[VIC] Does The Law on Cyclists Needs to Change?

Trying2SaveABuck on 09/12/2019 - 16:18
Last edited 09/12/2019 - 16:32 by 1 other user

I drove back from Lorne via the Great Ocean Road [GOR] yesterday and anyone who has driven on the GOR would know it is a little narrow and simply a long And winding road – with a great view of the sea.

Now I usually support Cyclists and I have ridden my bike to work in the past etc but the GOR and roads like it should not be for cyclists or at least not for cyclists riding double file.

I have to use this example as probably the dumbest women I have ever seen – two women ridding double file more interested in having a chat then actually riding or trying to right straight, swerving all over the shop on the GOR – now I slow down to make sure I don’t hit anyone but a number of drivers don’t and I know the law is on the side cyclists riding double file but it really shouldn’t be on certain roads a car missed this rider by no more then a few centimetres simply because she needs to ‘chat’
Im not saying all roads but certain roads would you change the law too:

Poll Options

  • 287
    Some popular roads should ban cyclists
  • 77
    The law should force cyclists should ride single file on certain roads
  • 83
    The law is fine drivers need to change
  • 7
    I think the law needs to change but I don’t know what the solution is
  • 96
    You cant stop stupidity there will always be stupid drivers and cyclists
Automotive

Comments

        • p1 ama on 10/12/2019 - 20:07
          +2

          99% of traffic jams are as a result of too many cars on the road.

          You're talking about a different issue. We're discussing cyclists going at 25km/h on a narrow road holding up every car behind them.

          • Thazza on 11/12/2019 - 09:21

            @p1 ama: No, not really.

            A bike will hold you like, what? a few minutes depending on the length of the road?

            Cars on the other hand. They impede traffic more often than not.

            Anecdotally, as both a driver and a cyclist, I'm held up mroe by cars, especially in peak hour traffic, than cyclist.

  • Cyrup on 09/12/2019 - 22:52
    +2

    I think both should just be respectful of each other’s space and needs. Unfortunately common sense is not common knowledge.

    As a cyclist, I can say a lot of the road laws for us aren’t made explicitly clear like they are when you start driving. This could be improved.

  • bobbified on 09/12/2019 - 22:57
    +4

    A bit of common sense and courtesy from everyone would solve a lot of these problems.

  • [Deactivated] on 10/12/2019 - 07:26
    +5

    Maybe single lane roads should be single file, the road is there to share, not blocked by cyclists.

    • Euphemistic on 10/12/2019 - 08:13
      -2

      So how about sharing it with the cyclists. They aren’t blocking the road, they are using it.

      • [Deactivated] on 10/12/2019 - 09:49
        +7

        if they are 2 abreast going 20-30kph on a 100kph road they are blocking it. sharing means everyone gets a turn, not everyone gets held up by 2 people.it seems like motorists need to share with cyclists but cyclists dont need to share with motorists.

        • Euphemistic on 10/12/2019 - 11:13
          +1

          And is a tractor or backhoe blocking the road when doing 20-30 in a 100 zone, or is ok just because it happens to be going to do some work and not just out for recreation - which coincidentally many drivers are also doing?

          • [Deactivated] on 11/12/2019 - 07:31
            +3

            @Euphemistic: you can be fined for driving abnormally slowly and driving distracted, why not fine cyclists for dawdling and wobbling about having a chat. save the chat for the coffee shop. and tractors/backhoes usually move early of late in the day, they dont hold up the general public so much.

            • 2ndeffort on 11/12/2019 - 17:48

              @[Deactivated]: Most recreational cyclists are out early in the day, certainly the large club rides. latest club ride I've been on started at around 7:30am, many are off around 6-6:30 am for the exact same reason, we want to get around before cars become an issue.

        • smartazz104 on 10/12/2019 - 18:19

          So instead of 2 abreast, you want just one cyclist blocking your way then? Or you think you will overtake every cyclist you come across on the GOR?

          • [Deactivated] on 11/12/2019 - 07:32

            @smartazz104: there is a greater distance between car and rider if they are single file and being overtaken. safer for all involved.

            • Nuggets on 12/12/2019 - 00:42
              +1

              @[Deactivated]: Assuming we're talking about a narrow road, the car should be fully in the other lane during the overtake, at which point it's actually safer if two cyclists are riding two abreast as the overtake will be completed sooner. The distance from the second rider is certainly big enough.

  • [Deactivated] on 10/12/2019 - 08:13
    +5

    Just adding fuel to the fire, I can’t stand when cyclists refuse to use cycle paths or cycle lanes adjacent to the main road and ride in a lane.

