Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Journalism and cycling
Options
Comments
-
I doubt it would, without CPOing 1000s of kms of people land and pushing boundaries back a bit.
Average speed cameras would be ideal, traffic calming solutions etc.
More than anything we need to show just how unacceptable it is. People need to be hit hard with heavy fines and custodial sentences for behaviour that endangers the lives of others.
Go to Spain, France, Portugal among others and there's a world of difference in the attitude of drivers.
Hang on - I didnt say it was realistic, I said it was comparatively more realistic.
The other alternative being that
(i) speed limits will be reduced, one presumes universally.
and
(ii) there will be sufficient enforcement such that anyone who speeds will be caught. How exactly does this work? They cant even enforce limits on motorways. Was chatting to a guy last week who told me, matter of factly, that he drives to Kerry from Dublin on cruise control at 150km per hour, slowing down at the spots that he knows are locations for speed cameras.
There is just no way to enforce speeding laws on small country roads, universally.
This is not going to happen.
You can talk about change culture all you want, thats a completely abstract thing, no way to measure it, no way to monitor it, no way to bring it about.
Maybe, on the other hand, it could happen that we have more bike lanes.0 -
To be fair, I don't mind speeding on Motorways as long as it's not weaving through traffic. Cars & braking have moved on a hell of a lot since the 60's when the 70mph limit was introduced. I'd be in favour of increased motorway speed limits (away from cities) i.e. not M50. And decreased speed limits in areas where there are obstructions, cyclists, pedestrians etc.0
-
Average speed cameras would help immensely but there is no appetite for it. The current speed cameras are accepted because anyone with a reasonable amount of intelligence and who regularly commutes in an area, should never be caught, even if they regularly speed.
This said, look at the Garda twitter feed, they constantly catch people with no road tax, insurance, NCT, bald tyres, not because of ANPR or some fancy system, its because the muppets will park across two Blue Badge bays, or swerve in front of them etc.
Average speed cameras would help in many areas, what you said is true, some people my wife works with constantly tip close to 200 on the motorway down to Limerick, brag about their 6 points on the license and how they should now start being more careful etc.
They are not perfect, even in France you have speeders who pull in and have a coffee break before the next one and have a clock to tell them when to go but overall, it reduces alot of messing. Start putting them on N roads every 100km, then use the money from that to increase it to every 50km. It won't catch or stop everyone but it will make it more convenient just to stay below the speed limit. In regards RTAs, it means that if the time of the accident can be accurately approximated, and the past a camera on that trip, Gardai can then say the average upto here was X, which was not speeding but was too much for the quality of the road etc.0 -
(i) speed limits will be reduced, one presumes universally.
and
(ii) there will be sufficient enforcement such that anyone who speeds will be caught. How exactly does this work? They cant even enforce limits on motorways. Was chatting to a guy last week who told me, matter of factly, that he drives to Kerry from Dublin on cruise control at 150km per hour, slowing down at the spots that he knows are locations for speed cameras.
There is just no way to enforce speeding laws on small country roads, universally.
This is not going to happen.
You can talk about change culture all you want, thats a completely abstract thing, no way to measure it, no way to monitor it, no way to bring it about.
Maybe, on the other hand, it could happen that we have more bike lanes.
Are small county roads the problem? the recent fatality of an 11 year old girl...would you consider that a small county road?
IMO a small county road usually has grass growing in the middle of it.
Stricter enforcement of existing ROTR will lead to cultural change (over time)0 -
07Lapierre wrote: »Are small county roads the problem? the recent fatality of an 11 year old girl...would you consider that a small county road?
IMO a small county road usually has grass growing in the middle of it.
Stricter enforcement of existing ROTR will lead to cultural change (over time)
Yes fair point.
Any and all roads that are not Motorway.
And again, my point is that ROTR are virtually unenforceable.
The only one that can really be enforced is drink driving, because the alcohol is in your system AFTER the event.
Otherwise, you are depending on a garda or speed camera picking up every single point on every single road.
