Journalism and cycling

SPDUB

The case I know from earlier this year didn't have 'died tragically' in reports , it just noted that they had died but without really saying why , but people who knew the person told me it was suicide .

AndrewJRenko

hans aus dtschl wrote: »

This. Anybody who's ever had an insurance claim will know it can be difficult to get them to pay out.

Has this changed recently? I was involved with one claim about 15 years back of a clear case of suicide by overdose, and there was no difficulty with the mortgage protection payout. There was restriction on death by suicide in the first year of the policy iirc.

SPDUB wrote: »

The case I know from earlier this year didn't have 'died tragically' in reports , it just noted that they had died but without really saying why , but people who knew the person told me it was suicide .

You do hear the 'died tragically' in the immediate news reports, or 'tragic incident' on the train line, but I don't think I've ever heard this in the case of a pedestrian being hit by a car. Either way, the more specific facts and details tend to come out at an Inquest, and tend to be reported by the press.

Steoller wrote: »

In the case I've told you about, evidently not, or I would have linked it.

As an aside, I don't understand why you're railing against this, like it doesn't happen, or it's a myth because we can't produce the reports for you. Society in this country has a terrible attitude to mental health as a whole and suicide in particular. Is it so hard to believe that reporters, doctors, and Gardai in such a society would omit suicide as a cause of death in these circumstances, to spare a family? That they would find it too ghoulish to record it that way officially unless they had no other choice?

I'm not really 'railing against it' - I'm trying to dig to find out whether it is a real issue or not. Is it an urban myth, or does it happen so rarely that it really isn't worth considering in road policy discussions.



My own gut feeling is that it is generally just another excuse for crap driving, but I'm happy to be informed by evidence either way.

meeeeh

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

My own gut feeling is that it is generally just another excuse for crap driving, but I'm happy to be informed by evidence either way.

Firstly I haven't used that as an excuse for crap driving because Irish roads safety statistics are pretty good. But your whinging about crappy driving is just whinging that not supported by international comparisons. It could always be better though.

https://www.google.ie/amp/www.thejournal.ie/shane-ross-road-safety-4079524-Jun2018/%3famp=1

My interest in suicide stats is just that I noticed there are a lot more single occupied car crashes in Ireland. And I know of one pedestrian death that was suicide. But then there are not that many bridges in Ireland where people can attempt suicides.

AndrewJRenko

meeeeh wrote: »

Firstly I haven't used that as an excuse for crap driving

Others have. They have explicitly used this trope of suicidal pedestrians as an excuse for drivers hitting pedestrians. They have used it to punch holes in the legal requirement for drivers to be able to stop in the distance they can see to be clear because, you know, pedestrians are always just jumping out in front of motorists trying to get themselves killed.

meeeeh wrote: »

because Irish roads safety statistics are pretty good. But your whinging about crappy driving is just whinging that not supported by international comparisons. It could always be better though.

https://www.google.ie/amp/www.thejournal.ie/shane-ross-road-safety-4079524-Jun2018/%3famp=1

The international comparisons on road death figures aren't too bad, and have improved considerably over 15-20 years ago.


But we're still seeing motorists killing 3 or 4 people each week in largely avoidable crashes. That's three or four families devastated each week, because someone was driving too fast, or driving on the phone, or driving after a few pints, or driving after too many hours working/driving.


We have three incidents of aggressive intentional attempts to harm cyclists by taxi drivers caught on camera in the past 2-3 weeks. If these are the ones caught on camera, how many other times is it happening off camera?



Just look around you in traffic and you'll understand why Ireland came 2nd worst in the European league table of mobile phone abuse.


We have a long, long way to go.

meeeeh

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

We have three incidents of aggressive intentional attempts to harm cyclists by taxi drivers caught on camera in the past 2-3 weeks. If these are the ones caught on camera, how many other times is it happening off camera?

I don't know but you probably have some coroner's report about it. Or it might be just the three incidents on camera. (For the record I think they should be put of road for life for that).

