Near Misses Volume 2 (So close you can feel it)

AndrewJRenko

Seaswimmer wrote: »

Absolutely. I guess we all handle things in our own way. If it helps Andy to engage and pursue it then great. He may change a motorists behaviour. For me I dont think motorists are deliberately out to get me. Certainly if I felt there was a deliberate attempt to harm me then I would surely try and do something about it but I believe the vast majority of motorists are the same as the vast majority of cyclists.
We all suffer from laziness, incompetence and poor behaviour on the roads now and again regardless of our mode of transport. But 99% of the time it is not an issue..

"not deliberate" won't be much consolation to those you leave behind. There are different legal and moral expectations of driver behaviour and cyclist behaviour for very good reasons, given the very different levels of danger involved.

AndrewJRenko

07Lapierre wrote: »

I just feel righttobike really, REALLY relishes the confrontation and he does seem to go out of his way to confront the drivers at every opportunity.

Not having a camera wont make his daily cycling safer, but ive viewed a lot of his footage on Twitter and a lot of the roads he cycles on look very cyclist unfriendly. I often wonder if their are safer routes he could use, but he chooses these routes as they offer more opportunities for "Good footage".

You see a very small selection of his cycling so you can't jump to conclusions about "every opportunity".

And so what if he relishes confrontation? That doesn't mean that confrontation is wrong.

It's not the roads he uses that are cyclist unfriendly. It is the drivers on those roads that are cyclist unfriendly.

Steoller

cletus wrote: »

On what basis is your assertion about dangerously unqualified drivers being licenced made?

Admittedly, personal experience, from the boss who ran his van over a row of ducks and didn't realise it despite two passengers telling him to watch out, or the neighbour who drove well into his nineties despite not being able to make out road-signs, and several others.

But besides that, the existence and extent of drink driving, hit and runs, and single car collisions suggests to me that there is a large cohort people out there driving vehicles they cannot be in control of.

Not to mention the drivers out there on their Amnesty driving licenses.

cletus

Steoller wrote: »

Admittedly, personal experience, from the boss who ran his van over a row of ducks and didn't realise it despite two passengers telling him to watch out, or the neighbour who drove well into his nineties despite not being able to make out road-signs, and several others.

But besides that, the existence and extent of drink driving, hit and runs, and single car collisions suggests to me that there is a large cohort people out there driving vehicles they cannot be in control of.

Not to mention the drivers out there on their Amnesty driving licenses.

OK, the Amnesty thing is a red herring. It happened in 1979, 42 years ago, and at the time it accounted for 45,000 people. At this juncture there would likely be much fewer of them on the road.

You have given two examples of poor driving, and alluded to others. You have made no comment about how many examples of good driving you might see on any given day. The last time I cycled to work, I had a ridiculously close pass by a bus driver. It stands out to me because of how bad it was. I did not extrapolate this out to all bus drivers, or all drivers around Naas, or any other subset.

With regards to fatalities etc. the last time this was discussed, I showed data that demonstrated that driving in Ireland was certainly no worse than many other EU countries, and better than many.

So, again, is there any actual data that supports your contention that there is largenumbers of dangerously unqualified drivers being issued licences in this country.

This is not to say there isn't poor driving, but we need to be careful with the language we use and how we present our arguments.

07Lapierre

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

You see a very small selection of his cycling so you can't jump to conclusions about "every opportunity".

And so what if he relishes confrontation? That doesn't mean that confrontation is wrong.

It's not the roads he uses that are cyclist unfriendly. It is the drivers on those roads that are cyclist unfriendly.

Of course i can jump to conclusions...this is the internet !

Look you make good points. he's free to record what he wants, confront who he wants and use whatever roads he wants.

I may not be able to jump to conclusions, but i can express an opinion. In my Opinion he certainly likes confronting motorists who do wrong. I feel he should record the incidents and report them to the Gardai. Its my opinion that confronting drivers at the next set of lights only reaffirms the negative image most motorists wrongly have of most cyclists.

expectationlost

so did righttobike accept the fine?

Tombo2001

hesker wrote: »

I know the road in question extremely well. It’s not particularly dangerous. It depends on the 12 year old and their level of road craft.
That particular merge point would be seen the length and breadth of the country

Very few 12 year olds have any level of road craft.

