Cycling on paths and other cycling issues (updated title)

kenmm

SeanW wrote: »

. But the cynics among us might suggest all this whataboutery by cyclists to distract from the appalling behaviour of cyclists is somewhat self-serving. :rolleyes:

There is a lot of whstaboutary on these threads, from ALL angles. But one thing that wind me up is the grouping/homogenisation of groups of people.

It's not the same cyclists that are defending the dick head cyclists.


Re police clampdowns, I think a series of time boxed campaigns targeting specific issues would be great and might raise awareness amongst different segments of road user. Targeting RLJ by all modes of transport, close passing, bad parking etc etc

Up in NI they recently done one for close passing where they targeted close passing and pulled good and bad passers, extending that across different problem behaviour would be great.


Shame they can't be arsed tho..

AndrewJRenko

breezy1985 wrote: »

I didnt call for a clampdown on cyclists I called for a clampdown on breaking red lights.

A few years back I worked right by one of the new cycle superhighways and when it was built the police spent a couple of days at a busy junction on and off at rush hour and pulled every red light breaker and car parked in the bike boxes in a drive to raise awareness of the laws and I thought it was a good idea.

Did they pull every driver who broke the speed limit on that stretch? And every driver who had their phone in their hand too?

SeanW wrote: »

Nothing special about you, I'm afraid, dealing with lawbreakers on two wheels is just a hazard you have to live with as an Irish pedestrian.

Funnily enough, there really does seem to be something special about yourself and Tauren, who seem to live is some kind of Bermuda Triangle parallel universe that the rest of us just don't seem to see, like your 'menacing with intent' cyclists on the pavement and your mostly unavoidable road deaths.

This seems to be a good distance from the reality of the roads/paths in Ireland.

SeanW wrote: »

Indeed. Like virtually all of the speeding that Andy drones on about. And the majority of other crimes that do not result in death.

That's correct - the majority of crimes do not result in deaths.

Unfortunately, the corrollory is not true. The majority of road deaths do relate to traffic law offences; speeding; drink/drug driving, phone use.

SeanW wrote: »

You must think everyone here is a special kind of stupid, that anyone would believe this.

Most speed enforcement is done by means of civilian contractors like GoSafe, and more is done by permanent cameras (like at the Port Tunnel), all of this being much easier because motor vehicles have registration plates. Gardai cannot even do speed enforcement without being stationed somewhere and using speed monitoring equipment. They are totally separate problems.

It's incredible that you actually think people are stupid enough to believe this nonsense.

No, we don't "know this very well" because it's a load of cobblers. But the cynics among us might suggest all this whataboutery by cyclists to distract from the appalling behaviour of cyclists is somewhat self-serving. :rolleyes:

Yes, most speed enforcement is done by cameras.

That doesn't change the fact that a Garda who chooses to pull a cyclist at any time could instead be pulling a motorist, given that it is motorists that kill people on the roads each week.

That's a fact. There is no option not to believe a fact. It's a fact.

kenmm wrote: »

There is a lot of whstaboutary on these threads, from ALL angles. But one thing that wind me up is the grouping/homogenisation of groups of people.

It's not the same cyclists that are defending the dick head cyclists.

If this is aimed at me, I'd challenge anyone to point out a post where I defended dickhead cyclists?

Charles Babbage

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

That doesn't change the fact that a Garda who chooses to pull a cyclist at any time could instead be pulling a motorist, given that it is motorists that kill people on the roads each week.

The Garda should pull lawbreakers of all sorts.

It's the broken window syndrome, crime flourishes when criminals are ignored even if they aren't the most serious crimes. The lout that is allowed cycle on the footpath at 15 will then be driving a car unaccompanied two or three years later.

TaurenDruid

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

If this is aimed at me, I'd challenge anyone to point out a post where I defended dickhead cyclists?

Defended? I can't remember. Can't be arsed going back through this thread again.

Deflected, changed the subject, indulged in whataboutery?

All. The. Time.

kenmm

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

If this is aimed at me, I'd challenge anyone to point out a post where I defended dickhead cyclists?

