Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Penny Farthings, Legality and responsibility.

Options
1…89111314…20

Comments

  • Options
    #302
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    gctest50 wrote: »
    It also takes 4 times longer to stop, right there in the sentencing remarks i pasted....[/b]

    I would assume the distance to brake is a factor of how fast you are going. The context being going at an inappropriate speed considering the environment. Lights of pedestrians etc.

    Since there's nothing in law about the performance of the brakes. Simply that you must have them and I assume they stop.


  • Options
    #303
    s8n
    Registered Users Posts: 3,840 ✭✭✭s8n


    lawrencesummers wrote: »
    I’ve already acknowledged that the van was in the wrong.


    But let’s be clear, cycling a PF in an urban area is a dumb idea for a lot of reasons. There is no law against it, but it’s a dumb idea.

    This x 1000000%

    The rider was an attention seeking ****tard


  • Options
    #304
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    breezy1985 wrote: »
    Well then go back to where you tell me my comment is wrong and tell me why it's wrong.

    I have been saying that the bikes are different and are treated as such by the law and you keep acting like I am saying the opposite

    I'm just saying even ignoring the legalities, the braking on a fixie and PF isn't the same mechanically. The chain is a crucial difference mechanically as its a point of failure the PF doesn't have. The bikes are not similar in any way. Other then they are bikes.


  • Options
    #305
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    s8n wrote: »
    This x 1000000%

    The rider was an attention seeking ****tard

    Still not the cause of the accident though.


  • Options
    #306
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Sounds like that guy in England was in a track bike. Not a fixie. Not that it makes any significant difference.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #307
    Allinall
    Registered Users Posts: 6,712 ✭✭✭Allinall


    beauf wrote: »
    Still not the cause of the accident though.

    Did you not see where the poster acknowledged that?


  • Options
    #308
    breezy1985
    Registered Users Posts: 26,172 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    beauf wrote: »
    I'm just saying even ignoring the legalities, the braking on a fixie and PF isn't the same mechanically. The chain is a crucial difference mechanically as its a point of failure the PF doesn't have. The bikes are not similar in any way. Other then they are bikes.

    Again I agree with all that and always have. I was only ever talking about legally where I thought they were the same but I was wrong.

    I explained that more than once but yet you kept going on


  • Options
    #309
    07Lapierre
    Registered Users Posts: 8,245 ✭✭✭07Lapierre


    s8n wrote: »
    This x 1000000%

    The rider was an attention seeking ****tard

    Bit like people who drive Ferrari’s, Lamborghini etc.. attention seeking gob****es!


  • Options
    #310
    breezy1985
    Registered Users Posts: 26,172 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    beauf wrote: »
    Sounds like that guy in England was in a track bike. Not a fixie. Not that it makes any significant difference.

    I saw a lot of rebuilds around London that could be a mix of both. Can't remember but I think the photos I saw were this type


  • Options
    #311
    meeeeh
    Registered Users Posts: 11,624 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    cletus wrote: »
    Who sets the standard? Who tests the standard? What bikes are tested? Do you have to display a cert showing the bike is roadworthy?

    I know at least one country where that would be considered breaking the law. There was s case of young child on the bike crashing into pensioner on the bike. The pensioner died but she was charged for cycling on footpath and child's mother was charged for letting child cycle bike that wasn't roadworthy and lack of supervision. I don't know what penalty mother received.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #312
    cletus
    Registered Users Posts: 7,996 ✭✭✭cletus


    meeeeh wrote: »
    I know at least one country where that would be considered breaking the law. There was s case of young child on the bike crashing into pensioner on the bike. The pensioner died but she was charged by cycling on footpath and child's mother was charged of letting chikd cycle bije that wasn't roadworthy and lack of supervision.

    I think you might have misquoted my post


  • Options
    #313
    meeeeh
    Registered Users Posts: 11,624 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    cletus wrote: »
    I think you might have misquoted my post

    Yours was just one of the ones challenging the assumption people should make sure their bikes are roadworthy. It's not a major issue because a moron cycling in the dark without lights will most likely only harm themselves but the notion that people should make sure their bike is in good condition isn't exactly irrational.

    As I said before you can climb up the mountain in flip flops. Nobody will stop you but your chances of getting down without injury are slimmer.


  • Options
    #314
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    meeeeh wrote: »
    I know at least one country where that would be considered breaking the law. There was s case of young child on the bike crashing into pensioner on the bike. The pensioner died but she was charged for cycling on footpath and child's mother was charged for letting child cycle bike that wasn't roadworthy and lack of supervision. I don't know what penalty mother received.

