Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
BUTT CHEEKS BARED, Hanoi’s ragtag nudist club ignore the chilly weather to do their daily exercises – some swim, some jog, one performs military drills – stripping off and defying norms in the conservative communist nation.
Tucked behind banana trees on the banks of the city’s Red River, the men meet to shed their clothes, and modesty, for a cheeky dip, a game of chess, or yoga headstands in the buff – which they believe comes with health benefits.
“It’s important for us to come here because we want to be healthy, we call ourselves addicts,” said Nguyen Tuan Nghia, 43, a self-taught Buddhist who’s been disrobing at the meeting spot for 18 years.
For Nghia, who recently embraced Protestantism, getting naked is his way to return to infancy, making him feel like he was just “given birth (to) by Jesus or Buddha”.
Most of them have straightlaced day jobs as civil servants, journalists, or even state officials.
Skinny dippers
Many come every day – a temperature of 18 Celsius did not keep a few dozen skinny dippers out of the water on a recent afternoon, though many warm up over hot tea by the fire.
They say shedding their clothes makes them feel uninhibited, a rare chance to stray from the pack in the one-party state where social compliance and strict norms are taught from a young age.
“I feel relaxed… and it’s fun. I feel at ease when I come here, I exercise and it makes me feel better when I return to my day job,” vendor Nguyen Hoang Duong, 23, told AFP wearing nothing but an army green cap.
‘No skin disease’
Though public nudity remains taboo in much of Asia, nudist swimming clubs have popped up in conservative China, and tourist-haven Thailand boasts several ‘naturalist’ retreats mostly for foreigners, while public bathhouses have long been popular across Japan and South Korea.
But nudist bathing and beach-going is rare in Vietnam, a one-party state where porn is banned and communist propaganda posters are ubiquitous.
Nudity in art, photography, film and dance is subject to strict censorship by eagle-eyed authorities, though some exhibitions featuring nudes have been given the greenlight in recent months.
None of this phases the men at Hanoi’s nudist enclave, who also brush aside concerns that the Red River might not be clean enough for swimming.
They are not worried by rising levels of trash on the river’s edge, nor do they pay much attention to reports about polluted runoff from nearby factories.
“We’ve never had any skin disease or feel itchy at all, we think it’s quite clean here,” said 67-year-old Le Duc Lam, who says his own health has improved after swimming in the river, which flows from southern China to the South China Sea east of Hanoi.
For Lam, the skinny dipping sessions under the 115-year-old Long Bien bridge, today buzzing with motorbikes, are also a chance to escape the commotion of the fast-growing capital and have a bit of fun with friends.
His group is one of a handful that meet in different spots along the waterway, including one for women to swim in the buff.
Some hope the trend will catch on.
“Vietnamese people should be more open when they talk about nudist bathing. We shouldn’t be so modest about it like in the past,” said naked bather Nguyen Thi Thuy, wearing nothing but the hair on her head.
- © AFP 2017.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
“Be safe be seen l” ia there as part of road safety as long as I can remember I would have thought wearing a high vis jacket would have been a priority.
@Elizabeth Hourihane: if they Don’t do it in Belgium or the Netherlands , then we Don’t do it here.
@Tony Stack: That’s an interesting metric.
@Mark Scott: given it leads the way on a good cycling system and progressive and safe attitude to cycling its a very good metric.
@Mark Scott: just copy the Dutch , its simples
@Tony Stack: The Dutch have been integrating dedicated cycle lanes into roads since the 1970′s, so to copy the Dutch system we would have to rip up all the roads and start again at huge cost. Whereas a Hi-Vi is a couple of EUR per person.
@Tony Stack: look out your window This isn’t Belgium or the Netherlands. We are subject to Irish bus laws.
Fed up with every counter argument with look what they do over there.
@Brian McDonnell: amazing logic, instead of trying to fix the overall issue, just patch it up…
@Brian McDonnell: hi viz has been shown to make no difference to driver passing distances on cyclists. On fact the opposite seems to be the case. Plus, the Dutch didn’t have to rip up their roads and start again. Neither did the Danes, the Swedes or the Belgians, who have copied the Dutch model. If you think hi viz is the answer, you’re asking the wrong questions.
@James Wallace: It may have no difference on passing distances but it certainly has a difference on visibility. Cyclists should be wearing them, no question about it.
@Tony Stack: I thought you were taking the piss!!
@Padraig Bateman: superior cycling regime overall, but I’ve seen some crazy dangerous layouts in Holland too.
@Elizabeth Hourihane: So we can apply that to all vehicles, hi-viz yellow vehicles should stop the carnage on our roads.
@Brian McDonnell: You advocate shifting the burden and cost of road safety away from the source of danger to the potential victims. Also – there isn’t a shred of evidence that says hi-vis is effective. It’s nothing more than safety theatre.
@Padraig Bateman: I’m looking forward to seeing your evidence that it’s effective. I’m sure you have lots to hand…
@Elizabeth Hourihane: strangely enough you’d think so. A lot of research has been done on this and the empirical evidence suggests that high vis actually doesn’t make you more visible. I can attest that the time I was knocked down, I wearing a high vis and in daylight with my lights on… Nothing will protect you if motorists are not paying attention to their surroundings.
@James Wallace: why is it mandatory for motorcyclit’s then (learners) ? Same Dept, same Govt.
@Elizabeth Hourihane: most of my cycling clothing as high vis built into it. One jacket has high vis as one of the threads in the weave does that count? I suspect it would be too difficult to enforce unless you made everyone wear yellow vests. Which are ridiculous on a road bike as the strips are generally at the wrong angle.
