundrive and A3, as she would hammer most of the Bs and be taking points in A3 without training.

I disagree with the keep pedalling comment as this is one I have been given loads but I can sort of understand why it has been misinterpreted.

eeeee

CramCycle wrote: »

My co worker has cycled the ****tiest of bikes since I have known her and for probably 7 years before that. She recently got an average commuter on the bike to work. I would have called it a lump of dead weight but it was a huge improvement, mudguards, changing gears, functioning brakes.

Every morning she comes in and some male tosser in cycling has pre judged her and jumped ahead of her at lights, she recounts the number of near heart attacks she has witnessed by lads on racing bikes offended that she has overtaken them. Or the ones who have glanced at her and decided they are faster and moved in front of her at the lights, so she cannot overtake them due to traffic on their right. A member of one of the RAI teams was so incensed at her being faster he overtook her by undercutting a roundabout to get in front.

She does this in jeans and a shirt during the summer and a t shirt and trackies in winter.

She has no interest in cycling past commuting, lucky for those in Sundrive and A3, as she would hammer most of the Bs and be taking points in A3 without training.

I disagree with the keep pedalling comment as this is one I have been given loads but I can sort of understand why it has been misinterpreted.

This, a thousand times this. If I had a euro for every time...

robyntmorton

CramCycle wrote: »

I disagree with the keep pedalling comment as this is one I have been given loads but I can sort of understand why it has been misinterpreted.

The trouble is that the comment (while usually totally innocent) can be so easily misconstrued (by either gender) as “Oh, look at the condescending pr!ck make comments as he flies past me”

Even a simple “Hello!” Or “Good [insert time of day]!” can cause offence if the recipient is having a really bad day, but is less likely to be taken as a comment on the persons ability.

Lumen

HivemindXX wrote: »

Taking umbrage at "keep pedaling, nearly there" is probably misplaced too. As a male cyclist I've both given and received that exact comment from and to other male cyclists. I think that's just friendly encouragement and there is too much being read in to it.

I don't consider myself a particularly uncivil person but if someone said that to me I'd tell them to fuck off.

I'm not sure my gender is particularly relevant either.

HivemindXX

Lumen wrote: »

I don't consider myself a particularly uncivil person but if someone said that to me I'd tell them to fuck off.

I'm not sure my gender is particularly relevant either.

A bit of introspection might do you some good then. If that's true you clearly need to work on your social skills. It's sad that people might be put off making a friendly comment because they are afraid the other person might be a touchy asshole.

Lumen

HivemindXX wrote: »

A bit of introspection might do you some good then. If that's true you clearly need to work on your social skills. It's sad that people might be put off making a friendly comment because they are afraid the other person might be a touchy asshole.

I wouldn't interpret it as a friendly comment. That's the whole point. I'd interpret it as being incredibly condescending.

Sometimes when someone is offended it's because you're being offensive, not because they're a touchy asshole.

Thanks for the life tips though.

Kaisr Sose

Lumen wrote: »

I wouldn't interpret it as a friendly comment. That's the whole point. I'd interpret it as being incredibly condescending.

Sometimes when someone is offended it's because you're being offensive, not because they're a touchy asshole.

Thanks for the life tips though.

Equating offering encouragement or giving encouragement to being condescending or offensive would, in most cases take or be a giant leap. Uttering F/Off in reply would in my view generally always be intentionally rude.

Sometimes people are just being nice, and don’t mean to offend. If the tone is demeaning or additional derrogotary comment is made, then it’s different.

Lumen

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

Equating offering encouragement or giving encouragement to being condescending or offensive would, in most cases take or be a giant leap. Uttering F/Off in reply would in my view generally always be intentionally rude.

Sometimes people are just being nice, and don’t mean to offend. If the tone is demeaning or additional derrogotary comment is made, then it’s different.

OK, this is going well off topic, but whatever.

Amongst the indignities of being a woman cyclist in Ireland is having GO BABY shouted at you by a man from the side of the road during a race. Actually this particular anecdote is fading in my memory and it might have been from a rider in the same race, but it doesn't really matter.

Now, I consider that deeply offensive. But maybe the infamous dirtbird was only intending to be encouraging? What's important, the feelings of the recipient or those of the perpetrator?

But maybe if that woman had shouted "f off" in response she'd be an arsehole, right? Or maybe an uptight bitch, or one of the other terms retained for women who assert themselves.

What's the difference?

magicbastarder

The story behind Ireland's greenway success
https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/travel/ireland/the-story-behind-ireland-s-greenway-success-1.3352239

Kaisr Sose

Lumen wrote: »

......What's the difference?

As I said...”If the tone is demeaning or additional derrogotary comment is made, then it’s different”. Your example above is different.

You are going off topic here. What the other poster said was offering general encouragement to someone nearing the top of a hill. That’s all. There is no need to saying f/off just for that. If you said it to me, I would think you were very rude to do so. (I don’t know you so don’t know the sun of your experience of words of encouragement)

Best leave it here or, if you feel it’s worth further discussion, start a thread using the example you just outlined as the basis for discussion.

magicbastarder

Deedsie wrote: »

Ever climb Croagh Patrick?

would you recommend a mountain bike, or would a CX bike suffice?

eeeee

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/past-six-days/2018-01-20/ireland/an-endless-cycle-of-outrage-in-the-roads-war-z82dkqgnp

There has to be a way to stop people sporting spurious percentages about cyclists. This is ridiculous.

I don't fit into any of the stereotypes she's conjured in the article either :rolleyes:

P_1

magicbastarder wrote: »

would you recommend a mountain bike, or would a CX bike suffice?

https://www.strava.com/segments/5884258 KOM is 36 minutes, deffo a CX bike needed if you want to earn it :P

ford2600

P_1 wrote: »

https://www.strava.com/segments/5884258 KOM is 36 minutes, deffo a CX bike needed if you want to earn it :P

Pftt

43 minutes without a bike

https://www.imra.ie/photos/view/id/11012/

That's up and down. Mountain runners are a different breed

magicbastarder

nee wrote: »

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/past-six-days/2018-01-20/ireland/an-endless-cycle-of-outrage-in-the-roads-war-z82dkqgnp

paywalled for me. i suspect it's not an article which would lead me to take out a subscription?

Corca Baiscinn

nee wrote: »

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/past-six-days/2018-01-20/ireland/an-endless-cycle-of-outrage-in-the-roads-war-z82dkqgnp

There has to be a way to stop people sporting spurious percentages about cyclists. This is ridiculous.

I don't fit into any of the stereotypes she's conjured in the article either :rolleyes:

You're right but it's getting wearying to have to counter everything wrong/negative re cycling in media! In last week alone, LLS fallout, Richard Grogan on Newstalk , Freight Transport Assoc on Times Ireland, Sarah Carey ditto & who knows what else. We need an office and paid lobbyists like the AA, FTA, etc!