Post by: alnjan on December 22, 2015, 10:01:24 PM
http://roadsafety.transport.nsw.gov.au/campaigns/go-together/index.html (http://roadsafety.transport.nsw.gov.au/campaigns/go-together/index.html)
Drivers must give bicycle riders at least a metre of space
From 1 March 2016, drivers who pass a bicycle rider must allow a distance of at least:
1 metre when the speed limit is 60km/h or less
1.5 metres when the speed limit is more than 60km/h
If drivers cannot pass a bicycle rider safely, they should slow down and wait until it is safe to pass the rider, leaving the minimum distance. To help drivers provide the minimum distance, some exemptions to the road rules will apply.
As long as a driver has a clear view of any approaching traffic and it is safe to pass the bicycle rider, the driver will be exempt from the following road rules:
Keep to the left of the centre of the road (two-way road with no dividing line)
Keep to the left of the centre of a dividing line - broken and unbroken lines
Keep off a dividing strip
Keep off a painted island
Driving within a single marked lane or line of traffic
Moving from one marked lane to another across a continuous line separating the lanes
Driving penalty
Drivers caught not allowing the minimum distance when passing a bicycle
rider face a $319 fine and a penalty of two demerit points.
Bicycle riders over 18 must carry photo ID
From 1 March 2016, all bicycle riders aged 18 and over must carry photo identification. If you don’t have a driver licence, you can apply for a NSW Photo Card. A 5-year NSW Photo Card costs $51. A NSW Photo Card is issued free of charge for eligible concession holders, people who receive a Centrelink Carer Allowance and NSW Seniors Card holders. The Roads and Maritime Services website has full details on the NSW Photo Card.
Increased penalties
Like drivers, the majority of bicycle riders have safety in mind most of
the time. The new penalties will only apply to riders who engage in
dangerous behaviour or break the law.
Fines for five offences will increase so that bicycle riders receive the
same fines as motorists for high risk behaviour. Increased penalties
will apply to bicycle riders who are caught:
Not wearing a helmet (up from $71 to $319)
Running a red light (up from $71 to $425)
Riding dangerously (up from $71 to $425)
Holding on to a moving vehicle (up from $71 to $319)
Not stopping at children's/pedestrian crossings (up $71 to $425)
Penalties for other bicycle rider offences will also increase from $71 to $106, including the offence of riding at night without lights.
Bicycle riders should provide pedestrians with a metre of space on shared paths
Bicycle riders are also encouraged to allow pedestrians a metre of space on shared paths, where possible.
Post by: tk421 on December 22, 2015, 11:29:09 PM
As a cyclist I don't have an issue with any of this. I already carry photo ID when I ride as I'm fully insured on my bike and an organ donor. If the worst happens if like them to know. I don't actually see the need for ID as the cops have been handing out fines to cyclists quite well without it. Minor thing though and I'll accept it as a compromise over rego. (Countless studies show bike rego will cost more to implement than it will make )
The only potential issue I see is for full carbon bikes not having enough metal to set off the induction coils at the lights.
The biggest argument against all this is for congested areas like Sydney where they should be encouraging more bike commuting, but the fines seem to be aiming at discouraging it.
I commuted by bike in London for 5 years and tried an experiment. I rode to all the rode rules including red lights and then ignored them the next day. My commute was 3 mins longer over a 8km commute when I followed the rules. I figured 3mins vs me dieing was a fair compromise and didn't break them again
Post by: Jeepers Creepers on December 23, 2015, 04:08:38 AM
Post by: tracker on December 23, 2015, 05:37:43 AM
Popcorn time
X2
Post by: Homer_Jay on December 23, 2015, 05:51:32 AM
The biggest argument against all this is for congested areas like Sydney where they should be encouraging more bike commuting, but the fines seem to be aiming at discouraging it
Those bloody fines, discouraging people doing the wrong thing. I just can't understand it myself.
WTF ???
Post by: Jackdawg on December 23, 2015, 06:04:26 AM
Seriously though the recommendation on cyclists giving the pedestrians should be a law, not a recommendation and they could do with introducing it in Qld as well. Sick of being nearly run over by bike riders on shared paths because they cant wait 20 seconds for a clear path around pedestrians
Post by: muzza01 on December 23, 2015, 06:51:12 AM
Post by: D4D on December 23, 2015, 07:11:46 AM
The only potential issue I see is for full carbon bikes not having enough metal to set off the induction coils at the lights.
Please explain?
Post by: Hoyks on December 23, 2015, 07:43:18 AM
They are induction coils. Put a ferrous metal lump in them, on them or move it over them (like a car or a motorbike) it changes the the magnetic field which induces a current in the coil, the traffic light controller interprets this as a vehicle is waiting for the lights and the lights change.
The problem with a carbon fiber bike is that there is bugger all steel to induce a change in the coil, so the lights don't change.
With race type light weight trailbikes it can also be an issue because they are mostly alloy and quite tall. Some claim that rare earth magnets stuck to the frame can help, no idea if it is true or not. If the thing isn't picking up the stator magnets and the spinning crank, then I don't think a little button magnet pilfered from a hard drive is going to cut it.
Post by: tk421 on December 23, 2015, 08:00:59 AM
Please explain?
As Hoyks said. A full carbon fibre bike won't have enough metal to set lights off so a cyclist could be waiting a long time to get the lights to change in less busy streets.
A mostly carbon bike, like mine, should have enough metal to set it off (gears/chain/rims/pedals) but only if the coil sensitivity is adjusted correctly.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: D4D on December 23, 2015, 08:03:56 AM
Post by: tk421 on December 23, 2015, 08:05:05 AM
Great idea with the $425 fines and photo ID. Bring that to QLD. I see bike riders running red lights every day but I have never seen one be caught by the Police.
http://m.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/police-crackdown-on-cyclists-catches-more-than-300-committing-offences-in-12-hour-period/story-fnpn118l-1227415192127
My commute in London had a major intersection where bike cops would hangout every 6 mths or so and ping the cyclists. Always made me chuckle seeing them pulled.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: edz on December 23, 2015, 08:33:51 AM
Popcorn time
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBYjZTdrJlA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBYjZTdrJlA) ther ya go !!! ;D ;D
Post by: gronk on December 23, 2015, 09:23:14 AM
as I'm fully insured on my bike and an organ donor.
Does that mean if you run into the side of a car, your insurance pays for the damage ?
Post by: gronk on December 23, 2015, 09:32:33 AM
The problem with a carbon fiber bike is that there is bugger all steel to induce a change in the coil, so the lights don't change.
If the pushy rider wears a metallic vest, he can jump off the bike and lie on the sensing pad.....sort of kills 2 birds with the one stone !!! ;D ;D ;D
Post by: muzza01 on December 23, 2015, 09:57:26 AM
The Cairns CBD is the worst. I remember writing a post on MySwag a couple of years ago where I was crossing as a pedestrian on a green walk sign and got cleaned up by a cyclist halfway across.
I didn't see him or hear him coming just felt his arrival. He did say sorry and that he didn't see me. I said but your light was red, gave him a big shove and he took off again through the red light.
We all make mistakes and nobody is perfect but he would of had to ride between stationary cars to get to that intersection so he knew he was doing the wrong thing. He came off worse than me, he was bleeding where as I just good bruised. Nearly crapped myself as I thought I had been hit by a car.
Post by: tk421 on December 23, 2015, 10:10:40 AM
Does that mean if you run into the side of a car, your insurance pays for the damage ?Yup- I have Worldwide Comprehensive cover
Are you driving an Bugatti?
From the PDS:
$20,000,000 for Public Liability claims
$5,000,000 for Professional Indemnity claims
What is Public Liability Insurance?
Public Liability Insurance pays for costs you are liable for in the event you cause bodily injury to someone or damage their property as a result of negligence whilst riding a bicycle
Am I covered if I cause damage to a motor vehicle?
Yes. If the motor vehicle owner takes action against you claiming for reimbursement of the cost of repairs etc and you were at fault, cover under the Bicycle NSW liability policy applies.
Post by: plusnq on December 23, 2015, 10:39:43 AM
Post by: gronk on December 23, 2015, 10:45:24 AM
Yup- I have Worldwide Comprehensive cover
I'll be buggered.......one sensible pushy rider who has his own interests AND others taken care of ... :cup:
Post by: cancan on December 23, 2015, 11:11:13 AM
Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk
Post by: GeoffA on December 23, 2015, 11:14:45 AM
I'll be buggered.......
Really??.....each to his own, but I wouldn't go that far Gronk.......
Post by: tk421 on December 23, 2015, 11:18:12 AM
I'll be buggered.......one sensible pushy rider who has his own interests AND others taken care of ... :cup:There's one or two out there if you look really really hard... :laugh:
I am insured and so are the kids.... if they run onto someone or something they are covered plus all my bikes are insured... I have been hit by a 4wd on my $12000 bike... plus I carry ID... just in case I do get cleaned up badly
Yeah it was having kids that made me think about doing it in the first place. Its more about protecting them if something happens to me.
Post by: tracker on December 23, 2015, 11:49:59 AM
I am insured and so are the kids.... if they run onto someone or something they are covered plus all my bikes are insured... I have been hit by a 4wd on my $12000 bike... plus I carry ID... just in case I do get cleaned up badly
Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk
$12000 bike !!!!!!!.....i'm defiantly in the wrong line of work.... ??? ???
Cheers Tracker.
Post by: time on December 23, 2015, 12:08:50 PM
Post by: alnjan on December 23, 2015, 01:11:06 PM
Post by: alnjan on December 23, 2015, 01:15:30 PM
You must like igniting wars by posting a bike thread? 😀
Not really. Just NSW has been slower than other states to bring these laws in and appear to have taken other things further the other States. Only meant to put it out there to inform others of the new laws and the increased penalties, sorry revenue raising NSW likes to implement.
For example : Not wearing a helmet (up from $71 to $319)
Post by: tk421 on December 23, 2015, 01:20:18 PM
Thanks for posting.
Post by: plusnq on December 23, 2015, 01:26:56 PM
The big issue I have with the whole issue of the alleged safety for all involved and the increased infringement notices, sorry revenue raising, is if the powers that be were really concerned about safety instead of introducing new rules to 'share' the road and everyone will be safe, which we know is prone not to be the case, spend the revenue on infrastructure and build separate cycle ways off the main roadway and make all safe.
Totally agree
Post by: Fizzie on December 23, 2015, 02:16:19 PM
I commuted by bike in London for 5 years and tried an experiment. I rode to all the rode rules including red lights and then ignored them the next day. My commute was 3 mins longer over a 8km commute when I followed the rules. I figured 3mins vs me dieing was a fair compromise and didn't break them again
Many years ago, we saw a segment on TV that had Peter Wherrett doing something similar.
He started from a servo on Liverpool Rd (or may have been Parramatta Rd? - same, same really!) with a full tank at 8.00am Monday morning, drove sanely, sensibly & totally legally to another servo 5km down the road & refueled.
Did same thing 8.00am the following Monday but this time drove like a lunatic, changing lanes, running "dark yellow" lights :D, accelerating hard & so on.
The second run, he did the 5km, 17 seconds faster!, & used "significantly" more fuel.
Not really worth it, is it.
Post by: gronk on December 23, 2015, 03:12:06 PM
if the powers that be were really concerned about safety instead of introducing new rules to 'share' the road
They ARE concerned about safety, but like trying to educate new drivers before they learn bad habits.....MONEY. If all P platers were prepared to pay $1000 for their license, then that sort of thing could happen....but it won't. We can't even finish off the dual lane hwy to the Qld border, so how could you believe separate bike paths would ever be built ??
Post by: alnjan on December 23, 2015, 05:04:13 PM
They ARE concerned about safety, but like trying to educate new drivers before they learn bad habits.....MONEY. If all P platers were prepared to pay $1000 for their license, then that sort of thing could happen....but it won't. We can't even finish off the dual lane hwy to the Qld border, so how could you believe separate bike paths would ever be built ??
Yeah I know what you mean. The dual lanes are slowly getting there. But funny you mention the dual lanes. We recently had a section of dual lane open from north of Coffs Harbour to Woolgoolga. There is a local road that runs the whole section alongside the dual lane 110km/h highway. On the local access road which in parts used to be the Pacific Highway is now restricted to 60 or 80 km/h. The local road is one lane either way and also includes a separate cycle lane. Apparently this was not good enough as the cyclist wanted a cycle lane on the highway as it is a direct route, not like the local road that has roundabouts and going over bridges as it crisscrosses the highway. So in the name of safety the outside edge of the 110km/h highway is now a cycleway, divided from the flow of traffic by one painted line maybe 15cm wide. I wonder if they will try to enforce the 1.5 meter passing rule if they ride right beside the lane vehicle lane. If the cyclist is really concerned for their safety, go back to the local road where the cycleway is off the vehicle roadway and a lot safer.
Post by: time on December 23, 2015, 05:25:09 PM
Post by: hoodoo on December 23, 2015, 06:40:56 PM
Post by: Bill on December 23, 2015, 07:03:09 PM
The big issue I have with the whole issue of the alleged safety for all involved and the increased infringement notices, sorry revenue raising, is if the powers that be were really concerned about safety instead of introducing new rules to 'share' the road and everyone will be safe, which we know is prone not to be the case, spend the revenue on infrastructure and build separate cycle ways off the main roadway and make all safe.That would be expensive.
Taxes would have to go up.
People would pitch a fit.
Where as if drivers of every type of transportation simplybfollowed the same road rules it would be safer for everyone and cost nothing.
Bill
Post by: TheWall on December 23, 2015, 07:34:18 PM
You bet your life on other drivers everyday when you druve your car...particularly the looney 4wd and caravan brigade ????, buses and trucks etc. Always interesting that people choose not to see it that way.
Using the same logic that often gets stated that is is the dead/maimed cyclists fault for just being there perhaps that is a reason why our toad toll is 3000 odd a year?
Sent from my GT-I9507 using Tapatalk
Post by: TheWall on December 23, 2015, 07:38:56 PM
(http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/12/23/19c020741395678c66ab6152e2acf974.jpg)
Sent from my GT-I9507 using Tapatalk
Post by: tk421 on December 24, 2015, 03:06:12 PM
The big issue I have with the whole issue of the alleged safety for all involved and the increased infringement notices, sorry revenue raising, is if the powers that be were really concerned about safety instead of introducing new rules to 'share' the road and everyone will be safe, which we know is prone not to be the case, spend the revenue on infrastructure and build separate cycle ways off the main roadway and make all safe.
Hard to think it's not about revenue raising when you see things like this. Cyclist only red light stays red whilst allowing cars travelling same direction through.. Then changes to green for mere seconds.
https://www.facebook.com/cyclistsparty/videos/713037895463682/ (https://www.facebook.com/cyclistsparty/videos/713037895463682/)
Post by: time on December 24, 2015, 03:15:29 PM
"Yes, I am amazed that people are happy to bet their lives that I'm a good driver, and judge of distance. All the near misses, and hits, I have seen, I would suggest that bicycles be no where near any road that has a speed limit above 60kph."
You bet your life on other drivers everyday when you druve your car...particularly the looney 4wd and caravan brigade ????, buses and trucks etc. Always interesting that people choose not to see it that way.
Using the same logic that often gets stated that is is the dead/maimed cyclists fault for just being there perhaps that is a reason why our toad toll is 3000 odd a year?
Sent from my GT-I9507 using Tapatalk
You missed my point by a mile. In traffic I pass a minimal number of vehicles, and am passed by a minimal number, and when I do/am it is a closing speed of a kph or 2. However, a bike rider is overtaken by potentially hundreds of vehicles each journey, in an 80 kph zone at a closing speed of perhaps 60 kph, thus betting their lives and well being that those hundreds of drivers are going to miss them. Doesn't matter who is in the right or wrong, my 4WD Urban Assault vehicle will come off with a scratch or two, the cyclist ................. As to your point about us all taking risks, yes we do, but I'd much rather be hit when in my 4WD than on a pushhy
This is going down the path predicted by an early poster in this thread, so you have your view and I'll have mine.
Have a safe and Merry Christmas
Post by: alnjan on December 24, 2015, 04:03:28 PM
Remember as of 1 March 2016 in NSW, this will impact of interstate people that believe it may be a good idea to pack the bike on the camper and come visit NSW.
Fines for five offences will increase so that bicycle riders receive the
same fines as motorists for high risk behaviour. Increased penalties
will apply to bicycle riders who are caught:
Not wearing a helmet (up from $71 to $319)
Running a red light (up from $71 to $425)
Riding dangerously (up from $71 to $425)
Holding on to a moving vehicle (up from $71 to $319)
Not stopping at children's/pedestrian crossings (up $71 to $425)
Penalties for other bicycle rider offences will also increase from $71 to $106,
including the offence of riding at night without lights.
http://roadsafety.transport.nsw.gov.au/campaigns/go-together/index.html (http://roadsafety.transport.nsw.gov.au/campaigns/go-together/index.html)
Post by: feisty on December 24, 2015, 04:52:26 PM
Some pretty serious increases - I must admit it would probably stop me sneaking cautiously through a red light at a vacant pedestrian crossing.
Not that I have ever killed or injured anyone doing it mind you. But hey the law's the law.
Post by: Foo on December 24, 2015, 06:17:50 PM
Also not saying all truck drivers are good, plenty of corkheads in this industry now, due to unreal expectations! >:D
Foo
Post by: Jeepers Creepers on December 25, 2015, 05:12:03 AM
Spend a day in a truck and you will understand why, the road toll is like it is!!!!!!!!!! ::)
Also not saying all truck drivers are good, plenty of corkheads in this industry now, due to unreal expectations! >:D
Foo
I must say, i take my hat off to truckies..... tough job in an ordinary environment.
Lots of folks hate 'em, but everyone needs 'em, no-one wants to follow 'em, truckies are always at fault.... ask any journo.... ::)
Watched a guy shorten up a truck last sunday when an overtaking lane was running out.
Poor ol truck driver trying to give him space, car over the centre line with on coming traffic....pure madness.
I've always hung back, quick flash of high beam so they know they can merge ok.
Always get the right flinker blink from the driver.
Post by: Hairs on December 25, 2015, 07:57:54 AM
About bloody time there were some changes.
Quote
1 metre when the speed limit is 60km/h or lessI'd like to know how this going to be enforced on country roads were cyclists ride two abreast on narrow roads and ride within .5 of meter or on the center line and there is sweet FA road pavement to allow 1.5 meters. This effectively means that motorists will not be able to overtake unless they(Cyclists) are riding in single file.
1.5 metres when the speed limit is more than 60km/h
If drivers cannot pass a bicycle rider safely, they should slow down and wait until it is safe to pass the rider, leaving the minimum distance. To help drivers provide the minimum distance, some exemptions to the road rules will apply
I doubt any of the cyclists that ride the Lawrence to Grafton road will carry ID, they are the most arrogant bastards I know.
I also have a beef about the length that some of the packs of cyclists are.
Sometimes there are forty or more two abreast and they are over 50 meters in length as a pack, yet they don't have pilot vehicles warning motorists, yet heavy vehicles must if the are over-sized.
And my biggest beef with these idiots, They choose to ride on the heaviest of foggy mornings(5.30 -7.00am).
Post by: alnjan on December 25, 2015, 08:32:54 AM
Post by: Hairs on December 25, 2015, 06:40:24 PM
Their reply was,
"It's too dangerous on the H/way because of the trucks"
I kid you not. (http://www.hairfysh.com/images/Icons/Smileys/Fall_Over_Shocked.gif)
Also with the H/way upgrade, more traffic is using the Lawrence to avoid the traffic on it.
I have come across a few times now as I drive into Grafton along Queen Street at about 6.30 am a group of cyclists racing each other 4 & 5 abreast near the Boundary Shop. They are obviously very competitive by the way they are up out of the saddle, I would presume that they belong to the local group/club. Being able to Identify them would be great.
I have a number Plate that people can use to identify me to police if they feel I have broken any road rules, being able to identify these road users would be great.
Anyway, we'll see how these new rule play out.
