Will proposed cycling laws make roads safer?

Nilrem said :

countach said :

As a guideline, it’s fine. As a law, it’s idiotic. You can’t get out and use a tape measure, and neither can the police. So in reality it’s basically unenforceable. Even if the police got in court and said yeah it was obviously closer than 1 meter, you’d be arguing about parallex error and angles and stuff and it would be thrown out.

I agree, enforcement is difficult. If making it a law increases compliance by a fraction over it being a guideline, it’s worth it. Laws can have an educative dimension.

No you can’t measure, but the police can use such a law to fine somebody they observe acting like a knob and driving too close to a cyclist. That’s why you have a law.

wildturkeycanoe said :

Felix the Cat said :

I see plenty of mowers driving along the roads, they are slower than cyclists. Why would the police pull them over? They are just as entitled to drive on the road as you are, and cyclists are. But nobody posts ill-informed rants on RiotACT about them, only about cyclists.

I have only ever seen them dart across or along a road if there is no footpath/cyclway to follow. To get to their suburb of work for the day they cart the mowers in trailers, because that is the considerate and efficient way. Rarely do they travel on interconnecting link roads like Parkes Way.

there were 3 mowers single file driving south over commonwealth bridge yesterday morning in peak morning hour traffic. they were going no more than 40 kmph in the right hand lane. cars in the lane behind them were patient and either waited behind them, or changed into the left lane when they could.

It really isn’t hard. Why does replacing the word mower with cyclist conjure up all sort of rabid hate?

Masquara said :

How about cyclists stop cycling across pedestrian crossings?

why? it’s legal and has been for 12 months…

Nilrem said :

countach said :

As a guideline, it’s fine. As a law, it’s idiotic. You can’t get out and use a tape measure, and neither can the police. So in reality it’s basically unenforceable. Even if the police got in court and said yeah it was obviously closer than 1 meter, you’d be arguing about parallex error and angles and stuff and it would be thrown out.

I agree, enforcement is difficult. If making it a law increases compliance by a fraction over it being a guideline, it’s worth it. Laws can have an educative dimension.

Missing the obvious that the bike is moving.

Take for example a car moving in traffic going 15km/h and a bike rolls up from behind going 20km/h.
The driver can get fined for being too close yet has no way to stop the bike from getting that close.

Socially the end result is all the drivers are going to hate the cyclists and try to discourage them from riding.

Next thing you know we’ll have a law where everyone has to keep left when supermarket shopping with trolleys. Or those with trolleys should be a metre away from shoppers with baskets.

How many people really believe that changes to the law change people’s behavior? This is just naive optimism.
Half the population won’t even hear about the change to the law because they don’t watch TV news or read newspapers.

countach said :

As a guideline, it’s fine. As a law, it’s idiotic. You can’t get out and use a tape measure, and neither can the police. So in reality it’s basically unenforceable. Even if the police got in court and said yeah it was obviously closer than 1 meter, you’d be arguing about parallex error and angles and stuff and it would be thrown out.

I agree, enforcement is difficult. If making it a law increases compliance by a fraction over it being a guideline, it’s worth it. Laws can have an educative dimension.

As a guideline, it’s fine. As a law, it’s idiotic. You can’t get out and use a tape measure, and neither can the police. So in reality it’s basically unenforceable. Even if the police got in court and said yeah it was obviously closer than 1 meter, you’d be arguing about parallex error and angles and stuff and it would be thrown out.

Nilrem said :

pierce said :

These are common sense rules that are long overdue.

I would like to see cyclists extend the metre matters practice to pedestrians on shared paths. Far too often I am out walking and a roadie (and it’s always roadies) will whip past well within that zone. It really makes me appreciate why otherwise reasonable people can become so vehemently anti-cyclist. (Some anti-cyclists though I’m pretty sure are just right-wing bigots that have a knee-jerk reaction to anything they perceive as “green”)

For the record I cycle to work as often as I drive

Good call, a bit more consideration needed from some cyclists on shared paths. I ride to work as often as I drive too!