@James Wallace: how do you figure that the dutch only started building more cycling facilities in th 60s as a response to rising car use.
@ed w: where did I say that? I said they didn’t have to dig up their roads and start again, like someone said we would have to. By the way, the Dutch began investing in proper cycling infrastructure as a result of parent power movement, that was a reaction to the numbers of kids being killed by motorists.
@Elizabeth Hourihane: May aswell just scrap Dublin Bikes and the equivalent Cork & Galway ones too, unless people always carry a hi-viz with them in case they might possibly cycle that day.
Cyclists should not be allowed on the road. They are a nuisance to pedestrians and motorists. They feel they do not have to follow the rules and must get to their destination without stopping and have no regard for other road users and are also very aggressive if approached. Be careful. They are a danger to society.
@Tony O Neill: Not all cyclists. Just the morning commuters.
@Tony O Neill: some motorists are the same Tony, worse at times. I do agree with you though, when I’m out cycling I’m embarrassed when other cyclists fly past at traffic lights etc. When I’m driving & see cyclists not lit up, I want to punch them in the face for being stupid and having no disregard for others aswell as themselves.
@Tony O Neill: very generalised there Tony. I cycle, I won’t bite you.
@Al Madzer: in fairness, cyclists that don’t follow the rules don’t scare me. Motorists do though
@Tony O Neill: #triggered
@Tony O Neill: and where would you put them, it’s illegal to cycle on the footpath, if you’d actually read the article?
@Tony O Neill: Ahh just the exact sort of brain dead comment I was expecting when I saw the headline.
@Tony O Neill: “Cyclists should not be allowed on the road”. Where do you think we should go? Do you realise that a very large proportion of cyclists are car owners?
Maybe we should get back in our cars instead and clog up the roads for dimwits like you.
@Tony O Neill: That’s what’s good about this article Tony, the guards will be targeting people with attitudes like you. Be careful out there.
@Al Madzer: I’m in a similar position to you. I have high viz gear, helmet and lights. The lot. As a cyclists and a motorist I would hope that it makes me a more conscientious road user. I know that I can make mistakes like the next person. Enforcement of both road users is the key I think and consistent enforcement at that. We are all trying to get somewhere and hopefully unscathed…..
@Tony O Neill: motorists should not be allowed on the road. They are a nuisance to pedestrians and cyclists. They feel they do not have to follow the rules and must get to their destination without stopping and have no regard for other road users and are also very aggressive if approached. Be careful. They are a danger to society
@Al Madzer: I’d go so far to say a lot of motorists are brutal. How many times have I narrowly missed getting ploughed into at Redmond sq wexford because some dozy idiot is in a hurry or on the phone or slapping the legs off the child in the back or while out cycling on roads drivers nearly slicing my hip off as they get too close. At all times I wear my helmet and Hiviz and I’m a big lump of a guy kinda hard to miss and cycling a white bike. Beggars belief really
@Ben Dromey: copycat!! Plagiarism.
@Tony O Neill: good trolling, fair play.
@Bilbo Baggins: the guards should do their duty and arrest these law breakers
@Tony O Neill: motorists kill over 1 million people every year every year world wide and cyclist are the danger to society? And that’s just road collisions, it doesn’t include the millions who die younger due to the air pollution cased by motorists. Get a grip, man.
@Tony O Neill: How many pedestrians were killed by motorists last year Tony? There’s your menace to pedestrians right there.
@Tony O Neill:
“They are a danger to society”
Who kills the most on roads – drivers or people on bikes…?
@Barra O Brien: I don’t drive, live on the outskirts of Dublin city and either walk or use public transport. I used to cycle until my bike was stolen and haven’t replaced it. I would agree that many cyclists are, indeed, a menace. They weave their way on and off footpaths in busy traffic as if it’s their right and I’m fed up of not being able to walk on a footpath without keeping an eye out for what’s coming from behind. I don’t know what the solution is, but it’s going to become even more of an issue as more and more people take to their bikes without any regard to the rules of the road and other road users and pedestrians.
@Tony O Neill: Drivers should not be allowed on the road. They are a nuisance to pedestrians and motorists and cyclists. They feel they do not have to follow the rules and must get to their destination without stopping and have no regard for other road users and are also very aggressive if approached. Be careful. They are a danger to society.
@Tony O Neill: You look like a BO smelling obese Taxi driver…
@Dotty Dunleary: close…..he’s bus driver for SE. Quite scary that cyclists share the road with him driving a 20 tonne bus.
@Michael Carolan: I hope he loses his bus driving licence.
@Tony O Neill: I agree that *subsection* of motorists who run red lights (as a motorist I witness it at junctions every-single-day) are an enormous danger to all other road users – other motorists, pedestrians crossing, cyclists, motorcyclists.
Hundreds of kilos of metal – scary scary stuff
The Gardaí should be stamping down on it or better yet have cameras that record this activity and take photos of reg no’s
@Tony O Neill: same as a lot of the drivers I see around Dublin too. They’re the ones breaking the rules the most and are more of a danger with a 2 tonne steel Box than any cyclist is.
Your statement is baffling.
@Tony O Neill: ah, our Tony is a “professional” coach driver with Swords Express…..possible THE most dangerous group on the road.
All cyclist’s should have to pass a road theory test before using the road
@George O Neill: and pedestrians as well?
@George O Neill: so what age do you propose this test is taken? 5 years of age?
@George O Neill: sure – then be able to fail it – slap an L plate on and still be able to drive/cycle
@Barry Somers: the age they take the test in the Netherlands is seven I think…..
