Damn Cyclists

[auxr]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

So because it is a public forum about cars, the discussion has to weighted in favour of cars to be allowed, is that what you are suggesting.

Or does it mean that we are only entitled to discuss Fords and not motoring related issues, in the motoring related section of thread?

Sorry mate, this is a public forum, not a dictatorship.

Nope, not at all - my reply was in regard to another post that you replied on behalf of. :

[King Nothing]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

I did not miss your point, just bought in some of the issues that this long discussed topic has presented.

It would have to be a seperate class of licence with testing to be of any value. Just as you do not automatically get a motorbike licence when you get car licence.

You would have to account for kids, they ride bikes on the road too.

The license plate is not dead in the water, plastic plates still have sharp edges. It would have to be more like an adhesive label of some sort.

Automatically giving car licence holders a bike licence will not work, they have not demonstrated ability to control a bicycle safely on public roads. Simple, if they do not want the licence, do not get it, but never ride a bike either.

Bah, accidently closed the window and lost my response. Not as good this time, but here it is:

It would take some massaging, no doubt. I take your point about giving accreditation without testing being useless, but as I see it there are two point to licencing cyclists

1 - To make cyclists fairly accountable when breaking road rules
2 - To improve the quality of cyclists

Now obviously giving all licence holders now a licence to ride bicycles won't improve their riding abiltiy, but at the moment they don't need one anyway. But it will make them accountable fairly when they break the law. Likewise those who do not have a car licence, but ride a bike, will now have to get a licence so they can be fairly identified and punished when breaking the law. No more uneven playing field for bicycle riders with and without car licences. Plus it will bring in an extra revenue stream for those who currently ride bicycles without a car licence, who essentially use the road for free.

In 10 years time though, the second benefit will come. Think of it as investing in the future.

By making it a separate accreditation system, and making everyone go through it, you will stop a large number of people ("casuals") accessing the sport. By tying it into a car licence, you make it pretty equitable for all road users. And at the same time educating future riders/drivers on sharing the road together.

As far as children go, perhaps a "provisional" licence where young riders are not allowed on 60km/h plus roads (or whatever is appropriate), motorways, certain main roads during peak times etc. Then they graduate to an unrestricted bike licence when they get their L's at 16. I know I wouldn't be comfortable with my future 12 year old on a main road during peak hour!

[mrbaxr6t]

just read the entire thread and it seems most people (even cyclists) get irritated by other objects/vehicles whatever that impede them.

here's an answer : make us ALL have the exact same mode of transport be it bike or car or bus or motorcycle or whatever, and make them identical that way nobody can get held up by the slow cyclist, or the car towing the caravan or the truck with a full load on. We cannot do this as at the very least we live in a democracy, doing this would take away peoples' freedoms.

I have lost count of how many times people walk 5 abreast on a footpath at a crawl, which holds me up when I want to walk fast, do I scream for them to be banned from the footpath, no I don't because it is their right to walk slow just as it is my right to walk fast.

Everybody needs to relax a little and have some compassion for their fellow man.

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by ryanstev

I actually don't mind cyclists, I've never had a problem with them getting in my way, I'm happy to slow down for a little while so I can pass safely (giving them lots of room) but I always see that argument so had to put that in.

I know what you mean, I see both sides of the argument as well because although I am a cyclist, I am a motorist and also happen to be a professional driver so therefore clock up a few more K's in city traffic than the average person.

I just made that point as I can see where that concept would end up, stuck behind some cyclist doing 40 in a 60 zone in the middle of a lane because his attitude would be "I pay my rego, I am entitled to this lane, I want my moneys worth".

Maybe things are better the way they are, food for thought.

[Chopped]

Originally Posted by mrbaxr6t

........
I have lost count of how many times people walk 5 abreast on a footpath at a crawl, which holds me up when I want to walk fast, do I scream for them to be banned from the footpath, no I don't because it is their right to walk slow just as it is my right to walk fast........

That reminded me of this ! >

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46Tq0qUSlls

[MAD]

Originally Posted by mrbaxr6t

I have lost count of how many times people walk 5 abreast on a footpath at a crawl, which holds me up when I want to walk fast, do I scream for them to be banned from the footpath, no I don't because it is their right to walk slow just as it is my right to walk fast.

Everybody needs to relax a little and have some compassion for their fellow man.

What about consideration as well?

If those 5 abreast walkers had any knowledge or consideration of what was going on around them, they might get move over rather than block the way.

