Lady Denman Lycra

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.

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.

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.

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!

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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….?

Well said beejay76.

I am, at various times, a pedestrian, a cyclist and a motorist. There’s a couple of important points that I don’t think anyone’s made yet.

What some non-cycling people might not realise is that the on-road cycle lanes often suddenly end inexplicably, then restart on another road around the corner, or maybe just down the road. I try to plan my routes around the cycles lanes, but it is almost impossible to ride any distance at all without running out of cycle lane somewhere along the way. So if you’re cycling on the road it is impossible not to occasionally ride in the ‘car’ lanes.

So, I hear you howl, what of riding on the shared cycle ways and therefore off the roads? 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.

Also lycra: it’s necessary. It’s not a fashion statement and most people I daresay feel fairly uncomfortable and conspicuous wearing it. But you really, really can’t ride for any distance without proper cycle nix. The ensuing damage to tender nether regions is extremely unpleasant.

Very interesting read as usual (Bikes VS Cars). I am a car driver, a motorcyclist who rides to work and races on weekends and I use cycling as cross training so I am not ‘fighting’ in anyones corner so to speak.

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.

The public like to call motorcyclists Temporary Australians and some of them definately are as are some car, truck etc etc drivers. Heck, going to the wood fire thread it seems anyone using a wood fire is going to be crucified despite the fact there there are worse things out there than wood smoke – 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.

If I were to poodle around in my car at 20KPH in a 80 zone all the time not only would it be extremely inconsiderate and dangerous but you would (eventually) be booked for it.

So why do cyclists think that it’s their ‘right’ to use major roads, travelling 5 abreast like the turkeys out at the Cotter (Tour Le Canberra) last weekend or otherwise travelling at speeds well under the traffic around them….no wonder they get collected by cars and thank god, natural selection and all that. Before anyone calls me a bigot, we have 5 pushbikes, 4 motorcycles and 3 cars. I love riding my pushie where its SAFE to do so. Riding on the roads 40-80kph less than traffic around me is quite frankly a very scarey prospect indeed.

At any rate, motorcyclists USUALLY select safety gear that suits their surroundings. FULL FACE HELMETS, Leathers, boots etc are all proven to save one’s skin. L Y C R A does nothing but burn into your skin once the friction burns kick in. Add in the ridiculous ‘Helmets’ that are on offer to cyclists and you’d really REALLY think they would take their practices OFF the road. Obviously they have no consideration for those loved ones around them because if they did they most certainly would not wear any lycra, most of us know the skin is the largest living organ of the body and damage that and it’s a very long and painful road to recovery. Leathers on motorcycles cut this down, sure you still get friction burns but don’t get the added abraisive qualities that our roads offer.

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???
Ok, sure you’re a cyclist who also has a car so therefore you pay rego on the car – I have several cars and bikes but have to register them all, WHY IS A PUSHBIKE ANY DIFFERENT? Heck, said cyclist could have 3 cars, 4 motorcycles and a bunch of pushbikes just like I do, doesn’t (and shouldn’t) make me or them exempt from the fee’s incurred by owning several vehicles. Further to my point, I also own a trailer, I cannot tow my trailer unless I have a car (or a horse? how safe will that be!) which we will assume is registered. So why do I have to pay trailer rego each year?!?!?

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.

I don’t expect cyclists NOT to have an area to ride their bike – heck I’d love to see a race track and dragway complex in Canberra for car and motorcylist enthusiasts…wait for the whinging to begin on that one ala The Canberra GMC400.

I agree with some of the responses above, you want to DRIVE/RIDE fast (lunatic?? Hardley what you’d call Lowndes, Brock and co but anyway I think all cyclists on the roads are lunatics so swings and roundabouts on that one), 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!!!

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.

bigred said :

Is the OP one of those crazed white ute drivers who belt around town in the early hours totally ignoring both the road rules and common decency. They spend a lot of time on the wrong side of the centre line on lady denman dr anyway. In any case, at that time of day the OP should be admiring the dedication of the lycra clad. Suggest they get a life instead!

OP sounds fat and angry. He should probably have another hamburger, that might calm him down a bit.

Is the OP one of those crazed white ute drivers who belt around town in the early hours totally ignoring both the road rules and common decency. They spend a lot of time on the wrong side of the centre line on lady denman dr anyway. In any case, at that time of day the OP should be admiring the dedication of the lycra clad. Suggest they get a life instead!

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

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.”

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

wildturkeycanoe said :

If you are behind them for say, a kilometre, get the opportunity to overtake and get some speed up, it takes a while to get around them doing the legal 70km/h. Then you pull almost level with them and have a car come over the rise[…]

Bicycles or not, you shouldn’t be overtaking anywhere near a crest.

