Lady Denman Lycra

wildturkeycanoe 13 November 2010 107

To all the lycra clad cyclists [up to 20 of you] on Lady Denman Dr. at the dam wall 0600-0630 every blxxdy morning…..get off the narrow 70km/h road and ride on the taxpayer funded cycleway provided on your right and left! You might believe you’re an Olympian athlete in the making, but training for this can be done in a safer environment than a busy motorway where cars have to either brake suddenly, cross over double white lines, veer into oncoming traffic or just stop and abuse you for your inconsiderate behaviour.  All of this occurs at a time of day when into the rising sun you decide to ride a meter into in the vehicular lane, in non-reflective clothing, whilst a cycle lane is available….on Cotter Rd.

How can a person dob in bad behaviour by a cyclist, when you can’t stop and talk to them and they haven’t got an identifying mark? Should I do a citizen’s arrest????? Help someone before I commit cyclicide!

Anyone else feel like I do. I’m sure there are, all those traveling with me every morning. C’MON, speak up before we all end up doing 25km/h at the mercy of these temporary Australians.


What's Your Opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
107 Responses to Lady Denman Lycra
Filter
Order
« Previous 1 4 5 6
Kan Kan 12:08 pm 23 Nov 10

In response to beejay76 – my post was about the drivers, not the traffic.

We lived in several places – Central Coast, Blue Mountains, Parramatta – and worked in the city. Like so many, we had to put up with either inconsistent train services or appalling traffic conditions. I agree traffic is dreadful in Sydney but from our experience, the drivers are mostly a polite lot. We never had an accident in Sydney but my spouse did when he came to Canberra because a woman (while chatting on her phone) drove into the back of his motorbike. Apparently she didn’t see him stop at the roundabout!

I am not the only one who witnesses near misses on a regular basis. Recently had lunch with a few ‘locals’ and when I asked them what they thought – they all had stories of dangerous Canberra drivers.They never said: “you’re exaggerating” or “don’t pick on us Canberra drivers”. Also consider this – all these people including myself have also driven overseas and still think ACT drivers have a lot to learn about road rules.

I am glad you’ve never experienced ‘scary’ Canberra drivers and I hope you never do.

beejay76 beejay76 9:57 am 23 Nov 10

Kan said :

I must admit when we were moving from Sydney to ACT, my Canberra relatives did warn me about the drivers – I realise now what they were talking about.

Where in Sydney were you? I wish I had lived there! I find Canberra drivers heaps better than Sydney ones! How weird is that? I used to spend a reasonably large amount of time on the Pacific Highway (not too bad) Epping Road (appalling), Victoria Road (cars don’t actually move here, so hard to judge quality of driving), and Military Road Mosman (pretty shocking). Particularly in the Inner West (or outer west for that matter, but I didn’t spend much time there) I found Sydney drivers to be impatient to the point of suicide. The words “Canterbury Road” are still enough to make me break out in a cold sweat. And Broadway?? *shudder*. I found they will not give an inch to let somebody in and fundamentally misunderstand the rules of merging. I wish I had lived where ever you lived!

I love driving in Canberra. When a lane ends, everybody zippers up nice and orderly. When you need to change lanes, you just indicate. And voila! somebody will let you in before long. Bliss!

Kan Kan 11:35 pm 22 Nov 10

I’ve never had a problem with cyclists on the road but then I am not an impatient driver and rider. I do agree that some cyclists do dumb and dangerous things on the roads. Maybe they should be called temp Aussies instead of us motorcyclists.

My spouse cycles to work every day and avoids the roads. He says cycling on the roads in Canberra is just too dangerous; he switched from riding his Suzi to cycling for that very reason. This is the same person who rode his bike in peak hour Sydney traffic for many years and rarely encountered problems.

We moved to the ACT nearly three years ago and think it’s a great place for many reasons. However, the only downside has been the lunatic drivers who have little regard for rules. Let’s see – indicators not used, constant tailgating, pushing the horn when somebody hesitates for a second when the lights turn green, running red lights, speeding excessively and so on.

I must admit when we were moving from Sydney to ACT, my Canberra relatives did warn me about the drivers – I realise now what they were talking about.

p1 p1 10:00 pm 20 Nov 10

wildturkeycanoe said :

p1 – all I can say is…read some of the IR laws or Awards and you’ll see why.

IR laws mean tradies have to get up early? WTF?

Most tradies I know get paid for the hours they work, just like most public servants.

