Cyclists are not people!

By 2 June, 2010 71

That is if you believe the road works sign located at the Flemington Road/Sandford Street intersection in Mitchell:

“CYCLISTS WATCH FOR MERGING TRAFFIC”

The definition of traffic being;

  1. The passage of people or vehicles along routes of transportation.
  2. Vehicles or pedestrians in transit

The sign suggests that a “cyclist” is none of these?

The purpose of this road sign is beyond me.  For starters… people on bicycles are part of traffic.  Secondly… any road user, regardless of their mode of transport, shouldn’t need a road sign to remind them to watch for merging traffic… that’s just an everyday part of using our road network.  Signs like this breed complacent road users.

Much like the “Watch For Entering Traffic” signs that can be found on Drake Brokman Drive in Holt.  The sign is redundant… road users should always be looking out for other road users or animals that might be entering the road at any stage of their journey, not just when a sign tells them to.

I’ve digressed… I’m sorry to announce to those who choose to use naturally aspirated forms of wheeled transport… according to Roads ACT, or construction companies contracted by ACT GovCo, when you get on your bike, you are apparently no longer a “people”, your bike is not a “vehicle”, you are not even a lowly “…pedestrian in transit”… you are just a cyclist.

How do you feel?

Please login to post your comments
71 Responses to Cyclists are not people!
#1
p19:48 am, 02 Jun 10

Maybe it’s a lycra thing?

#2
josh9:51 am, 02 Jun 10

is a cyclist not a pedestrian in transit?

how is that different than addressing drivers, and alerting them of potential road hazards?

if nothing else, pedestrian, vehicle or otherwise, I’m sure we can all agree that you’re an abrasive twat just stirring the pot and looking for trouble.

#3
buzz81910:20 am, 02 Jun 10

Umm the exact opposite of you? The sign is there as a warning, it isn’t picking on cyclists, it isn’t doing anything like that.

You are looking at it an totally PC way… OOOHHH IT SAYS CYCLIST IT IS BEING DISCRIMINATORY OOOHH!! IM A BIG GIRLS BLOUSE WHO HAS TO WHINGE BECAUSE I FEEL DIFFERENT!!!

It makes for complacent drivers? No it makes people more aware, they can be driving down see the sign and say, yeah that’s right even though this is pretty muchily a rural road there might be traffic coming out of driveways.

It’s trying to help people, what the road workers and the government do not need, is people getting up in arms over the most stupid inane things that have no real bearing on every day life.

You have no real idea do you Sgt?

#4
justbands10:29 am, 02 Jun 10

1. Build a bridge

I think you know what “2.” will be.

What a stupid whinge about nothing.

#5
Pommy bastard10:39 am, 02 Jun 10

I prefer the term “target” to “cyclist”, don’t you?

#6
Richo10:40 am, 02 Jun 10

I think he’s right They aren’t.

They are generally inconsiderate people who don’t know the road rules or choose to ignore them because it suits them.

#7
Postalgeek11:00 am, 02 Jun 10

Richo said :

I think he’s right They aren’t.

They are generally inconsiderate people who don’t know the road rules or choose to ignore them because it suits them.

As opposed to car drivers who continue to prove that speed cameras will never pay for themselves, don’t require law enforcement on the road, and never have accidents or require insurance.

#8
astrojax11:15 am, 02 Jun 10

a bicycle is a vehicle, ffs.

the sign simply targets a particular sub-set of vehicles – suggest you pop back to primary school for rudimentary maths…

#9
georgesgenitals11:24 am, 02 Jun 10

“How do you feel?”

I feel like a Toohey’s, I…

#10
Aurelius12:02 pm, 02 Jun 10

I read the original post three times, and I’m failing to find a point.
If anyone spots it, and can show it to me, that’d be handy.
Thanks. Cheerio.

#11
BenjaminL12:09 pm, 02 Jun 10

Cyclists, like gingers, have no souls. This sign is really just to single you out and warn other soul containing motorists of your presence. You ARE being targeted for being less than human.

Maybe we need another sign that says:
GINGERS WATCH FOR MERGING TRAFFIC

#12
kambahkrawler12:12 pm, 02 Jun 10

I think his point is that when a cyclist rides on the pavement s/he is not a pedestrian so has to get on the road (with the cars),
when on the road is too slow therefore not a vehicle therefore should get off it (ie mingle with the pedestrians, and not be allowed across pedestrian crossings unless we dismount),
when riding in a a national park IS a vehicle and therefore only allowed on roads (with cars) or firetrails (where 4wd’s and moto’s play),
when thinking about riding a mountain bike in a catchment area is also a vehicle and therefore not allowed even on firetrails because of the ‘contamination’ s/he may cause (despite walkers being allowed).

The end result is that when we’re on a bike and have laws that bounce us around like a pinball, it gets a bit grating.

#13
Thoroughly Smashed12:25 pm, 02 Jun 10

Sweet Jesus.

#14
hellspice12:28 pm, 02 Jun 10

OMG, finally one of them has worked it out !!

#15
la mente torbida12:59 pm, 02 Jun 10

Dammit! … reading this has made me realise that there’s 3 minutes of my life I’m not getting back.

#16
Pommy bastard1:11 pm, 02 Jun 10

BenjaminL said :

Cyclists, like gingers, have no souls.

That’s why I find these Haryy Potter movies unconvincing.

A ginger with two mates? Hardly likely.

#17
James-T-Kirk1:14 pm, 02 Jun 10

Ahhhhh – the old Cyclists are vehicles question..

