Police Sting Cyclists

the other bonus for staying on your bike at x’ings and being wavewd across is that the event can be over more quickly, reducing the waiting time for the motorist.

quite apart from clip shoes, yes!

I think pretty much anybody that rides on cycle paths a lot would agree that the dismount rule is ridiculous and is almost always ignored. If you ride in clip in shoes, walking is not as easy across a crossing – specially if the white paint is slippery.

However, the intent of the rule is good – i.e. to stop cyclists zooming over crossings and giving cars no time to stop.

I’d suggest a more workable rule would be a speed limit of 5km/h for cyclists within 20m of crossings.

Law aside, I’ve always found that common sense works best for all parties concerned. I slow right down at crossings. Most cars appreciate that and then wave me through. I know this is breaking the law as it currently stands and I can’t bitch if I’m booked.

I’ll bet if everybody had to push their car through an intersection the law would also be ignored!!

I think the issue is one of respect, I’ve driven heavy trucks for a few years and of course drive a car regularly and when i can i like to cycle to work.

As road user i observe more idiotic behaviour from fellow car drivers than any other means of transportation. I also slow right down to walking pace when using pedestrian crossings, believe me i don’t wish to stay on the road when on my bike,’d much rather use the footpath/bike lane but once your off the main artery’s theres very little space on the shoulders for bikes.

Perhaps there needs to be some money spent to get bikes off the roads and onto bike lanes. Any vehicle that is legally allowed to use public should be treated with respect, yes even cars that try to tow bloody great big caravans!

Well, the legal precedent favours the vehicle, as the cyclist is engaged in an illegal activity…

The moment someone successfully defends a cyclist vs vehicle impact in court with “But he should have been a dismounted pedestrian at the time, your honour”, I’ll withdraw the “Police have better things to do” comment.

Personally, I’d prefer if Canberra’s finest were off investigating\enforcing\policing (ie: why we pay them), rather than trying to educate the me about dismounting to walk a bike across the road.

Proud local will probably also admit to having better things to do than police pedestrian crossings, which would be why they set the trainees onto them.

PS: As an profile-raising campaign for strange laws, its apparently been an unexpected success.

All drivers pass a competency test that includes the relevant legislation, therefore I disagree that none of the drivers have a clue – a number of people here have acknowledged their awareness of the rule previously as well.

I can see the intent of the legislators is to respect that cyclists crossing roads need to pay due regard to the huge metal things we call vehicles, and also reflect that the onus of road usage falls primarily on those who pay for the privelege.

I would watch with anticipation the test case where a vehicle does not stop for an undismounted cyclist.

it’s a pretty stupid scenario, though, having ‘cyclists dismount’ at some x’ings but not all. and the intent of the legislators, surely, is to have all users of the crossing proceed at a largely uniform, walking, pace, no?

and, unless they were also cyclists, which cannot at all be assumed, none of the drivers on the road would have the feintest clue that cyclists were supposed to dismount. they may only reasonably expect that, as above, all crossers use the x’ing in a safe and slow manner to avoid anxiety and collisions… so i’m not sure i really see the point of any regulations requiring dismounting from my cycle…

p’raps proud local can cause inquiries to be made?

I would never zip across as I know this is dangerous and yes illegal. It’s still illegal at walking pace but I dont see the difference in riding across or walking across at this speed. – no, it doesn’t read like a misunderstanding, it’s an admission of breaking the law. Not good karma.

Whilst I’m aware of the fact that if a policeman robs a bank, it’s still not ok for me to do it, there are those in society who will stand up and say a blowjob is not sexual relations.

It read like Proud Local was not even aware that it’s illegal to ride a bike over a pedestrian crossing. Bit of a worry.

“Policemen should not admit to breaking the law, however minor the law is. It sets a bad example.”

Geez Proud Local, I hope you’re proud of yourself that it is because of your “bad example” that cyclists do no dismount when using pedestrian crossings. 😛

So what your saying instead is that policeman should lie and not admit breaking the law, no matter how minor even though they have? That’s sets an even better example don’t you think?

Policemen should not admit to breaking the law, however minor the law is. It sets a bad example.

See, calling them “recumbent bikes” or “recumbent cycles” at least implies what they look like and how they function, rather than “recumbent cyclists” which just seems an unneccessary attack on people who are lying down and occasionally ride bikes..