    I also think there is a big difference between people who regularly cycle, have road bikes and can hold their own. As opposed to ‘hobby’ cycles like the OP was talking about who make decisions that aren’t always appropriate.

    • Euphemistic on 10/12/2019 - 08:17
      +2

      Just adding fuel to the fire, I can’t stand when cyclists refuse to use cycle paths or cycle lanes adjacent to the main road and ride in a lane.

      Many cycle paths are not suitable to use. they go in the wrong direction, have many intersections where you need to stop, crowded with pedestrians who complain when you ride past etc. riding the road is legal, it is also more efficient at times.

      • smartazz104 on 10/12/2019 - 18:19
        +2

        TBF, half of those problems apply to actual roads as well.

        • Euphemistic on 10/12/2019 - 19:03
          +2

          When you are in a car it’s just a bit annoying, you quickly recover by pressing an accelerator and maybe a clutch a few times. When you are on a push bike starting our after stopping takes out a lot more energy than cruising along.

      • p1 ama on 10/12/2019 - 20:09
        +4

        crowded with pedestrians who complain when you ride past etc.

        This is literally how car drivers feel about cyclists…

        • 2ndeffort on 13/12/2019 - 14:01

          almost all cyclists are also car drivers, we know how it feels for both because we are both

      • [Deactivated] on 11/12/2019 - 09:08

        A general observation, again I care about the odd competent cyclist getting where they need to go or someone with experience riding on the road. My issue is with suburban and inner suburban areas where there may be a suitable cycle route and the cyclist rides in a single lane (with cars parked on the side) and hold up traffic during very busy periods and ducking and weaving unsafely. The rental bikes used by inexperienced road riders in Melbourne are a nightmare in the CBD.

        • Euphemistic on 11/12/2019 - 09:37
          +1

          The rental bikes used by inexperienced road riders in Melbourne are a nightmare in the CBD.

          I think you’ll find that in the CBD it’s the number of cars that is the bigger problem.

          • [Deactivated] on 12/12/2019 - 08:14

            @Euphemistic: The odd driver from O/S not knowing the road rules in a car an be a problem, yes. Most people who drive in the CBD do so because they are comfortable. The number of inexperienced cyclists, especially in summer is a major issue.

            • Euphemistic on 12/12/2019 - 08:38
              -1

              @[Deactivated]: Think you missed the point. It is the sheer number of cars that holds up the traffic, they are the traffic. Taking away cyclists would not make any significant improvement to traffic flow in the CBD given the average speeds are so slow anyway - because of the number of cars.

              Take away cars and put everyone on bikes, terms, buses etc and you’d likely decrease delay times in the CBD significantly.

  • MementoMori on 10/12/2019 - 09:37
    +2

    The REAL problem is the INFRASTRUCTURE.

    If we had bike lanes like Europe and Japan (joined to the footpath between the walkway and the parked cars, not on the road) we wouldn't have this issue.

    I don't know which government idiot thought its safer to mix cars and cyclists than cyclists with pedestrians.

    E.g. https://www.bikechaser.com.au/blog/wp-content/uploads/2017/0…

    • Thazza on 10/12/2019 - 14:33

      They have those types of roads in Sydney CBD.

      You often have litter on the ground on those paths and you have pedestrians who think that they can walk on it .. or jump out onto it without looking.

      Unfortunately, it's both infrastructure and the mentality of Australians.

      • smartazz104 on 10/12/2019 - 18:20

        So like most issue, the problem is humans.

  • [Deactivated] on 10/12/2019 - 10:12
    +5

    So you see one incompetent cyclist on the Great Ocean Road and so it follows that all cyclists should be banned from the GOR?

    If you followed that logic you'd ban people from driving cars on all roads based on the utter stupidity and dangerous driving that happens on roads by some motorists every day.

    Most motorists will have witnessed dangerous, selfish, reckless driving by their fellow motorists - but they don't immediately extrapolate that to all drivers.

    It's not really very helpful to judge the actions of a large, diverse group of people (i.e. cyclists, or motorists) by the actions of an occasional outlier.

    Just as an aside, the narrower and windier a road the safer it is for cyclists generally. Motorists tend to over estimate their competence in handling cars and y'know, it's not unknown for the more adventurous to drive to or exceed the speed limit. More challenging road conditions tend to force motorists to take a little more care navigating the road conditions and consequently be a little more mindful of sharing the road with other road users.

    Anecdotally, it can feel a little safer riding on a road like GOR with it's winds but without a bike lane, than a straight road with a 70kmh-100kmh speed limit (with bike lane). Anecdotally as well, most motorists seem genuinely ok with the concept of sharing the road and being a little patient with the slower speeds of cyclists.