Consideration from both people who cycle and walk. People who walk should keep left and look before they change direction (unfortunately many don’t), and people cycling should warn when passing, although this doesn’t always work these days, with all the plugs in ears. As someone who both walks (often many kms) and cycles, from observation, it appears to be mostly pedestrians who cause most of the conflict, by not keeping left and then making sudden turns across the path without warning and looking. Plus their dogs on long leads. When walking I keep to the left edge of the path and I have never had a bike going past, even fast ones, cause me a problem. I also check when I change direction. But then, because I also cycle (although these days I walk more than I cycle), I have more awareness of correct shared path use than many pedestrians who never cycle.

pierce said :

These are common sense rules that are long overdue.

I would like to see cyclists extend the metre matters practice to pedestrians on shared paths. Far too often I am out walking and a roadie (and it’s always roadies) will whip past well within that zone. It really makes me appreciate why otherwise reasonable people can become so vehemently anti-cyclist. (Some anti-cyclists though I’m pretty sure are just right-wing bigots that have a knee-jerk reaction to anything they perceive as “green”)

For the record I cycle to work as often as I drive

Good call, a bit more consideration needed from some cyclists on shared paths. I ride to work as often as I drive too!

These are common sense rules that are long overdue.

I would like to see cyclists extend the metre matters practice to pedestrians on shared paths. Far too often I am out walking and a roadie (and it’s always roadies) will whip past well within that zone. It really makes me appreciate why otherwise reasonable people can become so vehemently anti-cyclist. (Some anti-cyclists though I’m pretty sure are just right-wing bigots that have a knee-jerk reaction to anything they perceive as “green”)

For the record I cycle to work as often as I drive

People who don’t cycle often don’t appreciate the mechanics of riding.

Cyclists can’t gutter crawl, much as drivers might like them to.

They also have excellent acceleration and manoeuvrability at slower speeds which is why they often seem to dart out at lights.

Unfortunately because cycling does involve effort, they don’t like to slow down (like truck drivers with gears) once they have momentum. That leads to their bad habits of cutting across lights and lanes which I have always avoided and is as bad as the worst behaviour of drivers, which can be very bad.

Also you can get caught in the wrong gear on slopes and it is hard to speed up in those circumstances.

Just cut them some slack, there are plenty of slow and inconsiderate drivers to annoy other drivers, no need to target what should be seen as a good thing, people getting exercise and using less resources all at the same time.

Yeah the pedestrian crossing thing is a non issue. When I ride, I simply slow down, usually the driver waves me through and everyone gets on with their business. Same goes when I drive.

If you think of a pedestrian crossing more like an intersection, then even if a cyclist is stupid enough to dart through at 25km/h then your skills you’ve learnt to handle intersections with high speed car traffic should come into play. If the pedestrian crossing (or intersection) is obstructed visually then you should slow up a little more and take more caution crossing. If you can’t handle a bicycle crossing a pedestrian crossing, then maybe you need to revisit your driver training.

It’s really a non issue and the change in law just is brought in to correspond with common sense.

tim_c said :

Postalgeek said :

Masquara said :

How about cyclists stop cycling across pedestrian crossings?

To quote: “The overtaking law will be accompanied by new laws that allow riders to remain on their bicycles when crossing at pedestrian crossings.”

And that’s a disaster in the making – “cyclists must slow down to 10km/h and be prepared to stop” – I can’t really see that happening, nor can I see it being enforced (has anyone ever seen current the “cyclists must dismount” rule being enforced?).

Every morning and evening I watch numerous cyclists blitz across pedestrian crossings illegally without slowing down or even looking for traffic, forcing road users to stop to avoid a collision. The new law will only give those particular cyclists an increased sense of entitlement to a supposed “right of way”. Whenever there’s a collision, the car driver will be deemed “at fault”, irrespective of the cyclist’s speed across the crossing (note that a driver may have ascertained that the crossing is clear and decided to proceed with no cyclists in sight, but if a cyclist approaches at a modest 25+ km/h, the cyclist will often reach the crossing before the car driver is clear of the crossing).

