Why a helmet, lights and hi-vis clothing don't necessarily make you a safe cyclist...

[Firefly]

Just to add and pardon the pun, but I think wearing a helmet when cycling is a no-brainer..

 

[DeclanDublin]

I agree enforcement is a glaring issue. When I was run over by a cyclist, I emailed:
1. RSA
2.Garda Traffic,
3. DOJ.

I got pro forma responses from almost all of them, and I noticed a cop on bike tucked into Essex st who caught a few people breaking lights. I saw them there once and never since! We need proper enforcement, I think cyclists should be obliged to have some insurance, (having insurance tends to increase compliance with RTA legislation I would suggest), and finally I think cyclists need to take some personal responsibility for thier own safety, including wearing appropriate hi-viz gear, having a bike in good repair, and lights. I'm a cyclist, and I think these are simply common-sense and necessary precautions. In an argument between a vehicle and a cyclist only one comes away uninjured, and the balance of injuries likely favour the bike when an accident happens between a bike and a pedestrian. There seems to me to be a clear case for a zero tolerance attitude for bikes breaking essenttially common-sense codes, and to do it in a highly visible way so as to enforce compliance more widely. As it happens, I was driving up the Malahide rod t'other day and, very unusally, a motoriat was pulled in by Gardai for driving in the bus lane. I bet eveyone who saw that won't risk the bus lane on the Malahide road, at least for a while.

 

[Leo]

. When I was run over by a cyclist, I emailed:
1. RSA
2.Garda Traffic,
3. DOJ.

So it's the same situation as a cyclist or pedestrian being hit by a car, unless the Gardai / DPP want to take it further, it's a civil matter you have to pursue yourself.

having insurance tends to increase compliance with RTA legislation I would suggest

There is no evidence whatsoever to support that. When Dublin council do covert speed recording, 90% of drivers break the speed limit. Does it follow that it's only the 10% who have insurance? Around any of the housing estates across the country, how many cars park with wheels on the pavement? Is insurance playing a role there?

and the balance of injuries likely favour the bike when an accident happens between a bike and a pedestrian.

It's actually the other way around due to the greater speed the cyclist is travelling at and as a result hit the ground at.

There seems to me to be a clear case for a zero tolerance attitude for bikes breaking essenttially common-sense codes, and to do it in a highly visible way so as to enforce compliance more widely.

There is? I certainly don't see it. What is the justification for a zero tolerance approach for cyclists when we as drivers get away with far more and are the cause of the vast majority of injury and death on our roads? How could such an approach be anything other than a waste of money?

As it happens, I was driving up the Malahide rod t'other day and, very unusally, a motoriat was pulled in by Gardai for driving in the bus lane. I bet eveyone who saw that won't risk the bus lane on the Malahide road, at least for a while.

You'll see that now and again alright, but 100m further down the road you'll see the usual culprits pulling back into the bus lane as soon as the Gardai are out of sight.

 

[Brendan Burgess]

(having insurance tends to increase compliance with RTA legislation I would suggest),

I would say that people who drive without insurance are more likely to be the types of people who don't care about complying with legislation generally.

But requiring people to take out insurance would be unlikely to improve cyclist behaviour. There is a possibility that it might backfire "So what if I knock someone down, I'm insured".

But as I asked Mr Earl - are there any statistics for deaths or injuries by cyclists. I would say that they are very rare.

Brendan

 

[Cervelo]

Just to add and pardon the pun, but I think wearing a helmet when cycling is a no-brainer..

When you where in Amsterdam did you happen to notice how many cyclists were wearing helmets because any time I've been there the majority dont were helmets
I must admit it's been about five years since I've been there so things might have changed

 

[MrEarl]

All from the UK.....

Sorry to have to contradict you Mr. Burgess, but Roger Handy (formerly of McNally Handy) was Irish and the incident occurred in Dublin.

You are obviously correct that the other articles relate to the UK. Perhaps we can learn from what has happened there though and try to implement some corrective measures, before things get worse here (which I fear they will, given the notable increase in the amount of people cycling and sadly, the bad behaviour that we see from some of them).

....But requiring people to take out insurance would be unlikely to improve cyclist behaviour. There is a possibility that it might backfire "So what if I knock someone down, I'm insured"....

