Radical action for cycling safety attention.

Arcade_Tryer

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

From the study cited above:

That stat should be used on radio programmes if only to dispel the "there are good and bad cyclists and drivers" argument which is used to stifle proper discussion concerning the statistically proven danger motorists pose to others.

Chips Lovell

While there's a lot that could be done to improve road safety, I'd agree that it's important to view things in the context of overall cycling numbers.

The 2016 census commuting figures aren't due out until August 31 but the 2011 one showed a 10 percent increase in cyclists commuting over five years.

Figures from Dublin City Council showed that the number of cyclists travelling into the city centre grew from 10,893 in 2015 to 12,089 last year and were up from 4,839 ten years ago.

Alongside this, Cycling Ireland saw its membership grow from 9,000 in 2010 to 28,000 last year, which is indicative of the increase in the number of leisure and racing cyclists.

That's not intended to downplay the recent spate of road deaths, but it ought to born in mind, lest people be put off cycling or considering giving it up in the belief that cycling has become more dangerous than it was.

Hrududu

Pinch Flat wrote: »

Mrs Pinch Flat doesn't cycle, never has. Days when I'm a passenger in the car are fun. "Ah watch the cyclists", screams me. "Well, I didn't hit him, did i", shaving a guy by inches. That's part of the problem - there's a huge cohort of drivers that simply seen no issue with passing within inches. Sure I didn't hit you, do I?

A taxi driver did a veeeery close pass on me once. I kept calm and knocked on his window at the lights to ask why he would do that. He kept saying "Sure I didn't hit ya" and "I could see ya"

Ah grand so. The fact that you came so close to clipping me that the bike wobbled as you passed was fine.

For me though the inattentive drivers are far more prevalent on my commute than the ones that pass at dangerous distances. Glancing at their phones, half watching the car in front instead of everything going on on the road. Not sure how you get them to pay more attention

cajonlardo

Arcade_Tryer wrote: »

That stat should be used on radio programmes if only to dispel the "there are good and bad cyclists and drivers" argument which is used to stifle proper discussion concerning the statistically proven danger motorists pose to others.

Your post is the very reason I posted the link.

I am sick to the back teeth of this blame game. Given that I have a driving record of over 35 years combined with several advanced driving courses, emergency service driving, military driving and Close Protection experience I feel that I have a qualified opinion.

In my experience, if someone is driving regularly and experiencing difficulties regularly with cyclists, then the Drivers need to amend their road behaviour, their anticipation and their observation.

All My Stars Aligned

While only a short commute, 8km e/w Drumcondra through the city centre, up Camden St and onto Rathmines, I can honestly say that I feel very safe and over the years can not really think of any instances where I felt otherwise. the reasons for this I reckon are as follows:

I take my time on my bike, always giving myself plenty of time to reach my destination.
I do not cycle between bussed, lorries or other high-sided vehicles unless they are stationary and not in a position where they can make any sudden changes in direction. Even in these circumstances I will only do so when there is plenty of space for me. (At least once a day other cyclists will give me grief for this or try to squees past me). Also when passing between high-sided vehicles I will do so at a slow speed so shout a pedestrian walk out in front of me I can stop quickly.
I adhere to the ROTR. I stop at red lights, signal when turning and so forth.
I acknowledge other road users when appropriate, such as when somebody lets me turn to the like.
I don't take risks on the bike.
I cycle at a speed that allows me to stop quickly and safely.

Yes, some motorists can be a danger to other road users. Yes, some motorists drive with blatant disregard to road traffic laws.

The think is, as a individual we have little or no control on how others behave. We can however control out own actions and I have found that by cycling with due care, adhering to traffic laws and showing curtsey to other I can feel safe on the roads and even enjoy my rush hour commute.

I do feel that if others also did so at the very least we could maybe reduce the 17 - 25% of the statistic previously quoted.

'With adult cyclists, police found the driver solely responsible in about 60%-75% of all cases, and riders solely at fault 17%-25% of the time.'