Jono Jono 9:14 pm 20 Nov 10

wildturkeycanoe said :

… before road rage sets in and my horn will blast away behind you all the way to Yarralumla, simply because I can’t get past

You really don’t get it, do you? The problem here isn’t the cyclists; it isn’t the ACT Government; it’s what goes on between YOUR ears when you’re behind the wheel of a car. All car drivers have to deal with annoyances on the road. Most of us know to take a deep breath, stay calm, and make sure that we don’t do anything stupid. It’s a basic road skill, but one that you’re clearly missing. But by your own admission, in your original post and at #77, you consider killing a cyclist, or undertake stupid, illegal and dangerous overtaking manoeuvers, all in order to save yourself maybe as much as 30 seconds.

How about you have a good, hard think about how you drive your car before you’re responsible for a road death. I suspect that you won’t, but it’s worth a try.

As a final point, your original post describes how you were encountering the cyclists “every blxxdy morning”. Given that you knew that they were there and how irrationally angry you were to their presence, did you ever one consider the possibility of getting up 60 seconds earlier and taking the slightly longer route along the Parkway and the Cotter Road and avoiding the situation completely? No, I thought not.

vg vg 6:57 pm 20 Nov 10

[tradies have to get up early unlike the PS who have time to go for a cycle first]

I work for the government and I have been at work at every time on the 24hr clock. I also ride a bike.

I will tips me lid to the next tradie I see at work voluntarily at 0300.

Mr Evil Mr Evil 4:28 pm 20 Nov 10

CraigT said :

So, not your mother?

Depends if her prolapse shows through the lycra or not!

wildturkeycanoe wildturkeycanoe 3:47 pm 20 Nov 10

Well folks, those fashionistas have finally changed their routine or decided to take my advice, so I will no longer be complaining on this space about the bikies on L.D.Dr[thank God say some of us]. I can now enjoy my trips to work, except for the fact that the traffic lights are now delaying my journey unlike they did 3 months ago. Must be the change in people’s start and finish times.

p1 – all I can say is…read some of the IR laws or Awards and you’ll see why. Tradies have traditionally started early to avoid the heat, the traffic and to knock of early to sink a few beers in the arvo [As it is a more tiresome duty than many others]. It has become a requirement for some, so as to not affect those who expect have their water, power or gas available when they arrive at work around 9-9:30am. Tradies might be your worst enemy sometimes, but they will work those hours that most of us turn off our mobiles to avoid “work calls”.
I think this post has sort of achieved its goals and in time we will see many more I’m sure.
Be safe of all of you. I know I’m grumpy in the mornings on the way to work, but if you get in my way I’ll spend a few seconds thinking of what has been said here before road rage sets in and my horn will blast away behind you all the way to Yarralumla, simply because I can’t get past [legally, now that you’ve won the 1 metre ruling].
Wild Turkey Canoe over and out!

beejay76 beejay76 5:57 pm 19 Nov 10

wildturkeycanoe said :

So, riding past pedestrians doing 20-30km/h faster is inappropriate, but you think driving past a cyclist doing 20-30km/h faster is acceptable. It’s the same thing but all at a higher speed and higher risk. That logic doesn’t win you the argument, you’ve just won one for me. I’d like to see you do the speed of an average car on Lady Denman….wanna race?

Yes mate. I do think it’s OK for cars to go past me at 30+kph faster than me. I understand that cars drive at car speeds. Most cyclists do, I’ll warrant. I’d be in a fine state, wouldn’t I, if I completely lost my head every time someone drove past me at anything above 50kph!

As you rightly point out, cycle lanes, particularly divided ones are the best option. It may have escaped your notice, but cyclists hate being in traffic as much as motorists hate having them there. Pedal Power, I believe, has lobbied on this issue with monotonous regularity. Perhaps you could join Pedal Power and help their lobbying efforts? I’m sure those cyclists you mention would LOVE a cycle lane on Lady Denman!

I’m not sure what the speed limit is on Lady Denman, but I’m guessing that my millionth of a horsepower would be unlikely to contend with whatever you drive, don’t you? Similarly, I wasn’t trying to win an argument, merely expressing a point of view. Not everything’s a battle, mate, and not everyone’s trying to best you.

Northbourne Ultimatum Northbourne Ultimatum 5:56 pm 19 Nov 10

Postalgeek said :

…requires an attention span of more than a few seconds, which means the impatient muppets who rant about cyclists on the road delaying for a few seconds aren’t going to read it.

