Journalism and cycling

average_runner

Moflojo wrote: »

Are lawbreaking citizens particularly drawn to using Dublin Bikes? If you think Dublin Bike users are so particularly bad, what explains this behaviour? Is it the power of those 3-speed hubs going to their collective heads? Is it the weight and robustness of the bikes giving them a false sense of security? Or is it perhaps the absolute lack of cycling infrastructure connecting the Dublin Bikes "network" that influences this perceived misbehaviour?

Yeah it's the infrastructure sure. Dublin bike cyclist going the wrong way up the quay and straight across the O'Connell bridge junction the wrong way.

But it's on, it's infrastructure fault because less than 100 meters, the road for that direction is there

Moflojo

average_runner wrote: »

Yeah it's the infrastructure sure. Dublin bike cyclist going the wrong way up the quay and straight across the O'Connell bridge junction the wrong way.

But it's on, it's infrastructure fault because less than 100 meters, the road for that direction is there

When the Liffey Cycleway is built your anecdote will become a whimsical memory and we'll all chuckle heartily about it together as we reminisce about how awful Dublin used to be for pedestrians and cyclists.

average_runner

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

By taking a large number of taxis off the road and creating additional space on buses and trains?

Yeah because in the 90's that worked so well.
Using public transport at 2am is not that safe

average_runner

Moflojo wrote: »

When the Liffey Cycleway is built your anecdote will become a whimsical memory and we'll all chuckle heartily about it together as we reminisce about how awful Dublin used to be for pedestrians and cyclists.

That has nothing to do with what I said.

When is a very big word, maybe in next 15 years

average_runner

Pinch Flat wrote: »

I would hazard a guess that vast majority of dublin bike users also have driving licences, so chances are if they're a tw@t on a dublin bike, they're also a tw@t behind the wheel.

Can say the same for most cyclists

AndrewJRenko

average_runner wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

By taking a large number of taxis off the road and creating additional space on buses and trains?

Yeah because in the 90's that worked so well.
Using public transport at 2am is not that safe

I'm really not sure I get your point, though I don't hear too many stories of murders or stabbings on the Nitelink.

average_runner

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I'm really not sure I get your point, though I don't hear too many stories of murders or stabbings on the Nitelink.

So stabbing and murder the only type of crimes.


In the 90's there were massive queues for taxis at late hours, alot of incidents happened at taxi ranks, alot of rogue taxis and a few rape cases happened as result.

The buses weren't exactly the best way home due to drunken fools.

AndrewJRenko

average_runner wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I'm really not sure I get your point, though I don't hear too many stories of murders or stabbings on the Nitelink.

So stabbing and murder the only type of crimes.


In the 90's there were massive queues for taxis at late hours, alot of incidents happened at taxi ranks, alot of rogue taxis and a few rape cases happened as result.  

The buses weren't exactly the best way home due to drunken fools.

I'm still confused. I pointed out how Dublin Bikes took people out of taxis, buses and trains, and you point out the problems with late night taxis and buses?

Moflojo

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I'm still confused. I pointed out how Dublin Bikes took people out of taxis, buses and trains, and you point out the problems with late night taxis and buses?

If you told him cycling is good for one's health his response would be "Yeah, but only if you wanted to live longer." He's a total contrarian in my experience.

CramCycle

magicbastarder wrote: »

i passed a woman who was cycling on the footpath earlier; she was at least 75. despite the fact that she was a veteran criminal in the process of committing a crime, there did not seem to be any visible victims in her wake. strangely, she was not on a dublin bike.

Your as guilty as her, you didn't step in, didn't call the Gardai, shame on you.

tomasrojo

Stop the presses! Ross has sprung into action!

Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport Shane Ross has finally published some Ministerial priorities for his department, more than six months after his appointment to the position.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/shane-ross-publishes-ministerial-plans-after-six-months-in-office-1.2885574

Of course, you know there's a catch.

However, the vast majority of the items related to matters and projects which are ongoing or already well-established

buffalo

tomasrojo wrote: »

Stop the presses! Ross has sprung into action!


http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/shane-ross-publishes-ministerial-plans-after-six-months-in-office-1.2885574

Of course, you know there's a catch.

He was on Claire Byrne last night, but I had the sound turned down, so no idea what he said.

Fighting Tao

average_runner wrote: »

In the 90's there were massive queues for taxis at late hours, alot of incidents happened at taxi ranks, alot of rogue taxis and a few rape cases happened as result.

You do realise that the wild west past you describe is still the present.
http://www.thejournal.ie/dublin-fake-taxi-2643595-Mar2016/

tomasrojo

buffalo wrote: »

He was on Claire Byrne last night, but I had the sound turned down, so no idea what he said.

If I had to hazard a guess, nothing to do with transport, tourism or sport. "BO-RING! Can I be Minister for Justice now?"

