shaky Posted March 24, 2014 Posted March 24, 2014 If it is the case a bicycle is a road vehicle the same as a car, bus, truck or motorcycle, then you cannot expect as a cyclist or driver to be able to share the same piece of lane as another vehicle. The instance of the lady on the bike in Melbourne would not have occurred if this was the case. Unless she broke the law and passed the vehicle in front of her in the same lane. Same as a motorcyclist driving along a multilane road passing two cars, sitting in lanes next to each other, by going between them. Illegal! This should be the case for all road vehicles. If you are to pass a slower one, you need to move lanes, when it is safe to do so.
proftournesol Posted March 24, 2014 Posted March 24, 2014 What you're picking up on here Proft is the pervasive reality that a large number of us (more than we'd like to admit) are very selfish and have a sense of entitlement on the road (whether we're talking about cyclists or drivers). It's not just about cars and bikes sharing the road...it's about the way we have become in the major cities of this country. Why is that? Is it because of a growing gap between rich and poor? higher density housing and higher percentages of transient renters in the inner city which is killing any sense of community spirit? Less job or global security which is making us angry or anxious about our future? Longer working hours which are causing increasing levels of stress and leading us to grab...selfishly and zealously...whatever bit of road or time we can for ourselves and to hell with the rest of the world? Or maybe it's the ever increasing divorce rate? Or suicide rate? Pick your poison...but it aint a warm, fuzzy community out there. Not in my neck of the woods anyway.. One thing is for sure, owning more and more stuff is not the path to happiness 1
peacewise Posted March 24, 2014 Posted March 24, 2014 but it aint a warm, fuzzy community out there. Not in my neck of the woods anyway.. And that's they way those in power create it. A community has power, better to keep the people as individuals caring only for themselves, rather than a populace that cares for each other - such a populace would be just too powerful and motivated to permit Politicians to invade other countries for $$$, or permit limited liability for corporations destroying millions of species or environment, or etc. Divide and conquer, manufactured consent. Why is it that no one at the morning coffee break says "I drove to work today and 999 people obeyed the laws and respected my right to safety."? Instead it's, "one freaking dik head swerved in front of me!" It's how humans think, our psychology to notice the exceptions and ignore the normal. Bias of recallability. Reinforced by media that knows we notice exceptions and tune out the normal. 1
David A Posted March 24, 2014 Posted March 24, 2014 (edited) One thing is for sure, owning more and more stuff is not the path to happiness Financial success and focussing on lifestyle and income (instead of family) like my brother is a temporary temporal form of pleasure which quickly dissipates. No wonder my brother is constantly going to events and concerts...from one temporal pleasure to another...because he does not have inner peace. Edited March 24, 2014 by Bodhi
Jake Posted March 24, 2014 Posted March 24, 2014 What you're picking up on here Proft is the pervasive reality that a large number of us (more than we'd like to admit) are very selfish and have a sense of entitlement on the road (whether we're talking about cyclists or drivers). It's not just about cars and bikes sharing the road...it's about the way we have become in the major cities of this country. Why is that? Is it because of a growing gap between rich and poor? higher density housing and higher percentages of transient renters in the inner city which is killing any sense of community spirit? Less job or global security which is making us angry or anxious about our future? Longer working hours which are causing increasing levels of stress and leading us to grab...selfishly and zealously...whatever bit of road or time we can for ourselves and to hell with the rest of the world? Or maybe it's the ever increasing divorce rate? Or suicide rate? Pick your poison...but it aint a warm, fuzzy community out there. Not in my neck of the woods anyway..I blame John Howard.
peacewise Posted March 24, 2014 Posted March 24, 2014 The Species has Amused itself to Death. Hey, good title for an album.
Malcolm Posted March 24, 2014 Posted March 24, 2014 Why would you want to book a cyclist for running a red light? It should be encouraged I say (with care of course). Same with stop signs, we should be able to roll on through if it is safe to do so. Hey troll brother I think in some states in the US you can turn and drive through a red light if it's deemed safe ,but that would open a can of worms . But are we all that impatient that we can't what a few extra minutes . Cheers
peacewise Posted March 24, 2014 Posted March 24, 2014 If bike couriers waited at every red light, they'd be slower than cars... and waste about 150 minutes every day. 1
Malcolm Posted March 24, 2014 Posted March 24, 2014 Go on, report the next car you see breaking a road rule. Take down the number plate and go to the police and report them. Once the coppers get off the floor and catch their breath from laughing they will cheerfully ignore your complaint. This argument is complete and utter bollocks. DS Well David I've reported 2 drivers and both were fined ,one for doing burn outs the other for over taking me on the left ,but the left side was a nature strip . Cheers 1
Jake Posted March 24, 2014 Posted March 24, 2014 And you call me a troll :-) that's funny . Cheers I am serious though. I don't like stopping. 1
Malcolm Posted March 24, 2014 Posted March 24, 2014 I am serious though. I don't like stopping. From my old place to work ( 20/30 min drive ) there was 2 intersections with lights ,then they put a 3rd . I hated getting caught at the 3rd set of lights :-(
Orpheus Posted March 24, 2014 Posted March 24, 2014 Cars aren't dangerous. The idiotic drivers driving them are. There's a greater chance of bikes being banned on the road than cars ;-) Good luck there! *chuckles*Cars are inherently dangerous.Neither bicycles nor cars will be banned from the roads in the near future.