Motorists know this, and that is why ROTR are routinely broken.
To be fair, the same applies to cyclists.0 -
Advertisement
-
Yes fair point.
Any and all roads that are not Motorway.
And again, my point is that ROTR are virtually unenforceable.
The only one that can really be enforced is drink driving, because the alcohol is in your system AFTER the event.
Otherwise, you are depending on a garda or speed camera picking up every single point on every single road.
Motorists know this, and that is why ROTR are routinely broken.
To be fair, the same applies to cyclists.
Doesn't have to be on every road. Cameras between 2 points with a known distance can be used to determine the speed of a vehicle. Now a lot would be needed, but more of these placed smartly night get it into people's head that speeding will be punished.
We need to conditions people's behaviour to have them know that speeding is absolutely unacceptable0 -
You can talk about change culture all you want, thats a completely abstract thing, no way to measure it, no way to monitor it, no way to bring it about..
But driving culture has changed remarkably over the last 20 years.
Drink driving/having an unsafe car/ no seat belt is way less socially acceptable than it was. I can remember a time when you might borrow a car only to be told "she only has a handbrake", when driving after just 6 pints was being cautious etc etc
You can still drive above speed limit with impunity on most regional roads. Fitting a tracker with insurance company access in lieu of reduced premiums or similar ideas might work along with go safe cameras being put anywhere the superintendent feels like it rather than the current system.
You can certainly change culture if the will is there; although it's more difficult as our economy is built on the workforce being mobile in cars/Van's etc0 -
Yes fair point.
Any and all roads that are not Motorway.
And again, my point is that ROTR are virtually unenforceable.
The only one that can really be enforced is drink driving, because the alcohol is in your system AFTER the event.
Otherwise, you are depending on a garda or speed camera picking up every single point on every single road.
Motorists know this, and that is why ROTR are routinely broken.
To be fair, the same applies to cyclists.
Average speed cameras, acceptance of dash and helmet camera footage for unreported offences, RLJ cameras, which not only give out automatic fines and points but identify junctions where other road users have a high level of RLJing for Gardai to target.
This would quash alot of issues inside of 6 months when fully operational, it would become the societal norm once this generation moves along, it would be glorious.0 -
I doubt it would, without CPOing 1000s of kms of people land and pushing boundaries back a bit.
Average speed cameras would be ideal, traffic calming solutions etc.
More than anything we need to show just how unacceptable it is. People need to be hit hard with heavy fines and custodial sentences for behaviour that endangers the lives of others.
Go to Spain, France, Portugal among others and there's a world of difference in the attitude of drivers.
With regard to speed limits?
Certainly any time I've driven in France, Spain or Portugal the speed limit hasn't borne any relation to the speeds I observed the majority of traffic passing me at!0 -
Riding in the Zone Rouge: The Tour of the Battlefields 1919 – Cycling’s Toughest-Ever Stage Race https://g.co/kgs/kznSL4
Sean Moncrieff had author on.0 -
Advertisement
-
Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 49,598 CMod ✭✭✭✭
Join Date:Posts: 49031
speaking in a cycling context though, much of the behaviour from drivers which cyclists object to, is not easily definable in law in the way speeding is.We need to conditions people's behaviour to have them know that speeding is absolutely unacceptable
it's a general failure of empathy and just bad manners. an assumption that the only other road users are also in cars.
i'm not sure that clamping down on RLJing and speeding (welcome as that would be) would make drivers any more conscientious towards cyclists.0 -
magicbastarder wrote: »speaking in a cycling context though, much of the behaviour from drivers which cyclists object to, is not easily definable in law in the way speeding is.
it's a general failure of empathy and just bad manners. an assumption that the only other road users are also in cars.
i'm not sure that clamping down on RLJing and speeding (welcome as that would be) would make drivers any more conscientious towards cyclists.