RayCun

mcgratheoin wrote: »

In Brussels, cars can turn right onto a road that has a green man for pedestrians crossing. The pedestrians have right of way. I think there are quite a few places with "right turn on red" legislation that don't seem to generate the bloodbaths some people think would happen here.

In New York, traffic is allowed turn right on red, giving way to pedestrians.

It is a bloodbath, people are killed all the time by right-turning traffic.

Chuchote

tomasrojo wrote: »

If I had to hazard a guess, nothing to do with transport, tourism or sport. "BO-RING! Can I be Minister for Justice now?"

And yet if he suddenly announced that he was immediately setting Transport for Ireland's cyclable Dublin plan in action and building the major cycleways this year, he'd revolutionise Irish society from the health service to the carbon footprint! Such a lost opportunity for fame forever. Perhaps his successor will get the fame instead.

Fighting Tao

RayCun wrote: »

In New York, traffic is allowed turn right on red, giving way to pedestrians.

It is a bloodbath, people are killed all the time by right-turning traffic.

I was in Cologne at the weekend and traffic and bikes are permitted to turn right on red. Worked a treat for everyone involved. No carnage even though there were a few hundred thousand people visiting the christmas markets.

RayCun

So is driver behaviour in Dublin more like that of Cologne and Brussels, or that of New York? :pac:

Fighting Tao

RayCun wrote: »

So is driver behaviour in Dublin more like that of Cologne and Brussels, or that of New York? :pac:

There are idiots everywhere.

CramCycle

RayCun wrote: »

So is driver behaviour in Dublin more like that of Cologne and Brussels, or that of New York? :pac:

Depends on the parts of Brussels or New York. People are also missing the point that you often see signs stopping right turn on red at particular junctions because it does not work everywhere.

mcgratheoin

RayCun wrote: »

It is a bloodbath, people are killed all the time by right-turning traffic.

It's a nice soundbite, but it's not backed up by the data on killed or seriously injured. Here's the breakdown from 1105 crash reports in NYC 2009-2013

• Straight ahead - 55%
• Left turn - 19%
• Right turn - 6%
• Other - 14%
• Unknown - 6%

Source

Chuchote

mcgratheoin wrote: »

It's a nice soundbite, but it's not backed up by the data on killed or seriously injured. Here's the breakdown from 1105 crash reports in NYC 2009-2013

• Straight ahead - 55%
• Left turn - 19%
• Right turn - 6%
• Other - 14%
• Unknown - 6%

Source

Any idea of how many of those killed at turns are killed by trucks? Are trucks allowed drive through the streets of New York?

RayCun

If you read through it, it seems to suggest that a large part of the problem was left turns from one-way roads to two-way streets, and a major part of the solution was to introduce left-turn restrictions to eliminate the conflict between left-turning vehicles and pedestrians. (p48)

(also, the introduction of protected cycle lanes and pedestrian islands was highly effective, because it changed the speed and angle of turning traffic)

RayCun

Chuchote wrote: »

Any idea of how many of those killed at turns are killed by trucks? Are trucks allowed drive through the streets of New York?

4%, and don't know

mcgratheoin

RayCun wrote: »

If you read through it, it seems to suggest that a large part of the problem was left turns from one-way roads to two-way streets, and a major part of the solution was to introduce left-turn restrictions to eliminate the conflict between left-turning vehicles and pedestrians. (p48)

(also, the introduction of protected cycle lanes and pedestrian islands was highly effective, because it changed the speed and angle of turning traffic)

Yeah, left turns - which are the equivalent of right turns here, I don't think anyone here has suggested trying right turn on red in Ireland though. It's an interesting study about how to use minor infrastructure changes to improve safety - but my point is that the right turn on red (which would be the left turn on red here) is not the bloodbath that you suggested. Traffic driving straight ahead is by far the biggest danger (almost 10 times more KSIs).

It's slightly away from the original issue but my argument is as follows -

• Right turns on red (Left turn in Ireland) are commonplace for vehicular traffic in many countries
• These laws do not result in massive casualties in those countries - I think the NY data backs that up
• Therefore it is reasonable to extrapolate that allowing left turns on red at some junctions for cyclists would not result in fatalities as has been suggested here already.

AndrewJRenko

Just to get back to the original topic of journalism, Ryan Tubridy was banging the hi-vis drum on the radio today. Somebody called in to remind him that lights are more important than hi-vis, so he backtracked a bit.

HivemindXX

mcgratheoin wrote: »

It's a nice soundbite, but it's not backed up by the data on killed or seriously injured. Here's the breakdown from 1105 crash reports in NYC 2009-2013

• Straight ahead - 55%
• Left turn - 19%
• Right turn - 6%
• Other - 14%
• Unknown - 6%

Source

Those stats are rendered somewhat irrelevant to this discussion because NYC is an exception to the general rule where "right on red" is prohibited by default, permitted only where there is a sign.