    Can you post a link to both this law and link to this story.


  • Options
    #315
    meeeeh
    Registered Users Posts: 11,624 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    https://www.rtvslo.si/crna-kronika/kolesarka-poskodovana-po-trcenju-z-otrokom-umrla/529557

    You'll have to use Google translate from Slovene to English. You can Google Slovenian laws yourself if you don't believe what was stared in the link.


  • Options
    #316
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    meeeeh wrote: »
    Yours was just one of the ones challenging the assumption people should make sure their bikes are roadworthy. It's not a major issue because a moron cycling in the dark without lights will most likely only harm themselves but the notion that people should make sure their bike is in good condition isn't exactly irrational...

    Where is roadworthy defined?


  • Options
    #317
    meeeeh
    Registered Users Posts: 11,624 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    beauf wrote: »
    Where is roadworthy defined?

    I don't know if it's anywhere but only dumb people need everything defined to do the right thing.


  • Options
    #318
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    meeeeh wrote: »
    https://www.rtvslo.si/crna-kronika/kolesarka-poskodovana-po-trcenju-z-otrokom-umrla/529557

    You'll have to use Google translate from Slovene to English. You can Google Slovenian laws yourself if you don't believe what was stared in the link.

    It's didn't really say how the bike was unroadworthy or how that's defined. Seems the child cycled out of supervisor on to a (pedestrian/residential) area they aren't allowed on, causing an elderly cyclist to crash. Interestingly helmets are a legal requirement under the age of 14. Other than that theres no information to go.


  • Options
    #319
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    meeeeh wrote: »
    I don't know if it's anywhere but only dumb people need everything defined to do the right thing.

    What some think it's the right thing is often just person opinion and bias.


  • Options
    #320
    meeeeh
    Registered Users Posts: 11,624 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    Irc if I remember from another report the brakes were not great. I don't know what Google translate says but 'brezhibnega kolesa' would mean the bike wasn't in good working condition. The child was playing in the area in front of the apartment building and drove cycled towards pedestrian footpath and I assume road. Children under 15 are only allowed on the road without adult supervision by passing cycling competence test. You can be fined if your lights are not working for example. I also know the girl who was fined for cycling drunk and crossing the road under red.


  • Options
    #321
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    meeeeh wrote: »
    I know at least one country where that would be considered breaking the law. There was s case of young child on the bike crashing into pensioner on the bike. The pensioner died but she was charged for cycling on footpath and child's mother was charged for letting child cycle bike that wasn't roadworthy and lack of supervision. I don't know what penalty mother received.

    I wonder did they check out the pensioners ability to brake or how roadworthy their bike was...


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #322
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Interestingly Solvenia has better than average record on road and cycling safety. Impressive.


  • Options
    #323
    meeeeh
    Registered Users Posts: 11,624 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    beauf wrote: »
    I wonder did they check out the pensioners ability to brake or how roadworthy their bike was...

    She was t-boned. I presume her bike was in working order and I would say the charge of cycling on the footpath probably made charges against mother less severe.

    It might sound draconian but a lot more people cycle and my nieces and nephews all cycle to school independently on local roads without cycle lane and crossing main road. Making sure they know relevant rules of the road and their bike being in good condition makes them safer on the road.


  • Options
    #324
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    I'd love to see that clown track stand at lights on that thing.


  • Options
    #325
    meeeeh
    Registered Users Posts: 11,624 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    beauf wrote: »
    Interestingly Solvenia has better than average record on road and cycling safety. Impressive.

    And if laws were like in Ireland it would be a lot worse.


  • Options
    #326
    cletus
    Registered Users Posts: 7,996 ✭✭✭cletus


    meeeeh wrote: »
    Yours was just one of the ones challenging the assumption people should make sure their bikes are roadworthy. It's not a major issue because a moron cycling in the dark without lights will most likely only harm themselves but the notion that people should make sure their bike is in good condition isn't exactly irrational.

    As I said before you can climb up the mountain in flip flops. Nobody will stop you but your chances of getting down without injury are slimmer.

    I made no suggestions that maintaining a roadworthy bike was an idea that should be challenged. Many of my posts on this forum are in both the "Today I did something..." and "MB's no such thing..." threads.

    I would and have advocated for people to maintain their bikes, and do that maintenance themselves.

    What I questioned was the need to introduce an expensive bureaucratic solution to a problem that does not seem to exist.

    Are there badly maintained bikes out there? Undoubtedly.

