Cycling on paths and other cycling issues (updated title)

07Lapierre

ecoli3136 wrote: »

You don't have to believe me, but I don't break sored limits.

I acceptx most drivers do.

Again, why do you feel the need to defend cyclists using footpaths in a way they shouldn't? It's bizarre.

I have never defended cycling on the footpath, it's illegal.

07Lapierre

07Lapierre wrote: »

I have never defended cycling on the footpath, it's illegal.

Oh - so you wanted to point out that you think I break speed limits, but you agree with the substance of my post.

How very...odd. But you do you.

Hurrache

TaurenDruid wrote: »

I work in the city centre of Dublin, well I did until covid, and bicycles on footpaths are something I have to avoid literally every single day.

You're talking out your arse. You seem to think that none of us here have been working in Dublin city centre for decades and are firmly grounded in reality.

boardise

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Wait till you hear about cars, mate.

Assuming there might be a faint tinge of logic in your puny post -it seems to be that one set of misdemeanours can be excused on the basis that some other group are committing a worse set.

Ok - so can I go on a burglary spree and then claim that it's no big deal because at least I wasn't committing assaults or murders ?

A rather implausible basis for building a civil society I reckon. But then again why would I be surprised since many members of the cycling hordes seem to be as devoid of logic as they are of basic courtesy.

Thargor

Spook_ie wrote: »

You're assuming that HIPE , LA16 and PC16 forms are correctly filled in and collated. For people to state that cyclists do not kill or injure pedestrians is a stretch too far of any but the most blinkered and biased posters on Boards.ie

Lol what are you on about? You think there are unreported instances of cyclists killing people in this country? It would be a Joe Duffy/Irish Times/Journal.ie/Pat Kenny/Niall Boylon Show multi-week sh1t parade if that ever happened but thankfully its all in your head.

07Lapierre

ecoli3136 wrote: »

Oh - so you wanted to point out that you think I break speed limits, but you agree with the substance of my post.

How very...odd. But you do you.

I don't like cyclists cycling on the pavement.
I don't like cyclists breaking red lights.
I understand why the Gardai don't really enforce these laws.
Maybe if mor of us obeyed speed limits, Garda traffic could concentrate on more minor infringements?

It's bad enough that you break speed limits, but the fact you can't even admit it?
Man up!

boardise

magicbastarder wrote: »

gone?
it was garbage from the very first post.

No it wasn't .
It was after the first that the garbage began to be spewed.

LeinsterDub

Thargor wrote: »

Lol what are you on about? You think there are unreported instances of cyclists killing people in this country? It would be a Joe Duffy/Irish Times/Journal.ie/Pat Kenny/Niall Boylon Show multi-week sh1t parade if that ever happened but thankfully its all in your head.

Don't worry Spook will be along shortly with links to people who have said this because there is no possibility this is yet another of his strawman arguments

Hurrache

Thargor wrote: »

Lol what are you on about? You think there are unreported instances of cyclists killing people in this country? It would be a Joe Duffy/Irish Times/Journal.ie/Pat Kenny/Niall Boylon Show multi-week sh1t parade if that ever happened but thankfully its all in your head.

The cycling hordes are a powerful lobby.

To put it in terms these people associate with better, they're deep state, they have it covered up. A passenger in his car once told him.

AndrewJRenko

Spook_ie wrote: »

You're assuming that HIPE , LA16 and PC16 forms are correctly filled in and collated. For people to state that cyclists do not kill or injure pedestrians is a stretch too far of any but the most blinkered and biased posters on Boards.ie

I'm assuming that those forms are filled in with the same level of accuracy regardless of the nature of the collision. Are you suggesting that there there is some massive conspiracy or Bermuda Triangle of confusion around filling out these forms solely when it comes those people who are massacred by cyclists? And these issues are never picked up in any of the other sources of data used by the RSA, such as Garda reports? And no-one in the insurance industry or the press noticed this anomaly?

Really, you're just hilarious.

Charles Babbage wrote: »

No, it was a useful thread about an aspect of anti-social behaviour that was not being addressed. It was successfully derailed by whataboutery which implied that this particular anti-social behaviour should not be addressed because there also exists other anti-social behaviour. Mnay people seem to believe that they are entitled to their particular preference of anti-social behaviour because other people get away with things. But an eye for an eye makes us all blind.

I'd suggest a new thread which is confined to the matter at hand and not diluted by discussion of all the ills in society.

Could you point to any examples of the particular posts while implied that this particular anti-social behaviour should not be addressed please?

ecoli3136 wrote: »

What are you talking about? Drivers break speed limits (I don't) so I should be ok with cyclists cycling dangerously on foot paths?

Get a life.
.

Where did I say that you should be OK with anything?