Unfortunately, the reality at the moment is that there seems not to be the political will to genuinely improve road conditions for cyclists. Like others here on Boards, I have written to many TD and this has only confirmed my opinion that cyclists seem not to matter.

Perhaps another small thing that we could try is to take it upon ourselves to talk to friends/family and explain to them the dangers we may encounter on the bike. I know this should not fall on us to do but it seem that if we don't no-one will! Also, family and friends being able to relate these issues to people they actually know might have a better chance of them changing some of their behaviours when driving.

Anyway, I hope I haven't offended anyone with any of the above. Stay safe and enjoy your bike

FlipperThePriest

Pinch Flat wrote: »

Mrs Pinch Flat doesn't cycle, never has. Days when I'm a passenger in the car are fun. "Ah watch the cyclists", screams me. "Well, I didn't hit him, did i", shaving a guy by inches. That's part of the problem - there's a huge cohort of drivers that simply seen no issue with passing within inches. Sure I didn't hit you, do I?

How do you expect we as a nation will change our attitude toward cyclists when you, someone who is clearly very passionate about road safety and cycling, cannot change the attitude of the person closest to you? Surely education starts at home.

ED E

Monday 5th to Sunday 12th:

• Spot any motoring offence big or small that may in any way endanger cyclists
• Take registration plate if possible
• Lo Call 1890 205 805 (Save it in your phone now)

This will generate an influx of complaints to Castlebar which will then land on the desks of all the Supers.

Anyone willing?

jjpep

ED E wrote: »

Monday 5th to Sunday 12th:

• Spot any motoring offence big or small that may in any way endanger cyclists
• Take registration plate if possible
• Lo Call 1890 205 805 (Save it in your phone now)

This will generate an influx of complaints to Castlebar which will then land on the desks of all the Supers.

Anyone willing?

Excellent idea. I'm up for it.

Rezident

The technology is already there. All cyclists need to start using cameras.

I see one or two potentially lethal actions by drivers a week - this week it was the woman driving her kids to school near stillorgan who didn't look just swerved across the cycle lane early in the morning missing me by a few inches. I was expecting the worst (as always) but a colleague of mine was killed cycling in March so I'm particularly wary now.

but we need to record and report these instances every single time. When she gets penalty points or loses her licence, that is a life saved down the line. Possibly your own life!

More cyclists will be killed by cars at Foxrock church. Soon. It is sadly only a matter of time.

Lumen

Rezident wrote: »

The technology is already there. All cyclists need to start using cameras.

I've cycled something like 100,000km in the last ten years ish and the number of incidents I've had where I felt in real peril could be counted on the fingers of one hand.

The only case I've felt the need to report to the gardai was one the other day where a nutcase driving a car threatened to kill me and then attempted* to push me into oncoming traffic, but in that instance I had three witnesses who were happy to give evidence.

I'm not going to wire myself up every day for the sake of the very occasional loon.

As far as routine stuff goes, TBH I'd settle for aggressive enforcement against mobile phone use and regular social media campaigns teaching safe overtaking.

(* unsuccessfully, because I am awesome)

Tenzor07

Good idea to report something like this, Disqualified driver caught drinking bottle of beer and using phone had no tax,insurance or NCT



https://twitter.com/GardaTraffic/status/869841823958802432/photo/1

Richard308

As a cyclist I have to say we have to be more responsible. It's not always the cars fault and we have to be responsible for our own safety and actions also. I have seen so many poorly skilled cyclists, zero anticipation of danger, poor judgement. A single road death is too much. I've seen a close friend suffer a severe brain injury and debilitated for life. What's needed is more respect and carefulness by all road users. Take steps to reduce your risks. Use cycle ways where provided etc

cajonlardo

Richard308 wrote: »

As a cyclist I have to say we have to be more responsible. It's not always the cars fault and we have to be responsible for our own safety and actions also. I have seen so many poorly skilled cyclists, zero anticipation of danger, poor judgement. A single road death is too much. I've seen a close friend suffer a severe brain injury and debilitated for life. What's needed is more respect and carefulness by all road users. Take steps to reduce your risks. Use cycle ways where provided etc

Did you READ the thread?