RE The defending dicks- not you AJR, (badly written maybe if you read it that way?).. my point is most of the people who cycle like a dick are not going to be boards.ie members at all. i.e. people are right to call out crappy cycling behaviour, it's not like it doesn't happen, but not much point having a go at cyclist here by the very fact that they participate in an online cycling community shows that they are more like to not be cycling around like some if the examples here (ie there are threads where safety tips are shared, discussions on how to improve facilities etc etc).

breezy1985

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Did they pull every driver who broke the speed limit on that stretch? And every driver who had their phone in their hand too?

As for the phones I could not tell from across the street where I worked
The campaign was specifically related to raising awareness of the rules surrounding the new cycle lanes so there was no speed cameras from what I could see.

Duckjob

kenmm wrote: »

RE The defending dicks- not you AJR, (badly written maybe if you read it that way?).. my point is most of the people who cycle like a dick are not going to be boards.ie members at all. i.e. people are right to call out crappy cycling behaviour, it's not like it doesn't happen, but not much point having a go at cyclist here by the very fact that they participate in an online cycling community shows that they are more like to not be cycling around like some if the examples here (ie there are threads where safety tips are shared, discussions on how to improve facilities etc etc).

I think this post is quite close to the truth.

I see plenty of people on bikes acting the dick, I certainly don't defend them - they're dicks, pure and simple.

The problem arises on thread like this when anecdotes about encountering these dicks are continually posted that seem to be directed at the cycling folk on here as if they are expected to apologise / take responsibility for the bad behavior of other people they have never met. They don't.

1 sheep2

TaurenDruid wrote: »

But still. Nobody died, eh?

Well, you're right, that's the criterion for being able to complain about it, according to zealots like Renko on here.

Stark

1 sheep2 wrote: »

Well, you're right, that's the criterion for being able to complain about it, according to zealots like Renko on here.

or SeanW. Though the bar is set a lot lower than "nobody" in the motorists case.

monument

1 sheep2 wrote: »

Well, you're right, that's the criterion for being able to complain about it, according to zealots like Renko on here.

Stark wrote: »

or SeanW. Though the bar is set a lot lower than "nobody" in the motorists case.

Play the ball and not the poster.

— moderator

AndrewJRenko

TaurenDruid wrote: »

Defended? I can't remember. Can't be arsed going back through this thread again.

Thanks for confirming.

breezy1985 wrote: »

As for the phones I could not tell from across the street where I worked
The campaign was specifically related to raising awareness of the rules surrounding the new cycle lanes so there was no speed cameras from what I could see.

Amazing to see the selective level of detail that you picked up from across the streed.

1 sheep2 wrote: »

Well, you're right, that's the criterion for being able to complain about it, according to zealots like Renko on here.

I've never suggested any criteria for people being able to complain about anything. Complain away, and expect others to fill in the gaps that you leave.

breezy1985

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Thanks for confirming.

Amazing to see the selective level of detail that you picked up from across the streed.


I've never suggested any criteria for people being able to complain about anything. Complain away, and expect others to fill in the gaps that you leave.

Sorry but its easy to see a speed gun or someone breaking a light from across a street it's not so easy to see a phone in a car and also impossible to hear what the police were saying.

By your standards only the highest crime should be stopped. So let's stop investigations into financial crime cause it takes away from drug related crime.

Thelonious Monk

kenmm wrote: »

RE The defending dicks- not you AJR, (badly written maybe if you read it that way?).. my point is most of the people who cycle like a dick are not going to be boards.ie members at all. i.e. people are right to call out crappy cycling behaviour, it's not like it doesn't happen, but not much point having a go at cyclist here by the very fact that they participate in an online cycling community shows that they are more like to not be cycling around like some if the examples here (ie there are threads where safety tips are shared, discussions on how to improve facilities etc etc).

I'm a dick, I cycle up to pedestrian crossings, come to a stop if there's people there, and then continue on when it's free to do so. I have done it many times at St Stephen's Green shopping centre too!
I don't see anything wrong with it as long as you remember pedestrians have right of way and don't go if there's anyone there.

kenmm

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

I don't see anything wrong with it as long as you remember pedestrians have right of way and don't go if there's anyone there.

Not my definition of a dick then.

I look forward to the next chapter of pedantry I feel is coming to this thread!