CraigT said :

So, not your mother?

No. Yours…

;P

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.

Grrr said,
“They won’t be hard for the police to find if they’re out there every single morning, same place, same time. (Except they aren’t breaking the law.)”

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

Grrr also said,
“If you’re braking hard to avoid them, then perhaps your eyesight is such that you need to have new corrective lenses. You have a minimum of 150m visibility on that road. If they’re doing 35 in the same direction as you then you should have well over 10 seconds to see them and reduce your speed by 30-35kmh. That’s nothing like sudden braking.”

If you are behind them for say, a kilometre, get the opportunity to overtake and get some speed up, it takes a while to get around them doing the legal 70km/h. Then you pull almost level with them and have a car come over the rise or from the oncoming roundabout. Apart from planting the accelerator there is only one option left and that is to hit the brakes and pull back in behind again. Dangerous if other people behind you are as frustrated as you and have slower reflexes.

So, not lying, no logic issues and what’s with the score/ranking system?? What a toss.

wildturkeycanoe said :

I’ll drive 25km/h all the way to work. The only problem is, I’ll become a victim in these pages and the likelihood of becoming a road rage target is extreme.

You might, but you would be breaking the law, so perhaps the victimisation would be more justified than if it were targeted at someone who was not breaking the law.

wildturkeycanoe said :

Finally I would imagine that I’ll get a fine from the boys in blue for creating a dangerous situation on the roads, that’s the point I’m trying to convey here. It’s a dangerous situation which if enacted by a motorised vehicle is illegal, yet remains acceptable for pedal powered craft.

Any vehicle, motorised or not, is free to drive below the speed limit at whatever speed is normal for the circumstances (in the left lane anyway). See ARR 125. A driver is not considered to be unreasonably obstructing the path of another driver if “the driver is driving more slowly than other vehicles (unless the driver is driving abnormally slowly in the circumstances).” This is the same rule that makes it legal for agricultural and earthmoving equipment to drive well below the speed limit. For a cyclist, 30km/h is not abnormally slow.

wildturkeycanoe said :

Unfair rules that inconvenience drivers who use their vehicles to get to places on time.

Many road rules inconvenience one group of road user for the sake of another. You might as well complain about stop signs inconveniencing those who should stop more than those who they’re stopping for.

wildturkeycanoe said :

P.S Obviously 6-6:30 am isn’t peak hour [WillowJim & troll sniffer] but people are starting earlier now daylight savings has shifted the time zone. So, if it was 8-8:30 it’d be a problem eh? Because it’s not your problem you don’t care?

It might inconvenience more people at 8:30, if the bunches were on the road then. The organised rides move forward by half an hour in winter. They don’t go in peak hour at any time of year. Cyclists don’t want to be on the road for recreation in peak hour and a lot of them wouldn’t be at work on time if they were out riding at 8:30.

I ride a fair bit (10K+ a year), I wear lycra, I ride on the road, in bunches. I have been passed by cars thousands of times and most of the time it’s fine. You can really tell a surprising amount about a driver when they pass you. The best drivers will double tap their horn when they are way back, then come past at not too much over the speed you’re doing, giving you plenty of room in the process. Nervous drivers will sit behind you and wait until they can see to the horizon then drive full throttle in shoulder of the other lane and not move back over until they’re hundreds of meters ahead of you. Nervous and impatient drivers do the same but they give you angry-beeps while they wait. The absolute best cars at passing are Taxis, Police cars and any car that has a bike rack on it. Hybrids are usually good passers, but they’re so quiet you don’t hear them coming.

Most cyclists I know are happy to share the road and go out of their way to make it easier for drivers. For example, riding through some of the skinny twisty bits on Cotter Road if someone notices a car coming they’ll yell out and let the rest of the bunch know and everyone will slip into single-file and wave the car on through. Sure, by law, we could ride two abreast, 1.5m apart, as close as practicable to the left even though that doesn’t leave enough room to pass but most cyclists are reasonable people and most cyclists are drivers too.

I’ll just throw this in here as it may be of interest to some readers, it’s a scan of a column in the Herald that discusses most of the road rules relevant to the cyclists vs drivers debate. It’s cyclist-friendly http://i.imgur.com/3vHxx.jpg

(I tried to preview this, but it just kept showing me the first page of comments. Sorry if my quotes and the link aren’t formatted right.)

So, not your mother?

Pitchka said :

Lycra is gay….

The end.

Unless it’s on a chick. And she’s thin. And young. And hot.

Lycra is gay….

The end.

Just to add my 2c worth…I came close to wiping out a cyclist on the corner of Barry Dr and Northbourne Ave…I was turning left…and he went in front of me across the pedestrian crossing.

