Commuter cyclist negativity

C3PO

dbagman wrote: »

One thing iv noticed that I just cannot understand. Maybe some can shed some light on it here for me. It's happened me loads of times but most recently in merrion square. I was looking to turn left which would of taken me across a cycle lane. There was a line of a good 15 or 20 cyclists in said lane. I positioned my car beside the only decent sized gap between any of them(more than adequate space to fit my vehicle in) and preceeded to indicate left. Now I did this a good 200 or 300 metres before my turn to ensure cyclist behind me was well aware in plenty of time of my intentions. And low and behold as I went to turn cyclist attempts to undertake me and then throw his arms up in anger and starts shouting at me. This is not an isolated incident. Can I just ask how and why I could of been seen to be in the wrong in this situation? And why alot (not saying all) cyclists seem to think it ok to undertake moving vehicles in situations like this. I could not have given more space or notice of what was about to happen. Yet cyclist still perceived me to be in the wrong. Do cyclists expect other road users to bow down to them and stop dead in their tracks to suit them or what? How else could I of played this out? Stopping in the middle of the road to let a never ending stream of bikes undertake me is unreasonable. I was well in front of this guy with an orange light flashing in his face (I drive a jeep,so quite literally my indicators are eye level) . Like I said. Far from an isolated occurance .

Are you serious?

The cyclists are not "undertaking" you, they are cycling in a dedicated "cycle lane" and (unless my understanding of the law is way off!) have right of way over you as you turn left! It is your responsibility to wait until there is a suitable gap and then turn.

rollingscone

Answer: people can be dicks


Better answer: people's default is to be dickish and we all have a duty to manage our behavioursite. However rather than legitimising cycling by campaigning for reasonable road participant behaviour the overwhelming message is that cyclists are fragile and vulnerable and it's a warzone out there...and you must have the three holy relics of Helm Hivizalot to engage in this thrilling battle. Panic panic Panic!

As opposed to maybe calming the FORK down, relaxing, paying attention, taking the long view and enjoying your comnute in a conscientious considerate manner.

The panicsturbation practiced by a majority of inexperienced commuter cyclists is contagious grows and perpetuates poor road skills and selfish behaviour and intimidates new cyclists and pedestrians.

Yet the response from officialdom continues to consist of telling cyclists to wear yellow fabric and stay out of the way, with the occasional bit of punitive action aimed more at enforcing these two things than addressing the needs of transport development.

Also glad you have a jeep, those off road sections getting to Merrion square would be murder on a car ;-p

kirving

C3PO wrote: »

Are you serious?

The cyclists are not "undertaking" you, they are cycling in a dedicated "cycle lane" and (unless my understanding of the law is way off!) have right of way over you as you turn left! It is your responsibility to wait until there is a suitable gap and then turn.

There are two sides to this. We can I only assume dbagman to be genuine, so let's take it that he didn't cut across the lane abruptly or without warning.

So that leaves a cyclist who despite seeing an indicator, brake lights, and a car slowing still put themselves up the left of his car because they're legally allowed to do so. Why on earth would anyone do that? No point being right if you're dead.

I'm absolutely not picking on cyclists here either, or Victim Blaming as I know the above will be called. You see it on the dashcam thread on Motors too. Drivers who are legally in the right, doing things that put themselves or others in harms way. Like seeing a car going a bit quick about to enter a roundabout, accelerating a bit to make it close, and then beeping them.

Pedestrians too, at a Zebra crossing. Strolls right into the path of a car or cyclist without waiting. Now they're legally correct, but why walk out into the road until everything has stopped?

buffalo

C3PO wrote: »

Are you serious?

The cyclists are not "undertaking" you, they are cycling in a dedicated "cycle lane" and (unless my understanding of the law is way off!) have right of way over you as you turn left! It is your responsibility to wait until there is a suitable gap and then turn.

They are not undertaking, but they are overtaking on the left. This is illegal for cyclists under certain conditions where the vehicle to be overtaken...

S.I. No. 332/2012 wrote:

(i) has signalled an intention to turn to the left and there is a reasonable expectation that the vehicle in which the driver has signalled an intention to turn to the left will execute a movement to the left before the cycle overtakes the vehicle,

(ii) is stationary for the purposes of permitting a passenger or passengers to alight or board the vehicle, or

(iii) is stationary for the purposes of loading or unloading.”,

i.e. if dbagman is indicating they are about to make a left turn, no cyclists should proceed up the inside of his/her car.

