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

AndrewJRenko

What Username Guidelines wrote: »

Not visible from my camera, but this morning I was passed in traffic by a lady driving down Rathgar Road. It wasn't close as I was in the bus lane and she was in the driving lane, but she had her phone mounted in a windscreen phone holder, directly in front of her above the steering wheel, in landscape, watching a tv show/netflix/video.

I see this once or twice a week - watching Netflix, or watching porn - or doing a Skype or Facetime video chat or (as three people have told me when challenged) listening to a podcast, one that is supplied with moving video.

The mad thing is - if they're not touching the phone, they're not explicitly breaking the law.

rushfan

AndrewJRenko wrote:

The mad thing is - if they're not touching the phone, they're not explicitly breaking the law.

I could be wrong here but AFAIK the legislation states "operating an electronic device ". Open to interpretation possibly.

CramCycle

Driving without due care and attention would cover it if people wanted to get picky

ED E

rushfan wrote: »

I could be wrong here but AFAIK the legislation states "operating an electronic device ". Open to interpretation possibly.

"A person shall not while driving a mechanically propelled vehicle in a public place hold a mobile phone."


To watch a video would come under the trio of charges per a members discretion:
Inconsiderate driving (FCPN)
Careless driving (Court)
Dangerous driving (Court, more serious)

Doctors room ghost

Here’s a question for cyclists.
if there are 2 cyclists traveling along a main road with a full hard shoulder available beside them,but yet one cyclist is traveling on the outside of the hard shoulder and the other cyclist is traveling along side him 2 abreast with the other cyclist not in the hard shoulder but on the road and making cars go around him would you be right in assuming that they are selfish arseholes.
Why can’t they travel in single file in the hard shoulder and let traffic overtake them safely?
What is this obsession with traveling two abreast?

VW 1

Doctors room ghost wrote: »

Here’s a question for cyclists.
if there are 2 cyclists traveling along a main road with a full hard shoulder available beside them,but yet one cyclist is traveling on the outside of the hard shoulder and the other cyclist is traveling along side him 2 abreast with the other cyclist not in the hard shoulder but on the road and making cars go around him would you be right in assuming that they are selfish arseholes.
Why can’t they travel in single file in the hard shoulder and let traffic overtake them safely?
What is this obsession with traveling two abreast?

They just like to be awkward and annoy the people who pay road tax, isn't it terrible joe.

Doctors room ghost

VW 1 wrote: »

They just like to be awkward and annoy the people who pay road tax, isn't it terrible joe.

Would it not be considered an unnecessary safety issue when it would be safer for them and overtaking drivers if they travelled in single file in the hard shoulder.

Kamili

There is a provision for this in law already

http://www.rsa.ie/Documents/Campaigns/Mobile%20Phone/RSA_Mobile_DL.pdf

It is illegal to access information on a mobile
phone while driving (even if it’s in a cradle)

there is also a law that says it is illegal for a driver to be able to view a screen while driving the car unless it is a factory feature of the car.
Can't find the exact legislation but know this from looking into having a CCTV screen in a lorry so the driver can see the horses in the back.

amcalester

Doctors room ghost wrote: »

Would it not be considered an unnecessary safety issue when it would be safer for them and overtaking drivers if they travelled in single file in the hard shoulder.

More fun though to cycle slowly and hold up motorists.

Whoever causes the longest tailback gets an award at the annual cycling awards.

CramCycle

Doctors room ghost wrote: »

Would it not be considered an unnecessary safety issue when it would be safer for them and overtaking drivers if they travelled in single file in the hard shoulder.

Let me ask you, what causes the danger in this scenario? The cyclist staying out of the hard shoulder which may be full of debris, uneven surface etc. or something else, just wondering. I'd stay in the hard shoulder myself but that's not because I am the danger (I am not) nor is it because I am not an arsehole (I am).

CramCycle

amcalester wrote: »

More fun though to cycle slowly and hold up motorists.

Whoever causes the longest tailback gets an award at the annual cycling awards.

Those awards are always regionally biased, I think I should have a chance, even if I only hold up one car. If I do it for 10 times as long, is it not the same as you holding up 10 cars for far less time.

Doctors room ghost

CramCycle wrote: »

Let me ask you, what causes the danger in this scenario? The cyclist staying out of the hard shoulder which may be full of debris, uneven surface etc. or something else, just wondering. I'd stay in the hard shoulder myself but that's not because I am the danger (I am not) nor is it because I am not an arsehole (I am).