I submit that the problem will not be resolved without a bit of lateral thinking by the gov’t. It’s pretty shortsighted to assume that because a law is introduced it will automatically become general knowledge and obeyed. Without suitable prompting, the average cyclist doesn’t know or remember that there is a law requiring them to take the unnatural step of dismounting to cross what is a logical part of the path they’re travelling on.

The roads mob need to perform some time and motion studies to sort out what signage and design engineering needs to be put into place to let cyclists know of what is required.

Then and only then will the problem diminish and only then will it be reasonable to assume that cyclists who ride across pedestrian crossings know they are breaking the law and need to be punished.

As a wee footnote, I agree that recumbent bikes should be banned from the roads. At least on a normal bike you’ve got agility and some options if you find yourself in the path of an errant vehicle, in those stupid things you can’t jump off or turn quickly or any of the other actions open to an upright cyclist, you’re basically stuck in a chair on the road. But maybe that’s a good thing, cleansing the gene pool does have advantages for the species in the long run.

good upon you, proud local – ‘s nice to see i have the support of the community’s finest!

Godd work DMD! I think this thread has come to its logical conclusion.

^
Brought to you by the Australian Federal Police, Canberra.

Sorry, I had to. I completely agree with you though.

Anyways, BigDave, my fat liberal wanker friend – following your train of logic, which seems to be if one or two cyclists are inconsiderate, the entire cycling community are inconsiderate; that means everyone who drives trucks is inconsiderate and a danger on our roads. Ever been on the Barton Highway? I rest my case.

That means your argument is flawed…by your own logic.

Thankfully reality isn’t that ridiculous. Cyclists should not be excluded from the roads. Truck Drivers should not be excluded from the roads. Dickheads should be excluded from the roads. That’s why we have a system of fines for traffic offenses.

I’m going to start charging for these lessons.

As a Police officer myself I would like to comment on this.

1. I doubt any of the cyclists got a fine unless they acted like complete tools and failed the attitude test. I also suspect the cops were new graduates on their first week on the job.

2. I don’t think bikes should be registered. It would change absolutely nothing with attitude or how drivers thought about cyclists. Just another pain in the butt tax. Should all pedestrians who walk across the road have their shoes registered cause they are using the road are they not? It’s just a plain ridiculous argument and I’m constantly surprised at how many seemingly intelligent people keep raising this issue.

3. I ride a bike on the road on a semi-regular basis and like motor bikes I take great care and assume most cars won’t see me. I slow right down to almost walking pace for pedestrian crossings and then cross when I feel it is safe or I have caught the drivers eye. I would never zip across as I know this is dangerous and yes illegal. It’s still illegal at walking pace but I dont see the difference in riding across or walking across at this speed.

4. Yes there are some cyclists out there with poor attitudes who do the wrong thing by everyone. But this applies to any group, we all know how many poor/dangerous drivers there are out there. At least a cyclist isn’t going to kill or injure you when you collide with one. I wish car drivers would think about this a bit more when they vent their anger at poor cyclists who’s very lives are at risk.

5. I own, love and drive my car a lot. There is room for both on the roads, just be considerate of one another and be observant/patient and all should be able to get along.

Easy really. 🙂

Openyourmind2, I drive a truck every now and then also. I’ve never deliberately put anyone’s life at risk. I don’t need to. They do it themselves by doing stupid and erratic things. For instance, and this has happened to me more times then I care to remember where there’s a perfectly good off-road cycle lane. The cyclist, without warning or even looking, dives out onto the road giving me (in a truck) nowhere to go. I can’t brake in time, so I have to swerve into the right hand lane and hope whoever is there has lightning reactions, a strong nerve and an extra pair of underpants. My fault?

um, but ‘pedestrian’; means ‘by foot’ (more or less) – hey! which is how you power a bicycle… cyclists are therefore also ‘pedestrians’, no?

and just a thought, there are ’20kmh’ signs approaching the x’ing for motor vehicles (as opposed to ‘foot powered travellers’) on david st – wonder how many ranting against cycles actually slow their vehicles down…

‘member, obey the rules and think of others. easy, really, and everyone gets along fine.

Ant: I hope you can tell the crossings that are NOT pedestrian crossings, some of them have the green bike lights.

Joeyjo: fortunately the roads aren’t as bad as they fantasise.

Vitaras are coke cans (hence their incredible fuel efficiency) so mine needs a bullbar, as there are suicidal roos around (and cyclists). Vehicles do not use pedestrian crossings. Any vehicles on the crossing get the air horn, and no brakes.

