Skip to content Skip to main navigation

Pialligo bike heist

johnboy 9 July 2011 46

ACT Policing is investigating the theft of two bicycles valued at $18,000 on Beltana Road in Pialligo yesterday morning (Thursday, July 7).

Around 9.30am the victim parked his vehicle on Beltana Road, near the Pialligo and Fairbairn Avenue intersection. The victim had two bicycles secured to the top of his vehicle. He returned to his vehicle about 30 minutes later to find both bicycles had been stolen.

The first bicycle is an Orbea Orca (brand and model) full carbon fibre road racing bicycle. It is black with white lettering and white stripes down each side of the frame.

The second bicycle is a Specialized Epic (brand and model) full carbon fibre cross-country mountain bike. The bike is primarily black in colour.

Anyone who may be able to assist police in locating either of these bicycles is asked to contact Crime Stoppers on 1800 333 000, or via the Crime Stoppers website on www.act.crimestoppers.com.au

[Courtesy ACT Policing]


What's Your Opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
46 Responses to Pialligo bike heist
Filter
Order
KB1971 KB1971 6:38 pm 19 Jul 11

dvaey said :

KB1971 said :

I cant belive he is ignoring the valid (& correct) points about consolidated revenue, GST, the minimal amout that rego fee’s go to roads & having a car sitting there not destroying roads while people like myself are riding to work.

Im not ignoring those points at all. So you point out that revenue from rego doesnt go towards roads, then point out that youre doing your part by leaving your registered vehicle at home? Does that mean youd also happily ride a motorbike without rego, because your 2-ton road-destroying car is sitting at home?

KB1971 said :

Its a bit like me trying to say that I dont want people less fortunate than me to get free hospital care because they dont pay the medicare levy.

If you break the law, do you lose that hospital care like youd lose a car licence? Medical care is more of a basic right, when compared to the privellige of driving on a public roadway.

KB1971 said :

II also dont get how a bicycle paying rego will stop cyclists riding in 100km/h zones. this would give use MORE entitlement to be there.

Because it is then understood to be a privellige, not a right. And with the privellige, comes the responsibility. The ‘rego’ is a token amount, to receive an indication to show other road users that you understand the road rules and the laws applying to your vehicle. The whole point wouldnt be to raise money, it is to be able to identify those who should be on the road and those who shouldnt, the same way the rego costs for cars, bikes, trucks, etc doesnt cover the cost of roads (but is still legally required).

Others have pointed out that Pedal Power members have insurance (and obviously although not guaranteed, more knowledge of bike laws). Maybe theres a place for Pedal Power to issue some form of card or plate to members, which they can affix to their bike to show other roadusers that they too know the rules and are insured. It wont change the number of idiots on bikes on the roads, but at least it might make it easier for people to report illegal/dangerous cyclist activities.

I see now where you are coming from, you want bikes outlawed from the road unless they pay rego?
I am not sure that is going to happen as there is a fatal flaw in this plan. Where do you propose that they ride? While Canberra has a fantastic range of bike paths, they dont go everywhere.

What you are really talking about is a licencing system, just because a bike has rego, it doesnt mean that the operator has a great grasp of the rules. I see merit in what you are saying, roadcraft education should be taught to school kids but there will never be a liciencing nor a registration system.

One thing you seem hell bent on is saying that cyclists are the bane of society & the only people who do wrong on our roads. This is incorrect, no matter what your from of transport, if you are going to break the rules, you are going to break the rules.

To answer your question about the motorbike, I was riding a motorbike (registered of course) to work daily but many near misses with inattentive motorists has made me reconsider. Ironically the nail in the coffin was I had an accident with a cyclist where Cotter Road joins Adelaide Ave. No one was really hurt but he could have easily been a car that turned across in front of me. Cycling has so fan not provided me with those moments & its is fun even at -4.1 & in the fog.

I would not ride a motorbike unregistered as it is a requirement by law for it to be registered.

The point about me leaving my car at home while it is registered? Counter argument to the silly argument of “bikes must pay rego”.