Good point. I think a good RSA move would be rather than produce ads stating the distance you should pass cyclists at, they should publicise videos of close passes & what it feels like to be on a bike when a motorist flies by you & knocks you off course. It's something most in cars wouldn't consider.0 -
I think a lot of drivers even if they give you what they think a bit of room have no idea what the blast is like as they pass at speed, worse still a bus or hgv.0
-
Deleted User wrote: »I think a lot of drivers even if they give you what they think a bit of room have no idea what the blast is like as they pass at speed, worse still a bus or hgv.
Yea I was guilty of ignorance myself before i commuted by bike. I used to give plenty of room but didn't slow down enough.0 -
Lets not kid ourselves here, while cycling in Ireland is for the large part incredibly safe despite the media reports and how we feel, it doesn't change the fact that in reality, as backed up by the media, the government, the gardai and general water cooler chat, people have lose their humanity to a large degree once something is outside of their social group and they cannot directly relate.
The bit about travellers in regards the report, if we were a better society, that would be irrelevant, it would not be mentioned unless saying where the family are from or if they were run over specifically because they were Travellers. Regrettably, and lets not kid ourselves here, whoever reported it, unconsciously or not, was playing to a bias, where by a large part of the readership will think, sure they were probably abandoned, probably had no manners, probably breaking the rules (and certainly not my experience of the travelling community in my own area, far more people deserving of such a poor reputation who are not part of that community at all, my experience has been broadly positive, there are negatives but more to do with being human rather than a group). It was a, possibly unintentional, attempt to dehumanise the victims. We all suffer bias, we cannot help it, what makes society and civilisation worth it is when we can learnt to overcome these bias. There were a hundred ways to report that tragedy which created no bias, did not blame anyone without due process but these were all avoided. Loads of posts above about how papers report in a certain way so as not to bias any legal cases but only one or two asking if that were true, then why are motorbike, cyclist and pedestrian accidents reported in the same way.
There are those above who are saying that the way the media reports these things has no affect on driver behaviour, but cumulatively, while not too everyone, I find it hard to believe it doesn't. It won't affect everyone but enough voices saying that its not the drivers fault will convince some that drivers are not the issue, or they would have had more control at speed.0 -
Average speed cameras, acceptance of dash and helmet camera footage for unreported offences, RLJ cameras, which not only give out automatic fines and points but identify junctions where other road users have a high level of RLJing for Gardai to target.
This would quash alot of issues inside of 6 months when fully operational, it would become the societal norm once this generation moves along, it would be glorious.
Just for reference so you dont think its about self interest, I'm a cyclist and car owner with a much bigger preference for cycling (Ive driven less than 200km in the last 3 months in my car and I cycle more than that per week on my bike. I'm usually the slowest person on any road (I put on adaptive cruise control most of the time. My GF always complains I drive to slow) bar motorways where I do speed as I feel its generally safe to do and in the case of where I live now its legal (powerful car with big brakes and auto braking) so so the suggestions above wouldnt affect me in the slightest).
Would you agree to similar happening for cycling bikes that they should have license plates enforced and if you skip a red light or do something illegal you are fined automatically?
Maybe we could enforce helmet use?
We can then have cameras where cyclist usually do illegal things and expand it over time as revenue increases from it?
If not, why not?0 -
I don't know, there's always tonnes of irrelevant stuff printed in articles. Journalists tend to print the limited information they have to hand. The article about the lady being hit by a motorbike in Ballinasloe mentioned that she was elderly and it was believed she was visiting a relative in the area. How are they relevant to the incident? You could argue that if they left out the information about where they lived they were playing to another bias. It's not unusual for context about an incident to be provided, we wouldn't blink if they mentioned they lived in a housing estate around the corner.The bit about travellers in regards the report, if we were a better society, that would be irrelevant, it would not be mentioned unless saying where the family are from or if they were run over specifically because they were Travellers. Regrettably, and lets not kid ourselves here, whoever reported it, unconsciously or not, was playing to a bias, where by a large part of the readership will think, sure they were probably abandoned, probably had no manners, probably breaking the rules0 -
Just for reference so you dont think its about self interest, I'm a cyclist and car owner with a much bigger preference for cycling (Ive driven less than 200km in the last 3 months in my car and I cycle more than that per week on my bike. I'm usually the slowest person on any road (I put on adaptive cruise control most of the time. My GF always complains I drive to slow) bar motorways where I do speed as I feel its generally safe to do and in the case of where I live now its legal (powerful car with big brakes and auto braking) so so the suggestions above wouldnt affect me in the slightest).
