|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Talkback one eyed lunatics.
"F Murtz" wrote in message eb.com... Pelican wrote: "F Murtz" wrote in message ... I do not know If any one has heard 2UE afternoon talkback, think his name is Justin smith,on the subject of bicycle rider registration, he seems manic on the subject and howls down anyone who has an opposite view to his, he seems to have the opinion that it is a foregone conclusion that we will have rider registration by the end of the year. He seems to have Duncan Gay (roads minister)on his side. He also has the opinion that bicycle ordinations should not be allowed representation at the soon to be,round table group on the subject with Duncan Gay because "they are going to say no to everything". His idea is registration of rider not bicycle with mandated fluoro jackets with number on the back. We would then be the only place in the world with it. It would almost mean the death knell for cycle riding. He has a bee in his bonnet about insurance associated with license,which would in my opinion eventually make the license fee expensive which is the case of all mandated insurance since the beginning of time. He would be better served to get government paid cover for the minute cases of third party claims against bicycles.(every so often a bicycle knocks some one down injuring and even killing where the victim has no cover and can not identify the culprit) It is not worth registration just for revenge against the rider,it is better to cover the third party through special govt.paid insurance and would be much cheaper than an other licensing monolith. It would mean that I would never ride again as it is rare that I do and would not be worth it (I sometimes take train with bicycle to the city or places like Gosford for use at the other end) There are quite a few proposals floating around. For example, this one - http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/new...-1226738618261. It's a democracy, so feel free to make your views heard. Write to the Minister, and have your say. For what it's worth, I don't like your idea of a government scheme. I would much prefer a private scheme by the insurance industry, if possible, backed by law making it compulsory for bike riders, or bikes, to be registered in a way that makes it self-funding. The simpler, the better. No such animal as the simpler the better once it starts The small cost of third party claims paid by government would be nothing against the overall cost of compulsory licensing and insurance for all bike riders, a complete new industry with the insurers licking their lips at the new windfall, which would increase as it takes hold, the same as it did for all mandated insurance cover, compulsory auto third party compulsory building insurance etc, loads more govt staff to run licensing etc. You are over-exaggerating the problem. The law already provides a remedy for cyclists with personal or property injuries. The law already provides a remedy for others with personal or property injuries which are the fault of cyclists, but the consequences might be difficult where a cyclist doesn't have funds. That problem can arise in many situations, of course. All that is apparently being considered is a measure to ensure that those injured by cyclists have an effective remedy eg by there being some sort of fund of contributions by cyclists. That need not involve licensing, registration of bikes, annual payments etc etc. It's not an anti-biking measure. |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Talkback one eyed lunatics.
On Thu, 14 May 2015 17:17:33 +1000, "Pelican"
wrote: "Jeßus" wrote in message .. . On Thu, 14 May 2015 15:28:49 +1000, F Murtz wrote: I do not know If any one has heard 2UE afternoon talkback, think his name is Justin smith,on the subject of bicycle rider registration, he seems manic on the subject and howls down anyone who has an opposite view to his, he seems to have the opinion that it is a foregone conclusion that we will have rider registration by the end of the year. He seems to have Duncan Gay (roads minister)on his side. He also has the opinion that bicycle ordinations should not be allowed representation at the soon to be,round table group on the subject with Duncan Gay because "they are going to say no to everything". His idea is registration of rider not bicycle with mandated fluoro jackets with number on the back. We would then be the only place in the world with it. It would almost mean the death knell for cycle riding. You might find a lot of people celebrating if that comes to pass. I know I certainly would be. I recently fitted cameras to all my vehicles, specifically because of lycra wearig cyclists who think theyre entitled to do whatever they please on country roads. The next rider who makes me choose between hitting him/her, or another innocent vehicle, or the roadside verge, is going to have a very bad day. Even if every rider was a suicidal ****wit, you should not be in a situation of making such a choice. I shouldn't be, as you say. The last incident that compelled me to install cameras was extremely dangerous and almost caused a head on collision with an oncoming car. Not only was the rider unapologetic, he fully denied being dead centre of my lane (even though he was, hence the cameras now)... this was on a tight bend, on a country road with barriers/rails on the LHS and a cutting to the right (oncoming car anyway so that wasn't an option either). That rider is very lucky to still be here. After 10 years living in the Sunshine Coast hinterland and now N.E Tas - both places very popular with riders - I've lost pretty much all tolerance for them. Too many incidents and far too consistently for my liking. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Talkback one eyed lunatics.