One of the big reasons there is such responsibility placed on having a licence & registration is that anything that is 250kg & above travelling at 100km/h can cause a lot of collateral damage if something silly happens & plows into a group of school kids waiting at a crossing. A pushy at 40km/h? Not so much. People are so easily killed by cars its not funny.

I am a Pedal Power member so I have insurance. I like my house too much.

Come for a ride with me sometime, you might like it 🙂 (I am making an ass out of u & me here & assuming you dont…….).

Watson Watson 11:21 am 19 Jul 11

troll-sniffer said :

Your entire attitude throughout this forum demonstrates one of the basic anti-social tenets held by quite a large section of the population, that having a car somehow confers rights of passage and abuse simply because of the potential for speed.

Or maybe because of the bull bar?

+1 on that post. I couldn’t be bothered trying to formulate a response as it was so totally irrational.

troll-sniffer troll-sniffer 10:00 am 19 Jul 11

If you break the law, do you lose that hospital care like youd lose a car licence? Medical care is more of a basic right, when compared to the privellige of driving on a public roadway.

dvaey… you’ve consistently demonstrated an anti-cyclist bias that i have consistently let through to the keeper, but now you’re starting to get on my wick. Since when has access to the roads system been a privilege? Driving a car is considered a privilege, that’s why you need a licence. Other forms of access aren’t considered a privilege, they are a right.

Your entire attitude throughout this forum demonstrates one of the basic anti-social tenets held by quite a large section of the population, that having a car somehow confers rights of passage and abuse simply because of the potential for speed. Until attitudes such as yours that roads are for cars and everyone else in an invitee are changed, society continues to suffer.

dvaey dvaey 6:38 am 19 Jul 11

KB1971 said :

I cant belive he is ignoring the valid (& correct) points about consolidated revenue, GST, the minimal amout that rego fee’s go to roads & having a car sitting there not destroying roads while people like myself are riding to work.

Im not ignoring those points at all. So you point out that revenue from rego doesnt go towards roads, then point out that youre doing your part by leaving your registered vehicle at home? Does that mean youd also happily ride a motorbike without rego, because your 2-ton road-destroying car is sitting at home?

KB1971 said :

Its a bit like me trying to say that I dont want people less fortunate than me to get free hospital care because they dont pay the medicare levy.

If you break the law, do you lose that hospital care like youd lose a car licence? Medical care is more of a basic right, when compared to the privellige of driving on a public roadway.

KB1971 said :

II also dont get how a bicycle paying rego will stop cyclists riding in 100km/h zones. this would give use MORE entitlement to be there.

Because it is then understood to be a privellige, not a right. And with the privellige, comes the responsibility. The ‘rego’ is a token amount, to receive an indication to show other road users that you understand the road rules and the laws applying to your vehicle. The whole point wouldnt be to raise money, it is to be able to identify those who should be on the road and those who shouldnt, the same way the rego costs for cars, bikes, trucks, etc doesnt cover the cost of roads (but is still legally required).

Others have pointed out that Pedal Power members have insurance (and obviously although not guaranteed, more knowledge of bike laws). Maybe theres a place for Pedal Power to issue some form of card or plate to members, which they can affix to their bike to show other roadusers that they too know the rules and are insured. It wont change the number of idiots on bikes on the roads, but at least it might make it easier for people to report illegal/dangerous cyclist activities.

alaninoz alaninoz 7:13 am 14 Jul 11

dvaey said :

… and that I am qualified and knowledgable in the control of the vehicle and the road rules.

Interesting point. Other road users have to demonstrate competency, why not cyclists? Don’t have an answer or a viewpoint (yet), just wondering. Maybe because incompetent cyclists usually only seriously damage themselves and the occasional pedestrian.

KB1971 KB1971 7:54 pm 13 Jul 11

Watson said :

dvaey said :

Watson said :

I think we shouldn’t stop at cyclists. We should also force pedestrians to pay registration to use bike paths and pedestrian crossings.

A pedestrian walking a footpath with other pedestrians at 3km/hr is a different kettle of fish to someone riding a bike in an on-road bike lane at 20km/hr with traffic 1-2m away travelling at upto 100km/hr. It doesnt take a rocket scientist to see this, although judging by some comments, some fail to see the difference. Bikes and pedestrians have their own designated paths, which cars are not allowed to travel on.