:cheers:
Post by: oldmate on February 02, 2016, 03:10:55 PM
https://www.facebook.com/jacksonodohertyvideos/videos/829100917235082/?pnref=story (https://www.facebook.com/jacksonodohertyvideos/videos/829100917235082/?pnref=story)
Post by: gronk on February 02, 2016, 04:20:36 PM
Post by: GBC on February 02, 2016, 04:27:03 PM
Post by: scrapsD40 on February 02, 2016, 04:57:20 PM
Post by: plusnq on February 02, 2016, 05:01:12 PM
In this case I think you mean this is how a perfectly good thread gets derailleured
Lol. Classic
Post by: oldmate on February 02, 2016, 05:10:39 PM
Post by: Jeepers Creepers on February 02, 2016, 05:47:17 PM
Pmsl
Me too....
The worst part is, that's pushy riders to a T.
Post by: Hairs on February 02, 2016, 07:58:02 PM
Rude, arrogant doddles >:D
Post by: NewieCamper on February 03, 2016, 10:17:31 AM
I do carry ID mostly when I ride on the roads, I'm happy to kit up. ie get my phone, wallet, helmet, shoes, gloves, glasses etc. I shouldn't be compelled to ride with ID on the local foreshore pathway with the family, nor if I'm ducking over to a mates house in my T-shirt and thongs (and bloody helmet) for a beverage or two using a bike so I don't end up going DUI on the drive home and save me fuel etc too.
Not one of the fine increases are going to improve safety for cyclists, they are just pandering to the noisy anti cyclist types.
As for the clearance for cyclists, 1m under 60, 1.5 over, the vast majority of the time if a driver waits a few seconds uses the middle or wide pedal to slow, then the right pedal to speed up again we'll all get along nicely and we can all get home safely to our families. A cyclist can move over onto the shoulder when there is space to allow motorised traffic to pass when possible, and again, we can all get home safely to our families.
Post by: wilson79 on February 03, 2016, 10:31:25 AM
, nor if I'm ducking over to a mates house in my T-shirt and thongs (and bloody helmet) for a beverage or two using a bike so I don't end up going DUI on the drive home and save me fuel etc too.
hate to tell you this but you can also be charged with DUI on a bike..
Post by: macca on February 03, 2016, 10:45:51 AM
Post by: Bird on February 03, 2016, 10:58:20 AM
Quote from: NewieCamper
A cyclist can move over onto the shoulder when there is space to allow motorised traffic to pass when possible
be nice if they did... "BUT ITS MY RIGHT TO RIDE ON THE ROAD... I PAY CAR REGO.. BLAH BLAH "
Post by: edz on February 03, 2016, 11:07:23 AM
hate to tell you this but you can also be charged with DUI on a bike..
And dont ride a horse under the influence either http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/why-horses-and-alcohol-dont-mix/story-e6freuy9-1111117498616 (http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/why-horses-and-alcohol-dont-mix/story-e6freuy9-1111117498616)
Post by: Bird on February 03, 2016, 11:25:58 AM
And dont ride a horse under the influence either http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/why-horses-and-alcohol-dont-mix/story-e6freuy9-1111117498616 (http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/why-horses-and-alcohol-dont-mix/story-e6freuy9-1111117498616)and the bloke that got done in Geelong on the motorized lounge, and the dude on the motorized esky!
But I have no time for drink drivers.. arseholes to them.
Post by: cancan on February 03, 2016, 11:37:38 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ORpWYYsP5A&feature=youtu.be (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ORpWYYsP5A&feature=youtu.be)
and then absolute idiots
http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/feb/01/driver-caught-on-camera-reversing-into-group-of-perth-cyclists?CMP=soc_567 (http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/feb/01/driver-caught-on-camera-reversing-into-group-of-perth-cyclists?CMP=soc_567)
and then my kind of cycling
https://www.facebook.com/513353885365754/videos/951351518232653/ (https://www.facebook.com/513353885365754/videos/951351518232653/)
Post by: NewieCamper on February 03, 2016, 12:06:32 PM
hate to tell you this but you can also be charged with DUI on a bike..but you can't be stopped for RBT. The police need some sort of provocation to charge you with DUI, and if you are close to the limit for driving you have enough of your faculties intact to not do something stupid.
be nice if they did... "BUT ITS MY RIGHT TO RIDE ON THE ROAD... I PAY CAR REGO.. BLAH BLAH "Yes, there are jerks out there that shout and rant and rave, but... and this is the big one, cyclists are entitled to ride on the road, and take an entire lane in doing so. Just because there is someone slower in front of you doesn't give you additional rights to tell them to get out of the way.
The typical driver 'training' we get in this country is that the roads are there to be used at the posted limit and we have come to expect that there should be no delay. Further we are all 'so busy' that eight seconds late getting anywhere appears to be the end of the world. A cyclist, a tractor, a learner, roadworks are all 'obstacles' to get around in most drivers eyes, rather than just part of the traffic scene. Next time you are held up by any of these items check your watch and you might be surprised at how short the delay is. Don't estimate, check a clock.
Post by: gronk on February 03, 2016, 12:29:24 PM
but you can't be stopped for RBT. The police need some sort of provocation to charge you with DUI, and if you are close to the limit for driving you have enough of your faculties intact to not do something stupid.
Just like a car, if they suspect you are drunk or it's a rbt roadside setup, they certainly can pull you over and test you.
If I just duck down to the shops in my car I need ID, so why should it be different for NON paying road users??
Post by: Troopy_03 on February 03, 2016, 12:33:15 PM
but you can't be stopped for RBT. The police need some sort of provocation to charge you with DUI, and if you are close to the limit for driving you have enough of your faculties intact to not do something stupid.
Yes, there are jerks out there that shout and rant and rave, but... and this is the big one, cyclists are entitled to ride on the road, and take an entire lane in doing so. Just because there is someone slower in front of you doesn't give you additional rights to tell them to get out of the way.
The typical driver 'training' we get in this country is that the roads are there to be used at the posted limit and we have come to expect that there should be no delay. Further we are all 'so busy' that eight seconds late getting anywhere appears to be the end of the world. A cyclist, a tractor, a learner, roadworks are all 'obstacles' to get around in most drivers eyes, rather than just part of the traffic scene. Next time you are held up by any of these items check your watch and you might be surprised at how short the delay is. Don't estimate, check a clock.
While I don't doubt that is probably true for RBTs, I can't see any reason why pushy riders shouldn't be RBT'd as well. If they claim equal road use rights, they should have equal restrictions and testing.
Post by: NewieCamper on February 03, 2016, 01:15:10 PM
While I don't doubt that is probably true for RBTs, I can't see any reason why pushy riders shouldn't be RBT'd as well. If they claim equal road use rights, they should have equal restrictions and testing.It's to do with risk of harm.
DUI pushy rider falls off, injures self, scratches paint on impact object (house, car, etc)
DUI driver crashes, kills innocent pedestrian, crashes through living room wall.
There are a whole lot of rules around driving a motor vehicle because of the potential to harm, maim, kill. 2 tonnes of metal at 60km/h does a lot more damage than 100kg of pushbike at 20km/h. Straight up physics. How many cyclists kill another road user each year? How many fatalities do motor vehicles cause?
Post by: KingBilly on February 03, 2016, 01:21:40 PM
but you can't be stopped for RBT. The police need some sort of provocation to charge you with DUI, and if you are close to the limit for driving you have enough of your faculties intact to not do something stupid.
All legislation is on the web, free to anybody who wants to read it :D But don't let that stop the bush lawyers speculating. It gives me a good laugh ;D
No need to have any "provocation", whatever that is supposed to mean, to pull over any road user for a breath or drug test. Similarly you can be pulled over for a licence check at any time. If you have an open licence and can't produce it upon demand, you are given a notice to produce your licence to your local police station withon 24 hours or risk a fine. Lot easier to carry your licence at all times but it gives those who don't, or forget, an alternative option.
But, if you have committed an offence, the police officer must be satisfied of your identification. If you can't produce photo ID, easiest is a driver's licence, you run the risk of being arrested. An infringement notice, tarffic ticket, cannot be issued to an unidentified person.
Oh, and road rules apply to ALL road users, be they vehicle drivers, cyclists or horse riders.
KB
Post by: KingBilly on February 03, 2016, 01:25:19 PM
It's to do with risk of harm.
DUI pushy rider falls off, injures self, scratches paint on impact object (house, car, etc)
DUI driver crashes, kills innocent pedestrian, crashes through living room wall.
There are a whole lot of rules around driving a motor vehicle because of the potential to harm, maim, kill. 2 tonnes of metal at 60km/h does a lot more damage than 100kg of pushbike at 20km/h. Straight up physics. How many cyclists kill another road user each year? How many fatalities do motor vehicles cause?
Drunk cyclist crashes in front of car. Car slams on brakes, three more cars tail end the first car. Yep, drunk cyclists can do just as much damage.
Drunk cyclist crashes in front of car. Car swerves to avoid running over drunk cyclist and smashes head on into oncoming vehicles. Several innocent road users dead. Yep, drunk cyclist just as dangerous.
KB
Post by: duggie on February 03, 2016, 01:27:25 PM
Yes, there are jerks out there that shout and rant and rave, but... and this is the big one, cyclists are entitled to ride on the road, and take an entire lane in doing so. Just because there is someone slower in front of you doesn't give you additional rights to tell them to get out of the way.
When you ride, you must:
• keep as close to the left as practicable on a road that is not a multi-lane road
•on a multi-lane road, you can take up any position within the lane
• ride to the left of any oncoming vehicle
• not overtake another vehicle on the left if that vehicle is turning left and indicating they will turn left
• not overtake another vehicle on the left if it is not safe to do so
• not ride with more than 2 riders side by side unless you are overtaking
• ride within 1.5m of the other rider if you are travelling side by side with someone.
A cyclist may ride on the hard shoulder to the left of an edge line.
Post by: Bird on February 03, 2016, 01:29:36 PM
Post by: stabicraft on February 03, 2016, 01:33:19 PM
1) When I drive in slow traffic and finally manage to get past thet damn bike holding up the lane of traffic, they ride up the middle and I have to start all over again.
2) When said cyclist drags his/her or other (sometimes its hard to tell) handlebars down the side of my car taking off paint, they just ride off into the distance and never pay for the damage.
3) When I'm stationary and some idiot cyclist rams me because he/she or other misjudges the bikes width, they start screaming at me for being there. I was stationary idiot.
4) Finally, it seems that cyclists like the best of both worlds. If they feel that they dont want to wait for lights or at stop signs, they simply jump off the bike and run out across the pedestrian crossing, leaving little or any time to react. Point this out to the aggro bastards at your own peril, they go off like a bomb at a ISIS meeting.
Bike riders really have brought this on themselves.
If they were more compromising, more aware and more sympathetic to other drivers, this draconian legislation would not be necessary.
As a long time motorcycle rider, If I had gone on like these cyclists, I would have been dead many times, but rider training and being aware and coutious to other road users has served me well.
I may have posted this little gem before, but basically its all down to the Lycra.
When one wants to get a bull all worked up for a rodeo, they put rubber bands around the genitals to make it angry.
They lycra serves the same purpose, thus we have a real reason for all the aggro and anger that Lycra clad loonies exhibit daily.
Post by: scblack on February 03, 2016, 01:46:47 PM
My primary gripes with cyclists are;Haha, I have to have a good belly laugh at that one. You're having a gripe - because the cyclist is FASTER in traffic than you are, and you feel you have to re-overtake him?
1) When I drive in slow traffic and finally manage to get past thet damn bike holding up the lane of traffic, they ride up the middle and I have to start all over again.
Do you feel a desperate need to get to the next red light faster than he can?
Post by: scblack on February 03, 2016, 01:52:01 PM
Drunk cyclist crashes in front of car. Car slams on brakes, three more cars tail end the first car. Yep, drunk cyclists can do just as much damage.Car drivers must maintain a safe distance from the vehicle in front of them. Thus, if a car has to use emergency brakes, or swerve to avoid the cyclist they were breaking the law and were driving far too closely to be driving safely.
Drunk cyclist crashes in front of car. Car swerves to avoid running over drunk cyclist and smashes head on into oncoming vehicles. Several innocent road users dead. Yep, drunk cyclist just as dangerous.
KB
So in your little example - the drivers are all at fault - by road law.
Great example mate!
Post by: doc evil on February 03, 2016, 03:34:20 PM
......well in WA and QLD, dunno about other states.......
so don't claim you are all law abiding road users because you are not!!!!!!!!!
I won't start on the law of walking your bike across an intersection when you blatently use the footpath to avoid traffic lights or obeying speed limits on bike paths (there have been several pedestrian deaths from irresponsible cyclists in WA alone) or the law that you MUST have a warning bell...............
Post by: doc evil on February 03, 2016, 03:42:48 PM
Car drivers must maintain a safe distance from the vehicle in front of them. Thus, if a car has to use emergency brakes, or swerve to avoid the cyclist they were breaking the law and were driving far too closely to be driving safely.
So in your little example - the drivers are all at fault - by road law.
Great example mate!
Carp......
what if DUI lycra terrorist trips up over his locked in foot clips and falls infront of said driver, who is at the 1.5m gap and traveling within the law, thus causes a vehicle accident and then scarpers. What recourse is the for the CAUSE of the accident. No rego to report etc.
Post by: macca on February 03, 2016, 03:49:00 PM
Car drivers must maintain a safe distance from the vehicle in front of them. Thus, if a car has to use emergency brakes, or swerve to avoid the cyclist they were breaking the law and were driving far too closely to be driving safely.Not if the rider that caused the accident is drunk he shouldn't have been on the road and he is at fault.
So in your little example - the drivers are all at fault - by road law.
Great example mate!
Post by: tk421 on February 03, 2016, 03:49:13 PM
If I just duck down to the shops in my car I need ID, so why should it be different for NON paying road users??
Roads are paid from taxes, not rego. Most bike riders are tax payers. Most bike riders also own a car. Therefore most bike riders are already paying road users.
The majority of Rego pays for the admin costs, the rest goes into general revenue so can be used to fund anything.
Post by: GBC on February 03, 2016, 03:53:30 PM
Carp......
what if DUI lycra terrorist trips up over his locked in foot clips and falls infront of said driver, who is at the 1.5m gap and traveling within the law, thus causes a vehicle accident and then scarpers. What recourse is the for the CAUSE of the accident. No rego to report etc.
Please tell me you don't actually have a vehicle license.
Post by: Bird on February 03, 2016, 03:57:20 PM
(https://bewarethehair.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/img_1228.jpg)
Post by: scrapsD40 on February 03, 2016, 04:09:36 PM
HELP!delivered to your door by bike courier
(https://bewarethehair.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/img_1228.jpg)
Post by: doc evil on February 03, 2016, 04:11:20 PM
Please tell me you don't actually have a vehicle license.
Yes I do......... >:D
AND I do have a mountain bike however, I do not ride on the road as I'm not one to impede the progress of vehicles like most of the ignorant lyca terrorists whom like to think it's their god given right to break the law at every given opportunity.
I ride designated trails designed for mountain biking where the lycra terrorists should stick to their designated area...........the velodrome ;D :-*
Post by: GBC on February 03, 2016, 04:20:11 PM
It is also just an opinion which we all have.
Your inability to work out beside from behind is still a big worry.
Post by: doc evil on February 03, 2016, 04:46:33 PM
passing said DUI mamil, by the regulation 1.5m when the opportunity appears, and said lycra terrorist tumbles within vision of the vehicle driver but BEFORE the pass is completed say 10-20m..........
Ain't rocket science or are you implying that as a vehicle driver, we're not allowed to pass a cyclist.......
Hope you're not a lycra terrorist, as your confusion is a real worry if you're attempting to cycle with vehicles :D ;D
Post by: tk421 on February 03, 2016, 05:06:04 PM
Post by: Jeepers Creepers on February 03, 2016, 05:15:40 PM
Post by: doc evil on February 03, 2016, 05:21:54 PM
Post by: time on February 03, 2016, 05:23:37 PM
Post by: stabicraft on February 03, 2016, 05:54:30 PM
They possibly believe in their tiny little minds that they somehow resemble the actual cyclists.
Bad news....The majority of Lycra clad loonies should be charged with assulting the senses of the population or perhaps even obceen exposure of their seriously disfigured bodies.
Why not wear something that might actually have some small protective merit, so that when you fall, not if because the 2mm diameter tyres, (totally unsuitable for the goat tracks we laughingly call roads) will burst and generally result in a spectacular and very funny fall.
I also like the way the esky lids they wear disassemble themselves on impact, helmets that because of the lobbying of cyclists sick of being laughed at all the time, forced on normal human beings.
And the funniest thing of them all;
They pay several thousand dollars for these mechanical tooth pics, someone is having a real laugh at this baby.
Oh, and by the way I too ride, off the road on an old Malvern star bike.
No way Im hitting the bitumen with all the losers on the road without some serious metal around me.
Post by: gronk on February 03, 2016, 06:10:15 PM
No way Im hitting the bitumen with all the losers on the road without some serious metal around me.
And why no matter what the cyclists think, it is only a matter of time, and law of averages, that they will have an accident..
If they think it only means we educate the car drivers on the road rules regarding cyclists, then for the last 50 years it hasn't worked for other car drivers, so why would it work for the cyclists ??
Post by: tk421 on February 03, 2016, 08:03:59 PM
And why no matter what the cyclists think, it is only a matter of time, and law of averages, that they will have an accident..
If they think it only means we educate the car drivers on the road rules regarding cyclists, then for the last 50 years it hasn't worked for other car drivers, so why would it work for the cyclists ??
It must those 'unique Australian conditions. Works for millions of Europeans, Asians, Chinese and Indians
By the law of averages every Australian driver will have an accident eventually
Post by: NewieCamper on February 03, 2016, 08:35:58 PM
The majority of cyclists are law abiding, going about their business. The majority of motorists are law abiding, going about their business.
Lycra wearing cyclists who flout the law and ride like they own the planet are not the majority, just like rat bag drivers with huge alloy wheels and a heavy right foot are not the majority.
It's probably a case of most of the law abiding cyclists haven't even been seen by the motorists that get so upset at the Lycra clad stereotyped agro cyclist.
If it wasn't dark, I'd probably go for a ride now, need some fresh air. ;D
Post by: liquid on February 03, 2016, 08:36:41 PM
Post by: gronk on February 03, 2016, 08:42:05 PM
It must those 'unique Australian conditions. Works for millions of Europeans, Asians, Chinese and Indians
You wanna bet.....all those countries have huge numbers of pushy accidents.....only diff is if they live, they don't complain.....cause it wouldn't do any good anyway !!
Post by: tk421 on February 03, 2016, 09:06:23 PM
You wanna bet.....all those countries have huge numbers of pushy accidents.....only diff is if they live, they don't complain.....cause it wouldn't do any good anyway !!
Cyclists accounts for less than 3% of all road fatalities in Australia. 85% of those accidents involve another vehicle
25% of all crashes occur when vehicles are approaching from a perpendicular direction
Only 6% involve being hit from the rear
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: tk421 on February 03, 2016, 09:07:57 PM
(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160203/97d7eb3b9545fd005fa51e155552bf48.jpg)by the law of averages it's only a matter of time before a car driver has an accident.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: GBC on February 03, 2016, 09:10:17 PM
Cyclists accounts for less than 3% of all road fatalities in Australia. 85% of those accidents involve another vehicle
25% of all crashes occur when vehicles are approaching from a perpendicular direction
Only 6% involve being hit from the rear
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
How many drunk ones in cleats diving in front of 4bys?
Have an emoticon :cheers:
Post by: tk421 on February 03, 2016, 09:40:57 PM
You wanna bet.....all those countries have huge numbers of pushy accidents.....only diff is if they live, they don't complain.....cause it wouldn't do any good anyway !!
Yup lets blame the bike rider:
Police statistics show that 4/5 crashes (80%) between cars and bicycles are caused by the driver of the car.http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/four-in-every-five-crashes-between-cars-and-bicycles-caused-by-driver-of-car/story-e6frea83-1226581475412 (http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/four-in-every-five-crashes-between-cars-and-bicycles-caused-by-driver-of-car/story-e6frea83-1226581475412)
There were 1,156 road deaths in 2014, 152 were pedestrians (13%), 45 were cyclists (1.2%). But by all means lets blame the cyclists and not demand Pedestrians carry ID or have Insurance or rego.. Because, you know they only account for 10 times more deaths than a cyclist and only 13% of all road fatalities. https://bitre.gov.au/publications/ongoing/road_deaths_australia_annual_summaries.aspx (https://bitre.gov.au/publications/ongoing/road_deaths_australia_annual_summaries.aspx)
Accident between cyclist and the car is covered by Greenslip. Accident involving cyclist only, they have to pay for (most cyclists have cars so pay Greenslip anyway).
