Near misses - mod warning 22/04 - see OP/post 822

Pinch Flat

Danbo! wrote: »

I was just saying that the general gist of the post in the motors forum had tones of that, and that I could not understand why someone would decide to decide to disrespect all cyclists based on their interactions with some. Basically, I see motorists driving poorly daily but do not all of a sudden have the opinion all motorists are a hazard, so I'm wondering why it (at least seems to) happen with cyclists.

I'd say it's a combination of things - cyclists are low hanging fruit, so cycling is "dangerous", a sense of motorists ownership of the roads due to "road tax"" that cyclists don't pay, frustration from drivers being stuck in traffic and seeing cyclists progress easier.

Motorists also feel it necessary to lecture cyclists on their attire - helmets / hi-vis etc. It's again to reinforce that cycling is dangerous, whereas we all know it's motorized traffic that makes roads dangerous in the first place.

Annie get your Run

Danbo! wrote: »

I was just saying that the general gist of the post in the motors forum had tones of that, and that I could not understand why someone would decide to decide to disrespect all cyclists based on their interactions with some. Basically, I see motorists driving poorly daily but do not all of a sudden have the opinion all motorists are a hazard, so I'm wondering why it (at least seems to) happen with cyclists.

I had just typed a similar reply, why?? but tomasrojo's link seems to go some way to explain it. I would never tar all motorists with the same brush (possibly with the exception of taxi drivers.....!) There are good and bad amongst all road users, I'm happy to assume they're good until they show me otherwise which seems to be the opposite of how cyclists are seen 'assume they're all bad red light jumping, holding up the traffic peeps who therefore deserve no respect'. Frightening.

Tenzor07

Danbo! wrote: »

I was just saying that the general gist of the post in the motors forum had tones of that, and that I could not understand why someone would decide to decide to disrespect all cyclists based on their interactions with some. Basically, I see motorists driving poorly daily but do not all of a sudden have the opinion all motorists are a hazard, so I'm wondering why it (at least seems to) happen with cyclists.

Because it's acceptable(in some crazy persons mind) to discriminate against a less powerful minority would be the closest answer I have to that..

magicbastarder

tomasrojo wrote: »

"Eschew" seems to be my new favourite word.

bless you.

LpPepper

I was out with about 8 or 9 from my club yesterday evening for a spin and had this driver overtake us very closely and into the path of an oncoming car on the way into Celbridge....The wide angle lens on my GoPro makes it appear not as close or as fast as it really was, was sincerely scary.

Absolutely nuts....

brownian

Very nearly took out the other car, whatever about you lads.

amcalester

brownian wrote: »

Very nearly took out the other car, whatever about you lads.

I wonder if the other motorist blames the over taker for the unsafe manoeuvre or the cyclists for "forcing" him to overtake like that?

Pinch Flat

LpPepper wrote: »

I was out with about 8 or 9 from my club yesterday evening for a spin and had this driver overtake us very closely and into the path of an oncoming car on the way into Celbridge....The wide angle lens on my GoPro makes it appear not as close or as fast as it really was, was sincerely scary.

Absolutely nuts....

Crazy, senseless maneuver. Needlessly putting others at risk. For what? A few seconds. The mind boggles.

LpPepper

Pinch Flat wrote: »

Crazy, senseless maneuver. Needlessly putting others at risk. For what? A few seconds. The mind boggles.

The driver pulled in just before the bridge in Celbridge village literally about 30 seconds later, with the hazards on. We were just waiting for him to swing open the door or shout something at us but nothing happened. So he literally put our lives and the other driver's life in his hands because he wanted to pull in up the road a few seconds sooner??

Tenzor07

LpPepper wrote: »

The driver pulled in just before the bridge in Celbridge village literally about 30 seconds later, with the hazards on. We were just waiting for him to swing open the door or shout something at us but nothing happened. So he literally put our lives and the other driver's life in his hands because he wanted to pull in up the road a few seconds sooner??

I'd of confronted him about his wreckless manouevre and tell him you'll put it up on Youtube!

Pinch Flat

Tenzor07 wrote: »

I'd of confronted him about his wreckless manouevre and tell him you'll put it up on Youtube report it to the Gardai!