As with a lot of the other posts, I don’t mind law abiding cyclists (even in lycra) but those that change from cyclists to pedestrians at red lights are a menace!

wildturkeycanoe – you’re a liar, severely lacking logic – or both.

Feel free to make a citizen’s arrest. I imagine that charges will be pressed as a result – against you. Seriously, if you think these cyclists are breaking the law, call the police. They won’t be hard for the police to find if they’re out there every single morning, same place, same time. (Except they aren’t breaking the law.)

Now, you say you can’t talk to them, but you can: get on a bike and join the bunch. You claim that they’re only doing 25kmh, which I can assure you is a very easy speed from inside a bunch. I suspect you’ll find they’re doing a lot more than 25kmh though – probably 40kmh, which still means you’re a liar: They’re not slowing you down as much as you claim.

If you’re braking hard to avoid them, then perhaps your eyesight is such that you need to have new corrective lenses. You have a minimum of 150m visibility on that road. If they’re doing 35 in the same direction as you then you should have well over 10 seconds to see them and reduce your speed by 30-35kmh. That’s nothing like sudden braking.

You complain about them being in the rising sun – but no reflective clothing. Not sure how a bit of reflective stuff is going to help you see them against a rising sun – the reflection from your headlights (which I doubt you have on much after 6am at this time of year) will be so dim compared to the sun it’s useless.

Seems like you’re not driving to conditions, too. What if there was someone or something stopped on the road as opposed to doing 35kmh in the same direction as you? Then you’d have to pull up 4x as hard. Black Mountain is only 50m away – there could easily be a roo out.

Time to start scoring these anti-bike rants (in-case the number of replies isn’t a suitable indicator.) This one gets:
Fallacies: 5+
Threats: 1
Ad-hominem: 1-ish
Overall: Must troll harder, C+

Someone should start a cyclists vs pedestrians thread. I’d do it, but I’m afraid I might be too informed on the subject, thus limiting the flame potential.

Anna Key – read Deadly Schauzer’s post on page 1. The rules are explained there in black and white. No, cyclists do NOT need to ride in single file.

How did you pass your licence test if you didn’t know that? scary.

I’m a seven day a week bike rider (bike paths only).

To all you weekend warriors that drive your cars during the week but like to get a bit of exercise on a bike or by walking on the weekends…learn the shared path road rules…you twats.

It’s scary how many people here advocate (tacitly, facetiously or otherwise) the use of a motor vehicle as a deadly weapon.

Compulsory pysch evaluations for drivers licences anyone!?!?

The OP might be surprised to discover that there is a pretty good chance that there are some Olympians, Commonwealth Gamers, National or World Champions in such a group.

Cycle paths aren’t suitable for many riders. If you tried to average 25km/h for 1-200km in a group of 20 cyclists on shared paths you’d be crucified by ladies with prams and you’d be dizzy from going around in circles.

I cycle, but the twunts who refuse to pay attention to the “two abreast” rule get my goat.

Man. That was predictable.

+2 on the popcorn and I’ll grab the beers.

dvaey said :

Tooks said :

Rabble rabble…should be registered…Rabble rabble…they don’t even pay rego…and so on.

Tooks, do you believe that rego is entirely about paying a fee, and not understand the fact that if a vehicle is registered, its operator can be held accountable?

why dont you pick out the actual points I raised..?

rabble rabble … should be accountable on public roads … rabble rabble … they dont even obey the laws … and so on

Bullhsit, I smacked a cyclist on my motorcycle who pulled across the lane in front of me while I was approaching Adelaide Ave from the Cotter Road.

He was not seriosly hurt & I made him accountable fpr the damage by getting his detials (as you are supposed to do after an accident on the road) & letting my insurance company sort it out.

Having rego is not a magic bullet.

To the OP, you are an idiot & as has been stated here, please hand your licence in.

It’s not an issue with my driving skill, but when there’s a lot of traffic behind me, it certainly makes me question that of the vehicles behind me.

… do you believe that rego is entirely about paying a fee, and not understand the fact that if a vehicle is registered, its operator can be held accountable?

By that fucktard logic, if the car’s not registered the driver can’t be held accounatble. Grow up you twat.

Oh, and stop riding 2 abreast in busy 80k/h lanes where 2t cars are coming up behind you and have to brake hard.

Oh goodness! Hard braking. Are you really that much of a pathetic driver that it troubles you that mauc? Cry me a river.

Pay road registration like other road users, and I don’t see a problem with it. Oh, and stop riding 2 abreast in busy 80k/h lanes where 2t cars are coming up behind you and have to brake hard.

Because if you get into a fight with 2T of steel, you’re not going to come out very nicely.