The fact is that only death statisc increasing is cyclist, overall numbers and everything else is falling. I would assume that means road behaviour of motorists is improving as is the road infrastructure and yet cycling deaths are increasing. Either they are increasing because of bigger numbers of cyclists or maybe there is a space for improvement in cyclist behaviour too. Or do you have alternative explanation.

jjpep

meeeeh wrote: »

I don't know but you probably have some coroner's report about it. Or it might be just the three incidents on camera. (For the record I think they should be put of road for life for that).

The fact is that only death statisc increasing is cyclist, overall numbers and everything else is falling. I would assume that means road behaviour of motorists is improving as is the road infrastructure and yet cycling deaths are increasing. Either they are increasing because of bigger numbers of cyclists or maybe there is a space for improvement in cyclist behaviour too. Or do you have alternative explanation.

The infrastructure is not improving though. And the poor quality is being exposed by the increased numbers of cyclists. Combined poor quality infrastructure with increased number of cyclists with a motorist population that is being egged on by the media to feel as if there under attack by cyclists and you get the behavior that we've seen captured on video over the last few days.

On the subject of the media, its interesting that one of biggest advertisers (and therefore funders) as an industry is the motor industry. Might explain the stance some outlets take. Mad dangerous cyclists on the loose. Send your 30 cent text now....

AndrewJRenko

meeeeh wrote: »

I don't know but you probably have some coroner's report about it.

I really don't get the rationale for the jibe about Coroners' reports, as if I'm some kind of crazed extremist for looking at Coroners' reports as a useful source of data about causes and circumstances of deaths.

meeeeh wrote: »

Or it might be just the three incidents on camera.

Wouldn't that be an amazing mathematical improbability? What percentage of cyclists and motorists have cameras these days - maybe 10% or 20% at a stretch. And yet, you reckon that it's reasonable to assume that three incidents in question just happened to occur in view of a camera?

meeeeh wrote: »

The fact is that only death statisc increasing is cyclist, overall numbers and everything else is falling.

Where's did you get that from? 2017 did indeed have a worrying increase in deaths but it's a long way off from saying that the trend is increasing. Here's the year-on-year changes;



Source: http://irishcycle.com/2018/01/03/cycling-deaths-2017/

The current number for 2018 is 7 deaths, which would have us on track for a reduction in the total for 2018.

meeeeh wrote: »

I would assume that means road behaviour of motorists is improving as is the road infrastructure and yet cycling deaths are increasing. Either they are increasing because of bigger numbers of cyclists or maybe there is a space for improvement in cyclist behaviour too. Or do you have alternative explanation.

That's a big old assumption there, giving 'road behaviour of motorists' full credit for all reductions in road deaths. Do you think that improved safety technology in cars might play a part? Do you think that Mandatory Alcohol Testing by Gardai might play a part? Do you think that the NCT getting junker cars off the road might play a part?


And buried in your comment is the further assumption that cyclist deaths are down to cyclist behaviour - how did you manage to work this one out?

meeeeh

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

And buried in your comment is the further assumption that cyclist deaths are down to cyclist behaviour - how did you manage to work this one out?

By trolling and making the same nonsense generalised statements as you are making about drivers.

AndrewJRenko

meeeeh wrote: »

By trolling and making the same nonsense generalised statements as you are making about drivers.

I'm pretty sure that every 'generalised' statement I've made about drivers is backed up by evidence. But feel free to point out any specific statements that you think are 'nonsense'.

beauf

meeeeh wrote: »

I don't know but you probably have some coroner's report about it. Or it might be just the three incidents on camera. (For the record I think they should be put of road for life for that).

The fact is that only death statisc increasing is cyclist, overall numbers and everything else is falling. I would assume that means road behaviour of motorists is improving as is the road infrastructure and yet cycling deaths are increasing. Either they are increasing because of bigger numbers of cyclists or maybe there is a space for improvement in cyclist behaviour too. Or do you have alternative explanation.

