QLD New Cycling Laws Exposes Flaw in New CyclingLaws.

[Franco Cozzo]

If you guys crack the poos about cyclists being slow and taking up room, come out my way in rural Vic and deal with horse owners and riders.

HANDS DOWN the most inconsiderate people on the roads, if theyre not pulling out in front of you and going slow theyre riding their horses on the road.

[MAGPIE]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

If you guys crack the poos about cyclists being slow and taking up room, come out my way in rural Vic and deal with horse owners and riders.

HANDS DOWN the most inconsiderate people on the roads, if theyre not pulling out in front of you and going slow theyre riding their horses on the road.

Yep at least cyclists don't crap on the roads, those damn equine roadblocks need to be registered and have a number plate screwed to their ***.

[2011G6E]

Originally Posted by Chopped

I don't mind giving space to cyclists, I even appreciate the wave of approval for doing so.

I am curious though, do cyclists also have to allow the 1.5m space from vehicles?
I have noticed in slow moving traffic or at the lights, they tend to ride up right beside you and I would hate to get a fine for something that is more their fault than mine.

No, not at all. In fact if they move closer to [/i]you[/i], it's up to you to then move further away from them to make sure you maintain the 1 to 1.5 meter gap. Cyclists are under no obligation to stay any distance away from cars, it's completely the cars responsibility to make sure the car stays away from the cyclist.

You know...even though a cyclist can maneuver in traffic far faster and stop quicker than any car can...

As for the traffic light question, there's a simple (though stupid) answer. If you are stopped at a red light and a cyclist pulls up closer than the required 1 meter (probably leaning on your car...), then when the light goes green you cannot move...you must wait until the cyclist has decided he's going to move off, and only then can you move your car, making sure to maintain the proper gap and can find a place to overtake while maintaining the gap.
Of course this would be a rare occurrence because...you know..."stopping at a red light"...
The answers to your two questions are right here on the Transport Department website Q&A section on the laws:
http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/Safety/Que...oad-rules.aspx
Click on "frequently asked questions minimum passing distance section" and a .pdf file will open. Take note of numbers 10 and 11...they answer your two questions.


The laws, if they needed to be brought in at all for "cyclists safety measures", should have faced the reality of the situation and who has the real power in the relationship, and been reversed. They should have said "Cyclists must ensure that they stay at least a meter from cars at all times". Christ, it's what I do when I'm out riding...I'm not going to try and enforce my will on fast moving big lumps of metal zipping past me five times faster than I am travelling...I stay the hell out of the damn way! .

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by MAGPIE

They are legally allowed on the road too

Also what about runners/walkers who run/walk on roads where there are no footpaths, do they need to be registered, pay tax and wear a number plate too.

When walking you are not operating a road vehicle, so can't really compare that. Plus I have never seen a walker or jogger walking in the middle of a lane 'claiming a lane'
P
Also I never said bikes should be taxed, I just said they should be identifiable.

[2011G6E]

Originally Posted by Ben73

Also I never said bikes should be taxed, I just said they should be identifiable.

And that's the important thing right there. People say cyclists should be "registered", but what they actually mean is "clearly identifiable"..."registered" is just a convenient term.

Another point...cyclists are the only group on the road who is allowed out there without having to prove they know even the most basic road rules.
And if someone says "I already have a car licence", so what? I already had a car licence but had to go through the whole process again when I got a truck licence. And again when I got a motorcycle licence. Just because you have "a licence" doesn't mean you can venture out there in whatever you like with no further training or proof you know what you're doing...

[blueoval]

Ive seen plenty of jay walkers in the city crossing the road. They force the traffic to slow right down because of the impatience to wait at a traffic light. Why cant we make individuals like that identifiable? Sounds stupid doesnt it? Where does it end? Oh thats right....it ends when drivers get all cycling menaces off the road once and for all.....smh

I dont know why these threads keep appearing. Every single one of them turns to crap.

[MAGPIE]

Originally Posted by Ben73

When walking you are not operating a road vehicle, so can't really compare that. Plus I have never seen a walker or jogger walking in the middle of a lane 'claiming a lane'

Of course you can compare, they are operating on the road and making use of a facility my precious tax dollars have paid for.