Would you agree to similar happening for cycling bikes that they should have license plates enforced and if you skip a red light or do something illegal you are fined automatically?
Maybe we could enforce helmet use?
We can then have cameras where cyclist usually do illegal things and expand it over time as revenue increases from it?
If not, why not?
To some degree yes.
If I get my 4 year old a bike, does she need a licence?
Helmet use - personally I would agree with that. I dont think they can be compared to seat belts in terms of the benefit they bring though.
A big one is red light breaking, and not just for cyclists. But its far more dangerous when a motorist breaks a red light. Has any pedestrian in this country ever been killed by a cyclist breaking a red light? Has it ever happened even once? Its happened many times involving drivers but we dont hear a constant media theme regarding ninja red light breaking drivers......
And so the wider point - legislation to improve road safety should do just that.
Improve road safety.
It shouldnt be about addressing - "things that cyclists do that annoy drivers". If anything, that just makes the animosity worse, and feeds into the notion that cyclists and not drivers are the problem.
Are the things you are talking about above going to improve road safety? For me, they are more in the camp of "well it cant do any harm".0 -
Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 49,598 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Join Date:Posts: 49031
all this will do will be to massively decrease the number of people cycling and make it more dangerous for those who do.Would you agree to similar happening for cycling bikes that they should have license plates enforced and if you skip a red light or do something illegal you are fined automatically?
Maybe we could enforce helmet use?0 -
Would this also apply to children?Would you agree to similar happening for cycling bikes that they should have license plates enforced and if you skip a red light or do something illegal you are fined automatically?
Why?Maybe we could enforce helmet use?
If you logic is to help protect a cyclist if they are hit by a car, then why not make cars not hit cyclists rather than making the victim take precautions?
Comparitively speaking cars do more illegal things and the impact from these is more severe. As we don't adequately enforce the existing rules for drivers, why bother extending them to vehicles where the impact of breaking a law is less likely to cause death or serious harm?We can then have cameras where cyclist usually do illegal things and expand it over time as revenue increases from it?
If not, why not?
We have existing rules, we just don't enforce them!0 -
Advertisement
-
-
Just for reference so you dont think its about self interest, I'm a cyclist and car owner with a much bigger preference for cycling (Ive driven less than 200km in the last 3 months in my car and I cycle more than that per week on my bike. I'm usually the slowest person on any road (I put on adaptive cruise control most of the time. My GF always complains I drive to slow) bar motorways where I do speed as I feel its generally safe to do and in the case of where I live now its legal (powerful car with big brakes and auto braking) so so the suggestions above wouldnt affect me in the slightest).
Would you agree to similar happening for cycling bikes that they should have license plates enforced and if you skip a red light or do something illegal you are fined automatically?
Maybe we could enforce helmet use?
We can then have cameras where cyclist usually do illegal things and expand it over time as revenue increases from it?
If not, why not?
I think reading between the lines - that your overall message is that cyclists are not in a position to talk about greater responsibility in others when they behave irresponsibly themselves.
One area where I would see this is Third Party Insurance - if I cycle into a pedestrian - am I insured to pay their medical bills.
In practice - I dont know if this is a problem. I have no idea how many pedestrians are admitted to hospital each year after being hit by cyclists.
