A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » Regional Cycling » Australia
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Talkback one eyed lunatics.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old May 15th 15, 02:53 AM posted to aus.legal,aus.bicycle
Zebee Johnstone
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,960
Default Talkback one eyed lunatics.

In aus.bicycle on Fri, 15 May 2015 11:36:30 +1000
Pelican wrote:


"F Murtz" wrote in message
eb.com...

OOPS again (note to self should research before hitting button)Seems to
refer to bicycle lanes
I can not find any law in Tasmania and most states that stops a bicycle
riding in the centre of a lane except when it refers to bicycle lanes


The Australian Road Rules give the basic rule in rule 129 -


129 Keeping to the far left side of a road

(1) A driver on a road (except a multi-lane road) must drive as
near as practicable to the far left side of the road.
Offence provision.

(2) This rule does not apply to the rider of a motor bike.


Rule 129 applies to cyclists.


THe reason it doesn't apply to motorcyclists is due to some court
cases about safety and the meaning of the word practicable. (I was
involved in motorcycle lobbying in SA at the time the SA law was
changed before the national road rules came in and helped with the
defence of one of the riders.)

I expect that should a cyclist be prosecuted for it they'll be playng
the practical card.

I certainly take the lane when it is not safe to stay left such as in
a lane too narrow for safe passing and with no escape route for me if
a car does crowd me.

What I think is safe and what the impatient person behind me thinks is
safe can be very different of course.

Bicycles like motorcycles have to always take account of traction and
road surface. A bicycle needs to be more aware of road surface than a
motorcycle as a pothole that is an annoyance to a motorcycle can cause
a crash for a bicycle. A bicycle rider will also be more worried about
space to either side as bicycles often need to move on the road more
than motorcycles do.

I find that most times car drivers do the right thing, and I try and
share the road sensibly with them. If I can help them pass safely I
will.

But I will be the one making the decision about what is safe, and if
that means someone in a car is held up for 30 seconds or even a whole
minute till they can pass me safely, then I'll lose no sleep over it.

Should I ever be prosecuted for not keeping left, I will have good
reasons for doing so and I am confident I would win the case. I
expect it will go the same way as the SA ones many years ago.


Zebee
Ads
  #32  
Old May 15th 15, 03:13 AM posted to aus.legal,aus.bicycle
F Murtz[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 193
Default Talkback one eyed lunatics.

Rod Speed wrote:


"F Murtz" wrote in message
eb.com...
Rod Speed 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

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.


I would have thought that the accident rate with cyclists would be
covered by the car third party, as few cycle accidents are caused by
cycles causing injury to third parties


But plenty are caused by the bike coming to bits or
just coming off the road with no car involved etc.



But not usually involving a third party, I would have thought.



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.



  #33  
Old May 15th 15, 04:30 AM posted to aus.legal,aus.bicycle
Rod Speed
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,488
Default Talkback one eyed lunatics.



"F Murtz" wrote in message
eb.com...
F Murtz wrote:
F Murtz wrote:
Jeßus wrote:
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?


The problem is, regardless of the inconvenience of it a cyclist has
every right to cycle in the middle of the lane and unless the law is
changed it is one of the things up with which we must put, like wombats,
tractors,and any other slow moving things,that is why emphasis is put on
the dangers of blind curves.



OOPS,Apparently some jurisdictions state that you must keep to the left
when practicable on a bicycle.


OOPS again (note to self should research before hitting button)Seems to
refer to bicycle lanes
I can not find any law in Tasmania and most states that stops a bicycle
riding in the centre of a lane except when it refers to bicycle lanes


http://www.amygillett.org.au/tas-cyc...ic-road-rules/

Corse that doesn't mean that you are legally welcome to run them over if
they don't.

  #34  
Old May 15th 15, 04:33 AM posted to aus.legal,aus.bicycle
Rod Speed
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,488
Default Talkback one eyed lunatics.



"F Murtz" wrote in message
eb.com...
Rod Speed wrote:


"F Murtz" wrote in message
eb.com...
Rod Speed 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

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.


I would have thought that the accident rate with cyclists would be
covered by the car third party, as few cycle accidents are caused by
cycles causing injury to third parties


But plenty are caused by the bike coming to bits or
just coming off the road with no car involved etc.



But not usually involving a third party, I would have thought.


Doesn't need to involve a third party to
be covered by your compulsory insurance.

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.


