Advertisement

The No Bell Bicyclists

By 27 December 2012 189

An encounter today on the shared footpath/bicycle caused a bicyclist who had no bell. We did not hear him coming from behind. I asked him where his bell was. He said he didn’t need one as it didn’t fit on his bars.

Well here is what you need under the ACT Road Rules:

258 Equipment on a bicycle

A person must not ride a bicycle that does not have:

(a) at least 1 effective brake; and

(b) a bell, horn, or similar warning device, in working order.

Offence provision.

Please login to post your comments
189 Responses to The No Bell Bicyclists
#151
Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd9:08 pm, 13 Feb 13

Baldy said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

Baldy said :

We had an incident with two idiot bikers the other day coming back from the Multicultural Festival. We walking with a pram and there were two other couples nearby.

As we were walking along and taking over the other two prams these idiot bikers rode up and rode between the very small space between our pram and another, knocking both pram sushers aside.

Considering the riders looked like they were both in their late 30 and each had expensive bikes I would have thought a little curtesy would prevail but apparently, bikes have right of way whether it is on the road or the footpath.

Those bike riders are putting themselves and bikes in serious danger if this is true.

Yes. The bikes were in serious danger. That was my only concern at the time as well.

Babies can take care of themselves.

And it is true. I have no interest in making up random stories just to post on Riot Act

You miss my point. I was alluding to that they would try that sort of horrid crap on someone who would break their leg and their bike.

What sort of pos puts a little baby in a pram in danger that way?

#152
Deckard9:08 pm, 13 Feb 13

Baldy raises one good point. I ride on bike paths everyday and reckon that kids in prams, on bikes or walking get right of way. You can have the us v them mentality or be racing for your strava ranking but when a little kid gets hurt it’s not much fun for anyone.

That said, generalisations piss me off. Whether it’s pedestrians, cyclists, Canberra drivers or people who live in Charnwood, we are all the same. There’s good, there’s indifferent, there’s bad. And maybe we should all sit back and listen to what Rodney King has to say.

#153
Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd9:13 pm, 13 Feb 13

GardeningGirl said :

Grail said :

I do not dismount for crossings. When driving, I stop to allow mounted cyclists to cross. Similarly, I do not complain when a pub doesn’t have dry straw to accommodate my horse. Some laws make no sense, so there is no point obeying them. Sure, I will get arrested some day. But I will deal with that when it happens. In the meantime I fund lobbying to have that useless law repealed.

Does anyone know the purpose of the rule? If someone approaches at a speed and direction that ensures I have time to see them, and if they are not impeding anyone else’s use of the crossing, I really don’t care if they walk or ride or tango their way across. Is the dismount rule meant to simply slow them down?

The purpose of the rule is that too many half witted cyclists zoom across crossings at speed without even looking.

It’s sad that a dumb rule like this is even in play when most cyclists I see do go as slow as the pedestrians, but the amount of times I have nearly hit no looking speeding cyclists on crossings is ridiculous.

#154
LSWCHP9:19 pm, 13 Feb 13

Jim Jones said :

Baldy said :

Otherwise come back with a rebuttle of my statements on the subject matter with opinions/facts of your own.

My ‘opinion’ is you’re full of sh1t. Your ‘opinion’ that cyclists are all crap and show a ‘shocking lack of respect’ is a load of horsesh1t.

You’ve not bothered with any facts, but I can safely say that it is a fact that some dude making sweeping (bollocks) generalisations about an incredibly diverse group of road users isn’t the sparkliest penny in the fountain and has nothing to offer in the way of intelligent debate.

That’s my ‘rebuttle’.

Good to see you picked up on that Malapropism there Jim. As we all know, rebuttling actually occurs in the situation where your butler fails at some task, and you ask him to come back and correct the situation. For example, “Jeeves, there’s not enough Gin in this G&T. Please rebuttle it”. :-)

#155
Postalgeek10:44 pm, 13 Feb 13

Deckard said :

Baldy raises one good point. I ride on bike paths everyday and reckon that kids in prams, on bikes or walking get right of way. You can have the us v them mentality or be racing for your strava ranking but when a little kid gets hurt it’s not much fun for anyone.