I am not so sure that would be the case. I don't think it's the case with most private car or motorcycle drivers for example, unless you want to correct me. There is an obvious risk that the cost of insurance would increase, as more claims went against policies so that might possibly act as a deterrent to cyclists behaving badly. However, this would only be one part of the overall solution.

Cyclists also need to be compelled to obey the laws, just as other road users are. Breaking traffic lights, traveling on footpaths, or traveling the wrong way down a one way street is wrong, no matter which party offends. However, in reality, the cyclist is the least likely to ever be punished for any of these offenses and that only fuels the bad behaviour imho.

I also think certain safety gear should be compulsory for cyclists, just as a helmet is for a motorcyclist. Cyclists are extremely vulnerable, given they have no protection from their bicycles, unlike say the protection that a car with airbags etc. might offer a driver.

With the rapid increase in the number of cyclists, we have a genuine chance to try and start off on the right foot here, by enforcing good behaviour now, rather than just let it go from bad to worse, under the excuse that everyone else does it.

Clearly, far more needs to be done to improve our infrastructure for cyclists and while that also needs to be pressed him with the government and councils, it doesn't justify not acting now to get people to obey the laws, and commute safely.

 

[Brendan Burgess]

I hadn't heard of Roger Handy, so in Googling him

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2015/12/17/cyclists-244-motorists-112/

244 cyclists got on the spot fines, so the Gardai are enforcing the laws.

Another interesting article
Stop The Cycle of Hate

15 Cyclists killed in 2017.

How many drivers or pedestrians were killed by cyclists this year?


I was surprised I had not heard of Roger Handy. He was killed 15 years ago. Was that the last pedestrian killed by a cyclist?

““On a winter’s afternoon in 2002, he was cycling up a one-way street in Dublin 4 on the wrong side of the road, when he hit a pedestrian who had stepped out in front of him. Roger Handy (56), a respected auctioneer, had looked in the direction of oncoming traffic, but never saw O’Hegarty who was coming the opposite way.




Brendan

 

[cremeegg]

““On a winter’s afternoon in 2002, he was cycling up a one-way street in Dublin 4 on the wrong side of the road, when he hit a pedestrian who had stepped out in front of him. Roger Handy (56), a respected auctioneer, had looked in the direction of oncoming traffic, but never saw O’Hegarty who was coming the opposite way.

I hate to make light of somebody's tragedy, but it has to be said. That is the first time the words respected and auctioneer have appeared in there same paragraph on AAM.

 

[MrEarl]

I hadn't heard of Roger Handy, so in Googling him

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2015/12/17/cyclists-244-motorists-112/

244 cyclists got on the spot fines, so the Gardai are enforcing the laws.

Another interesting article
Stop The Cycle of Hate

15 Cyclists killed in 2017.

How many drivers or pedestrians were killed by cyclists this year?

I was surprised I had not heard of Roger Handy. He was killed 15 years ago. Was that the last pedestrian killed by a cyclist?

““On a winter’s afternoon in 2002, he was cycling up a one-way street in Dublin 4 on the wrong side of the road, when he hit a pedestrian who had stepped out in front of him. Roger Handy (56), a respected auctioneer, had looked in the direction of oncoming traffic, but never saw O’Hegarty who was coming the opposite way.

Brendan

Hello Mr. Burgess,

To be honest, I was a little surprised that you had not heard of Roger Handy myself.

I have no idea if he was the last person to be killed in Ireland as a result of a cyclist. I might drop the RSA a line at some stage, unless you or someone else here has already sent the email ? Regardless of whether it was the last one or not, I'm sure that everyone would agree that it's one too many deaths to have occurred.

I would love to see some more detail on how many on the spot fines the Gardai have handed out to cyclists. The figure from the article that you have quoted covers a 2 month period and was the first two months after the "on the spot fines" were introduced, from what I can gather. The number of fines seems very low (circa 4 per day, across the entire country).

I wonder how many adult cyclists there are using the public infrastructure on a regular basis. Anyone know, or care to hazard a guess ?

I must admit, I can't help but wonder what level of fines there might be for cyclists, if they had to contend with the private operators who operate the mobile speed camera vans, or the clamping service in Dublin ?

