That's a bit disingenuous Ranyday. While it is correct to say that cyclists get killed by motorists that does not mean that it is the fault of the motorists. We should not legislate against motorists in order to mitigate the impact of dangerous behavior by cyclists. We should instead legislate or, more appropriately educate, to stop that dangerous behavior by cyclists.You seem to think that the danger to cyclists is from other cyclists. It's not - it's from motorists. You can put as many hoops as you like in front of cyclists - that won't stop them getting killed by motorists. You're looking in the wrong place if you want to improve safety.
That's a bit disingenuous Ranyday. While it is correct to say that cyclists get killed by motorists that does not mean that it is the fault of the motorists. We should not legislate against motorists in order to mitigate the impact of dangerous behavior by cyclists. We should instead legislate or, more appropriately educate, to stop that dangerous behavior by cyclists.
That doesn't mean we should not legislate and educate motorists to behave appropriately around cyclists but there are two sides to the problem.
I cycle through Dublin regularly and many of the times I see near misses with cyclists it is due to the actions of the cyclist. It's maybe a 60/40 split with the cyclists accounting for the 40%. I still see cyclists with no lights, no high-vis and no helmets. I see them break red lights, pass on the inside of trucks and buses, weave between slow moving traffic and cycle down the wrong side of the road. I agree that "cyclists aren't chucking themselves under cars" but many are doing the next best thing. Ignoring that doesn't make cycling safer.Sorry but cyclists aren't chucking themselves under cars, generally it is the fault of the motorist through a lack of awareness and consideration that cyclists may well need more room that they are currently being given by motorists. When you're cycling along and suddenly come upon a pothole that will likely send you over the handlebars you are going to swerve to avoid it, this is where the motorist needs to realise this and give more space to the cyclist. I don't agree with legislating for the 1.5m gap but motorists need to be aware that cyclists might not always have the option to stay in a straight line.
I've had numerous drivers pull out in front of me from side streets knowing full well that i'm there but seemingly not giving a toss. It happens when I'm driving too, everyone needs to show a bit more consideration but with cyclists it can actually kill whereas motorists will just get a ding. The problem now is that we have a couple of generations who have never cycled at all so have no idea what it's like to cycle. The census figures for cycling are shocking - 3 schoolgirls in the whole of Waterford City cycled to school in 2011! - when I was in school (many years ago) most kids walked or cycled to school, that just isn't happening now though things are improving very slowly.
Sorry but cyclists aren't chucking themselves under cars, generally it is the fault of the motorist through a lack of awareness and consideration that cyclists may well need more room that they are currently being given by motorists. When you're cycling along and suddenly come upon a pothole that will likely send you over the handlebars you are going to swerve to avoid it, this is where the motorist needs to realise this and give more space to the cyclist. I don't agree with legislating for the 1.5m gap but motorists need to be aware that cyclists might not always have the option to stay in a straight line.
I've had numerous drivers pull out in front of me from side streets knowing full well that i'm there but seemingly not giving a toss. It happens when I'm driving too, everyone needs to show a bit more consideration but with cyclists it can actually kill whereas motorists will just get a ding. The problem now is that we have a couple of generations who have never cycled at all so have no idea what it's like to cycle. The census figures for cycling are shocking - 3 schoolgirls in the whole of Waterford City cycled to school in 2011! - when I was in school (many years ago) most kids walked or cycled to school, that just isn't happening now though things are improving very slowly.
Formal research carried out in London in the not too distant past confirms this;
http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2009/dec/15/cycling-bike-accidents-study
We all see cyclists breaking red lights of course. In some enlightened places like Paris, this has been legalised for right turns - better to let cyclists flow than to bunch them up.
But isn't it funny how blind we are to motorists who break the speed limit (just about all of them) or break red lights (1 or 2 or 3 at just about every city junction at every change of lights) or drive with their hands/eyes on their phone (maybe 1 in 10 motorists).