Pelican wrote:
"F Murtz" wrote in message eb.com... Pelican wrote: "F Murtz" wrote in message ... I do not know If any one has heard 2UE afternoon talkback, think his name is Justin smith,on the subject of bicycle rider registration, he seems manic on the subject and howls down anyone who has an opposite view to his, he seems to have the opinion that it is a foregone conclusion that we will have rider registration by the end of the year. He seems to have Duncan Gay (roads minister)on his side. He also has the opinion that bicycle ordinations should not be allowed representation at the soon to be,round table group on the subject with Duncan Gay because "they are going to say no to everything". His idea is registration of rider not bicycle with mandated fluoro jackets with number on the back. We would then be the only place in the world with it. It would almost mean the death knell for cycle riding. He has a bee in his bonnet about insurance associated with license,which would in my opinion eventually make the license fee expensive which is the case of all mandated insurance since the beginning of time. He would be better served to get government paid cover for the minute cases of third party claims against bicycles.(every so often a bicycle knocks some one down injuring and even killing where the victim has no cover and can not identify the culprit) It is not worth registration just for revenge against the rider,it is better to cover the third party through special govt.paid insurance and would be much cheaper than an other licensing monolith. It would mean that I would never ride again as it is rare that I do and would not be worth it (I sometimes take train with bicycle to the city or places like Gosford for use at the other end) There are quite a few proposals floating around. For example, this one - http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/new...-1226738618261. It's a democracy, so feel free to make your views heard. Write to the Minister, and have your say. For what it's worth, I don't like your idea of a government scheme. I would much prefer a private scheme by the insurance industry, if possible, backed by law making it compulsory for bike riders, or bikes, to be registered in a way that makes it self-funding. The simpler, the better. No such animal as the simpler the better once it starts The small cost of third party claims paid by government would be nothing against the overall cost of compulsory licensing and insurance for all bike riders, a complete new industry with the insurers licking their lips at the new windfall, which would increase as it takes hold, the same as it did for all mandated insurance cover, compulsory auto third party compulsory building insurance etc, loads more govt staff to run licensing etc. You are over-exaggerating the problem. The law already provides a remedy for cyclists with personal or property injuries. The law already provides a remedy for others with personal or property injuries which are the fault of cyclists, but the consequences might be difficult where a cyclist doesn't have funds. That problem can arise in many situations, of course. All that is apparently being considered is a measure to ensure that those injured by cyclists have an effective remedy eg by there being some sort of fund of contributions by cyclists. That need not involve licensing, registration of bikes, annual payments etc etc. It's not an anti-biking measure. Except that utopian idea wont take hold but my over exaggerated idea might as people have a hatred of bicycles (and motor cycles as well )because people see them doing things they cant(even legal things), when they are stuck in traffic, Bicycles drive me nuts too especially having to pass the same rider 10 times on the same bit of road but none of my annoyances would be fixed one iota by registration. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Talkback one eyed lunatics.
Jeßus wrote:
On Thu, 14 May 2015 17:17:33 +1000, "Pelican" wrote: "Jeßus" wrote in message ... On Thu, 14 May 2015 15:28:49 +1000, F Murtz wrote: I do not know If any one has heard 2UE afternoon talkback, think his name is Justin smith,on the subject of bicycle rider registration, he seems manic on the subject and howls down anyone who has an opposite view to his, he seems to have the opinion that it is a foregone conclusion that we will have rider registration by the end of the year. He seems to have Duncan Gay (roads minister)on his side. He also has the opinion that bicycle ordinations should not be allowed representation at the soon to be,round table group on the subject with Duncan Gay because "they are going to say no to everything". His idea is registration of rider not bicycle with mandated fluoro jackets with number on the back. We would then be the only place in the world with it. It would almost mean the death knell for cycle riding. You might find a lot of people celebrating if that comes to pass. I know I certainly would be. I recently fitted cameras to all my vehicles, specifically because of lycra wearig cyclists who think theyre entitled to do whatever they please on country roads. The next rider who makes me choose between hitting him/her, or another innocent vehicle, or the roadside verge, is going to have a very bad day. Even if every rider was a suicidal ****wit, you should not be in a situation of making such a choice. I shouldn't be, as you say. The last incident that compelled me to install cameras was extremely dangerous and almost caused a head on collision with an oncoming car. Not only was the rider unapologetic, he fully denied being dead centre of my lane (even though he was, hence the cameras now)... this was on a tight bend, on a country road with barriers/rails on the LHS and a cutting to the right (oncoming car anyway so that wasn't an option either). That rider is very lucky to still be here. After 10 years living in the Sunshine Coast hinterland and now N.E Tas - both places very popular with riders - I've lost pretty much all tolerance for them. Too many incidents and far too consistently for my liking. You have me puzzled, why would a rider being dead centre of a lane cause a problem? was he coming toward you on the wrong side of the road? |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Talkback one eyed lunatics.