FYP there....

Tenzor07

Pinch Flat wrote: »

FYP there....

I think YouTube with his reg would be more effective than that...

check_six

Another good example of someone trying a manoeuvre, not reading the road ahead, and causing a hazard. I had to look a couple of times to spot that the gap that the car left you was filled by another cyclist to your right. Yikes!

LpPepper

check_six wrote: »

Another good example of someone trying a manoeuvre, not reading the road ahead, and causing a hazard. I had to look a couple of times to spot that the gap that the car left you was filled by another cyclist to your right. Yikes!

Yep we were cycling 2 abreast, must have been a lot scarier for those on the outside...

Annie get your Run

check_six wrote: »

Another good example of someone trying a manoeuvre, not reading the road ahead, and causing a hazard.

TBH this happens on my commute every day, twice a day on two different roads with solid white lines, one is also a humpback bridge with zero visibility of what is coming and yet every single day, both ways, cars overtake me, over the white line (at least they're giving me space!) and into oncoming traffic. What puzzles me most is the reaction, or lack thereof, of the oncoming traffic. Mostly there's none! One of these days I'm going to witness a serious accident and I often wonder if the finger will be pointed straight at me.

shootermacg

Pinch Flat wrote: »

Crazy, senseless maneuver. Needlessly putting others at risk. For what? A few seconds. The mind boggles.

Nice pace you guys were doing

josip

amcalester wrote: »

I wonder if the other motorist blames the over taker for the unsafe manoeuvre or the cyclists for "forcing" him to overtake like that?

I would guess that the responses following post 6104 over here
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057386855&page=407
would be representative of most motorists

tomasrojo

Doctor Bob posted an interview with Andrew Gilligan in the Journalism and Cycling thread, but this bit dovetails with the conversation here:

People decide they don’t want cycling then they look for reasons to oppose it. Then sometimes they just make up reasons.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=103263267#post103263267

magicbastarder

josip wrote: »

I would guess that the responses following post 6104 over here
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057386855&page=407
would be representative of most motorists

posts about cyclists have been deleted.

CramCycle

magicbastarder wrote: »

posts about cyclists have been deleted.

The ones that remain are reasonable

mr spuckler

Annie get your Run wrote: »

One of these days I'm going to witness a serious accident and I often wonder if the finger will be pointed straight at me.

only it won't be a real "accident"! cause and effect and all that

an event that happens by chance or that is without apparent or deliberate cause.

people are aware of the potential consequences of drink driving, speeding, dangerous overtaking, not paying due attention etc. therefore a resulting incident is a direct result of their actions rather than something that happens by chance.

mp31

LpPepper wrote: »

I was out with about 8 or 9 from my club yesterday evening for a spin and had this driver overtake us very closely and into the path of an oncoming car on the way into Celbridge....The wide angle lens on my GoPro makes it appear not as close or as fast as it really was, was sincerely scary.

Absolutely nuts....

Please can I ask you to report it to the Gardai via the Traffic Watch number. Keep the footage, burn it to a CD ROM and give it to the Gardai when making a statement.

amcalester

josip wrote: »

I would guess that the responses following post 6104 over here
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057386855&page=407
would be representative of most motorists

Fair point but that thread is fairy heavily moderated so we don't know if any posts were deleted.

And the cyclists in that video were in single file, cycling 2 abreast seems to bring out the worst in otherwise reasonable motorists.

Pinch Flat

amcalester wrote: »

Fair point but that thread is fairy heavily moderated so we don't know if any posts were deleted.

And the cyclists in that video were in single file, cycling 2 abreast seems to bring out the worst in otherwise reasonable motorists.

There was one guy who posted who claimed he as a cycling and motorcyclist. He called out cyclists as the most selfish of road users, citing red light breaking, cycling 2 abreast, no helmets, hi-vis, lights, queried why advance boxes are used, footpaths.....ah heck, just the usual complaints about cyclists. This brought out some replies - in fairness the guy was on a trolling expedition about cyclists in the motoring forum.