@ant, bragging about driving a Vitara, that’s hilarious!

Pedestrian crossing is merely just a name, such as the name “bike path” as demonstrated above in the explanation that bikes still have to give way pedestrians, on a BIKE path! So what’s the point of calling it that?

My point is, why should a pedestrian crossing only be available to pedestrians when both pedestrians and cyclists are legally required to share the paths?

Anyway, I’m going to keep riding across them (slowly, after checking for traffic), if only to get out of the way of ant’s manly vitara bullbar.

Mountain bikers on roads is pointless go on the footpath/grass and use them shocks

Cyclists > Car,Truck,Bus no matter what the laws of Physics say.

To make a Bike and transport it ect.. prob uses 2x the emissions you would save in the few years riding it to work thinking your doing a good deed Just like recycling a Aluminium can!

Aeek: and yet look at all the people on this forum who think there is no place for you.

Joeyjo: if you think and act as if there is no place for you, then yes there is none. Personally, I have no troubles on the roads and am think about avoiding the paths because of the summer cyclists without a clue.

Cyclists who think PEDESTRIAN crossings are for them are why the Vitara has a bullbar, and an air horn.

The problem with being a cyclist is that there is really no place for you. If you ride on the road you are in the way. If you ride on the path you are in the way. There are some bike lanes, but cars drive across them and into them willy nilly. They also end randomly whenever the funding/room ran out and you are left with nowhere to go. Just give me somewhere I CAN ride and I will gladly get out of your way!

Riding down Cotter Rd to Stromlo Park, most drivers are really good but there’s usually one who overtakes with more space in the lane to their right than the left. Its keep left EXCEPT when overtaking. If it wasn’t for these few drivers who overemphasise keeping left we wouldn’t need bike lanes. There would be more space to share. Too idealistic?

They do this about once a year I think, will sit on north road near barry drive and book everyone breaking the law riding across pedestrian crossing or riding without a helmet, at any other time of the year they wouldn’t give a stuff.

As for pedestrian crossing, I’m in two minds here.. One that a lot of cyclists don’t bother slowing down to go across, but then a lot of motorists don’t bother stopping either. I don’t mind cyclists riding across as long as they slow down, BUT if there are actual pedestrians crossing at the same time they should walk across, number of close misses i’ve seen there too.

While we’re on cyclists obeying the rules, it’s time to point out that cyclists are required to give way to pedestrians on all paths, including bike paths! plus they’re legally required to be equipped with a bell to warn approaching pedestrians. I doubt we will see any enforcement there anythime soon though.

I’ll more than happily pay rego on my bike, provided it goes to maintaining the shocking state of the on road bike lanes we do have, building more bike lanes and is relative in cost to car rego ie: shit loads cheaper.

Alternatively, the money could could be stored by the government so when wankers like BigDave who have no respect to share the road run me over and kill me, my family can sue the ass of him.

I am a road cyclist and drive over 25,000km per year by the way.

P.S BigDave, I apologise on behalf of all cyclists for slowing down your journey by 2 seconds last time one got in your way.

BigDave your statement about not giving cyclists an inch makes you sound like an arse. Like it or not, cyclists have a legal right to use the road and they have a responsibility to obey the road rules, you have a responsibility to give them some space.

I drive a truck from time to time, how would you like it if I came out with a statement about how I like to put a member of your family at risk when driving?

By doing what your statement suggests, you’re not proving a point, you’re not being clever, you are just acting like another f#&kwit.

Yes….the only way to combat global warming is to NOT TELL EACH OTHER ABOUT IT! Let alone discussing ways to reduce emissions.

Shh, Al Gore! We don’t want to know. It’s not like the world’s ending tomorrow. Tomorrow never comes anyway. Case closed.

Less Co2 emissions!! LMFAO!! Come on down Deadmandrinking!! Another mug punter! You’ve won an all expenses paid trip to meet and kiss Al Gore’s arse!! Yes, you too can jet off with the other 15,000 idiots (ruining the earth’s atmosphere in the process), to Bali (very steamy place = imagine the effect all the AirCon being used will have to the climate), just so you can preach to the rest of us to do what we say, and not what we do!!
Hilarious!!

BigDave, Just remember that not all cyclists are assholes on the road. I ride casually on bike paths. But I would agree on the road there is a fair share of idiotic cyclists.