I think theres more to it than that...

http://www.thejournal.ie/rsa-road-deaths-4117518-Jul2018/

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/number-of-daily-dublin-cyclists-doubles-to-more-than-95-000-1.3230465

magicbastarder

Fatalities in cars have been falling over the years due in no small part to the fact that cars are safer to be in now than they used to be.

meeeeh

magicbastarder wrote: »

Fatalities in cars have been falling over the years due in no small part to the fact that cars are safer to be in now than they used to be.

They are but I would say the main difference are motorways.

magicbastarder

also, i have heard that fatalities in cars did not fall as quickly as they might have done at first because driving an older car, without the safety technology, crumple zones, etc., became more dangerous when *other* cars had them; i.e. a being in a 1995 car crashing into a 1995 car was more survivable than being in a 1995 car crashing into a 2005 car. but the playing field has levelled out to an extent since, so you're at less of a disadvantage when driving a 10 or 15 year old car.

Rechuchote

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I'm not really 'railing against it' - I'm trying to dig to find out whether it is a real issue or not. Is it an urban myth, or does it happen so rarely that it really isn't worth considering in road policy discussions.

One of Malcolm Gladwell's books has an interesting essay about suicide as a fashion statement. He starts out with an epidemic of male teen suicides on an island in… Micronesia, I think it was.

Then he talks about how one suicide reported heavily in the press tends to be followed by others.

Then, even more chillingly, how one suicide tends to be followed by car crashes that are similar - for instance, if there's a murder-suicide by a man of his wife and two children, this is (he says) statistically likely to be followed in the next few weeks by fatal car crashes with a man driving his wife and two children. If there is a single male suicide, there tend (he says) to be single male car crash deaths in the following weeks.

I don't know if he's correct, but it surely gave me the creeps.

Weepsie

meeeeh wrote: »

The fact is that only death statisc increasing is cyclist, overall numbers and everything else is falling. I would assume that means road behaviour of motorists is improving as is the road infrastructure and yet cycling deaths are increasing. Either they are increasing because of bigger numbers of cyclists or maybe there is a space for improvement in cyclist behaviour too. Or do you have alternative explanation.

Or that motorist behaviour is dropping. That just as easy an inference to make as the two very lazy ones you have made, and based on the evidence is the most likely reason for the increase in deaths.

That there are circa, 230,000 drivers with penalty points at present (about 10%) of the licensed amount, is utterly shameful. That this fails to take into account the sheer volume of drivers who get away with on a daily basis speeding, rljing, drink driving and perhaps most commonly, using their mobile phones while driving just points to how poor the standard of our drivers are. It's poor, and it's a minor miracle that their are not more serious injuries on our roads.

meeeeh

Weepsie wrote: »

That this fails to take into account the sheer volume of drivers who get away with on a daily basis speeding, rljing, drink driving and perhaps most commonly, using their mobile phones while driving just points to how poor the standard of our drivers are. It's poor, and it's a minor miracle that their are not more serious injuries on our roads.

And yet international comparisons tend not to confirm that. I'm well aware that Ireland has an advantage of very empty roads outside couple of cities so that helps. There are some local habits that are not as present in some other countries (stopping in the middle of a local road and having a chat, parking on roads, cycling paths, sidewalks and half of the people don't know how to drive on motorways) but I've driven quite a lot in central/western Europe and Ireland is not bad at all in comparison.

That being said I absolutely despise use of mobile phones while driving and I think it should be aggressively dealt with.

ford2600

magicbastarder wrote: »

Fatalities in cars have been falling over the years due in no small part to the fact that cars are safer to be in now than they used to be.

That's beyond simplistic view of things, the funny thing with all the factors which have contributed to fatalities reducing, that the one with most money and pr behind it.

We used to kill close to up to 650 a year when national fleet was tiny and fuel prices insured average annual mileage was also tiny.

The number in 17 was 25% of what the 1972 peak was. In 1972 in a crap car with drum brakes it was socially acceptable to cram as many as possible into it and drive as fast as possible while drunk. That was still acceptable at the turn of the century in many areas.