That said, generalisations piss me off. Whether it’s pedestrians, cyclists, Canberra drivers or people who live in Charnwood, we are all the same. There’s good, there’s indifferent, there’s bad. And maybe we should all sit back and listen to what Rodney King has to say.

I agree that cyclists should be extra careful around kids and animals, and abusing them doesn’t reflect well on the abuser (though ‘abuse’ is in the eye of the beholder).

Having said that, guardians need a good kick up the backside if they treat a shared path like a park and let their wards drift erratically. There are plenty of places to let a child ‘off the leash’, but a narrow shared path or cycleway is not one of them, any more than a road is a suitable place. It’s dangerous for other users and exceptionally dangerous for kids who are going to have the laws of physics stacked against them in a collision with an adult cyclist.

Any user of a shared path should behave as they would on a road, acting predictably and being aware of their surrounds, giving other users space, not occupying the lane of oncoming traffic, staying left to allow faster traffic to pass, and passing safely (no need to point out that there are plenty of people who don’t behave like this on the road).

#156
Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd10:56 pm, 13 Feb 13

To all those basically saying keep your children in line while walking, do you have kids? Do you remember stumbling as a kid. It’s up to a responsible cyclist to identify a child and slow the eff down.

#157
Postalgeek12:39 am, 14 Feb 13

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

To all those basically saying keep your children in line while walking, do you have kids? Do you remember stumbling as a kid. It’s up to a responsible cyclist to identify a child and slow the eff down.

To reiterate my very first sentence:

I agree that cyclists should be extra careful around kids and animals, and abusing them doesn’t reflect well on the abuser (though ‘abuse’ is in the eye of the beholder).

Yes I have kids and I do not think busy thoroughfares are the best place for them to learn direction and balance.

But hey, if you think your kids should be free to swerve in front of oncoming cyclists, whatever their speed, good for you. Let me know how it works out for you.

#158
wildturkeycanoe6:43 am, 14 Feb 13

Postalgeek, you obviously have no children. If you think lashing kids together like train cars to prevent drifting onto the wrong side of the track is what should happen, you really need a wake up call into reality. Here is a quote from the TAMS website about shared paths – “Cyclists should give way to pedestrians and other users at all times”. It does not say cyclists have a right to free passage without impediment from toddlers. Next you’ll be wanting dogs on leashes in these leash free areas in case they run out in front of you or walking licenses to be issued after completing a competency test, to see if you can pace a straight line for 10 metres without veering +/- 30cm. Walking whilst drunk or under the influence of drugs should be banned as well as talking on a mobile, listening to loud music or whilst engaging in the consumption of food and/or beverages.

#159
screaming banshee8:09 am, 14 Feb 13

Postalgeek said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

To all those basically saying keep your children in line while walking, do you have kids? Do you remember stumbling as a kid. It’s up to a responsible cyclist to identify a child and slow the eff down.

To reiterate my very first sentence:

I agree that cyclists should be extra careful around kids and animals, and abusing them doesn’t reflect well on the abuser (though ‘abuse’ is in the eye of the beholder).

Yes I have kids and I do not think busy thoroughfares are the best place for them to learn direction and balance.

But hey, if you think your kids should be free to swerve in front of oncoming cyclists, whatever their speed, good for you. Let me know how it works out for you.

Because a 2 hour session on a quiet footpath is sufficient to learn direction and balance….judging by the number of adult cyclists wobbling all over the roads I’d say its a lifelong learning thing.

It would be nice though if the govt provided facilities specifically designed to teach kids to ride….you know like the one in belconnen that already exists and just needs to mowed and cleaned up and the public allowed access. ARE WE READING THIS KATY?

#160
Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd8:45 am, 14 Feb 13

Postalgeek said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

To all those basically saying keep your children in line while walking, do you have kids? Do you remember stumbling as a kid. It’s up to a responsible cyclist to identify a child and slow the eff down.

