divadsnilloc
Registered User
- Messages
- 159
I'm sure if a cyclists ran into a pedistrian at full pelt, even someone with a child, they could easily kill someone. They could cause another cyclists or driver to swerve and result in an accident. So please don't defend cyclists by pointing out its not as bad as bad drivers. I've seen a few cyclists pulled over by the cops lately and its good to see. Some of them are lethal.
No, I'm not. I'm quote happy to talk about bad cyclists, provided the conversation is in context of the reality of cycling in Dublin. Estimates from Dublin City Council show that there were 26 million journeys done by bike in Dublin in 2006 - about the same as the number of journeys undertaken by Luas passengers in that year. Hundreds of millions have been spent on the Luas, yet Minister Gormley won't sanction the wages for one engineer to improve cycling facilities in the capital.Point is, in a thread about bad cyclists, your making it a bad motorist issue.
I don't think its one in a million you see near misses with cyclists almost on a daily basis. Everyday you see cyclists breaking lights and ignoring basic common sense when crossing lanes, etc. So I'm not surprised in the slightest at the high accident rate of cyclists. The other day I say a cyclist dart up between two buses stopped in traffic and run straight into a pedestrian crossing in front of them, both went flying. Yesterday I saw a courier zip up the inside of a bus turning a corner and he almost got creamed.
....cyclists ... they're never shy to criticise motorists....
The Police Department has attributed the impressive drop in cyclist-pedestrian accidents to its aggressive ticketing policy of cyclists. There is a certain correlation: from 1985 to 1986, when the bicycle messenger industry gained visibility and notoriety, the number of summonses issued to cyclists nearly tripled from 6,578 to 18,130, while bicycle-pedestrian accidents dropped 11 percent, from 707 to 631. Yet since then the rate of summonses has dropped back down, to 10,395 in 1990, while bicycle-pedestrian accidents have continued to decline. Moreover, while there is no record of which party is at fault in bicycle-pedestrian accidents, clearly a good proportion of them can be traced to jaywalking, for which the Police Department issued virtually no summonses.
The bicycling community ascribes the halving in bicycle-pedestrian accidents since 1985 instead to a gradual mutual accommodation of cyclists and pedestrians. The increase in accidents occurred in the mid-1980s, during a big boom in city cycling. As pedestrians and cyclists have learned to adjust to each other and anticipate each other's moves, the number has fallen back down.
...Ninety-eight percent of bicyclists killed in 1999 reportedly weren't wearing helmets.
...adult urban cyclists now constitute the dominant modality among bicycle traffic fatalities in general, and that nighttime fatalities comprise at least half the problem in this class. This is out of all proportion to the amount of urban cycling actually being done at night, and strongly suggests more attention needs to be given to the entire nighttime bicycle conspicuity problem.
http://www.yes-but.net/cycling_is_1dangerous.htmlAt the moment about 18% of UK cyclists use helmets.
We can all go googling for a few minutes and pull up random stories around the world. This really doesn't prove much about the Irish environment one way or other.I've been a cyclist and driver and pedestrian for decades, so that must mean I'm right. Regardless of any logical argument.
Thats because its motorists, politicans, pedestrians (all with iPods oddly enough) who are all to blame for making cyclists talk on their mobile, ignore all rules of the road and dart between lanes of moving traffic, often going the wrong way on one way streets. Its a complete mystery how they are involved in accidents.
Its not like theres anything cyclists can do to help with their safety.
http://www.transalt.org/files/resources/blueprint/chapter17/chapter17c.html
[broken link removed]
http://www.yes-but.net/cycling_is_1dangerous.html
You see its everyone elses fault.
We can all go googling for a few minutes and pull up random stories around the world. This really doesn't prove much about the Irish environment one way or other. ?
But more importantly, please stop attributing views to me that I don't hold. I started my contributions to this thread pointing out that use of a mobile phone by a cyclist is crazy behaviour. If you are actually interested in my views on poor cycling, do go back and read my posts. If you want to continue to polarise the discussion into 'all cars good, all cyclists bad', be my guest - but it really won't do much to move the debate forwards.
....I guess they are unlikely to do much harm to anyone other than themselves, unlike the many car drivers...
PS While googling for stats on helmet wearing, did you find any stats that show safety benefits from helmet wearing?
Perhaps I missed the announcement of your appointment as moderator? If not, I'd suggest you don't try to police threads in which you are involved. If you have a problem with my post being off-topic, then click the little red triangle at the top right of the post, and let the moderators moderate. It is interesting to note of course that you don't seem to have any difficulty dragging the thread off the original topic of mobile phones and cyclists to broader 'all cyclists are dangerous' discussions, so clearly, it's just the points that you don't like to hear that are considered to be off-topic.I didn't dispute your comments re:cyclists. Only those on motorists as those are off topic, for the subject. But like every Apple thread has to vilify a PC for some reason, every cycling thread has to vilify the motorist. (as divadsnilloc hinted in his OP). I didn't polarise the discussion. The OP polarised by the topic title. I don't think he expect someone to defend iPod wearing cyclists, by the logic that drivers are worse...
Coming from the poster who was quite happy to trot out the 'off-topic' classic line to avoid hearing the truth, it's a bit hard to take that jibe seriously. The words pot, kettle and black spring to mind.Rather than trotting out the old classic, "would be mod" line.
I apologise. I thought that your great Googling skills would ensure that you could find the relevant research straight away, but apparently, those Google skills only apply to stories that you want to hear. Anyway, here's the details of that research [broken link removed]I love the idea that kitted up with a helmet, lights and Hi-vis clothing, drivers drive closer to the cyclist. Lets make everyone more aware of cyclists by making them less aware of them.
I don't think anyone suggested that two wrongs make a right.Actually forget it. I made my point earlier. Two wrongs don't make a right.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?