TaurenDruid

kenmm wrote: »

Not my definition of a dick then.

I look forward to the next chapter of pedantry I feel is coming to this thread!

Nor mine.

Continuing through when the lights have changed and there are people waiting to cross, though? While cycling the wrong way down the one-way-street, so knowing the pedestrians are all looking towards the ongoing cars? That's being a dick.

SeanW

kenmm wrote: »

There is a lot of whstaboutary on these threads, from ALL angles. But one thing that wind me up is the grouping/homogenisation of groups of people.

It's not the same cyclists that are defending the dick head cyclists.

I hear what you're saying, but I've found it difficult not to generalise about cyclists given how many of them:

• Are extremists.
• Tell you that cyclists are a hive mind and that we should generalise them.

A good example is below:

what_traffic wrote: »

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.

Conor Faughan may be a person who regularly uses a bicycle, even daily, but he's not really a "cyclist" because he does not have the "correct" politics for a real "cyclist."

Given how many cyclists seem to hold similar views to that poster, it is very difficult sometimes not to agree.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I rarely see Gardai on foot patrol anymore, but for those that are - yes, they are capable of pulling up law-breaking cyclists, just as they are capable of pulling up the 98% of drivers who break urban speed limits.

Doesn't a Garda require speed monitoring equipment to determine a motorists' speed? How often do Gardai on foot patrol carry that kind of gear around? And how does the Garda on foot patrol catch up to a speeding motorists considering they are on foot and the driver is "speeding" away?

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Funnily enough, there really does seem to be something special about yourself and Tauren, who seem to live is some kind of Bermuda Triangle parallel universe that the rest of us just don't seem to see.

Well this part is simply a lie. This thread was started by a pedestrian, neither myself nor Tauren, and there were a few other pedestrians who also shared their experiences of having to negotiate with two-wheeled lawbreakers, usually followed by your good self jumping down their throat with "but motorists kill people" in one case it took you only six minutes to jump down a pedestrians throat with your deflections. I also posted a Liveline recording where yet more people talked about their experiences sharing footpaths with two-wheeled lawbreakers.

So the idea that just me and Taruen have noticed the behaviour of cyclists is just a straight up lie.

This seems to be a good distance from the reality of the roads/paths in Ireland.

You have shown your determination to deflect from the fact that Irish cyclists are totally unregulated and it shows. That does not change the fact that Irish cyclists are totally unregulated, and it shows in their appalling behaviour.

Yes, most speed enforcement is done by cameras.

That doesn't change the fact that a Garda who chooses to pull a cyclist at any time could instead be pulling a motorist, given that it is motorists that kill people on the roads each week.

That's a fact. There is no option not to believe a fact. It's a fact.

Do I hear the sound of goalposts shifting? Your claim throughout this thread has been very clear. Cracking down on lawbreakers on bikes would detract from the supposedly much needed enforcement for motorists.

Any implication of this kind is misleading. Any implication that an appropriate level of enforcement targeting motorists (whatever level that might be) and a modicum of enforcement against two-wheeled lawbreakers are mutually exclusive is false, especially given that enforcement methods for both modes differ.

If this is aimed at me, I'd challenge anyone to point out a post where I defended dickhead cyclists?

Does the Chewbacca defense count?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwdba9C2G14

Just spout a bunch of irrelevant crap to deflect and distract.

kenmm

SeanW wrote: »

but I've found it difficult not to generalise about cyclists given how many of them:

That's how you see things, but it's not really relevent (I mean your inability to stop generalising)?

It also suggest an angle of pre judgment- IE no matter how well someone is cycling, you already have them marked as a 'problem' due to some negative experiences in the past (it's true that some cyclists also do the same with other road users).

This cannot be healthy, as it means there is little anyone can say or do to change these preconceptions.

TaurenDruid

kenmm wrote: »

That's how you see things, but it's not really relevent (I mean your inability to stop generalising)?

It also suggest an angle of pre judgment- IE no matter how well someone is cycling, you already have them marked as a 'problem' due to some negative experiences in the past (it's true that some cyclists also do the same with other road users).

This cannot be healthy, as it means there is little anyone can say or do to change these preconceptions.