"Zebee Johnstone" wrote in message ... In aus.bicycle on Thu, 14 May 2015 16:09:38 +1000 Pelican wrote: It's a democracy, so feel free to make your views heard. Write to the Minister, and have your say. For what it's worth, I don't like your idea of a government scheme. I would much prefer a private scheme by the insurance industry, if possible, backed by law making it compulsory for bike riders, or bikes, to be registered in a way that makes it self-funding. The simpler, the better. Is car registration self-funding does anyone know? Self funding in what sense ? The total fees they charge do more than pay for the cost of all those shinybums. What about driver licencing? It isn't really feasible to separate the cost of rego and drivers licensing except with the license test stuff. after all this is closer to that than it is to rego. What ? At what age does a rider need to ahve a paid licence? Should there be high penalties for hitting a licenced cyclist given they would now have a "right to the road" many think they do not now have? |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Talkback one eyed lunatics.
"F Murtz" wrote in message eb.com... Pelican wrote: "F Murtz" wrote in message ... I do not know If any one has heard 2UE afternoon talkback, think his name is Justin smith,on the subject of bicycle rider registration, he seems manic on the subject and howls down anyone who has an opposite view to his, he seems to have the opinion that it is a foregone conclusion that we will have rider registration by the end of the year. He seems to have Duncan Gay (roads minister)on his side. He also has the opinion that bicycle ordinations should not be allowed representation at the soon to be,round table group on the subject with Duncan Gay because "they are going to say no to everything". His idea is registration of rider not bicycle with mandated fluoro jackets with number on the back. We would then be the only place in the world with it. It would almost mean the death knell for cycle riding. He has a bee in his bonnet about insurance associated with license,which would in my opinion eventually make the license fee expensive which is the case of all mandated insurance since the beginning of time. He would be better served to get government paid cover for the minute cases of third party claims against bicycles.(every so often a bicycle knocks some one down injuring and even killing where the victim has no cover and can not identify the culprit) It is not worth registration just for revenge against the rider,it is better to cover the third party through special govt.paid insurance and would be much cheaper than an other licensing monolith. It would mean that I would never ride again as it is rare that I do and would not be worth it (I sometimes take train with bicycle to the city or places like Gosford for use at the other end) There are quite a few proposals floating around. For example, this one - http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/new...-1226738618261. It's a democracy, so feel free to make your views heard. Write to the Minister, and have your say. For what it's worth, I don't like your idea of a government scheme. I would much prefer a private scheme by the insurance industry, if possible, backed by law making it compulsory for bike riders, or bikes, to be registered in a way that makes it self-funding. The simpler, the better. No such animal as the simpler the better once it starts Dunno. The small cost of third party claims paid by government would be nothing Dunno, given the very high accident rate seen with cyclists, that's a hard claim to substantiate. Corse it is covered by Medicare already. against the overall cost of compulsory licensing and insurance for all bike riders, Also not clear what it would cost if the RTA did it, just adding that to the current stuff for cars and trucks and trailers and drivers. a complete new industry No need for anything like that and it would be mad to go that route. with the insurers licking their lips at the new windfall, Not if it's a single small fee paid once with a new bike sale as Abbott's sister proposes. which would increase as it takes hold, the same as it did for all mandated insurance cover, compulsory auto third party compulsory building insurance etc, The cost has in fact dropped at times with law changes. loads more govt staff to run licensing etc. Not if its just a license with no testing involved. Not that I am saying it should happen, it shouldn't IMO. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Talkback one eyed lunatics.
