If a bus tries to run you off the road...

07Lapierre

gk5000 wrote: »

GK5000 is a commuting cyclist - 20km daily so is not a "they". There is no point in you arguing further because you are completely in the wrong.

Unfortunately you have loads of company - or all the sport cyclists - who also seem to be unaware of the cycling laws - and flame anyone who dares state it.

The law states http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2012/si/332/made/en/print

47. (1) A pedal cyclist shall not drive a pedal cycle on a roadway in such a manner as to result in more than 2 pedal cyclists driving abreast, save when overtaking other pedal cyclists, and then only if to do so will not endanger, inconvenience or obstruct other traffic or pedestrians.

There are further laws on keeping left, and checking before you overtake as per common sense and normal traffic laws for cars and bikes.

I personally would give the bus driver the full benefit of the doubt.

Edit to add - Given the above and that you were not following the rules of the road it is fair to say you were cycling recklessly - reckless to yourself, the cyclists to your left, the bus and passengers...

Can you post a link to the law that states a bus driver can use his bus to intimidate another road user in such a way that could potentially injure ot kill that road user?

magicbastarder

gk5000 wrote: »

GK5000 is a commuting cyclist - 20km daily so is not a "they"
...
The law states http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2012/si/332/made/en/print

two things.
'they' is used in a gender neutral sense, to avoid assuming you're a he, or a she. it's simply a stylistic approach to acknowledging that we don't know which you are (or identify as).

secondly, your repeated fallback to 'the law' (albeit applied in a cackhanded fashion) is quite bemusing given that you don't feel the law applies to you when it comes to red lights.

is a bus driver actually engaged in an overtaking manouevre if a bus - in a bus lane - passes a cyclist in an offroad cycle path? by your logic, they are - even though there is no legal or sensible requirement for them to leave their own lane to complete the 'overtake'.
by your reasoning, anyone in a bus lane passing cyclists on an offroad cycle path is performing an overtake, and thus should indicate to warn other road users of this - even though their positioning and lane use does not change.

gk5000

07Lapierre wrote: »

Can you post a link to the law that states a bus driver can use his bus to intimidate another road user in such a way that could potentially injure ot kill that road user?

We have statements from one side - who as it turns out was not following the law and cycling recklessly. We have no information from the bus driver, but as I stated - I would give him the benefit of the doubt. Professional bus drivers generally do not run people off the road or attempt to kill people. I personally find them to be predictable.

Weepsie

gk5000 wrote: »

47. (1) A pedal cyclist shall not drive a pedal cycle on a roadway in such a manner as to result in more than 2 pedal cyclists driving abreast, save when overtaking other pedal cyclists, and then only if to do so will not endanger, inconvenience or obstruct other traffic or pedestrians.

...

You're embarrassing yourself here with your very, very wrong interpretation of this bit of legislation.

By this logic, the cyclists in the lane are all breaking the law as they are obstructing the faster moving cyclist.

Why are you so up on this law (and wrongly interpreting it), but so for going through red lights last week?

Again, the OP had the lane long before the bus was behind them anyway, so the bus has to treat them as regular, albeit slower moving traffic. I'd let it go if I were you, as you're just wrong.

07Lapierre

gk5000 wrote: »

We have statements from one side - who as it turns out was not following the law and cycling recklessly. We have no information from the bus driver, but as I stated - I would give him the benefit of the doubt. Professional bus drivers generally do not run people off the road or attempt to kill people. I personally find them to be predictable.

I'm watching the movie "Martian" at the moment....appropriate as your clearly on a different planet to the rest of us!

Weepsie

gk5000 wrote: »

We have statements from one side - who as it turns out was not following the law and cycling recklessly. We have no information from the bus driver, but as I stated - I would give him the benefit of the doubt. Professional bus drivers generally do not run people off the road or attempt to kill people. I personally find them to be predictable.

Why are you so insistent that he pulled out dangerously in front of a bus. That's never been suggested.

There is nothing reckless if they took the lane in a safe manner, held the lane, maintained their pace, did their usual checks. You've made up your mind and gone away with some mad idea.