This is the nub of the problem. As a motorist if there is an obstruction in front of me I just can't swerve to avoid it. I must slow down or stop, see if the road is clear and then negotiate the obstacle. Likewise if I'm a pedestrian and there is an obstacle on the footpath I just can't barge into other pedestrians or expect them to give me more space to walk around it. The rules of the road obligate cyclists to cycle in such a manner they do not have to swerve suddenly in front of another vehicle. So if you are cycling with due care and attention, at a reasonable speed, and behave like other road users you shouldn't swerve. Legislating for a 1.5 metre gap is just legislating to accommodate bad road behaviour.When you're cycling along and suddenly come upon a pothole that will likely send you over the handlebars you are going to swerve to avoid it, this is where the motorist needs to realise this and give more space to the cyclist. I don't agree with legislating for the 1.5m gap but motorists need to be aware that cyclists might not always have the option to stay in a straight line.
This is the nub of the problem. As a motorist if there is an obstruction in front of me I just can't swerve to avoid it. I must slow down or stop, see if the road is clear and then negotiate the obstacle. Likewise if I'm a pedestrian and there is an obstacle on the footpath I just can't barge into other pedestrians or expect them to give me more space to walk around it. The rules of the road obligate cyclists to cycle in such a manner they do not have to swerve suddenly in front of another vehicle. So if you are cycling with due care and attention, at a reasonable speed, and behave like other road users you shouldn't swerve. Legislating for a 1.5 metre gap is just legislating to accommodate bad road behaviour.
This is the nub of the problem. As a motorist if there is an obstruction in front of me I just can't swerve to avoid it. I must slow down or stop, see if the road is clear and then negotiate the obstacle. Likewise if I'm a pedestrian and there is an obstacle on the footpath I just can't barge into other pedestrians or expect them to give me more space to walk around it. The rules of the road obligate cyclists to cycle in such a manner they do not have to swerve suddenly in front of another vehicle. So if you are cycling with due care and attention, at a reasonable speed, and behave like other road users you shouldn't swerve. Legislating for a 1.5 metre gap is just legislating to accommodate bad road behaviour.
Remember, a cyclist travelling in a lane has right-of-way in that lane. Traffic approaching from behind has a duty of care to overtake with caution and only when there is sufficient space to allow them do so without putting the cyclist at risk, and that includes potential hazards that the driver might not be aware of. Also, while overtaking, you are not allowed inconvenience the vehicle (includes cyclists) you are overtaking. Inconvenience would cover not giving enough space and forcing them to slow down so as to pass an obstacle. To do so is dangerous overtaking as covered in Section 10 of SI 182, 1997.
Who would be found responsible in a case of a cyclist wearing dark clothes with no reflectors or lights being hit on an unlit country lane at night? I used to watch Darwin candidates climbing on their bikes and heading off while I was attaching my lights and doing Christmas tree impressions.
Yes, but it's especially important for minority classes (like cyclists) where bad individuals can harm the whole class's perception.And does this 'collective responsibility' apply to drivers too?
Yes, but it's especially important for minority classes (like cyclists) where bad individuals can harm the whole class's perception.
This is the nub of the problem. As a motorist if there is an obstruction in front of me I just can't swerve to avoid it. I must slow down or stop, see if the road is clear and then negotiate the obstacle. Likewise if I'm a pedestrian and there is an obstacle on the footpath I just can't barge into other pedestrians or expect them to give me more space to walk around it. The rules of the road obligate cyclists to cycle in such a manner they do not have to swerve suddenly in front of another vehicle. So if you are cycling with due care and attention, at a reasonable speed, and behave like other road users you shouldn't swerve. Legislating for a 1.5 metre gap is just legislating to accommodate bad road behaviour.
There seems to be a fewer of these Ninja cyclists around these days, in my experience. There are some, including the ones who think hi-vis without lights is good enough, but not as many as there used to be. Maybe because you can get cheap lights just about anywhere, and decent lights for good prices in Aldi or Lidl from time to time.Who would be found responsible in a case of a cyclist wearing dark clothes with no reflectors or lights being hit on an unlit country lane at night? I used to watch Darwin candidates climbing on their bikes and heading off while I was attaching my lights and doing Christmas tree impressions.
Yes, but it's especially important for minority classes (like cyclists) where bad individuals can harm the whole class's perception.
.........Countries which have banned motorised traffic to allow free rein in certain areas of cities to cyclists enjoy something our cities don't; they have a joined up public transport system. We don't, so there's a bill to pay. If cyclists want change, they pay by direct taxation on bikes / cycling. They have already been the beneficiaries of the governments' bike to work scheme; maybe it's time to reverse that benefit.
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?