If we want to make Canberra more cycle-friendly, surely we should be implementing laws that reduce enmity between road user groups, not provoke it!

“Every morning and evening I watch numerous cyclists blitz across pedestrian crossings illegally without slowing down or even looking for traffic”

That’s something I rarely see, at least being done dangerously. Where is this happening? In many years of driving (over 40) I have only had to stop suddenly once for a person on a bicycle darting out, and there are always fools like that individual, both on a bicycle and behind the wheel of a car, but at least on a bicycle they are only likely to hurt themselves. Behind the wheel of a car, that individual is likely to hurt others. But then I do try to look ahead and anticipate. To be honest though, even if I had not slowed, that silly person would have made it. The fright was mine.
When I am cycling, more often then not, when I slow at a crossing I am waved through by the person in the car. In other words, hurry up.

Postalgeek said :

Masquara said :

How about cyclists stop cycling across pedestrian crossings?

To quote: “The overtaking law will be accompanied by new laws that allow riders to remain on their bicycles when crossing at pedestrian crossings.”

And that’s a disaster in the making – “cyclists must slow down to 10km/h and be prepared to stop” – I can’t really see that happening, nor can I see it being enforced (has anyone ever seen current the “cyclists must dismount” rule being enforced?).

Every morning and evening I watch numerous cyclists blitz across pedestrian crossings illegally without slowing down or even looking for traffic, forcing road users to stop to avoid a collision. The new law will only give those particular cyclists an increased sense of entitlement to a supposed “right of way”. Whenever there’s a collision, the car driver will be deemed “at fault”, irrespective of the cyclist’s speed across the crossing (note that a driver may have ascertained that the crossing is clear and decided to proceed with no cyclists in sight, but if a cyclist approaches at a modest 25+ km/h, the cyclist will often reach the crossing before the car driver is clear of the crossing).

If we want to make Canberra more cycle-friendly, surely we should be implementing laws that reduce enmity between road user groups, not provoke it!

Nilrem said :

Rollersk8r said :

…No, it’s basically that motorists go through a process. The process is licencing, rego, car maintenance, buying petrol and most importantly – following rules. The process is expensive but it entitles you to the road.

Cyclists are circumventing the process, which is not fair. Not entitled!

Heck, my own mother uses the “pay to use the road” argument, despite the fact I own and operate 2 cars – and I’m insured to ride my bicycles.

Fine, I’ll pay the $2 annual fee to cover my bicycle’s impact on road infrastructure. Happy?

You should actually get a rebate if that’s the case – Pedal Power often quotes a figure of $21 benefit that the community gets for every $1 invested in cycling infrastructure.

Rollersk8r said :

Maya123 said :

Grimm said :

rubaiyat said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

As a seldom visitor to Civic, I have not been privy to the regularity at which cyclists break the rules. A 15 minute lap around the Uni area enlightened me to the cycling mindset, with the complete disregard of “no walking” pedestrian and traffic lights, give way and which is the correct side of the road to ride on, not to mention helmets. Any police enforcing these rules? I wouldn’t mind seeing stats….
Of course vehicles make offences too, but anyone trying to make out cyclists as more righteous is dreaming.

See that’s in your own head.

No-one here has said the cyclists are more righteous.

Not directly.
Blaming everything on motorists and making excuses for some cyclists making a nuisance of themselves on the other hand…

The message I get here from most people, is that cyclists are law breakers, getting in the road of long suffering, patient, angelic motorists. Cyclists should be banned from all roads, and too much money is spent on cycle ways and this should stop. In other words, ban the activity of cycling, because if it were made illegal to ride a bicycle on the road and no money was ‘wasted’ on cycleways there would be no where those rude, law breaking, weirdo cyclists could go. They can go drive a car (I won’t say buy a car, as most adults who cycle have a car already) like the rest of you (us to you). Damn if those roads, as a coincidence, get even more crowded, because then at least, everyone can enjoy being stuck in traffic together, waistlines expanding, health getting worse as fitness drops, air quality getting worse, because damn, that’s how life should be!