What puzzles me about the motoring forum is that it's almost a badge of honour to routinely break the speed limit and then come on and brag about it. Yet motorists will frequently go off on rants about cyclists - red light breaking etc.

amcalester

Pinch Flat wrote: »

There was one guy who posted who claimed he as a cycling and motorcyclist. He called out cyclists as the most selfish of road users, citing red light breaking, cycling 2 abreast, no helmets, hi-vis, lights, queried why advance boxes are used, footpaths.....ah heck, just the usual complaints about cyclists. This brought out some replies - in fairness the guy was on a trolling expedition about cyclists in the motoring forum.

What puzzles me about the motoring forum is that it's almost a badge of honour to routinely break the speed limit and then come on and brag about it. Yet motorists will frequently go off on rants about cyclists - red light breaking etc.

Exactly, a few comments on a thread isn't a fair representation of all motorists.

Chuchote

Interesting study of who breaks rules and why. More or less 100% of road users - drivers, pedestrians, truckers, cyclists, bikers, vanmen, taxi drivers - break laws, but cyclists break fewest; their reason for breaking them (for instance by going through red lights or cycling on pavements) tends to be safety, whereas drivers and pedestrians give "saving time" as their main reason.

Love the word "scofflaws" used in the article! Hate that they use 'flaunt' when they mean 'flout' (flinch).

http://www.ssti.us/2017/04/we-all-break-traffic-laws-why-are-bicyclists-different/

…This difference may be linked to the low mode share for transportation bicycling, and your personal reaction may be linked to whether you get around by bike and whether you yourself are mostly law-abiding in the same situation. In addition, bicyclists’ lawbreaking ways are rational and generally safe, whereas drivers’ most common types of illegal behaviors—speeding and running red lights—are two of the top factors in injury and fatal crashes. Red light running by motorists is so common that Google has programmed its autonomous cars to wait one second after a green signal before proceeding.
These are among the conclusions of two papers by University of Colorado Denver professor Wesley Marshall. Marshall noted that there are few studies of the rate of bicycling lawbreaking and fewer still of why bicyclists flaunt the laws they do. In order to gather information about the behaviors of drivers, bicyclists, and pedestrians, the reasons for any lawbreaking behavior, and their attitudes toward other road users, he performed a scenario-based survey of 18,000 respondents. Both articles are based on the results of the survey.
In an article in the Journal of Transport and Land Use, Marshall concludes that while almost 100 percent of road users are scofflaws, regardless of mode, the reasons for lawbreaking differ. Drivers and pedestrians generally report that they are saving time. Saving time came in third as a reason for bicyclists, but personal safety was the top reason, with saving energy as second. Visibility to other road users was the fourth place answer.

RayCun

Chuchote wrote: »

Interesting study of who breaks rules and why. More or less 100% of road users - drivers, pedestrians, truckers, cyclists, bikers, vanmen, taxi drivers - break laws, but cyclists break fewest; their reason for breaking them (for instance by going through red lights or cycling on pavements) tends to be safety, whereas drivers and pedestrians give "saving time" as their main reason.

Love the word "scofflaws" used in the article! Hate that they use 'flaunt' when they mean 'flout' (flinch).

http://www.ssti.us/2017/04/we-all-break-traffic-laws-why-are-bicyclists-different/

To be honest, most of the cyclists I see breaking red lights might say "safety! " if pressed, but they are clearly doing it to save time and momentum.

Tenzor07

RayCun wrote: »

they are clearly doing it to save time and momentum.

Which is the main appeal of using a bicycle to commute rather than a car or taxi/bus...

Our more enlightened European neighbours, the Dutch are trialling a Green Wave system for bicyclists...

https://vimeo.com/144718190

Maybe we'll see something like this in Ireland by the year 2057?

Tenzor07

emm.. no.. just with regards to transportation..

Kaisr Sose

Pinch Flat wrote: »

Crazy, senseless maneuver. Needlessly putting others at risk. For what? A few seconds. The mind boggles.

My mind boggles too, but it's an all too regular occurance these days. it demonstrates a complete lack of awareness of the rules of the road, no clue as to when to overtake and how to do so safely.