If there is another SI relating to special circumstances for cycle lanes, please share it.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2012/si/332/made/en/print - Part 3, section 16, 5 (b)

Danbo!

dbagman wrote: »

One thing iv noticed that I just cannot understand. Maybe some can shed some light on it here for me. It's happened me loads of times but most recently in merrion square. I was looking to turn left which would of taken me across a cycle lane. There was a line of a good 15 or 20 cyclists in said lane. I positioned my car beside the only decent sized gap between any of them(more than adequate space to fit my vehicle in) and preceeded to indicate left. Now I did this a good 200 or 300 metres before my turn to ensure cyclist behind me was well aware in plenty of time of my intentions. And low and behold as I went to turn cyclist attempts to undertake me and then throw his arms up in anger and starts shouting at me. This is not an isolated incident. Can I just ask how and why I could of been seen to be in the wrong in this situation? And why alot (not saying all) cyclists seem to think it ok to undertake moving vehicles in situations like this. I could not have given more space or notice of what was about to happen. Yet cyclist still perceived me to be in the wrong. Do cyclists expect other road users to bow down to them and stop dead in their tracks to suit them or what? How else could I of played this out? Stopping in the middle of the road to let a never ending stream of bikes undertake me is unreasonable. I was well in front of this guy with an orange light flashing in his face (I drive a jeep,so quite literally my indicators are eye level) . Like I said. Far from an isolated occurance .

I was in a similar scenario, but on the cyclists side. I held back and waved the car on, only to be overtaken by a cyclist who squeezed past the car and came inches from being hit. Did the usual shouting "what are you doing?!" bull****.

I think better cycle lane design could help here but for now the city is full of these junctions. They've upgraded the junction at The Barge which is a big improvement. You cross the cycle lane before the junction allowing left-turners to wait in a 2-3 car area.

https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.3303185,-6.2605655,77m/data=!3m1!1e3

C3PO wrote: »

Are you serious?

It's a fairly valid question - Look how ridiculous this scenario is... A bit of common courtesy wouldn't go amiss.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCwLL6yStZI

Type 17

dbagman wrote: »

One thing iv noticed that I just cannot understand. Maybe some can shed some light on it here for me. It's happened me loads of times but most recently in merrion square. I was looking to turn left which would of taken me across a cycle lane. There was a line of a good 15 or 20 cyclists in said lane. I positioned my car beside the only decent sized gap between any of them(more than adequate space to fit my vehicle in) and preceeded to indicate left. Now I did this a good 200 or 300 metres before my turn to ensure cyclist behind me was well aware in plenty of time of my intentions. And low and behold as I went to turn cyclist attempts to undertake me and then throw his arms up in anger and starts shouting at me. This is not an isolated incident. Can I just ask how and why I could of been seen to be in the wrong in this situation? And why alot (not saying all) cyclists seem to think it ok to undertake moving vehicles in situations like this. I could not have given more space or notice of what was about to happen. Yet cyclist still perceived me to be in the wrong. Do cyclists expect other road users to bow down to them and stop dead in their tracks to suit them or what? How else could I of played this out? Stopping in the middle of the road to let a never ending stream of bikes undertake me is unreasonable. I was well in front of this guy with an orange light flashing in his face (I drive a jeep,so quite literally my indicators are eye level) . Like I said. Far from an isolated occurance .

Most issues like this are because people can't see things from the others' point of view (the RSA ad on TV about sharing the road tries to address this).

A similar thing happened to me the other day - approaching a junction on my bike, a car in front is indicating to turn left and slowing down (probably more than most drivers would, but there's an L-plate, so that's understandable). I'm in an on-road bike lane and, because their speed has dropped so much, I'm going to end up cycling up their inside if I don't either slow down, or go around them on their right.
I can see that the learner is slowing more now, wondering if they should stop to let me through, and I can see the both of us coming to a stop if we are both hesitant so, to avoid staying on the left and causing that scenario, I check behind (good space until car behind), and move out and go around the learner. The car behind has a freak attack, beeping at me, even though there's almost a car's-length between us (speeds are about 15-20km/h).
I overtake the learner, who gets to make the turn without having to worry about where I am, have I stopped, etc.
As the car behind passes me, further up the road, the driver's looking over at me scowling like I had done something terribly offensive to her.
All she could see was a slow-moving car in front, and a lunatic cyclist who's all over the road...

cython

buffalo wrote: »

They are not undertaking, but they are overtaking on the left. This is illegal under certain conditions where the vehicle to be overtaken...



i.e. if dbagman is indicating they are about to make a left turn, no cyclists should proceed up the inside of his/her car.