Did you read the link earlier posted with researched data stating that up to 80% of car/cycle accidents are established as the MOTORIST fault EXCLUSIVELY.

This is getting really and truly tiresome . I wish people would pay attention to FACTS and just try to suppress the brain farting , these threads are a pure waste of time. On one hand you have people who KNOW what is going on, on the other you have walter mittys

magicbastarder

Richard308 wrote: »

Take steps to reduce your risks. Use cycle ways where provided etc

the problem is that these two sentences are frequently mutually exclusive.

cajonlardo

Lumen wrote: »

I've cycled something like 100,000km in the last ten years ish and the number of incidents I've had where I felt in real peril could be counted on the fingers of one hand.

The only case I've felt the need to report to the gardai was one the other day where a nutcase driving a car threatened to kill me and then attempted* to push me into oncoming traffic, but in that instance I had three witnesses who were happy to give evidence.

I'm not going to wire myself up every day for the sake of the very occasional loon.

As far as routine stuff goes, TBH I'd settle for aggressive enforcement against mobile phone use and regular social media campaigns teaching safe overtaking.

(* unsuccessfully, because I am awesome)

Grand so.

Tell the families of the 10 dead this year so far and we'll see how smug you feel. Don't make the mistake of confusing Luck with skill.
If you do indeed cycle in excess of 10K a year without incident I hope it continues safely for you. I probably cover the same mileage but was hit very hard twice - once by a car that failed to yield at a roundabout ( what can you do?) and another time by a stolen car. Pure luck - 2 minutes earlier or later and I'd have been home safe. Anyway, safe home.

Rezident

Time wrote: »

The question of contributory negligence on behalf of those who have been killed must also be asked. It is highly likely that in some of these cases the accident was partially the fault of the cyclist, who due to the laws of physics will always come off worse, this is an oft stick to beat motorists with; the "they're killing us mantra".

The fact is though that if cyclists act in a manner that results in them being responsible for accidents that are fatal, then this need to be highlighted so we can all learn from it. We all know some motorists are bad, but we must also accept that a not insignificant number of cyclists act with flagrant disregard to their own safety and the law, especially in the city centre.

If we don't learn from the mistakes that are made by both sides, we'll never actually improve anything.

I don't know about the people who were killed (apart from one which I will not discuss out of respect for his family) but I know about myself. I cycle in on the N11 every day, in the cycle lane, in a straight line to town.

Without even taking any turns or leaving the cycle lane there are 2-3 vehicles a week (minimum) that will risk maybe hitting/killing me, just to make a left turn five seconds quicker. Five seconds, that's what your life is worth to them. They're safe in a car, you're on a bike, so F. you!

They absolutely MUST accelerate up past me and then cut me off and brake right in front of me - regardless of how fast I am going. It's insanely dangerous. It's a good thing guns are not legal in Ireland because there have been moments when this has happened (Foxrock church for example) when, if I had a gun, they would definitely deserve to be shot at for nearly killing me. That is how it feels. I have a baby son who has nearly become fatherless because of these worsethancnuts. Something must be done. I'm thinking anti-vehicle caltrops - arm cyclists with caltrops and dangerous drivers gets them in their wheels. There must be a deterrant. It's war, and they are killing us. That will get the Guards attention, since dead cyclists evidently do not.

Lumen

cajonlardo wrote: »

Grand so.

Tell the families of the 10 dead this year so far and we'll see how smug you feel. Don't make the mistake of confusing Luck with skill.
If you do indeed cycle in excess of 10K a year without incident I hope it continues safely for you. I probably cover the same mileage but was hit very hard twice - once by a car that failed to yield at a roundabout ( what can you do?) and another time by a stolen car. Pure luck - 2 minutes earlier or later and I'd have been home safe. Anyway, safe home.

