Cyclists

[SoundMan]

Now that I think of it, how much space must one leave when passing a pedestrian on such a roadway, does anyone know ?

Very good point - the lycra brigade on their bicycles insisted that there should be at least 1.5 meters distance for overtaking at speeds of 50kph or higher, how come pedestrians on country roads aren't afforded the same limits by law?

 

[TheEarlofPearl]

Very good point - the lycra brigade on their bicycles insisted that there should be at least 1.5 meters distance for overtaking at speeds of 50kph or higher, how come pedestrians on country roads aren't afforded the same limits by law?

Firstly the 1.5m distance for cyclists never made it to law, the Dail term finished before Ross's amendment got voted in. The law currently states

“(1) (a) A driver shall not overtake or attempt to overtake if to do so would endanger or cause inconvenience to a pedal cyclist.
(b) A driver shall not overtake or attempt to overtake if to do so would endanger or cause inconvenience to a person other than a pedal cyclist.”.

Secondly there is no exact distance guidance for passing pedestrians however the UK recently amended theirs to 2m.

 

[SoundMan]

Firstly the 1.5m distance for cyclists never made it to law, the Dail term finished before Ross's amendment got voted in. The law currently states

“(1) (a) A driver shall not overtake or attempt to overtake if to do so would endanger or cause inconvenience to a pedal cyclist.
(b) A driver shall not overtake or attempt to overtake if to do so would endanger or cause inconvenience to a person other than a pedal cyclist.”.

Secondly there is no exact distance guidance for passing pedestrians however the UK recently amended theirs to 2m.

2m

Oh I bet the brexiteers loved that

 

[TheEarlofPearl]

2m

Oh I bet the brexiteers loved that

What difference does it make, surely you only pass a pedestrian when it is safe to do so and there's no oncoming traffic, it shouldn't matter that you have to give them that much space.

 

[Pooman]

What difference does it make, surely you only pass a pedestrian when it is safe to do so and there's no oncoming traffic, it shouldn't matter that you have to give them that much space.

I give both cyclists and pedestrians as much space as I can. Why risk it?

 

[SoundMan]

What difference does it make, surely you only pass a pedestrian when it is safe to do so and there's no oncoming traffic, it shouldn't matter that you have to give them that much space.

I've no bother at all giving other road-users sufficient space when I pass them. I think anyone who who "punishment passes" a cyclist, even chicken john, is a dangerous moron who deserves the full rigours of the law.
BUT ? I'm not a bit happy about cyclists who are so vociferous about their need for safety when motorists pass them, whizzing dangerously close to me when I'm walking, cycling, or driving.

 

[TheEarlofPearl]

BUT ? I'm not a bit happy about cyclists who are so vociferous about their need for safety when motorists pass them, whizzing dangerously close to me when I'm walking, cycling, or driving.

Are they the same cyclists?

 

[SoundMan]

Are they the same cyclists?

Probably

 

[TheEarlofPearl]

Probably

Nonsense, that is like saying motorists that consistently speed and break the law are also advocates to slow down. Not all cyclists are the same, some take the ROTR and their own safety very serious.

 

[SoundMan]

Nonsense, that is like saying motorists that consistently speed and break the law are also advocates to slow down. Not all cyclists are the same, some take the ROTR and their own safety very serious.

Absolutely. And some don't. And you see those who are most vociferous online about others not following the ROTR almost invariably don't even bother to have a bell on their bike but just carry on blithely ignoring that inconvenience. I was merely extrapolating ?