    Zooming out a little more - it's not going to kill you to slow down a little to pass a cyclist safely. Although you might very well kill someone if you are impatient, or probably more likely, inattentive. Getting frustrated with cyclists slowing you down is akin to getting angry with corners for slowing you down, roundabouts, elderly drivers, L platers, traffic lights - it's all part of the motoring landscape and if you're chill it's not that hard to take it into your stride.

    Anyway, feel quite strongly about this as a friend of mine riding his bike was killed by an inattentive/reckless driver this time last year:

    https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/drunk-driver-hit…

    • Trying2SaveABuck on 10/12/2019 - 10:34
      +4

      Feel for your mate who died but bad drivers will always be on the road and if you ask me these people who be charged with murder and never allowed to drive again a car again.

      But you either missed the point or didn’t read the post I put up.

      Not saying that cyclist should be banned but the law allowing cyclist to ride on all the same roads at motor vehicles and the laws about ridding double file on certain roads ala the GOR need to be looked at.

      I like riding my bike to work but I am not dumb enough to risk my life riding double file on a narrow dangerous road. My point was some people are stupid and because the law allows them to do something they don’t realize they shouldn’t do it.

      Cycling on roads like the GOR also require a certain level of fitness this individual if you ask me didn’t have that why she starting veering all over the shop. Unlike driving a car which doesn’t require a great deal of effort.

      If you ask me there needs to be better infrastructure for cyclists and they should only be able to ride double file on certified bike tracks or when roads are closed for riding events.

      However Cyclist don’t pay registration and if you ask me this needs to change a small fee that goes towards improving bike paths and provided insurance (like TAC) would improve the problem in the long term. But Cyclist have profusely argued against it which basically means there is no money for bike infrastructure and if you ask me they don’t deserve infrastructure if they don’t want to pay for it. That is just my opinion but I was curious to see how other people felt.

      Ill leave you with this if talking on a mobile whilst driving a car is dangerous talking whilst riding a bike when cars are zooming past you is far more dangerous - so why do we allow it?

      • [Deactivated] on 10/12/2019 - 11:10
        +7

        Thanks for the response. We're probably broad in agreement, but just disagree about implementation.

        I think I did understand you correctly in thinking that bikes should be banned from the GOR. There are definitely roads where bikes are banned, certain freeways for example, and I wouldn't disagree with that. But I guess I object to a blanket ban on the GOR due to one obviously unfit individual who wasn't up to it.

        However, I think the thing about the GOR is that what people perceive as a infrastructure problem (road is too narrow, too dangerous and therefore unsuitable for bikes) can often be conceived of as an cultural issue (bikes don't belong here). I've been very fortunate to have cycled in the south of France along the road that links Nice to Monaco and it's not dissimilar to the GOR. But the mentality is totally different. Because motorists there accept cyclists as part of the landscape they don't seem to get impatient with cyclists. They also do have a legal system that assumes the fault lies with a motorists in a cycle v motorist collision, which tends to make motorists more cautious.

        Mind you I'm not going to insist on my rights if it leaves me or someone else dead. I try to be considerate of cyclists when I"m a motorist, and considerate of motorists when I'm a cyclist. So I'm just interest in unpacking some of the thinking behind your original post.

        The rego payment issue is a furphy though. Car registration doesn't pay for roads. We all pay for roads as taxpayers. I'm a cyclist, I'm a taxpayer. I'm happy to pay for roads for motorists to use, for me to use, for buses, delivery trucks to use etc. The 'user pays' mentality that has infected our culture and society tends to distort things. We all pay for things to improve society as a whole.

        There is plenty of money available for cycling infrastructure. It's just a lack of priority at the moment. Building bike lanes and separate infrastructure is cheap af compared to tunelling freeways (which get clogged up again within a few years). I reckon it's getting better in melbourne. The more they build the more of a viable network they create. Perhaps in the near future we will have the infrastructure that cyclists deserve and which will in turn get more people out of their cars and riding bikes.

        I"m not sure I get the equivalence of your last example. Cigarettes are legal too, they are dangerous and we allow that. If motorists wore helmets it would probably reduce injuries but we don't compel them to. Safety and laws relating to safety are always intended to strike a balance between public safety and convenience, although we may not always agree with how that balance is struck.

      • [Deactivated] on 10/12/2019 - 11:16

        Oh the point I was trying to make with the banning of cars was:
        - if you say dodgy cyclist on GOR endangers herself and others, and road is unsuitable, therefore cyclists should be banned on GOR

        it follows

        • because we see dodgy motorists endangering themselves and other motorists/pedestrians/cyclists on every bloody road in melbourne, we should consider banning all cars on these roads.