@George O Neill: Where should the certificate of passing this test be displayed by the bicyclist?
@George O Neill: Your troll game is poor.
@Dotty Dunleary: like a driving license, it would be illegal for you not to produce it upon request by a Garda I guess
@davey boy: I don’t agree it’s not too bad
@George O Neill: because that system works so well for motorists that we don’t need fines or penalty points at all
@The Prancing Stag: totally unworkable…
@Dotty Dunleary: why?
@George O Neill: Did that when I learned to drive. What year did you do your test George? Before or after the theory test?
@Barry Somers: in the Netherlands children start bike and road regulation lessons in school at age 5. By 8 they’re cycling to school trips. Road safety is indoctrinated into them from an early age. They take the test in their last year of primary school. “In the Netherlands, all children in their last year of primary school must take two tests to earn a bike diploma. First, they sit for a multiple-choice exam on the rules of the road. Then, they head to the streets for a real-world biking test on a course that winds through traffic. The bike diploma is one of the reasons about half of all people in the Netherlands ride a bicycle at least once per day.”
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2013/09/21/how-much-you-know-about-bike-safety/wBwlu3gHDVl32kqxf0ndDN/story.html
@Barry Somers: brilliant lolol
@GClare: I’m not doing your Google searches for you!
@George O Neill: I’ve no argument with that in principle, but passing “road theory tests” doesn’t make every motorist a good driver / exhibit awareness or adhere to the rules of the road does it? Be honest now George.
@George O Neill: Doesn’t seem to work for drivers.
At the very least a cyclist using a main road should b required to wear some type of high visibility top and a helmet. Iv seen a cyclist recently that had a wing mirror in fairness to him. The government just passed a law that a learner driver can’t drive on the road unaccompanied but any dope can hop on a bike and cycle along in heavy traffic with no safety equipments.
@MarkSul: Ah, the anti cycling Neanderthals are up early this morning. Why are people like you so uptight about cyclists? Are you envious because you are not the active type? Maybe you smoke too much and are too overweight to hop up a bike. The level of antipathy from non cyclists is very odd. Has to be back to some major personal insecurities.
@Bat Daly: I run, a lot. I live in a rural area and run on the roads. I only run when it’s light and, when I hear a car coming I step into the margin so it can pass safely as it’s faster moving.
I do the same when I hear a motorcyclist and when I hear a cyclist. It’s polite and sensible.
Cyclists I meet whilst driving do not do the same. They believe that motorists should always have to be the ones to make the concessions as ‘we have an equal right to be on the road’. As a runner, I have an equal right to be on the road but pulling in and yielding to faster moving traffic is just the polite thing to do.
When cyclists begin to realize this, you will see attitudes towards them change. Until then, you reap what many cyclists around the country sow on your behalf.
It’s been shown that forcing motorists to wear helmets reduces injury far more than with cyclists. You’re right Mark, if we’re serious about safety then every car should be fitted with 5 helmets that are compulsary to wear, same as seat belts.
Then we can start talking about cyclists’ helmets.
@Dara O’Brien: Dara, good for you. You are not obliged to stand in and yet you do it. I also walk and run a bit and I also stand in when a car is coming because with the standard of driving I see, I am too scared not to stand in. Cycling is different, whilst a stop might be a welcome break for a runner or a walker, it’s just not safe or practical to pull in a bike when a car comes but is sometimes the only way. There are a lot of inconsiderate cyclists out there but the they don’t pose the same danger as inconsiderate motorists.
@Dara O’Brien: Sorry, but by and large that’s rubbish! “pulling in and yielding to faster moving traffic”
If when out on a bicycle I did that i’d never get home from all the stopping!
Besides, I don’t see city drivers pull in and clear out of my way when i’m cycling at 25kph and they are stopped or doing 15kph
@Bat Daly: I play two sports , don’t smoke. Jog regularly whilst wearing a hi visibility top. Actually praised a cyclist for having a wing mirror in my comment. Don’t c why a cyclist should have less safety equipment or training that a motorcyclist.
@Dara O’Brien: Motorists do not have equal rights to be on the road, they have to be licensed , which may be revoked , Cyclists legally have more rights to be on the road than motorists.
@JayK: do you seriously believe someone driving a car needs a helmet more than someone on a bike? Get a grip.
@MarkSul: “Don’t c why a cyclist should have less safety equipment or training that a motorcyclist.”
Are you saying that a motorcyclist on say a Sport bike with 150bhp available at the twist of the wrist and a capability of doing about 260 kph is the same as someone on a bicycle weighing 8kg and 0.1hp??
@MarkSul: Maybe you should get one?
A 2006 study showed that “280,000 people in the U.S. receive a motor vehicle induced traumatic brain injury every year” so you would think that wearing a helmet while driving would be commonplace. Race car drivers wear helmets. But since almost no one wears a helmet while driving a regular car, you probably fear that if you wore one you would look silly, attract the notice of the police for driving while weird, or the attention of another driver who took your safety attire as a challenge. (Car drivers are more likely to hit bicyclists who wear helmets.)
@MarkSul: I agree there has to be an effort on everyone to be safe. I wear bright clothing to help being seen. The reason I am against mandatory hi viz etc is because I don’t agree with anything that helps dumb down the level of driving skills a motorist should have. It would be a travesty if a motorist was absolved for killing a cyclist just for not wearing hi viz. There are many hazards at night on the roads, dogs, wildlife etc . You are expected to see them whether they are highly visible or not. It’s called driving with due care and attention.