I find all these arguments are so stupid.
Tell me a story of an idiot cyclist and I'll tell you an equivalent story of an idiot motorist
Tell me a story of an idiot motorist and I'll tell you a story of an idiot cyclist.
Cyclists need to display registration plates to be held accountable? How many times have you seen a motorist break the law and reported them via their rego?
How many of those demanding cyclists display a rego plate are the same ones complaining about speed cameras/redlight cameras being purely revenue raisers and not about safety?
Rego doesn't pay for roads, Taxes do. Most bike riders already own a car, so have 'paid' for the 'right' to use the roads (and paid rego and greenslip). Rego was originally designed to be based on weight and to be paid for damages to road (Still is the case in NSW), An 8kg bike does no damage to the network. My 2.9T GVM Prado pays $63 Rego in NSW. So thats $0.02 per kg. Therfore My 8 kg road bike should pay $0.17 rego to pay for the damage to the road? ($1.30 if you include motor vehicle tax) Revenue won't cover costs, but we're happy to have the Government waste more money?
I'll pay my $1.30 but will you give me the space I deserve to stay alivce?
No other country in the world requires rego from cyclists or displaying a license - why is Australia so special? Including the Netherlands where bike deaths are around 25% of all road fatalities? What makes Australia different? Should horse riders also pay rego?
Post by: tk421 on February 03, 2016, 09:43:31 PM
How many drunk ones in cleats diving in front of 4bys?
Have an emoticon :cheers:
Sweet FA on both sides
Blood alcohol concentration (BAC) was unknown for 93 of the 222 cyclists killed but in nearly 90 per cent of the cases where it was known, BAC was found to be zero. Only 15 of the 222 cyclists were tested for drugs and the results for 14 of these were positive – this is likely to reflect the circumstances of the 15, rather than the drugs prevalence among the 222
Of the 202 motor vehicle drivers involved in crashes in which a cyclist was killed, 130 were tested for alcohol and in most cases (119) BAC was found to be zero. Most were not tested for drugs but a few tested positive.
https://bitre.gov.au/publications/ongoing/road_deaths_australia_annual_summaries.aspx
Post by: tk421 on February 03, 2016, 09:50:49 PM
How many drunk ones in cleats diving in front of 4bys?
Have an emoticon :cheers:
I'm sure we could find a case where one time, on a Monday, in a month with a vowel in it, when Neptune was ascendant, someone, somewhere, was drunk and caused an accident
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: alnjan on February 03, 2016, 10:06:17 PM
Oh and Bird, thanks for the photos of popcorn and beverages, but please remember so here are also dieting. 8)
Post by: edz on February 03, 2016, 10:44:12 PM
If that dont work well enough Im fitting a smaller version of this to wake idiots [ both drivers and riders ] up a bit ..https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rmBwCR1HVg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rmBwCR1HVg) ;D
Post by: gronk on February 04, 2016, 07:31:40 AM
It must those 'unique Australian conditions. Works for millions of Europeans, Asians, Chinese and Indians
Including the Netherlands where bike deaths are around 25% of all road fatalities? What makes Australia different?
Umm ??? Doesn't seem to work for some of those Europeans eh ??
You're fighting back with stats that say Australia has very low fatalities for pushies, so what is the whole argument about then ? Keep riding on the road and when you get hit, it will most likely not kill you....but it will still hurt !! ;D
Post by: scblack on February 04, 2016, 07:57:14 AM
I still find it comical how these Lycra clad loonies feel the need to don microcloth outfits advertising all manner of products that will in now way support them.Wow, there's some bitchy comments in there. Get the claws out girl! Meeoow!!
They possibly believe in their tiny little minds that they somehow resemble the actual cyclists.
Bad news....The majority of Lycra clad loonies should be charged with assulting the senses of the population or perhaps even obceen exposure of their seriously disfigured bodies.
Why not wear something that might actually have some small protective merit, so that when you fall, not if because the 2mm diameter tyres, (totally unsuitable for the goat tracks we laughingly call roads) will burst and generally result in a spectacular and very funny fall.
I also like the way the esky lids they wear disassemble themselves on impact, helmets that because of the lobbying of cyclists sick of being laughed at all the time, forced on normal human beings.
And the funniest thing of them all;
They pay several thousand dollars for these mechanical tooth pics, someone is having a real laugh at this baby.
Oh, and by the way I too ride, off the road on an old Malvern star bike.
No way Im hitting the bitumen with all the losers on the road without some serious metal around me.
Post by: tk421 on February 04, 2016, 08:04:59 AM
It must those 'unique Australian conditions. Works for millions of Europeans, Asians, Chinese and Indians
Including the Netherlands where bike deaths are around 25% of all road fatalities? What makes Australia different?
Umm ??? Doesn't seem to work for some of those Europeans eh ??
You're fighting back with stats that say Australia has very low fatalities for pushies, so what is the whole argument about then ? Keep riding on the road and when you get hit, it will most likely not kill you....but it will still hurt !! ;D
I'm over the arguments that get trotted out every time this subject comes up. "Rego! insurance! identification! Herpy derp derp!" Especially when the facts don't support them. My argument is no other country requires it, including those with far higher cycling participation rates ie most of Europe. Where they seem to be able to cope with out trying to kill each other. So what makes Australia so special and different that we need to do it? It just adds another peice of legislation and cost to our adminstrative organisations?
Then there's the hypothetical scenarios that get pulled out by both sides. So flipping obtuse and far fetched that they're unlikely to happen.
Someone wants to ride a bike? Whoppee! What's the big frikkin deal? Are we so far gone down the nanny state route that we are incapable of letting people make their own choices unless it's regulated to death? Yes it'll hurt if they crash. Let them make that choice.
I find the whole intolerance on both sides ridiculous and pathetic. It's not that hard to be a bit polite or courteous. TBH Cyclists vs Drivers is now the Aussie equivalent to the Amercan gun control debate. The rest of the world looks looks on thinking: "What a bunch of idiots!"
TBH this whole thing
Post by: Snapman007 on February 04, 2016, 08:11:07 AM
Sweet FA on both sides
Blood alcohol concentration (BAC) was unknown for 93 of the 222 cyclists killed but in nearly 90 per cent of the cases where it was known, BAC was found to be zero. Only 15 of the 222 cyclists were tested for drugs and the results for 14 of these were positive – this is likely to reflect the circumstances of the 15, rather than the drugs prevalence among the 222 it is what it is. that's over 93% of tested cyclist killed were high on drugs.
Of the 202 motor vehicle drivers involved in crashes in which a cyclist was killed, 130 were tested for alcohol and in most cases (119) BAC was found to be zero. Most were not tested for drugs but a few tested positive.
https://bitre.gov.au/publications/ongoing/road_deaths_australia_annual_summaries.aspx
Post by: scblack on February 04, 2016, 08:23:50 AM
I'm over the arguments that get trotted out every time this subject comes up. "Rego! insurance! identification! Herpy derp derp!" Especially when the facts don't support them. My argument is no other country requires it, including those with far higher cycling participation rates ie most of Europe. Where they seem to be able to cope with out trying to kill each other. So what makes Australia so special and different that we need to do it? It just adds another peice of legislation and cost to our adminstrative organisations?You're right of course but then you will always find a few people who carry on about some things WAY too much.
Then there's the hypothetical scenarios that get pulled out by both sides. So flipping obtuse and far fetched that they're unlikely to happen.
Someone wants to ride a bike? Whoppee! What's the big frikkin deal? Are we so far gone down the nanny state route that we are incapable of letting people make their own choices unless it's regulated to death? Yes it'll hurt if they crash. Let them make that choice.
I find the whole intolerance on both sides ridiculous and pathetic. It's not that hard to be a bit polite or courteous. TBH Cyclists vs Drivers is now the Aussie equivalent to the Amercan gun control debate. The rest of the world looks looks on thinking: "What a bunch of idiots!"
TBH this whole thing
I do wonder at times if there must be some psychological hang-up in the minority of people who are so militant in their attitudes to cyclists on our roads. There must be some sort of deep seated angst making them bitch and moan about it so forcefully.
I have ridden on all Sydney roads for 7+ years and over 27,000kms. I've had a few incidents, falls, shouting matches at losers - that's par for the course. Overall I would say 99.9999% of drivers and people in general are awesome to cyclists (as long as you are not stupid). But there's always some complete idiots out there who get too carried away - and that's the same in here.
Post by: gronk on February 04, 2016, 08:27:36 AM
I'm over the arguments that get trotted out
Someone wants to ride a bike? Whoppee! What's the big frikkin deal?
: "What a bunch of idiots!"
Dunno, what's the big deal ?? You want to ride a pushy, but then complain if there are any rules attached ?? I want to drive my 4wd with no license, but if caught I face a penalty. If you run into the side of my car and I ask for ID....or money for the damage....and you attempt to ride off, am I justified in grabbing you and beating the crap out of you ??
Carry some form of ID, stop whinging, and that ID might just help you one day.....even if it's just to identify the body parts left in the grill of the Mack truck !! ;D ;D
Post by: tk421 on February 04, 2016, 09:05:16 AM
Dunno, what's the big deal ?? You want to ride a pushy, but then complain if there are any rules attached ?? I want to drive my 4wd with no license, but if caught I face a penalty. If you run into the side of my car and I ask for ID....or money for the damage....and you attempt to ride off, am I justified in grabbing you and beating the crap out of you ??
Carry some form of ID, stop whinging, and that ID might just help you one day.....even if it's just to identify the body parts left in the grill of the Mack truck !! ;D ;D
Your scenario applies equally to another car driver hitting you.
Not arguing against rules. Arguing against unnecessary rules. Lots of people drive without ID and still get caught. Ride a bike without ID the police can still catch you. Same as they can catch pedestrians committing crimes without ID.
Doesn't seem to hinder the cops that much.
Nor the South Australians, who only have to carry it if on L's, P's, or a driving a vehicle over 4.5 T GVM.
You don't need to carry your driving licence with you in the UK whilst driving/riding (you've 7 days to produce it if requested). Yet they seem to be able to catch road offenders.
But as you brought it up, I do carry ID, and have done long before it became mandatory so I can be identified if anything goes wrong. Same as I've got bike insurance because I've got 3 kids.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: tk421 on February 04, 2016, 09:14:25 AM
Nope. That's 92% of the 15 that were tested. Not 92% of all cyclists. You can't extrapolate to the entire cohort. You can't say 92% of all cyclists unless you test all those involved.
And that stat ignores the time drugs are present in the system. Cannabinoids can remain detectable for up to 2 weeks after use.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: gronk on February 04, 2016, 09:38:31 AM
I think what he said is true......93% of TESTED cyclists killed was on drugs !!
Post by: tk421 on February 04, 2016, 10:23:32 AM
it is what it is. that's over 93% of tested cyclist killed were high on drugs.
I think what he said is true......93% of TESTED cyclists killed was on drugs !!
They only tested 6% of cyclists. They only test when they think its a contributing factor so the figure is skewed. 14/222 is only 6% of all cyclists.
16% of all cars/motorcycle fatalities involved a driver on illicit drugs. In Victoria that figure was 37%. 21% of those tested positive to THC, the active component of cannabis, or stimulant/amphetamine type drugs such as ecstasy, speed and ice.
Edit: newsflash - some people in our society take drugs.
1/3 of 50,000 drivers tested in NSW, tested positive. The roadside tests test for the psychoactive component. So all those people were under the influence whilst driving.
Post by: NewieCamper on February 04, 2016, 10:30:23 AM
If you run into the side of my car and I ask for ID....or money for the damage....and you attempt to ride off, am I justified in grabbing you and beating the crap out of you...
Just how often does this happen? They way people carry on about it I would think that in the 25 odd years of driving I've done I would have been hit by a cyclist a dozen times. It's just not that common
Pedestrians don't need ID in case they bang a trolley into your car, which is far far more likely to happen if you go to the local supermarket for your groceries.
So many of these arguments are" becuase it happened once to a bloke I know's stepmother's sister's uncles's brother's next door neighbour". Becuase that information is so reliable and never has any predjudice attached to it.
Post by: gronk on February 04, 2016, 11:28:54 AM
They only tested 6% of cyclists.
Nobody said they didn't.....the bit stated was 93% of TESTED !! No "skewed" figures......the figures are there for all to see.
Post by: tk421 on February 04, 2016, 12:22:51 PM
Nobody said they didn't.....the bit stated was 93% of TESTED !! No "skewed" figures......the figures are there for all to see.
YAWN. Focus on the tiny bit of detail that suits your argument. 92% means nothing by itself. Re-read the whole statement (author's word not mine). Only 15 of the 222 cyclists were tested for drugs and the results for 14 of these were positive – this is likely to reflect the circumstances of the 15, rather than the drugs prevalence among the 222.
I tracked down another review of that data from Monash - basically the testing had holes in it and the figure can't be relied on. "However there were signficant omissions in the report with no details provided on the types of drugs tested for, the number of drivers who tested postive or the types of drugs detected in cyclists and drivers."
Those cyclists were dead therefore they have to use a blood test, which picks up the results of metabolism - this can be up to 2 weeks old. All that statement proves is that some dead people had drugs in their systems, not that they were under the influence at the time of death, nor whether they were the contributing factor. It also doesn't say what drugs they were on.
A better, less ambiguous, more complete figure, is the 2015 South Australian Study which tested almost all of their bicycle trauma deaths (27/29) and found 26% had drugs OR alcohol in their system.
Which strangely, is similar to the 25% of motorists who die and have drugs or alcohol in their system. OMG! The percentages of bike riders affected by drugs and alcohol and die is almost the same as drivers. Who woulda thunk it?
Its also close to the 30% of Australians who are illicit drug users.
Tell me again how mandatory Id carrying is going to stop these drunk/drug affected drivers?
Post by: scblack on February 04, 2016, 12:47:54 PM
Nobody said they didn't.....the bit stated was 93% of TESTED !! No "skewed" figures......the figures are there for all to see.You posted this tiny little meaningless statistic AGAIN.
Why???
Post by: gronk on February 04, 2016, 12:49:09 PM
Tell me again how mandatory Id carrying is going to stop these drunk/drug affected drivers?
I didn't tell you anything about ID and drunk drivers( that should be riders though !! ). I didn't tell you anything except point out that someone elses fact was in fact a fact !! ;D ;D
Post by: gronk on February 04, 2016, 12:52:12 PM
You posted this tiny little meaningless statistic AGAIN.
Why???
If I have to explain, it might show why you haven't read all the replies.. :-* :-*
Post by: Bird on February 04, 2016, 01:12:31 PM
Buyin' Dinner and Wine
And me money on flowers and lollies
Only to find
That what's on me mind
Isn't on hers and she's sorry
So I've made up some lines
That save wastin' time
And keep me from blowin' me brass
I'm ever so cool
I just prop on me stool
Right next to hers and I ask
Do you **** on first dates
Does you Dad own a brewery
Could I feel Your ****
Or would you show 'em to me
Cause you've got a nice head
And you look pretty honest
So me face'll be leavin' in quart of an hour
I'd like you to be on it
You know how it feels when you first meet a sheila
And the bull*hit you gotta go through
Like callin' her up
An' tellin' her you love her
When all that you'd love is just a screw
But she wants to hold hands
And meet her old man
And sit around for hours and talk
But me new method is, you just cut through the ****
And get down to the goodies straight off
Do you **** on first dates
Does you Dad own a brewery
Could I feel Your ****
Or would you show 'em to me
Do you sleep in the nick
Do you give head very often
If we can decide your place or mine
We can **** off then
You know how it feels when you first meet a sheila
An you'd give a weeks pay to hold her
Don't sit actin' dumb
Just front her full on
and drop a few lines that I told ya
This new method of mine
Might not work every time, but then again no method will
I've been spat at and slapped
and kneed in the nackers
But then I've got a few ****s as well
Do you **** on first dates
Does you Dad own a brewery
Could I feel Your ****
Or would you show 'em to me
If the answer is no
to me questions above
Then be a good sport and give me the name
Of a girlfriend who does
Post by: tk421 on February 04, 2016, 01:37:01 PM
I didn't tell you anything about ID and drunk drivers( that should be riders though !! ). I didn't tell you anything except point out that someone elses fact was in fact a fact !! ;D ;D
Facts without context are meaningless. :p
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: scrapsD40 on February 04, 2016, 01:56:30 PM
I'd steer clear of cars and trucks coz they were made so solid back then they were hard to dent. If you managed to dent them, more than likely you came out with a broken leg or arm.
Suffered many a skinned face, elbows, knees and toes, but survived.
Back then we didn't have internet forums. You'd meet your mates down near the storm drains and bitch about life
Anyone else remember those days.
Post by: glenm64 on February 04, 2016, 02:01:38 PM
Just started reading this thread
Some people take getting run over far to serious.
(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160204/1afaa18adf116fbb39a6dfd03de9fd8f.jpg)
Cheers Glen
Post by: KingBilly on February 04, 2016, 02:04:41 PM
I used to ride a bike wearing t-shirt, shorts and thongs, but lost interest when they made helmets madatory.
I'd steer clear of cars and trucks coz they were made so solid back then they were hard to dent. If you managed to dent them, more than likely you came out with a broken leg or arm.
Suffered many a skinned face, elbows, knees and toes, but survived.
Back then we didn't have internet forums. You'd meet your mates down near the storm drains and bitch about life
Anyone else remember those days.
I remember taking the skin off my ankles on the pedal crank because my wet rubber thong slipped :D
KB
Whoops, before Bird jumps in, it was thong on my feet :D
Post by: Footy Shorts Shane on February 04, 2016, 02:10:54 PM
Post by: scblack on February 04, 2016, 02:39:38 PM
And riding with only the ball of your foot in the middle of bear trap pedals, only to slip off and remove lines of skin the full length of your shin.My shin bones still have dents from bear trap pedals gouging the bones when I was a teenager crashing my BMX. Did not have shinnies back then for protection.
Post by: Bad Scott on February 04, 2016, 02:45:27 PM
I used to ride a bike wearing t-shirt, shorts and thongs, but lost interest when they made helmets madatory.BMX bandits with tuff rims :D
I'd steer clear of cars and trucks coz they were made so solid back then they were hard to dent. If you managed to dent them, more than likely you came out with a broken leg or arm.
Suffered many a skinned face, elbows, knees and toes, but survived.
Back then we didn't have internet forums. You'd meet your mates down near the storm drains and bitch about life
Anyone else remember those days.
Post by: edz on February 04, 2016, 02:48:14 PM
Post by: scrapsD40 on February 04, 2016, 03:12:57 PM
You blokes had pedals !! the bikes I got to ride were hand me downs with only the bolts that used to hold the pedals and lucky to have a tyre at all and one unbuckled rim with all its spokes ..and surgical tape wrapped around the tyre that had worn through to the tube.
Luxury was being able to afford those new fandangle thornproof tyre tubes, and we used to relish the annual hard rubbish collections as you could go and stock up on tyres and bits from the bikes people would throwout complete with redback spiders
Post by: plusnq on February 04, 2016, 03:21:06 PM
Post by: glenm64 on February 04, 2016, 03:22:58 PM
When i say bike, it wasnt really a bike.
It was 2 old cans wired to a stick.
But to us it was a bike.
Cheers Glen
Post by: GBC on February 04, 2016, 03:32:15 PM
Post by: Bird on February 04, 2016, 03:53:32 PM
Post by: gronk on February 04, 2016, 04:02:10 PM
I used to dream of having a seat....
You got used to just the seat tube eh ?? ;D :o :o
Post by: Jeepers Creepers on February 04, 2016, 04:13:32 PM
You got used to just the seat tube eh ?? ;D :o :o
He still does.
Post by: scrapsD40 on February 04, 2016, 04:13:42 PM
Post by: Hairs on February 04, 2016, 04:46:15 PM
Seriously, these idiots have no idea.
The law says you need to remove your motorcycle helmet to enter a Bank Or a Servo, so you remove it.