I can't recall seeing any cyclists riding in the middle of a lane (normally they are as far left as possible), and the only time I see them "claiming a lane" is when they are making a right hand turn. Not too much to ask is it.

Originally Posted by Ben73

Also I never said bikes should be taxed, I just said they should be identifiable.

I never said you said anything, I was just covering all bases.

[MAGPIE]

Originally Posted by blueoval

I dont know why these threads keep appearing. Every single one of them turns to crap.

But there damn good sport, nearly as good as cycling itself.

[2011G6E]

So people don't have any problem at all with a group who has been given special laws putting them over and above all other motorised transport (which the roads were designed for, see the narrow lanes in most places now) and who are completely unidentifiable (and strongly wish to remain so) despite telling us they want to be seen as "legitimate road users" and "part of traffic" who are, by law, now "entitled to use the whole lane if they wish"...?

Good to know.

[NX74205]

Originally Posted by commodorenutt

I am a victim of an elitist minority cyclist. He pulled up at the lights, and because his feet were clipped into the pedals, leant on the car beside me. The driver of that car took offence, and bunny hopped the car on the spot, toppling Lycra wonderboy.

It's a pity I don't drive a manual, because I would've done exactly the same.

Originally Posted by Nova 8

Also my bonnet is not for someone on a bike to lean on!

This x 1000.

I don't know what goes through these people's heads to think that it is acceptable or even appropriate to treat other people's property like that.

[pottery beige]

if someones leans on your bonnet, regardless of pushbicycle or not

pull them up and offer them a smack in the mouth

or just jump on internertz in muchs outrage

[monzie]

I'am waiting for a tram driver to be booked for not giving a pushie enough room!!

[noflac52]

Originally Posted by blueoval

Ive seen plenty of jay walkers in the city crossing the road. They force the traffic to slow right down because of the impatience to wait at a traffic light. Why cant we make individuals like that identifiable? Sounds stupid doesnt it? Where does it end? Oh thats right....it ends when drivers get all cycling menaces off the road once and for all.....smh

I dont know why these threads keep appearing. Every single one of them turns to crap.

They keep appearing and being discussed with passion on both sides of the fence because there is something horribly wrong with the system at the moment that doesn't come close to satisfying the requirements of either motorists or cyclists.

Here's a suggestion! why don't both sides band together and protest/petition the QLD Gov to spend some time and money on a system that is fair and safe for both, rather than constantly airing differences and taking sides on a forum.

There is strength in numbers and if the government sees a united front lobbying them for improvements because no one is satisfied then some notice will be taken to rectify the situation.

At the moment there is a vocal minority of cyclists making a lot of noise and the government is now resting on its laurels and trotting out the safety mantra again to justify its stance. Saying look at us look what we have done to improve safety.

Its just inconvenient that it doesn't have a hope of working in the real world due to selfish attitudes, so unless a united front from motorists and cyclists show that they are one, as road users, and demand a system that works, be it more cycle lanes, adjustment to the regulations or accountability for the actions of all road users. Maybe all of these things and more will need to be adjusted to get it right but it won't happen while road users are divided into us and them interest groups.

We all use the roads in a lot of different ways. Unite and get strong representation.

Make it happen!

[Streets]

not sure what good it would do to have a number plate on a bike

if a car cut me off in traffic it's not like I'm going to ring the police and give them his number plate, so why would it be the same for a bike

I used to be a big bike whinger on this forum but at some point I realised that cyclists are actually humans just like me

[2011G6E]

Originally Posted by Streets

not sure what good it would do to have a number plate on a bike

if a car cut me off in traffic it's not like I'm going to ring the police and give them his number plate, so why would it be the same for a bike

I used to be a big bike whinger on this forum but at some point I realised that cyclists are actually humans just like me

Cut you off in traffic? No. Of course not.

However...did something that caused You to have an accident? Scraped or otherwise damaged your vehicle? Road rage and ride off? Doing something dangerous that hurt someone else in front of you? Struck a pedestrian in front of you and you witnessed what happened?

These are all things that, if the person was on a motorbike, in a car, driving a truck or bus, whatever, as a responsible citizen you should ring police about and inform them of at least part of the number plate...or even if you only have to contact your insurer to inform them who did the damage to your car so they know who to pursue.

[pottery beige]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

Cut you off in traffic? No. Of course not.