A major part of the issue here is that many of them have parents who dont cycle.

The default for most parents, including those who cycle, is that its safer for kids to cycle on the footpath
(which to be fair, is accurate. Car collisions are the number one cause of death for kids).

As such, many 12 year olds have only ever cycled on the footpath.

At some point, when they are old enough to venture off with their pals, they will go out on the road.

With little or no experience of cycling in traffic.

Tombo2001

07Lapierre wrote: »

Of course i can jump to conclusions...this is the internet !

Look you make good points. he's free to record what he wants, confront who he wants and use whatever roads he wants.

I may not be able to jump to conclusions, but i can express an opinion. In my Opinion he certainly likes confronting motorists who do wrong. I feel he should record the incidents and report them to the Gardai. Its my opinion that confronting drivers at the next set of lights only reaffirms the negative image most motorists wrongly have of most cyclists.

Is that not the lesser point, though.

He has reported 40 incidents, of which 20 have led to prosecution.

Its like saying, I dont care if Paul Kimmage is right about Lance, he's still an asshole and I dont like him.

CramCycle

expectationlost wrote: »

so did righttobike accept the fine?

As far as I know he is not accepting it. Personally I think he should appeal it if he doesn't agree but I get the impression he is letting it run to court based on his tweets. Having looked at the video several times, and knowing how gopro can distort distance to someone not used to using them, I would be happy to merge as he did comfortably but a viewer without knowledge of go pros might say its a flip of a coin on whether he had enough time or space. It's a fine line and I accept that many people might not think it was appropriate. If I was fined over it, provided the van got hammered with fines and points as well, I'd accept the fine.

hesker

I’ve looked at it several times there now again to see if my view has changed. The rearward view gives a better perspective I think. His arm doesn’t go out until the car has passed and he almost immediately is crossing the dotted line. From when his arm goes out to when the van draws level with him is about 2-3 secs.

robinph

That the van has the time to make the move to the left in retribution for him daring to merge means there was plenty of space and that the van knew they were there.

hesker

I’m done arguing. The Gardai found fault with both road users. It’s easy to spin the argument that the cyclist is being victimised but the video won’t support his appeal in my opinion in this instance. But you never know how these things will play out

AndrewJRenko

07Lapierre wrote: »

Of course i can jump to conclusions...this is the internet !

Look you make good points. he's free to record what he wants, confront who he wants and use whatever roads he wants.

I may not be able to jump to conclusions, but i can express an opinion. In my Opinion he certainly likes confronting motorists who do wrong. I feel he should record the incidents and report them to the Gardai. Its my opinion that confronting drivers at the next set of lights only reaffirms the negative image most motorists wrongly have of most cyclists.

I'm not sure why we'd be too worried about negative images. Do householders worry about negative images of burglars when confronting or reporting burglars to Gardai?

CramCycle

hesker wrote: »

I’m done arguing. The Gardai found fault with both road users. It’s easy to spin the argument that the cyclist is being victimised but the video won’t support his appeal in my opinion in this instance. But you never know how these things will play out

It will play out in one of two ways. 1. the Garda will show up and the judge will uphold the fine (or add more to it), or 2. the Garda won't show up and throw it out.
Or a variation of this, none of which will make him right on paper, and the Garda, if petty will be delighted either way as he will have wasted a day dealing with it, which has to be worth more than the fine based on the minimum wage.

Legally, its a flip of a coin how it goes in court and depending on how much you cycle, how much you are used to gopros and how you take that info in and what was said to you before you watch it, you will either agree or disagree with him, I can see why you would take either side but hands up, right or wrong, I think based on the space and speed given, I would have made that merge without concern, and maybe I am wrong. Either way, it's much of a muchness the garda fining him is a win either way for the Garda if it was petty and if it wasn't then he was either right or wrong.

Morally, it doesn't matter if he was right or wrong. We are not vigilantes and the van should have not put him in that danger, even if it was unintentional (which I think upon review it possibly was unintentional, just poor driving and spatial awareness).

expectationlost

if the judge looks at the satellite view the cyclist should win

CramCycle

expectationlost wrote: »

if the judge looks at the satellite view the cyclist should win

I should have caveated, as someone whose local judges judgements would have been classed as satire anywhere else in the modern world, I could be completely wrong. My favourite is the poster who put a video up on here where the driver who hit a cyclist blamed the sun in her eyes. The video of the incident, the time of day, the location, all showed the sun was behind her at the time but such things are never taken into consideration.