Anna Key said :

Are cyclists required to ride single file on the road? Or was that just what they told us when we were kids

They lied to you when you were a kid. Cyclists are permitted to ride two abreast, and the act is worded in a way that a third is permissible if overtaking the other two.

dvaey said :

Tooks said :

Rabble rabble…should be registered…Rabble rabble…they don’t even pay rego…and so on.

Tooks, do you believe that rego is entirely about paying a fee, and not understand the fact that if a vehicle is registered, its operator can be held accountable?

why dont you pick out the actual points I raised..?

rabble rabble … should be accountable on public roads … rabble rabble … they dont even obey the laws … and so on

What are you on about? I didn’t even read your comment, let alone reply to it. Nice to know I can wind you up without even trying though.

wildturkeycanoe said :

Okay, for all you pro-cyclist threaders, I’ll take your advice. I’ll start advocating that all roads in the A.C.T become 25km/h zones so that they’ll be safe for all commuters.

How old are you? 4?

End of rant tantrum.

Fixed that for you.

I hate red lights and stop signs – they forced me to brake and swerve to the centre of the road all the time – and it has nothing to do with my driving style at all!

Clearly, 30 seconds of wildturkeycanoe’s time is worth more than someone else’s life.

I don’t mind the clumping, tha pack riding, or where they ride on the road. I am jumst traumatised by the sight of 46-year-old bums in lycra.

I’m sick of lycra-clad weirdos treating our transport infrastructure as if it were a playground.

The road is there for us to get from point A to point B, and people who clog it up playing their childish dress-up-and-ride activity are basically selfish cocks.

people who are so upset about other people enjoying themselves really should take a good hard look at their own lives.

you know if be happy to have a license and pay a fee to ride on roads, as long as there is a fairly in depth psych evaluation done on both cyclists and car license holders. im willing to bet that a larger % of drivers would be refused licenses than cyclists.

hax said :

(people are imperfect and idiots are everywhere, a system that works should take this into account..)

Hax, you suggest the current system is flawed. I think the current system of road rules is a healthy balance between having appropriate controls in place to keep ALL road users in line without having to hold their hands like they are children. What a lot of people don’t appreciate is our roads are there to be used by members of our community who have been given the responsibility to do so. With that responsibility comes an obligation to the safety of everyone and not one individual. The facts are, cyclists are legislated road users who, while on the road, have obligations to other vehicles. Just as other road vehicles have the same obligations to cyclists.

That said, I think anyone as vulnerable as a cyclist who chooses to ride in the same lanes as vehicles at any time (not just during peak hours because it only takes one car) needs to check themselves in the mirror. Just think how the injuries a cyclist may sustain from tangling with a vehicle would impact anyone known to the rider. Self preservation and consideration for my family and friends tells me it’s better to be alive.

Are cyclists required to ride single file on the road? Or was that just what they told us when we were kids

DeadlySchnauzer said :

This thread made me look up the actual road rules. I was surprised to learn that:
a) cyclists are allowed to ride wherever they want on the road, including the middle of a lane.
b) cyclists are allowed to do this regardless of what the speed limit is.

So it’s perfectly legal for a cyclist to ride at 20km/h in the middle of an 80km/h laneway. This does dull my lycra clad cyclist anger somewhat, as I honestly thought they were purposefully flouting the law when they do that “lets ride side by side and block the whole lane” thing.

i draw your attention to this, turkey… no-one wants you advocating for 25kmh zones; just that you take responsibility for your driving and do this cogniscant of the road rules and not blustering about driving how you want ’cause you want to…

if you want to drive like a lunatic, one word: racetrack. end of rant.

P.S Obviously 6-6:30 am isn’t peak hour [WillowJim & troll sniffer] but people are starting earlier now daylight savings has shifted the time zone. So, if it was 8-8:30 it’d be a problem eh? Because it’s not your problem you don’t care?

Okay, for all you pro-cyclist threaders, I’ll take your advice. I’ll start advocating that all roads in the A.C.T become 25km/h zones so that they’ll be safe for all commuters. From now on I’ll leave for work 45 minutes earlier and I’ll drive 25km/h all the way to work. The only problem is, I’ll become a victim in these pages and the likelihood of becoming a road rage target is extreme. Finally I would imagine that I’ll get a fine from the boys in blue for creating a dangerous situation on the roads, that’s the point I’m trying to convey here. It’s a dangerous situation which if enacted by a motorised vehicle is illegal, yet remains acceptable for pedal powered craft. Unfair rules that inconvenience drivers who use their vehicles to get to places on time. If I had all day to commute, I’d do it on a bike, but for some people [not necessarily myself] work commitments dictate that you get from point A to point B at an average speed somewhere around the speed limit. How would the bus system fare if they all did 25km/h?
I ride, I drive, but I treat the two activities as the situation dictates. I want to keep as much distance from myself and the cars as possible so I stick to the gutter or the bike path if available. As for the Olympians on our roads…one word – velodrome. End of rant.