Unfortunately, I didn’t have time to write a shorter post.

Postalgeek Postalgeek 10:29 am 19 Nov 10

Your biggest mistake, Northbourne, is that you’re take all the salient arguments and logic and lumped it in a fashion that requires an attention span of more than a few seconds, which means the impatient muppets who rant about cyclists on the road delaying for a few seconds aren’t going to read it.

Northbourne Ultimatum said :

I remember the episode of Stateline well and I just watched it again. What I find amazing is how Stateline set up Graham Gittens from the car club. Look at this screencap http://i.imgur.com/YTFWK.png . You have a shot of four people walking across the entire width of the ‘shared’ path overlayed with Gittens complaining about cyclists telling pedestrians to get off “their” path.

One can only hope self-serving motorist lobbies increase their use of stupid old codgers as spokesmen.

p1 p1 10:03 am 19 Nov 10

wildturkeycanoe said :

[tradies have to get up early unlike the PS who have time to go for a cycle first]

Why the fµ¢k do people always say this? Why do tradies need to get up so fµ¢king early? Maybe in summer they could avoid the hottest part of the day or something, but at this time of year, tradies starting at 7am is either because they want to, or because it’s the way they have always done it, and they don’t have the creativity to change.

Northbourne Ultimatum Northbourne Ultimatum 4:06 am 19 Nov 10

wildturkeycanoe said :

Yes they are breaking the law when they cross double white lines to cut the corner going into Yarralumla. If the police were present, I’m sure some warnings would be issued, but I don’t think a complaint from one person is going to warrant taking the Law’s valuable time away from more important duties.

They sure are breaking the law when they do that, no one will disagree with you there. On most bunch rides around Canberra you will cop an earful from another cyclist if you do stuff like that. The thing is, your post that started this said nothing about cyclists crossing white lines though. It was specifically about them taking up space on the narrow Lady Denman Drive – the cars were the ones who “had” to cross the doubles. Many of the replies here have explained that what the cyclists were doing is perfectly legal.

Going on now to point out that cyclists break the law in some unrelated way is just abandoning your original point. It doesn’t support your argument at all. Most readers will automatically add the “But but but…” in front this recent addition.

I’ll assume you’re talking about them crossing the white line at the Cotter Rd to Dudley Street turn. So many road users, cars included, cross over that line that it is always wearing outand being repainted. You can even see the last faded line with street view http://i.imgur.com/yJ6Dc.jpg . Perhaps if cyclists and drivers asked for something to be done about this, it might get some attention. I’d love to see a barrier there – a lot of people who go that way, do so because they’ve just missed the lights.

wildturkeycanoe said :

Also, the comment about a citizen’s arrest was tongue in cheek, just in case you don’t recognize sarcasm when you see it.

The multiple question marks used after the question in your original post do not imply sarcasm (try the percontation point for that “?” ). This part of the post seemed no more exaggerated than the other parts, so I can understand why some didn’t pick up on the sarcasm… unless it was all sarcastic.

Imwatchinu said :

A regisitered/licenced car driver (or not licenced/registered and therefore driving illegally), can be booked for travelling either over which is usually the case or under the speed limit which admittingly is far less frequent, but does occur all the same – if you have no licence and or vehicle registration then the fines will keep mounting.

So the point that whether it takes 2.5 or 3.8 seconds to overtake a pushbike or several of them or consuming an entire lane is irrelevant and the point that cyclists need to be identifable and INSURED is further proven.

In the left lane, no one is ever booked for driving under the speed limit. Contrary to what people suggest and as much as it might improve safety on the road, there is no minimum speed. Slow drivers are booked for obstructing the flow of traffic by driving unreasonably in the circumstances – not driving under the speed limit. If there was a minimum speed, a driver could be fined for driving slowly even with no other cars in sight. As I mentioned before, given that it is normal for bikes to go 25km/h, they aren’t not fined for going that speed (even if they take up the whole lane). If you have some supported example to the contrary, many people would be interested to see it.

Your assertion does not prove that cyclists need to be identifiable and insured, in fact I don’t understand how it even makes an argument in that direction it’s a complete non sequitur. There are certainly some good arguments for such schemes, but this is not one of them.

Imwatchinu said :

Also, a % of our fuel, registration etc etc go to road works and the like – if cyclists aren’t paying their dues, where is the $$ coming from for their *road shared* bike lanes???

