Vehicles blocking Cyclists passing

AndrewJRenko

frankythefish wrote: »

I do think there should be extra controls around cyclists. A huge number breaking red light there. Whether lack of understanding of road rules or disregard for rules of road and safety of pedestrians etc it is poor

Far more motorists break red lights than cyclists, funnily enough


http://kerrycyclingcampaign.org/but-all-drivers-break-the-lights/


Do you think we should be diverting Garda resources away from dealing with the death toll on the road caused by motorists to chase cyclists?

Avatar MIA

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Do you think we should be diverting Garda resources away from dealing with the death toll on the road caused by motorists to chase cyclists?

This is a ridiculous position.

Should garda resources be diverted away from drug and gang crime to deal with motorists?

frankythefish

It can t be swept under carpet. Reality is that cyclists cannot be allowed to ignore rules of road. Same for motorists etc etc.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Far more motorists break red lights than cyclists, funnily enough


http://kerrycyclingcampaign.org/but-all-drivers-break-the-lights/


Do you think we should be diverting Garda resources away from dealing with the death toll on the road caused by motorists to chase cyclists?

AndrewJRenko

Avatar MIA wrote: »

This is a ridiculous position.

Should garda resources be diverted away from drug and gang crime to deal with motorists?

Does it not reflect reality? We have a finite set of Garda resources. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect those who are calling for extra Garda resources to deal with cyclists to suggest where these resources should come from - and in particular, to indicate if this will mean a reduction of Garda resources dealing with motorists - the ones who kill people on our roads each week.


On the broader philosophical question, it is worth thinking about the vast amounts of state resources that go into getting motorists to stop killing people - Gardai, RSA, Courts, legislation etc.

AndrewJRenko

frankythefish wrote: »

It can t be swept under carpet. Reality is that cyclists cannot be allowed to ignore rules of road. Same for motorists etc etc.

If 'same for motorists' is your standard or measure, I think cyclists are doing just fine. Given that we have 60% -82% of motorists breaking speed limits, and that we're 2nd worst of the European league table of mobile phone abuse while driving, it is clear that motorists in general treat the Rules of the Road as some kind of optional extra.


Where do you want Gardai to focus their resources?

magicbastarder

frankythefish wrote: »

I do think there should be extra controls around cyclists. A huge number breaking red light there. Whether lack of understanding of road rules or disregard for rules of road and safety of pedestrians etc it is poor

You'll probably find that there's broad consensus here that lack of enforcement of the law in general is a major issue.

Eamonnator

In the current edition of Cycling Plus, there's an article about Chris Boardman, ex professional cyclist, commentator and "Cycling and Walking Commissioner for Greater Manchester".
In the article, Boardman talks about streets being comfortable and safe places for cycling.
He says, talking about options "Policing is one. Streets need to be comfortable and safe places, and West Midlands Police have been amazing. They don't think in terms of 'motorists' and 'cyclists', to them it's 'people' and 'behaviour'. You don't need to mention the mode of travel, you don't need to tribalise road-users, you just start with those who can do the most harm and work your way down. Then, if you've got time, you'll get down to the lowest priority and deal with the person who rode their bike through a red light or on the pavement"

billie1b

Greentree_uk wrote: »

Thought it would be good to have a thread highlighting blocking of cyclists. its not suitable for the near miss thread. I've noticed it happen a lot recently especially busses. I understand if a vehicle is turning left but for vehicles travelling forward it only hinders traffic. the 1st example here is not the best as it is a bit of a squeeze at this section and it needs to be addressed but here's the video to start the thread.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8w46BUsUfF8

First thing you learn when you’re learning to drive is always keep as close to the left side of the lane as possible, if bikes want to filter they can go around on the outside of said vehicle instead of undertaking and risking danger to themselves

magicbastarder

billie1b wrote: »

First thing you learn when you’re learning to drive is always keep as close to the left side of the lane as possible

Eh, no.

billie1b

magicbastarder wrote: »

Eh, no.

Eh yes, you’re supposed to keep to the left side of the road, they reckon a metre from the kerb is the most acceptable and when at a junction you also have to take up your position for your intentions, ie turning left be no more than 1 metre closer to the kerb, driving straight on you take the same position or a position a little closer to the middle and turning right you position yourself about a metre from the white line.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

billie1b wrote:

First thing you learn when you’re learning to drive is always keep as close to the left side of the lane as possible, if bikes want to filter they can go around on the outside of said vehicle instead of undertaking and risking danger to themselves

Maybe that's what you were taught, but it's absolutely incorrect.

"Undertaking" is also used incorrectly here. Cyclists dont undertake stationary traffic. Why is it so difficult to leave a little room when the situation allows it?

Making cyclists go on the outside of stationary traffic is hazardous and therefore idiotic.

