Dangers of cycling

[Freedom]

You often can't especially in peak hour traffic. I see it daily. Those stuck behind the cyclist wait and wait and wait or are forced to squeeze into a gap in the right lane you ideally wouldn't be trying to squeeze into causing a lot of near misses for the motorists. We pay for cars with high purchase price, high ongoing costs, registration, insurance, tolls - so we can get where we need to go as swiftly as possible. I make appointments with clients based on estimate commute times. Google maps doesn't have a 'stuck behind slow ass cyclist' option to check so I can re-estimate my travel time. Having the decision to take far longer to get somewhere or risk an accident to pass a road hazard (cyclist) is not a decision I want made for me by someone who pays nothing to use the same road.

 

That's the point!

 

When you get cars (travelling at 60km) and cycles (travelling at 30kms) or thereabouts, you get 'problems'!

 

Then in 'peak hour' the problems are magnified!

[CryptiK]

Not really, if I'm forced to travel 1/3 of the speed limit until I can safely or semi safely pass, I cannot subsequently exceed the speed limit to then 'make up time'. Basic physics says that without speeding to favourably alter the time vs distance ratio after being held up, then I'll be slower overall.

[CryptiK]

The above was a response to proftournesols post above yours

[proftournesol]

Not really, if I'm forced to travel 1/3 of the speed limit until I can safely or semi safely pass, I cannot subsequently exceed the speed limit to then 'make up time'. Basic physics says that without speeding to favourably alter the time vs distance ratio after being held up, then I'll be slower overall.

Yes, that's right, you wait until it's safe to move lanes. The cyclist is riding as fast as s/he can go, we all share the road, sometimes you will be delayed by a slower vehicle. First world problem, not worth wishing death on a cyclist.

I have empathy for your situation, I'm also a driver, I also get held up at times, that's OK. If I'm in the right lane I always allow cars in the left lane behind the bike to merge, if other drivers did this more often then it wouldn't be an issue

[CryptiK]

not worth wishing death on a cyclist.

 

Where did I wish death on a cyclist? No need to exaggerate or put words in my mouth.

 

It's pretty simple, cyclists are too slow to use the road, and pay nothing for the privilege. I see them running reds, filtering through and bumping/touching cars at lights and doing numerous other stupid things. I don't wax and polish my car so you can smear sweat all over it as you lean on it squeezing through a gap you shouldn't be squeezing through. Coming this close to my door with your cleats and sharp edges. I often see cyclists take risks and show little regard for others property. Sure some are doign all they can to let you by as well. I drive up in the hills and when riders are in a pellaton I'll wait for a clear opportunity to pass, often they see you waiting and wave you by which is nice.

 

Cyclists in cities need their own lanes. Our infrastructure can't handle the traffic volume as it is, with huge delays and time wasted getting to and from work. Every time you encounter a cyclist the road effectively becomes single lane as everyone must at least move half into the right lane to safely pass the rider. This is effectively a slow moving bottleneck we can ill afford. That moving bottleneck pays nothing to hold everyone up, but somehow expects to be given the same rights as everyone else who pays through the nose to use the road. It's not right from a moral standpoint, nor from a traffic flow logistics standpoint. 

 

IMO cyclists should have to get a license, pay some form of registration and insurance, and with this money lanes for them to ride in safely should be built. Right now you're living off the back of the money motorists pay for their own roads, coming onto them and causing us all hassles - of course we're frustrated mate. Pay your own way like we do and petition the government to use that money to build you a suitable infrastructure.

Edited March 23, 2014 by CryptiK

[proftournesol]

I'm not putting words in your mouth but those comments comes out of plenty of other motorists mouths.

Let's look at some practicalities around your suggestions:

Are you suggesting that cyclists only be allowed to ride on the few roads with bike lanes? What happens when they want to turn down a side street without a bike lane? What happens if you want to connect 2 bike lane roads that requires travelling down a road without a bike lane, should the cyclist get off their bike and walk down the footpath?

How much is a dedicated network of bike roads going to cost? Maybe $50,000 licence fee per cyclist to fully fund the road? Would you charge the same fee for kids that ride on the road? Would you also suggest the same principle for car licenses? Should the driver be required to totally fund the cost of road construction and maintenance from license fees? Would you have a pro rata driving license refund system for cyclists who ride instead of drive?

 

If roads can't handle the existing traffic volumes shouldn't we be trying to reduce traffic volumes by improving public transport and cycling options? Wouldn't it be better to work on educating all road users to work cooperatively instead of treating it as a competition?

