Register to Comment
Page 658 of 744 FirstFirst ... 158558608648656657658659660668708 ... LastLast
Results 6,571 to 6,580 of 7431
Like Tree2998Likes
  1. #6571
    Dadaist Dadaist is offline
    Dadaist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    14,054

    Quote Originally Posted by Iusedmename View Post
    I disagree with the law myself, 1.5 meters is taking the piss. But it can't be that hard to enforce an over-taking law. Stick a dashcam on the bike and let the cyclists come to the Gardai with proof.

    Require plates on Dublinbikes and on the spot fines/confiscation of bikes would take care of the cyclists.

    3 points seems fair enough when you consider they're not risking scratching up someone's paint-job, they're risking breaking legs and killing people but it should be reduced to .5 meters or maybe 1 meter.
    .5 of a meter is a foot and a half. 1 meter is 3 feet. A driver can't overtake a cyclist without moving into the oncoming lane or the right hand lane where there is more than one lane. To overtake a cyclist these lanes must be clear, even if the car needs to just go a foot into the other lane. I really don't see the issue with 1.5m.

    I agree with some of your suggestions about penalising cyclist. Also, I have to say I have no problem during rush hour hugging the curb to make it easier for drivers overtaking. But that is just me being relitively comfortable with this.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  2. #6572
    Cdebru Cdebru is offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    5,332

    Quote Originally Posted by sic transit View Post
    There is only so much space on a road. I see no great issue with the idea but there is little clear way to enforce and demonstrate such a law and 3 points is incredibly harsh for what is a minor infraction. The lack of enforcement of fines for cyclists breaking red lights is a good example of how such traffic laws are viewed.

    The solution is to wait until you do have sufficient space to pass, if you come across a slowermoving car on the road you don't plow into it because there is not enough room to overtake it safely, you wait till there is.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  3. #6573
    Cdebru Cdebru is offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    5,332

    Quote Originally Posted by Iusedmename View Post
    I disagree with the law myself, 1.5 meters is taking the piss. But it can't be that hard to enforce an over-taking law. Stick a dashcam on the bike and let the cyclists come to the Gardai with proof.

    Require plates on Dublinbikes and on the spot fines/confiscation of bikes would take care of the cyclists.

    3 points seems fair enough when you consider they're not risking scratching up someone's paint-job, they're risking breaking legs and killing people but it should be reduced to .5 meters or maybe 1 meter.

    Tell you what, i will lend you a bicycle and then close pass you at 50kmh in a car, see if you think it is taking the piss after that.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  4. #6574
    McSlaggart McSlaggart is offline
    McSlaggart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    15,374

    Quote Originally Posted by Dadaist View Post
    I have no problem during rush hour hugging the curb to make it easier for drivers overtaking. But that is just me being relitively comfortable with this.
    Do not do that it may get you killed. It apparently encourages people to overtake when they should not do so.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  5. #6575
    Iusedmename Iusedmename is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    786

    Quote Originally Posted by Cdebru View Post
    Tell you what, i will lend you a bicycle and then close pass you at 50kmh in a car, see if you think it is taking the piss after that.
    Cycling's been my primary mode of transport for the last twenty years. I do think it's taking the piss.


    Quote Originally Posted by Dadaist View Post
    .5 of a meter is a foot and a half. 1 meter is 3 feet. A driver can't overtake a cyclist without moving into the oncoming lane or the right hand lane where there is more than one lane. To overtake a cyclist these lanes must be clear, even if the car needs to just go a foot into the other lane. I really don't see the issue with 1.5m.
    I'm not being rhetorical when I say that I don't understand why you're replying with conversions to imperial measurements.

    I'd say that the issue with it is that it's unnecessary. It's a sliding scale of all the obvious arguments; it's dangerous to force exaggerated movements, it blocks up traffic, if it's overly cautious people ignore it etc There's a balance point, maybe you think it's 1.5 (or more) I think it's a lot less.
    Quote Originally Posted by Dadaist View Post
    I agree with some of your suggestions about penalising cyclist. Also, I have to say I have no problem during rush hour hugging the curb to make it easier for drivers overtaking. But that is just me being relitively comfortable with this.
    What can I say? I think everyone should be required to be as courteous as we two fine specimens.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  6. #6576
    Iusedmename Iusedmename is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    786

    Quote Originally Posted by Dadaist View Post
    .5 of a meter is a foot and a half. 1 meter is 3 feet. A driver can't overtake a cyclist without moving into the oncoming lane or the right hand lane where there is more than one lane. To overtake a cyclist these lanes must be clear, even if the car needs to just go a foot into the other lane. I really don't see the issue with 1.5m.