The law says you need to keep at the speed limit or below, you travel at the posted speed limit.
The law says that you must not have an open container of alcohol and be over .05, so you don't drink and drive.
The law say that you must wear a seat belt, so you wear a seat belt.
Get the picture ???
The law say you must obey these new rules, you obey the rules.
If the law says you need to carry ID, oh hang on, I'm a bike rider, I don't have to.
Well you are breaking the law, you will be fined, carry ID and life is good.
Stop being a tool.
Simple, Now that's not hard is it. :D
Ok, maybe for some.
End of story.
:cheers:
Post by: oldmate on February 04, 2016, 04:50:02 PM
I remember taking the skin off my ankles on the pedal crank because my wet rubber thong slipped :D
KB
Whoops, before Bird jumps in, it was thong on my feet :D
You sure it wasn't you that made that vid that I posted KB. Looked like you and he was wearing a thong. Lol
Post by: oldmate on February 04, 2016, 04:52:12 PM
Can you imagine what your Dad would have said if you had spent the cost of a new car on a bike? My Dad would have had a stroke.
Yeah people today spend money on a bike that would of got them a new gtho in the day
Post by: oldmate on February 04, 2016, 04:58:10 PM
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-01-29/sydney-cyclists-protest-new-laws-requiring-them-to-carry-id/7123360 (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-01-29/sydney-cyclists-protest-new-laws-requiring-them-to-carry-id/7123360)
Seriously, these idiots have no idea.
The law says you need to remove your motorcycle helmet to enter a Bank Or a Servo, so you remove it.
The law says you need to keep at the speed limit or below, you travel at the posted speed limit.
The law says that you must not have an open container of alcohol and be over .05, so you don't drink and drive.
The law say that you must wear a seat belt, so you wear a seat belt.
Get the picture ???
The law say you must obey these new rules, you obey the rules.
If the law says you need to carry ID, oh hang on, I'm a bike rider, I don't have to.
Well you are breaking the law, you will be fined, carry ID and life is good.
Stop being a tool.
Simple, Now that's not hard is it. :D
Ok, maybe for some.
End of story.
:cheers:
Your right though, how hard is it to just carry your id? I know in my area they must all carry their credit card or cash so they can stop mid ride for 3 latte's with 20 bikes scattered against every other shopfront. So can't be hard to just throw some id in aswell.
Post by: scrapsD40 on February 04, 2016, 05:04:14 PM
Your right though, how hard is it to just carry your id? I know in my area they must all carry their credit card or cash so they can stop mid ride for 3 latte's with 20 bikes scattered against every other shopfront. So can't be hard to just throw some id in aswell.c'mon be fair. Credit cards aren't as big as these ID's?
Post by: Bad Scott on February 04, 2016, 05:11:32 PM
c'mon be fair. Credit cards aren't as big as these ID's?They gotta tow em, with rated hitch and chain
Post by: oldmate on February 04, 2016, 05:12:21 PM
Post by: Hairs on February 04, 2016, 05:13:58 PM
Your right though, how hard is it to just carry your id? I know in my area they must all carry their credit card or cash so they can stop mid ride for 3 latte's with 20 bikes scattered against every other shopfront. So can't be hard to just throw some id in aswell.With bikes everywhere on the foot path so those going to the bakery next door have to weave and step around bikes.
They congregate at the coffee shop's outside tables talking just as loud as they were on the open road, 6.30am in the morning. overcast and wearing their sunnies, heads bobbing they look like blow flies on a dog turd.
They have a different mind set to the average person.
Post by: Hairs on February 04, 2016, 05:19:22 PM
Post by: Jeepers Creepers on February 04, 2016, 05:31:33 PM
But, I can carry money, to pay for the Lycra Latte I have at the coffee shop.... go figure.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2dE6EQ3MCE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2dE6EQ3MCE)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6o3B601Ndsg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6o3B601Ndsg)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZ2GTbPDdrs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZ2GTbPDdrs)
Post by: glenm64 on February 04, 2016, 06:00:24 PM
Where do you keep your ID?
(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160204/a1e964c6886e7f16c3e63ae7e66c5f8b.jpg)
Cheers Glen
Post by: oldmate on February 04, 2016, 06:08:08 PM
Doh, I'm a cyclist, i'm not bright enough to carry ID, it might slow me down, cut or bruise me in a fall........ :'(
But, I can carry money, to pay for the Lycra Latte I have at the coffee shop.... go figure.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2dE6EQ3MCE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2dE6EQ3MCE)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6o3B601Ndsg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6o3B601Ndsg)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZ2GTbPDdrs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZ2GTbPDdrs)
i fell of the chair PMSl at the 2nd one :cup:
Post by: Steffo1 on February 04, 2016, 06:28:39 PM
I understand the cyclists dilemma.
Where do you keep your ID?
(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160204/a1e964c6886e7f16c3e63ae7e66c5f8b.jpg)
Cheers Glen
http://www.idlube.com/our-products/id-condoms-superior-feel/ (http://www.idlube.com/our-products/id-condoms-superior-feel/)
Post by: NewieCamper on February 04, 2016, 08:23:16 PM
Having to carry, or even hold, a licence doesn't stop the idiots on the roads, just watch a few episodes of highway patrol or rbt and you can see that if a driver doesn't want to give the police ID they don't, they get taken to the station and it goes from there, fine or not. Same for cyclists.
It's the incidental cycling it will hurt, not the stereotyped louts. We should be encouraging incidental bike use to help alleviate motor traffic. Make it easier to get to the local bowlo for a meal, down to the post office to pick up a little parcel that the courier didn't bother to get out of his van for, easier to follow the kids to school on a bike and a hundred other examples.
The other thing that should change is to allow cycling on the footpath. Helps those less confident to ride on the roads. I can't 'get out of the way' on the roads if I can't ride on the footpath, even if I want to - I don't want a fine and I don't want to be hit by an impatient motorist who can't wait a few seconds to give me some space on the roads and pass safely. While we are doing that we should be rolling back the helmet laws on pathways and residential streets, like the 50zones I haven't fallen off a bike in years except for high risk stuff like riding fast or in the scrub on MTB, there are millions of kms ridden by responsible adults around the world without a stack causing a head injury.
Post by: gronk on February 04, 2016, 08:56:08 PM
Post by: Bird on February 04, 2016, 09:05:55 PM
Whats wrong with the dimwits having one of these? (http://www.hairfysh.com/images/Icons/Smileys/Fall_Over_Shocked.gif)they are full of energy bars..
Post by: NewieCamper on February 04, 2016, 09:22:12 PM
I shouldn't have to wear my seatbelt if I'm just going down to the local shops either !! See how you can't have "flexible" rules...unfortunately rules have got to be rules !But not carrying ID isn't going to put you in hospital if you get hit by another car is it? I don't want a flexible rule, I don't believe that carrying ID will do anything to improve safety for cyclists which is supposedly what these changes are about. I'm all for changes to the rules that will improve safety. My opinion is that more bikes out there will improve safety, no- not the racers, the everyday joes.
If they want to do something positive throw more money at driver and road user training. Put it in schools, make it harder than just performing a reverse park to get a licence, retest licence holders for the rules every few years. Get kids to ride to school and learn the rules. These are things that will improve road safety, not asking a cyclist to carry an official photo of themselves.
Post by: Bird on February 04, 2016, 09:25:30 PM
Quote from: plusnq
Can you imagine what your Dad would have said if you had spent the cost of a new car on a bike?
I'd punch myself in the face if I ever did that.
Post by: Paddler Ed on February 04, 2016, 10:21:09 PM
Have you ridden on the road any time before or after getting your driving licence? I've been riding on roads in the UK and Australia for 2/3s of my life, and everytime I do it I find new things to think about, and use that to improve my driving - for example, my anticipation of what other drivers or road users is increased because on a pushy (or any 2 wheeler) you have to be aware of what some SMIDSY driver is going to do - that then translates to how you drive on the road as well. The other side of that is you'll also realise how to conserve energy, because them hills can be a bugger to get up...
It'll also make you realise how insulated you are from everything in the car; I listen for a lot of things, and can generally hear them ahead of when it becomes a problem and in part that's from riding in city centres in the UK, where being able to hear a siren from a way away was a good self preservation measure.
On the subject of ID:
I carry my expired driving licence - it sill has my current address on it, but also means that I don't run the risk of not having it in my wallet when I'm driving. I just lob it in the back pocket on my jersey, along with phone and house keys.
Falls:
I've had my share of them on the road, and off the road, with stitches in my chin (twice from bitumen, once from dirt) and my leg (bear trap pedal to the calf). However, because I'm aware of what's going on, try to move at a decent pace and ride defensively I can reduce my risk... oh, and I'm wary of wet roads and bus lanes...
Other drivers:
On roads where there is limited opportunities to overtake, I'll move over as much as I can, and wave drivers past if I have a better view of the road, or leave my hand down to the side if there's something that makes it not safe, and then wave them past as soon as I can.
I also watch out around here for certain vehicles as I know they may not see you... advantages of being in a town with a high International Student population, and a lot of older drivers...
Post by: cancan on February 05, 2016, 07:18:00 AM
Other drivers:
On roads where there is limited opportunities to overtake, I'll move over as much as I can, and wave drivers past if I have a better view of the road, or leave my hand down to the side if there's something that makes it not safe, and then wave them past as soon as I can.
I have stopped waving cars past after I saw another cyclist do this and the driver had no idea on how to pass and to took so long that they nearly crashed... i could have easily passed in but not all drivers have the same ability so now i give them as much room as i can but leave when to pass to them. ..
Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk
Post by: stabicraft on February 05, 2016, 08:15:39 AM
I dont try to "substantiate my legal rights" with trucks when driving my car because if the truck disputes my rights, its gonna hurt...bad.
Working on this principle, when riding a bike, you dont take on a 1-2 ton vehicle because there will only be one sure looser....the bike.
Better to back off than be DEAD RIGHT.
But I suppose the Lycra is bullet proof and will save your life along with the esky lid you wear.
I wonder just how much of a bump a head wrapped in an esky lid would make when run over by a car tyre?
Post by: NewieCamper on February 05, 2016, 09:29:50 AM
I got a big fright one day when a car drove between my sons while we were riding. There was no need to pass at that point, it was blatantly dangerous to take an exit between two young riders (9&7) and then come back and get all mouthy because 'he didn't indicate' to follow the road to the right where no cars ever indicate. We were doing the right thing, riding along with enough space for the car to pass safely if it had followed the road to the right where we were headed. I realise in hindsight I should have been in the middle of the lane protecting my kids from the idiot in the tin box.
There are times when a bike is safest in the middle of the lane when there isn't enough room for a car/truck to pass. A bike doesn't have to stop for cars and wait when it is a legally recognised vehicle. A bike does not 'obstruct traffic' (which is an offence) merely by riding along in accordance with the normal flow of traffic.
Have a little patience, have a little courtesy wether you are on a bike or in a car.
Post by: gronk on February 05, 2016, 02:31:01 PM
. A bike does not 'obstruct traffic' (which is an offence) merely by riding along in accordance with the normal flow of traffic.
I think it does if the bike is doing 15k/ph and the normal flow of traffic is 60+k/ph !!
Post by: stabicraft on February 05, 2016, 02:44:30 PM
In maritime law, if there is a collision, both vessels are held responsible, one for being in the wrong and the other for not keeping adequate lookout to prevent said collision.
Unfortunately, in Australian traffic law, one vehicle is always deemed in the wrong and the other in the right.
But in many cases the vehicle technically in the right could have avoided the accident had they had sufficient grey matter between the ears to actually think like a human does.
If they just changed the law a little where both drivers were considered culpable, and the degree of culpibility was examined more carefully so that deliberate accidents caused by some idiot taking their "Right of way" perhaps people would be more responsible and many lives could be saved.
But dont hold your breath.
The RMA hasn't enough intellegence or ability to make sensible laws.
The lawyers would hate it because accidents would not be as profitable for them
And governments would hate it .....just because.
So much easier to make more and more draconian laws and penalties which are far more profitable for Govco in the long run.
Post by: Jeepers Creepers on February 05, 2016, 05:40:14 PM
Why do so many cyclists have a go-pro stuck to their heads these days?
Post by: Bad Scott on February 05, 2016, 05:54:15 PM
Post by: macca on February 05, 2016, 05:54:37 PM
Post by: l0ckym on February 05, 2016, 05:55:52 PM
QUESTION.
Why do so many cyclists have a go-pro stuck to their heads these days?
I wear one, and I cycle 300-350kms/week. These aren't commuting kilometres, but I train to race, like to be fit, and most importantly - riding that much, means I can eat (and even more importantly) ;D -- drink whatever I want..
I send about 3 videos a week to the local cops of clowns trying to kill me. My videos have front and rear view, my speed and GPS location and time/date. More often than not, offenders get sent a ticket in the mail. I follow the road rules, ride defensively and give-way to traffic, let traffic past where it is safe to do so. If requested I provide all the footage which will include my cycling behaviour before and after incidents - I have nothing to hide.
Some of the opinions I read here, are quite frankly frightening - generally speaking its quite easy for bikes and cars to co-exist - look at most developed European countries..like Denmark, Sweden, France..they show it can be done - without the agro.
Yes there are clowns on bikes, and there are some very good, and respectful drivers. Some of the Truckers I come across are some of the most respectful and great drivers I've shared the road with.
So you might get delayed 2 secs, by having to slow momentarily behind me, before safely and legally passing me with a safe distance...I'm not sure why people get so upset by 2 seconds.
What happens when you are driving somewhere, and some Nanna is driving her immaculate 1983 Corolla at 30km/hr in front of you? Do you honk your horn, shout at her, try and run her off the road? No..she has as much right to be there are you do, bikes are no different.
I think the ID is ridiculous, and we are the only nation in the world to require such an impost on liberty...I look forward to pedestrians, skateboarders and dogs being walked to all having to carry their identification in future.
The law is an ass, as is the opinion of some drivers, whom I look forward to sending my footage of to the local constabulary..
Post by: glenm64 on February 05, 2016, 06:12:38 PM
the only reason you can identify the idiot drivers is because of registration requirements.
I think many of the idiot drivers get fustrated by some cyclists who also have pretty poor behavior.
The cyclists know there is no penalty and continue they ways which I believe cause fustration to those that are short fused.
Im not excusing any bad behaviour but it cuts both ways and unfortunately the lack of cyclist identification allows bad cyclists to carry on without any recourse.
Cheers Glen
Post by: D4D on February 05, 2016, 06:34:15 PM
More often than not, offenders get sent a ticket in the mail.
I call bullsh!t
Post by: Foo on February 05, 2016, 06:49:18 PM
I call bullsh!t
Don't be so quick to dismiss this! ;)
If the local Patrol hears you going on about some f-wit in a car/whatever, they will pull that car over. How do I know this? I was driving up Blackbutt Range and this corkhead, passed another truck that was coming down the Range = all double white lines. >:D If I had of been 2sec further up the road, it would have been a head on. Anyway, We get a call asking what happened and what vehicle it was and I told him. Couple of minutes late............I got him, thanks for that fellas! ;D
Foo
Post by: macca on February 05, 2016, 06:54:49 PM
I agree with your statements IOckym and agree with the need for all to be respectful of each other on the roads, butCouldn't agree more Glen
the only reason you can identify the idiot drivers is because of registration requirements.
I think many of the idiot drivers get fustrated by some cyclists who also have pretty poor behavior.
The cyclists know there is no penalty and continue they ways which I believe cause fustration to those that are short fused.
Im not excusing any bad behaviour but it cuts both ways and unfortunately the lack of cyclist identification allows bad cyclists to carry on without any recourse.
Cheers Glen
Post by: NewieCamper on February 05, 2016, 07:12:17 PM
Speeding, running red lights, drink and drug driving are very regular occurrences of readily identifiable motorists. The threat of fines doesn't do much to a proportion of society. carrying a little tiny pocket sized ID isn't going to change the way that those ratbag cyclists carry on becuase they still need to be caught by the police (like they currently are) at the time and I'm pretty sure we all know there isn't a copper around when you need one but they are doing the best they can.
Post by: macca on February 05, 2016, 07:17:05 PM
Post by: l0ckym on February 05, 2016, 07:49:33 PM
I call bullsh!t
See you in court.
Twice already in 2016, and its only Feb....I have footage and have done nothing wrong..
The license plate is also a misnomer...
Yes - there are d*ickheads on bikes, absolutely..
Having a numberplate doesn't stop people doing the wrong thing on a regular basis in cars/trucks/motorbikes... putting plates on push bikes would make us the only advanced economy in the world with such a regulation... (ex-Japan - where plates re used to help you identify your own personal bike out of 1000 in a parking space - not for legislation). The sheer cost of regulation, would far outweigh the reduction in cost to the health budget, carbon footprint and congestion costs - which is what other advanced economies actually measure...
I've been involved in several accidents, where I had no ID...the coppers are much smarter than they look - it doesn't take them long to work it out.....if a cyclist truly ruins your day by running a red light - have a dashcam, take time and date - chances are he's a creatuyre of habit, and does it often..... The other thing is, what about all those criminal jaywalkers....they don't have numberplates...the b*stards....perhaps we've all missed the boat and should be living like Gattica or Fahrenheit 451...every single person has to wear a name tag with their details.....
Some car drivers - really haven't thought this through...
Post by: D4D on February 05, 2016, 07:57:18 PM
See you in court.
Twice already in 2016, and its only Feb....I have footage and have done nothing wrong..
I still call bullsh!t
Let's say you get a video of me doing the wrong thing, you say you can get me sent a ticket, I contest it, we go to court, my legal counsel gets your video thrown out because there is no chain of custody and you cannot prove beyond reasonable doubt it was me in the video. Case thrown out, try again.
Post by: Rumpig on February 05, 2016, 08:00:58 PM
i don't recall anyone actually saying here that it does stop it occurring, but it does help prosecute those who do it..... as appears evident by your answer already.
Having a numberplate doesn't stop people doing the wrong thing on a regular basis in cars/trucks/motorbikes...
See you in court.what's good for the goose is good for the gander in my books :cheers:
Twice already in 2016, and its only Feb....
Post by: Bad Scott on February 05, 2016, 08:05:52 PM
Because they like taking video of the wiggling bum of their mate in front of them?????:cup: :cup: :cup: :cup:
Post by: l0ckym on February 05, 2016, 08:06:18 PM
I still call bullsh!t
Let's say you get a video of me doing the wrong thing, you say you can get me sent a ticket, I contest it, we go to court, my legal counsel gets your video thrown out because there is no chain of custody and you cannot prove beyond reasonable doubt it was me in the video. Case thrown out, try again.
Again, see you in court..
I've been there, given evidence, and had the driver rule responsible - one out of ten even get a conviction...
I'm only telling you what I do mate...I think the law is Shite...I'm just trying not to get killed by an imbecile..whilst keeping fit, reducing my carbon footprint, and saving money on fuel costs..I should be able to do that without being run over by a bogan..
Typically, if someone tries to kill me, I call the police straight away. They take a statement at the scene, and take statements from witnesses, and my video (from the start of the ride to the end) is provided as evidence. 3 blokes are now guests of our illustrious government because of my evidence, the video, and the video of witnesses. I hope they learn in the 'bighouse' that it is not ok to permit attempted murder...
I also have a lawyer, he's my bother, I'd love to get your numberplate on tape..he takes great pleasure in convincing magistrates that they tried to kill me...and gunning for suitable sentences..
Post by: KingBilly on February 05, 2016, 08:09:31 PM
3 blokes are now guests of our illustrious government because of my evidence, the video, and the video of witnesses. I hope they learn in the 'bighouse' that it is not ok to permit attempted murder...
Yep, 110% pure bull$hit ;D
KB
Post by: l0ckym on February 05, 2016, 08:15:26 PM
Yep, 110% pure bull$hit ;D
KB
Would you like me to quote case numbers..
I have nothing to gain by telling porkies...
I had my spine broken, lost the use of my left hand, and both legs broken by aggressive d*ckheads - where it was proven in a court of law - that I was not at fault, nor had done anything wrong..
If you blokes think you can just run over blokes in lycra on bikes, or scare them or swerve at them with no recompense, I suggest you reconsider.