Why was the hard shoulder perfectly fine for one of them to cycle in then and not the other lad.why didn’t the lad out on the road tuck in behind the lad in the hard shoulder?
What’s with the two abreast cycling?is it just so they can talk?

amcalester

CramCycle wrote: »

Those awards are always regionally biased, I think I should have a chance, even if I only hold up one car. If I do it for 10 times as long, is it not the same as you holding up 10 cars for far less time.

People think this but it’s all about the number of motorists impacted, the more the better.

Otherwise why bother getting on a bike at all.

DaveyDave

Doctors room ghost wrote: »

Here’s a question for cyclists.
if there are 2 cyclists traveling along a main road with a full hard shoulder available beside them,but yet one cyclist is traveling on the outside of the hard shoulder and the other cyclist is traveling along side him 2 abreast with the other cyclist not in the hard shoulder but on the road and making cars go around him would you be right in assuming that they are selfish arseholes.
Why can’t they travel in single file in the hard shoulder and let traffic overtake them safely?
What is this obsession with traveling two abreast?

What's selfish about it? To legally pass someone you have to move over into the other lane. One or two cyclists isn't going to inhibit your ability to move over into the opposite lane to pass?

Are you saying if they're cycling in single file you're not going to move out to pass them? I don't see what difference it makes to you.

Cycling single file or two abreast shouldn't change how you overtake them on the road. You can still pass them safely two abreast. It you can't then you probably shouldn't be driving.

If you can't share the road with other road users that would make you the selfish arsehole.

He's not "making cars go around him". It's called overtaking. People do it to mopeds, trucks, tractors etc.

Doctors room ghost

DaveyDave wrote: »

What's selfish about it? To legally pass someone you have to move over into the other lane. One or two cyclists isn't going to inhibit your ability to move over into the opposite lane to pass?

Are you saying if they're cycling in single file you're not going to move out to pass them? I don't see what difference it makes to you.

Cycling single file or two abreast shouldn't change how you overtake them on the road. You can still pass them safely two abreast. It you can't then you probably shouldn't be driving.

If you can't share the road with other road users that would make you the selfish arsehole.

He's not "making cars go around him". It's called overtaking. People do it to mopeds, trucks, tractors etc.

There would be no need to go around them if they were in single file in the hard shoulder though.whats the need to double their width by traveling two abreast?

Seth Brundle

Doctors room ghost wrote: »

There would be no need to go around them if they were in single file in the hard shoulder though.whats the need to double their width by traveling two abreast?

The issue wouldn't arise if the motorist cycled!
Seriously though, put yourself in their position. Walk along a hard shoulder sometime and see what they're like!
In addition cycling two abreast is completely legal (and a third can overtake)

07Lapierre

Doctors room ghost wrote: »

DaveyDave wrote: »

What's selfish about it? To legally pass someone you have to move over into the other lane. One or two cyclists isn't going to inhibit your ability to move over into the opposite lane to pass?

Are you saying if they're cycling in single file you're not going to move out to pass them? I don't see what difference it makes to you.

Cycling single file or two abreast shouldn't change how you overtake them on the road. You can still pass them safely two abreast. It you can't then you probably shouldn't be driving.

If you can't share the road with other road users that would make you the selfish arsehole.

He's not "making cars go around him". It's called overtaking. People do it to mopeds, trucks, tractors etc.

There would be no need to go around them if they were in single file in the hard shoulder though.whats the need to double their width by traveling two abreast?

You’ve just answered your own question. If two or more cyclists travel in single file, motorists approaching them from behind see no need to slow down or to move to the right. By cycling two abreast, motorists have to “go round” the cyclists. This encourages the motorists to overtake correctly... that is, mirror, indicate, overtake, mirror, return to the left side of the road.

What Username Guidelines

Doctors room ghost wrote: »

What is this obsession with traveling two abreast?

I’m not sure they’d call it an obsession, maybe they’re having a chat? I could argue that I’m held up all the time by motorists travelling alone in cars all by themselves. Can’t they just move over and get out of my way, sure I’m far faster than them at rush hour.

If they were single file, you spend more time overtaking. When two abreast, you slow down a bit and overtake correctly, spending less time over the line.

AndrewJRenko

Doctors room ghost wrote: »

Here’s a question for cyclists.
if there are 2 cyclists traveling along a main road with a full hard shoulder available beside them,but yet one cyclist is traveling on the outside of the hard shoulder and the other cyclist is traveling along side him 2 abreast with the other cyclist not in the hard shoulder but on the road and making cars go around him would you be right in assuming that they are selfish arseholes.
Why can’t they travel in single file in the hard shoulder and let traffic overtake them safely?
What is this obsession with traveling two abreast?