Actually, since I started participating in this thread, when driving, I've become more aware of cyclists and the hazards that might take them into my path. Like the securicor van parked outside the shops on Westland Row forcing bikes out from the cycle lane, for example.(*)

I've welcomed the new cycle lane on the quays even though it's a loss of space for cars, too.

I'm giving someone driving lessons at the moment and drill into them the need to give cyclists clearance when overtaking, and to not overtake unless there is clearance. And to beware their unpredictable nature.

They can still get the eff out of my way when I'm walking down the footpath, though, and the look of surprise on their faces when they realise I'm not getting out of their way is always amusing. Almost as incredulous looking as me, when I'm stopped at lights at a junction and see someone on a bike not even slow, as they break the red.

* As a logical person, I recognise it makes no sense to have delivery vans and security vans park on the opposite side. Also as a logical person, I have to wonder why the cycle lane wasn't put in as a contraflow on the other side of the road.

Stark

TaurenDruid wrote: »

They can still get the eff out of my way when I'm walking down the footpath, though, and the look of surprise on their faces when they realise I'm not getting out of their way is always amusing.

Where is this happening out of curiosity? I walk around Dublin city centre frequently and only on occasion encounter someone cycling on the footpath. Footpaths are barely wide enough for a couple of people walking most of the time (a bigger issue for pedestrians than a few cyclists on the footpath imo).

Had a flatmate giving out about constantly encountering cyclists on the footpath between Palmerstown and Chapelizod until I informed him that it was shared footpath/cycleway.

TaurenDruid

Stark wrote: »

Where is this happening out of curiosity?

Pembroke Street, Baggot Street, Leeson St, Stephen's Green, Grafton St, King St, Stephen Street (though there it's usually cycling against the one-way system).

Thelonious Monk

TaurenDruid wrote: »

Pembroke Street, Baggot Street, Leeson St, Stephen's Green, Grafton St, King St, Stephen Street (though there it's usually cycling against the one-way system).

I work in that area and would walk those streets every day, and never noticed this problem. You must have a target on your back.

SeanW

Sean O'Casey footbridge? I've never used it in peak times and did not have to negotiate with at least 4 two-wheeled lawbreakers. Even in the off-peak, you can expect to see lawbreakers playing zoom-zoom on it.

07Lapierre

Lawbreakers everywhere!

https://twitter.com/bicycletting/status/1297177711249678336?s=21

SeanW

But nobody died ...

AndrewJRenko

SeanW wrote: »

Sean O'Casey footbridge? I've never used it in peak times and did not have to negotiate with at least 4 two-wheeled lawbreakers. Even in the off-peak, you can expect to see lawbreakers playing zoom-zoom on it.

Did they have engines on their bikes? How are they managing to play the zoom zoom games without an engine, or do they make the engine noises themselves?

breezy1985

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Did they have engines on their bikes? How are they managing to play the zoom zoom games without an engine, or do they make the engine noises themselves?

I like to make X-wing sounds when I cycle

Spook_ie

https://twitter.com/CitizenW0lf/status/1294638504257957888

Pinch Flat

SeanW wrote: »

Sean O'Casey footbridge? I've never used it in peak times and did not have to negotiate with at least 4 two-wheeled lawbreakers. Even in the off-peak, you can expect to see lawbreakers playing zoom-zoom on it.

I visited derry this year on my stayction and walked over the peace bridge. It reminded me of the sean o'casey except - guess what - it has a sign specifically permitting cyclists and pedestrians. This works out perfectly. I'd use the sean o'casey a good bit and have zero issues with pedestrians and cyclists sharing it. Or perhaps a solution is to built another bridge at huge expense for cyclists only along side it?

Thelonious Monk

SeanW wrote: »

Sean O'Casey footbridge? I've never used it in peak times and did not have to negotiate with at least 4 two-wheeled lawbreakers. Even in the off-peak, you can expect to see lawbreakers playing zoom-zoom on it.

I used to cycle over that daily. I would make sure I didn't bother any pedestrians though.

micar

Spook_ie wrote: »

https://twitter.com/CitizenW0lf/status/1294638504257957888

He has a trilogy jacket on......he's a fu(king cyclist.

He's a complete idiot.