Watson said :

Now don’t get me started on people using public parks and bbq facilities! Bludgers, all of them!

As far as Im aware, there are no laws restricting anyones use of public bbq’s like there are laws restricting the use of public roads. If you think Im wrong, feel free to point me to the ACT Public Barbecue Act that covers the relevant laws. Or maybe you think Im wrong that there are laws restricting public roads? Either way you chose a bad argument.

I can’t believe you actually made the effort to respond to that in such detail!

I cant belive he is ignoring the valid (& correct) points about consolidated revenue, GST, the minimal amout that rego fee’s go to roads & having a car sitting there not destroying roads while people like myself are riding to work.

Its a bit like me trying to say that I dont want people less fortunate than me to get free hospital care because they dont pay the medicare levy.

I also dont get how a bicycle paying rego will stop cyclists riding in 100km/h zones. this would give use MORE entitlement to be there.

Watson Watson 7:27 pm 13 Jul 11

dvaey said :

Watson said :

I think we shouldn’t stop at cyclists. We should also force pedestrians to pay registration to use bike paths and pedestrian crossings.

A pedestrian walking a footpath with other pedestrians at 3km/hr is a different kettle of fish to someone riding a bike in an on-road bike lane at 20km/hr with traffic 1-2m away travelling at upto 100km/hr. It doesnt take a rocket scientist to see this, although judging by some comments, some fail to see the difference. Bikes and pedestrians have their own designated paths, which cars are not allowed to travel on.

Watson said :

Now don’t get me started on people using public parks and bbq facilities! Bludgers, all of them!

As far as Im aware, there are no laws restricting anyones use of public bbq’s like there are laws restricting the use of public roads. If you think Im wrong, feel free to point me to the ACT Public Barbecue Act that covers the relevant laws. Or maybe you think Im wrong that there are laws restricting public roads? Either way you chose a bad argument.

I can’t believe you actually made the effort to respond to that in such detail!

dvaey dvaey 5:58 pm 13 Jul 11

Watson said :

I think we shouldn’t stop at cyclists. We should also force pedestrians to pay registration to use bike paths and pedestrian crossings.

A pedestrian walking a footpath with other pedestrians at 3km/hr is a different kettle of fish to someone riding a bike in an on-road bike lane at 20km/hr with traffic 1-2m away travelling at upto 100km/hr. It doesnt take a rocket scientist to see this, although judging by some comments, some fail to see the difference. Bikes and pedestrians have their own designated paths, which cars are not allowed to travel on.

Watson said :

Now don’t get me started on people using public parks and bbq facilities! Bludgers, all of them!

As far as Im aware, there are no laws restricting anyones use of public bbq’s like there are laws restricting the use of public roads. If you think Im wrong, feel free to point me to the ACT Public Barbecue Act that covers the relevant laws. Or maybe you think Im wrong that there are laws restricting public roads? Either way you chose a bad argument.

Watson Watson 10:18 am 13 Jul 11

dvaey said :

I pay rego for 2 cars, also pay rego for 2 trailers and a caravan, and have also paid GST (and stamp duty) on all of them, plus Im legally required to demonstrate that theyre safe and that I am qualified and knowledgable in the control of the vehicle and the road rules. I accept the fact that if I wish to take any of these vehicles on the road, it is my responsibility to ensure that the item I am using is registered and insured, regardless of the number of vehicles I have at home or the insurance cover of any of them.

vg, are you advocating that if you pay appropriate taxes, and have some registered vehicles in your name, you dont need rego on them all?

My comment wasnt in regards to the usual lycra bandits who ride their $200 bikes and chirp on about saving the planet, it was in regards to this particular situation that someone will spend exorbitant amounts on a vehicle, but if asked to pay .1% of that to contribute to the paths and tracks they use will kick up a stink as demonstrated by the replies above. I know cyclists will never pay rego, they will never be identifiable or accountable, there will never be a way to remove dangerous cyclists from the roads/paths (other than natural selection), but that doesnt mean we cant hold out hope that one day they might be partly held to account like the rest of the users of the roads.

This discussion has been had many a time on here, but I’m always up for some more fun!