Let me guess - you're driving round with four empty seats complaining about the space cyclists are taking up on the road, right?


How much passing space were you planning of giving them when you pass them in the hard shoulder?

Wishbone Ash

Doctors room ghost wrote: »

Why was the hard shoulder perfectly fine for one of them to cycle in then and not the other lad.why didn’t the lad out on the road tuck in behind the lad in the hard shoulder?
What’s with the two abreast cycling?is it just so they can talk?

There are several reasons. The inner side of hard shoulders often has a lot more debris whereas the outer side (nearest the road) is usually clearer as it gets 'swept' by fast passing traffic. The lad on the right may be using race tyres which are more prone to punctures.

Imagine the two lanes of a dual carriageway - the left lane is full of debris and the right is clean. I'm sure you'd agree that 99% of motorists would move over to the right lane.

And as others have said, travelling two abreast creates more awareness and makes motorists put more thought into overtaking properly.

What Username Guidelines

Good morning from Harold's Cross

Now they even have the sign asking people nicely - Bus lane in use - Prohibited vehicles please don't go in there



Plenty smashed to pieces

Mc Love

Doctors room ghost wrote: »

Would it not be considered an unnecessary safety issue when it would be safer for them and overtaking drivers if they travelled in single file in the hard shoulder.

Like others have said there might be more debris closer to the edge and thus they dont want to hit drains (they're ultra slippy in the wet) or get a puncture.

amcalester wrote: »

More fun though to cycle slowly and hold up motorists.

Whoever causes the longest tailback gets an award at the annual cycling awards.

Is there somewhere I can register?

Seth Brundle

What Username Guidelines wrote: »

Plenty smashed to pieces

That broken post looks lethal.
However, would you look at the feckin cyclist blocking the road while there's space for three or four cars to stop in front of him. I wouldn't mind only he doesn't even pay road tax to be there!

AndrewJRenko

What Username Guidelines wrote: »

Good morning from Harold's Cross

Now they even have the sign asking people nicely - Bus lane in use - Prohibited vehicles please don't go in there

Only top quarter of first photo is visible for me. You might need to upload again.

Pinch Flat

Fair play to motorists that use bus lanes though. It's an effort to make their 20% full vehicles somewhat more efficient regarding roads Space they use.

Seth Brundle

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Only top quarter of first photo is visible for me. You might need to upload again.

Photo is fine, it's your download. Press Ctrl & F5 to refresh on PC.
It is the OP cycling in a bus lane with a few cars ahead seemingly in the driving lane and a sign telling motorists that the Bus Lane is in use and for illegal vehicles not to use it

blackwhite

What Username Guidelines wrote: »

Good morning from Harold's Cross

Now they even have the sign asking people nicely - Bus lane in use - Prohibited vehicles please don't go in there



Plenty smashed to pieces

Bus lane cameras badly needed - or just a Garda standing at the side of the road for a few mornings

amcalester

What Username Guidelines wrote: »

Good morning from Harold's Cross

Now they even have the sign asking people nicely - Bus lane in use - Prohibited vehicles please don't go in there



Plenty smashed to pieces

I wonder if Doctors Room Ghost would explain why these motorists are using the bus lane illegally when there’s a perfectly legal lane to their right?

blackwhite

Had a Tesla cut across and mount the kerb in front of me this morning to get into and drive the lenght of the bus stop with 2 wheels on the kerb to try and get around the right-turning queue for Beaver Row

https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.3121401,-6.2386323,3a,23.6y,334.77h,86.1t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-w04p1Lit7EM-u8oejSdnQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Mounting the kerb got him all the way to the lights, which were red :rolleyes:


Not so much a near-miss for me, I was 30m or so behind him when he started the "manoeuvre" - but the people standing at the bus stop got quite the jump!

Pinch Flat

07Lapierre wrote: »

You’ve just answered your own question. If two or more cyclists travel in single file, motorists approaching them from behind see no need to slow down or to move to the right. By cycling two abreast, motorists have to “go round” the cyclists. This encourages the motorists to overtake correctly... that is, mirror, indicate, overtake, mirror, return to the left side of the road.

Jaysus the amount of times this has to be explained to motorists. Buy yeah group think is just blast by - sure it's only a fella on a bike.