No, it’s basically that motorists go through a process. The process is licencing, rego, car maintenance, buying petrol and most importantly – following rules. The process is expensive but it entitles you to the road.

Cyclists are circumventing the process, which is not fair. Not entitled!

Heck, my own mother uses the “pay to use the road” argument, despite the fact I own and operate 2 cars – and I’m insured to ride my bicycles.

Fine, I’ll pay the $2 annual fee to cover my bicycle’s impact on road infrastructure. Happy?

Masquara said :

How about cyclists stop cycling across pedestrian crossings?

To quote: “The overtaking law will be accompanied by new laws that allow riders to remain on their bicycles when crossing at pedestrian crossings.”

Felix the Cat said :

I see plenty of mowers driving along the roads, they are slower than cyclists. Why would the police pull them over? They are just as entitled to drive on the road as you are, and cyclists are. But nobody posts ill-informed rants on RiotACT about them, only about cyclists.

I have only ever seen them dart across or along a road if there is no footpath/cyclway to follow. To get to their suburb of work for the day they cart the mowers in trailers, because that is the considerate and efficient way. Rarely do they travel on interconnecting link roads like Parkes Way.

How about cyclists stop cycling across pedestrian crossings?

Rollersk8r said :

Maya123 said :

Grimm said :

rubaiyat said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

As a seldom visitor to Civic, I have not been privy to the regularity at which cyclists break the rules. A 15 minute lap around the Uni area enlightened me to the cycling mindset, with the complete disregard of “no walking” pedestrian and traffic lights, give way and which is the correct side of the road to ride on, not to mention helmets. Any police enforcing these rules? I wouldn’t mind seeing stats….
Of course vehicles make offences too, but anyone trying to make out cyclists as more righteous is dreaming.

See that’s in your own head.

No-one here has said the cyclists are more righteous.

Not directly.
Blaming everything on motorists and making excuses for some cyclists making a nuisance of themselves on the other hand…

The message I get here from most people, is that cyclists are law breakers, getting in the road of long suffering, patient, angelic motorists. Cyclists should be banned from all roads, and too much money is spent on cycle ways and this should stop. In other words, ban the activity of cycling, because if it were made illegal to ride a bicycle on the road and no money was ‘wasted’ on cycleways there would be no where those rude, law breaking, weirdo cyclists could go. They can go drive a car (I won’t say buy a car, as most adults who cycle have a car already) like the rest of you (us to you). Damn if those roads, as a coincidence, get even more crowded, because then at least, everyone can enjoy being stuck in traffic together, waistlines expanding, health getting worse as fitness drops, air quality getting worse, because damn, that’s how life should be!

No, it’s basically that motorists go through a process. The process is licencing, rego, car maintenance, buying petrol and most importantly – following rules. The process is expensive but it entitles you to the road.

Cyclists are circumventing the process, which is not fair. Not entitled!

Heck, my own mother uses the “pay to use the road” argument, despite the fact I own and operate 2 cars – and I’m insured to ride my bicycles.

Does that mean that cars that use more petrol are more entitled to use the roads than cars that use less?

Oh hang on, that explains the behaviour then of some drivers of petrol guzzling large utes. Much clearer now. They are entitled.

Maya123 said :

Grimm said :

rubaiyat said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

As a seldom visitor to Civic, I have not been privy to the regularity at which cyclists break the rules. A 15 minute lap around the Uni area enlightened me to the cycling mindset, with the complete disregard of “no walking” pedestrian and traffic lights, give way and which is the correct side of the road to ride on, not to mention helmets. Any police enforcing these rules? I wouldn’t mind seeing stats….
Of course vehicles make offences too, but anyone trying to make out cyclists as more righteous is dreaming.

See that’s in your own head.

No-one here has said the cyclists are more righteous.