"Jeßus" wrote in message ... On Thu, 14 May 2015 17:17:33 +1000, "Pelican" wrote: "Jeßus" wrote in message . .. On Thu, 14 May 2015 15:28:49 +1000, F Murtz wrote: I do not know If any one has heard 2UE afternoon talkback, think his name is Justin smith,on the subject of bicycle rider registration, he seems manic on the subject and howls down anyone who has an opposite view to his, he seems to have the opinion that it is a foregone conclusion that we will have rider registration by the end of the year. He seems to have Duncan Gay (roads minister)on his side. He also has the opinion that bicycle ordinations should not be allowed representation at the soon to be,round table group on the subject with Duncan Gay because "they are going to say no to everything". His idea is registration of rider not bicycle with mandated fluoro jackets with number on the back. We would then be the only place in the world with it. It would almost mean the death knell for cycle riding. You might find a lot of people celebrating if that comes to pass. I know I certainly would be. I recently fitted cameras to all my vehicles, specifically because of lycra wearig cyclists who think theyre entitled to do whatever they please on country roads. The next rider who makes me choose between hitting him/her, or another innocent vehicle, or the roadside verge, is going to have a very bad day. Even if every rider was a suicidal ****wit, you should not be in a situation of making such a choice. I shouldn't be, as you say. The last incident that compelled me to install cameras was extremely dangerous and almost caused a head on collision with an oncoming car. Not only was the rider unapologetic, he fully denied being dead centre of my lane (even though he was, hence the cameras now)... this was on a tight bend, on a country road with barriers/rails on the LHS and a cutting to the right (oncoming car anyway so that wasn't an option either). That rider is very lucky to still be here. Legally he is entitled to be in the center of the lane if he wants to. Your camera will be what sees you jailed. After 10 years living in the Sunshine Coast hinterland and now N.E Tas - both places very popular with riders - I've lost pretty much all tolerance for them. Too many incidents and far too consistently for my liking. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Talkback one eyed lunatics.
"F Murtz" wrote in message web.com... Pelican wrote: "F Murtz" wrote in message eb.com... Pelican wrote: "F Murtz" wrote in message ... I do not know If any one has heard 2UE afternoon talkback, think his name is Justin smith,on the subject of bicycle rider registration, he seems manic on the subject and howls down anyone who has an opposite view to his, he seems to have the opinion that it is a foregone conclusion that we will have rider registration by the end of the year. He seems to have Duncan Gay (roads minister)on his side. He also has the opinion that bicycle ordinations should not be allowed representation at the soon to be,round table group on the subject with Duncan Gay because "they are going to say no to everything". His idea is registration of rider not bicycle with mandated fluoro jackets with number on the back. We would then be the only place in the world with it. It would almost mean the death knell for cycle riding. He has a bee in his bonnet about insurance associated with license,which would in my opinion eventually make the license fee expensive which is the case of all mandated insurance since the beginning of time. He would be better served to get government paid cover for the minute cases of third party claims against bicycles.(every so often a bicycle knocks some one down injuring and even killing where the victim has no cover and can not identify the culprit) It is not worth registration just for revenge against the rider,it is better to cover the third party through special govt.paid insurance and would be much cheaper than an other licensing monolith. It would mean that I would never ride again as it is rare that I do and would not be worth it (I sometimes take train with bicycle to the city or places like Gosford for use at the other end) There are quite a few proposals floating around. For example, this one - http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/new...