To reiterate my very first sentence:

I agree that cyclists should be extra careful around kids and animals, and abusing them doesn’t reflect well on the abuser (though ‘abuse’ is in the eye of the beholder).

Yes I have kids and I do not think busy thoroughfares are the best place for them to learn direction and balance.

But hey, if you think your kids should be free to swerve in front of oncoming cyclists, whatever their speed, good for you. Let me know how it works out for you.

It’s worked out great so far. We all keep left as much as possible and the cyclists so far have always gone around without issue.

#161
KB19718:52 am, 14 Feb 13

I just have to say this ….. WHAT AN AWESOME RIDE TO WORK TODAY!!!!

All the car drivers were courteous, all the dog owners had their dogs on leads, all the pedestrians were walking left and not wandering all over the place like a mixo rabbit.

& the morning was beautiful. So much better than commuting by car.

#162
Baldy9:17 am, 14 Feb 13

Jim Jones said :

Baldy said :

Otherwise come back with a rebuttle of my statements on the subject matter with opinions/facts of your own.

My ‘opinion’ is you’re full of sh1t. Your ‘opinion’ that cyclists are all crap and show a ‘shocking lack of respect’ is a load of horsesh1t.

You’ve not bothered with any facts, but I can safely say that it is a fact that some dude making sweeping (bollocks) generalisations about an incredibly diverse group of road users isn’t the sparkliest penny in the fountain and has nothing to offer in the way of intelligent debate.

That’s my ‘rebuttle’.

Ooohhh ouch. You got me with your witty comeback.
Thank you for proving my point.
You don’t have any real or intelligent contribution to the conversation so you insult the poster, thus making you feel superior. Hopefully (for you) they won’t respond so you can feel that you argued them down, thus proving your superiority.

Good for you. I can tell your high school debating team were eager to have you on their side.

Now if you please step aside, some of us are trying to have a real conversation.

#163
Baldy9:24 am, 14 Feb 13

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

Baldy said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

Baldy said :

We had an incident with two idiot bikers the other day coming back from the Multicultural Festival. We walking with a pram and there were two other couples nearby.

As we were walking along and taking over the other two prams these idiot bikers rode up and rode between the very small space between our pram and another, knocking both pram sushers aside.

Considering the riders looked like they were both in their late 30 and each had expensive bikes I would have thought a little curtesy would prevail but apparently, bikes have right of way whether it is on the road or the footpath.

Those bike riders are putting themselves and bikes in serious danger if this is true.

Yes. The bikes were in serious danger. That was my only concern at the time as well.

Babies can take care of themselves.

And it is true. I have no interest in making up random stories just to post on Riot Act

You miss my point. I was alluding to that they would try that sort of horrid crap on someone who would break their leg and their bike.

What sort of pos puts a little baby in a pram in danger that way?

Ah. My mistake sorry. I did think that was a strange comment.

Someone who is only thinking of themselves and their goals. Everyone else is just background.

#164
Postalgeek9:30 am, 14 Feb 13

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

Postalgeek said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

To all those basically saying keep your children in line while walking, do you have kids? Do you remember stumbling as a kid. It’s up to a responsible cyclist to identify a child and slow the eff down.

To reiterate my very first sentence:

I agree that cyclists should be extra careful around kids and animals, and abusing them doesn’t reflect well on the abuser (though ‘abuse’ is in the eye of the beholder).

Yes I have kids and I do not think busy thoroughfares are the best place for them to learn direction and balance.

But hey, if you think your kids should be free to swerve in front of oncoming cyclists, whatever their speed, good for you. Let me know how it works out for you.

It’s worked out great so far. We all keep left as much as possible and the cyclists so far have always gone around without issue.

Yep, there’s that keeping left thing working for you. Good to hear.

#165
dpm9:37 am, 14 Feb 13

KB1971 said :

I just have to say this ….. WHAT AN AWESOME RIDE TO WORK TODAY!!!!

and the morning was beautiful. So much better than commuting by car.