 

[Brendan Burgess]

To be honest, I was a little surprised that you had not heard of Roger Handy myself.

That I had not heard, or if I had heard, remembered about a pedestrian who was killed by a cyclist 15 years ago?

OK, it appears to be a very rare occurrence that cyclists kill pedestrians. But even still I don't keep a file on them.

Nor do I remember the names of all these:




Brendan

 

[Leo]

Cyclists also need to be compelled to obey the laws, just as other road users are.

They already are, and the stats suggest enforcement levels for cycling offences are broadly in line with those for other categories of road users. The number of cycling offenses versus those of motorists is very, very low.

Breaking traffic lights, traveling on footpaths

It absolutely is, but motorists also do it all the time. Add to that, crossing a continuous white line to pass a line of traffic just to get to a right turn lane ahead. It's the rare exception that waits in the line of traffic to move into the right turn lane correctly at times finding themselves being blown out of it by those overtaking illegally.

So what's the justification for a focus on cyclists? For the most part, when involved in a collision, they come off worst and by and large they cause minimal injury or damage. If there is to be increased enforcement or a focus on better standards from any class of road users, should we not be spending that money where it might actually save some lives?

With the rapid increase in the number of cyclists, we have a genuine chance to try and start off on the right foot here, by enforcing good behaviour now, rather than just let it go from bad to worse, under the excuse that everyone else does it.

Are we saying it's too late to hope for the same thing with motorists? With the 2016 census showing more people in Dublin commute by bike than take the Luas, Dart & trains combined, the start happened a long time ago.

 

[Leper]

We can have discussions here until the cows come home Cyclists -V- Motorists -V- Pedestrians. We can even bring in the Gardaí, Senior Counsel, Cycling Clubs and argue more. But, really all we need is Common Sense and a recognition that all of us must share the roads/paths.

 

[SparkRite]

Why, oh why, oh why (note the standard "Letters to the Editor" etc. start ) does it happen EVERYTIME we have a discussion here about cyclists, even like this thread, with the word "cyclist" in the title that once someone says that they observed a cyclist(s) breaking one or more of the ROTR, the most common reply is along the lines of "Well what about motorists.." ?

Why not stick to the thread topic and discuss the merits or failings of cyclists without the apparent "knee jerk" reaction of taking umbridge and retorting with "Sure that's nothing compared to a motorist I saw ...."etc..

Sure, motorists break the ROTR and indeed there have been many threads over the years, discussing this. However if memory serves me right, I do not think that these threads have degenerated into a tit for tat and at times, tantamount, to a puerile slanging match to the same degree as threads started to debate the safety/behaviour of cyclists.

I am aware that we all share the same roads and that the behaviour of one sector may, from time to time, impact on the other, however notwithstanding this fact, I still think my observations are valid.

My own opinion of why the above occurs, is that most cyclists know, in their heart of hearts, that an appreciable amount of cyclists, on occasion, tend not to pay as much attention to the ROTR as maybe they should and when this is brought to attention they react by bringing motorists into the equation in an attempt to shift the spotlight and thus attempting to lessen the blame.

Shame on you.

 

[Brendan Burgess]

The issue is that cyclists do virtually no harm to anyone else through breaking the rules of the road.

Of course, they are wrong to cycle without lights and to cycle on footpaths.

But drivers stuck in their cars or driving in bus and bicycle lanes get very jealous of the freedom of cyclists and want the Gardai to come down heavy on them when they do nothing dangerous. It would be much better use of limited resources if the Gardai confiscated the cars from drivers in bike lanes.

I started this thread with a video of a really stupid guy. If the Gardai were able to identify him, his bike should be confiscated and he should be fined heavily.

Brendan

 

[Leo]

Why, oh why, oh why (note the standard "Letters to the Editor" etc. start ) does it happen EVERYTIME we have a discussion here about cyclists, even like this thread, with the word "cyclist" in the title that once someone says that they observed a cyclist(s) breaking one or more of the ROTR, the most common reply is along the lines of "Well what about motorists.." ?

Why not stick to the thread topic and discuss the merits or failings of cyclists without the apparent "knee jerk" reaction of taking umbridge and retorting with "Sure that's nothing compared to a motorist I saw ...."etc..

