Cycling on paths and other cycling issues (updated title)

Duckjob

Marcusm wrote: »

In a sense you are right in that it is impossible to accurately judge their speed. However, they can be prosecuted for “cycling furiously” or “riding... without reasonable consideration” each of which could be used against a cyclist in excess of the speed limit. I imagine such furious cycling occurs infrequently although cyclists (like all road users) are regularly furious!

Yeah that's a catch-all like "driving without due care and attention", but the fact is it still makes no sense taking about people on bikes lack of adherence to a law that very specifically applies for motorised vehicles only.

It's just a dead horse being flogged by posters who, due to their mindsets against "cyclists", desperately want those laws to apply to people riding bikes for no rational reason. Not one cogent logical argument has been put forward here as to why they *should* apply to people riding bikes. Any that have been put forward have been dashed and in some cases undermined by the very posters trying to put them forward.

It's all purely grudge-based nonsense.

Duckjob

TaurenDruid wrote: »

In theory, absolutely. Can't see it working in practice, though, when some light sequences literally let two or three cars through at a time and that's it. That really removes any incentive to stop on amber. (Disclaimer: I've only started commuting by car regularly since covid and I know DCC have changed a lot of the signal timings since it started. It might be better when the original settings are restored).

What "incentive" do you need ? It's the law that you stop on amber unless it would be dangerous to do so.

Having said that, if the worst that was happening was drivers scooting through on a slightly stale amber, we'd be laughing, but the situation is far, far, far, worse than that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWC8sT06Zi0

kenmm

The whole time I lived in Dublin - it was always a bit of an amber gambler city. Last 5 years have been absolutely piss taking levels. I put it down to a combination of traffic massively increasing since the last recession and the cumulative effect (i.e. the slow decline until we reach the point where it is acceptable).

I catch myself drifting into that mindset as well from time to time, which is a pain as when I drive int he UK (for example) need to be really mindful as they actually enforce red light jumping (with cameras and traffic police).


EDIT: Its getting to the stage where in some places (Like the Becket bridge where there is a no left turn heading westbound from the convention centre) that its a red light jump + illegal move (i.e. red light for straight ahead, but cars sailing on ahead and illegally to the right). I got beeped the other day as I was walking across the road (on a green pedestrian).

07Lapierre

Marcusm wrote: »

In a sense you are right in that it is impossible to accurately judge their speed. However, they can be prosecuted for “cycling furiously” or “riding... without reasonable consideration” each of which could be used against a cyclist in excess of the speed limit. I imagine such furious cycling occurs infrequently although cyclists (like all road users) are regularly furious!

No. I'm just RIGHT.
You are also right. Cyclists can be dicks too and can ride recklessly/irresponsibly, which i agree can be very annoying/frustrating.

Stark

They really need to sort out mandatory hi-viz for houses.

https://twitter.com/DubFireBrigade/status/1293466867928104961

AndrewJRenko

Stark wrote: »

They really need to sort out mandatory hi-viz for houses.

https://twitter.com/DubFireBrigade/status/1293466867928104961

FFS - Someone managed to REVERSE into a house?

magicbastarder

maybe the handbrake was left off the car and it rolled?
though since the house was empty, someone may have abandoned a car there.

AndrewJRenko

magicbastarder wrote: »

maybe the handbrake was left off the car and it rolled?
though since the house was empty, someone may have abandoned a car there.

Would it not have taken considerable force to embed into a brick wall?

Or are Volvos that heavy and walls that flimsy these days?

breezy1985

Stark wrote: »

They really need to sort out mandatory hi-viz for houses.

https://twitter.com/DubFireBrigade/status/1293466867928104961

All I can see there is 4 firemen standing on front of a black screen

breezy1985

kenmm wrote: »

The whole time I lived in Dublin - it was always a bit of an amber gambler city. Last 5 years have been absolutely piss taking levels. I put it down to a combination of traffic massively increasing since the last recession and the cumulative effect (i.e. the slow decline until we reach the point where it is acceptable).