I think we shouldn’t stop at cyclists. We should also force pedestrians to pay registration to use bike paths and pedestrian crossings. Do you have any idea how expensive a pedestrian traffic light is???! But if you were to ask them to pay even 1% of the value of their flash sneakers, they’d find a way out of it.

We shoudl tax the crap out of pedstrians! They are a hazard on the road and they slow down traffic too much! And kids are the worst, they should pay double rego because they are barely visible from a car. And they are the reason for those annyong school zones and school crossings. Those orange flags look expensive too.

Now don’t get me started on people using public parks and bbq facilities! Bludgers, all of them!

dvaey dvaey 10:01 am 13 Jul 11

ThisIsAName said :

It could have been a lockable roof rack, but they aren’t totally secure. I know someone else who had a bike flogged from one of these. If I recall the details (probably incorrectly), the thief cut was able to cut/saw through it to steal the goods. Unfortunately, I can’t recall how long the bike was out for.

Well, someone will always be able to cut through things, but on a public road at 9:30am youd be pretty brave to be there with tools long enough to cut the rack, especially if you knew the owner could come back at any second. Sure, you can buy poor quality bike racks, but that was my whole point, the more your valuables are worth, the more you should be prepared to spend. If you want to stop someone stealing a kite, you tie it off with string, but if you want to secure 20k worth of bike, you dont use a simple piece of string, you should use a rack worthy of the task.

Deckard said :

Jeez, been a while since you brought this old chestnut up. You keep crapping on like a broken record but never pay any attention to the answers.

So, which is it.. has it been a long time since it was brought up, or is it brought up all the time? I never pay attention to the answer, which is why I dont bring it up except in cases like this. I would say the same thing if someone was in a new $100k sports car that was unrego’d.. theyre still an idiot for thinking that because they can drop a wad of cash at the car dealers, they dont need to pay the same as the rest of us.

Deckard said :

This guy would have paid $1,800 in GST on those 2 bikes. GST is collected by the Federal Govt and then allocated back to State and Territories to build things like roads for everyone to use.

vg said :

Along with my 2 bikes I also pay 2 car regos and, I can almost guarantee, a lot more tax than you. Your logic just flew out the broken record window

I pay rego for 2 cars, also pay rego for 2 trailers and a caravan, and have also paid GST (and stamp duty) on all of them, plus Im legally required to demonstrate that theyre safe and that I am qualified and knowledgable in the control of the vehicle and the road rules. I accept the fact that if I wish to take any of these vehicles on the road, it is my responsibility to ensure that the item I am using is registered and insured, regardless of the number of vehicles I have at home or the insurance cover of any of them.

vg, are you advocating that if you pay appropriate taxes, and have some registered vehicles in your name, you dont need rego on them all?

My comment wasnt in regards to the usual lycra bandits who ride their $200 bikes and chirp on about saving the planet, it was in regards to this particular situation that someone will spend exorbitant amounts on a vehicle, but if asked to pay .1% of that to contribute to the paths and tracks they use will kick up a stink as demonstrated by the replies above. I know cyclists will never pay rego, they will never be identifiable or accountable, there will never be a way to remove dangerous cyclists from the roads/paths (other than natural selection), but that doesnt mean we cant hold out hope that one day they might be partly held to account like the rest of the users of the roads.

vg vg 10:43 pm 12 Jul 11

“My other thought (slight tangent to a broken record), is this guy is prepared to spend 18k on a bike, but I bet if he was asked to pay $5/year towards the cost of using the road he commutes on he’d find any way out of it.”

Along with my 2 bikes I also pay 2 car regos and, I can almost guarantee, a lot more tax than you. Your logic just flew out the broken record window

Deckard Deckard 7:37 pm 12 Jul 11

dvaey said :

My other thought (slight tangent to a broken record), is this guy is prepared to spend 18k on a bike, but I bet if he was asked to pay $5/year towards the cost of using the road he commutes on he’d find any way out of it.

Jeez, been a while since you brought this old chestnut up. You keep crapping on like a broken record but never pay any attention to the answers.