Not directly.
Blaming everything on motorists and making excuses for some cyclists making a nuisance of themselves on the other hand…

The message I get here from most people, is that cyclists are law breakers, getting in the road of long suffering, patient, angelic motorists. Cyclists should be banned from all roads, and too much money is spent on cycle ways and this should stop. In other words, ban the activity of cycling, because if it were made illegal to ride a bicycle on the road and no money was ‘wasted’ on cycleways there would be no where those rude, law breaking, weirdo cyclists could go. They can go drive a car (I won’t say buy a car, as most adults who cycle have a car already) like the rest of you (us to you). Damn if those roads, as a coincidence, get even more crowded, because then at least, everyone can enjoy being stuck in traffic together, waistlines expanding, health getting worse as fitness drops, air quality getting worse, because damn, that’s how life should be!

No, it’s basically that motorists go through a process. The process is licencing, rego, car maintenance, buying petrol and most importantly – following rules. The process is expensive but it entitles you to the road.

Cyclists are circumventing the process, which is not fair. Not entitled!

Heck, my own mother uses the “pay to use the road” argument, despite the fact I own and operate 2 cars – and I’m insured to ride my bicycles.

Firstly, this trial is only formalising what a good driver should be doing anyway. The fact that we need to make it a law demonstrates that Canberra drivers need more training.

Canberra is aspiring to be a world class city – most big world cities have embraced cycling. Even London is becoming more cycle friendly. We already have an enormous cyclist population and we as drivers have a massive responsibility to protect more vulnerable road users including pedestrians, motorcyclists and cyclists. If you can’t accept this fact then perhaps you should not be driving? While cyclists have a legal right to use the road, they also have a responsibility to obey road laws and generally work to share the road. Cyclists are also not always perfect in their observation of the law.

It really isn’t that complicated. I drive around Canberra a lot and it’s incredibly rare that I’ve seen a cyclist obstruct traffic for more than a few moments. It’s rare that I see a cyclist breaking a law, but every day most cars around me break laws be it speeding, running red lights or failing to indicate. In Canberra, it’s almost a sport to bang on about how bad other people’s driving is, yet how quickly people seem to point their guilty finger at cyclists!

And here’s a thought for you, it won’t be that far in the future that autonomous cars will be in the mix and eventually a human driving a car will be a legal risk. Google is already building appropriate respect for cyclists into its algorithms – because that’s what all drivers should be doing.
Take a look at this simulation to get a sense of what Canberra transport would be like with autonomous cars: http://www.projectcomputing.com/resources/cacs/sim.html

No matter how much anyone bleats, the fact is that cycling will increasingly become an important part of the transport mix in Canberra.

Maya123 said :

The message I get here from most people, is that cyclists are law breakers, getting in the road of long suffering, patient, angelic motorists. Cyclists should be banned from all roads, and too much money is spent on cycle ways and this should stop. In other words, ban the activity of cycling, because if it were made illegal to ride a bicycle on the road and no money was ‘wasted’ on cycleways there would be no where those rude, law breaking, weirdo cyclists could go. They can go drive a car (I won’t say buy a car, as most adults who cycle have a car already) like the rest of you (us to you). Damn if those roads, as a coincidence, get even more crowded, because then at least, everyone can enjoy being stuck in traffic together, waistlines expanding, health getting worse as fitness drops, air quality getting worse, because damn, that’s how life should be!

Them thar uppity cyclists are upsettin’ tha Natooral Order!

Shootin’s too good fer ’em!

Mysteryman said :

Grimm said :

Maya123 said :

gazket said :

Cotter road shall be fun for drivers. There are kilometers of double yellow lines, long long and longer uphill sections and a 2 meter width of road. Enjoy your Cotter tourist drive at walking pace.

Cotter road shall be fun for people using bicycles. There are kilometres (spelling corrected) of double yellow lines, long long and longer uphill sections and a 2 meter width of road, and some drivers who are not willing to share and are a danger to other road users. Enjoy your Cotter tourist trip with dangerous, selfish drivers who don’t care if they endanger you.