I will continue to report aggressive behaviour, and illegal behaviour...just like I would intervene or report assault on a woman, or if I saw someone stealing stuff..It should be no different...
Post by: KingBilly on February 05, 2016, 08:18:25 PM
Would you like me to quote case numbers..
Yes please. Give me something to read on nightwork
KB
Post by: macca on February 05, 2016, 08:21:12 PM
Anyway I heard enough BS time to stop reading this thread. Bye
Post by: Foo on February 05, 2016, 08:43:39 PM
I must remember your friggin halfwit thinking as I drive down the hi-way in the truck, that costs over $10000 a year to register! Grow a figgin brain you lot, that bang on about regos and how it is the be all and end all of chit, because it's forking not!!!!!!! ::)
I must download the the 2hrs of f-wits running red lights and doing dumb chit in cars, 4bys, trucks,motorcycles and whatever the fork other type of vehicle there is. >:D
Foo
Post by: Black Diamond on February 05, 2016, 08:50:35 PM
Post by: Bad Scott on February 05, 2016, 09:15:45 PM
Post by: Bird on February 05, 2016, 09:45:44 PM
Post by: discoteddy on February 05, 2016, 10:11:55 PM
I still call bullsh!t
Let's say you get a video of me doing the wrong thing, you say you can get me sent a ticket, I contest it, we go to court, my legal counsel gets your video thrown out because there is no chain of custody and you cannot prove beyond reasonable doubt it was me in the video. Case thrown out, try again.
Police observe video and retain as exhibit, take witness statement of rider, form of demand placed on registered owner of vehicle depicted in video (offence dependant) , legal process commenced. Chain of custody pertaining to digital media, your legal council can argue long, and expensively on that one. In my experience the only loser is the wallet of the defendant. Can't smell poo here. Pretty disrespectful too. We can do better on here team.
Cheers,
Disco teddy.
Post by: alnjan on February 05, 2016, 10:54:44 PM
Again, see you in court..
I've been there, given evidence, and had the driver rule responsible - one out of ten even get a conviction...
I'm only telling you what I do mate...I think the law is Shite...I'm just trying not to get killed by an imbecile..whilst keeping fit, reducing my carbon footprint, and saving money on fuel costs..I should be able to do that without being run over by a bogan..
Typically, if someone tries to kill me, I call the police straight away. They take a statement at the scene, and take statements from witnesses, and my video (from the start of the ride to the end) is provided as evidence. 3 blokes are now guests of our illustrious government because of my evidence, the video, and the video of witnesses. I hope they learn in the 'bighouse' that it is not ok to permit attempted murder...
I also have a lawyer, he's my bother, I'd love to get your numberplate on tape..he takes great pleasure in convincing magistrates that they tried to kill me...and gunning for suitable sentences..
And there is the prosecution's case for all vehicles using the roadway to have a means of identification, including pushbike riders. If motor vehicles had no registration plates the owner and therefore the driver would not be able to be identified the same as push bike riders at present.
I have no problem with the current and soon to be introduced road rules, ALL road users should be treated the same, vehicles to be clearly identified and drivers/riders to carry identification and penalties to be the same regardless of vehicle type for traffic offences such as red light offences etc. Are we all not equal or are some more equal than others.
Personally I would prefer to see separate cycle ways/paths to the roadway allowing safety for all.
Post by: Jeepers Creepers on February 06, 2016, 03:42:51 AM
QUESTION.
Why do so many cyclists have a go-pro stuck to their heads these days?
Gee, :angel: who would've guessed, that one eeny weeny question would set the whole thread off again. :angel: 8) ;D
Post by: KingBilly on February 06, 2016, 04:40:11 AM
Personally I would prefer to see separate cycle ways/paths to the roadway allowing safety for all.
Brisbane City Council have spent millions, yes millions, on a cycle way along the river. But every morning, there are still the lycra groups cycling along the adjacent road. Seems it is not cool to use the cycle way if you are a serious pushie rider.
KB
Post by: D4D on February 06, 2016, 05:46:01 AM
Brisbane City Council have spent millions, yes millions, on a cycle way along the river. But every morning, there are still the lycra groups cycling along the adjacent road. Seems it is not cool to use the cycle way if you are a serious pushie rider.
As I understand the law, if a bike lane is provided it must be used, if the rider is on the road he can he fined. Maybe I should start videoing these guys and send it to l0ckym :)
Post by: GBC on February 06, 2016, 06:24:43 AM
Post by: D4D on February 06, 2016, 06:30:18 AM
Maybe you should learn the law first.
I read it again and the wording actually is 'Where bicycle lanes are provided, riders must use them whenever practicable'. What's the point of having that law...
Post by: NewieCamper on February 06, 2016, 06:40:06 AM
"Whenever practicable"
I read it again and the wording actually is 'Where bicycle lanes are provided, riders must use them whenever practicable'. What's the point of having that law...
Lots of so called bike lanes are in the dooring lane so rider choose the safer option of not getting hit by someone opening a door in their path and ride the road.
Bike paths are often meandering paths that don't allow you to go fast enough. Is there a freeway near you that doesn't go the right way so you use the backstreets?
Bike paths are often cluttered with pedestrians that wander, dogs off leashes and prevent travelling at a decent speed.
All these reasons are enough to cover the 'whenever practicable' clause and ride the road instead. There are others too.
All the agro from drivers seems to come from those who think the have the right to have everyone else get out of their way - which they don't.
Post by: GeoffA on February 06, 2016, 06:42:15 AM
.......
All the agro from drivers AND RIDERS seems to come from those who think the have the right to have everyone else get out of their way - which they don't.
Fixed.....
Post by: oldmate on February 06, 2016, 06:46:55 AM
Gee, :angel: who would've guessed, that one eeny weeny question would set the whole thread off again. :angel: 8) ;D
Lol, back on page 2, 3 days ago I posted a comical video. Look what happened after that. ;D :angel:
I thought the video was a Pissa. Wonder how many people commenting even watched it and noticed the guy in his g string..
Anyway, I feel like I was at the beach, with one chip left, which I throw on the ground, stand back and watch the seagulls fight over it. ;D :D. Giving everyone else some entertainment I guess.
Post by: GBC on February 06, 2016, 06:47:18 AM
You can choose whether or not you wish to use a bicycle lane where one is provided."
QLD law for the Brisbane river.
These are painted cycle lanes on the road. Cyclists are under no duress to ride anywhere in QLD. They cannot ride where there are 'no cycling' signs but that is the only restriction.
I can feel myself getting sucked back into the vortex of stupid that is this thread.
Post by: Jeepers Creepers on February 06, 2016, 06:53:41 AM
Lol, back on page 2, 3 days ago I posted a comical video. Look what happened after that. ;D :angel:
I could hear the fishing line whizzing away off the reel, with the hook, bait and sinker long gone to never be seen again. :cup:
But the thread slowed down yesterday and i thought, what the hell, if the fish are biting, i'm going fishing.
Got a couple of nice plump lycra mullets in the esky already. ;D
Post by: oldmate on February 06, 2016, 06:55:12 AM
I could hear the fishing line whizzing away off the reel, with the hook, bait and sinker long gone to never be seen again. :cup:
But the thread slowed down yesterday and i thought, what the hell, if the fish are biting, i'm going fishing.
Got a couple of nice plump lycra mullets in the esky already. ;D
I only had 400ft of line on the real. Cheers for throwing a new one out. ;D :cup:
Post by: Jeepers Creepers on February 06, 2016, 07:10:23 AM
Mirrors are made to be replaced. ;D
Post by: Bad Scott on February 06, 2016, 07:13:58 AM
Did ya go-pro it?
Got a couple of nice plump lycra mullets in the esky already. ;D
Post by: Jeepers Creepers on February 06, 2016, 07:17:22 AM
They fall off or get knocked off and they roll around like a soccer player looking a for a free penalty.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tk0-A0iSZLo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tk0-A0iSZLo)
Post by: Snow on February 06, 2016, 08:23:34 AM
Post by: edz on February 06, 2016, 11:42:07 AM
Post by: stabicraft on February 06, 2016, 12:00:44 PM
Someone wrote that bikes hold traffic up a couple of seconds.
Sorry thats just crap. Bikes hold traffic up far longer peddling uphill swaying all over the road and barely doing 2 klm/hr.
When one finally gets past them, they just overtake and get back in the front at the next set of lights, swerving through
the cars, knocking mirrors and scratching paint as they go. I have been on the bad end of this practice several times and
it has held me up considerably longer than a few seconds. I would never have caught the lights in the first place if the bike
had not held me us so long.
Why is it such an impost to have to carry ID?
You have to carry ID when you travel, when you drive, when you fish, and any number of other places.
A small card sized identification is far from bulky or heavy, what is the problem?
Or is it because it gives you the ability to remain anomalous when you have done something wrong or plan to
commit a traffic offence?
Mention is made of several countries that have few issues with bikes,
Try China, my friend, bikes are tolerated....barely. The new world uses scooters and bikes are frowned upon or even targeted.
Other countries have better roads and much better infrastructure to allow harmonious existence between bikes and cars.
The pathetic roads, goat tracks, disgusting lack of planning and useless bureaucracy do nothing to help make our traffic
system safe or even functional. And this is not going to get any better in the short term because our public servants and
politicians are far more worried about what they can get out of the system than what they can do to make it better.
And why do most bike riders have permanent PMS?
Anger is the only constant with bike riders, my sister was verbally and very nearly physically assaulted by a bike rider because
she had the temerity to actually turn left at an intersection legally while indicating said maneuver. The bike rider was screaming up
the inside and rammed her vehicle, he then leapt off his bike, kicked the door in and started to move on her. Fortunately the driver
of the car behind intervened and, as the rider was a typical coward, he backed off. The damage to the door was never paid,
and the rider rode off threatening to find her and kill her. Obviously a nice bloke. At least he didnt damage his Lycra too badly.
Finally, About this meter and a half clearance.
What of you are driving and a bike comes up alongside you from behind?
Does one swerve to the right to ensure the required personal space is maintained?
What if you are in heavy traffic? how does one comply with this law as the bike meanders down in between cars?
I can see it now, as the rider rides through the traffic the cars all swerve to maintain distance, crashing into each other in a
mad attempt to give this bike space. Heaven forbid should the bike come a croppers, and the car actually runs him over,
fingers pointed directly at the car driver, not at the idiot on the bike who was the real cause. Its a legal nightmare.
Post by: D4D on February 06, 2016, 12:11:26 PM
...because she had the temerity to actually turn left at an intersection legally while indicating said maneuver. The bike rider was screaming up the inside and rammed her vehicle
I love this one. I need to turn left into my CBD car park at the office in the morning. As I am aware that riders seem oblivious to my flashing indicator, I make sure I let it blink for an extended period before I turn in. 2 out of 5 days, I have a bike rider flying down the road abusing me thinking he has right of way as I turn in. I try and be courteous but if you're moving 5 times the speed of the traffic you're going to get yourself into trouble.
Bike paths are often meandering paths that don't allow you to go fast enough.
Bike paths are often cluttered with pedestrians that wander, dogs off leashes and prevent travelling at a decent speed.
I love this argument, ride to the conditions not mach 1 because you're trying to get aero. It's the same when I drive a car, I have to drive to the traffic speed.
Post by: weeds on February 06, 2016, 12:12:30 PM
I haved a few simple questions/comments.
Someone wrote that bikes hold traffic up a couple of seconds.
Sorry thats just crap. Bikes hold traffic up far longer peddling uphill swaying all over the road and barely doing 2 klm/hr.
When one finally gets past them, they just overtake and get back in the front at the next set of lights, swerving through
the cars, knocking mirrors and scratching paint as they go. I have been on the bad end of this practice several times and
it has held me up considerably longer than a few seconds. I would never have caught the lights in the first place if the bike
had not held me us so long.
Why is it such an impost to have to carry ID?
You have to carry ID when you travel, when you drive, when you fish, and any number of other places.
A small card sized identification is far from bulky or heavy, what is the problem?
Or is it because it gives you the ability to remain anomalous when you have done something wrong or plan to
commit a traffic offence?
Mention is made of several countries that have few issues with bikes,
Try China, my friend, bikes are tolerated....barely. The new world uses scooters and bikes are frowned upon or even targeted.
Other countries have better roads and much better infrastructure to allow harmonious existence between bikes and cars.
The pathetic roads, goat tracks, disgusting lack of planning and useless bureaucracy do nothing to help make our traffic
system safe or even functional. And this is not going to get any better in the short term because our public servants and
politicians are far more worried about what they can get out of the system than what they can do to make it better.
And why do most bike riders have permanent PMS?
Anger is the only constant with bike riders, my sister was verbally and very nearly physically assaulted by a bike rider because
she had the temerity to actually turn left at an intersection legally while indicating said maneuver. The bike rider was screaming up
the inside and rammed her vehicle, he then leapt off his bike, kicked the door in and started to move on her. Fortunately the driver
of the car behind intervened and, as the rider was a typical coward, he backed off. The damage to the door was never paid,
and the rider rode off threatening to find her and kill her. Obviously a nice bloke. At least he didnt damage his Lycra too badly.
Finally, About this meter and a half clearance.
What of you are driving and a bike comes up alongside you from behind?
Does one swerve to the right to ensure the required personal space is maintained?
What if you are in heavy traffic? how does one comply with this law as the bike meanders down in between cars?
I can see it now, as the rider rides through the traffic the cars all swerve to maintain distance, crashing into each other in a
mad attempt to give this bike space. Heaven forbid should the bike come a croppers, and the car actually runs him over,
fingers pointed directly at the car driver, not at the idiot on the bike who was the real cause. Its a legal nightmare.
Which country are you driving in??? I certainly haven't seen 90% of what you have said
Post by: briann532 on February 06, 2016, 12:33:18 PM
I haved a few simple questions/comments.
Someone wrote that bikes hold traffic up a couple of seconds.
Sorry thats just crap. Bikes hold traffic up far longer peddling uphill swaying all over the road and barely doing 2 klm/hr.
When one finally gets past them, they just overtake and get back in the front at the next set of lights, swerving through
the cars, knocking mirrors and scratching paint as they go. I have been on the bad end of this practice several times and
it has held me up considerably longer than a few seconds. I would never have caught the lights in the first place if the bike
had not held me us so long.
Why is it such an impost to have to carry ID?
You have to carry ID when you travel, when you drive, when you fish, and any number of other places.
A small card sized identification is far from bulky or heavy, what is the problem?
Or is it because it gives you the ability to remain anomalous when you have done something wrong or plan to
commit a traffic offence?
Mention is made of several countries that have few issues with bikes,
Try China, my friend, bikes are tolerated....barely. The new world uses scooters and bikes are frowned upon or even targeted.
Other countries have better roads and much better infrastructure to allow harmonious existence between bikes and cars.
The pathetic roads, goat tracks, disgusting lack of planning and useless bureaucracy do nothing to help make our traffic
system safe or even functional. And this is not going to get any better in the short term because our public servants and
politicians are far more worried about what they can get out of the system than what they can do to make it better.
And why do most bike riders have permanent PMS?
Anger is the only constant with bike riders, my sister was verbally and very nearly physically assaulted by a bike rider because
she had the temerity to actually turn left at an intersection legally while indicating said maneuver. The bike rider was screaming up
the inside and rammed her vehicle, he then leapt off his bike, kicked the door in and started to move on her. Fortunately the driver
of the car behind intervened and, as the rider was a typical coward, he backed off. The damage to the door was never paid,
and the rider rode off threatening to find her and kill her. Obviously a nice bloke. At least he didnt damage his Lycra too badly.
Finally, About this meter and a half clearance.
What of you are driving and a bike comes up alongside you from behind?
Does one swerve to the right to ensure the required personal space is maintained?
What if you are in heavy traffic? how does one comply with this law as the bike meanders down in between cars?
I can see it now, as the rider rides through the traffic the cars all swerve to maintain distance, crashing into each other in a
mad attempt to give this bike space. Heaven forbid should the bike come a croppers, and the car actually runs him over,
fingers pointed directly at the car driver, not at the idiot on the bike who was the real cause. Its a legal nightmare.
Oh FFS................ ARE YOU FRIGGIN SERIOUS?????
Why ruin a perfectly good and entertaining thread that we are all enjoying by posting something logical and rational?
Seriously!!! What are you trying to do??? :police: :police: :police:
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Post by: doc evil on February 06, 2016, 12:51:09 PM
All the agro from drivers seems to come from those who think the have the right to have everyone else get out of their way - which they don't.
Typical lycra terrorist view.........you're right, you have the right of way on the road. We vehicle drivers will just stop and wait for you............. the law abiding holier than thou justification of their lycra clad existence.......
pedestrians HAVE been killed because these poor excuse of human beings think that they can "race" whilst wearing their preffered latte lycra on a combined ( be it cars or pedestrians ) road or path.........
I'll spell it out.........if you want to train to be the best latte lycra terrorist you can be, do it on a velodrome...........everyone else has to use a specific place to train ( pool, race track, sporting venue etc) what give you the god given right to disrupt everyone else just to appease your ego........
Post by: NewieCamper on February 06, 2016, 01:28:31 PM
Typical lycra terrorist view.........you're right, you have the right of way on the road. We vehicle drivers will just stop and wait for you............. the law abiding holier than thou justification of their lycra clad existence.......
pedestrians HAVE been killed because these poor excuse of human beings think that they can "race" whilst wearing their preffered latte lycra on a combined ( be it cars or pedestrians ) road or path.........
I'll spell it out.........if you want to train to be the best latte lycra terrorist you can be, do it on a velodrome...........everyone else has to use a specific place to train ( pool, race track, sporting venue etc) what give you the god given right to disrupt everyone else just to appease your ego........
I'm not a Lycra wearer, I don't 'train' on the road, I don't ride 'just to distrust everyone else'. I ride for transport, sometimes that is riding to and from my 'training ground'.
Let's compare how many pedestrians have been killed by cars vs cycles? I think there might have been one pedestrian killed in the last couple of years by a bike, there are dozens more by cars.
Other than that, I sincerely hope you are just trolling, it scares me that there are some people out there that have that attitude against something I choose to do within the law.
I hate cigarette smoke, the smell, th health issues etc. but if you are exercising your right to do it and are doing so lawfully I just deal with it by moving away, I'm not going to run over there and grab it out of your mouth or get all ranty at you.
Just deal with the fact that cyclists are allowed to be on the roads, they delay you by seconds or at worst maybe a minute and with all that extra effort of moving your foot onto the brake then back to the accelerator afterwards I'm sure it's really going to damage your health.
I'm sick of the anti Lycra cyclist rhetoric, just get over yourselves, not everyone who rides a bike is one of them, they are the minority.
I keep coming back here trying to use reason, and considered statements, not ranty shouts hate speech but it doesn't seem to make any difference. Go And get stuck in some traffic, I want to go for a ride, and my family wants me to get back home in one piece.
Post by: weeds on February 06, 2016, 02:12:53 PM
Typical lycra terrorist view.........you're right, you have the right of way on the road. We vehicle drivers will just stop and wait for you............. the law abiding holier than thou justification of their lycra clad existence.......
pedestrians HAVE been killed because these poor excuse of human beings think that they can "race" whilst wearing their preffered latte lycra on a combined ( be it cars or pedestrians ) road or path.........
I'll spell it out.........if you want to train to be the best latte lycra terrorist you can be, do it on a velodrome...........everyone else has to use a specific place to train ( pool, race track, sporting venue etc) what give you the god given right to disrupt everyone else just to appease your ego........
Seriously how many pedestrians have been killed by cyclist???
We train on the road because we race on the road.......seems to meet the specific place to train.
I prefer the title 'tour de suburbs'.....when I'm training otherwise I'm commuting to work.
Post by: D4D on February 06, 2016, 02:17:54 PM
We train on the road because we race on the road.......seems to meet the specific place to train.
I guess these guys can, if they were still alive, use the same excuse...
http://www.3aw.com.au/news/two-dead-after-horror-smash-on-western-ring-road-20160126-gmem87.html (http://www.3aw.com.au/news/two-dead-after-horror-smash-on-western-ring-road-20160126-gmem87.html)
Post by: doc evil on February 06, 2016, 02:31:19 PM
Seriously how many pedestrians have been killed by cyclist???