I did find this study. It starts off with the somewhat surprising to me finding that right turns at junctions where you can turn right on red only account for 0.2% of fatal crashes (that's 1 in 500). It goes on to say that because they don't have data for whether the light was actually red it might be 0%.

Reading on though it turns out that for pedestrians and cyclists that number is a little higher at 22% (that's 100 times higher).

Study wrote:

When a RTOR crash occurs, a pedestrian or bicyclist is frequently involved. For all four states for all years studied, the proportion of RTOR pedestrian or bicyclist crashes to all RTOR crashes was 22 percent.

They go on to conclude that is acceptable since it doesn't really affect how many motorists are being killed

Study wrote:

In conclusion, there are a relatively small number of deaths and injuries each year caused by right-turn-on-red crashes. These represent a very small percentage of all crashes, deaths, and injuries. Because the number of crashes due to right-turn-on-red is small, the impact on traffic safety, therefore, has also been small. Insufficient data exist to analyze left turn on red.

I'm reminded of Homer Simpson's position on the speed limit - "Sure, it'll save a few lives, but millions will be late!". Perhaps it could be modified to something like "Sure some people will be killed, but just cyclists and pedestrians for the most part".

I'm also reminded of BSNYC's rant about the bus that went through a red and killed a pedestrian crossing at a green light which resulted in the bus company complaining that if they had to check and see that nobody was crossing before they went through the red they were going to go on a work to rule (oh now, they'll mind what they're doing!).

mcgratheoin

HivemindXX wrote: »

I did find this study.

I think you may have misinterpreted their figures. The 22% is for RTOR crashes involving pedestrians or cyclists, not fatalities. Essentially it's saying that 1 in 5 times there's a crash at a RTOR junction, a cyclist or pedestrian will be involved.
Incidentally, this is not dissimilar from the overall statistics about involvement of pedestrians and cyclists - in Ireland (2013 is the most recent here) 31% of collisions involved either a pedestrian or cyclist (1547 out of 4976). This might suggest that RTOR is no more dangerous than any other road manoeuvre. (I'm not making that claim btw, but it's interesting to look at the data.)

The fatality figures from the study you linked to are:

study wrote:

Only 1 percent of RTOR pedestrian and bicyclist crashes resulted in fatal injury.
However, less than one percent (0.2 percent) of all fatal pedestrian and bicyclist crashes result from a RTOR vehicle maneuver.

This would suggest that RTOR is not a significant contributor to cycling or pedestrian deaths over the period of the study. I've worked out the figures in this study and it's 45 deaths. At 0.2% that's a total of over 22 thousand pedestrian and cyclist fatalities over the same period.

HivemindXX wrote: »

Perhaps it could be modified to something like "Sure some people will be killed, but just cyclists and pedestrians for the most part".

Harsh - that study was specifically commissioned with an impact on pedestrian safety. Traffic in this sense encompasses all road users, not just motor vehicles. The question for policy makers and legislators revolves around acceptable levels of risk and practicable and realistic risk mitigation (but that's another issue).

HivemindXX wrote: »

Those stats are rendered somewhat irrelevant to this discussion

Completely agree - the whole RTOR has got out of hand slightly - for the reasons I posted above. The discusion on RTOR for vehicles is merely to stress the ridiculousness of suggesting that allowing LTOR in Ireland for cyclists at some junctions would result in fatalities.

Moflojo

Interesting article here from Chicago about the culture of victim-blaming in collisions involving cyclists and pedestrians. Also touches on the phenomenon of the "robot car", i.e. the passive reporting of a driver's actions, e.g. "the car mounted the kerb".

http://m.chicagoreader.com/chicago/stop-victim-blaming-cyclist-pedestrian-crashes/Content?oid=24570247

Roadhawk

Moflojo wrote: »

Interesting article here from Chicago about the culture of victim-blaming in collisions involving cyclists and pedestrians. Also touches on the phenomenon of the "robot car", i.e. the passive reporting of a driver's actions, e.g. "the car mounted the kerb".

http://m.chicagoreader.com/chicago/stop-victim-blaming-cyclist-pedestrian-crashes/Content?oid=24570247

Completely pointless article:

The driver being a 16 year old stoner who is a serial speeder should have been off the road before he had the chance of killing anyone on the road.

Comment like “Wearing dark clothing as a pedestrian is a completely reasonable thing to do. Running people over with a car is not.” in my opinion is completely irresponsible. Every road user should have a duty of care when using any road including making themselves visible by using lights or whatever. My one pet hate is seeing a ninja cyclist or even worse a ninja motorist. These people have a blatant disregard for their own safety. Having said that, it is clearly unacceptable to knock anyone down at any time of day. Each driver should adjust their approach to driving at different times of day. The trouble with the boy in this article stems from lack of experience (also known as stupidity).