Canberra cyclists are generally a fairly short-lived species anyway, so it’s not really a problem. I don’t mind them, mostly – they live short, presumably unhappy lives and provide a useful source of organ donation. I recently patiently waited until I could safely pass one of the species on Lady Denman (quite a fat one – bit scary in all that lycra – and no helmet, oddly), only to have him blithely sail on through the red light at Clunies Ross, narrowly avoiding ending up under a right-turning truck. It seems cyclists are a bit confused about their road-going status – sometimes a vehicle, sometimes a pedestrian, always a bloody nuisance – but militant in their demands to practice their dangerous pastime unfettered.

That said, they are particularly courageous (or, perhaps, stupid) given that your average Canberra driver is a homicidal maniac. Mully wasn’t actually much beyond the talents and viewpoint of your average Canberra motorist.

As for the excuse “I already pay rego for my car”, well, so do I. But I ride a motorcycle as well and have to pay rego for that, so an additional fee for a bicycle seems consistent with our fee-seeking overlords usual practices.

At least the Kangaroos have more sence! Also we need more organ donars!

Lol, look at all the stupid bigots, proudly displaying their small-minded prejudice.

what a waste of pixels this OP is. if it was about these cyclists riding along there at 8am causing massive congestion, yes, the post would be legitimate. but between 6 and 6.30 am the roads have little traffic, the cyclists choose that time to do their riding on the road knowing that they will be of minimal impact to the few motorists who are about.

so i suggest you get over it. if you lived near a quarry and there were dump trucks on the road at the same time and they were holding you up on a hill or narrow road, would we hear the same complaints? no. so when you see the bunch of cyclists on the dam and you are forced to slow up for maybe half a minute tops, just visualise them as a large slow-moving truck, and chill.

“but it only takes 0.2 seconds for a cyclist to make a sudden movement on the road in front of a car”

How long does it take a car to make a sudden move, or a dog, or a pedestrian? The point is moot in its most absolute form.

OP, in Australia we spell it ‘metre’ and your post also invokes a phrase about greasy sticks and dog’s bottoms

If both sides have legitimate concerns maybe it’s the system that is broken.. but lets carry on attacking each other instead?
(people are imperfect and idiots are everywhere, a system that works should take this into account..)

I don’t mind an occasional casual ride, so it would really p!ss me off if yet another layer of bureaucracy was added by needing to register/license just to ride a couple times a year (especially since I don’t ride on the road).

damn cyclists! how dare they not create congestion, pollute and exercise!!!!

silly people!

it’s interesting how many people in canberra have a beef with cyclists for some reason… are you honestly that incompetent a driver that cyclists can cause you grief? perhaps it’s time to hang up the driving gloves and maybe take a hand-eye coordination test?

before you get your knickers in a knot over cyclists on the road, consider why they cause you grief. you are probably completely out of your comfort zone in any situation deviating even slightly from normal. an accident waiting to happen, in other words.

OP. 1. Grow up. 2. Learn to drive.

I agree with bloodnut. Cycling may not be wise (depending on your choice of bike and wardrobe it may be downright silly) but it is fun and I’m allowed to do it.

If I seem oddly reckless on your road, please understand that your road has temporarily intersected with my playground and I want it to stop as much as you do.

Once again, Canberra roads have a problem that could very easily be solved with a bit of common courtesy on both sides.

But, of course, that won’t happen.

Spideydog said :

Hmmmm, the law tends to think they have the same rights AND RESPONSIBILITIES. They have just as much right to be on the road as car users, but they also have the same responsibilities as vehicle users, which sadly quite often by some, they don’t follow the rules.

One big difference, if a car user breaks the law they lose the right to be on the public road, if a bike user breaks the law, well, we get riotact threads. If there were groups advocating for drunk drivers and speeding P platers, the same way there are groups advocating for on-road cycle lanes and right-of-way laws for cyclists on roadways, imagine the carnage we’d have. We should be thankful that its only one small aspect of society seeking exclusion from the laws the rest of us follow.

bloodnut said :

I disagree with dvaey – its not a case of how well someone understands their ‘obligations of the road’, the simple rule of thumb is that unless you ride yourself, you despise cyclists for everything they are:

There are several issues here. Disliking someone because theyre wearing lycra, or they have brown hair or a red bike, is kinda stupid.. but Im not talking about that, Im talking about the ones who act dangerously for themselves and the rest of us.

Sure, it might only take 3.2 seconds to pass a cyclist, but it only takes 0.2 seconds for a cyclist to make a sudden movement on the road in front of a car, and ‘pass’ turns into ‘collide with’, and we all know that if a car and a bike collide, who will be held responsible.