I was simply responding to your 'bad name' theory to see if this also applies to motorists. Does it?

boardise wrote: »

Assuming there might be a faint tinge of logic in your puny post -it seems to be that one set of misdemeanours can be excused on the basis that some other group are committing a worse set.

Ok - so can I go on a burglary spree and then claim that it's no big deal because at least I wasn't committing assaults or murders ?

A rather implausible basis for building a civil society I reckon. But then again why would I be surprised since many members of the cycling hordes seem to be as devoid of logic as they are of basic courtesy.

Except these aren't burglary sprees, murders or assaults. They are traffic offences, one set of which lead to two or three people being killed each week on the roads, and one set of which don't.

I love the 'hordes' mention too. Don't forget lycra and road tax next time.

07Lapierre

07Lapierre wrote: »

It's bad enough that you break speed limits, but the fact you can't even admit it?
Man up!

I don't. It's very strange that you need to believe I do.

It also has nothing to do with cyclists using footpaths inappropriately.

Again, you do you, but it's odd, to say the least.

meeeeh

Hurrache wrote: »

The cycling hordes are a powerful lobby.

No they are not. They just about the most inefficient lobby around. Dominated by middle aged mostly white men with expensive bikes complaining about injustice suffered. As far as causes go it's way down the pecking order. Better hope that Greens go into government so their policies can improve your chances because there will be no cycling infrastructure if it is left to the cycling lobby.

AndrewJRenko

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I big long post

I know you put a lot of effort into this and your other posts (!), but would you not just agree that cyclists should not cycle dangerously on footpaths? That's all.

magicbastarder

meeeeh wrote: »

Dominated by middle aged mostly white men with expensive bikes complaining about injustice suffered.

my word, you can't give up with the stereotyping.
are you OK? do you need to speak to someone about it?

AndrewJRenko

ecoli3136 wrote: »

I know you put a lot of effort into this and your other posts (!), but would you not just agree that cyclists should not cycle dangerously on footpaths? That's all.

To help me to get to that conclusion, can you please tell me how often you see cyclists cycling dangerously on the footpath, with dangerously being the key word here?

Because for me, that is a very rare scenario.

07Lapierre

ecoli3136 wrote: »

I don't. It's very strange that you need to believe I do.

It also has nothing to do with cyclists using footpaths inappropriately.

Again, you do you, but it's odd, to say the least.

Cycling on the pavement is illegal. It's also relatively harmless (when compared to speeding).

Still, nice to know there's ONE motorist out their that never breaks the speed limit. Pity the 98% that do give you a bad name!

magicbastarder

meeeeh wrote: »

Dominated by middle aged mostly white men with expensive bikes

also, to set the record straight, i am not a middle aged mostly white man with an expensive bike.
i am a 'late youth' age fully white man (blindingly white in the winter) with an expensive bike. i am currently sporting a reasonably respectable farmer's tan.

meeeeh

magicbastarder wrote: »

my word, you can't give up with the stereotyping.
are you OK? do you need to speak to someone about it?

I'm actually generalising. Three out of four people cycling are men as reported by Cycling Ireland...

http://www.cyclingireland.ie/cycling-news-item/cycling-gender-gap-men-more-likely-to-cycle-daily-in-ireland/5555

You might get insulted but my point stands. There is even an acronym for it and used often (not by me, I think it's stupid). Cycling is a fashionable (I mean that in a good way) activity but not the one represented by people who attract much sympathy. You might think Andrew's repetitive novels, jokes about hi viz or dismissive attitude towards anyone who dares to criticise something work but the truth is they don't make one tiny bit of difference. If they did cycling infrastructure would be better here.

magicbastarder

meeeeh wrote: »

You might get insulted

don't worry about that, it takes a lot to get me insulted.

SeanW

magicbastarder wrote: »

you really have it in for cyclists, the above statement is verging on pathological.

Meh, I don't like sanctimonious hypocrites. You got me :rolleyes:

07Lapierre wrote: »

Cycling on the pavement is illegal. It's also relatively harmless (when compared to speeding).

Still, nice to know there's ONE motorist out their that never breaks the speed limit. Pity the 98% that do give you a bad name!

And yet in spite of all this speeding, Ireland remains near the bottom globally for road fatalities by every relative measure. Could it possibly be that Andy's 98% is not as decisive as might at first be expected?

ecoli3136 wrote: »

I know you put a lot of effort into this and your other posts (!), but would you not just agree that cyclists should not cycle dangerously on footpaths? That's all.

That would require him to do anything but engage in whataboutery. Indeed, if one were to use Andy's logic, one might consider going on a burglary spree and defending themselves with "but nobody died". I mean, that's the stock response to any criticism of lawbreaking cyclists, right?

meeeeh

magicbastarder wrote: »

also, to set the record straight, i am not a middle aged mostly white man with an expensive bike.
i am a 'late youth' age fully white man (blindingly white in the winter) with an expensive bike. i am currently sporting a reasonably respectable farmer's tan.

