On 08/01/2024 11:47 am, Simon Mason wrote:

Ah, looks like Brendan Gleeson has been left in charge of the police social media account again…

Because – less than a year after they were forced to retract a tweet wrongfully claiming (link is external) that high visibility clothing was mandatory for pedestrians and cyclists – An Garda Síochána, Ireland’s national police force, has once

again found itself embroiled in an online row over the clothing choices of vulnerable road users.

The row stems from a tweet posted by the Garda’s traffic and road safety account yesterday, informing us that “while on patrol, Naas Roads Policing observed this pedal cyclist in dark clothing with no front or rear lights”.

Of course, having a front and rear light on your bike while riding on public roads during ‘lighting up hours’ – between half an hour after sunset and half an hour before sunrise – is a legal requirement in Ireland, with those found not using

lights in that time period slapped with a €40 Fixed Charge Penalty Notice (the one our Grafton Street cyclist from the weekend got slapped with, before he indulged in some kicking).

However, as many – including politicians and cycling campaigners – noted on Twitter soon after the police’s post, wearing “dark clothing” is not against the law, as noted by the police itself when it responded “Oops, we got that wrong”

following last year’s ill-advised hi-vis tweet.

“Disappointing to see Garda Traffic make reference to clothing here,” Ciaran Cannon, a Fine Gael TD for Galway East, wrote.

“There is no legal requirement to wear any particular kind of clothing when cycling.

But in Ireland, there IS a a legal requirement for chavs riding
chav-bikes to display mandatory lighting when using the roads during the
hours of darkness.

Making reference to clothing creates confusion about the law and leads to victimisation of cyclists, often in court.”

Referring to a careless driving case from 2018, when a judge and police officer in Kildare claimed (link is external) that a cyclist was not wearing the “proper” or “correct gear” at the time a taxi driver hit them, Cannon continued: “Such

confusion and misinformation allows judges to make [such] erroneous statements.”

“When you observe cars and issue FCPNs, why don’t you comment on the colour of the car?” asked the Cycling in Kilkenny account.

“After all, black cars at night are harder to see. There's no legal requirement in relation to clothing colour, only lights. FCPN is justified but the mention of clothing is not.”

Meanwhile, Phil Skelton, founder of the Stayin’ Alive at 1.5 campaign, added: “Just so that we are clear here, the FCPN was issued for not using lights during lighting up hours – and not for the colour of the clothing?”

“No issue with the FCPN being issued here but let’s not cause further confusion. Will you issue a clarification post, Garda Traffic?”

Can’t wait for another “Oops, sorry about that” post, only for the same thing to be repeated next year…

(Oh, and for those who didn’t get the reference in the first line of this story, go watch The Guard. It’s brilliant.)

https://road.cc/content/news/cycling-live-blog-8-january-2024-306065#live-blog-item-53673

This was the case of the chav-on-a-bike who was illegally using the
roads at night with absolutely NO LIGHTS, wasn't it?

And which part of the UK contains "Kildare"?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)