Guess getting fit and healthy and not being a FAT JERK is offensive to you, Bigdave. I wonder why they call you big? Your hatred of cyclists stems from jealousy perhaps?

Not to mention more people riding/catching buses means less Co2 emissions, of course.

F**king cyclists deserve all they get in my books. I don’t give a toss about any of those burly steroid wankers or the Pedal Power fanatics. I don’t give them an inch. Never have, NEVER WILL. And that four-eyed twat Stanhope can jam his free bus rides right up his arse.

Cyclists should be fined for cycling across pedestrian crossings. They come out too fast to be seen at some crossings. It’s dangerous. And very dangerous is the posse of a dozen or so burly ACT Cycling type cyclists on steroids who chased my car to the Dickson shops and hassled me out very aggressively when I didn’t stop for them at the crossing behind Daramalan College.

@ Maelinar, I know this now, Thanks 🙂

Do you know if that is the same for the crossing around town that aren’t actual pedistrian (zebra) crossings. I more mean the ones that you cross when safe, but there is a path specifically in the road.

pierce, to answer your questions:

1: 12
2: all roads that have more than two syllables in the name
3: Al Gore will foot the bill
4: Yes, it does lead to a licensing system. Cyclists will need microchips and GPS tracking implants
5: Unicycles are only entitled to half registration which gives them half the rights (at the discretion of the motorist) and have to obey half the rules (at the discretion of the cyclist).

Mmmmm … beer.

Undy hamsters on normal bikes are still ok though Thumper?

I think some of the bureaucratic issues would include at what age cyclists can use major roads, how a major road is defined, if the registration system is set up – who pays for it if it is free?, does this lead to a licensing system, does it need to be a national system and what about unicycles 🙂

I agree that if you’re on the road, you should have your bike registered.

Explain to me the “bureaucratic nightmare” about registering bikes for use on roads. If you’re on a road that’s a major road (however that gets defined), you get your bike registered. Works for motorbikes and motorcars. As far as the worry about kids bikes, I’d argue that any child unable to understand the concept of road responsibilities shouldn’t be near the major roads in the first place. Stick to the footpaths/bikepaths. How is enforcement handled? Same as it is for riding without a helmet (of which there is an awful lot).

This scheme isn’t about revenue, or that old chestnut of “make the bike riders pay for their use of the road”. Make it free for all I care. All road users should be identifiable and responsible for their actions. My view on this was cemented in after reading a cycling forum at work where one post was “yeah that rude cage driver honked his horn at me, so when he was stopped at the lights I kicked his side mirror off”.

I always ride like the cars don’t see me, so I stop/pause at a crossing until I get a wave across, or I have also been known to dart thru quickly – which may have resulted in driver soiling themselves, but hey I know I’ll make the gap (unless my chain falls off – in which case I guess I’ll get a new bike and a prosthetic leg to match).

Fiona – in the ACT all footpaths are fair game for cyclists (except within 10 meters of shops, or something like that).

“Cyclists can ride on bike paths, footpaths and roads legally in the ACT, what exactly is so special about pedestrian crossings? “

I thought that cyclints couldn’t ride on footpaths unless they were marked that they could?
I think it was NSW that had you could up to the age of twelve and then after that if you were supervising under 12s

I have no time or patience for cyclists, nor motorists for that matter, that don’t THINK of other road users… unfortunately for cyclists, nine times out of ten, they will come off second best resulting in a tragic circumstance for ALL parties when someone ‘learns the hard way’. I have nearly run over two cyclists who crossed a ped crossing at pace. Like most people, i don’t want to run over a cyclist, but after a couple of near misses i want to string up those perpetrators as an example to the rest of them!!!

I trust all police graduates are instructed to book all recumbent cyclists – on roads, bike paths, footpaths or even on private property.

They are teh gheyness!

“not a day goes by when i don’t see some fool on their bike whizzing across a pedestrian crossing.”

I can add that not a day goes by when I don’t see some idiot driver refuse to stop for pedestrians who are attempting to legally cross a pedestrian crossing.

Maybe we should ban ALL cars from using the roads then? 🙂

I think what the story is referring to was a RBT on David Street last night near the predestian crossing. After coming to a complete stop before the crossing and making sure that the car coming saw me I rode across in front of the cops with no hassles. Maybe the cops saw a few idiots and pulled them up at the time.

@bighead – it’s actually law. Cyclists must dismount and walk their bikes across when crossing a pedestrian crossing.