        I make the second argument to illustrate what I think are some problems in the first.

        Thanks for the discussion anyway.

      • [Deactivated] on 10/12/2019 - 11:16

        dupe

      • Thazza on 10/12/2019 - 15:10

        Ill leave you with this if talking on a mobile whilst driving a car is dangerous talking whilst riding a bike when cars are zooming past you is far more dangerous - so why do we allow it?

        Talking on a mobile phone, if not on P's or L's is not illegal if you're using hands free.

        The main issue is when your eyes are diverted from the road to your phone in order to reply to messages or checking social media. That's the danger of mobile phones - not the inherent nature of being able to call and talk to people (despite being somewhat distracting for drivers).

        • Trying2SaveABuck on 10/12/2019 - 15:14

          If you are caught touching your mobile you will be fined upto $1000 in some states and losing 3-4 d points

          Nothing to do with looking at the phone you could have your point hooked up to your phone holder be in a parked position with the engine running the police can still fine you….

        • gromit on 10/12/2019 - 18:37

          Actually a lot of studies show that simply the distraction of talking on the phone even hands free is inherently dangerous as the distraction reduces your ability to respond to whats happening outside your car, especially if the conversation evokes visual imagery

      • [Deactivated] on 11/12/2019 - 17:14

        In group rides, while most of the chat is just friendly chat people also alert each other to obstacles in the road to keep everyone safe as things like pot holes may not be easily visible to someone not at the front of the group. Banning talking under the guise of safety seems counter productive.

        Also mobile phone use has distractions outside of just the talking. While the talking itself is potentially distracting and may increase accidents, the not looking at the road part, or holding onto the device part is far more of an issue. Hence why the latter is banned, and speaking isn't.

  • OzHunterNSW on 10/12/2019 - 10:19
    +1

    Unfortunately they have as much right to use the road as you do. Riding double file would present itself as being of a more safety issue.
    Notice how you noticed them… notice how you had to slow down… notice how you gave them space.

    Didn't their "chats" suggest to you that you should maybe relax and smell the roses?

    Otherwise, I am sure you were just dying to hoon into the sweeping bends.

  • superdarkhumour on 10/12/2019 - 11:24

    What do you think of a feature on GoogleMaps or Waze to mark cyclists?

    Will this increase cyclists' safety and influence drivers on which route to take?

    • Euphemistic on 10/12/2019 - 11:28

      Just makes drivers more likely to be playing with a phone- bad idea.

      How about looking out the windows instead?

      • superdarkhumour on 10/12/2019 - 11:59

        Actually I was thinking more like something where the cyclists share their location, similar to some buses in Sydney where you can see where they are live.

        But I agree, less phone usage while driving must be a priority.

        • DashCam AKA Rolts on 10/12/2019 - 19:18

          In the Paris Dakar rally, cars, trucks and motorcycles use a devise to alert riders/drivers to motorcycle ahead/vehicle behind. Maybe we need this for cyclists/vehicles.

    • Trying2SaveABuck on 10/12/2019 - 20:20

      I think it would be a good idea Superdarkhumour

      • Euphemistic on 10/12/2019 - 20:53

        Tracking for motor vehicles too then?

        • p1 ama on 12/12/2019 - 01:58

          That already exists, if you go onto Google Maps you can see what the traffic is like for cars.

    • prinsenhof on 11/12/2019 - 00:02

      ohhh good lord no. It would be like shooting fish in a barrel.

      I regularly commute to work, I actually know the cars who actively try and run me off the road for fun. If they had an app which could track me, i wouldn't stand a chance.

  • seraphim2017 on 10/12/2019 - 11:44
    +10

    The bar for passing the driving test should be significantly higher. I cycle to commute and am a car driver as well, it's not hard to be a considerate cyclist, or a considerate driver. It's very hard to significantly injure someone using a 10kg bike, and very easy to murder someone by being a self indulgent onanist in a 2 tonne machine.

    Cycle as if even other cyclists don't care, because they very often don't. What saddens me is that people who think they're decent 'salt of the earth' types who 'tell it like it is' are usually those scumbags on channel 7 being sh1tty neighbhours and driving like A holes because it's their right.

    Cyclists have parents, partners, kids, and are generally (certainly when commuting) doing other motorists a favour by reducing traffic a bit, it's not hard to be a little bit thoughtful. I'd hope most OzBargainers wouldn't chose to just walk up to someone randomly on the street and murder them, so it is strange the same rules don't apply when in a car. Stand a cyclist and a driver (often the same thing) side by side and there's no difference at all. Imagine explaining to your kids why you chose to take their friends/dads life, or how you'd feel if your loved one was mown down by a drunk/careless/speeding/arrogant driver? Accidents are almost non existent, incidents happen because of someones action or inaction. Almost all blow outs are due to lack of servicing or old tyres, very few are product failure. It's always a choice, make good ones.