I think the problem is not so much cyclists being on the road but the piece of road that they happen to be using instead – cause and effect or a bit of common sense and one’s own personal safety wouldn’t go astray.

In the case of the dam wall on Lady Denman Drive, the road is quite narrow, winding and the posted speed is 70kms an hour. Often it is difficult to spot the cyclists and to slow down in time to see them or to an appropriate speed where overtaking is possible. Ditto Alexandrina Drive and Commonwealth Avenue Bridges.

I’m happy to have cyclists on most roads, but there are some roads where it makes it difficult to be a safe considerate driver around them.

Me no fry said :

Jethro said :

I’m going to make me some popcorn.

OK, you get the popcorn, I’ll grab a few beers (not too early, is it?)

Never too early for beer.

This is always going to be a ‘us and them’ debate.

There are just as many stupid drivers as there are cyclists.

All cyclists must obey the Australian Road Rules. However, there is no legislation requiring them to actually understand the rules. They have no requirement to carry identification either. This becomes a big problem for Police to enforce the law against cyclists, hence thier arrogant behaviour (of some).

The Govt must act now. All cyclists should undergo Road rule testing and hold a cyclist licence and must carry it on them at all times, just like a driver. The next step would be some sort of identifier, whether that be a registration plate or similar. Cyclists need to be placed under the same scrutiny as drivers.

Cyclists are here to stay so everyone has to get use to that and come up with ways to make the roads safer. Other than taking them off the roads of course! 😉

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.

This thread made me look up the actual road rules. I was surprised to learn that:
a) cyclists are allowed to ride wherever they want on the road, including the middle of a lane.
b) cyclists are allowed to do this regardless of what the speed limit is.

So it’s perfectly legal for a cyclist to ride at 20km/h in the middle of an 80km/h laneway. This does dull my lycra clad cyclist anger somewhat, as I honestly thought they were purposefully flouting the law when they do that “lets ride side by side and block the whole lane” thing.

nescius said :

Punter said :

As for bicycles riding in a vehicle lane when there’s a cycle lane at the side of the road, rule 247 of the good ol’ Oz Road Rules applies: “The rider of a bicycle riding on a length of road with a bicycle lane designed for bicycles travelling in the same
direction as the rider must ride in the bicycle lane unless it is impracticable to do so.” Does this fit your circumstances Wildturkeycanoe?

I think that refers to on-road cycle lanes, the path around the lake is a shared path (pedestrians/cyclists/etc) not a cycle lane.

Yep, I refer to the Cotter Road reference from the OP. I think a cycle lane runs along side that road.

All this talk of Lycra…

“Fat bottomed girls you make the rockin’ world go round
Get on your bikes and ride!”

Queen 1978

Why get so agitated? So the trip takes a few minutes longer, big freaking whoop!

Lol you can pick a bigot the moment the word ‘lyrca’ appears.

I think the real problem is that Kelloggs has been allowed to hand out too many drivers licenses in their cereal packets.

Learn to farking drive, you useless trolling twat.

DeadlySchnauzer said :

Amen to that. If there’s one thing that really gets my goat its the lycra clad cyclists who believe that they have the same rights as a car, that the roads are as much theirs as the car drivers. Get over yourselves. You are much slower than a car. You are much squishier than a car. You belong on the side of the road (not in the middle of it), or on a cycle way.

Hmmmm, the law tends to think they have the same rights AND RESPONSIBILITIES. They have just as much right to be on the road as car users, but they also have the same responsibilities as vehicle users, which sadly quite often by some, they don’t follow the rules.

Tooks said :

Rabble rabble…should be registered…Rabble rabble…they don’t even pay rego…and so on.

Tooks, do you believe that rego is entirely about paying a fee, and not understand the fact that if a vehicle is registered, its operator can be held accountable?

why dont you pick out the actual points I raised..?

rabble rabble … should be accountable on public roads … rabble rabble … they dont even obey the laws … and so on

No wildturkeycanoe, I don’t feel like you. I know what the road rules are.

To add to Punter’s comment. The bicycle lane referred to in ARR 247 is defined in 153. It is a marked lane with a bicycle lane sign at the beginning. There are no bicycle lanes on Lady Denman Dr. The presence of a shared path (with kids in strollers and dogs on leads) near the road is unrelated.

As you point out, there is a cycle lane on Cotter Road and given that Lady Denman Drive leads to Cotter Road it’s quite possible that these cyclists were on their way to or from Cotter Road. Do you think car parks should be built at the start of those on-road cycle ways so that cyclists can get to them without getting in your way (for the 3.2 seconds and 60m it would take you to pass them (thanks wolfram alpha))?