If we stick to the topic of this thread, we can all agree the cyclist in that video is an idiot and move on. Thread over after the first post.

If people just want to have a one sided go at cyclists or motorists without interference from 'the other side', there are threads all over the motoring and cycling forums where like-minded souls get together to agree that the others are at fault and they themselves are model citizens. A thread of anecdotes of what one class of road users have observed others doing without any balance would be equally tedious in my view. We'd all be far better served if we could acknowledge there are failings on every side, and no one class of road user is much better or worse than the other.

I write as a motorist who used to commute by bike in Dublin, even if that was 10+ year ago now.

 

[Buddyboy]

One of the best (to me) trains of thought that I read went like this.
There are two types of cyclists. Those, like me, who are car and motorbike riders who use a bicycle instead (for whatever reason). I therefore apply all the safety measures I use on my car or motorbike. I wear a fluorescent jacket, helmet, have multiple rear lights and use rear view mirror. I am coming from a more protected environment (my car anyway) to a less protected environment (my bicycle), combined with the fact that I am going slower than most other forms of transport (hence the rear view mirror). I am adopting the measures I already use, and I don't find this onerous or in any way difficult to do. In fact, I would feel less safe if I did not do so. My mindset is coming from a car/motorbike to another form of road transport.

The other type of cyclist is the pedestrian who uses a bicycle instead (again for whatever reason). They adopt their pedestrian measures when riding their bike. Hence, dark jacket, no helmet, no attempt at making themselves conspicuous, probably no lights and definitely no rear view mirror. It's just not in their mind-set. They are coming from a relatively protected environment (the footpath) and carrying that mind-set over.

I meet both types daily on my commute.

This is not a hard and fast rule of course, but I find it useful and seems to fit my general observations.

 

[Leo]

Hence, dark jacket, no helmet, no attempt at making themselves conspicuous, probably no lights

I see Simon Delaney is hosting a new series putting drivers through a series of tests. It'd be interesting to put a few of those ninjas behind the wheel of a car on a dark wet night and see how they get on.

 

[MrEarl]

They already are, and the stats suggest enforcement levels for cycling offences are broadly in line with those for other categories of road users. The number of cycling offenses versus those of motorists is very, very low.

Hi Leo,

The figures for the on the spot cycling fines, were only for the first two months after it was implemented, as I understood it. That's far too short a period of time to be used as comparison with enforcement levels for other categories of road users.

Also, let us not forget, motorists are also "kept in check" by the private companies who do the speed cameras for example. I do not think the speed tickets (and associated penalty points) are included in enforcement figures, do you know if they are ? Assuming they are not, they should be as it's part of enforcement and I suspect, would show a very different figure for the level of enforcement against motorists.

It absolutely is, but motorists also do it all the time. Add to that, crossing a continuous white line to pass a line of traffic just to get to a right turn lane ahead. It's the rare exception that waits in the line of traffic to move into the right turn lane correctly at times finding themselves being blown out of it by those overtaking illegally.

Sure, and lets also include all of the cyclists that insist on trying to get to the front of a queue of traffic on a road, while stopped at red lights. The list of things that are wrong is endless, but lets not use one wrong action to try and justify another here. It's long past time we started putting things right and perhaps even more importantly, prohibited new bad habits from becoming "the accepted norm" so as to stop things going from bad to worse.

So what's the justification for a focus on cyclists?

Simple, cycling is on the up and being encouraged as a principal method of transport (particularly in Dublin city).

You have referenced the 2016 Census and with the ongoing development of bike lanes, the increase in the number of publicly available bikes for hire / short term use around the city, the continued tax break for biking to work etc. those numbers are likely to rise further. As such, the cyclist is becoming one of the main commuters around the city and by default, as that number rises so will the number of accidents associated with that form of transport.

Why not try and do it right, rather than just replicate the numerous mistakes that have been made previously (with cars, motorbikes etc.) ?

Are we saying it's too late to hope for the same thing with motorists?

Not quite, but it's far harder to change established bad habits than prevent new ones from bedding in.

The issue is that cyclists do virtually no harm to anyone else through breaking the rules of the road.