Weepsie

gk5000 wrote: »

He was overtaking other cyclists recklessly. Cyclists same as other road users must keep on the left, and then check/signal/manouver....
He may have been in the bus lane, but he should not be if there was space on the left, and he should not leave the space on the left unless it is safe to do so. So whatever way you look at it he was being reckless and inconsiderate.

The driver was alerting to his recklessness etc.

Okay I missed this. Again, you've no idea of this. They just said they were cycling in the bus lane. They never said when they entered it. They may very well have gone into the bus lane when it was clear and safe to enter.

I've bolded a bit, as it's both wrong, and portrays an ignorance reserved for people who insist cyclists should pay "road tax"

gk5000

Weepsie wrote: »

Why are you so insistent that he pulled out dangerously in front of a bus. That's never been suggested.

There is nothing reckless if they took the lane in a safe manner, held the lane, maintained their pace, did their usual checks. You've made up your mind and gone away with some mad idea.

I never said he pulled out - just the "inconvenience or obstruct other traffic"as per the law. He was overtaking other cyclists.

Weepsie

Ahem:

gk5000 wrote: »

No the cyclist was overtaking (the other slower cyclists) recklessly without having ascertained a space to pull into and also impeding other road users ( the bus) - cycling without due consideration to other road users.
.

What you don't get either is, s/he is traffic. IF anything the bus is reckless. It should see the slower moving traffic ahead, and reduce speed accordingly. Beeping the horn is wrong in every respect here as you are too by my reckoning.

gk5000

magicbastarder wrote: »

two things.
'they' is used in a gender neutral sense, to avoid assuming you're a he, or a she. it's simply a stylistic approach to acknowledging that we don't know which you are (or identify as).

secondly, your repeated fallback to 'the law' (albeit applied in a cackhanded fashion) is quite bemusing given that you don't feel the law applies to you when it comes to red lights.

is a bus driver actually engaged in an overtaking manouevre if a bus - in a bus lane - passes a cyclist in an offroad cycle path? by your logic, they are - even though there is no legal or sensible requirement for them to leave their own lane to complete the 'overtake'.
by your reasoning, anyone in a bus lane passing cyclists on an offroad cycle path is performing an overtake, and thus should indicate to warn other road users of this - even though their positioning and lane use does not change.

I interpreted "they" the usual ad-hominess slur from the gang here like Weepsies "an ignorance reserved for people who insist cyclists should pay "road tax" - and just pointed out that I am a commuting cyclist (and further note the usual MOD inaction)



I would not post a thread about being nearly run down by a driver/cyclist going through a green light while I was running a red ( BTW, I do not run reds - but yield on them) - and blame everybody else. I object to and am trying to highlight the incorrect sense of entitlement and incessant whingeing which I believe are not in the best interests of cyclists.



The law quoted is for cyclists, not buses obviously.

Weepsie

gk5000 wrote: »

I interpreted "they" the usual ad-hominess slur from the gang here like Weepsies "an ignorance reserved for people who insist cyclists should pay "road tax" - and just pointed out that I am a commuting cyclist (and further note the usual MOD inaction)

To be honest that wasn't a slur. That was an observation based on your claiming something to be illegal or reckless based on an entirely wrong interpretation of the law and ignoring that the bike, while in the bus lane, is just like any other traffic in that lane and deserves to be treated as such.

You said you go through red light. I would consider that reckless, no matter how you think it isn't. There is nothing in the OP's post that is reckless, or illegal other than the bus driver's reaction based on how it is described.

Why are so nigh on ensuring this one particular law is (wrongfully) applied, but in another thread you can decide when and when a law isn't??

CramCycle

MOD VOICE: gk5000 take a break from this thread.

gk5000

Let's be straight here.
- You (collective) are defending a guy who blocks/obstructs buses.
(what would the anti cycle lobby make of that - even if you don't see it)


- He's not much of a sports cyclist if he can't keep ahead of a Dublin Bus


- Wonder if he's got a rear reflector - or realises the law requires it - doubt it


;-)

at1withmyself

You claim to be a daily cyclist and it worries me that you think this way, between this and the other thread, you clearly need to reaquaint yourself with the rules of the road.

gk5000 wrote: »

Let's be straight here.
- You (collective) are defending a guy who blocks/obstructs buses.
(what would the anti cycle lobby make of that - even if you don't see it)


- He's not much of a sports cyclist if he can't keep ahead of a Dublin Bus


- Wonder if he's got a rear reflector - or realises the law requires it - doubt it


;-)

AndrewJRenko

defrule wrote: »

Are we allowed to create a YouTube channel dedicated to posting videos of dangerous drivers? Or do we need to block out othe licence plates?