To listen to some people - cyclists are "almost" killing pedestrians at every minute at pedestrian crossing.0 -
It woudl be self interest, I drive a few 100km a week, it would be in my interest for other road users to not break lights, not sit in yellow boxes and not be d1cks, because, if they stopped this, as a whole, alot of people would get around alot quicker and there would be alot less stressed heads on the road. So yes, there is self interest there. I get around this by leaving way earlier than needed and do other stuff if I am early, so it rarely affects me but it would be nice if it worked better than it does.Just for reference so you dont think its about self interest, I'm a cyclist and car owner with a much bigger preference for cycling (Ive driven less than 200km in the last 3 months in my car and I cycle more than that per week on my bike. I'm usually the slowest person on any road (I put on adaptive cruise control most of the time. My GF always complains I drive to slow) bar motorways where I do speed as I feel its generally safe to do and in the case of where I live now its legal (powerful car with big brakes and auto braking) so so the suggestions above wouldn't affect me in the slightest).
In the bigger picture, it would be moronic, whether I cycled or not. It would reduce cyclist numbers as it would be a barrier to cycling, reducing cycling numbers increases road traffic volume. This said, most cyclists have cars and are licensed, so happy for them to run a database facial recognition search if they do see that. My post if you had read it would free up so much Garda time that they could actually target cyclists at percieved problem junctions, the cameras would throw up numbers of cyclists RLJing, the Gardai could then target that junction at the most likely time of day, and still not waste as much time as they do now by handing out FPNs to motorists. I stop at reds and try not to act like a d1ck, so none of the suggestions affect me personally, the license plate one though would be a gross loss for the economy, traffic management and the HSE, hence why I would be against it.Would you agree to similar happening for cycling bikes that they should have license plates enforced and if you skip a red light or do something illegal you are fined automatically?
there is a thread for that. Since its not illegal, I am not sure why you would, maybe have a read and post on the helmet megathread if you think it is an issue.Maybe we could enforce helmet use?
I really don't think you read my post at all, the cameras I refer to would achieve that. At the same time. Jebus, please read posts before responding as it is infuriating to repeat the same stuff over and over again.We can then have cameras where cyclist usually do illegal things and expand it over time as revenue increases from it?
If not, why not?0 -
Lets not kid ourselves here, while cycling in Ireland is for the large part incredibly safe despite the media reports and how we feel, it doesn't change the fact that in reality, as backed up by the media, the government, the gardai and general water cooler chat, people have lose their humanity to a large degree once something is outside of their social group and they cannot directly relate.
I experienced my first "bloody cyclists thing" in a social gathering over the Easter weekend at a gathering of friends and partners. It was the day of the incident in Galway, and despite may car right outside the front door with a bike rack on it, my bike in the hallway, and me only being asked an hour or so previous as how my recent spin went.
In fact what started it was the Galway incident coming up in conversation and the first thing out of one person was concern for the driver never being right again.
I was in absolute no mood to hear it and knocked the **** out of it, turning the atmosphere slightly frosty.
Some people are just tone deaf.0 -
Just because the fatalities are low doesnt mean its necessarily that safe.
https://www.thejournal.ie/cyclists-injuries-ireland-3823052-Jan2018/0 -
I experienced my first "bloody cyclists thing" in a social gathering over the Easter weekend at a gathering of friends and partners. It was the day of the incident in Galway, and despite may car right outside the front door with a bike rack on it, my bike in the hallway, and me only being asked an hour or so previous as how my recent spin went.
In fact what started it was the Galway incident coming up in conversation and the first thing out of one person was concern for the driver never being right again.
I was in absolute no mood to hear it and knocked the **** out of it, turning the atmosphere slightly frosty.
Some people are just tone deaf.
The one thing that I just dont get, it annoys me no end....
Is that the same people who give out yards about cyclists, will say "I wouldnt cycle myself - its far too dangerous".
The reason its dangerous is because of drivers. its not the roads, its not the cars. Its the drivers. if there were no drivers in their cars on these roads, then it would be 100% safe for cyclists.
And these people are all drivers themselves.
And they are saying implicitly that drivers are dangerous around cyclists.
And they are able to talk all day about how cyclists are dangerous to others, but they cant see that they as drivers are far more dangerous.0 -
Sorry if I dont answer all your points I've just finished work when I started writing the first comment, I'm up since 2am and am very tired now so may ramble a bit when replying.To some degree yes.