We train on the road because we race on the road.......seems to meet the specific place to train.
I prefer the title 'tour de suburbs'.....when I'm training otherwise I'm commuting to work.
Google it.........but I know of 2 in perth recently, 1 being a young engineer from work......and a year or so ago in sydney......
and what happened to all the law abiding cyclists out there that ring their bell when approaching pedestrians.......zip zilch nada........oh, that's right, don't have a bell......as it'll spoil my Frappuccino look at the cafe.......
now, I can drag the racecar outta the garage and "train" on the road by your logic...... ::) ::)
Post by: NewieCamper on February 06, 2016, 03:35:42 PM
Google it.........but I know of 2 in perth recently, 1 being a young engineer from work......and a year or so ago in sydney......
and what happened to all the law abiding cyclists out there that ring their bell when approaching pedestrians.......zip zilch nada........oh, that's right, don't have a bell......as it'll spoil my Frappuccino look at the cafe.......
now, I can drag the racecar outta the garage and "train" on the road by your logic...... ::) ::)
Ok, I googled it.
Here: http://acrs.org.au/wp-content/uploads/Grzebieta-McIntosh-Chong-Pedestrian-Cyclist-Collisions-Issues-and-Risk..pdf (http://acrs.org.au/wp-content/uploads/Grzebieta-McIntosh-Chong-Pedestrian-Cyclist-Collisions-Issues-and-Risk..pdf)
It says
"This comparison indicates that the risk of a pedestrian being struck down by a bicyclist and killed is currently less than the risk of being struck by lightning (0.1 chances of fatality per million person years), 23 times less likely than tripping on a footpath or roadway (1.15 chances of fatality per million person years), 200 times less likely being involved in an airline crash (10 chances of fatality per million person years), and 700 times less likely than being struck and killed by a motor vehicle (35 chances of fatality per million person years)."
Four deaths between 2001 and 2006. Stop everything we need to solve this problem now! Oh, wait maybe we should get cars off the roads, it is 700 times more likely to cause a fatality to a pedestrian, let alone maim, damage or injure: cyclists, other motorists, fences, shop fronts, kangaroos... Etc.
Post by: NewieCamper on February 06, 2016, 03:41:45 PM
Using 'taking your race car out on the road' is a ridiculous example, unless you can drive it within the law and still consider it training. most training cyclists are still going to stick to the speed limit, becuase riding a bike as fast as possible tends to be under the posted limit and follow other rules becuase not doing so significantly increases the risk of being hit by a car, and that hurts.
Post by: plusnq on February 06, 2016, 03:59:23 PM
Post by: Hairs on February 06, 2016, 04:06:59 PM
Funny to see tho,
All dress the same, tennis cap on, lose shirts, white joggers and wearing Mumble pants which look like they were sprayed on. From behind it looks like two possums fighting in a chaff bag.
;D
Post by: GeoffA on February 06, 2016, 04:11:32 PM
There is now a cycle path from Grafton to Junction Hill(Not very long BTW) Cyclist can't use it because the stay at home mums power walk their prams in groups trying to loose the baby fat on their arse, maybe there needs to be Prams paths. ???
Funny to see tho,
All dress the same, tennis cap on, lose shirts, white joggers and wearing Mumble pants which look like they were sprayed on. From behind it looks like two possums fighting in a chaff bag.
;D
So, now there isn't a cycle path.....
Post by: duggie on February 06, 2016, 04:12:01 PM
But why do cyclist believe that if and when riding in a group that they all have right of way on a bloody roundabout.
Come on guys , 40 bikes in a line 100metres long does not constitute a single vehicle .
But be warned the motorist who does have the right of passage if he/she dares to use that law abiding right and drive onto the roundabout.
Post by: scblack on February 06, 2016, 04:30:01 PM
I have to agree that motorist , motorcycles and bike cycles have to co exist on the roadways.Have the smallest ounce of patience. Those 40 riders will take approx. 1minute to clear the roundabout.
But why do cyclist believe that if and when riding in a group that they all have right of way on a bloody roundabout.
Come on guys , 40 bikes in a line 100metres long does not constitute a single vehicle .
But be warned the motorist who does have the right of passage if he/she dares to use that law abiding right and drive onto the roundabout.
How much do we have to compensate you to get that 60 seconds back in your life?
Post by: Hairs on February 06, 2016, 04:36:53 PM
So, now there isn't a cycle path.....Nope,
You'll see the odd kid riding their pushie or kids on a skateboards or Ripsticks.
Post by: duggie on February 06, 2016, 04:41:26 PM
Have the smallest ounce of patience. Those 40 riders will take approx. 1minute to clear the roundabout.
How much do we have to compensate you to get that 60 seconds back in your life?
What about the rules of the road, do they not exist ?
Post by: time on February 06, 2016, 04:42:16 PM
Nope,So now the cyclists know the frustration of being stuck behind a slow moving vehicle, Karma, suck it up Princesses :(
You'll see the odd kid riding their pushie or kids on a skateboards or Ripsticks.
Post by: Hairs on February 06, 2016, 04:46:40 PM
So now the cyclists know the frustration of being stuck behind a slow moving vehicle, Karma, suck it up Princess :(Cyclists don't use the cycle path, they ride on the road(Which is the Summerland H/way) having trucks cross double white lines to get around them.
Post by: weeds on February 06, 2016, 05:09:06 PM
What about the rules of the road, do they not exist ?
No you have never broken a road rule????
How bout a bit of give and take.......
Post by: duggie on February 06, 2016, 05:09:30 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_NJmrvc0wc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_NJmrvc0wc)
Post by: D4D on February 06, 2016, 06:07:45 PM
Post by: Hairs on February 06, 2016, 06:23:09 PM
Pink Floyd
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmW17QvUhRM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmW17QvUhRM)
Post by: Foo on February 06, 2016, 07:09:51 PM
I have to agree that motorist , motorcycles and bike cycles have to co exist on the roadways.
But why do cyclist believe that if and when riding in a group that they all have right of way on a bloody roundabout.
Come on guys , 40 bikes in a line 100metres long does not constitute a single vehicle .
But be warned the motorist who does have the right of passage if he/she dares to use that law abiding right and drive onto the roundabout.
But what is different to what happens now, with peak hour traffic with cars? You can sit there for ages trying to get a break to get through. ???
Foo
Post by: alnjan on February 06, 2016, 07:27:47 PM
But what is different to what happens now, with peak hour traffic with cars? You can sit there for ages trying to get a break to get through. ???
Foo
Just about every argument to justify one side's view point can be just about be reversed to support the other side either positive or negative. Bottom line the new rules will be coming into force in a couple of weeks in NSW, like it or not we have to get used to it and accept it or pay the fine
Post by: TheWall on February 06, 2016, 10:40:31 PM
Love these discussions...especially on a forum where people own big slow ponderous vehicles and tow massive weights behind them...but they complain about other holding THEM up. If it was so delusional it would be pretty funny...
I know what..let's all get in out cars (thus adding to congestion) and drive to where we "allowed" to exercise (velodrome/gym etc). That makes sense...or even better...let's all drive to and from school/uni/wk...imagine how delayed the poor 'car' drivers would be then! Sounds like Nirvana to me!!!
I love how people talk about how dangerous riding is but are happy to jump in their smoke boxes and play out in the traffic for their holidays! I am sure more people die 4wding every year but that seems ok?
Sent from my GT-I9507 using Tapatalk
I
Post by: gronk on February 07, 2016, 07:35:25 AM
I love how people talk about how dangerous riding is but are happy to jump in their smoke boxes and play out in the traffic for their holidays! I am sure more people die 4wding every year but that seems ok?
Sent from my GT-I9507 using Tapatalk
I
[/quote]
I'm sure the people trying to justify the pushy existance won't stop using their cars, so that argument is just not on.
Smoke box ?? What's that ??
You want to ride on the roads. ....that's your decision, but don't complain about reckless drivers mowing you down, you're not alone, motorbike riders get the same treatment. .....most times they just don't see you.
How many of you wear an orange helmet and vest?? I bet none ??
How many of you wear ballet shorts (lycra) and a shirt with names all over it that gives the impression you've just come back from the tour de france.....but does nothing for visibility ??
Post by: discoteddy on February 07, 2016, 09:44:12 AM
Cheers
Disco teddy.
Post by: gronk on February 07, 2016, 09:50:34 AM
I would think any road user would have a legitimate and legal right to complain if a reckless driver were to mow them down. Regardless of your point of view on this subject absurd throw away comments such as these do little for the discussion. Can't we just share the road?
Cheers
Disco teddy.
Reckless throwaway comments ???? Don't understand ??
I was referring to visibility.......do you wear an orange helmet and orange vest ?? If not, why not ??
Post by: discoteddy on February 07, 2016, 11:19:28 AM
This one.
1. I don't ride on the road. The ACT is blessed with brilliant bike tracks and more importantly for me, MTB trails.
2. Orange isn't my colour.
3. And lastly, if, as you have indicated the driver was being "reckless" colour of the riders clothing would be far less relevent.
I'm not a road cyclist but I do respect those that do. I don't drive with a hat on either but each to their own. Respect, consideration for other road users and above all tolerance is whats required here. ANY road fatality is a disarster for someones family.
In the event of a fatal collision the reckless road user usually goes to goal.
Cheers,
Disco teddy.
Post by: TheWall on February 07, 2016, 02:13:25 PM
Why don't you drive a high vis car? Would make much easier for trucks and buses to see you?
I will say I also get baffled by the dark riders (commonly referred to as 'Ninja's) but I am not one of them as I have two rear lights, one front and wear bright coloured clothes so why do you feel the need to lump every one in a group? Kinda feels like a food chain/bully technique to me.
The main point I was making is that cyclists (you know, the mums, dads, brothers, grannies and kids who happen to ride bikes) should be the LEAST of your concerns when on the road...you might be delayed ever so slightly by a bike but you CAN be killed by poor driver or your own stupidity. Perhaps you should worry about not breaking any road rules before you comment on the methods of others...often when they are just minding their own business.
But on the off chance that that you have always indicated at every roundabout, never exceeded the speed limit by even a kilometre, never picked up your phone whilst at the wheel, never sat in the right hand lane when others wanted to pass and always behaved in a couteous manner I apologise for lumping you with all of the people who should have to sit mandatory drivers licence checks every year.
Sent from my GT-I9507 using Tapatalk
Post by: gronk on February 07, 2016, 02:24:33 PM
Why don't you drive a high vis car? Would make much easier for trucks and buses to see you?
Aahh sigh.......you pushy riders get all upset over sensible discussions about the danger of being a pushy rider on the road......BTW, I do drive a high vis 4wd !!
Do you wear high vis clothing AND a helmet ?? Post up a pic !!
You all don't get it ( and probably never will )......ride amongst motor cars and you'll never win a battle, no matter who was at fault !!
Post by: scrapsD40 on February 07, 2016, 02:51:53 PM
Post by: Bad Scott on February 07, 2016, 03:29:08 PM
..:D MAMIL :D
Post by: discoteddy on February 07, 2016, 04:04:29 PM
Aahh sigh.......you pushy riders get all upset over sensible discussions about the danger of being a pushy rider on the road......BTW, I do drive a high vis 4wd !!
Do you wear high vis clothing AND a helmet ?? Post up a pic !!
You all don't get it ( and probably never will )......ride amongst motor cars and you'll never win a battle, no matter who was at fault !!
Wow, mate you have finally worked out how to miss the point :cheers:
Cheers
Disco teddy.
Post by: oldmate on February 07, 2016, 04:08:13 PM
Post by: gronk on February 07, 2016, 04:17:55 PM
Wow, mate you have finally worked out how to miss the point :cheers:
Cheers
Disco teddy.
Aahh, I don't think so !! Maybe take these off !! :laugh: :laugh:
Post by: Snapman007 on February 07, 2016, 04:28:00 PM
..
Lol, you stole that pic from Pedro.
Post by: scrapsD40 on February 07, 2016, 04:31:14 PM
Lol, you stole that pic from Pedro.damn that pedro. If I ever catch up with him, he better look out!!!! I'll get Gary to beat him up
Post by: Snapman007 on February 07, 2016, 04:34:49 PM
Post by: scrapsD40 on February 07, 2016, 04:43:51 PM
Who the fk is Gary?pmsl
It's Olly
Shawn's old mate
Post by: oldmate on February 07, 2016, 04:55:41 PM
pmsl
Olly, who the fk is Olly? Gary's mate ultimate ?
Post by: Jeepers Creepers on February 07, 2016, 04:59:36 PM
I thought it was "Who The Fukk is Alice."
Hey Olly, you're not a tranny are ya? :-*
Post by: scrapsD40 on February 07, 2016, 05:00:42 PM
Olly..... ???Alice......Alice
I thought it was "Who The Fukk is Alice."
Hey Olly, you're not a tranny are ya? :-*
That might explain the fluffy white handbag pooch
Post by: oldmate on February 07, 2016, 05:02:34 PM
Olly..... ???
I thought it was "Who The Fukk is Alice."
Hey Olly, you're not a tranny are ya? :-*
Jesus creepers, don't tell everyone
I don't wear Lycra though
Post by: scrapsD40 on February 07, 2016, 05:08:49 PM
Jesus creepers, don't tell everyone
I don't wear Lycra though
Post by: Bad Scott on February 07, 2016, 05:12:23 PM
Post by: Jeepers Creepers on February 07, 2016, 05:46:56 PM
Olly, DON'T TURN AROUND.
Post by: stabicraft on February 07, 2016, 06:00:46 PM
Pedestrians are in the wrong for daring to walk where cyclists want to ride?
But bikes have the right to ride where they like, road or footpath.
Women power walking with prams are in the wrong for holding up faster bikes?
But bikes are in the right if they hold up vehicular traffic.
Cars are at fault because they are impatient?
But bike riders dont consider it impatient to refuse to wait at red lights, or for pedestrians or women with prams.
Lycra is acceptable attire while riding a bike?
But shorts and a "T" is laughed at by the Lycra brigade.
It seems to me that all the arguments seem to favor the Lycra clad loonies.
My grandaughter was cleaned up by a bike rider several years ago.
She was caught up in the frame and chain of the rider that decided he was too privileged to stop at the lolly pop stop sign and therefore went footpath at speed.
My grandaughter was standing next to my wife, holding her hand on the footpath when she was caught by the passing bike.
The A Hole didnt even stay around to see if she was OK, he just disengaged her and rode off.
This is one of the many reasons I have a dislike for Lycra clad A Holes.
PS
The Grandaughter was fixed up at the hospital, and my wife suffered nightmares for months.
The bike rider, just kept peddling around and perhaps one day I home he takes on a truck.
Post by: Hairs on February 07, 2016, 06:17:27 PM
Post by: gronk on February 07, 2016, 06:40:56 PM
Lycra is acceptable attire while riding a bike?
Ballet wear....lycra is just what it's made of !!! ;D ;D ;D
Post by: oldmate on February 07, 2016, 06:47:34 PM
I bet if he turns around, he still has a little wiener.
Olly, DON'T TURN AROUND.
Just for you mate
Post by: CRW on February 07, 2016, 07:09:32 PM
Cheers
Carl
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Post by: plusnq on February 07, 2016, 07:13:46 PM
Post by: gronk on February 07, 2016, 07:46:55 PM
Ha ha this is better than some of the old Electrical posts
Cheers
Carl
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
I should take up fishing ( never fished in my life ).......seems so easy catching fish !! :cup:
Post by: briann532 on February 07, 2016, 07:47:59 PM
I reckon if you had a solar powered bike made from 6b&s with a drone camera hovering overhead to record all the attempts on your life.......you'd have the ultimate thread ;D ;D
Yep, that's about got it all!!!!
PMSL.
Brian
Post by: oldmate on February 07, 2016, 08:16:02 PM
I reckon if you had a solar powered bike made from 6b&s with a drone camera hovering overhead to record all the attempts on your life.......you'd have the ultimate thread ;D ;D
Not unless you own an ultimate, then you own an ultimate and posting in an ultimate thread, that makes you the ultimate... Now where is the old bike and panel and 6b&s I have laying around
Post by: Fathom on February 07, 2016, 08:20:39 PM
I reckon if you had a solar powered bike made from 6b&s with a drone camera hovering overhead to record all the attempts on your life.......you'd have the ultimate thread ;D ;D
Hmmm you forgot which country it was made and or assembled.
Post by: MarkGU on February 07, 2016, 08:21:22 PM
Not unless you own an ultimate, then you own an ultimate and posting in an ultimate thread, that makes you the ultimate... Now where is the old bike and panel and 6b&s I have laying aroundUltimate BS by the sound of it 8)
Post by: plusnq on February 07, 2016, 08:25:02 PM
Hmmm you forgot which country it was made and or assembled.
Fixed just for youI reckon if you had a unknown country of origin, solar powered bike made from 6b&s with a drone camera hovering overhead to record all the attempts on your life.......you'd have the ultimate thread ;D ;DNot unless you own an ultimate, then you own an ultimate and posting in an ultimate thread, that makes you the ultimate... Now where is the old bike and panel and 6b&s I have laying around
Obviously.......... Bring on March 22 ;D
Post by: oldmate on February 07, 2016, 08:33:40 PM
Ultimate BS by the sound of it 8)
Am I known for anything else???
Post by: MarkGU on February 07, 2016, 08:35:23 PM
Am I known for anything else???nope.
Post by: oldmate on February 07, 2016, 09:25:59 PM
nope.
Would hope not. :cheers:
Post by: WCN_Bren on February 08, 2016, 01:00:24 AM
Google it.........but I know of 2 in perth recently, 1 being a young engineer from work......and a year or so ago in sydney......
and what happened to all the law abiding cyclists out there that ring their bell when approaching pedestrians.......zip zilch nada........oh, that's right, don't have a bell......as it'll spoil my Frappuccino look at the cafe.......
now, I can drag the racecar outta the garage and "train" on the road by your logic...... ::) ::)
Pedestrians are much more likely to get injured or killed by a 4wd than a cyclist. I will try and dig out the NRMA study tomorrow.
I ride. Bells do bugger all unless your on a quiet shared path. Even then a lot of people have headphones on.
Studies have been done on Hi-Viz clothes too...makes zero difference during the day. ZERO. NONE. It makes little difference at night too but flashing lights during the day have a little affect while at night have a large impact.
Cycling road races are done on the road and it's legal to ride on the road. Car races tend to be done on a track and it's illegal to race on the road.
I used to be very anti-cycling and anti-lycra...until I got injured and needed to ride to do rehab and keep fit. Firstly, after a few weeks of riding you will soon learn why everyone ends up wearing all the gear...it's comfortable and you will do / wear anything to stop the pain.
I did an experiment over a few days just a couple of weeks ago. I wrote down how many times i had to slow down for a car, a truck, a bicycle and tried to note whether is was a male / female, old/young as well. (I drive a small truck for a living). Anyway, I'm sure you can guess the biggest frustration to my day was not cyclists.
the thing that really disappoints me with these threads is:
a) the hate! how someone can HATE another group of people so vehemently.
b) the "my logic is better than your logic" battle.
c) the absence and often ignorance of facts. so many stories of "this one guy a new..."
Truth is, cycling is increasing. SA has goal to double the amount of people riding to work / school by 2020. There are similar goals for almost every state. A NSW study showed that every time someone road their bike to work (in Sydney) it saved the community as much as $20. The time impact on a trip home because some people ride to work is actually a win in your favor - even if you miss the lights because you had to wait for a cyclist. Those cyclists being in their cars or even on buses would contribute to much more traffic congestion than those precious seconds (or even minutes) waiting for a cyclist.
Lastly, as a newbie... Hi!
Post by: scrapsD40 on February 08, 2016, 05:24:48 AM
Pedestrians are much more likely to get injured or killed by a 4wd than a cyclist. I will try and dig out the NRMA study tomorrow.welcome to myswag, great to have you on board
I ride. Bells do bugger all unless your on a quiet shared path. Even then a lot of people have headphones on.
Studies have been done on Hi-Viz clothes too...makes zero difference during the day. ZERO. NONE. It makes little difference at night too but flashing lights during the day have a little affect while at night have a large impact.
Cycling road races are done on the road and it's legal to ride on the road. Car races tend to be done on a track and it's illegal to race on the road.