    Drive safe, cycle safe, get home safe. And if you want to race, pay for a drag strip and go nuts!

    • Cheap Steve on 10/12/2019 - 13:58

      I had to google "onanist"… wish I didn't.

    • Euphemistic on 10/12/2019 - 15:44
      +1

      it's not hard to be a considerate cyclist, or a considerate driver.

      This. So much this

    • gromit on 10/12/2019 - 18:46

      Back in the early 80's my primary school required students to pass a riding test to be allowed to ride to school, effectively giving you a bicycle license. I wish the same applied to riders today. While I use my bike far less than I probably should I would happily get a license that tested the safety awareness. I am constantly appalled at the some of the bike riders around here (and drivers for that matter), Canberra seems to have some of the worst of both. Also remember, Drivers also have parents, family etc too and hitting a irresponsible rider will scar them for life. Hell it took me months to get over watching someone else clean up a rider that went straight through a roadabout without giving way (and I consider that suicide on the part of the rider, the poor driver was in tears and I imagine he will probably never get over it).

      basically both drivers and riders need to take more care, riding like an a hole is just as much a problem as driving like one.

    • p1 ama on 12/12/2019 - 02:10

      it's not hard to be a considerate cyclist, or a considerate driver.

      Except this is a fairy tale. No amount of "consideration" changes the fact that cars and bicycles are not the same thing and do not belong together. No amount of "consideration" will change the fact that when a cyclist falls on the road, they will be collected by an oncoming car who can do nothing to stop in time even if they wanted to.

      This might not sit well with some people, but roads are designed for and built for motor vehicles (e.g. cars, trucks…etc.) not for bicycles or tractors or bulldozers or whatever. Yes, there are cases where those things are on the road, but they are very rare exceptions.

      The only solution that will make cycling safe is to separate motor vehicle traffic and cycle traffic and minimise the number of times they need to come into contact. Not too different to how we have footpaths for walking. This whole notion that as long as we're all nice to each other, everything will work out is just not true.

  • Gnosh on 10/12/2019 - 13:55
    -1

    Need more full-stops, OP.

  • rave75 on 10/12/2019 - 15:02

    Let the Darwin Law do its job.

  • Andremelb on 10/12/2019 - 15:24
    +2

    Remember too that this road has signs in Chinese and frequently reminds you on which side of the road to drive on. So many tourists have caused accidents on this road that they've put up these signs. If I was cycling this road, I'd be very cautious!

  • bargainman000 on 10/12/2019 - 16:00
    -5

    1. Roads were created for transport and commuting from one place to another.

    2. Cyclists if they fit the above are fine.

    3. Roads were not created as personal gyms to provide exercise.

    4. If the above is the case then why can't I put my weight bench out on the road and work out there?

    Get a life lycra cyclists. Use cycles for travelling or get a gym membership instead.

    • raisinberry777 on 10/12/2019 - 16:31

      Travel mode can't be separated by purpose. Should we only allow people to use cars to commute to a workplace, but not to socialise? Obviously, this would be impractical. If you're allowing a mode of transport, then you have to allow it for any purpose.

      • bargainman000 on 10/12/2019 - 17:05

        Travelling by bike to a place to socialize is fine by me.

        Using the roads for a form of exercise is not.

        Ok. Let's put it another way. Picture Sydney's roads if 3 million people decided to exercise every morning by cycling. Yep you've got it, the city would grind to a standstill. Take it a step further and I could imagine the Australia's economy grinding to a halt if everybody used roads to exercise.

        Cycling is so 1800s.

        • Euphemistic on 10/12/2019 - 19:07

          Cycling for exercise typically happens at times when commuting isn’t the bulk of transport, early mornings and weekends. Typically during those times you have a bulk of drivers doing so for recreation. If you want to stop cyclists using the rods for exercise you’ll have to stop drivers from going on holidays and off to weekend sport.

  • dfr on 10/12/2019 - 16:10
    +3

    Can we add another option to list, ban everything except motorbikes?

    • smartazz104 on 10/12/2019 - 18:22

      Nah ban everything except me.

  • bargainman000 on 10/12/2019 - 17:10
    +1

    How about horses? Is it ok if most of the 5 million people in Sydney decided to ride horses on our roads? It's not illegal afterall.

    I'm pretty sure that the government would SOON clamp down on that.

    So why is cycling any different?

