That website is propaganda group that both fuels and funds far-right movements. They are not journalists, but an influencing machine. The better subs have banned their links.
If you want to read about our asshat politician and this story in particular, it's covered here: https://irishcycle.com/2025/07/05/td-asks-about-making-high-vis-compulsory-for-all-pedestrians-cyclists-and-users-of-school-transport/
In other news, the Irish accidentally elected a car.
That tracks.
It should be noted that in rural areas, many roads are unlit and quite winding. Ireland has very high road density with lots of minor roads. Many people walk on these roads which have no path. Use of lights and reflective or hi vis clothing is sensible and already common.
I can understand. Once I encountered a jogger wearing a completely black outfit in a dark unlit road. The only reason I saw the guy was because there were a few reflective bits on his shoes. That was a nice scare.
Horrible. I hope your car wasn't traumatized. Let's call these "pedestrians" by their true name: terrorists! Because that's what they are. Terrorists, creeping around our roads at night, dressed in black, assaulting our vehicles, eating our cats and dogs.
Why are you being downvoted? I can't believe people are not able to see the clear sarcasm in your comment.
There all terrorists, obviously. Terrorists! Or maybe they can't take the idea of a traumatized car. But it happens, I'm telling you. It's the truth! Our cars are being traumatized, our dogs and cats are eaten, it happens every day!
I've come across similar cyclists, no lights, no reflectors, dark clothing. Just borderline suicidal.
Is wearing hi vis clothing sensible on country roads with no sidewalks? Yes.
Should it be mandatory just to go out on a walk? No. How about we lower speed limits on those roads or create safer roads. Walking is a basic human right (or moving about in whatever way you need to if your body doesn't allow you to walk). Driving a car is not.
Those roads already have a lower speed limit. I think the geography of the landscape and the neighbouring properties does not allow them to be more visible without loss of scenery.
Roads are designed for transport. Cars can be fatal. It's all well and good to say we should be safer but is wearing appropriate clothing when walking in a shared car pedestrian zone really be that onerous?
We already require the cars to have multiple safety standards to aid pedestrians and visibility. Cyclists are required to wear helmets in many places etc.
I am finding it odd that many comments talk about pedestrian freedom, yet jaywalking is illegal in many places but not in Ireland, where people can use their personal judgement and the cars are held responsible.
When my dad visited Dublin and the surrounding area, they were driving by another car on a road with a car they rented and the road was so narrow that the side mirror got knocked right off.
When they returned the car, the rental company was completely nonplussed because it happens so often. Afterwards, they started noticing that a lot of the cars had their mirror missing on the same side.
Sounds like Ireland should invest some of that money they earn from being a tax-haven into some proper infrastructure.
Seems like subsidizing free hi vis jackets is the way to go then, and let people decide.
What about kids? Should we let the parent decide or,.if it's a blatantly obvious way to protect them, should we prosecute parent that don't suitably dress their kids for the risk? Or require it. Personally, o don't have a problem with making it a requirement. Knowing the Irish gardaî, of expect light enforcement.
Use of lights and reflective or hi vis clothing is sensible and already common.
Thanks for sharing, would you say accidents happen enough to make this mandatory?
Like seatbelts, of it saves lives and is harmless, then why not. If no lives are saved, nobody is worse off. If one life is saved, it's worth it. Like seatbelts laws, the idea is a change in thinking not to fine people for non compliance.
I doubt it will become mandatory. It seems more like a thought bubble. Ireland used to have very high road death figures but has worked hard to change that.
Wouldn't reevaluating the road system to meet pedestrian needs better be a far saner response than trying to mandate everyone wear special clothing? Maybe convert a few of those roads from vehicle to pedestrian only and explore options to provide better lighting on both.
I think the why not is anyone leaving their house without the required vest could be ticketed. Even walking to a car. I know my wife would not be keen on having to wear a reflective vest over a fancy dress and I certainly would not want to wear one over a plain white tee or no shirt at all on hot days hiking somewhere.
Sounds like the speed limit should be 20km/h then.
12mph?! Never traveled rural areas? It would take me over 2 hours to get to my camp in the boonies and 26 hours to pick up my kids.
Wanna go faster? Get your politicians to build you safer roads. Pedestrian lives are not expendable.
Safer roads would mean a lot of environment destruction in such case (and very high cost, for the low traffic there). I would rather wear some hi-vis and keep narrow rural roads rural and narrow.
I don't appreciate using the environment as a cudgel to entrench the expendability of human lives in the altar of the fast car.
I don't think you've ever been to a rural area, have you?
Ooooo urban people and their weird "don't kill pedestrians" ideas.
Yeah, I'm guessing you've never been anywhere properly rural. The distances involved are huge, and there are almost no pedestrians, as going anywhere but the neighbour's place would mean walking for hours.
Putting in footpaths on every road would be an absurd amount of money.
Are we still talking about rural and periurban Ireland?
“Jay walker” propaganda all over again.
Very common in Ireland. The main contribution of the RSA (Road Safety Authority) over the past few years seems to be handing out high-vis elements to pedestrians and cyclists. The media is antropomorphising cars instead of blaming drivers, to the extent that statistics on the causes of crashes aren't being collected.
I mean, making sure drivers can see you seems like a very sensible thing to do. I've come across pedestrians on unlit roads, and any sort of high visibility clothing or a light makes them visible from multiple times the distance.
There's a reason cyclists are required to have lights outside of daylight hours where I live.
Pedestrians call for mandatory glasses for all driving members of parliament.
I'd propose to introduce a pedestrian's licence, too. Can't have these people just run around without any proper training!
So now our deference to cars is such that we all have to carry an extra garment just to walk the streets? That seems fine. /s
Sure, make it a problem of everyone else. Just please, please, don't inconvenience the car enthusiasts! 😭
What about streets that don't endanger others? Bike lanes that don't cross streets? Dunno, make car drivers drive careful?
Well if we're going to unnecessarily inconvenience a group of people, I think a national 5mph limit would have a better effect
He is not wrong. Makes it way easier to hit pedestrians.
Tap for spoiler
/s
Maybe they should also make it mandatory for pedestrians to carry rocket-propelled grenade launchers, and be trained in their operation.
This would hopefully make car drivers to exercise more caution.
/sarcasm that has an unfortunate chance of becoming reality in a few decades, you just watch
I recommend it. I can't tell you how many times I've had to slam on the breaks because some jackass decided to cross on the middle of a dark street in dark clothes.
How DARE people move around the landscape in the traditional way that humans have been locomoting for tens of thousands of years without considering YOUR needs!
(That is, if you can't see what's in front of your car, you need to slow down.)
e: typo
It's inexcusable in an urbanized area, there are crosswalks for a reason. We all have to share this wasteland, Andy while yeah it needs improvements, you're just making it worse by not at least trying to play nice with others.
Hi-viz doesn't do anything. There's no statistical difference in casualty rates between people wearing it and people not. Consider that drivers routinely plow into the back of emergency vehicles stopped by the side of the highway, completely wrapped in hi-viz, reflective material, and with million-lumen flashing lights. This is victim-blaming nonsense.
Not necessarily true. Hi-viz markings on vehicles have proven to reduce crashes by as much as 20%.
I don’t see why the same logic couldn’t be applied to crashes involving people.
I'd love to see a source for that claim, because I do drive in rural areas with no street lighting, and high vi's makes a person visible from multiple times the distance.
Also, people driving on the back roads tend to be paying a bit more attention.
A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/