I used to be very anti-cycling and anti-lycra...until I got injured and needed to ride to do rehab and keep fit. Firstly, after a few weeks of riding you will soon learn why everyone ends up wearing all the gear...it's comfortable and you will do / wear anything to stop the pain.
I did an experiment over a few days just a couple of weeks ago. I wrote down how many times i had to slow down for a car, a truck, a bicycle and tried to note whether is was a male / female, old/young as well. (I drive a small truck for a living). Anyway, I'm sure you can guess the biggest frustration to my day was not cyclists.
the thing that really disappoints me with these threads is:
a) the hate! how someone can HATE another group of people so vehemently.
b) the "my logic is better than your logic" battle.
c) the absence and often ignorance of facts. so many stories of "this one guy a new..."
Truth is, cycling is increasing. SA has goal to double the amount of people riding to work / school by 2020. There are similar goals for almost every state. A NSW study showed that every time someone road their bike to work (in Sydney) it saved the community as much as $20. The time impact on a trip home because some people ride to work is actually a win in your favor - even if you miss the lights because you had to wait for a cyclist. Those cyclists being in their cars or even on buses would contribute to much more traffic congestion than those precious seconds (or even minutes) waiting for a cyclist.
Lastly, as a newbie... Hi!
Post by: gronk on February 08, 2016, 05:53:36 AM
Quote from: WCN_Bren link=topic=46262.msg798371#msg798371
Studies have been done on Hi-Viz clothes too...makes zero difference during the day. ZERO. NONE.
[/quote
Studies have been done on Hi-Viz clothes too...makes zero difference during the day. ZERO. NONE.
[/quote
Surely you have your facts mixed up.........wearing black clothes makes you just as visible to a car driver as hi vis ?? Sorry, can't agree with that. .
Post by: TheWall on February 08, 2016, 11:06:47 AM
The hate... go pick on someone your own size ?????
Welcome WCN!
Sent from my GT-I9507 using Tapatalk
Post by: discoteddy on February 08, 2016, 11:16:13 AM
So Gronk...out of all of the balanced and reasoned points presented you cannot bring yourself to agree with anything and you pick out that?
The hate... go pick on someone your own size ?????
Welcome WCN!
Sent from my GT-I9507 using Tapatalk
:cup: :cup:
Post by: TheWall on February 08, 2016, 12:21:58 PM
Note the light on the seat stay of the bike is also a FLY6 camera which has resulted a few police reports...
Great one last night. A car was thinking of squeezing me through a roundabout but they quickly and suddenly backed off to my surprise...it was a Pootrol that i had reported to Police a few weeks earlier. ..sweeet. ????(http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/16/02/07/2b1c9bbcd75178086e91b8d5d778db41.jpg)(http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/16/02/07/ab280692b6856050f4e8a3676933612e.jpg)
The second photo is one I want to add to try and help reduce the hate...When I re took up cycling for the same type of reasons that were stated by WCN the joy was immediate...I gotta admit that I also started out anti Mamil but 1st the Mtn bike was too slow so it got slicks but that was still too slow...then it got upgraded to a roadie and in turn that one got upgraded to a better one...and then the gear just makes sense...oh, upgrade itis is just as fun for the pushie than the car or camper...
And as per the photo. My kids love bike riding.... my 4yo boy can easily do a 15k round trip (helps when there is a half way milkshake he he). Don't you all remember how much fun bike riding was/is?
Sent from my GT-I9507 using Tapatalk
Post by: D4D on February 08, 2016, 12:47:24 PM
Would you like me to quote case numbers..
Yes
Post by: scblack on February 08, 2016, 12:54:25 PM
Ps Gronk. You asked for a photo riding gear with the lights and colour and I really would not want to let you down...went for a ride last night...this is before the FLY12 front camera and light arrives in a few weeks.Good work Wall. :cup:
Note the light on the seat stay of the bike is also a FLY6 camera which has resulted a few police reports...
Great one last night. A car was thinking of squeezing me through a roundabout but they quickly and suddenly backed off to my surprise...it was a Pootrol that i had reported to Police a few weeks earlier. ..sweeet. ????(http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/16/02/07/2b1c9bbcd75178086e91b8d5d778db41.jpg)(http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/16/02/07/ab280692b6856050f4e8a3676933612e.jpg)
The second photo is one I want to add to try and help reduce the hate...When I re took up cycling for the same type of reasons that were stated by WCN the joy was immediate...I gotta admit that I also started out anti Mamil but 1st the Mtn bike was too slow so it got slicks but that was still too slow...then it got upgraded to a roadie and in turn that one got upgraded to a better one...and then the gear just makes sense...oh, upgrade itis is just as fun for the pushie than the car or camper...
And as per the photo. My kids love bike riding.... my 4yo boy can easily do a 15k round trip (helps when there is a half way milkshake he he). Don't you all remember how much fun bike riding was/is?
Sent from my GT-I9507 using Tapatalk
I took my kids for a ride around Homebush Olympic Park yesterday, a great mornings fun.
Unfortunately you are finding some people have a bug up their arse, and odds are that is a large arse too - too big to fit on a cycle seat. Or they'll say they are "baiting" other members. But guess what? - the people who are doing the so-called baiting are posting MORE than anyone else. Isn't the point of baiting people to make them post more? Not do the most posting themselves - they don't see the fact they have been caught by the topic Hook, Line & Sinker as sadly ironic. And basically pretty sad overall really. At least we are getting an insight into the mentality of some forum members.
Post by: NewieCamper on February 08, 2016, 01:49:03 PM
its the same old story:
All muslims are going to blow up my family - no, there is a tiny minority of whack jobs that unfortunately identify themselves as muslims.
All dole recipients are useless drugged out slobs - no, there is a group of them that think everyone else owes them everything they can get.
All people from Texas are rednecks... no
All Asian people are... no.
All cyclists are lycra wearing ... no.
All 4wd drive owners are... no.
All .... etc...
Nope, there are just a bunch of people in this world that are scum or are out to cause trouble. The vast majority are pretty decent and want to get on with whatever they want to get on with, be it riding a bike, towing a camper to a remote spot, praying to their favourite deity on a regular basis, or getting annoyed and trolling the internets.
Post by: briann532 on February 08, 2016, 03:21:06 PM
Yup,
its the same old story:
All muslims are going to blow up my family - no, there is a tiny minority of whack jobs that unfortunately identify themselves as muslims.
All dole recipients are useless drugged out slobs - no, there is a group of them that think everyone else owes them everything they can get.
All people from Texas are rednecks... no
All Asian people are... no.
All cyclists are lycra wearing ... no.
All 4wd drive owners are... no.
All .... etc...
Nope, there are just a bunch of people in this world that are scum or are out to cause trouble. The vast majority are pretty decent and want to get on with whatever they want to get on with, be it riding a bike, towing a camper to a remote spot, praying to their favourite deity on a regular basis, or getting annoyed and trolling the internets.
Yep, fully agree.
Group hug now so we can move on??? :-*
Post by: D4D on February 08, 2016, 04:16:49 PM
Group hug now so we can move on??? :-*
Will you wear your lycra?
Post by: briann532 on February 08, 2016, 04:18:12 PM
Will you wear your lycra?
Am I on a promise??? :-* ;) ;)
Post by: scrapsD40 on February 08, 2016, 04:48:07 PM
Will you wear your lycra?
Post by: gronk on February 08, 2016, 05:01:49 PM
So Gronk...out of all of the balanced and reasoned points presented you cannot bring yourself to agree with anything and you pick out that?
Sorry about that......I'll agree then.......black clothes are just as easy to see ( especially at night ) as hi vis gear !!
How could I be so wrong ????????
Post by: Hairs on February 08, 2016, 05:18:01 PM
How could I be so wrong ????????
Apparently I'm wrong as well, cause I have a difference of opinion.
I was of the thinking that being a human being the first rule of thumb was self preservation.
But according to those that support the idea of I have a right, screw you Jack, that is thrown out the window.
Hmm
Arrogance; offensive display of superiority or self-importance; overbearing pride.
And with that your Honor,
I have nothing else to add.
(http://www.hairfysh.com/images/Icons/Smileys/Banghead.gif)
Post by: gronk on February 08, 2016, 05:32:40 PM
Apparently I'm wrong as well, cause I have a difference of opinion.
And with that your Honor,
I have nothing else to add.
(http://www.hairfysh.com/images/Icons/Smileys/Banghead.gif)
Same as greenies and new age carbon bashers....you are scum if you don't agree with their view of the world.
I'm outa here !!
Post by: Jeepers Creepers on February 08, 2016, 05:35:36 PM
Post by: Hairs on February 08, 2016, 06:35:16 PM
Don't go guys, we've only gone for 12 pages.See ya at the National Meet, 2017 :cheers:
Post by: Bad Scott on February 09, 2016, 10:32:18 AM
Don't go guys, we've only gone for 12 pages.Enjoyed the fishing show. Got more bites than Rex Hunt
Post by: scrapsD40 on February 09, 2016, 01:23:24 PM
Enjoyed the fishing show. Got more bites than Rex HuntIs He still alive? These days probably more Paul Worsteling or Robson Green
Post by: ATC on February 09, 2016, 01:59:12 PM
http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/feb/09/south-australian-police-denounce-cyclists-for-disregarding-the-law
Booked cyclists and motorists who weren't following the new road rules.
Not wearing a helmet
No lights at night
Parking / driving in a bike lane
All got winning tickets from the
Sent from my SM-T815Y using Tapatalk
Post by: plusnq on February 09, 2016, 02:57:00 PM
Is He still alive? These days probably more Paul Worsteling or Robson Green
Yep. He is still kicking around.
Post by: GBC on February 09, 2016, 04:16:49 PM
Just saw this from South Australia
http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/feb/09/south-australian-police-denounce-cyclists-for-disregarding-the-law (http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/feb/09/south-australian-police-denounce-cyclists-for-disregarding-the-law)
Booked cyclists and motorists who weren't following the new road rules.
Not wearing a helmet
No lights at night
Parking / driving in a bike lane
All got winning tickets from the
Sent from my SM-T815Y using Tapatalk
Good. Same thing happened here in QLD when the spotlight went on cycle rules. cyclists can't expect legitimacy without spending time under the microscope. Mt coo tha often has speed camera and bell blitzes these days, and the whole Zupps ride group got fined last year for pulling an Idaho stop at a stop sign (rolling stop, calling 'clear' to those behind). As a cyclist I understand that we have hearing and communication well in excess of what a car driver does so we can pull such stunts in relative safety. It doesn't make them legal though. Crazy commuters are well documented and they also need to settle down a bit too, as do some of the one eyed cage pilots around here.
Post by: Jeepers Creepers on February 09, 2016, 04:17:02 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7QW0X0Z5UA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7QW0X0Z5UA)
Post by: fergy on February 09, 2016, 04:22:38 PM
I don't drive far but the one think that gets me is the cyclists that ride on the narrow windy roads when there is an alternative road that there could be on
when your on a road like that and come up behind a cyclist that is going rather slow (uphill) and then have a car coming the otherway there is not much room to give them
and there is noway these fellas are commuting to work as it is a back road
im not sure if they don't value there life or are just ignorant (not havin a go at all cyclists so don't get ya lycra in a twist)
them being in the right in regards to the law just aint gunna help them and I pity the poor soul that runs one over
some roads just aint made to be safe for cyclists I just wish they could see that themselves
oh and the twats that ride two abreast or in large groups. that is just plain rude
Post by: Jeepers Creepers on February 09, 2016, 04:40:29 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVr2vPhpvEM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVr2vPhpvEM)
Post by: TheWall on February 09, 2016, 07:40:17 PM
Just saw this from South Australia
http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/feb/09/south-australian-police-denounce-cyclists-for-disregarding-the-law
Booked cyclists and motorists who weren't following the new road rules.
Not wearing a helmet
No lights at night
Parking / driving in a bike lane
All got winning tickets from the
Sent from my SM-T815Y using Tapatalk
Yep...cyclists are your biggest threat on the roads...???? check out this from the 2014-15 SAPOL Annual Report...
During 2014-15, SAPOL’s Operation Safe Roads conducted 43 traffic policing operations across the state, 17 metropolitan, eight rural and 18 combined metropolitan/rural. Safe Roads focussed on speeding, mobile phone use (distraction), seatbelt non-compliance, drink and drug driving, fatigue and recidivist dangerous road users. Other operations were added to the initial Safe Roads annexures throughout the year in response to prevalent trends in road safety issues. Overall results from Operation Safe Roads were 115 794 expiation notices issued and 19 578 apprehension reports, including 4967 seatbelt, 11 419 mobile phone and 31 912 speeding offences detected.
Wowsers!
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Post by: TheWall on February 09, 2016, 07:49:16 PM
My questions would be...if you drive these roads and you know they are used by mums, dads, sons and daughters who happen to ride bikes is it really too much to ask a vehicle to use the middle/left pedal occasionally and slow and wait till a safe place to pass - I think that is commonly referred to as 'sharing' the road' or put another way are you driving to fast for the unexpected? Is your speed/time more important than a life?
PS: I often find it easier to overtake groups riding two abreast as the line of bikes is half as long...
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Post by: TheWall on February 09, 2016, 07:57:24 PM
Should we all hope that when you have a car accident that there is footage so share the laughs when you are in hospital?
I much prefer this type of entertainment...
1. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GymlhreKW0Q
2. Or an old personal favourite
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6fKof31u-2oSent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Post by: ATC on February 09, 2016, 08:00:44 PM
Yep...cyclists are your biggest threat on the roads...???? check out this from the 2014-15 SAPOL Annual Report...I also want the idiots speeding, driving with phones, texting, drug effected, drunk, etc also sorted out...
During 2014-15, SAPOL’s Operation Safe Roads conducted 43 traffic policing operations across the state, 17 metropolitan, eight rural and 18 combined metropolitan/rural. Safe Roads focussed on speeding, mobile phone use (distraction), seatbelt non-compliance, drink and drug driving, fatigue and recidivist dangerous road users. Other operations were added to the initial Safe Roads annexures throughout the year in response to prevalent trends in road safety issues. Overall results from Operation Safe Roads were 115 794 expiation notices issued and 19 578 apprehension reports, including 4967 seatbelt, 11 419 mobile phone and 31 912 speeding offences detected.
Wowsers!
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
ATC
Sent from my SM-T815Y using Tapatalk
Post by: NewieCamper on February 09, 2016, 08:05:00 PM
For all the non-riders, you know, just for a laugh. :D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7QW0X0Z5UA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7QW0X0Z5UA)
In the interests of balance:
http://youtu.be/_XjXXt1qARk (http://youtu.be/_XjXXt1qARk)
Post by: rags on February 09, 2016, 08:12:18 PM
Back home in Brisbane on the Bus taking approx 60 passengers heading to the city today and a bike rider holds the bus up causing frustration to the driver, after finally passing the bike only to have the bike get back in front at next lights or bus stop and the process happens all over again up the next hill the bus now attempts to pass again.
For me bikes have there place and that is on the cycle way if available and not holding up commuters doing the right thing catching the bus. And yes I do ride a bike as recreation and yes I have also been hit by a car whilst riding a bike when I was 19 years old with a hole in my head as evidence.
Post by: fergy on February 09, 2016, 08:18:09 PM
Some good points Fergy...there are some roads I won't ride due to conditions and some that are awesome but have a couple of pinch points which are dangerous due to ped zones and other barriers which artificially narrow lanes and bad points...an example is David Low Way on the Sunny Coast...mostly a great road but there is a section just Sth of Coolum shops which has NO shoulder.
My questions would be...if you drive these roads and you know they are used by mums, dads, sons and daughters who happen to ride bikes is it really too much to ask a vehicle to use the middle/left pedal occasionally and slow and wait till a safe place to pass - I think that is commonly referred to as 'sharing' the road' or put another way are you driving to fast for the unexpected? Is your speed/time more important than a life?
different part of town than your thinking mate, no one in there right mind would allow there kids to ride them roads. I'm talking the likes of caves rd Margaret river and other windy roads . If there life was important to them they would not be there just like you avoid certain areas, I have no problem slowing for them but these roads are winding and tight there is no shoulder to speak of . My time is not the point the danger of what they are doing is the problem, and yes there are alternative routes
PS: I often find it easier to overtake groups riding two abreast as the line of bikes is half as long...
Point taken but if I had a convoy of caravans doing 30kmph with only a 1second gap between each other and a line of cars/trucks and busses behind me stretching kms I would be an assh##e
Do it on a bike and there is no problem?
Sure I get that the majority do the right thing it's just a pity they don't ride around here
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Post by: doc evil on February 09, 2016, 08:24:13 PM
Just check out the "Show us your push bike" thread.........almost all don't have a bell.........even some of the kids bikes............
Yep, you lot definitely a law unto yourselves.
Like I said previously, it's even against the law to take your bum off the seat........but hey, laws are there to be broken right....... ::) ::) ::)
Post by: xcvator on February 09, 2016, 08:36:13 PM
Post by: plusnq on February 09, 2016, 09:48:56 PM
Post by: WCN_Bren on February 09, 2016, 10:46:56 PM
Yep......ALL cyclists are law abiding citizens.
Just check out the "Show us your push bike" thread.........almost all don't have a bell.........even some of the kids bikes............
Yep, you lot definitely a law unto yourselves.
Like I said previously, it's even against the law to take your bum off the seat........but hey, laws are there to be broken right....... ::) ::) ::)
that's a gee up... surely. nah, you can't be serious about this stuff?
1) that's totally not true about taking your bum off your seat. sorry, calling BS on that.
2) a bell does bugger all on the road. If i was riding a shared bike path (bikes and pedestrians) on a regular basis then I would have a bell. I noticed in Melbourne people used them quite effectively on the running / cycling paths. But the law is actually "horn, bell or other warning device" Guess what? My voice is actually a warning device! True. I'm actually 80% deaf (the effects of a brain tumor) and Bells just annoy me as there is no sure way to tell where the noise is coming from unless you take your eyes of the path or road and look behind you (if you are riding). What is MUCH more practical is "PASSING ON YOUR RIGHT" or even just "ON YOUR RIGHT". So simple hey. A warning device that is communicative at the same time.
Shake it up dude. Don't be one of those "haters gonna hate hate hate". Just maybe there is some logic and reasoning behind some of the MAMILs behaviour. Maybe?
Post by: NewieCamper on February 10, 2016, 06:27:03 AM
that's a gee up... surely. nah, you can't be serious about this stuff?Not so long ago in WA at least it was the law. Traffic code, regulation 211 used to state you must be seated, it has had a few amendments and now states "if seated..." The amendment may have been as recent as 2013, as I found a blog quoting it from 2011 which was that you must be seated. It also says you must have one hand on the bars.
1) that's totally not true about taking your bum off your seat. sorry, calling BS on that.
Post by: Rumpig on February 10, 2016, 06:37:32 AM
Post by: xcvator on February 10, 2016, 07:21:39 AM
Think ya have a big one on the hook Jeepers ;D
Ferk me, I'm glad I'm too old to ride a bicycle with some of you lot around (http://aussiedistiller.com.au/images/smilies/scared/eek.gif)(http://aussiedistiller.com.au/images/smilies/scared/eek.gif)
Post by: edz on February 10, 2016, 07:30:37 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6n0op0sLPA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6n0op0sLPA)
Post by: WCN_Bren on February 10, 2016, 08:51:07 AM
Not so long ago in WA at least it was the law. Traffic code, regulation 211 used to state you must be seated, it has had a few amendments and now states "if seated..." The amendment may have been as recent as 2013, as I found a blog quoting it from 2011 which was that you must be seated. It also says you must have one hand on the bars.That law is about being "astride" ... one leg either side and facing forward. Yes, technically an officer might attempt to interpret that as also being seated but in the practical application of riding a bike we all know thats not possible 100% of the time and in certain situations may actually prove dangerous. The intention of that regualtion is clearly to ensure riders are riding safely and in a way that the bike was designed for. Geez, imagine the public backlash a magistrate or judge would recieve for upholding a fine for not being constantly seated on your bike. The NSW law is exactly the same... "astride". I believe the minister for transport is on record saying it does not mean a rider should be seated 100% - its about the orientation of the rider on the bike.