I'm not smug. I'm saying that in my experience cycling is not dangerous and that I'm not going to carry around a camera for a year or so at a time to capture one incident.

You're the one leveraging dead people as a debating strategy whilst presumably knowing little or nothing of the circumstances of their deaths. Cop on.

MediaMan

I'm trying hard to understand why it is that whenever someone suggests that some cyclists might need to improve their awareness and behaviour on the road, as part of the overall solution to make the roads safer for themselves and others, they are accused of being anti-cyclist or being on a rant.

I'm as worked up as anyone about the treatment of cyclists on the road and the levels of death and injury that's happening. But to deny that cyclists as well as motorists have to up their game is missing seeing the whole picture, and missing seeing all the elements of the solution.

degsie

Total segregation of trucks/buses from cars, cars from cyclists and cyclists from pedestrians is the only way to stop the carnage.

Macy0161

Bearing in mind there haven't been inquests yet, a significant number of the deaths recently have been reported as cyclists being hit from behind by vehicles travelling in the same direction. How this points to anything other than the person driving the vehicle is beyond me!

ganmo

Rezident wrote: »

I don't know about the people who were killed (apart from one which I will not discuss out of respect for his family) but I know about myself. I cycle in on the N11 every day, in the cycle lane, in a straight line to town.

Without even taking any turns or leaving the cycle lane there are 2-3 vehicles a week (minimum) that will risk maybe hitting/killing me, just to make a left turn five seconds quicker. Five seconds, that's what your life is worth to them. They're safe in a car, you're on a bike, so F. you!

They absolutely MUST accelerate up past me and then cut me off and brake right in front of me - regardless of how fast I am going. It's insanely dangerous. It's a good thing guns are not legal in Ireland because there have been moments when this has happened (Foxrock church for example) when, if I had a gun, they would definitely deserve to be shot at for nearly killing me. That is how it feels. I have a baby son who has nearly become fatherless because of these worsethancnuts. Something must be done. I'm thinking anti-vehicle caltrops - arm cyclists with caltrops and dangerous drivers gets them in their wheels. There must be a deterrant. It's war, and they are killing us. That will get the Guards attention, since dead cyclists evidently do not.

ahh maybe you should educate yourself about the gun laws.
While your at it read section 9 of http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1990/act/12/enacted/en/print#sec9

jimmycrackcorm

Richard308 wrote:

As a cyclist I have to say we have to be more responsible. It's not always the cars fault and we have to be responsible for our own safety and actions also. I have seen so many poorly skilled cyclists, zero anticipation of danger, poor judgement. A single road death is too much. I've seen a close friend suffer a severe brain injury and debilitated for life. What's needed is more respect and carefulness by all road users. Take steps to reduce your risks. Use cycle ways where provided etc

I'm a cyclist who stops at the red lights I do see idiotic behaviour by cyclists buy my considered opinion is that it's not that different to seeing pedestrians crossing o Connell bridge as buses are turning right from Westmoreland street or the incessant cars running red lights. It's mostly a perception that cyclists are behaving dangerously when it's practically not. I consider those pedestrians being generous because I'm stopped every day watching them.

Nobody gives out about how dangerous it is for car drivers to run red lights, because nothing happens to them. Yet there's constant sniping at cyclists for going though them.

I'd be willing to put a bet though trust none of the cyclists killed this year so far were at fault.

Chips Lovell

Lumen wrote: »

I've cycled something like 100,000km in the last ten years ish and the number of incidents I've had where I felt in real peril could be counted on the fingers of one hand.

Same here. I cycle between 10,000km and 15,000km annually, including 5,000km (ish) of commuting in heavy traffic and I've only had a tiny number of genuine close calls. Videoing every cycle would be complete overkill.

flatface

The key is education. First for us, we need a clear understanding of the causes of recent deaths on Irish roads so we can focus on reducing those risks. At the moment without those facts even this community is not sure how to react and address cyclist deaths nevermind others not so cycle minded.