@Dotty Dunleary: helmet (ok not a full motor bike one) lights, visibility top and knowledge of the rules of the road ya.
@Dotty Dunleary: if I’m in a crash with a cyclist because some other driver clips him on a roundabout and he lands in front of my car and gets a belt in head I won’t be going to hospital, the cyclist will. Surely suggesting compulsory helmets for cyclists on a major roads inst a bad idea? Never said they shouldn’t b on the road.
@MarkSul: A piece of foam and plastic cycle helmet is designed to stop more serious injuries from a low speed impact with the ground, not from stopping Mr. Car or Truck driver from rolling over someone’s head…
You should really Google these things before coming on here..
@Dotty Dunleary: go away your just being a troll. Your right tho, no helmet will never save someone’s life. Tell all d lads on the Tour de France not to bother.
@MarkSul: When you can’t raise a sensible logical counter argument in a debate then you should call the other commentator a Troll. And sprout some nonsense about a French bike race….
Come back when you start to have a little tiny bit of a clue of what you’re trying to talk about…
@Dotty Dunleary: do I need a counter argument for people not wearing helmets?
@Bat Daly: I live in an rural area, I work shift, leave when its dark and back when its dark, iv seen (just about) cyclist in all black gear in wet/ misty conditions. Anything that helps me and other divers see cyclists as early as possible should be encouraged if not enforced.
@MarkSul: See not c, motorbikes can hit speeds that cyclists never reach and easily kill the rider or pedestrians
@MarkSul: are you comparing cyclist in the Tour De France who can hit top speeds of 90 kmh with the grandmother who cycles down to the shop for a pint of milk? One is a high risk activity, the other isn’t.
@IrishSportives.ie: no I’m not on about speeds, I’m on about the damage a cyclist can take from a fall. Helmets can only help, but apparently not.
@IrishSportives.ie: and fair play to your grandmother for being so active. Good for her
@Bat Daly: Why do you think people who want better road awareness and safety for all are Neanderthals? Are you honestly suggesting some cyclists don’t adhere to the rules of the road? There are bad drivers on the road, there are also irresponsible, reckless cyclists who act like they’re in the Tour de France and own the footpaths as well as the road.
Mark, it’s a fact that forcing people in cars to wear helmets will cause a much, much larger reduction in head injuries than making cyclists wear helmets.
Do you not care about safety? I thought wanted to reduce injuries? Because if you oppose compulsory car helmets then it seems your point is actually incoherent. That you’re actually just waffling about something you don’t really understand at all.
@MarkSul: It sounds like a good idea, but they really don’t protect the brain from serious impact.
Also, let’s face it, cyclists in traffic have to be agile and keep their wits about them. It’s worth considering that a helmet can restrict your field of vision.
@Bat Daly: good points
@EillieEs: I think you are being a bit reductive and lumping a subset of the occasional/ casual cyclist type (who cycles on footpaths without giving a shit, etc) together with serious road bike users who in fairness you’ll never see doing that.
@MarkSul: So, in your scenario we have not just one, but two, drivers trying to kill a cyclist.
@MarkSul: How about drivers take some responsibility and use their mirrors and look around before entering and leaving lanes and before opening doors onto cyclelanes!
In the country at weekends we get large groups of cyclist travelling in bulk. These are impossible to safely overtake.
Cycling clubs should stagger their members at say 5 per group at maybe ten second intervals . Not all of us are going shopping – some of us need to get to work even at the weekend. Patients depend on us. The sheer amount of black clad unlit cyclists I did not see but did not run down makes by blood run cold.
Bit of common sense folks. Be safe be seen.
@willow moon: You Sir are a danger on the road
@Tony Stack: why? he is just stating his observation. I have also seen cycle groups travelling in bulk 3 or 4 abreast, not allowing anyone to overtake. this is something that has been drummed into me when I was a kid. cycle behind each other NOT beside each other. I have also gotten a fright a few times when eventually noticing black clad cyclists without lights when I was walking. though to be fair I have seen an uptake of helmets in the last year
@sue: I have yet to see one cycling club that allows more the two abreast and I have never seen someone with out a helmet on the big club spins. It just doesn’t happen. I will agree that I can’t understand cycling wearing all black, we even changed our club jersey so get a bright colour on the back so we could be seen. And unless the sun is splitting the stones i use front and back lights during the day. The cyclists you see are newbies who just haven’t a clue.
You were taught a wrong and dangerous thing then Sue. It’s safer to cycle two abreast. If you really care about safety then I assume you support that?
Or do you not care about safety at all and you’re just having a selfish whinge?
@sue: If your knowledge of road safety is based on what you learned back in the 70′s then I suggest you go look up RSA.ie and check the latest rules of the road…
@Tony Stack: I was giving you the benefit of the doubt before I saw this comment.
@davey boy: I’ve met cyclists five abreast on country roads. These cycling clubs act like they just bought the roads.
@willow moon: Every day local roads are clogged with cars causing tailback and traffic jams, a lot of these cars are black or dark colours, they should all be hiviz so that they are easy to see.
@davey boy: clubs are only a % of cycle traffic. There’s a huge amount of ‘spins’ at weekends that follow no rules.
@sue: Nobody cycles 3/4 abreast, cycling clubs promote safe cycling. It is perfectly legal to cycle 2 abreast and makes it easier to overtake.
@willow moon: Spot on! How many of these weekend warriors know the Rules of the Road? And how many have roadworthy bikes, i.e. with reflectors and bell?
I am a cyclist and they annoy me.