-1226738618261. It's a democracy, so feel free to make your views heard. Write to the Minister, and have your say. For what it's worth, I don't like your idea of a government scheme. I would much prefer a private scheme by the insurance industry, if possible, backed by law making it compulsory for bike riders, or bikes, to be registered in a way that makes it self-funding. The simpler, the better. No such animal as the simpler the better once it starts The small cost of third party claims paid by government would be nothing against the overall cost of compulsory licensing and insurance for all bike riders, a complete new industry with the insurers licking their lips at the new windfall, which would increase as it takes hold, the same as it did for all mandated insurance cover, compulsory auto third party compulsory building insurance etc, loads more govt staff to run licensing etc. You are over-exaggerating the problem. The law already provides a remedy for cyclists with personal or property injuries. The law already provides a remedy for others with personal or property injuries which are the fault of cyclists, but the consequences might be difficult where a cyclist doesn't have funds. That problem can arise in many situations, of course. All that is apparently being considered is a measure to ensure that those injured by cyclists have an effective remedy eg by there being some sort of fund of contributions by cyclists. That need not involve licensing, registration of bikes, annual payments etc etc. It's not an anti-biking measure. Except that utopian idea wont take hold It has in some places. but my over exaggerated idea might I doubt it. as people have a hatred of bicycles (and motor cycles as well ) SOME people do. because people see them doing things they cant (even legal things), when they are stuck in traffic, Bicycles drive me nuts too especially having to pass the same rider 10 times on the same bit of road I object more to the fools that insist on riding side by side and the fact that that is legal now. but none of my annoyances would be fixed one iota by registration. It might help if your claim that it would see lots not bother to register because they don't ride enough to warrant the cost is true. Can't see it being viable tho, particularly with kids. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Talkback one eyed lunatics.
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Talkback one eyed lunatics.
On Thu, 14 May 2015 18:33:45 +1000, F Murtz
wrote: Jeßus wrote: On Thu, 14 May 2015 17:17:33 +1000, "Pelican" wrote: "Jeßus" wrote in message ... On Thu, 14 May 2015 15:28:49 +1000, F Murtz wrote: I do not know If any one has heard 2UE afternoon talkback, think his name is Justin smith,on the subject of bicycle rider registration, he seems manic on the subject and howls down anyone who has an opposite view to his, he seems to have the opinion that it is a foregone conclusion that we will have rider registration by the end of the year. He seems to have Duncan Gay (roads minister)on his side. He also has the opinion that bicycle ordinations should not be allowed representation at the soon to be,round table group on the subject with Duncan Gay because "they are going to say no to everything". His idea is registration of rider not bicycle with mandated fluoro jackets with number on the back. We would then be the only place in the world with it. It would almost mean the death knell for cycle riding. You might find a lot of people celebrating if that comes to pass. I know I certainly would be. I recently fitted cameras to all my vehicles, specifically because of lycra wearig cyclists who think theyre entitled to do whatever they please on country roads. The next rider who makes me choose between hitting him/her, or another innocent vehicle, or the roadside verge, is going to have a very bad day. Even if every rider was a suicidal ****wit, you should not be in a situation of making such a choice. I shouldn't be, as you say. The last incident that compelled me to install cameras was extremely dangerous and almost caused a head on collision with an oncoming car. Not only was the rider unapologetic, he fully denied being dead centre of my lane (even though he was, hence the cameras now)... this was on a tight bend, on a country road with barriers/rails on the LHS and a cutting to the right (oncoming car anyway so that wasn't an option either). That rider is very lucky to still be here. After 10 years living in the Sunshine Coast hinterland and now N.E Tas - both places very popular with riders - I've lost pretty much all tolerance for them. Too many incidents and far too consistently for my liking. You have me puzzled, why would a rider being dead centre of a lane cause a problem? was he coming toward you on the wrong side of the road? He was in my lane, going in my direction. The problem was he was in the middle of my lane and I couldn't veer into the oncoming lane because of an oncoming vehicle. I was *going* to veer into the other lane but thankfully I didn't (blind corner). I dunno, you've lost me a bit here if you can't see the problem? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Talkback one eyed lunatics | F Murtz[_2_] | Australia | 2 | May 15th 15 07:57 AM |
lunatics or heroes? | Zebee Johnstone | Australia | 3 | June 18th 08 03:38 AM |
ABC 774 talkback etc | cfsmtb | Australia | 3 | May 16th 06 04:36 AM |
Clarkson pie-eyed | Just zis Guy, you know? | UK | 219 | September 28th 05 07:08 AM |
RR: Get away from me you lazy eyed freak | Jimbo(san) | Mountain Biking | 1 | December 2nd 03 01:47 PM |