Cycle protest in dublin city centre

Samuel T. Cogley

Deedsie wrote: »

Where the hell did I say "cycling is without issues"? I am advocating for a cycling protest, many many issues in relation to cycling in Ireland.

TBH I didn't realise that I though you were just chatting about the weather. That's a much more serious issue. It's a bloody stupid idea.

This needs to worked on locally in areas where there can be some impact and easy wins, not trying to dig up the city centre.

Samuel T. Cogley

Deedsie wrote: »

Was that a reply to my comment? I have no idea what you are talking about there.

Okay.

Samuel T. Cogley

Deedsie wrote: »

Was that a reply to my comment? I have no idea what you are talking about there.

These are the aims of the protest, no one is talking about digging up the city centre whatever that means.

We’re calling on the Minister to:

allocate at least 10% of the Transport Budget to cycling
implement the National Cycle Policy Framework in full
take action to reduce transport emissions so that Ireland fulfils its obligations under the Paris Agreement

Okay well best of luck. As long as it doesn't involve any disruption to traffic flow and everyone is considerate of each other and just realises everyone is just trying to get about I'm happy.

I hope some more grass roots stuff is going on too. I've not looked very hard I concede, but can we please get the Clontarf route opened up again. On the odd sunny day we do get I like to meander down there.

Samuel T. Cogley

Actually - I'm all for live and let live, but that love 30 sh!te really annoys me. 30KPH is a stupid speed limit and probably not obeyed by the majority of serious cyclists.

It's also raining in the flyer but now I'm just messing :pac:

Samuel T. Cogley

Deedsie wrote: »

I don't think we'd get on...

Can't wait for expansion of the 30km/h zone. Hopefully people will obey the speed limits. Should be extended to all urban residential areas in my opinion.

The speed limits will make absolutely no odds, whats needed is wholesale change for hazard perception. Speed limits are whole sale ignored now and I actually think the 30 limit will be counter productive.

An example of HP driving up past Connolly I hang back a bit in the outside lane and flash taxis out when they're trying to get past cyclists. It's an absolute rage inducing pet hate of mine to see cars squeeze cyclists. It adds absolutely no time to my journey and makes everyone else a little safer.

Pissing contest aside, genuine question - won't most cyclists break a 30KMH limit?

P_1

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

The speed limits will make absolutely no odds, whats needed is wholesale change for hazard perception. Speed limits are whole sale ignored now and I actually think the 30 limit will be counter productive.

An example of HP driving up past Connolly I hang back a bit in the outside lane and flash taxis out when they're trying to get past cyclists. It's an absolute rage inducing pet hate of mine to see cars squeeze cyclists. It adds absolutely no time to my journey and makes everyone else a little safer.

Pissing contest aside, genuine question - won't most cyclists break a 30KMH limit?

Depends on the bike they're on and the road they're cycling TBH.

A road bike on a flat section of road will break 30 easily.
A hybrid or an MTB on a flat might.
A Dublin bike or an old rust bucket not a chance.

On an uphill section of road really you'd only be likely to see people on road bikes troubling the 30.

Tenzor07

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

Pissing contest aside, genuine question - won't most cyclists break a 30KMH limit?

Yes..they will, and so?

Samuel T. Cogley

Deedsie wrote: »

I could break 30 km/h but I cycle and drive conservatively in urban areas. Speeding in an urban area is shocking behaviour in my opinion.

As you mentioned above I was in two RTC's so I don't want to experience that again. Both incidents the driver was and admitted responsibility but even still I like to give myself as much time as possible to react to unpredictable situations. I drive the same way.

I sincerely wish more did! Incidentally my post stalking was in no way an attempt to cast aspersions on your cycling. Even the small amount I do has me seeing some real dick moves.

ted1

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

So it was roughly once every six weeks you sat sopping wet in the office?

No, I shower in work or in the gym beside work.

ted1

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

Pissing contest aside, genuine question - won't most cyclists break a 30KMH limit?

Under Irish Law bikes are excluded from speed limits. Yes I'd hazard a guess and say a large number of commuters cycle above 30km.

Samuel T. Cogley

ted1 wrote: »

Under Irish Law bikes are excluded from speed limits. Yes I'd hazard a guess and say a large number of commuters cycle above 30km.

Good reason not to try and limit cars then if the old arguments of you can't ask a cyclist to maintain a speed limit get trotted out.

Tenzor07

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

Good reason not to try and limit cars then if the old arguments of you can't ask a cyclist to maintain a speed limit get trotted out.

Not a reason, not even remotely...:rolleyes:

Samuel T. Cogley

Deedsie wrote: »

Combined weight of me and my bike 88kg

Combined weight of me and my car 1787kg

Combined safety features and crumple zones built into your bike, combine braking system, combined force over the much smaller impact area?

Tenzor07 wrote: »

Not a reason, not even remotely...:rolleyes:

:rolleyes:

meeeeh

Why would you. It will be cyclists who will get killed when undertaking cars. Maybe it's the strategy to get more space for cyclists and improve the experience.

Samuel T. Cogley

meeeeh wrote: »

Why would you. It will be cyclists who will get killed when undertaking cars. Maybe it's the strategy to get more space for cyclists and improve the experience.

That's my other issue, a complete change of road dynamic with no training or education running completely counter to peoples experience.

Dr Crayfish

cajonlardo wrote: »

Huh?
I wasn't commenting on women or people in general but seeing as you want to post excuses....