If there is another SI relating to special circumstances for cycle lanes, please share it.

On the bolded, I've posited the question before, but I have noted that since SI 332/2012, the law no longer refers (if it ever did) to "cycle lanes", but rather they are now "cycle tracks", so while there is the idea and requirement of yielding to traffic already in a lane before crossing/changing into that lane that people may be counting on, it may be difficult or impossible to argue that the cycle track is a lane in this context.

Personally, if I see a left indicator come on in good time in dbagman's situation (there are many people who indicate after commencing their manoeuvre too, though not suggesting the poster is one of them), I'll move right in the lane, and overtake the vehicle on their right either before or when they make their turn.

learn_more wrote: »

Oh, so the issue is overtaking. I never ever, whether I'm running or cycling shout from behind to let someone know I'm overtaking. I don't think that strategy is part of accepted or expected overtaking behaviour.

I have had a few people do that to in my lifetime whether it is while I am walking or cycling and mostly it just gives me a fright, and I think it's just really really rude.

What you have do is wait till you think it's safe to overtake even when you feel the front person is totally unaware of you. And that INCLUDEDS if they are on their phone. When you overtake it is your responsibility to give a wide girth in the event that the person in front would serve out for some unexpected reason. If you feel you are being held up because of that, tough.

I think you meant wide berth

Wishbone Ash

learn_more wrote: »

Oh, so the issue is overtaking. I never ever, whether I'm running or cycling shout from behind to let someone know I'm overtaking. I don't think that strategy is part of accepted or expected overtaking behaviour.

I have had a few people do that to in my lifetime whether it is while I am walking or cycling and mostly it just gives me a fright, and I think it's just really really rude.

What you have do is wait till you think it's safe to overtake even when you feel the front person is totally unaware of you. And that INCLUDEDS if they are on their phone. When you overtake it is your responsibility to give a wide girth in the event that the person in front would serve out for some unexpected reason. If you feel you are being held up because of that, tough.

Thanks for the pep talk - this cycling is so new to me!

Just for the record, I don't feel the need to make any sort of verbal warning when overtaking another cyclist 99% of the time but there are occasions when the cyclist being overtaken suddenly changes their position on the road and it is on these occasions that I will shout 'on your right' or 'careful'. (I've never had a collision with another cyclist but that is usually down to me taking evasive action rather than the other cyclist's taking appropriate action).

Your point about waiting until it's safe to overtake is valid when the possible danger is foreseen but if the distracted swerve occurs while I'm in the process overtaking it's too late to wait.

Regarding giving a wide berth - true but not always practical when on a segregated narrow two way cycle track.

(And I'm aware that I have a legal requirement to have a bell).

dbagman

C3PO wrote:

Are you serious?

C3PO wrote:

The cyclists are not "undertaking" you, they are cycling in a dedicated "cycle lane" and (unless my understanding of the law is way off!) have right of way over you as you turn left! It is your responsibility to wait until there is a suitable gap and then turn.

Deadly serious

I assume you have reading difficulties or just chose to read the bits that suited you there. I indicated well in advance and was a good bit ahead of cyclist. I crossed the cycle lane on a broken white line which I'm perfectly entitled to do. And still this Numpty thought it reasonable to keep coming and still act the dick after I'd turned. To clarify....I was nowhere near him despite him not slowing to allow the turn. In fact I'd swear he sped up. I also stated this happens regularly. With and without a cycle lane in place. Attempting to cycle walk or drive up the left hand side of a vehicle indicating to turn left when you are coming from behind them is undertaking. Simple.

dbagman

buffalo wrote:

They are not undertaking, but they are overtaking on the left. This is illegal under certain conditions where the vehicle to be overtaken...

Coming up the inside of a vehicle is undertaking. Passing the drivers side of a vehicle is called overtaking. Pretty basic terminology in fairness. What else would you call passing a car on the inside??

Chips Lovell

It's called overtaking on the left in law. "Undertaking" is a colloquialism. And he was pointing out that you were in the right.

average_runner

Kevin Irving wrote: »

There are two sides to this. We can I only assume dbagman to be genuine, so let's take it that he didn't cut across the lane abruptly or without warning.