I never realised that you were meant to walk your bikes across a crossing. I have always just slown down or stopped before any sort of crossing. That seems to be common sense in order to make sure that a car has a chance to actually react and stop.

@pierce: I agree with the bureaucratic nightmare in regards to bikes, or cyclists, having some form of registration. However, as one example, a child of, say 6 or 7 years old, probably still gets told how to cross the road by their folks. Yet, they’re probably allowed out on their bikes without supervision. If so, you reckon they don’t get on the road from time to time?

I’m begrudgingly happy to share the road with cyclists, but some general things do need to be taken into account. The fact we fang along on highways at 100km/h+ with nothing but a strip of paint separating two lanes of traffic is scary enough. Add that to the scenario that the same road could have a cyclist doing somewhere around 50-75km/h slower than the regular traffic flow as well, and it is a bit daft when you think about the risks involved. However, seeing as that’s just the way the world is and it’s unlikely to change, then making a greater effort at having cyclists acknowledge or learn what their rights are is no bad thing IMO. Ditto for increasing motorists awareness at dealing with cyclists on the road.

I haven’t ridden a bike on the road for years, but even when I was a kid fanging around on my BMX I never got anything other than a “be careful” as an explanation of my rights as a road user.

I am fully aware that for every dickhead cyclist there is probably 10 dickhead motorists, and certainly in my younger days I would have been labelled one. Also given that I’m quite willing still to nudge over the speed limit almost everytime I drive I do tend to remember the whole glass houses and throwing stones things.

All that said, and hopefully you can make some sense in what I’ve written, it all comes back astrojax’s comment that all road users should “think of others”.

Don’t get me started on motorists who don’t know when to switch on their lights?! Never mind the indicating. Haha!

Now I understand the whole recumbnent cyclist flamewar (as opposed to thinking the-RiotActa colony of rambly fogey bloggers), I’m quite suprised I’d forgotten they exist.
Maybe I’d just repressed any memory of them because they’re so darn ugly.

I was thinking that you’d need to be in at least some motion or you’d fall over on a bike, but I guess their centre of gravity is low enough to avoid the falling over before starting.

I agree, those things are terrible and should be kept off the road and securely stored under several tonnes of landfill.

Maybe they should just come up with a minimization speech, and let the driver off scott-free.

The speech would include words to the effect of the cyclist was traveling dangerously, and put themselves into this dangerous situation.

Nothing teaches compliance better than respect.

i’m with pierce on this one. If ever there were a more stupid law that needed to be terminated with prejudice its having cyclists dismount to go over a pedestrian crossing.

I happily wiz across pedestrian crossings (and wherever else I feel like crossing) at the fastest pace I can manage, however, I dont expect cars to give way, unless I have right of way, which, in these circumstances I usually wouldnt, so, if there is another vehicle, I give way, by slowing down. for me bike lanes / tracks are pretty good, so theres not much bike car interaction for me. bike bike interaction makes me much more nervous – if bike lanes start getting all tour de france Im buying a hummer.

“cyclists on pedestrian crossing’ cameras,” Wo hoo – now there’s a plan – In the good old USofA, companies run speed cameras on the basis that they receive a cut of the profits.

My plan – cut a deal with the SlowHope government, collecting 20% of the fine, and pay uni students to wait at crossings in the city with a camera. Target the university area, Nortborne, and Dickson, you would hit 200+ people per day. At $237 each, you would provide a valued revenue stream of $47,400 per day ($9k for me!!!)

And I would get to piss off the cyclists.

Mwa Ha Ha Haaaaaa.

“It is tragic enough that the cyclists need separate traffic lights …” No, cyclists don’t. It’s the stupid ACT Roads nanniness in action, the same as right-turn lights on minor roads “because tourists might get confused.” When I become king, I am so going through ACT Roads like a dose of extremely salty salts.

Maybe we need ‘cyclists on pedestrian crossing’ cameras, to ensure that this dangerous and socially unacceptable behaviour is stopped, and that related deaths can be completely preventd.

agree with you thumper – ride rego is unworkable – would cost more to administer properly than it would bring in.

my pockets hurt.

@Skidbladnir: Dunno if you were taking the piss or not, but these are the bikes I am referring to…

http://www.rbr.info/2006_rbr_rally_01.jpg

“what exactly is so special about pedestrian crossings”

Precisely that – they are PEDESTRIAN crossings.