I dont stop next to someone on an escalator, I will move over in case somebody wants to go faster than I do. Same goes for walkways in shopping centres, if I want to stop because I've realised I should be going the other direction, I dont just stop and turn around, I try to make sure I am clear behind first so I dont run into someone or have them run into me.

[lownloud]

I guess the other thing you have to be mindful of too is that in the future the number of cyclists on the road is only going to increase as people try to shun high petrol prices and live a greener lifestyle. Love it or hate it...It's gunna happen!

[russellw]

Somewhat surprisingly there were only (well any is too many) 27 cyclist deaths nationally in 2008 compared to 245 motorcyclists from a total of 1,464. There aren't any stats that I have available for how these relate per km travelled (this data only being kept for cars) but it means that cyclists make up 1.8 % of all road fatalities compared to motorcyclists at 16.7 %.

This either suggests that:

1. There are less cyclists than motorcyclists (which anecdotally wouldn't seem to be the case).
2. They travel a considerably lower overall distance (which again might be the case but then they will probably spend more time on the road doing that distance anyway and thus increase their risk statistically).
3. They are more cognisant of the hazards and ride accordingly.

Despite the occasional stupidity we all see displayed by cyclists, I'm inclined to lean toward the 3rd option if only because it makes more sense. It is no greater or lesser than the daily lunacy displayed by representatives of any other group of road users and the law provides them with equal right to be there within the boundaries of the relevant State legislations.

Those who find their actions frustrating might like to try China where they are the dominant form of transport and it is nothing unusual to see them 10 wide and 20 deep in front of the traffic and most of them seem hell bent on an early meeting with whatever God they follow. After that, the odd cyclist or three here is a picnic.

Cheers
Russ

[Pinch]

Originally Posted by ryanstev

Bad argument.
I have two cars, I pay registration for both, even though I can only drive one at a time. It doesn't matter if a cyclist has a car at home, they aren't paying rego on their bike.

I wouldn't say its a bad argument. I appreciate that those with multiple rego's vehicles don't drive them at once either. Bicycles though create maintenance issues for roads so minisule that it is near immeasurable. Cars and other vehicles do damage roads - hence a large proportion of rego revenue (is supposed to) goes towards road maintenance. I pay rego on a boat trailer that sits in a paddock 8 months of the year while my boat is on the mooring. Problem is, at 1.5 tonnes it will damage the road when it uses it so rego must be paid. An actual distance/damage based fee system would be much better for me, but not for most others and so hard to implement it won't happen any time soon.

Maybe we could also ask kayakers to pay Maritime rego fees? They get in the way of power boaters on the water too, yet don't create the damage that powered vessels do.

There is also the issue about the government taxing perceivably 'bad' things. Cars, alcohol, cigarettes, gambling etc. All these things lead to indirect on-costs for the government they need to address. Cars use finite resources, create emissions that need to be dealt with etc.

Don't forget too that a large proportion of annual fixed motor vehicle costs are third party personal injury insurance. Sure a bike can hurt someone, but get an actuary to add up the claims costs from motor vehicle accidents, and then bike accidents and see what the difference is. Accident claims experience from bikes would hardly even register.

As much as we love them, cars cause a huge societal and environmental on cost. Fact is, bikes don't. That's why cars pay, and bikes don't.

Licence idea has merit, people on the road should know what they are doing. Boat licences are available for Young Adults in NSW from 12 or 14 to drive some vessels on a restricted basis. Maybe something similar could operate for bicycles. At least some form of online test you where you can print out a 'licence' for for a nominal fee. Much like a fishing licence you can get online.

[BlackLS]

Originally Posted by ryanstev

I actually don't mind cyclists, I've never had a problem with them getting in my way, I'm happy to slow down for a little while so I can pass safely (giving them lots of room) but I always see that argument so had to put that in.

Same here - never had a problem with them. Same with motorbikes, trucks etc.

[xbgs351]

I was riding my bicycle last Sunday afternoon, when some clown in an early 80's Gemini went past me leaving me about a foot of clearance. Now I was dressed in my club gear which is lycra and is also very visible as it is mainly yellow, so there is no doubt in my mind that the driver saw me. The road was a very quiet country road with plenty of width, good visibility and a speed limit of 100km/h. At the time I remember thinking that if I had swerved for a pothole that my wife would be a widow and my baby fatherless.

I guess this thread has just reminded me that I really should report the incident to the police. I have the cars rego number and I know a local policeman who also happens to cycle a lot.

[torbirdie]

Originally Posted by ryanstev

Bad argument.
I have two cars, I pay registration for both, even though I can only drive one at a time. It doesn't matter if a cyclist has a car at home, they aren't paying rego on their bike.