What about cars parking on cycle lanes posing a danger not only to cyclists but also to car drivers and pedestrians? It’s such a common behaviour in my area (south Dublin) and nobody does anything about it… Same with cars parking on foot paths.
@Aga Grandowicz: what about cars parking on footpaths?
Locally I can pick at least two streets where its actually impossible to walk down one side of the street because of the cars parked.
@Aga Grandowicz: it’s a joke alright, unfortunately it’s legal during certain times.
@Barry Somers: Yep, that’s what I mentioned as well. Such a money-making opportunity for clamping companies yet none of them seem to bother!
If I have my car headlights on , you should have a hi viz jacket and lights as well as a cyclist or pedestrian
@Mickey Finn: so all pedestrians should now have to wear hi viz at all times because motorists can’t drive.
You first mate.
@Mickey Finn: As a motorist you must drive with due care and attention for the sake of yourself, your passengers and other road users. In other words you cannot drive with your head up your azz. What part of its your responsibility to be aware of hazards do you not get?
@Mickey Finn: and all cars should be painted with hi-viz paint
@Mickey Finn: in the dark, cyclists are required to have lights. Same as cars and motorbikes. That should be enough. Demanding them to be draped in hi-viz is akin to having every car painted hi-viz.
@Barry Somers: all cyclists and pedestrians should wear hi viz. I realise this plays havoc with your fashion sense but it’s probably better to be easily seen. If you’ve ever driven a country road at night and met a pedestrian without one you’d appreciate the idea is sound.
@Bat Daly: we all have a responsibility to keep ourselves safe on the road. There’s no passing the buck when it comes to safety.
@Bat Daly: excluding for footpaths, you as a pedestrian you have a duty of care to not only yourself, but to your family and even drivers to not put you or them at risk. You are basically abdicating responsibility when you have an input. That’s just ignorant.
@Mickey Finn: exactly I was pulling out from the side of the road the other day. I nearly dropped my phone when this cyclist nipped past my bumper shouting something about me being in a cycle lane. Cheek of him. Idiot
If he’d been wearing a hi-viz gilet jaune, I might have at least caught a brief glimpse of him in the side view mirror whilst texting my buddy
Do you want road safety? First start with the actual road surface, get rid of the perpetual potholes, widen the roads for a genuine cycle path, and only sell cycles with proper safety lighting.
@John Flood: Stop using flashing headlights. If motorists did it, we would be fined. We just need to see you, not be distracted by your stupid flashing headlights….
@Sean Oige: You’re easily distracted, maybe you shouldn’t be driving.
@Sean Oige: Did you see the cyclist without flashing lights? No?
well there you go!
@Dotty Dunleary: strobe lights are not the only lights that bring on seizures, but I suppose cyclists don’t stay at traffic lights long enough to make a difference
@Sean Oige: whilst I see your point on flashing headlamps on bikes, you have proved the purpose of them, you can see them, my one complaint about them, some bike lights these days are very powerful and can be quite blinding like meeting an oncoming car with its full beams on, cyclists need to be aware of this and position them dipped accordingly, as you have to in a car.
I have come across cyclists using very powerful lights for road use that are actually designed for trail use, by which, I mean, they are blinding to oncoming traffic, great for trail use, but adjust them dipped a bit for road use.
@GClare: If you suffer from photosensitive epilepsy then you wouldn’t be licenced to drive, correct?
@Sean Oige: Flashing lights are legal.
@Andrew Giles: Maybe we need the stronger lights to be seen by all the cars with the blinding halogens? Many cars look like they have full beams on now.
What about cyclists putting themselves at risk
@Pajo Mata: let them
@Sean Oige: Sounds like we are so the likes of you on the road. You are probably one of those inconsiderate dangerous clowns who overtake cyclists with only inches to spare and don’t seem to know where your indicators are. These new rules are there for bad drivers like you.
@Bat Daly: I’m a very safe driver with no penalty points and full no claims bonus. I do however stop at red lights, don’t drive on the footpath, don’t clip or damage people’s wing mirrors, light up appropriately and drive on the part of the road that is meant for drivers. You can’t say the same about cyclists can you?
The morning commute / evening rush hour cyclists around Dublin are an absolute disgrace. How people can put them selves at risk weaving in and out and appearing out of no where is mind boggling. There is no other road user that behaves like cyclists do.
@Rob: agreed and then when your stuck at lights you’ve about ten of them sat in front and won’t move over. Half with the proper gear on and the other half dressed in dark clothing.
@Rob: Apart from motorists and pedestrians, I completely agree.
@TechBuzz Ireland: As a car driver, the onus is on you to see ALL potential hazards. If you are driving with due care and attention, you WILL see any pedestrian or cyclist dressed in dark clothing unless you are on checking Facebook posts, texting or checking your Spotify playlist which see a lot of motorists doing.
Is that why you want us to wear hi viz? So you can be asleep while behind the wheel?
No thanks.
@Rob: If motorists didn’t park in cyclelanes we might be able to use them.
If they had a high viz jacket rule , the Dublin bike rent schemes would not work. The same goes for making cyclist wear helmets compulsory.
@Martin Sinnott: helmet you have a point but it’s easy enough to leave a hi viz vest in the basket of a rental bike.
@Owen: is it really?
You think they won’t be stolen? …. Awww bless.
@Martin Sinnott: Hit the nail on the head here why Lord Ross never brought in legislation.. it would have cost Dublin Council a headache.. oh for the power of the lobbyist in Ireland over common sense.
@Barry Somers: they cost feck all and you can stick in pocket. Bless.