It is tragic enough that the cyclists need separate traffic lights (Picture of a bike” as well as a picture of a person) just to remind them that the rules of the road apply to them as well.

I would be all for ‘cyclist crossings’ where there were NO RULES AT ALL ;-P Mwa ha ha ha…..

@Holden: How can a bicycle rider be recumbent, other than at a time when they are not in fact riding a bike?

And if they’re not riding a bike, why do you care what they do so that they’re lying down?

i meant ‘as a cyclist’ i am but one… ; )

crap, captain – cyclists do need to obey road rules, but surely trying to sort out bikes on paths, bikes for kids and bikes on roads, then some of each, is a stupidly dense task that acheives little.

there is a sign at the david st x’ing that tells cyclists to walk their bike across and while i generally disobey the letter of that law, i do actually slow down to a walk pace and actually wait until i get a signal from the approaching driver to cross. surely that is the intent of the law – the pace at which the x’ing is made?

as a cyclists, i deplore other cyclist’s stupidity giving a broad majority of cyclists a bad name – but then i’ve had me hide toughened to the same from riding a motorcycle and seeing temporary australians do ridiculous things.

the two road rules that will always work – ‘keep left’ and ‘think of others’ – work for ALL road users!

I’ll accept that cyclists shouldn’t whiz out suddenly in front of cars on these crossings, that is just stupid behaviour. What would be wrong with slowing to walking pace though?

Cyclists can ride on bike paths, footpaths and roads legally in the ACT, what exactly is so special about pedestrian crossings?

It seems to make as much sense as asking drivers to get out of their cars and push them over the footpath when they are backing out of the driveway. It’s an unnecessary interruption to the journey to breaks momentum.

I drive and I ride, by the way. I can appreciate the desire for accountability for cyclists but at what age does it start? Seems like a bureaucratic nightmare to me.

I agree with your post captain.

I saw some coppers near the crossing at Barry Drive/McCaughey St, Turner, yesterday afternoon (IIRC) and thought it was odd. But all makes sense now.

As my grey hairs advance my anger towards inappropriate use of the road by cyclists has tended to mellow a bit. But fk me if those recumbent bikes shouldn’t be banned from public roads. No matter how hard you keep an eye out for the fkers you can still not see them because they’re just so damn low. As such they are grossly unsuitable for use on the roads. I do my best to keep my wits about me on the road and try to maintain an awareness of everything that’s going on around, and in doing so it is abundantly clear that countless other motorists don’t. So, what hope have they ever got of seeing one of those bloody things crawling along the ground?!

Just another example of why bicycles on the road need to be registered like any other road user – make them accountable for their actions.

Make it a token amount or even free as a sign of good faith, and then require all cyclists on a major road (maybe define this as anything above 50km/hr) to display registration. At the very least it’ll remind motorists that cyclists have rights on the road, and remind cyclists that they have responsibilities.

My guess is that the crossing involved is the one in David St, along the bike path from/to the city/ANU. Most of the major road crossings along that bike path actually have lights, but the David St crossing is a pedestrian crossing clearly marked as “cyclists dismount”, even though I rarely see any cyclists who do.

Strangely though, the next crossing at Condamine St has nothing, despite the fact that the 33 bus goes along that road, and I worry that one day a cyclist will be wiped out by a bus.

not a day goes by when i don’t see some fool on their bike whizzing across a pedestrian crossing.

it is little wonder a lot of people lack sympathy when cyclists get hit by cars.

I’ll admit I’ve almost collected the odd cyclist when they suddenly appear as if by magic on a crossing (especially on the turn left filter lanes with pedestrian markings), so if the story is true then it is about time. No doubt the Pedal Power lobby group will start bleating in protest – wouldn’t it be nice think otherwise.

Cyclists need to work out whether they want to be on the road (and conform to the road rules) or use the foot paths and walk their bikes across pedestrian crossings (once again in accordance with the appropriate rules).

The key reason you have to dismount and walk your bicycle across a pedestrian crossing is simply a matter of safety. (a) so that you suddenly do not spring out of no where on to the crossing at 20-30km/h – even the best drivers peripheral vision is not that good, and (b) so that pedestrians are afforded the safety they deserve when crossing the road without having to compete with other vehicular movements (read: cyclists).

That being said there ARE appropriately marked crossings in Canberra (I think all are traffic light signaled along bike paths) where cyclists can ride their bike across the road. I have no problem in having more of these type of crossings if thats what the cycling lobby wants.