The cost of roads does not come from rego! Nor does it come from the compulsory state wide insurance for injury that comes along with your rego renewal! The rego fee is just an administrative tax, the insurance....obvious Id of thought, none of the $5-600 dollars we pay to have our cars on the road pays for the roads, its that simple. The only roads we have to pay to use are toll roads, the rest are free........something to make the community function!

The cost of building and maintaining roads?, individual councils maintain them according to revenue they raise and monies received from state and federal governments. The money for roads comes from taxes! So if you arent paying tax, you are getting a free load, perhaps you should demand people that dont pay tax to put large stickers on their cars saying that so you can bully them out of the way if they are holding you up.
Of course if you fill your car with the commercially available fuels you'll be paying a healthy tax here anywhere.

Rego for pushbikes, absurd. Licences for pushbike riders, even more absurd.

Though the current double standard of a 15 year old getting pulled up ****ed on a pushbike gets a slap on the wrist, whereas if you have a car licence and get pulled up on a pushie ****ed, you get slapped real hard. Not that Ive ever done either, but its not quite right

[luke1984]

Originally Posted by ryanstev

Bad argument.
I have two cars, I pay registration for both, even though I can only drive one at a time. It doesn't matter if a cyclist has a car at home, they aren't paying rego on their bike.

Agreed, I have two car rego's, yet have to pay $1000 a year to register and insure a motorbike that never touches the bitumen, but thats another argument......

[irlewy86]

Originally Posted by Pinch

Licence idea has merit, people on the road should know what they are doing. Boat licences are available for Young Adults in NSW from 12 or 14 to drive some vessels on a restricted basis. Maybe something similar could operate for bicycles. At least some form of online test you where you can print out a 'licence' for for a nominal fee. Much like a fishing licence you can get online.

I passed my first "Bicycle Safety Course" way back in 1989 (on my good old baby blue bike) when the Department of Transport Qld ran courses (alot like Qride) for Bicyclists. I also had to do the same course every year untill I was 12.

So in reality the "Bicycle License" has been around for donkey's

[torbirdie]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

What you need to consider is these groups often travel at speeds of 40-50kp, this is too fast for paths that pedestrians use. They need to do this speed, that is how they train for their sport. Do you for a moment think that Cadel Evans, Lance Armstrong etc got to where they did but riding at 20kph on footpaths? The nature of the sport and the equipment they use dictates the safest place for all involved (pedestrians, motorists and cyclists) is on the road. Suggesting the competetive cyclists (which most of these large packs are) must train on footpaths, would be like saying the Brisbane Bronco's must only train down at the local suburban park where pedestrians and kids will get knocked over and hurt, or the bronco's not run as fast. It would not work would it?

Gecko, Im with you all the way, until I got to this?

If you use the same argument, where is our next formula one champion or drag racer going to be able to get some practice in?

Public roads are exactly that, not training arenas for those wanting to excel at sport. If there is no training venue available that is too bad. If the pastime can be done on public roads according to the road rules that is fine. However, riding in a peleton is not riding according to the road rules and with damn good reason, although Police in this state (vic) are loathsome to do anything about it. How can a pack of cyclists 4 across doing 50km/h avoid a child that steps onto the road or similar, or for their own sake, when one falls, the whole lot comes down.

Aspiring Tour de France riders will have to find some other venue for practising riding a couple of cms from the next riders tyre at 80km/h. Yes, just the same as if you were attempting to dirive cars on public roads a cm apart.

There are plenty of roads in Australia, we actually have the highest amount of km of road per capita in the world. Aspiring Evans and the like should be capable of cycling that little extra distance and finding a nice quiet road to practice the peleton, rather than using a busy city arterial in peak hour.

[hendrixhc]

One of the worst things in Adelaide is around the time of the tour down under.

Suddenly everyone is a cycling expert and whacks on the lycra and hits the roads. NOt only is the sight of an overweight fat guy sweating it out on a Huffy special from Kmart disgusting they ride round in packs and generally make a huge pain in the a... of themselves.

I live in the hills and i dont think i can go for a drive anywhere without coming across a bike rider.

I agree keep them of the roads or make them pay rego as well.

[xbgs351]

Originally Posted by mick robb

bullbar and a :love tap ?"

Cellmate and a stretched sphincter?

