Cyclists - aghrr

Firefly

Registered User
Messages
3,499
Walking through town at lunchtime today a cyclist was nearly hit by a car turning in front of him into a car parking space. The driver of the car was elderly and obviously didn't see him. The cyclist proceeded to approach the driver and started giving out to him at his window. After about 20 seconds the cyclist proceeded to resume cycling upto the traffic lights still giving out as he passed me. The cyclist then proceeded through the red lights and at a cross junction and also cut across traffic coming from his right. Seems like some of these cyclists have an a-la-carte approach to the rules of the road. Also, this looked like a "proper" cyclist with proper gear and a proper bike
 
For reference, the cyclist was heading down the South Mall, Cork. He cross the lights at the end (at the junction of Parnell Bridge) and proceeded down Lapps Quay (Connelly Hall)
 
Seems like some of these cyclists have an a-la-carte approach to the rules of the road. Also, this looked like a "proper" cyclist with proper gear and a proper bike

+1. I experienced this first hand myself alot.
 
For reference, the cyclist was heading down the South Mall. He cross the lights at the end (at the junction of Parnell Bridge) and proceeded down Lapps Quay (Connelly Hall)

South Mall? Parnell Bridge? Lapps Quay? I don't know that part of Dublin! Sounds like something that could only happen in the Countryside!
 
Walking through town ...

Ho Ho - so Corkonians are guilty of this Dublinism too? :)

...
and a proper bike

Aww. I was picturing a unicycle. You've ruined it now.

But yeah, they are mental alright.

Even in the small towns near me. Between maverick cyclists, farmers with no functional lights on their soon about to fall completely apart vehicles and little fart boy and girl racers who seemingly have neither eyes nor indicators, it's really frustrating - and dangerous.
 
But yeah, they are mental alright.

No, SOME of them are mental, just as some motorists, pedestrians etc are mental.

As someone who often either cycles or drives to work, I can undestand the frustrations of both cohorts.

Ultimately, though, a cyclist is much more vulnerable to harm than a motorist whose potential upset, really, doesn't extend beyond fairly mild inconvenience.

In rtesponse to the original OP, I'd say that just because the cycllist doesn't have much apparent regard for his own safety, this doesn't absolve other road users from applying reasonable standards of care towards him.

I'm not sure what the point about him being a "proper" cyclist is intended to make.
 
Ultimately, though, a cyclist is much more vulnerable to harm than a motorist whose potential upset, really, doesn't extend beyond fairly mild inconvenience..

As a motorist I would not consider knocking a cyclist off his bike and injuring him because he was racing through a red light a 'fairly mild inconvenience'. I would be in bits.
 
As a motorist I would not consider knocking a cyclist off his bike and injuring him because he was racing through a red light a 'fairly mild inconvenience'. I would be in bits.

Of course. But that's very much an exception. I was referring to the more frequent occurence of motorists being held up by a couple of seconds because a cyclist has the audacity to occupy the same road space or because he doesn't take off from traffic lights with turbo-driven urgency.
 
Seems like some of these cyclists have an a-la-carte approach to the rules of the road.
You do stick to the speed limit at all times - right? And you never use your phone when driving - right? No a-la-carting for you, I presume?
 
After about 20 seconds the cyclist proceeded to resume cycling upto the traffic lights still giving out as he passed me. The cyclist then proceeded through the red lights and at a cross junction and also cut across traffic coming from his right. Seems like some of these cyclists have an a-la-carte approach to the rules of the road. Also, this looked like a "proper" cyclist with proper gear and a proper bike

That is the same anti-social behaviour that I personally witness everyday by 99% of "cyclists" as I walk through Dublin on my way to work. They are more akin to law breaking joy-riders than the few decent law abiding cyclists that are usually abused by these "cyclists" if they actually stop at red lights and prevent their progress..

Virtually all known traffic laws are ignored as 99% of cyclists run through red lights, cycle across pedestrian bridges, luas tracks etc etc. The worst culprits are to be found on the Christchurch to O'Connell St route.