[Phantom]

 

IMO cyclists should have to get a license, pay some form of registration and insurance, and with this money lanes for them to ride in safely should be built. Right now you're living off the back of the money motorists pay for their own roads, coming onto them and causing us all hassles - of course we're frustrated mate. Pay your own way like we do and petition the government to use that money to build you a suitable infrastructure.

 

It may be a surprise, but consider the fact that most ( if not all ) cyclists are also motorists who pay the same taxes as you.

 

I only recently bought a bike and for the moment, I am keeping well clear of main roads because I simply don't trust motorists to do the right thing . When I am driving my car, I admit to getting frustrated by some cyclists who are idiots but overwhelmingly, they are just decent, reasonable people who sometimes ( or often ) seek an alternative form of transport.

 

I am not really part of the bike culture and only ride for fun and recreation, but I can certainly see both sides of the equation and just a small amount of empathy goes a very long way. Also, if you feel like you will be help up or delayed by cyclists then perhaps you should allow 5-10 minutes extra for your journey ( it really isn't a catastrophe ) and I often do this myself in the course of business.

[Jake]

I have say I am fortunate to have the Fernleigh Track here in Newcastle. Did a moderate 50kms this arvo using the track and some quiet suburban hills and only had to contend with about 5 cars, and all this meant was for me to slow down a couple of times and wait for the cars to get out of my way.

[Jake]

And I see Qld is getting the 1m/1.5m rule as law come April. A fantastic step in the right direction.

 

A key point for all road users in Qld is that the law will now permit a motor vehicle to cross a double white line when passing a cyclist in order to maintain the minimum safe passing distance. Without this relaxation the rule would be unworkable.

 

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/queensland-cyclists-to-get-1m-clearance-on-roads-permission-to-ride-without-helmets-under-proposed-laws/story-fnihsrf2-1226770826919

[CryptiK]

I understand your frustration, I ride recreationally (off road though, I used to race downhill and BMX). With the current state on the roads, slowing everyone down and risking accidents numerous times per each cyclists trip, I feel sharing narrow lanes is not tenable. I know you pay taxes and rates like I do, but you expect to share roads with motorists who pay upwards of 1500-2000 a year to use a car on the road while you pay nothing - and expect be treated equally. You aren't equal though. You are slow, you are hard to see, and you dont pay for a license, registration or insurance. The existing infrastructure doesn't even handle the volume of motor vehicles and with the narrow lanes in Australia (this is not the US!!) passing cyclists requires the use of the right lane - effectively reducing an already inadequate road to 1 lane. This is not acceptable. 

 

We need proper infrastructure to handle cyclists, I am not a road planner so don't ask me how it's going to work. Sharing the road is asking for trouble though.

Edited March 23, 2014 by CryptiK

[Monty]

CryptiK, obviously I can only guess as I've never driven with you but I'd be surprised if cyclists kept you from doing the maximum speed limit more than a fraction of the time you are held up by other cars. Yet you seem particularly incensed by the cyclist. It seems a big part of this is your sense that they don't pay their way.

But seriously how much road infrastructure do you think is funded through motorists' license, registration and insurance fees. Insurance (which includes the bulk of rego) covers, umm, insurance; and I doubt the residual rego and license fees do much more than cover the administrative costs of those schemes. As I understand it roads are mostly funded through rates and general revenue, that is by all of us regardless of transport mode.

We just have to share the infrastructure we have. Sometimes it will be congested, which can be frustrating, especially if you are terribly important and in a great hurry. But that's just one of the hang ups with living in big cities with high expectations of personal mobility.

Your points about running red lights and leaning on cars are fair. Those behaviors are illegal and rude respectively. No excuses. But you can't single out cyclists on that basis either.

[davidsss]

Dave, any middle aged man in lycra needs to be penalised, bike licensing is just a great place to start.

I say make them pay double what motorists do just for their outfits.

 

Ha, no licensing for me then, never wear lycra, just shorts and a T shirt or a bike jersey when hot.

 

Prof, you don't need better clothing, get a better saddle, I have a Brooks.

 

DS

[Orpheus]

Cryptik, rego does not come close to covering the costs associated with car use.

Bicycles, on the other hand, have little impact on the road.

As others have pointed out, when you are stuck in rush hour traffic, you don't blame the other cars. Yet the occasional moments when you are temporarily inconvenienced by a bike upsets you greatly.