Again not among the groups that attract much sympathy lately. If you were a woman you might have a chance, teenage girl even better. You probably have more physical similarities with Maga crowd than any other effective cause.

LeinsterDub

meeeeh wrote: »

No they are not. They just about the most inefficient lobby around. Dominated by middle aged mostly white men with expensive bikes complaining about injustice suffered. As far as causes go it's way down the pecking order. Better hope that Greens go into government so their policies can improve your chances because there will be no cycling infrastructure if it is left to the cycling lobby.

The lockdown has shown all demographics want to cycle they are just too scared too. Which is often a reason people cycle on the footpath.

Pinch Flat

meeeeh wrote: »

Again not among the groups that attract much sympathy lately. If you were a woman you might have a chance, teenage girl even better.

Can you explain what sort of sympathy I can expect from someone driving a vehicle? Just curious of the group think here.

meeeeh

Pinch Flat wrote: »

Can you explain what sort of sympathy I can expect from someone driving a vehicle? Just curious of the group think here.

I am talking about getting cycling infrastructure. I don't think you need any sympathy from drivers except that they drive safely and respect the rules of the road.

I didn't think lobbying would be about what drivers feel I thought it's more about infrastructure.

magicbastarder

meeeeh wrote: »

You probably have more physical similarities with Maga crowd than any other effective cause.

weird. you're just as much of a bot as AJR is.

Hurrache

meeeeh wrote: »

No they are not. They just about the most inefficient lobby around. Dominated by middle aged mostly white men with expensive bikes complaining about injustice suffered. As far as causes go it's way down the pecking order. Better hope that Greens go into government so their policies can improve your chances because there will be no cycling infrastructure if it is left to the cycling lobby.

Ooh, we rich white guys have been exposed by a member of the frightened proletariat. Run....,eh, cycle I mean..

I mean this is a new one from the cycling mob being told they're poor because they cycle. Get your story straight proles.

Spook_ie

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I'm assuming that those forms are filled in with the same level of accuracy regardless of the nature of the collision. Are you suggesting that there there is some massive conspiracy or Bermuda Triangle of confusion around filling out these forms solely when it comes those people who are massacred by cyclists? And these issues are never picked up in any of the other sources of data used by the RSA, such as Garda reports? And no-one in the insurance industry or the press noticed this anomaly?

Really, you're just hilarious.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.tii.ie/tii-library/road-safety/Road%2520Safety%2520Research/Collision-Data-and-International-Benchmarking.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwikxpC0_ZPqAhXSThUIHcvxDcEQFjABegQIBxAC&usg=AOvVaw28EQcrUR-Qk9Faj0Cs3u9-

Chapter 4 is the one you're interested in, especially where they use the word "supposed", by the way of the 3 instances of the word "supposed" 2 of them are in chapter 4 which is specific to Ireland, so yeah I do suspect that not all road (except fatal) incidents are recorded correctly ( if at all )

As regards HIPE it would appear that it doesn't get into RSA hands see recommendation 12

The RSA and NRA should work with the Health Service Executive to establish whether
or not the data collected in HIPE can be developed so that individuals can be identified
and linked to road collision data, and how to enable this data to be released for
research purposes.

One would hope that things have improved in the last 8 years but I wouldn't be betting much on it

TaurenDruid

micar wrote: »

The next time you see a 5 year old cycling on the footpath, follow them home and when you have their address...dial your local Garda station and report them for "riding a bicycle without reasonable consideration".

Come back and tell us what the Guards say.

If you can't be arsed reading what I actually wrote, well, I guess I'll stop there and not read the rest of your reply, either.

LeinsterDub

meeeeh wrote: »

Again not among the groups that attract much sympathy lately. If you were a woman you might have a chance, teenage girl even better. You probably have more physical similarities with Maga crowd than any other effective cause.

https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/health-family/fitness/why-are-so-few-teenage-girls-cycling-to-school-1.4043983

Great we'll get all 250 of them who cycled to school into a small village hall so

meeeeh

LeinsterDub wrote: »

The lockdown has shown all demographics want to cycle they are just too scared too. Which is often a reason people cycle on the footpath.

The lockdown also showed all people like to walk. At the peak of Corona I met at least 5 times as many people where I usually go for a run or take dog for a walk. The numbers are already getting lower and there no cars so it isn't because of traffic.

I do agree that cycling is great activity and I go around quite often with kids (running would be my preferred exercise when on my own because it's more intensive for me). It's also great commute option for some but when you mention lobby groups they are usually not fronted by families with children or grannies on bikes. You might not believe me but I do want better cycling facilities and I also think cars parked on cycling lanes should be towed away. However I am also absolutely certain that carry on like in this thread will achieve nothing except more opposition to what you want.