If I get my 4 year old a bike, does she need a licence?
Helmet use - personally I would agree with that. I dont think they can be compared to seat belts in terms of the benefit they bring though.
A big one is red light breaking, and not just for cyclists. But its far more dangerous when a motorist breaks a red light. Has any pedestrian in this country ever been killed by a cyclist breaking a red light? Has it ever happened even once? Its happened many times involving drivers but we dont hear a constant media theme regarding ninja red light breaking drivers......
And so the wider point - legislation to improve road safety should do just that.
Improve road safety.
It shouldnt be about addressing - "things that cyclists do that annoy drivers". If anything, that just makes the animosity worse, and feeds into the notion that cyclists and not drivers are the problem.
Are the things you are talking about above going to improve road safety? For me, they are more in the camp of "well it cant do any harm".
4 year old bike: Yes why not if we are going to legislate and maybe add insurance requirements too? Kids can be covered under parents insurance policies. (me personally I think their is such a thing as too much legislation, both for cars and bikes but I wanted to point out where do you actually draw the line and stop with legislation as you can always add policies that reduce the risk to peoples lives or health). Maybe add restrictors on road bikes so they can't breach 30km/50km in 30/50km/h zones, you could enforce this with gps requirements, I just wanted to add this for the most over the top example.
Their are never going to be zero deaths until you take humans out of the equation and even then its questionable as people can either walk in front of cars too late or cycle out in front of them.
Either stupidity, not caring or temporarily losing attention are going to occur (no person is exempt from at least one of these at one point or another whether a cyclist or a motorist).
When it comes to breaking red lights, would it not be more effective to put cameras on these rather than on N roads as its a lot harder to enforce on N roads and it will be less likely to pass. This would make it less likely for people to skip lights (both car and bike). Bikes skipping it would only be prevented if plates were enforced. More importantly though cars will be less likely to do it, they have the biggest chance for harm so will be the biggest benefit. The thing about cyclists pushing this is it will be seen as them against us unless it is designed to prevent both and the other is a much bigger voting block. This is why I point out the need to legislate against cyclists also if you want to protect cyclists/pedestrians.
In my 2/3 years cycling I've seen 9 accidents (2 involving me), 5 were bikes skipping red lights hitting pedestrians (only ever happened in and around town, never seen it happen elsewhere), only 2 were hurt that needed hospitalization (one look liked a broken ankle, the other had a head injury) stopped and asked if help was needed and if they wanted the footage which is why I know. A car skipped a red light and hit a cyclist (much worse injury for the biker from the looks of it and an ambulance was already there, I didn't actually see the impact only the outcome of the person on a stretcher and a mangled bike), I was also hit by a van skipping a corner at a traffic light and crossing a bike lane to save a second (second for me was a pedestrian running through traffic and ran out in front of me, my wheel went between his legs and I got a nut shot on the handle bars so extremely minor).
Others were cars hitting each other. It may be I see more of these types of accidents because of the daily route I took (sandyford to Town), my new route (clondalkin to sandyford) I've seen zero accidents on this route but had one close call where a driver was on the phone and was close to pinning me against a barrier where the long mile road starts, she noticed at the last second luckily.
I could also be seeing it from a biased view as I generally avoid N roads while cycling and use alternatives which is why I see more benefit at juntions than N roads as I'm happy to avoid them as I've always seen them more roads for cars not unlike motorways - yes I know legally you can cycle on N roads, I just woudn't.
My points were more to show it from the other side and play devils advocate a bit. As from the other side it appears to be cyclist think we cant trust drivers as they are all incompetent and want to change rules to benefit themselves at the loss to the majority which they will push back at. Examples of the push back being stupid articles from journalism blaming cyclists for being knocked down but I'm sure their might be more valid/worse opinions).