This guy would have paid $1,800 in GST on those 2 bikes. GST is collected by the Federal Govt and then allocated back to State and Territories to build things like roads for everyone to use. The rego fees alone would cover sweet FA of the cost of roads in this country.

Hopefully you pay attention and this will be the last time we have to hear it.

ThisIsAName ThisIsAName 3:58 pm 12 Jul 11

alaninoz said :

dvaey said :

Why would you leave 18k worth of bike unlocked?

I was wondering about that, but couldn’t tell from the post. If unlocked, I wonder what the insurance company will have to say?

It could have been a lockable roof rack, but they aren’t totally secure. I know someone else who had a bike flogged from one of these. If I recall the details (probably incorrectly), the thief cut was able to cut/saw through it to steal the goods. Unfortunately, I can’t recall how long the bike was out for.

alaninoz alaninoz 3:36 pm 12 Jul 11

dvaey said :

Why would you leave 18k worth of bike unlocked?

I was wondering about that, but couldn’t tell from the post. If unlocked, I wonder what the insurance company will have to say?

Clown Killer Clown Killer 3:20 pm 12 Jul 11

I bet if he was asked to pay $5/year towards the cost of using the road he commutes on he’d find any way out of it

The Hume Hilton, roadside art and the Al Grasby statue become exemplars of government expenditure when compared to an idea like making cyclists pay $5 (or $10, or $15 or $50) a year to use roads. Despite what the fcuktards with the “I drive and I vote” sticker will try and tell you.

amarooresident3 amarooresident3 3:17 pm 12 Jul 11

dvaey said :

Why would you leave 18k worth of bike unlocked? Even cheap $20 bike-carriers can have a padlock put on them. You lock up a $200 bike to a bike rack in a public area, why wouldnt you lock up 20k worth of bikes in a public area?

My other thought (slight tangent to a broken record), is this guy is prepared to spend 18k on a bike, but I bet if he was asked to pay $5/year towards the cost of using the road he commutes on he’d find any way out of it.

You did read the bit where the bikes were stolen from on top of his vehicle didn’t you?

KB1971 KB1971 2:51 pm 12 Jul 11

OpenYourMind said :

dvaey, a lot of us regular cyclists already pay the expensive component of rego by being members of Pedal Power. Pedal Power membership includes 3rd party insurance. If a rego fee included this component I think many cyclists would consider it. I don’t think its in the interests of our local Government to charge such a fee – in fact there’s so many benefits to our local govt of greater cycling participation that they are probably better off paying an allowance to each regular ACT bicycle commuter. Well, that would get my vote 🙂

Its already happening in Europe:

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/world/archives/2011/06/23/2003506502

In other parts of the world:

http://www.commutebybike.com/2009/01/16/get-paid-to-commute-by-bike/

Postalgeek Postalgeek 2:40 pm 12 Jul 11

dvaey said :

My other thought (slight tangent to a broken record), is this guy is prepared to spend 18k on a bike, but I bet if he was asked to pay $5/year towards the cost of using the road he commutes on he’d find any way out of it.

‘Broken record’ is an apt description, dvaey.

Two words: Consolidated Revenue. Look it up, understand it.

OpenYourMind OpenYourMind 2:02 pm 12 Jul 11

dvaey, a lot of us regular cyclists already pay the expensive component of rego by being members of Pedal Power. Pedal Power membership includes 3rd party insurance. If a rego fee included this component I think many cyclists would consider it. I don’t think its in the interests of our local Government to charge such a fee – in fact there’s so many benefits to our local govt of greater cycling participation that they are probably better off paying an allowance to each regular ACT bicycle commuter. Well, that would get my vote 🙂

Felix the Cat Felix the Cat 1:22 pm 12 Jul 11

The Frots said :

Henry82 said :

The Frots said :

It might be cheaper if you simply bought a box of carbon itself – without the rest of the bike!

At $23/tonne, its a pretty good deal. More expensive than water, but thats about it.

Sounds great – I’ll take three.

Reddogincan said “Well, trees are essentially carbon fibre so it would be cheapest just to make a bike out of wood.

LOL for that one. I can see it now! A nice piece of kit.

http://www.bikebamboo.com/

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2020 Region Group Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | riotact.com.cn | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site