I don't think it's that simple, Mr. Burgess.

Why should cyclists be permitted to even put themselves in harms way ? We don't allow suicide in this country and while that's an extreme example to reference, cyclists have little or no protection so in reality, they are putting their lives at risk on regular occasion when they made bad decisions.

A bad cyclist breaking the laws can increase the risk of harm to other road users. Think about the possible implications for another road user such as the driver of a car, who swerves to try and avoid hitting a cyclist (who endangered himself) and risks colliding with someone / something else, as a result. Not to mention the stress and fear that comes with thinking you are about to hit someone on a bike, while driving your car - that can have a long term effect and turn a good driver into a less confident and perhaps more dangerous driver.

Last, but not least, we've all seen plenty of examples of road rage from cyclists, just like we have from motorists driving their cars.

Of course, they are wrong to cycle without lights and to cycle on footpaths.

Yes, just as we also acknowledge the many wrong doings of other road users.

My principal point is that cycling is on the up, so we should be trying to encourage more good habits with this mode of transport as it's becoming more and more popular.

But drivers stuck in their cars or driving in bus and bicycle lanes get very jealous of the freedom of cyclists and want the Gardai to come down heavy on them when they do nothing dangerous.

I'm sure that point about the "freedom" that cyclists have is true, to a degree.

But I think you are forgetting that a cyclist causes danger to more than just themselves, so it's a case of having to consider all road users here and think in terms of some of the dangers that cyclists can cause, either directly or indirectly.

It would be much better use of limited resources if the Gardai confiscated the cars from drivers in bike lanes.

I agree that a car should not be driving in a bike lane, unless the road layout is so badly designed that the motorist is compelled to cross over a bike lane (and then, obviously they need to get in and out of it quickly, and safely).

But, I actually think we'd be better off putting our limited resources to more serious crimes. Clearly, the real issue here is the need for more resources, but that's a conversation for another thread.

I started this thread with a video of a really stupid guy. If the Gardai were able to identify him, his bike should be confiscated and he should be fined heavily.

Brendan

Agreed, I'd even take it a step further and look for a (short) jail term.

 

[MrEarl]

Hi,

Sorry one question that someone here might know the answer to....

Are there more strict rules / laws for users of electric bikes ?

I see delivery staff from JustEat using these electric bikes and to give them credit, they all wear helmets and what looks like very heavy padded jackets etc. on. I have also noticed a few electric bike users in the bicycle lanes and doing significantly faster speeds than those being achieved by peddle powered bikes (so are the electric bikes actually putting the users of peddle powered bikes at risk here ?).

 

[Leo]

The figures for the on the spot cycling fines, were only for the first two months after it was implemented, as I understood it. That's far too short a period of time to be used as comparison with enforcement levels for other categories of road users.

On the spot fines for cyclists were introduced in July 2015, they're running at around 800 penalties applied per annum. I'd argue that's far too low, but alas that is te case across all road traffic offences.

Also, let us not forget, motorists are also "kept in check" by the private companies who do the speed cameras for example. I do not think the speed tickets (and associated penalty points) are included in enforcement figures, do you know if they are ?

They are included. There's just one company, GoSafe, they just gather the evidence, the prosecution of offences follows the same process, as offences detected by the Gardai and these are captured in the published stats.

Sure, and lets also include all of the cyclists that insist on trying to get to the front of a queue of traffic on a road, while stopped at red lights.

Cyclists are perfectly entitled, and actually encouraged to do that as it is safer for them. They are the only category of road used that are explicitly allowed to overtake on the left for the purposes of doing so. The subsequent introduction of Advance Stop Lines was to make this easier, other vehicles are prohibited from advancing into these spaces on a red light.

... those numbers are likely to rise further. As such, the cyclist is becoming one of the main commuters around the city and by default, as that number rises so will the number of accidents associated with that form of transport.

The number overall might, but multiple studies have shown that increasing numbers of cyclists in a city lowers the changes of incidents as drivers become more aware of their presence and pay more attention.

Not quite, but it's far harder to change established bad habits than prevent new ones from bedding in.

Cycling has been around since before cars were, we can't pretend it's something new. All new road users need to be educated equally.