So that leaves a cyclist who despite seeing an indicator, brake lights, and a car slowing still put themselves up the left of his car because they're legally allowed to do so. Why on earth would anyone do that? No point being right if you're dead.

I'm absolutely not picking on cyclists here either, or Victim Blaming as I know the above will be called. You see it on the dashcam thread on Motors too. Drivers who are legally in the right, doing things that put themselves or others in harms way. Like seeing a car going a bit quick about to enter a roundabout, accelerating a bit to make it close, and then beeping them.

Pedestrians too, at a Zebra crossing. Strolls right into the path of a car or cyclist without waiting. Now they're legally correct, but why walk out into the road until everything has stopped?

Actually your not legally allowed to walk straight on to a zebra crossing, you got to look left or right to ensure it safe first.

07Lapierre

C3PO wrote: »

Are you serious?

The cyclists are not "undertaking" you, they are cycling in a dedicated "cycle lane" and (unless my understanding of the law is way off!) have right of way over you as you turn left! It is your responsibility to wait until there is a suitable gap and then turn.

Last night i was waiting at a "T" junction to turn right ( I was cycling). The car to my Right stopped, the driver flashed the cars headlights to indicate to me that he was stopping to allow me to move out into the road. As I moved, the car coming from the left also stopped to allow me to complete my right turn. BOTH of these cars had Right of way and didn't have to stop to allow me to turn. A bit of courtesy from all road users goes a long way.

NeedMoreGears

The whole car turning left/bike going straight on thing is a right pain for all involved.

My own approach (FWIW) when turning left in a car is to close the gap close to the turn point - basically no-one can come up my inside in that case ; the trick is not to block the left side for too long/not be a dick about it.

On the bike I pretty much do as Cython does ; sometimes yielding to the turning car if I find myself stuck on the left.

On a slightly whingey note, the one that drives me nuts is the "fake left hook". I'm one the left pootling along, car rushes past signaling left but realizes they cant make the turn without causing me to jam on. Car then slows but stays ahead of me, still signaling left, in some sort of effort to leave me proceed. I'm never sure if its really safe to keep going.

railer201

average_runner wrote: »

Actually your not legally allowed to walk straight on to a zebra crossing, you got to look left or right to ensure it safe first.

AFAIK the action of placing one foot out on the crossing establishes the pedestrian's right of way, traffic then are obliged to stop.

Wishbone Ash

Danbo! wrote: »

I was in a similar scenario, but on the cyclists side. I held back and waved the car on...

Danbo - you should never gesticulate to another road user. I know people do it all the time but it is much safer just to wait in that scenario and leave it to the other road user to decide whether it is safe to proceed or not. Many people who make such gestures do not check their surroundings first to establish that it is safe.

tomasrojo

rollingscone wrote: »

However rather than legitimising cycling by campaigning for reasonable road participant behaviour the overwhelming message is that cyclists are fragile and vulnerable and it's a warzone out there...and you must have the three holy relics of Helm Hivizalot to engage in this thrilling battle.

I enjoyed that. What's the third relic? €2 light on a string?

CramCycle

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

Danbo - you should never gesticulate to another road user. I know people do it all the time but it is much safer just to wait in that scenario and leave it to the other road user to decide whether it is safe to proceed or not. Many people who make such gestures do not check their surroundings first to establish that it is safe.

While you are right, more the fool who takes your gesticulations as safe to follow. For all I know you could be reciting Hamlet and getting into character.

On the overtaking on the left. Most of the junctions on my commute, I get into lane and then overtake on the right rather than play guess who is going to jump their clutch. Interestingly, DB drivers on my commute seem to prefer this, and most drivers seem to like the fact that I am, in their view, getting out of the way.

cjt156

C3PO wrote: »

Are you serious?

The cyclists are not "undertaking" you, they are cycling in a dedicated "cycle lane" and (unless my understanding of the law is way off!) have right of way over you as you turn left! It is your responsibility to wait until there is a suitable gap and then turn.

There you go. 100% wrong and convinced they are right.

You cannot pass on the left if a vehicle is ahead and indicating left.
Multiple warnings here and elsewhere about not doing this when a HGV is involved. Yet doing the exact same thing is OK if it's a smaller vehicle?