There has been a dramatic change in driver behaviour in that time.

Also road quality in terms of design, surface materials has also moved on immeasurably. Junction design layout in now coded in central (and copied from UK ) design manuals.

The former NRA has a specialist unit which examines every road fatality and the role road/signage played in it and lessons to learn and implement.

The Gardai has a specialist forensic unit also which does prosecute people, which was not the case.

While not perfect penalty points and RSA PR campaigns have changed attitudes.

We would all like things to be better, and there is room for improvement in lots of areas, the refusal to admit driver behaviour is better than it was is at odds with the facts. If behaviour can be changed with regard to drink/speed it can be changed with regard mobile phone/respect for vulnerable road users also.

Rechuchote

ford2600 wrote: »

The former NRA has a specialist unit which examines every road fatality and the role road/signage played in it and lessons to learn and implement.

And yet in coroners' court reports you hear unqualified gardaí being asked for their opinion of cycling infrastructure safety, and you don't hear evidence from this NRA unit with, presumably, scientific analysis of how the 'accident' happpened. Why is that?

RacoonQueen

Weepsie wrote: »

Or that motorist behaviour is dropping. That just as easy an inference to make as the two very lazy ones you have made, and based on the evidence is the most likely reason for the increase in deaths.

That there are circa, 230,000 drivers with penalty points at present (about 10%) of the licensed amount, is utterly shameful. That this fails to take into account the sheer volume of drivers who get away with on a daily basis speeding, rljing, drink driving and perhaps most commonly, using their mobile phones while driving just points to how poor the standard of our drivers are. It's poor, and it's a minor miracle that their are not more serious injuries on our roads.

Ah penalty points. I remember once seeing a post somewhere on boards from someone saying that they are far too easy to get and it so unfair etc etc and people agreeing with this. Jesus. :rolleyes:

Cabaal

RacoonQueen wrote: »

Ah penalty points. I remember once seeing a post somewhere on boards from someone saying that they are far too easy to get and it so unfair etc etc and people agreeing with this. Jesus. :rolleyes:

Normally these are the same people that outright hate clampers no matter the situation.

Its funny, I'm driving over 10 years and to date:
- No points
- No fines
- No clamps

If anyone finds points or clamping too easily to happen to them, then they really need to take a hard look in the mirror.

magicbastarder

ford2600 wrote: »

We would all like things to be better, and there is room for improvement in lots of areas, the refusal to admit driver behaviour is better than it was is at odds with the facts. If behaviour can be changed with regard to drink/speed it can be changed with regard mobile phone/respect for vulnerable road users also.

Not sure if you're still addressing my post here, but I was in no way addressing driver behavior. All I was saying was that car design has had an impact (pun unintended) on survivability of crashes.

Interestingly, I've just learned that airbags are not mandatory in Europe on new car builds. Assuming Wikipedia is correct. Obviously, not having them has a fairly significant effect on euro ncap ratings so manufacturers do include them.

Macy0161

ford2600 wrote:

We would all like things to be better, and there is room for improvement in lots of areas, the refusal to admit driver behaviour is better than it was is at odds with the facts. If behaviour can be changed with regard to drink/speed it can be changed with regard mobile phone/respect for vulnerable road users also.

I really don't see the behaviour changed to be honest. Just enforcement is even less. Try sticking to the speed limit (even off GPS rather than speedometer) and see how often you're passed or how quickly traffic builds behind.

IMO any improvement in stats is down to infrastructural improvements. I genuinely don't see any change in attitudes/ behaviour, or in enforcement. There was slight bumps with penalty points, and speed cameras, but that quickly dissipated when enforcement wasn't followed up on, and what started as new cameras just became regular spots that people know.

I can tell you the same location, on the same days, at the same times the private camera van will be in our village every week! It clicks up the checks, but only non-locals have any chance of being caught. Meanwhile, you'll be overtaken trying to be even close to the limit, within the 50 zone, away from that spot.

meeeeh

Macy0161 wrote: »

I can tell you the same location, on the same days, at the same times the private camera van will be in our village every week! It clicks up the checks, but only non-locals have any chance of being caught. Meanwhile, you'll be overtaken trying to be even close to the limit, within the 50 zone, away from that spot.