    Cyclists slow down road travel for other road users. But hey let them carry on screaming for road user rights but please don't ask them to pay no tax or rego.

    • Euphemistic on 10/12/2019 - 19:10
      +5

      Think about your recent driving experience. How often were you actually slowed down by a cyclist compared to how often you slowed down for other motorised traffic. Include red lights in that because the only reason we have traffic lights is because there is too much motorised traffic.

      If you want to talk about being slowed down THE BIGGEST problem on our roads is too many cars.

      • TheBird on 11/12/2019 - 21:57

        A majority issue I have (at least on my commute - mostly freeway) are vehicles who are slow (often dangerously slow), and erraticly either sweaving or moving in front of oncomming vehicles (often without indicating). It's the speed difference that I see is dangerous, but it's also the reaction (often overreaction) others drivers have to this speed difference.

        I used to work where I used to pass more cyclists. Again, the difference in speed (sometimes in the order of 50 to 60km/h), erratic swerving/moving in front of vehicles, often without indicating… but on that commute, I'm convinced most of the slow down… the traffic jams… were caused by those who had little clue on how to drive (or cycle) and their obligations and responsibilities when on the road. Car, cyclists alike… but mostly Utes and SUVs.

    • [Deactivated] on 11/12/2019 - 18:29
      +2

      Did I miss the memo where people who ride a bike are exempt from paying tax? I better call the ATO and demand all my money back. Sweet!

  • SlickMick on 10/12/2019 - 17:53
    -2

    Where is the poll option for cyclists should only be allowed on bike lanes. Never on a road.

    • fossilfuel on 10/12/2019 - 18:09
      +2

      What to do when there's a road and footpath but no bike lane? Ride on the nature strip?

      • SlickMick on 10/12/2019 - 18:18
        -4

        Not ride, but dismount and walk your bicycle until you are on bike lane.

        Those signs on motorways "no bikes, horses" etc should apply to all roads.
        I'm happy for someone in such a category to apply for a temporary permit, for a fee, so long as sufficient safety strategies are in place eg you'll need to hire pilot vehicles front and rear to warn other traffic.

        • fossilfuel on 10/12/2019 - 18:37
          +3

          Yeah and what happens if the closest bike lane is 5, 10 or 20km away? Dismount and walk until you reach it? Bike lanes are non-existant in Sydney.

          • SlickMick on 10/12/2019 - 18:40
            -8

            @fossilfuel: 3 options off the top of my head:
            1) Move to a bike-friendly neighbourhood of a bike-friendly town;
            2) Campaign your local member of parliament; or
            3) stop riding

            • Euphemistic on 10/12/2019 - 19:12
              +4

              @SlickMick: Better option to ban cars. We’ll get significantly better air quality and decreased health problems as a result.

              • bargainman000 on 10/12/2019 - 19:16
                -3

                @Euphemistic: Without cars Australia would be worse that a 3rd world country and you wouldn't be sitting on Ozbargain fishing for deals as there would be NO DEALS.

            • [Deactivated] on 11/12/2019 - 18:27
              +1

              @SlickMick: 1) You know a lot of people ride because its affordable transport right? Not everyone is on a $10,000 carbon fibre aero bike. Telling the poor that they should move house because you're an inpatient and shitty driver is pretty pathetic.
              2) Keen cyclists do.
              3) Get stuffed.

              What you're advocating for is as a motorist, that you want to put more cars on the road and make your traffic over all worse for everyone, because occasionally you are inconvenienced by a few seconds. Awesome! More grid lock. I love taking an hour to drive home!

              You may say that's not true, since you just want cyclists ONLY on cycle lanes not banned completely, but unless you want to start all our urban design again from scratch that's an impossibility. Cyclists will always need to ride on roads. When I ride to work I have to do about 3 blocks on the road before its a lovely river side ride for the next ~30mins. But instead you'd prefer to make that impossible for me, and add to the grid lock instead.

              It already takes me less time to ride home from work than to drive because of the shitty Brisbane traffic. Lets not make the traffic worse please.

              • SlickMick on 11/12/2019 - 21:47
                -3

                @[Deactivated]: how would putting riders back in cars make traffic worse? Bikes are a huge nuisance, cars not so much.

                • Euphemistic on 12/12/2019 - 05:38
                  +4

                  @SlickMick: The whole reason we have traffic jams is cars. More cars means more delays.

                  Ever noticed how much easier it is to get to work during school holidays? That’s because there are less cars. Ever noticed that Saturday morning traffic is different to the weekdays? That’s because there are more cars travelling in all different directions, unlike weekdays when it is mostly going in a similar direction and easier to manage with traffic lights.