Cyclists do pay their dues – in the form of taxes, just as everyone else does. Taxes are levied by the government pay to for the infrastructure and services provided to citizens. Just as a percentage of a driver’s fuel costs goes to fixing the road, so does a percentage of the tax a cyclist pays on their bike and the burger they have for lunch that fuels their ride home. The roads are infrastructure provided by the government for the citizens. The revenue collected from car, motorbike and trailer registration, from fuel excise and drivers licences fees aren’t somehow tagged and reserved for use on the roads. Those fees aren’t what gives someone the right to use the road. In fact, the revenue collected by those means couldn’t pay for the roads as it falls well short of their costs.

To directly answer your question, the money for the shared bike lanes is coming from everyone. Just as the money for the ABC comes from everyone, even those who don’t watch it. And just as the money for the skate parks comes from everyone, even though they don’t skate. (I know I have conflated local/state/federal funding here, but the point remains)

Imwatchinu said :

…go to the racetrack (I frequent race tracks for this very reason and costs a fortune), so you want to ride your pushbike, do it in a suitable place and wear suitable safety gear…! Easy see! Don’t really need to be smart to work that one out!!!

At a road racing track, drivers regularly drive at speeds and in a manner that would be illegal on our roads. They do it in a place free of street-light poles, trees and oncoming traffic. When cyclists go to the criterion track at Stromlo, they race 8 abreast, something that would be illegal on the road. They do it there without the dangers of curbs, drains or traffic. Drivers are free to recreationally drive their vehicle on public roads whenever they want. Cyclists are free to recrationally ride their bikes on the road whenever they want. Would you accept being told that you could only use your car or motorbike on the road if it was for transport, not recreation?

Imwatchinu said :

…[Lycra and helmets]…

The helmets worn by cyclist are approved to an Australian Standard. An official organisation whose job it is to decide if a piece of safety equipment provides enough safety for the user considering the risks they will be exposed to while use it. I imagine a very similar organisation to the one that makes the same decision about motorbike helmets. Some less qualified people may think that bike helmets are ridiculously unsafe but I tend to trust the opinions of the professionals.

Lycra doesn’t burn into your skin, it’s never there long enough in a crash. If you hit the road wearing Lycra, the first thing that happens is it tears to shreds and falls off you. You can’t ride a bicycle in leathers but fortunately you aren’t exposed to the same risks that you are on a motorbike. The fastest the average person is likely to go on a bicycle on a daily basis is about 60km/h, and they’re only going to be doing it for a few minutes at most. A motorbike can sit on 100km/h for the length of the parkway, that exposes a motorcyclist to a whole lot more risk. It’s simple risk management. The cost of wearing more protective clothing far outweigh any benefits they would provide. I’m sure all cars would be safer if they had roll cages and five point safety harnesses, but that level of safety equipment just isn’t required – nor are kevlar pants on a pushbike.

Imwatchinu said :

Cyclists should MOST DEFINATELY be charged some sort of ‘fee’ that goes to covering insurance costs and roadworks, maybe also a (re)education centre for cyclists JUST like we have for motorcycles. (Think StayUpRight). VIC R(T)oads also have a $50/year fee JUST for being a motorcyclist and this goes into road safety measures FOR MOTORCYCLES.

Jono already covered the tragic statistics regarding motorcycle accidents, what he didn’t include was that the most frequent crash type in those statistics is single vehicle accidents. This plainly illustrates the greater need for rider education to improve the safety of motorcyclists. Aside from that though, as much as you think that cyclists should be charged some sort of fee, it will never ever happen. There is no chance the government is going to anything that is likely to deter people from getting out on the bike and riding, be it on the road or on bike paths. Look at what they’ve been doing, the green bike lanes, the bike lanes on Northbourne, the Civic Cycle Loop (that tops the Government’s priority list for Civic), the bike lanes on Cotter Road. They’re desperately trying to get more people out on bikes because it’s good for parking, it’s good for noise levels, it’s good for traffic congestion, it’s good for people’s health and it has significant economic benefits ( http://www.bfa.asn.au/the-economic-benefits-of-cycling/ ). For example cycling improves people’s health which reduces the costs of medical care by far more than the extra costs of injuries sustained while cycling. So it might annoy some impatient drivers but the benefits that cycling offers the city far outweigh the risks and the costs.