Orpheus Posted March 24, 2014 Posted March 24, 2014 Why would you want to book a cyclist for running a red light? It should be encouraged I say (with care of course). Same with stop signs, we should be able to roll on through if it is safe to do so. Can't agree, Jake.
Orpheus Posted March 24, 2014 Posted March 24, 2014 Is the following true? Every single cyclist who stays to the left is being courteous, as a vehicle they have a legal right to the entire lane. Yes.
jezzaboogie Posted March 24, 2014 Posted March 24, 2014 (edited) Is that actually correct? That multichoice quiz in the age seemed to imply that a cyclist is required to move to the left if it is safe to do so: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/think-you-know-your-bike-and-road-rules-take-the-quiz-20140320-3548k.html I'm surprised by that. What happens when it is no longer safe to do so 20m on down the road? What is the cyclist meant to do then? I never move over to the left when there is space because of free car parking spots. To do so just causes trouble at the next parked car. It just seems safer to pick a line and stick to it. Weaving in and out of parked cars is erratic and obviously dangerous. Edited March 24, 2014 by jezzaboogie
blybo Posted March 24, 2014 Posted March 24, 2014 Is the following true? Every single cyclist who stays to the left is being courteous, as a vehicle they have a legal right to the entire lane. Yup! I think we all do a pretty good job of minimizing our disruption to traffic flow, however once in inner suburbs it's actually cars holding cyclists up.
David A Posted March 24, 2014 Posted March 24, 2014 (edited) If bike couriers waited at every red light, they'd be slower than cars... and waste about 150 minutes every day.Poor bike cowboys, I mean couriers! Edited March 24, 2014 by Bodhi
joz Posted March 24, 2014 Posted March 24, 2014 Agree with this. As a rider I think one of the most confusing thing a driver can do is to come past me and then wait in the adjacent lane. I don't know what the driver is going to do. I don't know whether to continue riding in case they haven't seen me etc....l always take a defensive point of view. I generally think that the driver was just being dumb, why couldn't they have stayed behind me if they wanted to turn left. If they weren't sure where they are going again why come past? But would you dent the car because it tried to allow you to pass. I would of just over taken the cyclist and turned left , if they run up the back of me they were to close and shouldn't of been tale gating . Cheers Yes but who will pay for the damages to you vehicle? Anyhow best not to I think, I would hate to be the cause of anyone's suffering Why would you want to book a cyclist for running a red light? It should be encouraged I say (with care of course). Same with stop signs, we should be able to roll on through if it is safe to do so. This attitude by cyclists putting themselves above the road rules is the cause of much angst. How can they be considered a vehicle and not have to obey the road rules? 1
Jake Posted March 24, 2014 Posted March 24, 2014 This attitude by cyclists putting themselves above the road rules is the cause of much angst. How can they be considered a vehicle and not have to obey the road rules? No, no, no Joz. You are reading too much into it. I never said I run red lights and stop signs. I actually obey the road rules completely when on a bike as I try to set a good example. I do, however, wish the rules were changed to allow us to roll through when safe. 1
gainphile Posted March 24, 2014 Posted March 24, 2014 How is 'legally' rolling through red lights can make them safer?
nofixedaddress Posted March 24, 2014 Posted March 24, 2014 (edited) It occurred to me (riding home this time) how much happier things will be when cars are automated and driven by computer. I think 2020 is earmarked for when automated cars will start to be used on the roads. They are getting close now. NFA Edited March 24, 2014 by nofixedaddress
Jake Posted March 24, 2014 Posted March 24, 2014 How is 'legally' rolling through red lights can make them safer? When turning left of course.
blybo Posted March 24, 2014 Posted March 24, 2014 No, no, no Joz. You are reading too much into it. I never said I run red lights and stop signs. I actually obey the road rules completely when on a bike as I try to set a good example. I do, however, wish the rules were changed to allow us to roll through when safe. Yeah, just like in Sydney until recently all traffic could turn left at many red lights if safe. There was a camera put on a post near the intersection of Fitzroy and Johnston Sts in Fitzroy a year or so ago to count red light infringements of cyclists and cars. It found cyclists on this major cycling route were no more likely to run the red than cars, however the majority were stopping to check if safe and then ducking left around the corner. I find the motorists issue is not cyclists braking the law, it's getting away with something they would equally like to do. There is rule of thought that there is no point in fining cyclists anyway as they are very unlikely to cause traffic issues. Cyclists know they are vulnerable so don't put themselves in danger. Another way often discussed regarding motorists and being inattentive at the wheel. It seems cars are so safe with so many active and passive devices fitted that motorists pay far less attention than they once did. Maybe we should replace drivers airbags with nice sharp spikes! That would get people to pay attention
Recommended Posts