Pretty sure it isn’t people in cars riding 3 abreast at 20km/h in a 100 zone full of blind corners and then complaining. Apart from putting themselves in danger, it is outright inconsiderate and selfish. Use some bloody common sense and ride single file on such a narrow road. Won’t bother me a bit when you bounce off my bull bar.

Sharing the road means not being a traffic hazard, and not unnecessarily endangering yourself and other people. It works both ways and shouldn’t all be up to people in cars to be courteous and sensible.

Absolutely. It’s a shame that so many of the people around here don’t understand the importance of mutual respect – particularly those harping on, and on, and on, about evil cars and the forever virtuous cyclists and pedestrians.

Where do we see the aggressive attitude to drivers that they show to not only pedestrians and cyclists in the A.C.T., but each other as well?

The thin skinned outrage is coming from those attacking others wanting to get around Canberra as they choose.

The only one harping on about “evil cars” is you and the other reactionaries from the anti-Light Rail lobby, and when I quote that back at you the “moderators” here cut the reply so you can keep on saying it unchallenged.

I simply pointed out that all the claims that Light Rail is or will be killing and severely injuring countless thousands every year year, leads to crime, is the cause of our debt, is damaging our environment is not true.

It is in fact cars.

Not something hidden or undocumented.

Your conclusion that that makes cars evil may be justified, but it wasn’t me that said it.

Meanwhile the scare campaign by you and others goes on unmoderated.

Grimm said :

rubaiyat said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

As a seldom visitor to Civic, I have not been privy to the regularity at which cyclists break the rules. A 15 minute lap around the Uni area enlightened me to the cycling mindset, with the complete disregard of “no walking” pedestrian and traffic lights, give way and which is the correct side of the road to ride on, not to mention helmets. Any police enforcing these rules? I wouldn’t mind seeing stats….
Of course vehicles make offences too, but anyone trying to make out cyclists as more righteous is dreaming.

See that’s in your own head.

No-one here has said the cyclists are more righteous.

Not directly.
Blaming everything on motorists and making excuses for some cyclists making a nuisance of themselves on the other hand…

The message I get here from most people, is that cyclists are law breakers, getting in the road of long suffering, patient, angelic motorists. Cyclists should be banned from all roads, and too much money is spent on cycle ways and this should stop. In other words, ban the activity of cycling, because if it were made illegal to ride a bicycle on the road and no money was ‘wasted’ on cycleways there would be no where those rude, law breaking, weirdo cyclists could go. They can go drive a car (I won’t say buy a car, as most adults who cycle have a car already) like the rest of you (us to you). Damn if those roads, as a coincidence, get even more crowded, because then at least, everyone can enjoy being stuck in traffic together, waistlines expanding, health getting worse as fitness drops, air quality getting worse, because damn, that’s how life should be!

rubaiyat said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

As a seldom visitor to Civic, I have not been privy to the regularity at which cyclists break the rules. A 15 minute lap around the Uni area enlightened me to the cycling mindset, with the complete disregard of “no walking” pedestrian and traffic lights, give way and which is the correct side of the road to ride on, not to mention helmets. Any police enforcing these rules? I wouldn’t mind seeing stats….
Of course vehicles make offences too, but anyone trying to make out cyclists as more righteous is dreaming.

See that’s in your own head.

No-one here has said the cyclists are more righteous.

Not directly.
Blaming everything on motorists and making excuses for some cyclists making a nuisance of themselves on the other hand…

wildturkeycanoe said :

As a seldom visitor to Civic, I have not been privy to the regularity at which cyclists break the rules. A 15 minute lap around the Uni area enlightened me to the cycling mindset, with the complete disregard of “no walking” pedestrian and traffic lights, give way and which is the correct side of the road to ride on, not to mention helmets. Any police enforcing these rules? I wouldn’t mind seeing stats….
Of course vehicles make offences too, but anyone trying to make out cyclists as more righteous is dreaming.

See that’s in your own head.

No-one here has said the cyclists are more righteous.

gooterz said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

Why can cyclists get away with the same thing whilst they don’t have any other obligations to the road rules such as registration, licensing or insurance?