+1! It was a nice morning for a ride! I hope all the pedestrians, joggers, motorists and pram pushers are also happy this AM, and not angry with the world! :-)

#166
Postalgeek9:40 am, 14 Feb 13

wildturkeycanoe said :

Postalgeek, you obviously have no children. If you think lashing kids together like train cars to prevent drifting onto the wrong side of the track is what should happen, you really need a wake up call into reality. Here is a quote from the TAMS website about shared paths – “Cyclists should give way to pedestrians and other users at all times”. It does not say cyclists have a right to free passage without impediment from toddlers. Next you’ll be wanting dogs on leashes in these leash free areas in case they run out in front of you or walking licenses to be issued after completing a competency test, to see if you can pace a straight line for 10 metres without veering /- 30cm. Walking whilst drunk or under the influence of drugs should be banned as well as talking on a mobile, listening to loud music or whilst engaging in the consumption of food and/or beverages.

Nice straw man, with a subtle hint of hysteria. I liked the bit about wanting dogs on leashes in off-leash areas.

Equally entertaining was your pick of the choice cuts of the TAMS dictate while ignoring the rest:

Shared path
(Mostly black bitumen often marked with white centre lines)
The use of shared paths is restricted to non-motorised transport (with the exception of motorised wheelchairs and power assisted pedal cycles). Both pedestrians and cyclists must share the use of these paths. Please respect all users and be prepared to give way to cyclists and pedestrians as necessary. When cycling, warn of your approach by sounding your bell; if you are cycling or walking, keep to the left. Cyclists should pass pedestrians on the right. Cyclists should give way to pedestrians and other users at all times. If you are a pedestrian, keep a look out for cyclists and give them room to pass. Dogs must be on a leash at all times.

http://www.tams.act.gov.au/roads-transport/cycling/cycling_information/road_rules

#167
Dilandach10:09 am, 14 Feb 13

Postalgeek said :

I agree that cyclists should be extra careful around kids and animals, and abusing them doesn’t reflect well on the abuser (though ‘abuse’ is in the eye of the beholder).

Yes I have kids and I do not think busy thoroughfares are the best place for them to learn direction and balance.

But hey, if you think your kids should be free to swerve in front of oncoming cyclists, whatever their speed, good for you. Let me know how it works out for you.

Any cyclist that doesn’t give way like they’re supposed to and ends up hitting one of my little ones because they’re riding like a juiced up Armstrong are going to get their bike placed internally via their closest orifice.

* Use your damn bell, I don’t give a shit what excuse you come up with for not having one.
* Give way to pedestrians like you’re supposed to, the pathways aren’t a velodrome.
* Be aware of little kids and don’t be a self righteous jackass that thinks its cyclists first and foremost on the path. Is it really too much to ask to slow down?

Cyclists don’t like the crap that some drivers pull so why do it to pedestrians?

#168
Dilandach10:11 am, 14 Feb 13

Postalgeek said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

Postalgeek, you obviously have no children. If you think lashing kids together like train cars to prevent drifting onto the wrong side of the track is what should happen, you really need a wake up call into reality. Here is a quote from the TAMS website about shared paths – “Cyclists should give way to pedestrians and other users at all times”. It does not say cyclists have a right to free passage without impediment from toddlers. Next you’ll be wanting dogs on leashes in these leash free areas in case they run out in front of you or walking licenses to be issued after completing a competency test, to see if you can pace a straight line for 10 metres without veering /- 30cm. Walking whilst drunk or under the influence of drugs should be banned as well as talking on a mobile, listening to loud music or whilst engaging in the consumption of food and/or beverages.

Nice straw man, with a subtle hint of hysteria. I liked the bit about wanting dogs on leashes in off-leash areas.

Equally entertaining was your pick of the choice cuts of the TAMS dictate while ignoring the rest:

Shared path
(Mostly black bitumen often marked with white centre lines)
The use of shared paths is restricted to non-motorised transport (with the exception of motorised wheelchairs and power assisted pedal cycles). Both pedestrians and cyclists must share the use of these paths. Please respect all users and be prepared to give way to cyclists and pedestrians as necessary. When cycling, warn of your approach by sounding your bell; if you are cycling or walking, keep to the left. Cyclists should pass pedestrians on the right. Cyclists should give way to pedestrians and other users at all times. If you are a pedestrian, keep a look out for cyclists and give them room to pass. Dogs must be on a leash at all times.

http://www.tams.act.gov.au/roads-transport/cycling/cycling_information/road_rules

Nice that you neglected to bold Cyclists should give way to pedestrians and other users at all times.