I catch myself drifting into that mindset as well from time to time, which is a pain as when I drive int he UK (for example) need to be really mindful as they actually enforce red light jumping (with cameras and traffic police).


EDIT: Its getting to the stage where in some places (Like the Becket bridge where there is a no left turn heading westbound from the convention centre) that its a red light jump + illegal move (i.e. red light for straight ahead, but cars sailing on ahead and illegally to the right). I got beeped the other day as I was walking across the road (on a green pedestrian).

In London you have amber before and after green so you get double amber jumping. Used to see people get beeped all the time for not going on amber

Losty Dublin

magicbastarder wrote: »

maybe the handbrake was left off the car and it rolled?
though since the house was empty, someone may have abandoned a car there.

The house was apparently seized by CAB. Make what you will of that.

07Lapierre

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

FFS - Someone managed to REVERSE into a house?

They should invent sensors that fit into the rear bumper of cars, that emit a hi pitched "Beep" noise if you reverse too close to an obstacle. Maybe fit cameras to the rear of the car? when reverse gear is engaged, a display on the dashboard would show the driver where/what they are reversing towards? :P

failing that, they could just do what most cyclists do when we want to know whats going on behind us and just look over your shoulder??

TaurenDruid

Duckjob wrote: »

What "incentive" do you need ? It's the law that you stop on amber unless it would be dangerous to do so.

Having said that, if the worst that was happening was drivers scooting through on a slightly stale amber, we'd be laughing, but the situation is far, far, far, worse than that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWC8sT06Zi0

Yes, it is the law, and it's ignored by cyclists all the time, too.

TaurenDruid

kenmm wrote: »

EDIT: Its getting to the stage where in some places (Like the Becket bridge where there is a no left turn heading westbound from the convention centre) that its a red light jump + illegal move (i.e. red light for straight ahead, but cars sailing on ahead and illegally to the right). I got beeped the other day as I was walking across the road (on a green pedestrian).

Has happened me too. I find stopping in front of the car, and loudly asking them what the problem is, and if they've forgotten their glasses, can be hilarious.

(Oh, wait, I'm a motorist - am I not supposed to be 1000% pro-motorist and 5000% anti-cyclist, according to some here? Oops!)

breezy1985

Duckjob wrote: »

What "incentive" do you need ? It's the law that you stop on amber unless it would be dangerous to do so.

Having said that, if the worst that was happening was drivers scooting through on a slightly stale amber, we'd be laughing, but the situation is far, far, far, worse than that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWC8sT06Zi0

Going through a green Man like that takes a serious level of scumbaggery especially on busy Dublin streets

TaurenDruid

07Lapierre wrote: »

They should invent sensors that fit into the rear bumper of cars, that emit a hi pitched "Beep" noise if you reverse too close to an obstacle. Maybe fit cameras to the rear of the car? when reverse gear is engaged, a display on the dashboard would show the driver where/what they are reversing towards? :P

failing that, they could just do what most cyclists do when we want to know whats going on behind us and just look over your shoulder??

Empty house, possibly re-possessed by CAB, jeep reversed in? Yeah, I'm guessing there's more to this particular story than an Andy-level "Stoopid drivers are stoopid, hyuk hyuk hyuk"...

TaurenDruid

breezy1985 wrote: »

Going through a green Man like that takes a serious level of scumbaggery especially on busy Dublin streets

It does. Cyclists doing it too, obviously.

Spook_ie

Stark wrote: »

They really need to sort out mandatory hi-viz for houses.

https://twitter.com/DubFireBrigade/status/1293466867928104961

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

FFS - Someone managed to REVERSE into a house?

magicbastarder wrote: »

maybe the handbrake was left off the car and it rolled?
though since the house was empty, someone may have abandoned a car there.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Would it not have taken considerable force to embed into a brick wall?