I wouldn't trust a judge in Ireland to look past much past the end of their nose but I would love to be proven wrong.

AndrewJRenko

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

That's your choice. For me, it is absolutely cathartic to engage, even more so to make Garda reports with video evidence.

I'm curious, does this crusader cathartism hold when you are behind the wheel of a car, involving day to day road rage, or do you leave your cape behind you when you dismount the saddle?

AndrewJRenko

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I'm curious, does this crusader cathartism hold when you are behind the wheel of a car, involving day to day road rage, or do you leave your cape behind you when you dismount the saddle?

Dunno where you got "road rage" from?


I don't have a dash cam, so I'd rarely have video evidence when behind the wheel. I did get the kids to record an adjacent driver using his phone on the M50 and reported it once.

Wait, do you NOT report dangerous drivers?

AndrewJRenko

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Dunno where you got "road rage" from?


I don't have a dash cam, so I'd rarely have video evidence when behind the wheel. I did get the kids to record an adjacent driver using his phone on the M50 and reported it once.

Wait, do you NOT report dangerous drivers?

Unlike you I have no cathartic desire for confrontation on our roads. I just get along safe as I can, I don't think road confrontation is productive to anyone. I rarely even blow the horn anymore. A lot of idiots out there, also a lot of unintentionally clueless people, I'm not perfect either.

Fighting Tao

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Unlike you I have no cathartic desire for confrontation on our roads. I just get along safe as I can, I don't think road confrontation is productive to anyone. I rarely even blow the horn anymore. A lot of idiots out there, also a lot of unintentionally clueless people, I'm not perfect either.

Part of the problem with most people going along minding your own business and not reporting is that some day that may not be enough to keep you safe from another driver who isn’t attentive or driving to the co dictions. They would probably be serial offenders but no one has reported them. It may be too late for you and your family.

07Lapierre

Fighting Tao wrote: »

Part of the problem with most people going along minding your own business and not reporting is that some day that may not be enough to keep you safe from another driver who isn’t attentive or driving to the co dictions. They would probably be serial offenders but no one has reported them. It may be too late for you and your family.

You remind me of the NRA in the USA. Everyone should have a gun "to protect our family".

I know i could be killed if i'm involved in a RTA while cycling. But the benefits of cycling far outweigh any such risk. Our roads are not that dangerous that we need to record every minute of our journeys.

Kander

07Lapierre wrote: »

You remind me of the NRA in the USA. Everyone should have a gun "to protect our family".

I know i could be killed if i'm involved in a RTA while cycling. But the benefits of cycling far outweigh any such risk. Our roads are not that dangerous that we need to record every minute of our journeys.

Not sure I would agree with this from my experience. What changed my mind and made me get a camera was after getting hit by three cars in the space of a month. All of them where the drivers fault and a complete case of sorry I didn't see you there.

Deleted User wrote: »

Unlike you I have no cathartic desire for confrontation on our roads. I just get along safe as I can, I don't think road confrontation is productive to anyone. I rarely even blow the horn anymore. A lot of idiots out there, also a lot of unintentionally clueless people, I'm not perfect either.

We need to point out that these people have the capability to kill others. If someone is stupidly wielding a knife and is going to hurt someone, I'll point it out. If someone is stupidly driving and is going to hurt someone, I'll point it out.

Wildly Boaring

Kander wrote: »

Not sure I would agree with this from my experience. What changed my mind and made me get a camera was after getting hit by three cars in the space of a month. All of them where the drivers fault and a complete case of sorry I didn't see you there.

I have no camera either.
I try to stay away from tech in general when cycling / running. Just about bring phone in back pocket for emergencies and to take the odd photo.

I suppose my view is, a camera isn't going to stop them hitting me.

Is your view that at least if they do you'll have evidence to get them prosecuted?
Do you have 2, one front and back? Or just back?

