Cyclists' responsibility for their own safety *warning* infractions given liberally for trolling etc

That's why lights are a requirement for cyclists.

What you're really saying is those who don't obey the law should. But that's not really understanding that these people are deliberately not obeying the law.

The whole tech thing is irrelevant.

I'm saying someone who's deliberately flouting the law isn't going to care about responsibility.

Never did I say they were ignorant of the law. In fact I said the opposite. "Deliberately not obeying the law".

Drivers have their own obligations. Are you "effectively" saying if someone perhaps drunk or sick wanders out into the road. A driver has no obligations.

Some companies decided to use cameras instead of radar, lidar, lasers etc. It's had its problems. Come a long way no argument.

Even a cyclists with rear lights will be a fraction of the power of a cars headlights.

If the driver can't see what's in front of them with the headlights that's a bit of a problem.

I was a daily pedestrian in Ireland's major cities for the best part of a decade. In that capacity, I indeed generalise as I certainly saw enough lawbreaking by cyclists (and had enough near-misses) to warrant this.

Not sure where there the "cult like" part comes into things, 2.8 million is a fairly large cult, but all I'm asking you to do is to clarify (be specific!) which of Ireland's 2.8 million drivers you so readily accuse of "killing X or Y people every week."

Because 2.8 million is a very large group to tar with a brush of "killers" I'm sure you'll agree. But perhaps you can explain why you use such large groupings as "motorists" or "drivers" aware that it's such a large group?

So generalisation is OK, based on personal anecdote and and confirmation bias, but not based on independent professional measurement that comes out with 98% non-compliance? That's some twisted logic there.

I'm not sure where you got the term 'killers' from, because you didn't get it from me. By cult-like, I was referring to the fervour of your defence of law-breaking drivers (who are killing three or four people each week on Irish roads) particularly when contrasted against the fervour of your attacks on cyclists (who are killing one person each decade on Irish roads).

I consider lawbreaking by cyclists in Ireland to be universal. So I find your complaints about "non-compliance" to be a little rich.

You are on record as accusing "motorists" and "drivers" of "killing X or Y people every week." Yet, each time, you seem to leave out the fact that Irish drivers are a very large cohort, and have difficulty defining which of the cohort fall into the group of "killers." And yes, if you accuse a group of killing people, then it follows that people in the group are killers, unless you can clarify which members of the larger group you are accusing, which so far you haven't really.

But at least we're getting somewhere as you've narrowed it down slightly to 98% of drivers in Ireland, or about 2,744,000 drivers. Still most of that number have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the small number of incidents you refer to. So what is your basis for blanket accusing 2,744,000 people of "killing X or Y people every week?"

Are you suggesting that drivers aren't killing three or four people each week?

Or are you playing some pedantic word game to fulfil some obligation to your cult to protect them from the harsh reality of drivers killing three or four people each week?

I don't have a crystal ball, so I can't tell you which drivers will the be the ones to kill three or four people each week. It may not be three or four this week. It could be one or two, or it could be five or six, but on average, drivers are killing three or four people each week. You can play whatever word games you like. They don't change the facts.

It is a fact though, that drivers are killing three or four people each week on Irish roads.

Your taking of offence on this doesn't change the facts.

What definition of culpability are you using for that 70% statistic you quoted?

So both retro-reflective material, and matt back clothing is equally visible, and it's only drivers observation that's the issue? Got it.

The Free Speed survey is total massaged nonsense to be honest.

Unknown locations, good weather, no other traffic, straight roads, no hills, intersections, 5.30am-7:30am.

Yes drivers speed, a high percentage too, but the experiment was specifically designed to inflate numbers.

I genuinely don't think that enforcement alone is, or ever will be enough to limit road deaths.

Enforcement will never target vulnerable road users, who (as per the thread title) do have a responsibility to their own safety, as it's repeatedly derided as victim blaming.

Look at how the Construction industry tackled deaths. They brought in mandatory Safe Pass training for everyone on a site, in 2001 or so.

Enforcement is no good if someone is dead, and noone intends to go out and kill someone, so enforcement isn't much of a deterrent IMO.

I'd love to see data on how many penalty points drives who have caused fatalities have, I'd bet it's no more than average.

It IS a fact though. Drivers are killing three or four people each week, regardless of how fervently you deny this.

The irony of saying enforcement doesn't work in this thread. Is that the driver who should have been in custody and not on the road anyway. Was stopped at a check point and let continue, even though driver and car were not legal on the road. Then killed someone. Drove on and hid the car.

Enforcement is definitely not going to work if you don't do it.