Imwatchinu said :

Dress in lycra (the best anti abrasive clothing around apparently) on roadways designed for large, fast volumes of traffic pay the consequences of YOUR choices. I couldn’t care less if you make a mistake and I mow you over at 80kph and you end up with no skin looking like a poorly skined animal, hey that was YOUR choice to dress like that and ride in that place at that time…….OR if you absolutely must dress in lycra and use these roads (or demand cycle ways within them) then you pay a fee for the infrastructure AND your future hospital/funeral bills.

Your disregard for the safety and wellbeing of fellow Canberrans is sickening and despicable. Fortunately you are a significant minority on our roads.

wildturkeycanoe said :

Hey folks, for everyone here who hasn’t yet, please do a search on “bikes” in RIOTACT and watch the video that was on Stateline. Has enlightened me much, but also verifies my belief that cyclists should remain off our roads.

I remember the episode of Stateline well and I just watched it again. What I find amazing is how Stateline set up Graham Gittens from the car club. Look at this screencap http://i.imgur.com/YTFWK.png . You have a shot of four people walking across the entire width of the ‘shared’ path overlayed with Gittens complaining about cyclists telling pedestrians to get off “their” path. What actually happens is cyclists call out and ask pedestrians to keep to the left of the line or to tell them they are passing – this happens all the time. Then the interviewer sets a huge trap saying “and it’s shared facility” and Gittens leaps straight into it head first. Gittens says, and I’ve got to quote it. “Yes, they [the shared paths] were never meant exclusively for cycle riders. It’s safer, it’s their safety that should be paramount And they should use the facilities that have been put in by all tax payers.” And the segment ends – it’s brilliant! Gittens has no idea that he just precisely described the situation with bicycles on the road – he basically just repeated the argument that cyclists make all the time. The road was never meant exclusively for cars and it is a facility that was put in by all tax payers. The worst criticism the story has of cyclists is that they ride across pedestrian crossings (something that numerous car drivers agree is better as long as it’s done safely because they don’t have to wait as long for the cyclist to dismount and hobble across the road). It’s interesting how you came to the complete opposite conclusion to what I did after watching the segment – almost as if we’d made up our minds before watching it.

The number of cyclists on the road is only going to increase, the trend of the last 10 years will continue. As you point out wildturkeycanoe, like in Beijing, when Canberra more cyclists things will be much better on the road for them. Things are pretty good right now though. Do you know how amazing it is to roll along a bike lane past the cars in traffic in the morning, getting your heart rate up and getting in some exercise before work, enjoying the fresh air and the wind in your ears. It’s a brilliant way to start the day, that’s why so many cyclists have grins on their faces. The cycling community is fantastic too, often chatting to each other out on the roads, always offering assistance if they see a fellow rider with a flat or mechanical. Meanwhile I read stories of car drivers getting all angry and waving hammers. It’s really unfortunate that more people don’t live close enough to their work to ride or have other reasons they can’t ride.

Cyclists are happy to share the road, when will more drivers learn to share the road too.

wildturkeycanoe wildturkeycanoe 9:03 pm 18 Nov 10

Hey folks, for everyone here who hasn’t yet, please do a search on “bikes” in RIOTACT and watch the video that was on Stateline. Has enlightened me much, but also verifies my belief that cyclists should remain off our roads. Something to add from my personal experience in the middle of Beijing where bikes number in the millions…..they have a whole car lane to themselves, on both sides of the street and divided from the vehicular traffic by a verge/traffic island lined with trees, shared only if a car wants to pull in to a premise on that block. I rode a bike over there and felt much safer than any “bike path” here. Since they narrowed Northbourne Ave to three lanes + cycle, I fear for myself when a bus and semi are on outside lanes with me in a car in the middle. Great planning A.C.T gov!

wildturkeycanoe wildturkeycanoe 7:34 pm 18 Nov 10

Imwatchinu – My hero. You said it all better than I ever could. Perhaps my emotions took me away from the facts but you have beautifully put word after word into a perfect several paragraphs.

Jim Jones – So, 62.5 kg is fat now is it??? The fact I took my son a whole suburb away for cricket training yesterday on pushbikes whilst towing my 3 y.o. along in the trailer with the cricket gear, totally wipes the smirk off your face. AND, I didn’t get in the way of any cars because I used cycleways the entire way there and back. I probably averaged about 15km/h, so if I’d ridden on a main road with the trailer sticking out half a car width into the traffic there would most likely be an “In Memoriam” here instead of my response.
The only reason I’m angry…well read the first post!