However...did something that caused You to have an accident? Scraped or otherwise damaged your vehicle? Road rage and ride off? Doing something dangerous that hurt someone else in front of you? Struck a pedestrian in front of you and you witnessed what happened?

These are all things that, if the person was on a motorbike, in a car, driving a truck or bus, whatever, as a responsible citizen you should ring police about and inform them of at least part of the number plate...or even if you only have to contact your insurer to inform them who did the damage to your car so they know who to pursue.

I am outraged with how much outrages you must come across in your life

[hedgehobb]

Originally Posted by pottery beige

I am outraged with how much outrages you must come across in your life

I'm outraged by your outrages over someone else outrage.

[MAGPIE]

Can't believe Obama and the western world are so concerned about ISIS when they should be concentrating on CYCLISTS the biggest threat to the free world since... well ever.

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by MAGPIE

Of course you can compare, they are operating on the road and making use of a facility my precious tax dollars have paid for.

I can't recall seeing any cyclists riding in the middle of a lane (normally they are as far left as possible), and the only time I see them "claiming a lane" is when they are making a right hand turn. Not too much to ask is it.

Pedestrians don't have right of way on roads except at specific locations(crossing, traffic lights etc) they also don't have rules that say car must give them x amount of room when passing them on the road. Cyclists have a right to ride on the road, pedestrians don't. So comparing the two is completely stupid.
Just because some pedestrians illegally walk on the road, that doesn't suddenly make cyclists and pedestrians the same thing.

Also how stupid is it of us to discuss road related things on a car forum when Isis exists. Aff should just shut down or just change it's identity to a forum that only discusses important foreign wars and not what wheels you have on your car.

[MAGPIE]

Too easy

[ljf12]

I have a simplistic view on this debate, bicycles and cars/trucks etc will never safely share busy roads because of the speed differential.

Like it or hate it cyclists are legally allowed on most roads but as a cyclist you must accept the fact you are the one at most risk of harm. It's like the shark cull debate in WA, individuals choice to put themselves in harms way in a risky environment.

[olfella]

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-...31-11f37b.html
I am one for bikes being identifiable and by the outcome of the linked court decision it would be interesting to know how this other bike rider is going to find the necessaries without third party insurance.

[FoxtrotGolfXray 5.0]

So, after 5 pages of discussion/debate on a topic that has arisen numerous times on AFF, the conclusion, if I may, seems to be something along the lines of:

We, as road users, must expect that there are a number of different styles of road users that share that same space with us, all with different capabilities and abilities. If, as a user, we show courtesy and respect to each and every other user, and in turn that courtesy and respect is given to us, then there will be no need for rules that attempt to legalise and enforce that very same courtesy and respect that should be displayed anyway.

There, that really wasn't that hard, was it?

[/THREAD]

Craig H

[prydey]

Originally Posted by Streets

I used to be a big bike whinger on this forum but at some point I realised that cyclists are actually humans just like me

well said. cyclists are humans. we are also someones son/daughter/father/mother/brother/sister/uncle/aunt/g'pa/g'ma/ etc etc. when it becomes personal, people are much more respectful. i know quite a few people that have changed their attitude when they discover they know someone or are related to someone involved in cycling.

Originally Posted by psychobimbo

courtesy and respect

this is what its all about. not just cycling but life in general.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

That picture I took of the Montville Palmwoods road on the Sunshine Coast...when I was driving back up the range at the posted limit...50kph I believe...I had a very nice and very large dark grey Mercedes coupe a short distance behind me. As I rounded a tight corner in the old Celica, I found in front of me three MAMIL's, standing up on the pedals, huffing and puffing away as they rode very slowly up the steep hill. I jammed on the anchors, cars coming the other way so I couldn't overtake, and leaned on the horn...hard. Then I remembered the Mercedes. I glanced in the mirror and he came around the corner behind me where I was virtually stationary (going about 10kph), and his nose dove to the bitumen as I was saved from a staggeringly expensive nose to tail by modern ABS technology. If it had been me behind him, in my non-ABS equipped Celica, I would have been picking my teeth out of his bootlid, all because three numpties wanted to use the public roads as their own personal exercise track...