@TechBuzz Ireland: How much do they cost? Where do you get them? Bless.
@Sean Walsh: re cost of hi-viz
€3-4 from Halfords, Woodies; free from RSA
@Barry Somers:Who’s going to steal them? Hardly the cyclists and pedestrians who are objecting so strenuously to wearing them!
@Seamus Murphy: overly focussing on hi viz as some sort of a solution or cure-all is the problem, not cyclists refusing to wear them, as many cyclsts do wear them. The point is, they make no difference to driver behaviour. I wear hi viz on my commute, 2 lights on the front, 3 lights on the back, reflective tape everywhere and I still regularly have near misses due to ignorant drivers, and it can’t be because they don’t see me.
@IrishSportives.ie: just to clarify, its only a small minority of drivers, most are very careful around cyclists
@IrishSportives.ie: imagine if you weren’t wearing your hi viz and they really didn’t see you!
It should be illegal for cyclists to wear headphones, especially in the city. Cars have mirrors, bicycles do not. They are effectively shutting down one of the most important senses they have, as important as eye sight, which they should be using to keep safe. No mirrors, no headphones.
@Tommy Sea: Should it be illegal for cars to drive with their windows up?
@paul kelly: of course not. As I said, cars have mirrors, bicycles do not.
@Tommy Sea: I’m a cyclist and I do agree, no headphones with the exception of maybe a single Bluetooth device in one ear. It’s madness to not be 100% aware of your surroundings on a bike.
@Tommy Sea: I have a mirror on my bike so can I wear head phones?
@paul kelly: again, as said, no mirrors no headphones. If you have a mirror and can see what’s approaching from behind then knock yourself out with your music. If not then it should be illegal. You need to hear what’s coming. I’m not sure which part of this you’re having trouble understanding Paul.
@Tommy Sea: Tommy, you appear to be muddling hearing things with seeing things.
Mirrors and headphones (or car stereos, for that matter) both relate to situational awareness but they are nonetheless two distinct issues.
If, as you say, cyclists who use headphones “are effectively shutting down one of the most important senses they have, as important as eye sight, which they should be using to keep safe”, then the issue of car drivers’ ability to hear what is around them should be of equal concern to you (perhaps even greater concern, given the greater capacity of cars to cause serious injury or death) and, to avoid inconsistency on that point, you should be equally vocal in calling for car drivers to be banned from using stereos and driving with their windows closed, lest they effectively shut down one of the most important senses they have, as important as eye sight, which they should be using to keep safe.
I’m not convinced that you would make that latter argument, though you seem content to make the former without being troubled by your inconsistency.
Would you ban deaf people from driving or from cycling?
Cars have mirrors because they have large blindspots. Bicycles do not have those blindspots, so they do not need mirrors.
@Skangerland: bicycles should have mirrors, they should be mandatory. I’ve no problem with deaf people cycling, don’t twist things, as long as deaf people have mirrors all is good. Nothing worse than almost hitting some cyclist who has headphones on and just swerves out to overtake another cyclist. They should have mirrors so, like cars, they can check what’s behind them. Bikes don’t have blind spots? You must be one of those people that can swivel their head around 180 degrees so. What’s the problem with mirrors on bikes anyway? Surely anything that makes using the roads safer for everyone should be welcomed. But don’t let a small thing like safety get in the way of your rant. Good day sir.
@Tommy Sea: “bicycles should have mirrors” spoken like someone who never sat on a bicycle in 30+ years! Comical!
@Dotty Dunleary: what are you on about? I’ll have you know I cycle on a weekly basis, usually around the blessington lakes. And yes, I have a mirror on the right hand side so I can see trucks, buses and other heavy machinery approaching from behind while listening to my music. Safety first, it’s what keeps me alive.
@Tommy Sea: Ok, tell me this, while your looking into your rear view mirror are you watching what’s in front of you? i.e. potholes, other road users, overhanging bushes etc.?
Also when you turn your head to look behind you prior to moving across a lane of traffic for example, any drivers behind you will see your head turn and get some indication you’re going to do something; whereas with a mirror, the drivers behind you don’t see you checking the traffic and assume you’re riding straight. A recent talk I attended about cycling safety stressed the importance of giving clear signals to other road users and the ‘turning head to see behind’ was one of those signals.
@Dotty Dunleary: I don’t rely on other road users to see my head turning. Instead I put my arm out, like I’m supposed to, to let other road users know where I’m going. Again, safety first
@Tommy Sea: Arm out when you should be in control of your bicycle at all times in case you hit a pothole and end up under the wheels of car..
remember, safety first!
@Dotty Dunleary: I think I could cycle with one arm by the time I was 4 years old, no hands at 6. What’s your point? I’m quite capable of steering a bicycle with one hand, maybe you’re not but that’s your business.
@Tommy Sea: Bored answering you now, you’re happy with your mirrors good for you!
But in no way ever in a million years will they be mandatory on bicycle.
Adieu!
@Dotty Dunleary: they should be!
Laws should be applied equally.
Red light = STOP!
When was the last time a cyclist was fined for racing through a red light?
@Rodney Williams: I regularly have to count to 10 after the green man comes up at a crossing and wait for all the speeding cars busses and trucks to pass through the red light, haven’t seen one of them fined by the Gardai and the station is 5 mins down the road..
@Dotty Dunleary: I’ve been a pedestrian in and around the city centre every day for the past decade, I can count on one hand the number of times what you describe happened but I literally have lost count of how many times I’ve nearly been mowed down by cyclists running red lights and getting up on footpaths, indeed it’s rare for me to to go a day without seeing at least cyclist run a red light.