Big Red – “White ute driver’s”? Considering that they make up probably 20 – 30% of all vehicles on the road at that time of morning [tradies have to get up early unlike the PS who have time to go for a cycle first], I give you 90% for factuality, 5% for creativity. Comment FAIL. Road rules apply and common decency apply to both cyclists and cars, except only cars seem to be policed to obey the road rules, no-one enforces common decency so who is at disadvantage here.

Beejay76 said “I ride on the off-road cycle paths sometimes. When I want to go slow. I don’t think it’s appropriate for a cyclist to be riding on a shared cycle way at 30-40kph. It sure gives me a nasty turn when a cyclist zooms past at warp speed. Even if they’ve rung their bell, at that speed by the time you’ve registered there’s a cyclist there, they’re past. So if I’m riding apace, I use the roads. Frankly, my speed is far closer to the average car than the average pedestrian. But if I’m riding my ‘ute’ bike, I ride on the paths because I’ll be riding at around 20kph.”

So, riding past pedestrians doing 20-30km/h faster is inappropriate, but you think driving past a cyclist doing 20-30km/h faster is acceptable. It’s the same thing but all at a higher speed and higher risk. That logic doesn’t win you the argument, you’ve just won one for me. I’d like to see you do the speed of an average car on Lady Denman….wanna race?

p1 p1 2:03 pm 18 Nov 10

Ahhh, I was away for a weekend and missed a car-v-bike bitchfest.

When the compulsory “driver” education, licensing and numberplate system for bicycles comes in, I want to be their to watch the instructors teaching the first group of 8 year olds.

Holden Caulfield Holden Caulfield 10:14 am 17 Nov 10

OpenYourMind said :

I love all these people bitching about cyclists breaking laws – and then it turns out they aren’t actually breaking any laws. Rule #1 Check the actual road laws before posting about road rules.

Vix said :

Just a question then, are cyclists supposed to dismount at a pedestrian crossing? (assuming they are crossing the road…lol

OpenYourMind said :

Vix, legally, yes. That said, it’s a stupid law and Pedal Power are lobbying to get it changed.

I don’t have issue with OYM’s position on cyclists and pedestrian crossings, but given the first comment I thought the following exchange was rather amusing.

bitzermaloney bitzermaloney 9:32 am 17 Nov 10

creative_canberran said :

Everytime I see cyclists on the road instead of the millions of dollars of largely underused bike paths, I just remind myself that there’s an organ donation shortage and that someone will no doubt benefit for their stupidity.

If the gov spent the $8m that they spent on road beautification projects (somtimes called art… but not by most people I know) on proper cycle paths then both cyclist and car drivers would be happy (not to mention the motorcyclists who cure exactly the samething on cars that seems to be ranted here on bicyclist’s).

Andrew Denton used to end many of his tv & radio shows with the phrase “Society is to blame,” but in this case, the government is to blame, who we voted in, so I guess society IS to blame.

carnardly carnardly 9:02 am 17 Nov 10

I wear lycra. I have ridden for over 20 years and never *touch wood* have any major incident on the road. Except for a stupid woman who drove into the Flynn Drive roundabout and didn’t happen to notice i was in the roundabout doing 25 kmph past the front of her car as she did, or the few crazies that decide to pass and then need to turn left immediately so i need to grab the brakes to stop myself supermanning through their back window. I do think of my loved ones and my choice of clothes has got nothing to do with fashion, but function. Ride 40 kms in jeans and you’ll know why. I’ll take my chances on the road against obesity and lifestyle diseases.

And you know what – I’m one who stops at ALL red lights and looks like a blinking christmas tree in the dark. Please don’t tar everyone with the same brush. If rego was brought in, then so be it – I’d be quite happy to play that game as there’d be absolutely no effect on me. It’d be the same old same old in what i do now.

Jono Jono 8:56 pm 16 Nov 10

Imwatchinu said :

cyclists are, as others have quite rightly pointed out, in far more danger mainly due to the speed at which they interact with all other traffic but also their size.

Sorry?? This coming from a motorcyclist? You’ve got to be kidding, don’t you? Are you that completely unaware of the world that you live in?

In the 10 years to the end of last calendar year, 2 cyclists have been killed on ACT roads (and one of them coming down Fitz’s hill, a place that most cyclists wouldn’t even consider going) – in the same period 24 motorcyclists, and 2 pillion passengers have been killed. (Source : Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government database available on their website). For completeness, the remaining figures for the period above are 25 pedestrians; 59 car drivers; and 31 passengers.

So the basis for your claim that cyclists are in far more danger would be….?

« Previous 1 4 5 6

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top

Search across the site