A good study into the causes, and how the deaths could be avoided is necessary. Following that we could work on a reaction for instance:

IF the 2 main causes are 1. 60% Cyclists on country roads obeying ROTR and hit by car, 2. 30% Left turning HGV - then all else is noise. It's not your Dublin commute, high viz, headphones or RLJ or whatever. Media and online discussion must be constantly brought back from the noise to the stat causes.

I would like to see some new RSA ads focused on the results. With my guesses above 1. Ads showing the main country road scenarios and facts making it very clear situations that drivers have caused to kill cyclists. 2. Showing a HGV turning left rolling over a dummy on a bicycle in a cyclelane. Ways to avoid putting yourself in this position.

In the absence of information, I apologise for my assumptions in my examples and hope to be clearly educated by the real stats ASAP.

Jawgap

Is it really as 'bad' as people make out?

......what I'm wondering is if bad driving, bad cycling or a failure to appreciate probabilities and causation are really the issue?

Personally, I think it's simply a function of more people cycling, more often and for over greater distances......meaning that cycling is - at least - as safe as it was last year, or any year of the last five.

I've not noticed or perceived cycling being less safe recently; certainly not around Dublin anyway.

Just because a headline number bounces up, it doesn't mean the activity has become more risky or more hazardous.

As for radical action? Annoying people will definitely garner attention but I doubt it will result in any meaningful change.

The only thing I'd like to see (apart from some infra-structure improvements) is more vigorous and persistent enforcement of existing road traffic legislation - if you think driver behaviour is the root cause of the issue then only when people feel that their licence is genuinely at risk will they modify their behaviour.

Tenzor07

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

Same here. I cycle between 10,000km and 15,000km annually, including 5,000km (ish) of commuting in heavy traffic and I've only had a tiny number of genuine close calls. Videoing every cycle would be complete overkill.

Good for you, but it's always the one time you don't have a camera where an incident will occur where you'll be far better off for having a record of the incident, especially if it's a hit and run where you may end up badly injured...

I think they are a great idea, especially for someone who commutes a lot, 5k a year for example..

Macy0161

Jawgap wrote: »

Is it really as 'bad' as people make out?

......what I'm wondering is if bad driving, bad cycling or a failure to appreciate probabilities and causation are really the issue?

I don't think it's really as bad as some would make out, as someone who already cycles. But I think the headline figures do put people off from starting at the very least.

I have to say, as I mentioned in the earlier post, it's the rear enders that genuinely concern me. Putting yourself in a poor position is one thing, but just cycling on a road and someone coming up behind not looking?

Jawgap wrote: »

The only thing I'd like to see (apart from some infra-structure improvements) is more vigorous and persistent enforcement of existing road traffic legislation - if you think driver behaviour is the root cause of the issue then only when people feel that their licence is genuinely at risk will they modify their behaviour.

This is it. But look at the resistance to any enforcement. Just this morning, read comments on articles about the enforcement of the speed limit in the port tunnel.

Lumen

Out of idle curiosity I went to the RSA website, wondering what sort of advice they were giving. The information is not presented in a fashion that would persuade anyone to change their behaviour.

But I wonder whether people really go looking for advice anyway? I mean, we have a constant stream of threads moaning about how lethal cycling is (despite evidence to the contrary), but are there instances of people coming on this forum to start a thread of the sort "How do I stay alive?"? I can think of a couple, amongst thousands.

And boards is fun, sort of. It's certainly engaging. You get a personal response from a bunch of randomers! For your exact problem that's unique to you and cannot possibly be answered by a quick Google search! Lap it up snowflakes!

I think people just don't go seeking advice from strangers about road safety. Which set of wheels should I buy? Sure! How do I improve my skill? No way!

Maybe social media is the answer. Those 1.5m overtaking campaigns have certainly popped up a bit on my feeds. And judging by the response the "1.5" bit has certainly been taken on board, although a few people are still having problems with the units.