    Do they cause a big enough issue that we need to create a nationwide testing centre system to monitor this maintenance? I haven't seen any evidence of this


  • Options
    #327
    Large bottle small glass
    Registered Users Posts: 1,811 ✭✭✭Large bottle small glass


    On a nct for bikes the following might be worth noting.

    The NCT was introduced here in 2000 at a time when motor vehicles collisions were killing well over 400 people a year.

    It was part of a raft of changes in relation to road safefy including
    *penalty points
    *improved roads
    *setting of of Garda Forensci Collision unit
    etc etc.

    As far as I know 2 people have been killed by a cyclist in the last 20 years in this country. From what I know of both cases the condition of bike as picked up by an annual NCT wouldn't have helped at all.

    The primary reason though is a cyclist riding around with no/poor brakes, no lights, tyres in bad condition will with a huge degree of probability likely end up hurting himself before anyone else; so in effect it's self policing/Darwin policed.


  • Options
    #328
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 39,765 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    Large bottle small glass wrote: »
    On a nct for bikes the following might be worth noting.

    The NCT was introduced here in 2000 at a time when motor vehicles collisions were killing well over 400 people a year.
    In addition, it was brought in under an EU directive - every EU country had to make car testing compulsory under this directive.


  • Options
    #329
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,912 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    Gerry T wrote: »
    It's crazy when you think a person can get straight on a bike and go, he/she doesn't need to know any rules of the road, how to check their bike isn't a death trap, how to cycle safely, this will change it's only a matter of time.
    Most people know the basics from simply existing in society. Having heard some of the BS spouted in court by drivers with licences who thought they didn't need a solicitor, having a license is clearly no indication that a person knows anything past how to fill out a form and get lucky for 45minutes.
    road_high wrote: »
    Wouldn’t have been easy to see either for the van driver- dressed in black on a black tall thin cycle even in day light hours
    Ah here, bright day, you couldn't see someone 2.5m tall on the road. If that's used as a reason, the driver needs an eyesight test and their license taken from them. I presume you are joking, but just in case.
    DaaaaaaaaaaN wrote: »
    Didn't a lad get done for manslaughter in the UK a few years ago after hitting a pedestrian while riding a brakeless bicycle? Despite the fact she walked out in front of him, it was deemed that the bike was illegal so he was at fault. Would a penny farthing fall under the same ruling?
    He also was an outrageous pr1ck before and after he realised she was dead. I feel terrible for her but I feel Karma didn't give him enough retribution in this case. A similar case happened here years ago, and the cyclist fell apart and was so remorseful, the last I heard, he never recovered. That's the difference, I feel bad for the Irish guy.
    breezy1985 wrote: »
    I assume we are talking about the one in or around Commercial St. and yes they did try claim he should have been more attentive but his lawyer showed that no vehicle could have stopped regardless given the distance away he was when she stepped out. His bike was illegal though but like many people I don't think he was aware of that till after the case

    The whole circus around that case was horrible and even if his bike had been legal lots of people were still gonna blame him despite it not really being his fault. He didn't help himself though by boasting about it on social media before he realized she was dead
    Circus aside, if I hit someone, even if it was 100% their fault, I would still feel bad. the lawyer was right but that doesn't make his reaction right.
    gctest50 wrote: »
    The PF rider altered his course and cycled straight into van - looks like a compo claim tbh

    If the PF rider continued in a straight line he wouldn't have cycled straight into the tail end of the van


    https://imgur.com/Fqu57L5
    What???? Did you watch the video or read the thread, I presume you are joking and I missed the joke.


  • Options
    #330
    tomasrojo
    Registered Users Posts: 11,767 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    Gerry T wrote: »
    crazy when you think a person can get straight on a bike and go, he/she doesn't need to know any rules of
    I know walkers have to use roads but that's not the same as a mechanically propelled bike.
    Probably pointed out already, and a bit pedantic, but a mechanically propelled bicycle is a motorbike.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #331
    Gerry T
    Registered Users Posts: 1,444 ✭✭✭Gerry T


    Seth Brundle wrote:
    For the four years between 2016 and 2019, less than half of vehicles passed the NCT on the first attempt. Only about a third passed without an advisory note. Out of curiosity, how many times have you had a conversation like the above in the motors forum?


    Never, but your proving my point, if 50% of cars failed then loads of issues were fixed. I dont buy into the conspiracy theories.
    My car has failed, needed shocks replaced and once a tyre had wear on the inside of a rear tyre. Things i hadnt spotted but were needed. Thats exactly why the test is there, i dont see that as a bad thing, people will always moan but cars are in far safer condition because of the nct.
    Obviously for a bike the test could be much less complicated and your lbs could do the test.


Advertisement