Mother of 3 worked with me for years and managed no problem. In fact i'd say she was immaculately turned out compared to most people in the building.

Worked in italy and nederlands and weather didn't bother women there where they cycle in HUGE numbers - are they different from women here?

They tend not to worry as much about hair or make up in holland anyway, not been to Italy much.
I remember it was a huge concern with a previous girlfriend when I was trying to encourage her to cycle!

technics_1210

most cyclist don't know the rules of the road,
how should they?

they didn't have to pass the driving test, so how should they know?

ted1

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

Good reason not to try and limit cars then if the old arguments of you can't ask a cyclist to maintain a speed limit get trotted out.

What?

ted1

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

That's my other issue, a complete change of road dynamic with no training or education running completely counter to peoples experience.

Many have drivers licence and cycle training commenced this year.

http://www.smartertravel.ie/content/cycle-right-national-training-standard

ted1

technics_1210 wrote: »

most cyclist don't know the rules of the road,
how should they?

they didn't have to pass the driving test, so how should they know?

Most drivers don't know them either, none seem to know how to use round abouts, yellow boxes, etc

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

Good reason not to try and limit cars then if the old arguments of you can't ask a cyclist to maintain a speed limit get trotted out.

Limits apply to motorized vehicles, not bicycles. Your point is irrelevant.

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

Combined safety features and crumple zones built into your bike, combine braking system, combined force over the much smaller impact area?

:rolleyes:

I am not quite sure what you are getting at here, but bikes don't need crumple zones. Breaking systems on bikes are also very good.

technics_1210 wrote: »

most cyclist don't know the rules of the road,
how should they?

they didn't have to pass the driving test, so how should they know?

There's plenty of motorists on the road who haven't passed their driving test either. I would be happy to see those removed first before anything else.

Samuel T. Cogley

Sounds to be like the ol' we want to be treated as equals until it inconveniences us then we're a special case, as usual. Not all of you mind, but I refer you back to my original post.

Pinch Flat

This thread is great. There's just so many unique points and straw men I've never heard before. Fascinating stuff.

Dr Crayfish

Mylah Melodic Munitions wrote: »

There's plenty of motorists on the road who haven't passed their driving test either. I would be happy to see those removed first before anything else.

It's their culture

Samuel T. Cogley

Pinch Flat wrote: »

This thread is great. There's just so many unique points and straw men I've never heard before. Fascinating stuff.

Ah the commentator on the comments, wit at it's finest. Thanks for stopping in, but could you have at-least tried to be as funny as Kbannon?

kbannon wrote: »

Can I summarise the next 47 pages of posts?

A: I hate cyclists in their lycra using up my roadspace whilst going slow.
B: yeah me too
C: But we're entitled to be there.
A: Use the cycle lanes then you tosser
C: They're crap and dangerous
So is cycling on the road
E: Lycra
A: You've no right to be there because you don't pay road tax
F: I drive as well as cyxle so I pay my road tax
G: *motor tax
E: Lycra
...

prinzeugen

Weepsie wrote: »

Apologies. Worded badly. There are 150000 uninsured drivers on the road. That's a figure from 3 months ago. There's an estimated 137000 untaxed vehicles being driven around too.

So not eh...No. eeeh..Yes, more than I stated.

Now I'll get a response well none of ye pay tax/insurance (except that those that drive who do indeed) and it's not (rightly so) a legal requirement

Again.. No.

There are 150,000 motorists that have a license but no policy. Myself included. Why? Because I don't currently own a bloody vehicle to insure.

According to the MIBI that makes me an uninsured driver.

That is how stupid those statistics are.

There is no evidence to suggest that ALL of these drivers/cars are out on the road. As I said most of the vehicles will have been scrapped, in bits in fields/gardens or in car dealers.

I am sure the MIBI put a little twist on the figures to justify soaring premiums.

AndrewJRenko

technics_1210 wrote: »

most cyclist don't know the rules of the road,
how should they?

they didn't have to pass the driving test, so how should they know?

Of course they had to pass the driving test to drive the car they left sitting in their driveway to reduce the size of your traffic jam.

You have managed to work out that many people cycle by choice, not because they don't have a car - right?

Pinch Flat

technics_1210 wrote: »

most cyclist don't know the rules of the road,
how should they?

they didn't have to pass the driving test, so how should they know?

Here's a thought. About 80% of cyclists drive as well, in fact I've never met someone who solely cycles and doesn't hold a driving licence (excluding my 10 year old son of course).

Pinch Flat

prinzeugen wrote: »

Again.. No.

There are 150,000 motorists that have a license but no policy. Myself included. Why? Because I don't currently own a bloody vehicle to insure.

According to the MIBI that makes me an uninsured driver.

That is how stupid those statistics are.

There is no evidence to suggest that ALL of these drivers/cars are out on the road. As I said most of the vehicles will have been scrapped, in bits in fields/gardens or in car dealers.

I am sure the MIBI put a little twist on the figures to justify soaring premiums.

The MIBI is funded by a levy on all policies (I believe it's 2%). This pays out €60m annually for accidents caused by uninsured drivers. So maybe that puts the issue in perspective.

eeguy

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

Sounds to be like the ol' we want to be treated as equals until it inconveniences us then we're a special case, as usual. Not all of you mind, but I refer you back to my original post.

We want to be treated as equals by having more than 0.5% of the transport budget assigned to a quicker, healthier, more environmentally conscious, safer, cheaper, more suited to urban areas mode of transport.