Nothing you describe about the behaviour of the cyclists is even close to illegal. At worst it is inconsiderate, but it is debatable which of these two sets of law-abiding road users are really being more inconsiderate.

Given they are not breaking the law, your suggested citizen’s arrest might not work out too well for you. If each cyclist had a visible registration number, dobbing them in for such actions isn’t going to do anything. Probably about as much as dobbing in a driver who blocks access to a left turn slip lane because they didn’t stop close enough to the traffic lights. Sure it might annoy you, but the police don’t care.

Also reflective clothing doesn’t make cyclists any more visible in the situation you describe where they are riding into the sun. And just so you know – there are Olympic cyclists on the roads around Canberra, world champions too.

If you really think that cyclists should not be on the road, I encourage you to lobby for changes to the road rules.

wildturkeycanoe, cyclists are nice people – they just have an annoying habit. I liken them to your good mates who smoke cigarettes:

1. It’s a nasty habit that will likely get you killed.
2. Non-cyclists sharing public spaces with you find your habit selfish, annoying and rude.

I disagree with dvaey – its not a case of how well someone understands their ‘obligations of the road’, the simple rule of thumb is that unless you ride yourself, you despise cyclists for everything they are:

– the lycra outfits,
– the tendency to clog cafes during peak times,
– the clip-clop noises their stupid shoes make,
– their inability to effectively integrate with fast moving vehicles on the road.

These are not characteristics particular to ‘good’ or ‘bad’ cyclists – they are just intrinsically hateable things that all cyclists possess.

I try to be be the bigger person and remain patient with them in the hope they one day quit.

Disclaimer: I ride my bike slowly on footpaths. Often without a helmet. Sometimes I am intoxicated.

Rabble rabble…should be registered…Rabble rabble…they don’t even pay rego…and so on.

Lycra louts?

Someone needs to wash the sand out

We need an “open season” on cyclists…

Punter said :

a big part of the problem is some drivers (not all) don’t recognise bicycles as other vehicles on the road and don’t realise their obligations to the bicycles with regard to road rules. Also, some bicycle riders (not all) don’t recognise themselves as road users and don’t realise their own obligations to the road rules.

This has just about hit the nail on the head. One issue you forgot to mention, is size difference. A lot of cyclists for some reason, consider theyre equal to a car (when it suits them, anyway). Car drivers are required to understand the road rules, because theyre in control of such a large dangerous object. Bicycle riders feel because their bike is much smaller, they dont need to understand or follow the same rules as larger vehicles, even when sharing the same space. Many years ago, there was a bicycle education centre, where you learnt these things the same way you learnt the road rules when driving a car, but sadly that centre closed and we now have a huge population riding 5kg bikes along-side 20-ton trucks, when they dont understand the most basic safety rules.

Punter said :

Until all road users understand and accept their obligations there will always be an ‘us and them’ mentality from both sides of the fence.

This has always been true of those who dont follow rules of society. Whether that be bushrangers who break the laws, dangerous drivers who break the law or dangerous cyclists who break the law. There will always be an element who for whatever reason, see themselves as above the laws the rest of society lives by. As mentioned in the first comment, the lack of any liability or responsibility, plays a big part in this, every road user is required to be responsible or be held accountable, except for cyclists.

DeadlySchnauzer said :

Amen to that. If there’s one thing that really gets my goat its the lycra clad cyclists who believe that they have the same rights as a car, …

um, they sort of, like, do…

Punter said :

As for bicycles riding in a vehicle lane when there’s a cycle lane at the side of the road, rule 247 of the good ol’ Oz Road Rules applies: “The rider of a bicycle riding on a length of road with a bicycle lane designed for bicycles travelling in the same
direction as the rider must ride in the bicycle lane unless it is impracticable to do so.” Does this fit your circumstances Wildturkeycanoe?

i think these road rules mean the sort of cycle lane along northbourne, etc – a lane on the same roadway, not a dual-use pedestrian and cycle path in the general vicinity.

how’s the popcorn, jethro? buttery enough?

These cyclists, you say, use that road from 6am to 6.30am. This is not peak hour. Nor are they breaking the law.

You need to get over yourself. Why do drivers get so annoyed when they spend 30 seconds longer on a trip than if they had the road to themselves?

I blame the mully cup………………and people that cant drive a car. Soooo boring.

The bike path is a bike path separate to the road, not a lane along that stretch, so that won’t apply there, Punter. Thx for the info though. My issue is with cyclists along the cotter rd between the parkway and Duffy, where there is a cycle lane and the cyclists often don’t use it. At least there’s two lanes there.

Lamest, troll, ever.

But a troll’s gotta eat.

So you’re stuck behind a cyclist averaging 25km/h along the entire 8km stretch of Lady Denman Drive, from the CSIRO to Curtin… The trip will take you 19 minutes, instead of 7.