[chris0]

I want the time i wasted reading this thread, returned in full.
I am an avid cyclist, Mountain and Road.
Firstly, the knee jerk reation to someone having an "altercation" with a cyclist has been beat around the bush a thousand times...
"Get them off the road"
"Why dont they pay rego" etc etc
Its pretty simple really..Those of us who train on the road, do so for fitness/endurance and fun really. Training on the road is the only way to stay fit for road racing.
Unfortunately I cant speak for every cyclist out there, only the ~50 riders out on saturday/sunday mornings around my area. We try to keep left riding two a breast (as stated by NSW law) as much as often, but on the odd occasion if we do venture into the lane, it is only briefly and not exactly sudden. If you cant see 50 riders merge into a part of your lane doing 35-40km/hr, you have bigger problems.
As for the cyclists having to pay rego for cycling on the road....please.
If you went up to a jogger running on the side of the road and tried to slap him rego for his shoes, or the fact that he was running on the road, how far would you get? Bikes do not emit carbon monoxide, thereofre not harming the environment nor do they damage the road.
More bike lanes is the key, as previously discussed
It is unlawful for those over the age of 12 to ride on a FOOTpath in NSW.
Combined paths are a different story ala the path along the M7, which is a perfect width for pedestrians and cyclists. Its not a bad ride either.....

[DBourne]

King oath chris well said.

Some of the comments from people on this forum are disturbing to say the least.

[Pedro]

Chris, you say training on the road is the only way to stay fit for road racing. What's the difference training on a road as opposed to say a velodrome?

[Pinch]

Originally Posted by irlewy86

I passed my first "Bicycle Safety Course" way back in 1989 (on my good old baby blue bike) when the Department of Transport Qld ran courses (alot like Qride) for Bicyclists. I also had to do the same course every year untill I was 12.

So in reality the "Bicycle License" has been around for donkey's

See that is good to hear. In NSW though there is nothing, nothing mainstream anyway. Our primary school did a safety day I remember doing, local cops turned up and all to do a talk and explain things. Same school also made you do a 'test' and get a 'licence' (basic road rule stuff) before you were allowed to ride to school. Nothing from the RTA (or DMR or whatever it was back then).

Was that mandated though, or did you do it of your own free will? People who care about road safety will usually do such things, like those of us that do defensive or advanced driving courses. It seems the ones who don't care that are the problem though.

[torbirdie]

Originally Posted by Pedro

Chris, you say training on the road is the only way to stay fit for road racing. What's the difference training on a road as opposed to say a velodrome?

did you really want/need an answer to that question?

I think what you are getting at is if they are simply training they shouldnt be using the road?

So what type of journeys do you suggest should be allowed on public roads?

[Pinch]

Originally Posted by Falcman0o7

.... deleted ....

Yeah, ill bite. I am in the mood.

Everyone has their right to an opinion, that's what forums are for. But you realise that is a criminal act right? If something happened as a result of something like that - like getting it in their eye and them falling in the path of a truck you do know that not only will you have to live with that on your conscience for the rest of your life, but any criminal charges and their affect on you and your family.

I realise that is likely some sort of keyboard bravado, but people do do things like that on the spur of the moment (although prefilling washer reservoir with bleach is premediated and the effect of that is measured in years). It can ruin the victims life, AND the offenders. Sometimes it just pays to think things through a little. Like how far you would go to seek revenge for the loss of what could only ever amount to a few seconds here and there. 5-7 years is not a good timeframe to admire cinder blocks and kind of negates the few seconds you were trying to save here and there. Might want to sit down and read some of the more thought out posts here, even before being (hopefully for your sake) sarcastic.

[MO]

It seems that a common theme of 'bike riders don't emit co2 'is being used....hmm so how much was emitted making your bike? Then of course there is another gas that bike riders DO emit and that is methane,oh but wait bike riders are legends in their own lunchbox so I guess they don't.
As for riding two abreast well it should be single file,the number of times I've seen two abreast take up a whole lane,I've lost count.
This type of thread has been done to death,as for me if the bike rider stays out of my way I'll stay out of theirs,as for rego on bikes yes I'm for it.
So the wash up is if the bike riders obey the rules fine if not suffer the consequences.
Finally I'll give this thread about 12 or so hrs and the lockwood will out.

[xbgs351]

Originally Posted by Falcman0o7

..... deleted .....

One thing that I have noticed over twenty years of cycling, is that drivers that get angry and hurl abuse or do stupid acts towards cyclists almost all fit into one of two categories.

The first category consists of young kids who have just got their licenses, feel invincible and think that they own the road. The second category consists of no hopers that drive crap cars. Just picture fat guys wearing high visibility clothing and driving Hyundai Excels or E-series Falcons.

The two categories are not mutually exclusive.

[naddis01]

Gee I hate these threads! They make me so mad! All because there are some idiots that sprout the sort of garbage in post 5 for example. GROW A BRAIN PEOPLE. Poor little pets are going to lose 10sec out of their precious little lives while waiting to go around a cyclist.

My wifes mother was hit by a car on Good Friday of this year, the day after her 55th birthday. She was riding her bike with her partner on a country victorian highway (quiet, 2 lane). The driver that hit her admitted that he saw her well up the road yet still managed to hit her. She had multiple fractures, collapsed lung, degluved angle and many many more injuries. She was in an induced coma for a week and when brought out of that looked to be progressing well.
However she then had some complications with her injuries (I dont want to go into it) and later died as a result of her injuries a month after the accident.

She was in the prime of her life and was one of the fittest people I know. She lost her life because of 1 idiot that did not give her enough room that she was entitled to. So to say "a bullbar and a love tap" has to be one of the stupidest things I have ever heard. How would you like it if I gave you a love tap that resulted in you losing your life?

[Pinch]

Originally Posted by MO

It seems that a common theme of 'bike riders don't emit co2 'is being used....hmm so how much was emitted making your bike? Then of course there is another gas that bike riders DO emit and that is methane,oh but wait bike riders are legends in their own lunchbox so I guess they don't.
As for riding two abreast well it should be single file,the number of times I've seen two abreast take up a whole lane,I've lost count.
This type of thread has been done to death,as for me if the bike rider stays out of my way I'll stay out of theirs,as for rego on bikes yes I'm for it.
So the wash up is if the bike riders obey the rules fine if not suffer the consequences.
Finally I'll give this thread about 12 or so hrs and the lockwood will out.

This is the thing though, are bike riders 'fine' if they obey your rules, or the Australian Road Rules as adopted by the various state authorities? Because the ARR allows 2 abreast, but you seem to think it "should be single file". Not have a go personally, just using this to emphasise a point. Most people seem to think other road users are 'ok' if they abide by some personally held unwritten rule. I have my own rules and no one abides by them : but the problem is some people do act on those instances were unwritten personal rules are broken somehow.

You can all rest easy though now, gonna go and play in the garage for a while and leave you all to it...

[xbgs351]

Originally Posted by Pedro

Chris, you say training on the road is the only way to stay fit for road racing. What's the difference training on a road as opposed to say a velodrome?

For a start track bikes have fixed wheels and no brakes, making it a completely different discipline. Track riding is predominately a summer sport, compared to road cycling for the rest of the year.

Also it is very hard to get access to a velodrome as they are very few and far between. Even if you could get access to a velodrome every day of the week, you would have to be superhuman to endure your weekly long ride on the velodrome, given that it will take about five hours.

[xbgs351]

Originally Posted by naddis01

Gee I hate these threads! They make me so mad! All because there are some idiots that sprout the sort of garbage in post 5 for example. GROW A BRAIN PEOPLE. Poor little pets are going to lose 10sec out of their precious little lives while waiting to go around a cyclist.

My wifes mother was hit by a car on Good Friday of this year, the day after her 55th birthday. She was riding her bike with her partner on a country victorian highway (quiet, 2 lane). The driver that hit her admitted that he saw her well up the road yet still managed to hit her. She had multiple fractures, collapsed lung, degluved angle and many many more injuries. She was in an induced coma for a week and when brought out of that looked to be progressing well.
However she then had some complications with her injuries (I dont want to go into it) and later died as a result of her injuries a month after the accident.

She was in the prime of her life and was one of the fittest people I know. She lost her life because of 1 idiot that did not give her enough room that she was entitled to. So to say "a bullbar and a love tap" has to be one of the stupidest things I have ever heard. How would you like it if I gave you a love tap that resulted in you losing your life?

My commiserations to you and your family. My father recieved similar injuries two years back after a truck pulled out in front of him, but luckily he pulled through. What really annoyed me was that the truck driver wasn't charged.

[MO]

Originally Posted by Pinch

This is the thing though, are bike riders 'fine' if they obey your rules, or the Australian Road Rules as adopted by the various state authorities? Because the ARR allows 2 abreast, but you seem to think it "should be single file". Not have a go personally, just using this to emphasise a point. Most people seem to think other road users are 'ok' if they abide by some personally held unwritten rule. I have my own rules and no one abides by them : but the problem is some people do act on those instances were unwritten personal rules are broken somehow.

You can all rest easy though now, gonna go and play in the garage for a while and leave you all to it...

And not taken personally,as I said the number of times that two abreast takes up a whole lane. Thats further apart than driver and passenger in a car.
As for the rules not mine but the duly legal ones.