C3PO wrote: »

my understanding of the law is way off

Well, you got that bit right.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

dbagman wrote: »

One thing iv noticed that I just cannot understand. Maybe some can shed some light on it here for me. It's happened me loads of times but most recently in merrion square. I was looking to turn left which would of taken me across a cycle lane. There was a line of a good 15 or 20 cyclists in said lane. I positioned my car beside the only decent sized gap between any of them(more than adequate space to fit my vehicle in) and preceeded to indicate left. Now I did this a good 200 or 300 metres before my turn to ensure cyclist behind me was well aware in plenty of time of my intentions. And low and behold as I went to turn cyclist attempts to undertake me and then throw his arms up in anger and starts shouting at me. This is not an isolated incident. Can I just ask how and why I could of been seen to be in the wrong in this situation? And why alot (not saying all) cyclists seem to think it ok to undertake moving vehicles in situations like this. I could not have given more space or notice of what was about to happen. Yet cyclist still perceived me to be in the wrong. Do cyclists expect other road users to bow down to them and stop dead in their tracks to suit them or what? How else could I of played this out? Stopping in the middle of the road to let a never ending stream of bikes undertake me is unreasonable. I was well in front of this guy with an orange light flashing in his face (I drive a jeep,so quite literally my indicators are eye level) . Like I said. Far from an isolated occurance .

You should give right of way to those travelling on straight. It would be nice if the cyclists stopped and let you go, but is it something you would do for other road users? I don't think it's much to ask to be patient. The "endless stream of cyclists" does have an end.

Your comment reminds me of the following joke;

"Man calls wife to warn her of an incident on the M50. Man says to wife to be careful as there's one twit driving the wrong way, wife replies with "ONE? There's loads of them".

Kevin Irving wrote: »

There are two sides to this. We can I only assume dbagman to be genuine, so let's take it that he didn't cut across the lane abruptly or without warning.

So that leaves a cyclist who despite seeing an indicator, brake lights, and a car slowing still put themselves up the left of his car because they're legally allowed to do so. Why on earth would anyone do that? No point being right if you're dead.

I'm absolutely not picking on cyclists here either, or Victim Blaming as I know the above will be called. You see it on the dashcam thread on Motors too. Drivers who are legally in the right, doing things that put themselves or others in harms way. Like seeing a car going a bit quick about to enter a roundabout, accelerating a bit to make it close, and then beeping them.

Pedestrians too, at a Zebra crossing. Strolls right into the path of a car or cyclist without waiting. Now they're legally correct, but why walk out into the road until everything has stopped?

Cycling with caution is definitely advised, but following the rules of the road is also important. It's reasonable to expect that a left turning vehicle will give right of way to traffic going straight.

Danbo! wrote: »

I was in a similar scenario, but on the cyclists side. I held back and waved the car on, only to be overtaken by a cyclist who squeezed past the car and came inches from being hit. Did the usual shouting "what are you doing?!" bull****.

I think better cycle lane design could help here but for now the city is full of these junctions. They've upgraded the junction at The Barge which is a big improvement. You cross the cycle lane before the junction allowing left-turners to wait in a 2-3 car area.

https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.3303185,-6.2605655,77m/data=!3m1!1e3


It's a fairly valid question - Look how ridiculous this scenario is... A bit of common courtesy wouldn't go amiss.

Well you don't have the right to stop traffic, so the cyclist who overtook you was in the right to cycle on, but not right to cycle wrecklessly. In the video above, there's nothing ridiculous happening here, apart from your expectation of the cyclist. The cyclist has green and is going straight ahead. The car should wait until the lane is clear. I find what the cyclist did in the video to be dangerous (over taking on the right), this can cause more distractions for the driver and lead to an accident, the cyclist should have continued going straight. If the cyclist was on his/her own, then overtaking on the right (when safe) was a nice gesture.

By promoting "give way to left turning vehicles" you will encourage this type of behavior, watch the first 10 seconds;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwFcAGDLWxs

cjt156

Christopher Sparse Pub wrote: »

You should give right of way to those travelling on straight.

In the words of President-Elect Trump;

Orange Fella wrote:

WRONG!

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

cjt156 wrote: »

In the words of President-Elect Trump;

How so? Left turning vehicles have the right of way?

cjt156

YES!
If a vehicle is ahead of you with their left indicator on you cannot go up the inside.
The legislation is quoted by Buffalo in an earlier post.

magicbastarder

Christopher Sparse Pub wrote: »

You should give right of way to those travelling on straight.

not only does it appear that the car indicating a left turn ahead of you has legal right of way, you'd be an idiot to proceed up the inside of a car indicating left (unless they're stationary or near stationary and you'll pass them before the turn, obviously)

average_runner

railer201 wrote: »

AFAIK the action of placing one foot out on the crossing establishes the pedestrian's right of way, traffic then are obliged to stop.