Do you really believe it’s worth a dramatic “veer” onto the wrong side of the road, or crossing double white lines, risking your life, the lives of the family in the car coming around the blind corner, to save yourself 12 minutes?

Hate to tell you this mate, 12 minutes of your life is worthless. Nobody is so important as to have the right to risk anyone else’s life under any circumstance, let alone trying to save a piddly 12 minutes.

If you really get so angry as to be prepared to risk lives under such meagre circumstances, then I urge you to stay off public roads in your motor vehicle before you kill someone. Circumstances which are even more meagre and pathetic when you consider that the chance of anyone being stuck behind a group of cyclists for the entire length of Lady Denman is slim to none… and you’ll most likely be able to safely go around the bicyclists within a minute or two.

May I suggest you leave 10 minutes earlier when utilising a public transport corridor. It is inevitable you will face delays of some sort on any given day.

The ones who tick me off the most are the ones who use every type of path. They ride on the cycle path when it suits them, they ride ont he road but if they come to a red light, they move over and cross in the pedestrian lanes. I understand that many people want cyclists to pay for riding on the road when a great many of them already pay for their car rego. What I’d like to see if bicycles forcded to have an identification tag. A number plate. The don’t have to pay rego for it if they can prove they already have a registered vehicle in their name.

I think it says in the Bible somewhere that God created roads for cars only.

I want to ride my bicycle
I want to ride my bike
I want to ride my bicycle
I want to ride it where I like.

Queen 1978.

Jethro said :

I’m going to make me some popcorn.

OK, you get the popcorn, I’ll grab a few beers (not too early, is it?)

Here I was hoping for pics of a Land Girl in a body suit.
But instead it’s another Driver v Cyclist thread.
Disappointed.

Pedal cyclists who ride their f**ken bikes on the roads are organ donors. Not just motorbike riders who can at least keep up with the traffic instead of slowing everyone down.

Punter said :

As for bicycles riding in a vehicle lane when there’s a cycle lane at the side of the road, rule 247 of the good ol’ Oz Road Rules applies: “The rider of a bicycle riding on a length of road with a bicycle lane designed for bicycles travelling in the same
direction as the rider must ride in the bicycle lane unless it is impracticable to do so.” Does this fit your circumstances Wildturkeycanoe?

I think that refers to on-road cycle lanes, the path around the lake is a shared path (pedestrians/cyclists/etc) not a cycle lane.

So the cyclists forced you to drive dangerously and illegally did they? How exactly did they do this? Did one of them hold a gun to your head?

Here’s a tip for you: The only person responsible for what your car does is the person behind the wheel. Just because someone is moving slower than you doesn’t excuse dangerous driving on your part.

There are so many whingers in this town, why don’t you leave earlier if you’re in such a hurry to get somewhere? Cyclists never give me a problem, I find it easy to see them and passing them safely never takes long at all, are your driving skills really that poor? The fact is that they are legally able to ride on the road, deal with it and get on with your life.

a big part of the problem is some drivers (not all) don’t recognise bicycles as other vehicles on the road and don’t realise their obligations to the bicycles with regard to road rules. Also, some bicycle riders (not all) don’t recognise themselves as road users and don’t realise their own obligations to the road rules. Until all road users understand and accept their obligations there will always be an ‘us and them’ mentality from both sides of the fence. Sadly though, this seems to be a pipe dream.

As for bicycles riding in a vehicle lane when there’s a cycle lane at the side of the road, rule 247 of the good ol’ Oz Road Rules applies: “The rider of a bicycle riding on a length of road with a bicycle lane designed for bicycles travelling in the same
direction as the rider must ride in the bicycle lane unless it is impracticable to do so.” Does this fit your circumstances Wildturkeycanoe?

+1 What is it about some of these Lycra Louts that makes them think they’re the gods’ gift to the world?

Grow up and act responsibly.

Amen to that. If there’s one thing that really gets my goat its the lycra clad cyclists who believe that they have the same rights as a car, that the roads are as much theirs as the car drivers. Get over yourselves. You are much slower than a car. You are much squishier than a car. You belong on the side of the road (not in the middle of it), or on a cycle way.

I’m going to make me some popcorn.

I do think that cyclist have the right to be on the roads with cars. I do believe there are dangerous/stupid cyclists on the road as well as dangerous/stupid drivers.

I think that there needs to be some regulations put in place regarding cyclists using the public roads. If I am to drive my car on the road I need to be registered, is not possible for cyclists to be required to register their bike and display their rego number as well. The fee would be nominal and then drivers would be able to identify and report dangerous cyclists the same way cyclists are entitled to report on dangerous drivers.

Cyclists should be able to use roads but there needs to be equality for both parties.