#169
Postalgeek11:08 am, 14 Feb 13

Dilandach said :

Nice that you neglected to bold Cyclists should give way to pedestrians and other users at all times.

Wildturkeycanoe already highlighted that section, but if you need things done twice for you here you go:

Cyclists should give way to pedestrians and other users at all times.

Now read the rest of it.

#170
Postalgeek11:10 am, 14 Feb 13

Dilandach said :

Postalgeek said :

I agree that cyclists should be extra careful around kids and animals, and abusing them doesn’t reflect well on the abuser (though ‘abuse’ is in the eye of the beholder).

Yes I have kids and I do not think busy thoroughfares are the best place for them to learn direction and balance.

But hey, if you think your kids should be free to swerve in front of oncoming cyclists, whatever their speed, good for you. Let me know how it works out for you.

Any cyclist that doesn’t give way like they’re supposed to and ends up hitting one of my little ones because they’re riding like a juiced up Armstrong are going to get their bike placed internally via their closest orifice.

* Use your damn bell, I don’t give a shit what excuse you come up with for not having one.
* Give way to pedestrians like you’re supposed to, the pathways aren’t a velodrome.
* Be aware of little kids and don’t be a self righteous jackass that thinks its cyclists first and foremost on the path. Is it really too much to ask to slow down?

Cyclists don’t like the crap that some drivers pull so why do it to pedestrians?

Yeah, I can see now reading back through what I’ve written that I’ve said that cyclists shouldn’t be careful around kids.

I think my only mistake was suggesting that all users abide by the rules and that parents should shoulder some responsibility and endeavour to prevent their kids drifting across shared lanes and causing accidents. But I can understand why that would be offensive to a certain group of people.

#171
KB197111:21 am, 14 Feb 13

Dilandach said :

Postalgeek said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

Postalgeek, you obviously have no children. If you think lashing kids together like train cars to prevent drifting onto the wrong side of the track is what should happen, you really need a wake up call into reality. Here is a quote from the TAMS website about shared paths – “Cyclists should give way to pedestrians and other users at all times”. It does not say cyclists have a right to free passage without impediment from toddlers. Next you’ll be wanting dogs on leashes in these leash free areas in case they run out in front of you or walking licenses to be issued after completing a competency test, to see if you can pace a straight line for 10 metres without veering /- 30cm. Walking whilst drunk or under the influence of drugs should be banned as well as talking on a mobile, listening to loud music or whilst engaging in the consumption of food and/or beverages.

Nice straw man, with a subtle hint of hysteria. I liked the bit about wanting dogs on leashes in off-leash areas.

Equally entertaining was your pick of the choice cuts of the TAMS dictate while ignoring the rest:

Shared path
(Mostly black bitumen often marked with white centre lines)
The use of shared paths is restricted to non-motorised transport (with the exception of motorised wheelchairs and power assisted pedal cycles). Both pedestrians and cyclists must share the use of these paths. Please respect all users and be prepared to give way to cyclists and pedestrians as necessary. When cycling, warn of your approach by sounding your bell; if you are cycling or walking, keep to the left. Cyclists should pass pedestrians on the right. Cyclists should give way to pedestrians and other users at all times. If you are a pedestrian, keep a look out for cyclists and give them room to pass. Dogs must be on a leash at all times.

http://www.tams.act.gov.au/roads-transport/cycling/cycling_information/road_rules

Nice that you neglected to bold Cyclists should give way to pedestrians and other users at all times.

the paragraph is basically saying everybody should give way to everybody……regardless of the bolding…..*rolls eyes*

#172
Pitchka11:21 am, 14 Feb 13

Nice that you neglected to bold Cyclists should give way to pedestrians and other users at all times.