Yes, as others have already done. Reg plates are not personal data.

dermabrasion

This crap will just keep on happening because there are no consequences
A few Sundays back, I was crossing East Link going north towards East Wall Rd with my 12 yr old daughter following my wheel. As I entered the roundabout, I pointed to my exit as there was a tourist bus coming from my left along North Wall Quay. When I'm on the roundabout (and the bus has yet to enter it), but instead of yielding, it keeps on keep going, I have swerve to my right and emergency break to avoid being run-over. My 12yr old daughter was on her bike just behind me has to do the same. I screamed at the top of my lungs, and other people in cars are mouth-opened the other side see just what happened. The bus driver waves and keeps going.
I got the reg, the make, the company, the website, the phone number the whole lot. I called Garda Traffic watch gave details of time, place and have heard absolutely nothing. Gone a month now. I called and emailed the company and they will not acknowledge my contacts.
I am upset as I cannot fathom what level of disgusting sub-human bilious scum thinks its 'grand' to nearly run-over a child on a bike and give a wave.
But there is no consequence. I'm not surprised as this Garda district did nothing on a previous incident when I was knocked down by a hit-and-drive-off.

mrcheez

gk5000 wrote: »

Let's be straight here.
- You (collective) are defending a guy who blocks/obstructs buses.
(what would the anti cycle lobby make of that - even if you don't see it)


- He's not much of a sports cyclist if he can't keep ahead of a Dublin Bus


- Wonder if he's got a rear reflector - or realises the law requires it - doubt it


;-)

Your understanding of the issue is as bad as your understanding of basic English grammar.

Give up and accept you have no idea what you are talking about.

CramCycle

MOD VOICE: gk5000 has been asked not to post again in this thread and as such has no response to give, and as such, its unfair to goad the poster into a discussion.

07Lapierre

Yep cycle lanes are safer: https://twitter.com/righttobikeit/status/1032417171987558400?s=21

1st thought was I'd have sat up there and held back until I noted the lack of indicators on the Nissan. Pet hate of mine is non use of indicators even when I'm driving :mad:

AndrewJRenko

dermabrasion wrote: »

This crap will just keep on happening because there are no consequences
A few Sundays back, I was crossing East Link going north towards East Wall Rd with my 12 yr old daughter following my wheel. As I entered the roundabout, I pointed to my exit as there was a tourist bus coming from my left along North Wall Quay. When I'm on the roundabout (and the bus has yet to enter it), but instead of yielding, it keeps on keep going, I have swerve to my right and emergency break to avoid being run-over. My 12yr old daughter was on her bike just behind me has to do the same. I screamed at the top of my lungs, and other people in cars are mouth-opened the other side see just what happened. The bus driver waves and keeps going.
I got the reg, the make, the company, the website, the phone number the whole lot. I called Garda Traffic watch gave details of time, place and have heard absolutely nothing. Gone a month now. I called and emailed the company and they will not acknowledge my contacts.
I am upset as I cannot fathom what level of disgusting sub-human bilious scum thinks its 'grand' to nearly run-over a child on a bike and give a wave.
But there is no consequence. I'm not surprised as this Garda district did nothing on a previous incident when I was knocked down by a hit-and-drive-off.

Terrible, though not unusual, and it highlights the need for the Liffey Cycle Route again.

You could try getting a camera, which gives you some more leverage with Gardai and employers.

Just on that incident on the roundabout dermabrasion posted about I have seen a similar incident successfully prosecuted very recently. I recall posting about it at the time but unfortunately the piece in the paper was scant on detail as to how it was detected or reported and if cameras were a factor.