There will come a time when we think it incredible that we let practically anybody loose on streets behind the wheel of over a ton of metal.

Cars are the problem, not bikes.

I love my car, but I do understand the problem with it.

Luckily, there is a decent train service, so I don't have to use it during the week much.

[CryptiK]

I've repeated those points a couple times because they've not been addressed, not due to some hubris on my behalf. As I've said too it's about the safety issues too, not just being held up by slow cyclists. The roads where there's dedicated cycling lanes work just fine. Sharing the road with things 100 times your size/weight travelling 3+ times your speed is asking for trouble, and that's not something needing a discussion per se, it's a fact. Hopefully we get a better public transport system meaning (hopefully) less cyclists needing to use roads without cycle lanes. The more cycle lanes we can build the better giving you guys more reach, I'm all for that. Our stupid government wastes enough on useless things, I'd much rather they spent it on something worthwhile.

[oldrose]

As a license paying motorist and cyclist my HO is Drivers on shared roads need to accept that bicycles are legally allowed to be on the road and from time to time you need to SLOW the F... down. Yes it's annoying when you're in a hurry but it's not dangerous to go slower and pass when safe.

 

On the other hand I'm amazed at the poor behaviour of pack cyclists on public roads - Beach Road in Melbourne especially - where complete and wilful ignorance of the road rules seems to apply.

[davidsss]

Anyone who thinks it is cyclists holding them up on the road is just not looking. When the road is congested it's not bikes which are causing the congestion, it is too many cars. The fact that thousands of people take their bikes to work is saving you time every day. Held up by traffic lights? We only have traffic lights because of traffic volume. Look how traffic lights have multiplied as more and more cars attempt to use the roads. Face facts, the roads are congested because there are too many cars, there is only one solution: less cars. Less cars means more people using alternatives, such as bikes.

 

I still have no answer to the question about bike licensing and registration: who will pay? I'm certainly not willing to pay more tax for such a stupid idea.

 

DS

[davidsss]

Cryptik, the roads are not made for cars, they are made for road vehicles. Bicycles are road vehicles.

 

What you need to understand is that we don't need more cycling infrastructure, there is a hell of a lot of cycling infrastructure out there, it's called the road network. It wasn't built for the sole use of cyclists, it was built for the use of everyone in or on a road vehicle.

 

We don't need bike lanes, we have vehicle lanes now, since bicycles are vehicles those lanes are built for cyclists as well as other road users. More bicycle lanes just marginalises cycling even more. I pay my taxes I get to use whatever road vehicle I choose on the road. Complaining about the very small amount of road I use makes little sense, you should be complaining that too many people are using large cars to transport one person around.

 

DS

Edited March 23, 2014 by davidsss

[proftournesol]

Ha, no licensing for me then, never wear lycra, just shorts and a T shirt or a bike jersey when hot.

 

Prof, you don't need better clothing, get a better saddle, I have a Brooks.

 

DS

I've got a great saddle, designed by Josh Cohen, the guy who wrote the only specialist textbook on saddle design, but undies and cotton pants chafing on a great saddle are not conducive to happy riding

[CryptiK]

There was a whole thread of positive and negative discussion before I came in here. You guys pretty clearly need someone to vent at but I'm not the guy. I don't abuse you, I leave plenty of room when I pass you. I am not your enemy.

It would be nice if you cyclists admitted that you dont pay to be treated as a road vehicle. Even motorcycles pay tolls now along with mandatory licensing, rego and insurance. You share the road with cars you should have to pass a test like the rest of us. Pay rego for your road vehicle like the rest of us. And because your road vehicle can damage our cars, and people if you hit them, insurance too. Only then are you a 'road vehicle' on equal terms with the rest of us. That's what you need to address and acknowledge, but not one of you have.

[davidsss]

I do pay for the roads, they are funded from the taxes I pay. Rego barely breaks even, third party pays for the TAC. I pay for the roads which are owned by everyone and I choose to ride a bicycle on my road rather than take up lots of space with a car and wear out the road quicker with a heavy vehicle.

 

It would be nice if those going around in motor vehicles admitted that it is taxes that pay for roads and that the cause of congestion is not bicycles but motor vehicles with a single occupant.

 

DS

[CryptiK]

I'm not talking about taxes. I'm talking about cyclists handling their 'road vehicles' in close proximity to other vehicles - do you need to pass a test to get a license to do this? No. Do you need to ensure your bike complies with appropriate standards and register it? No. Are you insured in case you damage a car, someone else's property or person? No. 