But then maybe that's because I am Facebook friends with a bunch of experienced cyclists.

Chips Lovell

Tenzor07 wrote: »

Good for you, but it's always the one time you don't have a camera where an incident will occur where you'll be far better off for having a record of the incident, especially if it's a hit and run where you may end up badly injured...

Going by that logic, I should also put a camera on the dashboard of my car or wear a bodycam any time I go for a late night kebab, lest some drunken eejit assault me.

The point is not that there is a risk of any of the above happening, but that the risk is so minute there's little point in recording everything.

Tenzor07

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

Going by that logic, I should also put a camera on the dashboard of my car.

Yes, good idea also, I've done the same, will help provide any evidence to my insurer should an incident with another road user occur, and avoid any denial of liability against my favour...

Leroy42

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

Going by that logic, I should also put a camera on the dashboard of my car or wear a bodycam any time I go for a late night kebab, lest some drunken eejit assault me.

The point is not that there is a risk of any of the above happening, but that the risk is so minute there's little point in recording everything.

True, but it's hardly a major inconvenience and cameras are relatively cheap these days. I use one and have found that if there is any incident the other party is normally more civil when I point out my camera.

Have I had many? no. A few dangerous events, mostly cars passing me on the right before breaking hard to make the next left, close passes etc.

Having the footage to hand means it doesn't become a he said/she said opinion piece. Does it make the driver apologise, well very rarely, but it means that I can, or possibly could, cut out most of the nonsense arguments that would be put forward by the driver if there was an accident. Things like "I came out of nowhere", "He was riding recklessly" etc.

I do agree though, that the constant talking about it does make the problem appear worse, IMO, than it actually is. In saying that, it only takes one instance to really scare the willies out of you on a bike as you are so exposed. But rather than shy away from cycling, people should seek out others to cycle with. Be that a cycle club or simply a few mates. It is easy for motorist to try to intimidate a single cyclist, much harder with a group of two of more. Sure you might still get the beeping and some abuse shouted at you, but it is invariably safer.

Harrybelafonte

Leroy42 wrote: »

I do agree though, that the constant talking about it does make the problem appear worse, IMO, than it actually is.

+1

mr spuckler

MediaMan wrote: »

I'm trying hard to understand why it is that whenever someone suggests that some cyclists might need to improve their awareness and behaviour on the road, as part of the overall solution to make the roads safer for themselves and others, they are accused of being anti-cyclist or being on a rant.

I'm as worked up as anyone about the treatment of cyclists on the road and the levels of death and injury that's happening. But to deny that cyclists as well as motorists have to up their game is missing seeing the whole picture, and missing seeing all the elements of the solution.

but i don't think that's what's happened, at least not here. we all agree that some cyclists could and should improve their behaviour but in general the debate is about trying to understand what's actually causing the incidents and address that. as has been stated multiple times (and using one example of poor cyclist behaviour) red light jumping by the cyclist is cited as a cause in a tiny number of collisions.
surveys of actual collisions have shown the majority to be primarily caused by the motorist.

so putting that stat together with the fact that in a collision the motorist is highly unlikely to be injured while the cyclist is highly likely to suffer serious injury, the conclusion is that much more focus needs to be placed on motorist behaviour than on the cyclists side in order to stop the worrying number of deaths.

if that trend changes or if we get findings from recent incidents that demonstrate the cyclist was considerably at fault then i can guarantee there will be a debate here as to how we can educate cyclists in general on these specific risks.

mr spuckler

Lumen wrote: »

Out of idle curiosity I went to the RSA website, wondering what sort of advice they were giving.

what was the line on rte news yesterday regarding the proposed MPDL? paraphrasing - "the RSA had no comment"

fat bloke

Jawgap wrote: »

Is it really as 'bad' as people make out?