From Irish Statue Book


38.—(1) On a roadway on which a zebra crossing has been provided a pedestrian shall not cross the roadway within 50 feet of the crossing except by the crossing.


(2) When a vehicle is approaching a zebra crossing a pedestrian shall not step on to that crossing if his action is likely to cause the driver either to brake suddenly or to swerve.

PokeHerKing

Christopher Sparse Pub wrote:

By promoting "give way to left turning vehicles" you will encourage this type of behavior, watch the first 10 seconds;

The footage in that video is slightly different to situation described by the other poster IMHO.

If I'm travelling straight at speed and a car cuts in front of me to turn left right before said turn then the motorist is at fault for any accident that occurs. As a cyclist I'm either dead or seriously injured tho, so blame to me will be inconsequential I imagine.

If however I'm travelling straight and a car in front of me signals left as we both approach a left turn he has right of way and I should not continue straight up the inside of him. For my own safety first but also because it's the rules of the road.

CramCycle

average_runner wrote: »

From Irish Statue Book


38.—(1) On a roadway on which a zebra crossing has been provided a pedestrian shall not cross the roadway within 50 feet of the crossing except by the crossing.


(2) When a vehicle is approaching a zebra crossing a pedestrian shall not step on to that crossing if his action is likely to cause the driver either to brake suddenly or to swerve.

First of all, should be their not his. Second, I understand these have been updated to include metric measurements and other changes (could be wrong).

Lastly, a driver approaching a zebra crossing where there is a pedestrian in a position that they move onto the crossing should not be driving in a fashion that braking suddenly or swerving is required.

That is why they have the flashing yellow lights at the crossings.

kirving

Christopher Sparse Pub wrote: »

It's reasonable to expect that a left turning vehicle will give right of way to traffic going straight.

By promoting "give way to left turning vehicles" you will encourage this type of behavior, watch the first 10 seconds;

I would argue the opposite. Regardless of the law, why put yourself in a position which will at best might injure you, and at worst kill you (versus a truck for example).

That is absolutely not a risk I'm willing to take in an attempt to police the rules of the road as I see them.

The clip you posted is certainly an example if very poor driving, but the cyclist did pause a moment before braking in order to prove a point in my view.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

cjt156 wrote: »

YES!
If a vehicle is ahead of you with their left indicator on you cannot go up the inside.
The legislation is quoted by Buffalo in an earlier post.

Did the vehicle in the video I posted have the right of way, because he was ahead and indicating. People translate this law into "I am indicating left, I have right of way, to hell with everybody else".

The SI also states the following, which I thought was amended, maybe I am wrong;

(4) A pedal cycle shall be driven on a cycle track where—

(a) a cycle track is provided on a road, a portion of a road, or an area at the entrance to which traffic sign number RUS 021 (pedestrianised street or area) is provided

magicbastarder wrote: »

not only does it appear that the car indicating a left turn ahead of you has legal right of way, you'd be an idiot to proceed up the inside of a car indicating left (unless they're stationary or near stationary and you'll pass them before the turn, obviously)

Yes of course, but in an ideal situation. Some brands of cars don't have indicators, others are very difficult to turn on and require advanced training which people just can't afford.

The rules of the road state that traffic going straight ahead has the right of way. So this is conflicting to me. I can't find it in the SI.

In other countries Cyclists have right of way, it works really well in my experience and Ireland has to move away from it's motorcentric rules.

kirving

CramCycle wrote: »

Lastly, a driver approaching a zebra crossing where there is a pedestrian in a position that they move onto the crossing should not be driving in a fashion that braking suddenly or swerving is required.

That is why they have the flashing yellow lights at the crossings.

My point is somewhat different. Even at 15kph a driver will have to slam on the brakes if a pedestrian just walks out in front of them. At 15kph, the pedestrian will also likely be injured.

This isn't really about what people should be doing, or what may discourse poor behaviour in future. The bigger picture doesn't matter when it's ME who will be injured. Forgetting what is my legal right in a given situation, I have to do everything I can to minimise the risk to myself.