I'm sorry but nonsense about speed vans is the height of stupidity. The role of the van is not to try to dish out fines half of the country doesn't bother paying and half of the courts don't bother to collect. They stop people speeding on dangerous parts of the road. If they don't catch anyone it means they are achieving what they are supposed to achieve and hopefully save lives. If you want to catch people for speeding put a van before a toll collection point and you will catch 80% of the traffic and achieve absolutely nothing because motorways are by far the safest roads.

Macy0161

The spot the van parks in is near no junctions, no pedestrian crossings or crossing points. It happens to be after a blind corner, so that you cant see it in time, if you weren't expecting it.

Seriously, I just believe you're trolling the thread, based on this comment on top of the rest.

I could think of 5 places that speeding is more of a potential impact in the village limits than where they chose to set up.

meeeeh

Macy0161 wrote: »

The spot the van parks in is near no junctions, no pedestrian crossings or crossing points. It happens to be after a blind corner, so that you cant see it in time, if you weren't expecting.

But all those of you who know it is there are driving according to the speed limits through the blind corner. I'm not going to argue about where every speed van is but I know they were put on more dangerous locations. And no I'm not trolling this time, the point of fines it is not to collect more money for the budget but to improve behaviour on the roads. I don't know your expertise so you might be better equipped to position speeding vans than whoever was analysing data for gards but maybe you can email them with your suggestions.

https://www.garda.ie/en/roads-policing/road-safety/view-safety-camera-locations.html

CramCycle

meeeeh wrote: »

But all those of you who know it is there are driving according to the speed limits through the blind corner. I'm not going to argue about where every speed van is but I know they were put on more dangerous locations. And no I'm not trolling this time, the point of fines it is not to collect more money for the budget but to improve behaviour on the roads. I don't know your expertise so you might be better equipped to position speeding vans than whoever was analysing data for gards but maybe you can email them with your suggestions.

https://www.garda.ie/en/roads-policing/road-safety/view-safety-camera-locations.html

Well a far better use would have been a network of average speed cameras, but thats not politically viable. Start with a broad sweeping network and slowly ramp it up to cover most of the country. Simples.

magicbastarder

the stupid thing about speed cameras is that often their location is publicised (i believe in an effort to prove they're not simply a revenue generator).
anyway, it completely negates the whole point of them. you shouldn't be given forewarning about the (very limited) specific spots you actually need to adhere to the speed limit on.

meeeeh

magicbastarder wrote: »

the stupid thing about speed cameras is that often their location is publicised (i believe in an effort to prove they're not simply a revenue generator).
anyway, it completely negates the whole point of them. you shouldn't be given forewarning about the (very limited) specific spots you actually need to adhere to the speed limit on.

Except if you want to make sure that people don't speed and that part of the road is therefore a lot safer... Isn't that the aim? Actual garda manned speed checks can be for catching serious offenders.

As for average speed cameras I think they mostly work on motorways. Irish motorways are relatively empty and safe so I assume it would be more or less pointless. Average speed cameras on roads with turn off every 30 meters won't work (I think).

magicbastarder

meeeeh wrote: »

Except if you want to make sure that people don't speed and that part of the road

that part of the road being a half kilometre stretch, usually?
why not make motorists aware that there's a speed van in operation somewhere near kildare, for example, rather than naming the specific stretch of road it's on?

meeeeh

magicbastarder wrote: »

that part of the road being a half kilometre stretch, usually?
why not make motorists aware that there's a speed van in operation somewhere near kildare, for example, rather than naming the specific stretch of road it's on?

Our one is on a 100km road about 200m before turn off for the local school. That one is in the perfect location. I'm not overly bothered about naming location or not, but it's fairly common to advertise speed cameras when you really want people to slow down. It's used a lot in tunnels for obvious reasons.