This problem is simply created by the blithering idiots who believe that they can be pedestrians at one time and vehicles a millisecond later. It gets a bit scary when they decide to “change mode” from Pedestrian to Vehicle without paying attention to traffic flows…..

Sorry guys…. Pedestrians have their feet on the ground, and are not supported by wheels.

I completely approve of signs targeting cyclists. It is just like the pictures of bikes in the walk/don’t walk signs – Just there to remind them that like the pedestrians – crossing while the light is red may be very very bad…..

#18
PM1:19 pm, 02 Jun 10

“The sign suggests that a “cyclist” is none of these?”

Um… no it doesn’t.

“Much like the “Watch For Entering Traffic” signs that can be found on Drake Brokman Drive in Holt. The sign is redundant… road users should always be looking out for other road users or animals that might be entering the road at any stage of their journey, not just when a sign tells them to.”

There you go – maybe you’ve just contradicted yourself. Is the cyclist sign redundant, or is the government discriminating against cars, too, by suggesting they aren’t traffic?

#19
ConanOfCooma1:20 pm, 02 Jun 10

You have posted a definition of Traffic from answers.com.

How about you check up on some actual legislation, see what makes a bike qualify as traffic, because not all do.

Cyclists need signs like that, especially in Canberra, because they think that they are untouchable, and only follow the road rules when it suits them (suddenly switching to pedestrian mode and using the footpaths and vice versa, pushing to the front of the red light queue and then slowing everyone down when it turns green, etc, etc…).

Regrettably, most Canberra drivers also need convoluted signs and visual indicators on how to drive, but hey, it’s better than VIC or QLD!

#20
bigcohuna12:19 pm, 02 Jun 10

The big question here is that the original poster complained of not being recognised as a road user.

normally when they are called road users (i.e. vehicle traffic) they jump up an down and say nay. nicely forgetting htat when they run a red light and get hit by a car that it was their fault in the first place. Like when they run into pedestrians and other cars they are at fault. But they dont pay up since they arent insured, etc.

so heres the deal

as the original poster has in black & white demanded to be treated like a normal vehicle user so the answer is a definate:

Licence
Registration
CTPI

or we put on some work for the dole types to go round and cut their spokes

#21
snakeye4:40 pm, 02 Jun 10

Podgy middle aged lycra clad people on bikes turn me on.

#22
georgesgenitals4:48 pm, 02 Jun 10

snakeye said :

Podgy middle aged lycra clad people on bikes turn me on.

Me too. Those chicks are so hot.

#23
hellspice4:49 pm, 02 Jun 10

James-T-Kirk said :

This problem is simply created by the blithering idiots who believe that they can be pedestrians at one time and vehicles a millisecond later. It gets a bit scary when they decide to “change mode” from Pedestrian to Vehicle without paying attention to traffic flows…..

Sounds like we need some “transformer” sign’s. That might cover the situation for a while

#24
J Dawg5:00 pm, 02 Jun 10

James-T-Kirk said :

It gets a bit scary when they decide to “change mode” from Pedestrian to Vehicle without paying attention to traffic flows…..

And it gets a bit annoying when a cyclist rides up to an intersection on the road, then pops off the road and rides across a green pedestrian light, only go back on the road after the intersection!

kambahkrawler said :

The end result is that when we’re on a bike and have laws that bounce us around like a pinball, it gets a bit grating.

Hmmmm I fail to see why this is a problem since the majority of cyclists do not obey the most basic of cycling laws. (see http://the-riotact.com/?p=20210)

#25
Thoroughly Smashed6:05 pm, 02 Jun 10

J Dawg said :

And it gets a bit annoying when a cyclist rides up to an intersection on the road, then pops off the road and rides across a green pedestrian light, only go back on the road after the intersection!

Other than the question of dismounting and walking vs riding across pedestrian crossings, what’s your issue with this?

#26
TheVirulentOne6:22 pm, 02 Jun 10

Hmmm, I thought the Roads ACT folk got it exactly right, cyclists aren’t people.

#27
bd846:33 pm, 02 Jun 10

Well given that they are putting up a warning sign that would likely be no bigger than an A4 piece of paper with writing that needs to be big enough for people to read, the current wording of the sign would be the most appropriate. I don’t think they can display a full definition of the meaning of the sign on the sign or include every possible thing the cyclist should be watching out for.

On the same subject, there are recently installed signs near the Athllon Dr/ Beasley St intersection and Melrose High/Marist that say “watch for pedestrians”. Would you like them to say something different too! Maybe.. watch for stupid school kids running across the road? or, watch for cyclists riding in the middle of the lane? or, motorists who fail to indicate? Hey we could just put signs everywhere!

#28
Pork Hunt6:50 pm, 02 Jun 10

la mente torbida said :

Dammit! … reading this has made me realise that there’s 3 minutes of my life I’m not getting back.

You’re lucky you got in early, I had to read till post #25 thus consuming a further 3 minutes..

What would one be classed as if one travelled by pogo stick?

#29
Aeek9:14 pm, 02 Jun 10

Aeek said :

What would one be classed as if one travelled by pogo stick?

Pedestrian. No wheels and not an animal rules out everything else.

#30
ProudTenant9:40 am, 03 Jun 10

May I suggest this is the whinge of all whinges.

Honestly. It’s a freakin’ sign.

Advertisement
GET PREMIUM MEMBERSHIP

Halloween in Australia?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

IMAGES OF CANBERRA

Advertisement
Sponsors
RiotACT Proudly Supports
Copyright © 2014 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.