@Sarah: Did you have the head down looking at your smartphone and/or with the headphones on?
This is endemic of in particular but not solely young women coming home from work in the city centre around 5.30pm every weekday..
@Dotty Dunleary: are you now pedestrian blaming?
@GClare: Cop onto yourself and grow up!
@Dotty Dunleary: So If I’m walking across the road when the man’s green it’s MY fault if a cyclist running a red light hits me because I have headphones on? That’s a nice bit of victim blaming eh?
@Sarah: now you’re making things up to suit your own agenda
@Sarah: I’m a motorist, cyclist and a pedestrian. I witness a subsection of ALL three ( yes cars, vans, trucks and buses) on a daily basis breaking red lights.
And c’mon, let’s be realistic Irish pedestrians would win the jaywalking Olympics!
@Dotty Dunleary: what agenda? I’m just relaying my experiences. Ive seen significantly more cyclists running red lights in the city center than cars or vans. And I’m absolutely not making anything up indeed when I wrote that comment I was thinking of an incident that happened last week on my way home, and no, I didn’t have earphones in and I wasn’t jaywalking. What you’ve done is try to excuse cyclists who run red lights by claiming pedestrians should be more vigilant or simply deny that it happens despite a quick glance at the comments showing countless people who’ve had similar experiences… however based on your comments here it seems you have some sort of massive chip on your shoulder as you’re hotly denying and excusing any wrongdoing on a cyclists part
Great, and what about cyclists who endanger pedestrians or those who endanger themselves by believing that because they’re on a bike the rules of the road don’t apply to them?
@Sarah: like pedestrians obey red lights
yeah right Sarah
Thought there was a law brought in a couple of years ago about cyclists cycling on the footpath s with a 50 euro fine? And does this law also apply to gardia cyclists who also think they have a right to abuse the footpath
@liam ward60: How do you abuse a footpath? Is the use of intemperate language? Is it shouting at it? Maybe stomping your feet?
Cyclists who don’t drive have no idea how hard it can be to see them on a badly lit road, of course high vis jackets should be mandatory for all cyclists.
@dorothy giselsson: Most cyclists drive.
@Bat Daly: statistics please
@Maria Hickey-Fagan: What? I am speaking anecdotally. All of my cycling friends have cars. I only know one man in his 60′s who doesn’t have a car and cycles 7kms each way to work Winter and Summer. He definitely is a rare breed. I don’t need statistics to prove my point.
@Maria Hickey-Fagan: Are you that lazy that you can’t do your own search on Google??
Yes The Journal PPE (helmets & hi-viz) is the very least effective measure for safe cycling. Can we not have a piece on the importance of investing in safe segregated cycling infrastructure ? #allocate4cycling
@Kevin O’Farrell: Well said, this country is a disgrace for supporting sustainable transport options…. Most journeys made by car in Dublin are less than 3 to 5km, easily done by bicycle if it was safe.
Gosh, it’s against the law for cyclists to cycle on footpaths, crash red lights and cycle through pedestrian crossings while people are on them! Who’d have guessed that?
And it illegal to drive or park on the footpath , but it occurs every day.
@Des O’Leary: it’s illegal for motorists to break red lights. I see it happening every day without fail – no lie, no exaggeration Des
The absolute disgrace here is the resistance by those in government, the courts and Gardai not to support the minimum passing distance!
Other countries and US states can do this apart from little old motor centric Ireland.
The roads are crowded with vehicles and distracted drivers, without the MPD law and enforcement of the law you’re basically extremely vulnerable on bicycle.
Bring in the MPD and or build a network of Dutch standard cycle lanes.
How could it be mandatory to dress like a construction worker – mandatory helmet wearing should be first and foremost
@Jake: It’s called common sense. I would never consider going out walking or cycling without some form of hi viz.
@Jake: I don’t think it should be mandatory but also it doesn’t have to look like you are a construction worker. There is some good gear available now from top brands (Castillo, Ale, etc.) that looks quite smart. Personally I don’t see the issue, I cycle a lot and prefer to be lit up on busy roads. But that’s just my opinion.
@Jake: Mandating helmets appears to make intuitive sense, but when you actually look at the evidence, it is not at all convincing. There’s a short BMJ article that sets it out clearly: https://www.bmj.com/content/346/bmj.f3817?ijkey=I5vHBog6FhaaLzX&keytype=ref
I’d be happy with mandatory hi vis if we also have mandatory jail terms for hitting a cyclist wearing hi vis.
If it actually works like a magic visibility cloak then there can be no objections, right? Right?
@Hundredth Idiot: and if cyclists who break red lights also get penalised? Right, right?
@Anthony Edward Healy: they do, but are outnumbered by red light breaking drivers.
http://www.stickybottle.com/latest-news/8-times-more-drivers-than-cyclists-caught-breaking-red-lights-in-dublin/
Cyclist’s should wear hi viz by default, be madeline identifiable simple as. OK many do but many don’t.
There is a cycle lane at Grand Canal / Lower Mount Street that has specific green and red lights for cyclists, I work beside the canal, they completly ignore the red lights and I have seen so many pedestrians being knocked over week after week. And I have had a few near misses, and been shouted at by cyclists who broke the red light!
@Anthony Edward Healy: So the hospitals are full of pedestrians knocked over by cyclists? My oh my. Perhaps you should get on with your work instead of staring out of the window all day.
Cyclists have the right to be on the road, motorists do not, and may only do so under license.
Yet many motorists feel that they own the road ( because they pay “road tax”) and that cyclists should get out of their way.