A better way might be to push rules that reduce the affect of the stupidity of drivers and cyclists at once which will cause less kick back as their will be less of a defence then.0 -
Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 49,598 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Join Date:Posts: 49031
two points; the other side. most people on this forum drive a car. what side are you exposing to us?My points were more to show it from the other side and play devils advocate a bit.
secondly, if you're openly playing devil's advocate, it doesn't exactly entice people to respond to your comments when they don't know when you're being serious.0 -
Sorry if I dont answer all your points I've just finished work when I started writing the first comment, I'm up since 2am and am very tired now so may ramble a bit when replying.
4 year old bike: Yes why not if we are going to legislate and maybe add insurance requirements too? Kids can be covered under parents insurance policies. (me personally I think their is such a thing as too much legislation, both for cars and bikes but I wanted to point out where do you actually draw the line and stop with legislation as you can always add policies that reduce the risk to peoples lives or health). Maybe add restrictors on road bikes so they can't breach 30km/50km in 30/50km/h zones, you could enforce this with gps requirements, I just wanted to add this for the most over the top example.
Their are never going to be zero deaths until you take humans out of the equation and even then its questionable as people can either walk in front of cars too late or cycle out in front of them.
Either stupidity, not caring or temporarily losing attention are going to occur (no person is exempt from at least one of these at one point or another whether a cyclist or a motorist).
When it comes to breaking red lights, would it not be more effective to put cameras on these rather than on N roads as its a lot harder to enforce on N roads and it will be less likely to pass. This would make it less likely for people to skip lights (both car and bike). Bikes skipping it would only be prevented if plates were enforced. More importantly though cars will be less likely to do it, they have the biggest chance for harm so will be the biggest benefit. The thing about cyclists pushing this is it will be seen as them against us unless it is designed to prevent both and the other is a much bigger voting block. This is why I point out the need to legislate against cyclists also if you want to protect cyclists/pedestrians.
In my 2/3 years cycling I've seen 9 accidents (2 involving me), 5 were bikes skipping red lights hitting pedestrians (only ever happened in and around town, never seen it happen elsewhere), only 2 were hurt that needed hospitalization (one look liked a broken ankle, the other had a head injury) stopped and asked if help was needed and if they wanted the footage which is why I know. A car skipped a red light and hit a cyclist (much worse injury for the biker from the looks of it and an ambulance was already there, I didn't actually see the impact only the outcome of the person on a stretcher and a mangled bike), I was also hit by a van skipping a corner at a traffic light and crossing a bike lane to save a second (second for me was a pedestrian running through traffic and ran out in front of me, my wheel went between his legs and I got a nut shot on the handle bars so extremely minor).
Others were cars hitting each other. It may be I see more of these types of accidents because of the daily route I took (sandyford to Town), my new route (clondalkin to sandyford) I've seen zero accidents on this route but had one close call where a driver was on the phone and was close to pinning me against a barrier where the long mile road starts, she noticed at the last second luckily.
I could also be seeing it from a biased view as I generally avoid N roads while cycling and use alternatives which is why I see more benefit at juntions than N roads as I'm happy to avoid them as I've always seen them more roads for cars not unlike motorways - yes I know legally you can cycle on N roads, I just woudn't.
My points were more to show it from the other side and play devils advocate a bit. As from the other side it appears to be cyclist think we cant trust drivers as they are all incompetent and want to change rules to benefit themselves at the loss to the majority which they will push back at. Examples of the push back being stupid articles from journalism blaming cyclists for being knocked down but I'm sure their might be more valid/worse opinions).
A better way might be to push rules that reduce the affect of the stupidity of drivers and cyclists at once which will cause less kick back as their will be less of a defence then.
The devil's advocate approach is fine and is always a good approach. Having said that I think personally I've read all these points before - perhaps there should be some kind of sticky for this forum. Why registration plates for bikes is not a good thing and what happened in jurisdictions where it has been tried ( I mean also it doesn't seem to have much of a cooling effect on people's behaviour when they drive either).0 -
Advertisement
-
There is, it's called Sticky: Charter (updated 8/11/14) & Frequently Asked Questions and contains this list of FAQs...perhaps there should be some kind of sticky for this forum
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=69453554&postcount=20
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement