Road Safety-Bicycle riders

Now, I don't want anyone to start an all out war against cyclists, I just want to raise this as a road safety issue. Please refer to the video I have shared here (sorry about my shoddy video editing), but my point is, why VicRoads is not stepping in to make sure that all our road users are safe?

I believe it's high time that they start a licensing system for cyclists along with a mandatory road rules awareness program.

My thought is, licensing cost can be minuscule for cyclists like $20 for 5 years term or so, just to cover the costs, but the aim must be that cyclists know what they are doing on roads, and hold them accountable.

I'm not saying other road users are perfect, far from it, but at least there is a system to hold them accountable and make sure they know what they are doing.

I read this article today, and not pointing fingers, but it shows how important the road safety awareness is just to make sure that we all make home safely.

Not to exaggerate, but I could have hit that cyclist and repercussions of that would've been unimaginable for both parties.

What do you think needs to happen?

Poll Options

  • 129
    Start a licensing system with a mandatory road rules awareness program
  • 178
    Leave things as they are
  • 32
    Ask everyone to ride Bicycles
  • 13
    Ask everyone to use a motor vehicle or get out of the roads


        • +1 vote


          I'm going to quote a comment of mine from above because it meshes so perfectly here:

          Cyclists absolutely refuse to accept any responsibility for road conduct.

          Because it's literally what you're saying.

          I really find it legitimately concerning you're advocating for biased laws carrying the presumption of guilt.

        • -1 vote

          @ProspectiveDarkness: I've decided I don't care what you think, but maybe others can consider options to make cycling safer.

          there have been too many incidents where drivers have done something stupid, killed a cyclist and the cyclist gets no justice because the driver said whoopsie and the cyclist has done nothing wrong but cannot defend themselves. Creating a situation where the person in charge of tonnes of deadly weapon is responsible to ensure the safety of vulnerable road users does increase safety.

          It works in our WHS system in workplaces, an employer is deemed to be at fault firstly so we now have a system in place where good employers go above and beyond to ensure the safety of their vulnerable workers. Even if it isn't technically a strict liability that the employer is guilty, it is presumed the worker has not had sufficient training or equipment to be safe. That's what I want it like on the roads, make all drivers remember that they are responsible for what the car does so they do everything possible to keep all other road users safe.

        • +1 vote


          I've decided I don't care what you think

          I'm glad you're able to epitomise my issue with [many] cyclists better than I can describe it. It's a good time saver.

          there have been too many incidents where drivers have done something stupid, killed a cyclist and the cyclist gets no justice because the driver said whoopsie

          Oh, you mean like this:

          Hit-run driver Stephanie Maher found guilty over cyclist's Nepean Highway death

          and this?

          or this?

          Man charged after cyclist killed in West Footscray hit and run

          Or do those instances disrupt your narrative? You see, the way courts actually work, is that sufficient evidence needs to be presented to charge someone. You don't just assume they're guilty. It's not as if the courts have it out for you, or the laws are there to sabotage you. They're there to maintain objectivity and equality under the law. What you're suggesting isn't justice. It's an emotional, blind, knee-jerk reaction to the fact that sometimes there aren't easy solutions to difficult problems. And it needs to stay away from our legal system, because it's ridiculous.

          That's what I want it like on the roads, make all drivers remember that they are responsible for what the car does so they do everything possible to keep all other road users safe.

          We already have laws for this. You just want them unjustly applied as a blanket rule. Must be easy seeing the world in such simple terms, huh?


          @KMeister: e=mv^2 is really what you want. Sure more mass means more damage, but speed really does make the difference.

        • +1 vote

          @ProspectiveDarkness: Yeah, but those cyclists were killed.

          Go find how many non-fatal accidents there were, and what their outcome was.


          @D C:

          Yeah, but those cyclists were killed.

          That was the situation Euphemistic laid out for me (well, for "others", seeing as they apparently don't care what I say). So I'm just replying in kind.


          @ProspectiveDarkness: Well, anyway.

          Essentially you can run over as many cyclists as you like, and so long as they don't wind up dead or lose too many limbs, it's all ok.

          Look at 'road rage' incidents. Between cars drivers will probably get a result, but driver & cyclist? Look at all the 'driver abuses cyclist' clickbait articles - with video! - that come to nothing.

          The only thing lower on the road foodchain than cyclists is skateboarders, and perhaps women pushing prams.


          @D C: Learn more about conservation of momentum, and no, your formula is wrong, it must be E=1/2mv^2, and that is for kinetic energy :)


          @KMeister: Yeah, I noticed the formula was wrong, but eh.

          The point still stands, velocity lets you kill cyclists more effectively than mass does.

          Or just drive your car a bit faster, that works superbly and saves you from buying a bigger one.

          (Oh yeah, where's my cookie?)


          @KMeister: No cookie?


          Right, you're off my Christmas card list.

      • +2 votes

        ideas for improving safety:
        Separated infrastructure
        Strict liability (motorist presumed at fault unless proven otherwise)
        Allow riding on footpaths
        Ditch helmet laws except on roads 60km/h and above (controversial, but it gets more people riding)
        Safe passing distance laws, some states have this.
        Idaho stops for cyclists.
        Reduce speed limits in built up areas eg 30km/h in CBD, 40km/h in residential streets.

        There are more but I can't think of them right now.


          This is true, you only notice them when they interfere with the usual flow. Definitely, we need to educate drivers too, and I believe, VicRoads should educate everyone with rule changes too, other than relying on media to do that part.


          Separated infrastructure

          Literally the only thing on this list I'll happily support

        • +2 votes


          it gets cyclists the **** off the road.

          I think a comment like that excludes you from participating further in an otherwise rational discussion between adults.

          the only thing on this list I'll happily support

          Based on the above, I imagine you'd actually have some pretty strong opinions regarding your taxpayer / registration dollars being spent on such infrastructure.


          @picklewizard: And I think you have an inflated sense of self-importance if you think your word is enough to exclude someone from participating in an open discussion.

          But anyway. I don't see how becoming frustrated at an aggravatingly entitled list of demands precludes me from having a rational discussion. Am I somehow wrong for wanting cyclists off the road? Surely that's the best options for both parties?

          taxpayer / registration dollars being spent on such infrastructure.

          Oh piss off. I said I'd happily support it, and I do. Don't put words in my mouth, it's a cheap, petty argument tactic and undermines your claim to a "rational discussion among adults"

  • +1 vote

    Infrastructure and education. Those are the proven models that improve rider participation and safety, time and time again.

    Registration, licensing of cycling has never ever worked. If you think it does, provide a source.


    Didn't they already put mandatory id's for riders in NSW?


    Now, I don't want anyone to start an all out war against cyclists

    [Angry bell ringing intensifies]

  • +2 votes

    No need for helmets or ID's in Germany, Austria, Denmark, Netherlands etc. and everyone is happy, thousands of bicycles everywhere. Why Australia needs to be different?
    Maybe instead of wasting time on nonsense like this, we need to better educate drivers how to behave around cyclists?

    • +1 vote

      Judging from OP's video he linked, it seems the cyclist is the one in dire need of education regarding road rules.

  • +3 votes

    Drivers need to clam down. So what if they are delayed slightly. Some drivers are so angry (usually about something else) that they slow down for a minute or so to tell off the cyclist for delaying them. How moronic is that. If you have kids, and I do, you realise the need for calm on the drivers side.

  • -1 vote

    We have a few shitty cyclists around my area who ride their bike close to the centre of the street. So I have to go all the way to the other end just to overtake these inconsiderate idiots. This puts us all at risk. I hope something is done about bad cyclists just like bad motorists. Also cyclists who think that they are pedestrians and swoop in suddenly on a zebra crossing and expect the cars to wait. I however have no problem with sharing the road otherwise and I am quite patient person and don't mind waiting behind.

    • +3 votes

      Maybe they are riding away from the left side of the lane to avoid getting doored or hitting debris on the side of the road?

      If you have not problem with sharing the road as you said, you could always be patient and wait until it is safe to pass can't you?

    • +4 votes

      When i ride my bike i always share the lane.

      Having said that, i'm always considering whether to ride in the middle. From a bike riders perspective:
      1. Some drivers see a cyclist sharing the lane as more of a pedestrian and expect them to give way even though the car is behind them.
      2. Parked cars sooooo often open their doors. I have a conspiracy theory that there's this club of people who get together, park their cars and wait for a cyclist.
      3. Some drivers think its a great time to park their car, seeing as though their bonnet is in front, it means they successfully overtook you, so why not.
      4. God forbid you need to get the in the right lane for a right hand turn, no chance, notta, go walk your bike or become a blood stain on the road.
      5. Any hazards on the road, you cant move, your sharing the road and have less than 1 metre of space to avoid something, often you dont have time to check your blind spot so you just have to hit the hazard (potholes etc that can actually bend your rim).
      6. Roundabouts, well i think about 80% of drivers will make a left turn on the cyclist who is going straight, especially if the cyclist has stopped to give way to others on the roundabout. I think most people think your just chilling out to watch the traffic go in circles.

      So i still share when i ride, but i think its alot safer if i didn't and completely understand when others dont.

      • -2 votes

        Your points are valid and reasonable. However the few I was mentioning above the said things didn't apply. There is only one narrow lane to and fro, the streets turn so there is no vision of the oncoming car, there are no parked cars and the right turn were far away and there are not any visible debrees on the road( I walk there). Under those circumstances I would asssume sharing the lane is better because it helps me as a driver avoid take the risk of going onto incoming traffic.

        • +2 votes

          Can't you apply the same principle as when you overtake slower moving vehicle in a narrow lane?

          Wait until it's safe to do so maybe?

    • +1 vote

      <Mod Edit: Personal attack removed>, cyclist can legally take the full lane for safety. take over a bike like how u would for a car . safe and when the other lane is clear

      You can cross to the other lane dotted or full lines. Know your road rules! Be a smart ass and go to jail for killing a person


    Once OP has solved the bicycle problem, perhaps he can turn his attention to the other great issue of the ages, why don't motorcycles have a front registration plate?

    Seems a bit unfair, after all cars have both so why not bikes as well?


      Traffic cameras need only to snap the back ;)


        It's amazing how the bag you just put onto your oversized rack just happened to slip a little…

        Anyway, not all speed cameras take a rear photo.

        It comes up every few years (just like the 'licence cyclists & make them pay rego!' etc as per this thread), but nothing ever happens. It often winds up being two groups of nanny state types arguing with each other plus the occasional libertarian complaining about revenue raising.

        A quick Google will bring up the usual tedious arguments for & against.

        We must be overdue for another round.


    OP in pedestrian mode:

    Took me ages to find that.

    (Well maybe not the OP, but certainly a few posters here. Imagine them as drivers!)

  • +1 vote

    Bigger issue is cyclists being hit by cars who break a rule. Licensing cyclists does not reduce the number of accidents as they are at fault only 20%, reducing driver mistakes is a bigger issue.

    Most probably fining drivers more for not taking due care will do more.

  • +1 vote

    The video shows a driver attempting to overtake or share the lane with a cyclist within 5 metres of a left hand turn. If i was driving, i would not have made the call that the cyclist chose the left lane so soon, that would mean id be about 3 metres further back and not currently attempting to perform an overtake.

    Actually, on second look, the driver accelerated through the turn, coming within 1 metre of the cyclists rear wheel by the exit of the turn.

    Because the cyclist failed to indicate, it caused a dangerous situation because the driver was attempting to overtake on the exit of the turn.

    Whether a cyclist or another car, it was a shit move. Especially when there were parked cars ahead and the left lane merged to one anyway. Its just lucky that 90% of drivers allow for this shit to happen by driving defensively so the other 10% can make it work as well.


    I'm interested if the typical 'cyclist hater' makes any distinction between the different groups of people riding bikes or just lumps them together all as 'cyclists'. E.g.

    • your typical junkie on a shitty old bike, no helmet, no lights, probably all dark clothing weaving along
    • teenagers on bmx bikes going to school/the skate park, possibly with brakes removed using their shoes to slow down
    • student food delivery rider (uber eats/deliveroo etc) typically riding the wrong way down the street looking at their phone
    • the average bike path cyclist doing a bit of fitness or just enjoying being outside
      -bit more serious commuting cyclist going to work, shops, etc with bags/backpack
    • serious road cyclist (yes the lycra type) riding on the road either by themself or in a group

    See as a pretty serious cyclist myself I don't see the first 3 groups as even cyclists. They are just people riding a bike. If I saw a junkie stumbling across the road on foot I wouldn't think 'those damn marathon runners'. I also don't think i have ever seen what I consider to be a real cyclist without a helmet and very rarely without lights (though I've been caught out myself when batteries died expectedly).

    Riding in groups I sometimes see some guys do some dumb stuff like rolling though red lights. If it is persistent then I just wouldn't ride with that group again, not really my place to lecture grown men. I rarely have issues out on the road with motorists as my regular groups are quite considerant and avoid the busiest roads, go single file (thought not required by law) when the road narrows and wave through cars when they are too hesitant and are causing a line up.

    The mandatory ID carrying is no issue for me, I always carry a plastic bag with my drivers licence, credit card and emergency contact numbers. My cycling Australia membership gives me full liability insurance if I did happen to hit and damage someone's property or cause injuries. If there was a nice aerodynamic little rego tag I wouldn't have an issue with clipping it on.

    Anyway, that's my 2c as I lie here watching the Tour de France :)


      Hahaha, i remember using my shoes to stop the bike when i was a kid.

      Dad asked why my shoes were all stuffed, when i told him he laughed and just put new brakes on the bike. I never thought of that, shoes were fine.


    People are too ignorant around cars, trucks and buses

    I say let natural selection sort them out
    Maybe then they will learn that their ~50-100kg doesnt compare to a ~1500kg object moving at 60kph

  • +1 vote

    I've been hit by cars three times on my bike, all three times I was going straight and the driver was turning across my path and failed to give way. Thankfully no serious injuries, but it seems having a license/numberplates didn't stop them from breaking the law and putting others in danger.


    Wow… turn out I wasn't the only one who has issue with a cyclist today. Not all cyclist just 1 particular douche cyclist.
    I was riding my motor bike in CBD on my way home then I have to pull a complete stop behind a car. This guy on his pushbike suddenly stop beside me and said "You are not suppose to use that lane. It is for pushbike only". I was like what the f**k are you talking about. Then I was deaf for a few second. Yes talking loud while wearing full cover helmet can make you deaf temporarily. After that I have to take off because the car in front of me has moved and I don't want to hold back the car behind me from getting home to their family.

    My entire ride home tonight was thinking about the incident.
    First the road that I use is between parked cars and traffic (so completely legal).
    Second there is no green colour or bicycle drawing on the road.
    Third there is no street sign saying bicycle only lane.

    So is this guy lecturing me with a thought every single narrow road is a dedicated bicycle lane?
    Did he just make a fool of himself while thinking he is right all along? what is the word for it hmm… Mr. Know-it-all.

    From this incident I learn that there are road users who thinks they fully know about road rule but they actually don't.
    On my perspective I believe if you are using the road old enough to take a Learner license please do take them for your own safety. Get a qualification to show yourself that you understand about using the road safely and ready to enter the road. Because you will be joining more than one over 1 Ton vehicle every single time you are on the road. Even if you are not a road user who knows you might be someone road guidance one day. This is still a good knowledge to have.
    I am sure some people take the test for the sake of getting proof of age but at least you learn something.

    In conclusion I have to agree with OP by forcing road user to obtain Learner license is not actually a bad idea. The only thing I hate is the license fee. I think VicRoad should reduce the price like down down way down to encourage more people taking Learner permit.

    Lastly and this is probably a bit personal. For people who are not aware. In order for a motorbike rider to obtain a road qualification we have to pass 2 Learner test, hazard perception test and 2 practical test. Therefore before you try to lecture us about rule on the road especially to the full license, first make sure own a Learner permit so you are not making a full of yourself (like that guy). Secondly we know about road rule so you can stop your lecture. Sometimes we are a bit ignorance but to the degree of only if it is safe to do so. Hey we love our life too.
    Let me put it a little bit simple. Every smoker knows smoking is bad but you don't say it to their face. The only people who qualify to said it to their face is their doctor. Got it? Good. :)

    Now I feel at ease for letting all out and thanks to the OP letting me have the opportunity to express. Not sure how many haters I am gonna get tomorrow but that is tomorrow problem.
    Good night Ozbargainer keep the bargain alive that is what I care more than the hater. LOL… Peace ✌

    • -1 vote

      Cool story bro. we don't need everyone to take a test to understand road rules. You learn a fair bit by watching, even more in schools and we could get even more out there with educational advertising rather than the old favourite of speed kills.

      Better education for all combined with better education and testing for motorised vehicles. It's a joke that once you've got you licence you have it for life without going through refresher courses. It would be very easy to start retesting drivers when they renew their licence. Heck, every other high risk licence you obtain (for construction work etc) requires you to undergo refresher training every few years and yet one of the biggest problems is drivers. It's about time we brought some worksite safety principles to our roads, but not just installing more signs and dumbing down the signs.


    lol at the people still claiming the driver here is the one at fault. A bike is a road vehicle as well, meaning you must abide by all laws that apply to cars, including indicating and not crossing double white lines, the guy on the bike is putting both himself and others at risk here.


      I think both are at fault:-

      The cyclist for moving over into the outside lane without signalling and then of course moving over to the pavement on the opposite side of the road.

      The driver for moving straight into the outside lane so SOON after the corner. Sure, the driver had every intention of overtaking the cyclist but moved way too early in my view. No doubt the driver has "assumed" that the cyclist would be riding straight on. Assumptions are fine until they proved wrong.

      As I understand it both vehicles are entitled to use either lane in this kind of road and who's to say the cyclist wasn't going to be turning into the opening a few metres up the road on the opposite side.

      My big takeaway is that one shouldn't assume anything when it comes to driving and always keep a bit more distance.

      Note - I'm not really blaming the car driver, it's just not as clear cut as many would like.

  • +1 vote

    Here I go with my two pennies worth. The video clearly shows that the cyclist didn't even look before swerving in front of the car and they wonder why they get knocked down, maybe killed.
    In this situation the car driver can't be held responsible for the actions of a cyclist whose one and only brain cell is inserted in the area where his body touches the saddle.
    Ask yourself, do you cross the road without looking to see if there is traffic coming yet those idiot cyclists believe that they have priority over everyone else and are fireproof.


      Yes those idiot cyclists that believe they have priority over everyone else are idiot cyclists. All the other cyclists (the majority of them) are not idiots and follow the rules and ride defensively to avoid incidents. Then there are also a few that are not idiots, but occasionally make a mistake. It's kinda like drivers, most are ok, some are idiots and some make mistakes occasionally.

      • +1 vote

        Well, yes you're right in part. I wouldn't agree that the majority are not idiots, the best estimate I would give is 50/50, but then that's just my opinion. But there's one big difference when a cyclist makes a mistake - they don't have the protection of a vehicles body surrounding them and so you would think that they would 'engage brain' before making a maneuver.


          I think you'll find that it's 50% of the cyclists YOU NOTICE that you think are idiots. There are probably of a lot of as abiding cyclists you don't even notice.

  • +1 vote

    Many people drive a car with the inflated ego of a Roman chariot racer, but the times I've caught up to a driver who has then been abusive and actually got out of their car, all of a sudden their attitude has softened.

    The ametuer psychologist in me would say this is because they are now as vunerable as the cyclist or pedestrian is, the same ametuer psychologist would say it is better for me to not get into these confrontations in the first place, but some times it feels like they have already thrown the first "punch" and my fight or flight response kicks in.

  • +1 vote

    I drive, race Go-Karts competitively and ride a BMX as my exercise tool - and by that I mean I've completed the (63km Syd-Wollongong Ride) on my BMX so I'm not just a casual. I believe I have pretty good self awareness and I have put my self in the shoes on the perspective of all parties here.

    I don't like riding my bike on the road - BMX/Mountain Bike or whatever it is. If there is a clear footpath I will use it. Unfortunately because I'm above a certain age (12) I'm not allowed to legally ride on the footpath in certain areas though.

    I think it's selfish for people traveling 1/3rd - 1/4th the speed to be on the road - bike or not. It's causes traffic but the bigger issue is the danger of it. Even cars doing 60km/h on a 100km/h Freeway is exactly the same boat.

    The problem is infrastructure. Sydney just wasn't a planned city. It wasn't built with a solid mindset from the start for cars to travel let alone for bikes separately. Having independent pathways, like the M7 Bikeway is the best way to ensure EVERYONE is safe but in the already built areas it's not possible :(

    On a side note that dude swerving across a lane on a BMX is just throwing caution into the wind. You have to be more cautious when you're the one at the bigger risk and he showed zero awareness.

  • +1 vote

    If people are getting hurt/injured/killed, should regulation be focussed on:
    (a) The victims, or (b) the people causing the injury/deaths…??

    Car drivers kill around 500 people per year, but clearly feel that the onus of safety should be shifted to the 'victims'… Mind-boggling…

  • +1 vote

    I'm a casual rider, I used to commute to work but now I'm a SAHM so just use the bike to get my son and I around easier than walking. I live in QLD where I am freakin happy that I'm legally able to ride on footpaths. And it's hard… there are so many people who do the wrong thing - both cars and bikes. Everytime something like this comes out in a forum it almost always ends up in an all out them vs us war.

    I took to walking to work (3km one way up hills) when I got pregnant because other bike riders that traveled the same bike path scared me more times than not. Although the guy who rode a good km or so around bends and on roads with no hands was kinda impressive the first few times I saw him… That said as a pedestrian/cyclist on footpaths the amount of times car drivers have done seriously dangerous things is terrifying. I've been almost run over on pedestrian crossings more times than I can count while I had a green light to cross and they had a red arrow …

    Road safety is EVERYONE'S responsibility. Pedestrians need to know safe behaviour. Cyclists need to know safe behaviour, and drivers need to know safe behaviour - all while remembering that the other pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers are people with families. It should never be an US vs THEM mentality. People make mistakes, sure - and sometimes they can be deadly - so I think road safety: in all forms, remembering in QLD at least, it's legal for motorbikes to travel through the middle of slow/stopped traffic - that bikes can be on footpaths and pedestrians ALWAYS have supreme right of way (well maybe not on a motorway where they're not allowed) needs to be refreshed regularly. I wouldn't be opposed for there to be a refresher video you have to watch to renew your license and I wouldn't entirely be opposed to bikes getting an identifying number plate to be able to more effectively track down people who are doing the wrong thing/repeat offenders and issue fines (The amount of riders I see with the helmet over their handlebars!!!!). However you do in that regard need to look at what the laws would be around kids/younger riders in those situations.

    I would love to see something done to increase riders numbers - it's a win for all if the safety is there - Less traffic on the road, in theory less road works due to less wear and tear on the road… no need to go to a gym, less air pollution, healthier citizens that could potentially reduce obesity rates & in turn reduce some of the demands on medicare - meaning more for your taxes.

  • +1 vote

    I think more bike lanes are the only suitable improvement for both parties…but then it costs more money.

    Who should pay? The cyclists everyone would suggest….but does that mean I can pay half the rate of rego and half the rate of cycling costs for doing car/bike 50/50?

    However, cars will drive right through me to make their left turns in bike lanes all the time despite the green paint on the road and the white line…or even if Im just riding on the side of the road…Incoming fire has right of way.

    I suspect everyone will kill me, so I'm very cautious but still get abused by bogans. blah blah blah. Hard problem to fix cos everyone one wants the other person to get out of their way.

    Cycling has many benefits, but you have to be in the right area and heading to the right area to realise them.

    • +1 vote

      Rego doesn't pay for road projects or upgrade… Everyone who pay tax contributes towards that…


        Beyond that, cars do bugger all damage to roads.

        Trucks do the bulk of the damage (weather the rest), without them the roads would last forever.

        From a rego point of view, trucks are very much under-taxed.

        Garbage trucks are the worst, heavy with a short wheel base. Good for mangling corners.


        Theres a portion of it that goes to traffic improvement scheme or something similar to that (QLD)…I think

  • +3 votes

    Build better cycling facilites so that cyclist arn't on the road.

    • +1 vote

      That's the most logical solution. If you have a problem with someone or something, you should always consider whether it's there fault, or if the system has been designed to cause conflict. In the present case there is very little thought for cyclists when it comes to that. My favorite example is bike lanes that cars can park in. If that doesn't say it all, what does

      • +5 votes

        Yeah… Nah.

        Cyclists offer a lot to the community. Reduced congestion. You can put hundreds more cyclists on a road than motorists. In inner city areas Nike lanes are faster than vehicle lanes and carry more people. Cycliing is a great way to maintain fitness and increase health, reduce obesity. Cycling reduces pollution and is much cheaper than driving which allows us to put more cash back I the community. Bicycles can park a dozen in a single car space, we woils the need to build ridiculously big car parks if more people rode bike instead of driving 2min to the shops. If more kids rode to school we would have half the traffic in the morning peak, see how much less traffic there is on school holidays? That is becuase too many people think the have to drive the kids to school.

        You seem to be confused and think that the only cyclists are those out in a group all clad in Lycra. There are so many more types of cyclist.

        We should be encouraging more people onto bikes, the more there are the better it is - for everyone except those selfish people that think that one bike holds up the whole city for hours by riding on the road.


    A few weeks ago, I was in an 80 zone on a Saturday morning around 10am and two cyclists were side by side chatting on one lane in a two lane road. Took them a good five seconds before they went behind each other and moved left after several cars were overtaking them..

    • +2 votes

      They were abiding the road rules. 2 abreast, 3 when a rider is overtaking 2 others.

    • +1 vote

      5 seconds!!!! OMG!!! They held up cars for 5 seconds!!! You'll never get that 5 seconds back!! I that happened to you every day for a year do you know how long you would miss? Do you have any idea how little difference 5 seconds makes to anything in life other than a hundred metre sprint? I get held up more in life by numnuts who take to long to move off from red lights becuase they are busy updating Faceache and don't look up.

    • +2 votes

      Daaaamn, you poor thing. Do you want a delay trophy for all your hardship?

  • +1 vote

    I don't believe for a second that you are worried about the welfare of cyclists. Your primary worry seems to be the difficulty involved in cleaning meat juice off the grill of your car should you run someone over, and all the other words you've inserted in your post are just there to disguise that underlying motivation.

    how important the road safety awareness is just to make sure that we all make home safely

    Thats gold.

  • -1 vote

    Rego and insurance for professional bike riders.
    anyone under 16 shouldnt need it but those that do it for recreation or day out with the family then at least a type of rego for the bikes.

    I am respecable for other road users but this is a hot topic for me especially when you drive around the spit bridge in sydney and you can see how vulgar the attitude is from bike riders.

    • +3 votes

      I'd love to pay rego on my bikes to shut up the whiners that think it is necessary. It would only cost the community a fortune becuase it would need to be so cheap that the system couldn't pay for itself. Do I need to register my 14yo sons bike becuase I chose to take it to the shops becuase my registered bike has a flat tyre? Can I transfer rego between bikes? Do I need to register my mountain bike that rides in the bush, but occasionally rides 200m to get from home to the bush? Do I need to register a bike that only rides on the bike paths on the weekends with the kids? Rego doesn't pay for anything but the rego system and everyone complains how much it costs to register a car already, how much would it cost to register a bike in your system?

      Part of the attitude from bike riders is because they consistently get close passed, cut off and abused on the roads. Yesterday I rode 27km to work. About 5km was on the roads and I got 4 close passes from drivers. The drivers could have easily moved over a metre to give me plenty of room but instead I felt in danger for doing absolutely nothing wrong. When bike riders feel in danger they often react with the fight response becuase there is no option for flight.


        You see im not in a position to be able to answer all the questions but unfortunately we needs bike riders to be responsible and be accountable for accidents if they cause it but also its common sense when there is a foot path use it.
        Really put it in simple terms if a bike rider hits a car regarless of whos at fault who is worse off? The biker or the driver of the car?

        I have had issues with bikers and no id or playing the blame game but when cops get involved or how dose one pay for damages becomes a difficult issue so if one was to get rego or insurance then the process is simple.

        • +1 vote

          Most bike riders are responsible and accountable. if a bike rider hits a car (and in 90% of cases the car hits the bike) the damages will be negligible, maybe some scratching on a panel. You are right, the bike rider will generally be much worse off in a crash..

          It is not common sense that when there is a footpath it should be used. I have found footpaths can be much more dangerous than the roads when riding at a reasonable pace. Too many driveways where vehicles may enter or leave at any time so you are better off on the road. And that is beside the point that in most states riding on the footpath is illegal if you are over 12.

        • +1 vote

          Most bike riders are responsible and accountable. if a bike rider hits a car (and in 90% of cases the car hits the bike) the damages will be negligible, maybe some scratching on a panel. You are right, the bike rider will generally be much worse off in a crash..

          It is not common sense that when there is a footpath it should be used. I have found footpaths can be much more dangerous than the roads when riding at a reasonable pace. Too many driveways where vehicles may enter or leave at any time so you are better off on the road. And that is beside the point that in most states riding on the footpath is illegal if you are over 12

        • -1 vote

          @Euphemistic: down voted twice, do I have to say it again?


        Take the full lane mate for safety, I hate idiots who think bike riders are skinny as paper! Im getting a gopro on my back to record regos of cars that tailgate me or pass me deadly close

    • +1 vote

      That seems fair, with cyclists receiving all the financial benefits that are available to motorists ie. tax deductions, employer contributions, 4c discount on water at petrol stations.


      I pay rego as a recreational rider/racer. Over $300 a year just to be a member of cycling queensland and to cover my public liability.

  • +1 vote

    The never-ending war between two parties who think they are superior to one another.

    Proof that ending religion won't stop people fighting over ridiculous notions.

  • +3 votes

    Firstly let me say I own a car, a motorcycle and several bicycles. And my weapon of choice is the bicycle.
    Secondly OP, you did the right thing.

    My thoughts on the matter is that traffic is alive and everyone has to learn the lingo to be able to communcate their intentions to each other. Indesicsion is the worst thing on the roads. One of the best ways is to get in their shoes. So I would encourage everyone to ride a bicycle or motorbike. Laws won't have the desired affect, and enforcing these laws can lead to paranoia and hesitation. Hesitation on the roads leads to unpredictable behavior such as sudden stops, swerving, losing balance and coming off the bike.

    My advice to everyone is just give everyone space. Not every driver is as courteous as the OP. But think about it if you see some (profanity) P plater tailgating you, and swapping lanes every 2 seconds to get 1 car space up at every light. You would give them a wide birth. You don't try and catch up to him and compete for the same gaps in traffic that he's looking for. If you're in a car and you have to slow down for 10-20 seconds? what's the big deal? you use a little more petrol to accellerate back to cruising speed by applying pressure with your right foot. When a cyclist loses momentum they might never get it back, it takes a lot of effort to get back to crusing speed.

    Pay attention to all the road users around you. If you're on a long straight road, you should identify the other drivers around you, and know their driving style. Likewise with cyclists and motorcyclists. Know what they're capable of and what they're likely to do.

    So I assume in the OPs video, that they were travelling together for some time. The Cyclist made the assumption that OP was a cautious driver and gave them enough space for them to do an illegal right turn from the left lane. OP made the assumption that the cyclist could change direction on a whim, and slowed down. Everybody is still alive. OP is a little pissed off.

    If OP was revving their engine, braking harshly, swerving, pumping loud tunes or abusive. Then the cyclist should've pulled over to the left, or tried to indicate early and rode even slower.

    Watch for 'body language' of a cyclist. See how hard they're working, some people like to cruise casually, others are pedalling furiously, hunched down in aero position, standing up and mashing down. Watch for their position in the lane. They might swerve out because a parked car up ahead is a potential dooring hazard, or the parked car is half in the cycling lane. Or there is a pedestrian in the way.

    Stay safe everyone.



    Im a human being (dad with two kids) on a bike also loving known as a cyclist!

    I own two cars AND i pay rego, insurance and have a drivers license
    i also choose to ride my bike to work to the city for health.

    Legally i can and do take up the full lane when I find it for my own safety so I dont get Doored and also driver who dont know the road rules. That is Take over with care and give 1-1.5 metres space that means u can cross to the over lane dotted or double lines. Take over a cyclist like how you would take over a car.

    Dont get aggro or stress, everyone wants to get to there point A to B safety. dont try something stupid or you risk KILLING a person with a family and getting sent to JAIL. Think about it!

    im getting a gopro camera to record any idiot that trys to kill me as evidence.
    If you have an issue with anyone call the cops and talk it out. dont shout abuse to people.

    Thanks all!


    My near misses

    1. Fat shiat cyclist thought he was lance armstrong, he was on my right avoiding a reversing car. That fat lard crashed into me, cut my eye and was taken in ambo for checkup.

    2 car speed through red light, the bastard didnt even tap his brakes. i shouted abuse at him and he goes "oh sorry I didnt see you" what a motherf…. he could of killed whole family of kids. now I ensure all cars are stopped at red before walking or riding

    3 old granny probably 80ish drived 10cm close to

    Me when trying to pass me. i shouted at her, shoild report that old bag to the rta! If she killed me she would
    Of been let off. Clearly they arent updated with latest road rules. Give me 1-2 metre you old fart!!

    4&5 aggro bastard who have mental issues. Doesnt matter how much fluro or flashing lights you have they will tailgate you, horn you, shout abuse and then stop and Basically looking for a fight and hurt u. These guys are

    Mental dont risk being stabbed by them. Usually utes, couriers, lebos, wogs, blue collar yobbos. Camera to record the motherf and rego will send them to court

    Good day! Chill out and look after everyone on the roads

      1. dont be a fat shiat cyclist yourself so you can overtake fat shiat cyclists quickly yourself. the quicker you do this the less trouble you will have.
      2. SMIDSY. happens all the time. its common even for motorbikes. having said that, i had a gopher driving on the road as i was reversing out of my driveway (very very slowly as i always do). absolutely could not see him at all. i checked the footpath , and was expecting bikes and cars on the road, but only saw him at the last second just before i was about to fully reverse out onto the road.
      3. or she doesnt care.
      4. &5. happens rarely. don't be initimidated but at the same time get out of their way. don't escalate if you can help it. even if you're in the right and when it gets recorded by a dashcam or otherwise, australia will blame you. because you're a cyclist of course.

      Take some of your own advice. You seem to be very angry in those situations.

      • +1 vote

        try riding a bike on the road and see how it feels when people harass, intimidate, and sometimes try to kill you. then come back here and talk about your 'anger'.


          I do ride on the roads, very regularly. My comment was directed at gumcheap. Getting all ragey then as his last line calling for everyone to chill.


          @Euphemistic: well he can do both at the same time. i dont see a problem with venting somewhere, it can be a form of therapy for some (after a while you learn its pointless arguing with people that already have their minds made up due to underlying prejudices and insecurities in the way of lycra). at least in some way he was trying to make people understand the threats and issues we have on the road.

          he's just listed some of the usual suspects in his 2nd last line, although wogs and lebos isn't necessarily an accurate generalisation. i find that feral anglo australians will also, and are capable of doing you more harm than people that come from countries (heritage or otherwise) that are more accepting towards cycling in general. upbringing is also a huge factor as well. gender is irrelevant. in fact, once behind a tonne+ hunk of metal with a gas pedal, literally anyone can be a hazard/murderer.


    Drivers should be allowed to drive however they like on the road. Please understand that all drivers are experts, regardless of the conditions. Before you disagree, rest assured that this is why drivers have licences. Indeed, it is because they are experts that there are no car accidents at all.

    In this case, it is the OP's right, nay duty, to drive menacingly behind the cyclist while also using his phone, at night.

    • +1 vote

      I'm not even going to attempt that first paragraph, but as for your last little snipe.

      to drive menacingly behind the cyclist

      Oh please. The only time OP was a little too close, was when the completely oblivious cyclist cut across OP's lane for the illegal turn. The cyclist did not have the right to "take" that right lane, at that time. OP, going on the presumption of two lanes, one occupied by the cyclist and one not, moved to overtake the cyclist in the free right lane. Perfectly appropriate move. That is why OP got too close, because the cyclist was in the wrong and occupied the wrong lane for an illegal turn.

      Even if that turn weren't illegal, that is not how you merge into a lane. Don't try and turn this around, as you people are so adept at doing, the cyclist is very clearly in the wrong.

      while also using his phone

      It's very obviously a dash-cam.

      at night.

      OP has the nerve to drive at night? The utter horror.

      Might want to get your facts straight before mouthing off, eh?

      • -1 vote

        It's very obviously a dash-cam.

        You're right, it is a dashcam. But the rest stands.

        The only time OP was a little too close

        Don't get me wrong, I was absolutely defending the driver's right to drive too close, on the grounds that by paying taxes, drivers quite literally own the road.

        Don't try and turn this around

        I would never do that. Wait, is that a bicycle wheel pun, or a steering wheel pun? I mean, it's funny either way.


          Boy, don't we have have the full spectrum of the society here!


          @KMeister: Luckily people who want to turn everything into a nanny state by licencing and regulating everything and everyone are in the minority.

          Image what society would be like if they got their way?

          Still, someone has to 'think of the children!'.

  • Top