  #35  
Old May 15th 15, 04:50 AM posted to aus.legal,aus.bicycle
Peter Jason
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8
Default Talkback one eyed lunatics.



Yes the cyclists should pay plenty for their
licences just as dog and cat owners do.


Cat owners don't.


Yes they do.

http://www.cafepress.com.au/+victori...license-plates
See! If cats have to have licence plates, why not cyclists?

also:
http://www.depi.vic.gov.au/pets/cats...eeping-of-cats

  #36  
Old May 15th 15, 07:08 AM posted to aus.legal,aus.bicycle
Max[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default Talkback one eyed lunatics.

"F Murtz" wrote in message
web.com...

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.


Yeah, nothing worse than seeing the same rider over and over again. It
would be alright if they were different riders.

  #37  
Old May 15th 15, 07:58 AM posted to aus.legal,aus.bicycle
Stuart Longland
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 22
Default Talkback one eyed lunatics.

On 14/05/15 16:03, Peter Jason wrote:
Good idea. Ot tattooed on the back of the neck.


That'll work real well when I'm wearing a hood under the helmet.
  #38  
Old May 15th 15, 08:24 AM posted to aus.legal,aus.bicycle
Zebee Johnstone
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,960
Default Talkback one eyed lunatics.

In aus.bicycle on Fri, 15 May 2015 16:58:55 +1000
Stuart Longland wrote:
On 14/05/15 16:03, Peter Jason wrote:
Good idea. Ot tattooed on the back of the neck.


That'll work real well when I'm wearing a hood under the helmet.


A while back one cold winter a friend of mine was getting petrol for
his motorcycle.

He fronted up to the counter and the person there demanded he take his
fullface helmet off, pointing to the sign that said he must do so.

He shrugged and took it off.

Revealing the full balaclava underneath....


Zebee

  #39  
Old May 15th 15, 09:21 AM posted to aus.legal,aus.bicycle
Stuart Longland
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 22
Default Talkback one eyed lunatics.

On 15/05/15 11:53, Zebee Johnstone wrote:
I certainly take the lane when it is not safe to stay left such as in
a lane too narrow for safe passing and with no escape route for me if
a car does crowd me.


I avoid riding in the centre of the lane because I know it annoys
drivers. If I'm in the centre or the extreme right of a lane however,
there's usually a good reason for it:

- I'm avoiding a hazard (e.g. potholes, debris, car doors) in the far
left of the lane.
- I'm about to make a right turn in the next few hundred metres.

The latter, I'll likely be in the far right of the lane. I'll probably
have an indicator flashing too, or I'll be momentarily giving hand
signals if that isn't available to me.

At last check, it was legal to pass a vehicle on its left when it is
making a right turn.

I did nearly get taken out yesterday by some pillock who couldn't wait
30 seconds and decided to charge passed me, nearly having a head-on
collision with another car.

I have a rear facing camera on the bike, and if that collision had
occurred, the SD card would be immediately provided as evidence.
Thankfully the driver got away with it and no one was hurt, just a
couple of us rather rattled by the experience.

Personally I don't see why people are in such a hurry.

Ever seen peak hour in a major city? It doesn't need cyclists in lanes
to help it slow down to sub 20km/hr speeds, it does that all on its own
by the sheer volume of cars.

In fact the cyclist might do the traffic a favour by forcing a 20km/hr
creep instead of the constant start-stop traffic, which puts needless
wear and tear on engines and wastes fuel.

A mad dash isn't going to get anyone there any faster, and 90% of this
argument seems to be about people being in a hurry for no apparent
reason. Impatience is the real enemy here, not the driver or the cyclist.
  #40  
Old May 15th 15, 10:19 AM posted to aus.legal,aus.bicycle
Jeßus[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12
Default Talkback one eyed lunatics.

On Fri, 15 May 2015 10:40:21 +1000, F Murtz
wrote:

Jeßus wrote:
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?


The problem is, regardless of the inconvenience of it a cyclist has
every right to cycle in the middle of the lane


Umm, Jesus. Where do I start here with this?

1: They are NOT permitted to be in the middle of the lane (Where in
the hell are you getting that from?). They are required to keep as
close to the left of the lane as is possible.

2: You describe a life threatening situation as an 'inconvenience'.
Are you just trolling these days?


and unless the law is
changed it is one of the things up with which we must put, like wombats,
tractors,and any other slow moving things,that is why emphasis is put on
the dangers of blind curves.


Mate, you're not well.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

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 02:47 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:28 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.