Sent from my SM-N920I using Tapatalk
Post by: NewieCamper on February 10, 2016, 09:51:04 AM
That law is about being "astride" ... one leg either side and facing forward. Yes, technically an officer might attempt to interpret that as also being seated but in the practical application of riding a bike we all know thats not possible 100% of the time and in certain situations may actually prove dangerous. The intention of that regualtion is clearly to ensure riders are riding safely and in a way that the bike was designed for. Geez, imagine the public backlash a magistrate or judge would recieve for upholding a fine for not being constantly seated on your bike. The NSW law is exactly the same... "astride". I believe the minister for transport is on record saying it does not mean a rider should be seated 100% - its about the orientation of the rider on the bike.
Sent from my SM-N920I using Tapatalk
The old version, no longer in force, stated if the bike has a seat, you must sit on it. They have reworded the regulation to not include that requirement (common sense)
Quote
Part 15 of the Road Traffic Code 2000 opens with regulation 211 which spells out how we must ride a bicycle, i.e., ride facing forward, have at least one hand on the bars (no hands free riding) and finally and the most interesting aspect is a rider must remain seated, i.e., one cannot stand up (regulation 211(c)) unless the bicycle does not have seat. For the record, regulation 211(c) states:
“if the bicycle is equipped with a rider’s seat — ride the bicycle seated in or on that seat.”
Another version, I suspect from later (or could be a different state) is
Quote
(c) if the bicycle is equipped with a seat – not ride the bicycle seated in any other position on the bicycle.
Yes, the law is an ass. But sometimes they recognise the law was wrong, and change it.
Edit: Potentially the internet is actually wrong and the quotes above weren't right either so this has become an urban myth. Either way the current wording is more sensible.
Post by: WCN_Bren on February 10, 2016, 10:16:49 AM
Pretty easy argument to make against though... spirit of law etc.
I like that you actually have quoted something and shown it...it soothes my soul. Thanks heaps.
Sent from my SM-N920I using Tapatalk
Post by: Rumpig on February 10, 2016, 11:50:56 AM
Ferk me, I'm glad I'm too old to ride a bicycle with some of you lot around (http://aussiedistiller.com.au/images/smilies/scared/eek.gif)(http://aussiedistiller.com.au/images/smilies/scared/eek.gif)hey Jeepers...looks like we may have a double hook up ;D ;D
Post by: tk421 on February 10, 2016, 11:53:31 AM
On the weekend we were down driving along the rd between Gerrigong and Geroa on a road that sweeps up n down hills around bends with great coast line views. The government thought it would be good to build a great cycle lane 2.4 my wide concrete seperate from the road, not in a spot where mums with prams or Grans with white fluffy dogs would walk and we're does the bike rider ride you ask , Yes on the road next to the unbroken divide line. Happen to be travelling with an off duty highway patrol officer and his comment was that they should be able to book the rider if there is a cycle way and they don't use it.I agree
Your old mate doesn't know his road rules:
ROAD TRAFFIC CODE 2000 - REG 213
213 . Riding in bicycle lane
Wherever a bicycle lane is provided as part of a carriageway, and is in a reasonable condition for use, a rider of a bicycle shall use that portion of a carriageway and no other.
Modified penalty: 1 PU
Post by: NewieCamper on February 10, 2016, 12:29:10 PM
Your old mate doesn't know his road rules:
ROAD TRAFFIC CODE 2000 - REG 213
213 . Riding in bicycle lane
Wherever a bicycle lane is provided as part of a carriageway, and is in a reasonable condition for use, a rider of a bicycle shall use that portion of a carriageway and no other.
Modified penalty: 1 PU
I'm not familiar with that road, and can only comment on what I've seen on streetview. If you look at the description of a bicycle lane, you might find that the path you refer to is not a bike lane. It is separated, so not part of the carriageway. It appears to be a sharepath although a sharepath is able to be used by bicycles it is not a bike lane.
A concrete path like that is uncomfortable to ride on a road bike due to the construction joints, they create bumps so assuming the bike was a road bike the path is not in a reasonable condition compared to the road. I'd probably ride it on a mountain bike, but a road bike I'd have to assess before trying it.
Yes, it's getting picky, but that is what the law does.
Did that cyclist actually hold anyone up for a significant amount of time (minutes, not seconds)? Is the road windy and makes the cyclist difficult to see on approach? Is it that busy there is no option to pass safely? It certainly appears to be a seaside town
Post by: tk421 on February 10, 2016, 12:46:31 PM
I'm not familiar with that road, and can only comment on what I've seen on streetview. If you look at the description of a bicycle lane, you might find that the path you refer to is not a bike lane. It is separated, so not part of the carriageway. It appears to be a sharepath although a sharepath is able to be used by bicycles it is not a bike lane.
A concrete path like that is uncomfortable to ride on a road bike due to the construction joints, they create bumps so assuming the bike was a road bike the path is not in a reasonable condition compared to the road. I'd probably ride it on a mountain bike, but a road bike I'd have to assess before trying it.
Yes, it's getting picky, but that is what the law does.
Did that cyclist actually hold anyone up for a significant amount of time (minutes, not seconds)? Is the road windy and makes the cyclist difficult to see on approach? Is it that busy there is no option to pass safely? It certainly appears to be a seaside town
I drive it once every couple of months. The Gerringong end is shared path then it turns into separated cycle lane- (which cyclists have to use by law). Cycle lane on the left as you head to Gerroa right about here: https://goo.gl/maps/QmNeK6bvqA72
Post by: scblack on February 10, 2016, 12:49:04 PM
I'm not familiar with that road, and can only comment on what I've seen on streetview. If you look at the description of a bicycle lane, you might find that the path you refer to is not a bike lane. It is separated, so not part of the carriageway. It appears to be a sharepath although a sharepath is able to be used by bicycles it is not a bike lane.***Edit - its closer to the road than I recall. I'd be using that pathway for sure if I was riding there.***
A concrete path like that is uncomfortable to ride on a road bike due to the construction joints, they create bumps so assuming the bike was a road bike the path is not in a reasonable condition compared to the road. I'd probably ride it on a mountain bike, but a road bike I'd have to assess before trying it.
Yes, it's getting picky, but that is what the law does.
Did that cyclist actually hold anyone up for a significant amount of time (minutes, not seconds)? Is the road windy and makes the cyclist difficult to see on approach? Is it that busy there is no option to pass safely? It certainly appears to be a seaside town
I'll generally always use a pathway if its reasonably convenient - you never know when a redneck might be hammering along, or texting and not paying full attention.
Post by: NewieCamper on February 10, 2016, 01:05:36 PM
I drive it once every couple of months. The Gerringong end is shared path then it turns into separated cycle lane- (which cyclists have to use by law). Cycle lane on the left as you head to Gerroa right about here: https://goo.gl/maps/QmNeK6bvqA72While it looks like it is a cycle lane, unless it has a 'bicycle lane sign', and a 'bicycle lane end' it isnt (not in streetview in 2010). Having said that the section up the hill into Gerroa looks like a section I would choose to ride, as would most.
Councils get carried away putting in 'cycle infrastructure', but when push comes to shove a lot of it doesn't meet the required standard, so is not required to be used - and wont be used by a fast moving cyclist, because it is better to be on the roads where there are less obstructions. There are so many useless and dangerous bits of cycle infrastructure around that it is easier, and safer, to be a part of the traffic. Just this morning I chose to use the right lane around a roundabout to turn right, rather than stop and cross the road to an island twice
Post by: WCN_Bren on February 10, 2016, 01:37:23 PM
The big issue I have with the whole issue of the alleged safety for all involved and the increased infringement notices, sorry revenue raising, is if the powers that be were really concerned about safety instead of introducing new rules to 'share' the road and everyone will be safe, which we know is prone not to be the case, spend the revenue on infrastructure and build separate cycle ways off the main roadway and make all safe.
Couldn't agree more. The one thing research shows worldwide...dedicated cycleways :cheers:
It's great for gov'ts to say they want to increase cycling but they need to increase infrastructure at the same rate.
The Vic High Country (Parks Vic) is a great example of this... the sheer amount of toilets they now have throughout the place is impressive. They could have banged on about fining people for not digging appropriate holes etc but by providing the amenities they have made camping more appealing to many and kept the place tidy as well.
http://imgur.com/gallery/FdMalAQ (http://imgur.com/gallery/FdMalAQ)
Post by: WCN_Bren on February 10, 2016, 01:56:16 PM
I drive it once every couple of months. The Gerringong end is shared path then it turns into separated cycle lane- (which cyclists have to use by law). Cycle lane on the left as you head to Gerroa right about here: https://goo.gl/maps/QmNeK6bvqA72It's pretty easy to argue the cycle lane is not in an adequate condition to use. They are almost always substandard to the road. If that's the bike lane way out on the left edge there is no wonder some cyclists don't use it. I'd suspect it's substandard to the rest of the road and the amount of debris out there is usually dangerous.
I would rather not do it but on a busy road like that, i would rather ride just in the lane and veer over (to the left) when cars were approaching from behind or at least ride close to the lane line. Way out there on the left you will find bad road surface, potholes, spanners, car trim, nails, screws, glass, etc I've collected a whole tool kit over the years. I'm not saying that's the right thing to do, i'm merely suggesting that to a cyclist that it's probably the safest option.
Post by: stabicraft on February 10, 2016, 02:18:13 PM
And that they behave the same way in cars that they do when treadling.
On the Pacific highway this afternoon, I was in the overtaking lane coming up on some slow moving traffic.
The slow lane was moving at around 70 klm/hr and the speed limit was 90 klm/hr.
As I was overtaking, a small late model vehicle pulled out in front of me without indicating.
As I am a careful driver, apart from a small sudden braking event, there was no real issue.
It was several kilometers later that I realised that said car was not overtaking, but was in fact keeping pace with the slower truck in the left lane.
On closer examination I also noted that said car had two bikes mounted on the roof in that well known Cockatoo format.
Now, I was in no hurry, so I was happy to just sit behind and observe, but a vehicle was coming up behind me rather quickly, so I moved into the left lane to allow him to pass.
Stupid thought, the little car with the bikes refused to move and when the faster car tooted him (it was a toot not a blaring horn) he was shown the car drivers finger, which I think was an effort to explain that he had injured it and that was why he was driving so slowly.
This went on for a while and after much tailgating from the vehicle behind the car, the intelligent truck driver in front of me realised that it was an accident waiting to happen, he therefore slowed to allow the faster vehicle to slip up the inside and around the idiot in front.
There was some swerving and more demonstration of sore fingers from both the passenger and drivers windows of the small car before the faster vehicle finally managed to pass him and be on his way.
Seeing an opportunity, I pulled out and followed the faster car and was again on my merry way.
The Pacific highway in the area of this incident has several traffic lights, and due to being held up at said lights and also because of some traffic, the small car manged to catch up.
Now I think the car driver forgot that he was in a car, so he slipped down the breakdown lane all the way to the front where he almost caused an accident as he pulled into the traffic, again without indicator, and happily proceeded to travel at a snails pace again.
It appears it may not just be the bike that causes the brains of these Lycra clad loonies to act like total and absolute morons, it must be a hereditary thing. I wonder if there is some gene that attracts these morons to bikes?
Or is it the esky lid that stops the brain from cooling, therefore overheating it to the point of idiocy?
Whatever the reason, I now know that its not just bikes that the Lycra clad loonies drive with reckless abandon.
Its also the cars that they drive afterward.
Post by: NewieCamper on February 10, 2016, 02:23:38 PM
Post by: Jeepers Creepers on February 10, 2016, 03:28:01 PM
hey Jeepers...looks like we may have a double hook up ;D ;D
Hmmm, gotta go and get a treble hook and give it my best shot. ;D
What I really need is some good pics to put up.
I might have to trash another door mirror and go get me one of them darn ol law breaking cyclists and knock 'em arse over elbow and post a pic.
Falcon Work Van. 1
Cyclist............... 0
Post by: WCN_Bren on February 10, 2016, 03:38:59 PM
Today I saw proof that lycra clad loonies do in fact drive cars.
And that they behave the same way in cars that they do when treadling.
Today it took me 12 minutes to do an 8 minute trip because a guy in his 4wd was doing 50 in an 80 zone. I could count 16 cars behind me and 5 between the hilux and myself. 22 cars being held up because it's double lines the whole way along this particular road.
Realising my heart rate lifted from 47bpm to 49bpm I concluded it was just further proof 4wd's should be banned from regional and city areas. No matter where they are they think they own the road. Sheeeeeesh.
Post by: Snow on February 10, 2016, 04:56:25 PM
Post by: Footy Shorts Shane on February 10, 2016, 05:16:23 PM
Falcon Work Van. 1
Is that thing still alive ?
Post by: Jeepers Creepers on February 10, 2016, 05:21:37 PM
Is that thing still alive ?
It rolled 700,000 klm a few weeks back.
Mate, its a rocket ship...... 0 to the ton in 48 hours as one famous person quoted once
(http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h200/figjam007/Tomasina%20Toastie%20%20on%20Fraser%20Island/DSCF5490_zpscauojoac.jpg) (http://s64.photobucket.com/user/figjam007/media/Tomasina%20Toastie%20%20on%20Fraser%20Island/DSCF5490_zpscauojoac.jpg.html)
Post by: scrapsD40 on February 10, 2016, 05:23:05 PM
Today it took me 12 minutes to do an 8 minute trip because a guy in his 4wd was doing 50 in an 80 zone. I could count 16 cars behind me and 5 between the hilux and myself. 22 cars being held up because it's double lines the whole way along this particular road.well there's your problem right there. It was a Hirux. I know another forum admin that has a Lada that is more powerful
Realising my heart rate lifted from 47bpm to 49bpm I concluded it was just further proof 4wd's should be banned from regional and city areas. No matter where they are they think they own the road. Sheeeeeesh.
Post by: Fathom on February 10, 2016, 05:39:06 PM
well there's your problem right there. It was a Hirux. I know another forum admin that has a Lada that is more powerfulThat's hard to argue. You just can't top a Lada. Surely it's the ultimate in advanced off road technology and power.
The bigger issue here is... How will the poor bloke that owns one use all that power with those bicycles, motorbikes, 4wds, campers, caravans, trucks, drones skateboards, mums with prams,
hover boards etc using up his road.
Now... If they made a Lada with Lycra...
Post by: cancan on February 10, 2016, 05:39:34 PM
Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk
Post by: scrapsD40 on February 10, 2016, 06:03:53 PM
I got stuck behind a truck doing less than half the speed limit... and then trying to survive the mayhem aa everyone tried getting around him. ..i think all trucks should be banned as welll...they just dont accelerate from the lights quick enough and one even parked in the middle of the road today...you think they own it
Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk
Post by: xcvator on February 10, 2016, 06:18:52 PM
(http://www.myswag.org/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=46262.0;attach=119038;image)
(http://www.myswag.org/Themes/Sinful_Silver20_1/images/icons/clip.gif) image.jpg (http://www.myswag.org/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=46262.0;attach=119038) (58.09 kB, 299x448 - viewed 22 times.)
But,but ,but, that's not lycra your wearing is it Snow :angel: I really hope you're not trolling now ;D ;D
Post by: rags on February 10, 2016, 08:18:36 PM
Your old mate doesn't know his road rules:
ROAD TRAFFIC CODE 2000 - REG 213
213 . Riding in bicycle lane
Wherever a bicycle lane is provided as part of a carriageway, and is in a reasonable condition for use, a rider of a bicycle shall use that portion of a carriageway and no other.
Modified penalty: 1 PU
He is aware of the rules but the cycle way in question was not a bike carriageway on the left of the road but rather a seperate concrete cycle path some 8 ft to the side of the road with a seperate grass verge separating the road from the cycle path.
Post by: TheWall on February 10, 2016, 08:25:42 PM
Anyway, back to the topic at hand...ha ha
(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160210/030aa6dddb12493e6a4a523dc4c15da0.jpg)
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Post by: Bird on February 10, 2016, 08:27:24 PM
Post by: Bad Scott on February 10, 2016, 08:30:26 PM
>:D >:D >:D >:D (http://i00.i.aliimg.com/wsphoto/v0/1919694566/100pcs-lot-Round-head-Wooden-box-Wine-box-Upholstery-nails-Small-Upholstery-tacks-Antique-1-6.jpg) >:D >:D >:D >:D
Thats tacky >:D
Post by: rags on February 10, 2016, 08:33:20 PM
I'm not familiar with that road, and can only comment on what I've seen on streetview. If you look at the description of a bicycle lane, you might find that the path you refer to is not a bike lane. It is separated, so not part of the carriageway. It appears to be a sharepath although a sharepath is able to be used by bicycles it is not a bike lane.
A concrete path like that is uncomfortable to ride on a road bike due to the construction joints, they create bumps so assuming the bike was a road bike the path is not in a reasonable condition compared to the road. I'd probably ride it on a mountain bike, but a road bike I'd have to assess before trying it.
Yes, it's getting picky, but that is what the law does.
Did that cyclist actually hold anyone up for a significant amount of time (minutes, not seconds)? Is the road windy and makes the cyclist difficult to see on approach? Is it that busy there is no option to pass safely? It certainly appears to be a seaside town
The road in question is a single lane in each direction, divided by a double unbroken line for the length of the rd , this would be due to the blind corners. The section we encountered the bike was on a blind bend, they cycle heading north and we South, The cars are attempting to pass safely but due to the road he was holding up in excess of 10 cars . The bike way is concrete but it is intended for bikes , and maybe it was placed there to make the road safer for both cars and bikes. If I considered that the road was to bumpy in my car I am not allowed to drive on your smooth grass nature strip, I may adjust my driving style to suit the conditions.
Post by: WCN_Bren on February 10, 2016, 08:48:05 PM
The road in question is a single lane in each direction, divided by a double unbroken line for the length of the rd , this would be due to the blind corners. The section we encountered the bike was on a blind bend, they cycle heading north and we South, The cars are attempting to pass safely but due to the road he was holding up in excess of 10 cars . The bike way is concrete but it is intended for bikes , and maybe it was placed there to make the road safer for both cars and bikes. If I considered that the road was to bumpy in my car I am not allowed to drive on your smooth grass nature strip, I may adjust my driving style to suit the conditions.
Hmmmm sometimes i think people forget they are called ROAD bikes.
Seriously??? It's dangerous and illegal to drive on the nature strip. A road bike on the road... soooooooo unheard of... oh wait, it's legal too. And, you can't adjust your riding style on a road bike to absorb steel, glass and tools. It's nowhere near the same things.
It really doesn't matter does it- no matter how much things are explained and no matter how much evidence is put before some people they are just gonna hate cyclists and try to make up all sorts of crap to justify it. Even though that cyclist held people up you still got to your destination faster than if that cyclist and his MAMIL mates were driving cars.
Post by: WCN_Bren on February 10, 2016, 08:57:19 PM
He is aware of the rules but the cycle way in question was not a bike carriageway on the left of the road but rather a seperate concrete cycle path some 8 ft to the side of the road with a seperate grass verge separating the road from the cycle path.
We get this near where i live. there is a shared running/walking/bike path 10-15 metres away from the road and diverts about 2 klm longer than the road and i constantly get yelled at "ride on the f'ing bike path - IT'S THE LAW!!!" argh. Even when there's no-one else on the road it still happens. yes, the bike lane referred to in the law is one that is part of the road. We have a few around here but the police have said they will never book anyone around here for not using them - a mountain bike's handlebars are wider than the cycleway. lol. cars park in them and even if they don't the mirrors stick out in to the lane.
Post by: oldmate on February 10, 2016, 08:58:11 PM
Hmmmm sometimes i think people forget they are called ROAD bikes.
Seriously??? It's dangerous and illegal to drive on the nature strip. A road bike on the road... soooooooo unheard of... oh wait, it's legal too. And, you can't adjust your riding style on a road bike to absorb steel, glass and tools. It's nowhere near the same things.
It really doesn't matter does it- no matter how much things are explained and no matter how much evidence is put before some people they are just gonna hate cyclists and try to make up all sorts of crap to justify it. Even though that cyclist held people up you still got to your destination faster than if that cyclist and his MAMIL mates were driving cars.
See! ;D ;D
Post by: Snow on February 10, 2016, 09:16:45 PM
It is time to move on folks. Thread is locked.