Well, it's hard to argue with the bald figure of ten dead since Christmas. Sure, you can argue that statistically speaking the risk is low but, as an activity to encourage your kids to do (and I do - every day) when you think about it...

If ten people had died playing football, or Irish dancing. -Would I still be sending my kids out to participate?

Would I fcuk.

Macy0161

mr spuckler wrote: »

what was the line on rte news yesterday regarding the proposed MPDL? paraphrasing - "the RSA had no comment"

It was something along those lines, or "no opinion at this stage". No money in MPDL - missing a trick, as they could plaster it all over a builders hi viz vest!

Jawgap

fat bloke wrote: »

Well, it's hard to argue with the bald figure of ten dead since Christmas. Sure, you can argue that statistically speaking the risk is low but, as an activity to encourage your kids to do (and I do - every day) when you think about it...

If ten people had died playing football, or Irish dancing. -Would I still be sending my kids out to participate?

Would I fcuk.

Actually, it's very easy to argue with it.

These are, effectively, "Black Swan" events - they get attention and so they lodge in the mind.....

......or put it this way, ain't no one writing a headline that says "10,000 people cycled in Dublin today. No fatalities."

Btw, if you think just because no one dies on the GAA, soccer or rugby pitches of the country that somehow there's no danger, maybe think again......about 1 in 700 are genetically predisposed to SADS, and most of of those are neither detected nor screened before taking part in competitive sport, which has been associated with an increased risk of a SADS death occuring.

......and in the interests of transparency, my lads cycle (MTB'ers, unfortunately) and have played rugby since they were 7......

Chuchote

woody1 wrote: »

but nobody passes a runner or a walker that close, or someone on a horse or one of those sulky- horse and cart things .

This is worth pointing out to RSA and asking them to make an ad saying it?

uptherebels wrote: »

You want safer roads for cyclists the country needs a proper integrated public transport network. But due to successive governments kicking that can down the road for so long it is now at the stage that so much work needs to be done to achieve it, it will never happen.

The one thing that will make it happen is already on the go: many, many people getting out of cars and on to bikes.

And the Core Bus Corridors plan is (slowly) moving into action - this will mean a series of suburbs-to-town bus routes that are bus routes for the whole way, not stop-and-start gappy things like the current routes; and a series of orbital bus routes that circle the city and connect with the into-town ones.

ED E wrote: »

Monday 5th to Sunday 12th:

• Spot any motoring offence big or small that may in any way endanger cyclists
• Take registration plate if possible
• Lo Call 1890 205 805 (Save it in your phone now)

This will generate an influx of complaints to Castlebar which will then land on the desks of all the Supers.

Anyone willing?

I'm in. Is there an email address to send footage to?

PaulieC

Interestingly, Minister Ross is moving very quickly to bring in 'urgent' legislation to allow the 2023 Rugby World Cup bid go through.

If only dead cyclists were as important as sporting tournaments.

07Lapierre

fat bloke wrote: »

Well, it's hard to argue with the bald figure of ten dead since Christmas. Sure, you can argue that statistically speaking the risk is low but, as an activity to encourage your kids to do (and I do - every day) when you think about it...

If ten people had died playing football, or Irish dancing. -Would I still be sending my kids out to participate?

Would I fcuk.

Well, whatever you do, don't let your kids go to sleep!

http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Sudden-infant-death-syndrome/Pages/Introduction.aspx

Cycling is SAFE.

Jawgap

07Lapierre wrote: »

Well, whatever you do, don't let your kids go to sleep!

http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Sudden-infant-death-syndrome/Pages/Introduction.aspx

Cycling is SAFE.

Slightly off topic.......but it reminds me of being at a funeral when someone asked how the deceased died and the reply came, "peacefully, his wife came in and found him in his chair by the fire with a book in his lap......"

There followed a moment of quite reflection before someone said "That's it, I'm never reading again!!!!"

Jawgap

PaulieC wrote: »

Interestingly, Minister Ross is moving very quickly to bring in 'urgent' legislation to allow the 2023 Rugby World Cup bid go through.