Or are Volvos that heavy and walls that flimsy these days?

breezy1985 wrote: »

All I can see there is 4 firemen standing on front of a black screen

According to gossip it was a CAB acquired house and was likely a targeted attack rather than an accident ( I stress GOSSIP ) but would seem likely

07Lapierre

TaurenDruid wrote: »

Empty house, possibly re-possessed by CAB, jeep reversed in? Yeah, I'm guessing there's more to this particular story than an Andy-level "Stoopid drivers are stoopid, hyuk hyuk hyuk"...

Well since we’re speculating... maybe the driver knew the house was empty and reversed into it as some kind of break in/ theft attempt? Either way... stupid is as stupid does!

kenmm

TaurenDruid wrote: »

Has happened me too. I find stopping in front of the car, and loudly asking them what the problem is, and if they've forgotten their glasses, can be hilarious.

(Oh, wait, I'm a motorist - am I not supposed to be 1000% pro-motorist and 5000% anti-cyclist, according to some here? Oops!)

Di(kheads are Di(kheads no matter how they travel.

It's impossible to mention on problem on the roads without dragging in others.

Spook_ie

07Lapierre wrote: »

Well since we’re speculating... maybe the driver knew the house was empty and reversed into it as some kind of break in/ theft attempt? Either way... stupid is as stupid does!

Well Jeeps on fire and Southside/City West seem to occur more often than you'd think

https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/tallaght-fire-shocked-locals-watch-6382057

07Lapierre

Spook_ie wrote: »

Well Jeeps on fire and Southside seem to occur more often than you'd think

https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/tallaght-fire-shocked-locals-watch-6382057

The Jeep is not on the pavement and is very well “Lit up”! What’s the problem?

Spook_ie

07Lapierre wrote: »

The Jeep is not on the pavement and is very well “Lit up”! What’s the problem?

Well according to some it needs HiViz as well as being lit up

07Lapierre

Spook_ie wrote: »

Well according to some it needs HiViz as well as being lit up

Not me... I’ve always said lights trump Hi-viz. or maybe your confusing Hi-viz with day glow?

07Lapierre

THIS is a cycle lane!

https://twitter.com/dlrcc/status/1293468539366641666?s=21

breezy1985

07Lapierre wrote: »

THIS is a cycle lane!

https://twitter.com/dlrcc/status/1293468539366641666?s=21

Amazing work. Off road level and path level is the only way to go. Anyone know what the junctions and on ramps looks like ?

Spook_ie

07Lapierre wrote: »

Not me... I’ve always said lights trump Hi-viz. or maybe your confusing Hi-viz with day glow?

Not going to go through it all again, but HiViz includes DayGlo and Reflective Panels/Stripes

Tea drinker

TaurenDruid wrote: »

Has happened me too. I find stopping in front of the car, and loudly asking them what the problem is, and if they've forgotten their glasses, can be hilarious.

(Oh, wait, I'm a motorist - am I not supposed to be 1000% pro-motorist and 5000% anti-cyclist, according to some here? Oops!)

We're all sharing the road so being courteous and helpful to each other makes the journeys better and less stressful. The "Racism" of each side is just toxic unhelpful sh1t.

SeanW

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I've heard him enough times before thanks - all in favour of cycling, once it doesn't impinge on the customers of his insurance business at all - all against very basic safety measures like the 30kmph limit around the city.

So, he's a cyclist, but not a "real" cyclist because he doesn't agree with you. Hmmm ...

Spook_ie wrote: »

Just the theory

I take back what I said about Ireland's driver licensing system being "barely functional" it's clearly not even that.

Stark wrote: »

They really need to sort out mandatory hi-viz for houses.

Once you see the word "Tallaght" you should immediately question whether this was accidental or deliberate. And this very much looks like the latter.

what_traffic

SeanW wrote: »

So, he's a cyclist, but not a "real" cyclist because he doesn't agree with you. Hmmm ...

He is a paid motoring lobbiest who also just happens to cycle to work. He respresents the interests of those (motorists) - who at end of the day pay his salary.