HAHA, yes, just a small oversight….

#173
dpm11:27 am, 14 Feb 13

Dilandach said :

Postalgeek said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

Postalgeek, you obviously have no children. If you think lashing kids together like train cars to prevent drifting onto the wrong side of the track is what should happen, you really need a wake up call into reality. Here is a quote from the TAMS website about shared paths – “Cyclists should give way to pedestrians and other users at all times”. It does not say cyclists have a right to free passage without impediment from toddlers. Next you’ll be wanting dogs on leashes in these leash free areas in case they run out in front of you or walking licenses to be issued after completing a competency test, to see if you can pace a straight line for 10 metres without veering /- 30cm. Walking whilst drunk or under the influence of drugs should be banned as well as talking on a mobile, listening to loud music or whilst engaging in the consumption of food and/or beverages.

Nice straw man, with a subtle hint of hysteria. I liked the bit about wanting dogs on leashes in off-leash areas.

Equally entertaining was your pick of the choice cuts of the TAMS dictate while ignoring the rest:

Shared path
(Mostly black bitumen often marked with white centre lines)
The use of shared paths is restricted to non-motorised transport (with the exception of motorised wheelchairs and power assisted pedal cycles). Both pedestrians and cyclists must share the use of these paths. Please respect all users and be prepared to give way to cyclists and pedestrians as necessary. When cycling, warn of your approach by sounding your bell; if you are cycling or walking, keep to the left. Cyclists should pass pedestrians on the right. Cyclists should give way to pedestrians and other users at all times. If you are a pedestrian, keep a look out for cyclists and give them room to pass. Dogs must be on a leash at all times.

http://www.tams.act.gov.au/roads-transport/cycling/cycling_information/road_rules

Nice that you neglected to bold Cyclists should give way to pedestrians and other users at all times.

I think because that was the one bit that was already quoted and she was highlighting the other relevant bits that were missed?

#174
thebrownstreak6911:31 am, 14 Feb 13

Dilandach said :

Cyclists don’t like the crap that some drivers pull so why do it to pedestrians?

A very good point.

#175
wildturkeycanoe12:17 pm, 14 Feb 13

Postalgeek said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

Postalgeek, you obviously have no children. If you think lashing kids together like train cars to prevent drifting onto the wrong side of the track is what should happen, you really need a wake up call into reality. Here is a quote from the TAMS website about shared paths – “Cyclists should give way to pedestrians and other users at all times”. It does not say cyclists have a right to free passage without impediment from toddlers. Next you’ll be wanting dogs on leashes in these leash free areas in case they run out in front of you or walking licenses to be issued after completing a competency test, to see if you can pace a straight line for 10 metres without veering /- 30cm. Walking whilst drunk or under the influence of drugs should be banned as well as talking on a mobile, listening to loud music or whilst engaging in the consumption of food and/or beverages.

Nice straw man, with a subtle hint of hysteria. I liked the bit about wanting dogs on leashes in off-leash areas.

Equally entertaining was your pick of the choice cuts of the TAMS dictate while ignoring the rest:

Shared path
(Mostly black bitumen often marked with white centre lines)
The use of shared paths is restricted to non-motorised transport (with the exception of motorised wheelchairs and power assisted pedal cycles). Both pedestrians and cyclists must share the use of these paths. Please respect all users and be prepared to give way to cyclists and pedestrians as necessary. When cycling, warn of your approach by sounding your bell; if you are cycling or walking, keep to the left. Cyclists should pass pedestrians on the right. Cyclists should give way to pedestrians and other users at all times. If you are a pedestrian, keep a look out for cyclists and give them room to pass. Dogs must be on a leash at all times.

http://www.tams.act.gov.au/roads-transport/cycling/cycling_information/road_rules