Perhaps because our elected representation think they are elected dictators.
Who only have token consultation and only when it suits them.

They don’t really care about road safety, until someone points out that its also covered in their job.

Take the European traffic lights. They look better, because they don’t have the black border. However they are useless because of glare and background distractions.
We got them, then decided we needed to cover them over with standard black borders.

Maybe as a result of a higher number of members, we can expect more unenforceable laws?

Most people who cycle that I know have insurance when riding a bicycle. I have insurance.

Holden Caulfield said :

VYBerlinaV8_is_back said :

What we need is to somehow create and promote a culture of inclusiveness and courtesy, rather than aggressiveness and selfishness.

Bravo.

End thread.

Can’t fault this logic. If everyone was a little bit more considerate, the situation would improve drastically.

Maya123 said :

My previous comment: “But I did know this aggression against people who use bicycles would be fore and centre here. Sad and selfish. Why are you like this? Don’t say it’s the people cycling. It’s not. It’s in you. So, why are you like this? What do you get out of being this hateful?”

It’s called projection.

Disregarding bad drivers for a second (and there are plenty), cyclists often behave extremely disrespectfully to other road users. They break laws, unreasonably slow traffic and endanger themselves and other road users. All for some believed “entitlement” to selfishly own a section of road.

When drivers behave the same way, they are called out on their bad behaviour, they can often face legal sanction for it.

But when cyclists are called out on their bad behaviour, somehow it’s because drivers are “hateful, sad and selfish”.

Ezy said :

Cyclists should get off the roads and ride somewhere else… wait, we can’t as people are making barbed wire traps across the trails. This is disgusting behaviour.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/barbed-wire-booby-trap-for-cyclists-sprung-20150921-gjrlq7.html

And cyclists should get off the roads and ride somewhere else… like the footpaths and cycleways that are commonly blocked by illegally parked cars, and which 2/3 of RA think is acceptable and that there should be no penalties for that.

wildturkeycanoe said :

I was looking plenty ahead, which is why I said I slowed down, it isn’t like I have four spot Brembo calipers with 8 inch wide slicks for traction on my little 4 cyl, I slowed down nice and quickly …

I think you just proved my point – if you’re looking more than 2m ahead, on suburban roads, you’ll see a cyclist well before you catch up to him/her (except for those who consider $30 for a decent tail-light to be too much to spend to making sure they can be seen by other road users). Assuming you’re also driving in the vicinity of the speed limit, this will give you ample time to assess your speed and the cyclist’s speed and anticipate at what point you’ll catch up to him/her and determine whether there will be sufficient space to overtake safely, taking into account any oncoming traffic – you wouldn’t need to slow down “nice and quickly”, you could simply back off the accelerator and slow gradually. In most cases you wouldn’t even need to touch the brakes so I don’t know what relevance ‘four spot callipers and 8″ slicks’ have in this discussion, nor why there should be any panicked response needed from the traffic behind you.

wildturkeycanoe said :

Holden Caulfield said :

VYBerlinaV8_is_back said :

What we need is to somehow create and promote a culture of inclusiveness and courtesy, rather than aggressiveness and selfishness.

Bravo.

End thread.

Stick a dog and a cat into the same cage and expect to see inclusiveness?

Hopefully humans operating machinery have more reasoning capacity and are less driven by instinct than cats and dogs?

As a seldom visitor to Civic, I have not been privy to the regularity at which cyclists break the rules. A 15 minute lap around the Uni area enlightened me to the cycling mindset, with the complete disregard of “no walking” pedestrian and traffic lights, give way and which is the correct side of the road to ride on, not to mention helmets. Any police enforcing these rules? I wouldn’t mind seeing stats….
Of course vehicles make offences too, but anyone trying to make out cyclists as more righteous is dreaming.

Holden Caulfield said :

VYBerlinaV8_is_back said :

What we need is to somehow create and promote a culture of inclusiveness and courtesy, rather than aggressiveness and selfishness.

Bravo.

End thread.

Stick a dog and a cat into the same cage and expect to see inclusiveness?