    I agree with some of your suggestions about penalising cyclist. Also, I have to say I have no problem during rush hour hugging the curb to make it easier for drivers overtaking. But that is just me being relitively comfortable with this.
    Quote Originally Posted by McSlaggart View Post
    Do not do that it may get you killed. It apparently encourages people to overtake when they should not do so.
    I'd say he's talking about slow moving city traffic, given s/he says 'rush hour'.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  7. #6577
    sic transit sic transit is offline
    sic transit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    25,739

    Quote Originally Posted by Cdebru View Post
    The solution is to wait until you do have sufficient space to pass, if you come across a slowermoving car on the road you don't plow into it because there is not enough room to overtake it safely, you wait till there is.
    The issue is not the safety element, which is a given, but a reliable and prosecutable determination of the distance between. That's where it risks falling down completely. Like all of these things those lovely RSA middle of nowhere videos do not reflect the reality of most road users and do not help driver decisions.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  8. #6578
    Iusedmename Iusedmename is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    786

    Quote Originally Posted by sic transit View Post
    The issue is not the safety element, which is a given, but a reliable and prosecutable determination of the distance between. That's where it risks falling down completely. Like all of these things those lovely RSA middle of nowhere videos do not reflect the reality of most road users and do not help driver decisions.
    Could you explain what exactly is the difficulty of looking at a video of a close pass and determining the distance?
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  9. #6579
    sic transit sic transit is offline
    sic transit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    25,739

    Quote Originally Posted by Iusedmename View Post
    Could you explain what exactly is the difficulty of looking at a video of a close pass and determining the distance?
    I'm talking about RL and how it could be made work. That's essential if you're going to issue points to drivers. This thing has court challenge written all over it. There are many, many roads where 1.5m is not feasible.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  10. #6580
    Dadaist Dadaist is offline
    Dadaist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    14,054

    Quote Originally Posted by Iusedmename View Post
    Cycling's been my primary mode of transport for the last twenty years. I do think it's taking the piss.


    I'm not being rhetorical when I say that I don't understand why you're replying with conversions to imperial measurements.

    I'd say that the issue with it is that it's unnecessary. It's a sliding scale of all the obvious arguments; it's dangerous to force exaggerated movements, it blocks up traffic, if it's overly cautious people ignore it etc There's a balance point, maybe you think it's 1.5 (or more) I think it's a lot less.
    What can I say? I think everyone should be required to be as courteous as we two fine specimens.
    My point is that there is not enough awareness of the fact that it is down right dangerous to overtake a cyclist whilst still being in the same lane as the cyclist. I have no issue with a driver overtaking on me in this way whilst moving at low speed i.e. the rush hour reference. Let's forget the 1.5m proposal for a moment. How else can we create awareness that drivers must safely leave their lane to overtake a cyclist, thus getting it across that close passes are utterly unnecessary as the lane the overtaking driver must move into to overtake the cyclist must be clear. As in 100% clear. So the actual distance advised for passing becomes pretty much irrelevant, as if you overtake leaving 1m you can just as easily overtake at 1.5 as you will always have a free lane to mover into whilst overtaking.

    It's a sliding scale of all the obvious arguments; it's dangerous to force exaggerated movements, it blocks up traffic
    A driver either has enough room to safely pass a cyclist or they don't. For me the focus on the actual passing distance misses the point. Many drivers simply are not aware of how much room is needed so as to not endanger a cyclist when passing at speed. This isn't just about urban environments either. As any road cyclist will tell you, you are taking your life into your hands on busy single lane rural roads, especially with 100 km speed limits. On straight sections drivers will often overtake a cyclist at speed with oncoming traffic. As in they will overtake at 100-120km whilst still being in the same lane as the cyclist with traffic oncoming.

    Just as would be the case in the picture you provided. It is madness. I have stopped using many road sections for this reason. Roundwood to Kilmacanogue in Wicklow being one example.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

Sign in to CommentRegister to Comment