@paul kelly: with rights come obligations. Rules of the Road apply equally to cyclists
@paul kelly: there’s no such thing as road tax. You may be thinking of motor tax which is based on engine emissions.
Even school kids?
I love the way people generalize when talking about cyclists. I wonder do you generalize about motorists the same way. You know, one brakes a red light then we all must do it. We are always going to road users that brake the law whatever type of transport they use. Just make sure you’re the better person and don’t. Keep the roads safe for everyone
Please someone tell me who has right of way. Cyclist has cycle lane on path.. yet uses the road. Causing traffic to build up behind cyclists, who has the right of way ?
@Psych-nesss: a cyclist has the same right of way on the road as any other road user car truck horse and cart or bus . Most often if there’s a burden of behind a cyclist in city traffic it has no impact as once you get past the pinch point the cars usually catch up to the traffic ahead of them so it saves them no time at all ,I routinely get overtaken when you can see traffic 50m metres ahead only to catch up and ovetlrtake again 10 second later
@Psych-nesss: cyclist has right of way and I’m a motorist.
More law d daws with a revenue sting attached
What kind of idiot would not see a link between visible and being involved in an accident. From building sites to farms to factories their worth has been proven. Why cant we get a person making these decions with at least one brain cell.
@jp tobin: Hi vis has not been proven.
https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/latest-news/making-high-vis-compulsory-reduce-number-crashes-study-finds-374898
Drivers should not be allowed on the road. They are a nuisance to pedestrians and cyclists. They feel they do not have to follow the rules and must get to their destination without stopping and have no regard for other road users and are also very aggressive if approached. Be careful. They are a danger to society.
@Angry car driver: does that include my kind yeah? You’d be screwed in a week if we were taken off the road.
It is good to see so many cyclists on the road. However they fail to use designated cycle lanes despite the rules of the road stating that “cyclists must use cycle paths or cycle lanes where they exist”. This should be promoted with the use of appropriate signage reminding cyclists of their responsibilities.
Also while LED lights are great for visibility, the issue with them is that they are quite powerful, and can easily dazzle drivers as there is nothing to prevent them from being shone directly in a drivers eyes.
@John Valentine: It’s not a law that bicyclists must use a cycle lane, and no cycle lanes are mandatory, go look it up.
Led lights help keep cyclists safe, are you against that?
@Dotty Dunleary: where cycle lanes exist, their use should be mandatory. Otherwise do the taxpayer a favour and rip them out and replace with a car lane. You can’t have it both ways.
@John Moylan: Zzzzz come on now, you can do better than that?
@John Valentine: They don’t use cycle lanes because cars park in them (illegally).
What about the cyclists who are now cycling the wrong direction in the cycle lanes. Since when has this become acceptable.
Comment are gas as usual. A lot of cyclists stop at red lights, are well behaved, wear clothing to make themselves viable and have from and rear lights yet continue to encounter dangerous drivers on a daily basis. Some motorist are cocconned in the car obvilious what’s going on around them.
Here I sort the problem for the tw@ts. Create proper bicycle lanes .
It is expected that more cyclists will die as more people use bicycles and there is a lack of infrastructure.
There is no use bringing in penal laws against car drivers . Shane Ross sits in his tower bringing in laws that he has no clew about since the clown does not even drive.
Most of the roads are not adapted for cyclists. And another case..Last evening a moron wearing black and no light decided to cross the road at the last moment even so he saw me coming. Legislation should start by passing the code prior to ride a bike on the road at least…
@Dominic Leleu: “Most of the roads are not adapted for cyclists”
Ah so you get one of the points of introducing MPD laws? To make up for the poor road design.
@Dominic Leleu: the roads were designed for walkers, horses, bikes, and then cars etc. The cars are the newcomer to the party.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2018/11/16/cyclists-spend-40-more-in-londons-shops-than-motorists/amp/
Cyclists = good
Motorists = bad
It should be a requirement for walkers and cyclists to wear high visibility clothing while out and about…..
@Kevin O’Neill: especially for protests
Why Lord Ross was appointed to Transport I’ll never know. For god sake the man doesn’t even drive yet here he is making laws on road traffic matters. Any chance of somebody who understands all road users and has a background in Transport might one day be appointed Transport minister?
Can we also stop Motorbikes using the cycle lanes too thanks
Cycle lanes are the new lane for motorcyclists now also bus lanes,if they are going to target some road users they should target them all,city center is a shambles,parking on footpaths,the Magic hazzard lights,clear way times just ignored,lights don’t matter to some cyclists,traffic lights don’t matter to anybody now,I know one road which just has shop owners parked there all day because it is free,no parking for customers?? As I said there are no laws in Dublin city concerning any road user now.
In Spain motorist are very careful with cyclists.
The reason – if car hits a cyclist the liability is automatic on the motorist.
Same in the Nederlands
Every bicycle should have flashing lights front and rear, day and night. These bloody cyclists in black/ blue Lycra are a menace. The idiots who put rucksacks over their hi-vis vests are the same.
Every bicycle should have flashing lights front and rear, day and night. These cyclists in black/ blue Lycra are a menace. The idiots who put rucksacks over their hi-vis vests are the same.
So many fabulous cycle lanes in Dublin,unfortunately it sometimes leaves half the width of a van to avoid driving in cycle lane,it’s physically impossible not to.
Every bicycle should have flashing lights front and rear, day and night. These bloody cyclists in black/ blue Lycra are a menace. The idiots who put rucksacks over their hi-viz vests are the same.
have your say