this is a common theme to many arguments against cyclists being on the road. what if you replace the cyclists in your story with something else. lets say, a herd of cows for example. what if it was a fallen tree?? basically, as operator of the motor vehicle, it is your job to make sure that you are able to avoid these types of situations, and usually comes under the banner 'driving to the conditions' or such like. this means if visibility is poor, or you are, i don't know, driving around a sharp bend for example, you should be prepared for unexpected objects.

also, seeing as how you are banging on about momentarily straddling double white lines, what if there is a fallen tree partially blocking the lane, and to get around the tree, you have to go over the double lines?? would you just sit there until emergency services comes to remove it? or would you be able to use your judgement, and given the relatively short amount of time you would be over the lines, safely maneuver your car around the obstacle??

its not exactly rocket science. if you aren't sure, or if you can't see, then it is still deemed unsafe.

also, if you are held up by cyclists on a road that is difficult to pass, what would be the maximum delay, in the big scheme of things?? most of the time, the delay would be measure in seconds, not even minutes, and if it was minutes, it would be less than 5.

the thing is, most of these types of articles are nothing more than click bait. i do my fair share of riding and rarely do i have issues with other road users. occasionally i get passed a bit close, but on the whole, its not that bad. having said that, i can only speak for adelaide, which is arguably the best city to ride in, in the country, probably due to the lower population. if i ride thinking cars are out to get me, then i would get home thinking the cars were out to get me. instead, i ride with a much more positive frame of mind, and am not that bothered by cars.


and the whole 'pay rego' thing, seriously, do some research. even if it was a valid argument, its not going to somehow make me disappear is it??! i will still be on the road.

[NX74205]

Originally Posted by prydey

and the whole 'pay rego' thing, seriously, do some research. even if it was a valid argument, its not going to somehow make me disappear is it??! i will still be on the road.

What do you mean, even 'if' it was a valid argument? I don't see any down sides to requiring cyclists to pay for registration and display some sort of registration number for identification purposes. That way, it will be much easier to enforce traffic penalties when they get snapped running a red light, or for insurance to catch up with them when they run into someone's car then not pay for the damage, even if they were at fault. Far from registration making cyclists 'disappear', it's about making them appear more prominently. Making them identifiable will hopefully also make them more accountable for their actions on the road.

[oxmo]

Originally Posted by NX74205

What do you mean, even 'if' it was a valid argument? I don't see any down sides to requiring cyclists to pay for registration and display some sort of registration number for identification purposes. That way, it will be much easier to enforce traffic penalties when they get snapped running a red light, or for insurance to catch up with them when they run into someone's car then not pay for the damage, even if they were at fault. Far from registration making cyclists 'disappear', it's about making them appear more prominently. Making them identifiable will hopefully also make them more accountable for their actions on the road.

"I don't see any down sides to requiring cyclists to pay for registration and display some sort of registration number for identification purposes." +1

[prydey]

Originally Posted by NX74205

What do you mean, even 'if' it was a valid argument? I don't see any down sides to requiring cyclists to pay for registration and display some sort of registration number for identification purposes. That way, it will be much easier to enforce traffic penalties when they get snapped running a red light, or for insurance to catch up with them when they run into someone's car then not pay for the damage, even if they were at fault. Far from registration making cyclists 'disappear', it's about making them appear more prominently. Making them identifiable will hopefully also make them more accountable for their actions on the road.

the most common argument says cyclists shouldn't be on the road due to not paying. well, if i did pay, i would still be on the road. so when you come up behind me on your high horse, you'll have to think of some other poorly researched reason for me to not be there.

as for rego, and being identifiable, hows that working out for cars and trucks?? really decreasing the rate at which people break the law isn't it!

[mcnews]

Yes have more rules for everyone. Slaps forehead. Australia is the biggest nanny pansy state in the universe already thanks very much.

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by prydey

also, seeing as how you are banging on about momentarily straddling double white lines


and the whole 'pay rego' thing, seriously, do some research. even if it was a valid argument, its not going to somehow make me disappear is it??! i will still be on the road.

In a perfect world it would be straddling the line. I was in the passenger seat this morning when we came across a group of cyclists in a 100 zone. To pass them we would of had to put the entire vehicle over the double lines. To be honest they were riding 3 abreast.

Also I may have missed the post on this thread that said people want bikes to pay rego so they disappear. Most people here seam to just want bike to be identifiable by a plate not necessarily pay yearly rego.