 

Address those points rather than deflecting please.

 

edit - you should have to do what every other road user has to do if you want to be treated equally. Currently you don't have to do anything, you just don a helmet and ride. Other motorists have the right to be protected by the fact you passed a test proving a basic standard of skill regarding bike handling and road rules, know that your bike is safe and suitable for road use, and that if you damage our motor vehicles or person, that you are covered by insurance. That should be mandatory for bike riders, I can't believe it's not. And none of you seem to get it. You just brush it off like it doesn't matter. Amazing.

Edited March 23, 2014 by CryptiK

[David A]

To offer an opposing view, all cyclists aren't angels...I was recently road raged...by a cyclist. He didn't like that I honked him for dangerously veering partially into my lane (he had half a lane beside parked cars within which to cycle) and promptly sprinted after me. I then got caught at the next set of lights. He then opened my car door, launched a spray of expletives at me then slammed my car door shut. He then simply ducked down a side street knowing he will remain completely anonymous. No wonder the public at large (myself included) have little sympathy for cyclists...

Edited March 23, 2014 by Bodhi

[proftournesol]

I'm not talking about taxes. I'm talking about cyclists handling their 'road vehicles' in close proximity to other vehicles - do you need to pass a test to get a license to do this? No. Do you need to ensure your bike complies with appropriate standards and register it? No. Are you insured in case you damage a car, someone else's property or person? No. 

 

Address those points rather than deflecting please.

 

edit - you should have to do what every other road user has to do if you want to be treated equally. Currently you don't have to do anything, you just don a helmet and ride. Other motorists have the right to be protected by the fact you passed a test proving a basic standard of skill regarding bike handling and road rules, know that your bike is safe and suitable for road use, and that if you damage our motor vehicles or person, that you are covered by insurance. That should be mandatory for bike riders, I can't believe it's not. And none of you seem to get it. You just brush it off like it doesn't matter. Amazing.

CryptiK, car insurance isn't mandatory, bike insurance is available and many riders have it, if you are a member of the Bicycle Network in Victoria for instance, its included with membership. If its the same in other states then a lot more orders than you assumed are already covered in the unlikely event that their pedal or cleats scratch a car. I agree that cyclists also need the same knowledge of the road rules as motorists, although most adult cyclists are also motorists and so have the same knowledge as those who don't ride. The answer is more respect and cooperation by all road users, riders and drivers. I always ride as if I'm in a car, I don't jump red lights and obey the rules, despite that I'm collectively punished by a small but ubiquitous section of drivers who become furious at the supposed slight of every rider. As I said the fury directed at riders is paralleled to the fury directed at 'those queue jumping asylum seekers'.

[jezzaboogie]

As I was riding in to work this morning I was thinking that I wouldn't mind having a registration plate on my bike ("jezzboogie01" would be cool I reckon) and wouldn't mind paying say $100 a year rego as a STFU fee. However, as has been abundantly pointed out, I suspect this wouldn't make any difference, as the complainees would just find something new to whinge about. Anyway, as has also been (abundantly) pointed out, that whole line of reasoning is a furphy. I remember checking a while back and it turns out that the medical costs associated with motor-vehicular accidents add up to about $2 a day for every Australian (including the little ones and the really really little ones). Someone can chase this up again if they want, but obviously vehicle registration doesn't come close to covering this, let alone the cost of maintaining road infrastructure, which is also comparatively enourmous.

 

So anyone spouting the old "I pay rego, get off MY roads" arguments should just STFU.

 

I also don't understand the problem with bike rider using a combination of the roads and the footpaths (where it is safe and legal to do so). I regularly use the footpath where a significant time or distance saving can be made. What's the big deal? (Yes, I'm being deliberately disingenuous: I know the answer to this.)

 

I agree with prof that the answer is more respect and cooperation by all road users. As a bike rider I've worked hard to take a massive chill pill and temper down my general distaste for cars and how they have dramatically affected the makeup of our public spaces. I've also slowed right down when on footpaths out of respect for walkers who really shouldn't have to worry about what they are doing. I mean this seriously: if we can't just WALK AROUND from place to place in a relatively relaxed manner, then we are doing something seriously wrong! Most of the time, I just wish car drivers had in mind that they are responsible for a fast-moving multi-tonne object and behave accordingly.  

Edited March 23, 2014 by jezzaboogie

[jezzaboogie]

In summary: If bike registration is the answer, BRING IT!