Fighting Tao

That’s what happens when generations were thought to drive by their mammy and daddy.

billie1b

Fighting Tao wrote: »

That’s what happens when generations were thought to drive by their mammy and daddy.

I would have loved for Mammy and Daddy to have been around to teach me how to drive or even to see me pass my test but unfortunately 20 years ago it was at my expense to the ISM to learn how to drive.

magicbastarder

billie1b wrote: »

Eh yes, you’re supposed to keep to the left side of the road, they reckon a metre from the kerb is the most acceptable and when at a junction you also have to take up your position for your intentions, ie turning left be no more than 1 metre closer to the kerb, driving straight on you take the same position or a position a little closer to the middle and turning right you position yourself about a metre from the white line.

you said 'as close as possible'. now you're saying a metre.

anyway, from the rules of the road (maybe you could send this to your instructor in the irish school of motoring):

Make sure you drive your vehicle far enough to the left to allow traffic to safely pass or overtake on the right, but not so far to the left that you are driving on a cycle lane or blocking or endangering cyclists or pedestrians.

http://www.rsa.ie/Documents/Learner%20Drivers/Rules_of_the_road.pdf
page 51

magicbastarder

speaking of blocking pedestrians, check this twitter thread out for one where things go very off piste very quickly:
https://twitter.com/Dub14Blockers/status/1101796262733664257

stateofflux

i would never go up the inside on a bus...or any large vehicle unless there is a defined cycle lane and plenty of space.

If i am at a red traffic light with little space and a large artic lorry or bus behind me i will break the red light (if road clear) . i will never assume the truck/bus driver can see me especially when there is no space

AndrewJRenko

magicbastarder wrote: »

speaking of blocking pedestrians, check this twitter thread out for one where things go very off piste very quickly:
https://twitter.com/Dub14Blockers/status/1101796262733664257

The level of entitlement is off the scale - 'not my fault there is no parking', so I'll just block people with disabilities and parents with buggies etc.

Eamonnator

^^^^^^^^
WOW.

That did get nasty very quickly.

magicbastarder

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

The level of entitlement is off the scale - 'not my fault there is no parking', so I'll just block people with disabilities and parents with buggies etc.

it wasn't the sense of entitlement which stuck out at me in the responses!

CramCycle

That really went straight to 90 in the responses, really weird and uncomfortable where some peoples heads go. I suspect the F.C. and the R.A. will have new PROs by their next AGM.

TallGlass

Fian

I cycle through rosemount twice daily on my commute. Fortunately I don't have a helmet/handlebar cam!

Strange twitter thread...

Fighting Tao

They sound like lovely representatives for the area.

magicbastarder

residents associations usually are. my dad was elected treasurer for the one in the estate i grew up in; he left soon enough as he said it was waaay too political and petty.
reminded me of that (i think kissinger?) quote along the lines of 'the reason student politics are so vicious is precisely because the stakes are so low'.

Redhighking

stateofflux wrote: »

If i am at a red traffic light with little space and a large artic lorry or bus behind me i will break the red light (if road clear) . i will never assume the truck/bus driver can see me especially when there is no space

Instead of breaking the red light, why not dismount and wait for the bus/truck to pass you ?

Fighting Tao

magicbastarder wrote: »

residents associations usually are. my dad was elected treasurer for the one in the estate i grew up in; he left soon enough as he said it was waaay too political and petty.
reminded me of that (i think kissinger?) quote along the lines of 'the reason student politics are so vicious is precisely because the stakes are so low'.

Good people in septic clubs and associations usually don’t stick around.

I can handle political and petty. However, this one seems to be quite extreme. They must be trying to devalue properties in the area to move their families in or something.

Weepsie

magicbastarder wrote: »

residents associations usually are. my dad was elected treasurer for the one in the estate i grew up in; he left soon enough as he said it was waaay too political and petty.
reminded me of that (i think kissinger?) quote along the lines of 'the reason student politics are so vicious is precisely because the stakes are so low'.

I know of a RA that got the addresses of four roads changed by deed poll to a let's say a more upmarket address. (It might be the same one). I think a lot of the residents rolled their eyes believing there to be absolutely nothing wrong with the address.

TheChizler

Weepsie wrote: »

I know of a RA that got the addresses of four roads changed by deed poll to a let's say a more upmarket address. (It might be the same one). I think a lot of the residents rolled their eyes believing there to be absolutely nothing wrong with the address.

I've heard of changing your name by deed poll, but... :rolleyes:

magicbastarder

nah, wasn't where i grew up so, the names of the streets have changed since they were built in the 70s.

Effects

Weepsie wrote: »

I know of a RA that got the addresses of four roads changed by deed poll to a let's say a more upmarket address.

Happened near my father's house too. I'd say it helped resale values.