                  • SlickMick on 12/12/2019 - 06:33
                    -2

                    @Euphemistic: yes, traffic jams and bikes are a pain. Today we're addressing the latter. Why are you trying to link them? Taking bikes off the road, even replacing them with cars, would not make traffic worse.

                    • Euphemistic on 12/12/2019 - 07:04
                      +2

                      @SlickMick: You can’t talk about traffic problems and only mention one part in isolation. Yes, we are talking about bikes but taking them off the roads and replacing with cars would only increase traffic problems.

                      Taking cars off the roads and replacing them with bicycles en mass would improve traffic conditions.

                • Thazza on 12/12/2019 - 11:48
                  +2

                  @SlickMick: How are bikes a nuisance, and cars not so much?

                  Because you're inconvenienced for a minute at most while trying to overtake a cyclist?

                  • SlickMick on 14/12/2019 - 07:42
                    -1

                    @Thazza: yes.

                    Saw a classic yesterday: a bike crossing a big roundabout… A car enters from right, and can't exit because has to give way to bike. He has totally choked that side of roundabout, then first car that wants to come around also gets blocked, now the entire roundabout is in gridlock expect for the bike. It would only take a bike every 5 minutes to totally shutdown this road network.

                    • timmypete on 14/12/2019 - 10:04

                      @SlickMick:

                      A car enters from right, and can't exit because has to give way to bike

                      The car here is blocking traffic because they didn't understand or follow the roundabout rules for Queensland.

                      You must give way to any vehicles already on the roundabout before you enter, to ensure the roundabout remains clear for others with a clear path forward. Equally, the bike can't enter until the other traffic within clears.

                      This video at 0:34 shows the rule more clearly (bike is car B) noting that the obligations on Car A/Car B don't change if you swap with a truck/bike/horse carriage/motorbike/other vehicle.

                      This isn't a stab at slickmick, but shows even drivers who presumably went through a full licencing process and pay rego don't understand or follow the rules. I think a bike rider registration scheme would face similar issues. Both vehicle categories would probably benefit from an information campaign or more rigorous enforcement of the day to day rules that are ignored or misunderstood (giving way, roundabouts, blocking intersections, orange lights).

                      • SlickMick on 14/12/2019 - 18:40
                        -1

                        @timmypete: It's not a misunderstanding, it's the danger of allowing bikes on a road with large roundabouts. The bike entered the roundabout long before this car approached. There was no way he could have known that some time previous there was a bike entering the roundabout, and would still be there some time later. Think about where you check who to give way too - you can't do an assessment of the entire roundabout or you'd never enter.
                        So what happens in real world, the car encounters the bike when he's already smack in the middle of the roundabout.

                        • Euphemistic on 14/12/2019 - 19:16

                          @SlickMick: If the roundabout is that big it isn’t hard to enter and wait behind vehicles in front. In my experience bicycles often get around roundabout as quick as cars, quicker than them in small roundabouts.

                        • Thazza on 16/12/2019 - 15:16
                          +1

                          @SlickMick: It's called driving to the conditions. If it's not safe to enter - then the cars shouldn't enter the round-about.

                          I don't understand how the bike would have blocked the roundabout - unless you were overexaggerating the effect that they had (highly possible).

                          But irrespective - cars would and could also block roundabouts as well. So that is a moot point.

                          And again, i'll re-iterate the same point.

                          How long did the cyclist 'choke up the point'. I'm sure once the cyclist exited the roundabout - the over-eager motorists would be on their merry day without any further thought.

  • BhanuL on 10/12/2019 - 19:54

    Aus road rules rock. Aus road users suck.

  • cynicalmike on 10/12/2019 - 22:49

    can the moderators please give me unlimited negative votes just for this thread? please? so many feral opinions. i just can't seem to pick the worst 5.

  • cashless on 10/12/2019 - 23:42

    Time to make GOR a cycle lane only methinks

  • ieatcrackers on 11/12/2019 - 00:10

    Some roads have signs advising cyclists to ride in single file for certain areas.

  • prinsenhof on 11/12/2019 - 00:56
    +4

    "a car missed this rider by no more then a few centimetres simply because she needs to ‘chat’"

    No, they got impatient and passed when it wasn't safe to do so.

    You see cars are king. If it was another car then they would need to perform an overtaking manoeuvre. This needs line of sight on the opposite side of the road and unbroken white lines. But in the case of a cyclist, its more socially acceptable to lane share instead, even if a group of cyclists have decided against this by riding double file.

    They probably missed them by a few centimetres because they enjoy running cyclists off the road, like a minority of drivers often do. Otherwise a car must have came, so they needed to share the lane.