I’m sorry, as much as you print things in the media, on paper or otherwise, generally toddlers do not read, do not focus on a bell ringing when there is an exciting butterfly fluttering off in the distance and have the ability to rely on their younger sibling to distract Mum for minutes on end.
When a cyclist, able to ride in excess of 40km/h on a bike path with clearance between left and right lanes of less than half a metre, has to react to a possible collision with animate object doing 10km/h in perpendicular vector it leaves little time to remember the rules.
If you want some assistance in understanding this issue, the following link has some interesting points regarding shared paths, their jurisdiction being administered by the authorities and 10km/h speed limits for shared paths, http://ntc.gov.au/rfcDocuments/DOC2112112011122115343511642.pdf
Liability comes into play here, so if words do not convince you, perhaps dollars and cents will.
I cannot believe I’ve become anti-cycling from the point of view of a pedestrian. Even as a cyclist I cannot understand your point of view. However, if I could BOLD something it would be “Please respect all users.”. That pretty much sums up the one problem with not just cycle paths, but society in general.
Also, apologies for the comment about you not being a parent, your reply to someone else beat my post. [Plus, it was a little insensitive]. Insert peace sign here —>

#176
Felix the Cat12:47 pm, 14 Feb 13

KB1971 said :

I just have to say this ….. WHAT AN AWESOME RIDE TO WORK TODAY!!!!

All the car drivers were courteous, all the dog owners had their dogs on leads, all the pedestrians were walking left and not wandering all over the place like a mixo rabbit.

& the morning was beautiful. So much better than commuting by car.

Checks date on calender, hmmm not April 1st yet.

#177
Jim Jones1:09 pm, 14 Feb 13

Baldy said :

Now if you please step aside, some of us are trying to have a real conversation.

Offering your all-important ‘opinion’ via meaningless generalisations is a ‘real conversation’?

When did that happen?

I’ll have to let all the scientists know they can down tools, as we won’t need any of those pesky ‘facts’ anymore, apparently the sanctity of ‘my opinion’ is good enough these days.

#178
Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd1:31 pm, 14 Feb 13

Postalgeek said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

Postalgeek said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

To all those basically saying keep your children in line while walking, do you have kids? Do you remember stumbling as a kid. It’s up to a responsible cyclist to identify a child and slow the eff down.

To reiterate my very first sentence:

I agree that cyclists should be extra careful around kids and animals, and abusing them doesn’t reflect well on the abuser (though ‘abuse’ is in the eye of the beholder).

Yes I have kids and I do not think busy thoroughfares are the best place for them to learn direction and balance.

But hey, if you think your kids should be free to swerve in front of oncoming cyclists, whatever their speed, good for you. Let me know how it works out for you.

It’s worked out great so far. We all keep left as much as possible and the cyclists so far have always gone around without issue.

Yep, there’s that keeping left thing working for you. Good to hear.

You too miss the point. Children are unpredictable and i refuse to put mine on a leash like some sort of animal. i will do best i can, but you better god damn slow down and take care if you pass us.

I also do not give a crap if you yell bike or ring a bell or start singing like a kookaburra, just make sure you notify us of your presence and i will do my best to not only keep left but also kep left of the left side of the path.

#179
KB19711:33 pm, 14 Feb 13

Felix the Cat said :

KB1971 said :

I just have to say this ….. WHAT AN AWESOME RIDE TO WORK TODAY!!!!

All the car drivers were courteous, all the dog owners had their dogs on leads, all the pedestrians were walking left and not wandering all over the place like a mixo rabbit.

& the morning was beautiful. So much better than commuting by car.

Checks date on calender, hmmm not April 1st yet.

No, no, true story I swear :)

#180
Postalgeek2:01 pm, 14 Feb 13

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

You too miss the point. Children are unpredictable and i refuse to put mine on a leash like some sort of animal. i will do best i can, but you better god damn slow down and take care if you pass us.

I also do not give a crap if you yell bike or ring a bell or start singing like a kookaburra, just make sure you notify us of your presence and i will do my best to not only keep left but also kep left of the left side of the path.

Oh boy.

Let me just clarify something. Are you saying that you think I’ve said children should be kept, literally, on a leash?

Be aware that the earlier use of ‘off the leash’ was metaphorical, not literal, hence the inverted commas.

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