The anti-social behaviour will only be brought to task if cyclists are licensed, and I am told, Dublin City council is seriously considering it for the Dublin Cycling scheme due in no small way for the number of accidents that have occured
 
Exaggerate much Werner?

Cyclists that break the rules of the road can have penalty points added to their Driving Licences if they have one - I'm sure it happens rarely enough but it should be used more. There will be no licensing of cyclists by DCC or any other local authority.

I'd be interested in knowing where you got your statistics on increased accidents in recent years because all evidence from other countries shows that the more cyclists there are on the roads the fewer (per cyclist) accidents occur as motorists become more aware of cyclists and how to behave around them.

There are a lot of cyclists that break the rules of the road but nowhere near the 99% Werner states. I've taken up a little bit of cycling since the Dublinbikes scheme came in and do stop at traffic lights and have yet to be harangued by other cyclists for doing so.

Werner, do you always wait for the green man when crossing roads on your perambulations around Dublin? If you do, then you may be the 1%* of pedestrians who do so.

*(perhaps a teensy bit of exaggeration here, purely for comedic effect)
 
I have to say, I am really on tenterhooks at the moment over cyclists. I live in Co Cork and the amount of cyclists cycling at all times without relfective gear and no lights at night is scaring the life out of me each time I drive. Is there a standard of lights/ gear that cyclists need to meet
 
I have to say, I am really on tenterhooks at the moment over cyclists. I live in Co Cork and the amount of cyclists cycling at all times without relfective gear and no lights at night is scaring the life out of me each time I drive. Is there a standard of lights/ gear that cyclists need to meet

Essentially no, nothing explicit though, other than lights, as far as I'm aware though there are recommendations.

Let's face it we're in a bit of a transition period. There are some good, bad and ugly cyclists (and not just those who shouldn't wear lycra), the same way there are good and bad drivers and good and bad pedestrians.

I see the idiot cyclists every day as I cycle in, but I have as many close calls or occasions of idiot drivers and idiot pedestrians.

But I've seen a big improvement. When the bike for work scheme was introduced there was some serious problems with new cyclists who not only put themselves at risk, but on occasions me too. This last few months it has been much better (though I expect a there's a few who've put the bike away for the winter), more with lights, more with helmets, more being sensible on the roads.

There are a couple of areas I do break the "rules" as such. One is not using a designated cycleway thats on a pavement because it is so poorly maintained it is extremely dangerous to use. The other is two sets of lights that if all is clear (good visibility) I will break them because to leave at the same time as cars (and buses) is extremely dangerous as they jostle for position or try and get past me to turn left, etc. A busted hip and a disolcated shoulder from separate incidents in these locations has taught me to get a head start.

But cycling such distances is still new to a lot of people and to the country, it'll take time. Even so, in all my years of cycling, I've seen a much greater improvement all over in behaviour and safety. Not perfect, but getting better.
 
Essentially no, nothing explicit though, other than lights, as far as I'm aware though there are recommendations...

brakes, tyres, chain, lights, reflector and bell!!!

From Rules of the Road @


  • Your brakes, tyres, chain, lights, reflector and bell must all be in good working order.
  • Your bicycle should be the right size to allow you to touch the ground with both feet.
  • When carrying goods, you should use a proper carrier or basket and take care that nothing is hanging loose.
  • At night you must carry a lamp showing a white or yellow light to the front and a lamp showing a red light to the back. These are the minimum lighting requirements laid down by law. However, to be even more visible to motorists at night, you should:
    • add strips of reflective material to the bike (white to the front and red to the back),
    • wear a reflective armband, and
    • wear a "Sam Browne" reflective belt or reflective vest.
So the answer to the old knock knock joke is "Yes! A bell is necessary on a bicycle" :)
 
brakes, tyres, chain, lights, reflector and bell!!!

From Rules of the Road @


  • Your brakes, tyres, chain, lights, reflector and bell must all be in good working order.

Yeah, but as I understand it (stand to be corrected) it is only if you have a bell that it must be in working order, not you must have a bell. It only explicitly talks about fixing lights in the RoTR.

Again stand to be corrected, and those bells are pathetic. Much more effective to shout obsenities as a warning.
 
Back
Top