Kander

Wildly Boaring wrote: »

I suppose my view is, a camera isn't going to stop them hitting me.

Is your view that at least if they do you'll have evidence to get them prosecuted?
Do you have 2, one front and back? Or just back?

Yes primarily it was for the aftermath of any issue. Though since I got the camera I did find that drivers were more attentive in general and I had less close passes & smidsy.

I put the camera on top of my helmet so it sees what I see. I look like an absolute tool but it works.

Here is a previous post and link I put up from it: https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=111292229

07Lapierre

Kander wrote: »

Not sure I would agree with this from my experience. What changed my mind and made me get a camera was after getting hit by three cars in the space of a month. All of them where the drivers fault and a complete case of sorry I didn't see you there.

Did these incidents go to court?
Did you have video evidence?

CramCycle

I found the number of issues dropped when I got a camera. Now you can argue that is awareness from drivers or awareness from me, either way it works. I used to get the same years ago when I had a light on my helmet, people often mistook it for a camera. Now regrettably for some its a red rag but that is a tiny percentage. Overall, cycling is not dangerous, and hasn't been for many years. Could it be safer, yes, but is it dangerous, nope.

Kander

07Lapierre wrote: »

Did these incidents go to court?
Did you have video evidence?

Nope no camera at the time

I went to the Garda with the first two and was told there wasn't anything they could do without footage or witnesses. No injury to me to report on. It was 1. side swiped from a car filtering on to a roundabout I was already on and 2. car pulling out from a side road and not looking ended up half on the bonnet & half on the bike.

Gave up on reporting the third as it would have been the same as the previous two

magicbastarder

waiting to do a U-turn at a set of lights earlier, taxi in front of me. we got a general green, and the taxi driver (who was taking a right) pulled away from the lights and then had to stand on his brakes in the middle of the junction, because he only saw the cyclist coming the other direction at the last second. i completed my u-turn, and as i passed the cyclist passed some comment about him being invisible. 'huh?' 'that taxi driver who just nearly drove into you'
'what taxi driver?'

AndrewJRenko

Deleted User wrote: »

Unlike you I have no cathartic desire for confrontation on our roads. I just get along safe as I can, I don't think road confrontation is productive to anyone. I rarely even blow the horn anymore. A lot of idiots out there, also a lot of unintentionally clueless people, I'm not perfect either.

07Lapierre wrote: »

You remind me of the NRA in the USA. Everyone should have a gun "to protect our family".

I know i could be killed if i'm involved in a RTA while cycling. But the benefits of cycling far outweigh any such risk. Our roads are not that dangerous that we need to record every minute of our journeys.

I don't think anyone suggested that everyone HAS to record every minute of their journeys. But likewise, it might be wise for those who choose not to record their journeys to not take swipes at those who do. You can be fairly certain that not taking any action against dangerous drivers is not going to do anything to improve the situation on the roads.

Wildly Boaring wrote: »

I have no camera either.
I try to stay away from tech in general when cycling / running. Just about bring phone in back pocket for emergencies and to take the odd photo.

I suppose my view is, a camera isn't going to stop them hitting me.

Is your view that at least if they do you'll have evidence to get them prosecuted?
Do you have 2, one front and back? Or just back?

My view is that you don't wait for them to hit you or anyone else to get them prosecuted. I use two, front facing on my helmet and rear facing under the saddle. I don't think most drivers notice the one on my helmet at all.

Mercian Pro

Heading home from the Park this morning via the Ashtown Gate and going to Ashtown/Rathborne, I entered the Halfway House roundabout knowing that there were a couple of cars heading in towards town on the Navan Road. Unlike umpteen other times I've done the same, one of the cars didn't stop or even slow and would certainly have hit me if I hadn't braked and swung sharply to the right. We ended up side by side and I gestured to him to pull in which he did. I got the classic SMIDSY excuse and replied with a detailed description of what would have happened had I not taken evasive action followed by questions about his eyesight, mental capacity and general fitness to drive.

I suppose if I had it on camera, I probably would have rung the Garda but I let it go in the hope that he will remember the incident and my diatribe and will be more alert in future. Afterwards, thinking about it, I should have insisted he wait until a Garda arrived as that would be a lot more memorable even if it didn't result in a prosecution.