    If the driver "almost" rear ended the cyclist, then speed comes into it and this post would make sense, but this scenario is plain and simple road rage or point collecting.

  • Kranbone on 11/12/2019 - 01:07

    There needs to be a common sense law put in place.

    • Euphemistic on 11/12/2019 - 09:03
      +1

      We have laws because common sense has deleted.

  • SpendLess on 11/12/2019 - 09:49
    +1

    cycling is so popular now there really should be some type of registration paid where the money is used to make better and safer paths for cyclists.
    I dont cycle but fish alot. The fishing license we pay is getting used for better fishing facilities, breeding programs to increase fish stocks, jetties and fishing platforms, netting license buy backs

    • Euphemistic on 11/12/2019 - 11:00
      +5
      1. Registration of cars doesn’t pay for roads.
      2. Any registration cost would need to be low enough to not penalise those who have limited income. Cycling should be accessible to all
      3. A low registration fee would be likely chewed up in the admin costs and provide negligible benefit to infrastructure.
      4. The fishing licence system doesn’t raise much revenue and is largely a system to try to educate fishers about size and bag limits to prevent overfishing.
      • p1 ama on 13/12/2019 - 17:17

        The fishing licence system doesn’t raise much revenue and is largely a system to try to educate fishers about size and bag limits to prevent overfishing.

        I'm not even in favour of bicycle registration or licensing, but this seems like an argument against your point?

        If fisherman need to be educated about these issues pertaining to fishing, why do cyclists not need to be educated about road rules and safety?

        • Euphemistic on 13/12/2019 - 17:46
          +1

          That is a valid point. Kids are educated about road rules in schools. Most cyclists have a drivers licence (or had one). It’s hardly necessary.

          On the whole I’d rather see regular retesting of drivers on road rules, like at licence renewal, before any cycle licensing. Drivers are the real danger on our roads. Those ignorant of the laws are often found on this forum. Cyclists, despite breaking a fair few rules at times do so knowing that there is not much protection from a plastic bucket on your head and generally won’t do stuff that risks crashing, especially into motor vehicles.

          And yes, I recognise that the perception out in radio shock kick land is that cyclists are a menace and never do anything right, but those types are definitely the tiny minority in the world of bicycle riders, just the ones that are noticed most often. Law abiding cyclists just aren’t noticed - to the detriment of safer cycling.

          • p1 ama on 13/12/2019 - 22:00

            @Euphemistic:

            Kids are educated about road rules in schools.

            Not to any real degree besides looking both ways before crossing the road.

            Most cyclists have a drivers licence (or had one). It’s hardly necessary.

            So why did I have to get a motorbike license when I already had a car license?

            On the whole I’d rather see regular retesting of drivers on road rules, like at licence renewal, before any cycle licensing. Drivers are the real danger on our roads. Those ignorant of the laws are often found on this forum.

            I agree loosely, but I think knowledge of the road rules beyond some basics actually has very little to do with whether you're likely or not to kill someone.

            And yes, I recognise that the perception out in radio shock kick land is that cyclists are a menace and never do anything right, but those types are definitely the tiny minority in the world of bicycle riders, just the ones that are noticed most often. Law abiding cyclists just aren’t noticed - to the detriment of safer cycling.

            This is all besides the point really. Let's be honest, drivers hate cyclists because they're slow. That's just what it is. Any rationale of cyclists doing dumb sh1t is just a facade to hide the fact that they don't like having to sit behind a cyclist.

  • cloudstrife on 11/12/2019 - 10:13

    Cyclist rides into the side of my car and scratches it when I'm stopped at a traffic light (he was trying to get to the front, riding in between two cars). He just rides off and I couldn't get to him without leaving my car in the middle of the road and chasing him…

    They need some form of registration, even if its not paid for as right now there's no accountability for them.

    Now I gotta get that scratch fixed at my own cost on a fairly new car :(

    • Trying2SaveABuck on 11/12/2019 - 10:24
      -7

      I would of prob ran the bastard over

      • [Deactivated] on 11/12/2019 - 18:15

        You wonder why cyclists get a bit shitty in these threads when they're full of people joking about murdering them.

        • Trying2SaveABuck on 11/12/2019 - 19:34
          +2

          Cyclist or motorist you hit someones car you stop leave a note

          dont vandalise people shit and do a runner

          • devpress on 12/12/2019 - 10:21

            @Trying2SaveABuck: That was a crummy move by the cyclist for sure. But you would advocate physically injuring - with the potential of killing someone - over a scratch?

            What has happened to society that people like you have lost total sense of the value of human life?

            There will always be arseholes on the road (and in life) but advocating for people to be hurt is not the right outlet

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join