If only dead cyclists were as important as sporting tournaments.

In fairness, legislation is not the answer - if it was we'd have no drink drivers.

There's boat loads of legislation - if anything allowing the government and the minister to 'get away' with just passing more legislation is letting them off easy.

The minister to criticise is Fitzgerald, she needs to be telling the Commissioner to ring the head of the Traffic Corps (when she finds her phone ) and get them out there and active.......and while the minister is at, she could throw a few shekels in their direction so they can expand the TC.

archer22

In fairness I don't think this should be made a them and us issue....there are many really good drivers out there who take great care passing cyclists and its only fair to give them credit.
The problem is the sizeable minority of ignorant c**ts who think the roads are their private property and they can do what they like on them without any consideration for others.
They pose a mortal threat to us cyclists and pedestrians and are one of the causes of higher insurance premiums for other drivers.
Its those that need to be sorted out and put off the roads for life for everyone's sake.

tomasrojo

On the subject of "you'll run out of luck eventually", that reminded me of the graph yesterday that showed Ireland with <10 deaths per 100 million km travelled. Presuming that still holds approximately, even a pretty frequent cyclist would struggle to get up to the, say, 13 million km mark (approximately average distance covered before one death) in several lifetimes. Even Jep and Lumen (say, 10000km per year) would take 1300 years to get up to that total.

So, yes, your luck might run out in this lifetime, but not very likely. Of course, if it does run out, it's unimaginably awful. But that's also true of walking everywhere.

greenspurs

No enforcement = No change .

Simple.

Thud

The RSA annual international road safety conference is on today might have been a good occasion to raise the cycling safety topic (Shane Ross is even there), main topic is drink driving this year.

Missed opportunity

Shedite27

2 thoughts on the actions.

The 1.5m has a onus on the cyclist too, can't pass on the inside of a vehicle unless there's 1.5m of space (that's half a bus width) for you to get through. Are you willing to stay behind that car unless there's 1.5m clearance?

On bike lanes, there's not going to be a bike lane on every road, so how far out of your way would you be willing to travel to stay on segregated bike lanes? If your commute is 8k, would you add another 2/3k to stay on segregated bike lanes?

MediaMan

Jawgap wrote: »

In fairness, legislation is not the answer - if it was we'd have no drink drivers.

In general, I agree, but there are some cases where it IS at least part of the answer. One of those cases is where the general public and law enforcement have an interpretation of an existing law which is not valid, because they are not familiar with the situation from the perspective of the person that the law is supposed to protect.

The vast majority of drivers and the Gardai believe that as long as a driver passes a cyclist without hitting them that they are leaving enough space as laid down in current legislation. The only way to address this delusion is to define that safe distance in an objective way.

I know that close passing is not the primary cause of cyclist deaths and injuries, but it is part of a general pattern of carelessness towards cyclists. That overall carelessness IS one of the major factors, I believe, and these things really do need to be addressed (edit: primarily by enforcement, but with legislation where needed).

magicbastarder

Thud wrote: »

main topic is drink driving this year.

there'll be some awkward silence from the garda contingent.

Grassey

Shedite27 wrote:

The 1.5m has a onus on the cyclist too, can't pass on the inside of a vehicle unless there's 1.5m of space (that's half a bus width) for you to get through. Are you willing to stay behind that car unless there's 1.5m clearance?

Is it not proposed to be 1m in <50km zones? If traffic is stationery then I'd expect cyclists could still filter.

Shedite27 wrote:

On bike lanes, there's not going to be a bike lane on every road, so how far out of your way would you be willing to travel to stay on segregated bike lanes? If your commute is 8k, would you add another 2/3k to stay on segregated bike lanes?

I currently do add 3k each way on my commute to make the use of wider roads and/or good off road cycle sections or empty bus lanes. It's quicker than navigating awkward pinch points and badly (for cyclists) designed junctions, or filtering across multiple lanes.