Ezy said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

tim_c said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

Nilrem said :

When cycling, it is problematic to keep as far left as you can. Motorists then try to stay in the lane when overtaking, and often pass dangerously close. And because you are keeping as far left as you can, there is no more room for evasive action. This is why I often ride about a metre from the kerb. I find when I do this, people are more consciously overtaking, and there are fewer people passing dangerously close. I have been cycling for years and this has been my observation. When I am driving my car, I always make sure that I leave a big gap, two or three metres, when overtaking, even if this means partially using the adjacent lane. If there is too much traffic to do this, I just wait until overtaking is possible. It is safer. When you get anoyed with cyclists, just try to imagine that every cyclist was driving a car instead. Traffic would be even worse, and we would all suffer from the increased congestion.

When cyclists ride on the road and a car cannot pass because it is unsafe as there isn’t enough room or the other lane has traffic, do you know what the consequences are?
The car behind the cyclist slows from 60-70km/h to the cyclists’ speed, say 20km/h. The car behind them hits the anchors, the car behind and so on. Eventually, about six cars back the traffic has almost come to a standstill thanks to the concertina effect and then you have people trying to change lanes because they want to keep moving. It causes CHAOS, but cyclists do not understand this, because they are “entitled” to ride on the roads.
Yesterday afternoon on Southern Cross Dr I had this exact thing happen, though there were 2 riders side by side using half the lane. I had to slow down to 25 because cars in the right lane were passing me. Then I had to accelerate back to 60 again once I could pass. I wore out my brakes and used more fuel, albeit in a tiny portion, but over the lifetime of each and every person who has to work around cyclists on the roads I wonder how much cars end up adding to the global warming problem because of cyclists. In any case, the riders inconsiderately kept chatting away, oblivious to the obstruction they were causing, though legally of course.

It sounds like you might need to look a bit further ahead when you’re driving.

I was looking plenty ahead, which is why I said I slowed down, it isn’t like I have four spot Brembo calipers with 8 inch wide slicks for traction on my little 4 cyl, I slowed down nice and quickly but not every car behind will be able to see the cause of the “obstruction” ahead. Unlike when a semi, bus or articulated vehicle is on the road, cyclists won’t be visible to traffic four or five cars behind. If you drove around in a car doing 30km/h on any 60 or 80 zone in Canberra, apart from causing some serious traffic congestion problems, you’d probably get dobbed in and fined for doing so. Why can cyclists get away with the same thing whilst they don’t have any other obligations to the road rules such as registration, licensing or insurance? Try riding a mower along a road and see how long you can do it before the plod pulls you up. Ever wonder why the council grass mowers use footpaths instead of the road to get to where they work? But yet, cycling is perfectly acceptable way to cause accidents and disrupt the life of every motorist.
Horses are legally allowed on our roads, but horse people are smarter than to take their four legged creatures into the path of 1 tonne petrol and diesel powered machines. Why don’t cyclists have the same horse-sense.
I wonder what would happen if cyclists tempted fate and tried riding two abreast on the Kings Hwy?

Big brembo brakes and wide wheels on your little 4 cyl? Sounds like your car shouldn’t be on the road.

I said “It isn’t like my….”, meaning I do not have the accessories mentioned. Do you not understand the context here? Honestly, I do not appreciate the “you should drive like this” and “your car should be off the road” comments when they are based on completely incorrect quotes, taken out of context. Pre-determined assumptions made without reading and undersanding the entire text, what else can one expect from RA?

rubaiyat said :

Bertie was priceless:

“It has been said that man is a rational animal. All my life I have been searching for evidence which could support this.”

? Bertrand Russell

Indeed, however I prefer to quote Plastic Bertrand “Ca plane pour moi”

This is a useless and unenforceable law.

Mull over that.

VYBerlinaV8_is_back said :

What we need is to somehow create and promote a culture of inclusiveness and courtesy, rather than aggressiveness and selfishness.

Bravo.

End thread.

wildturkeycanoe said :

Try riding a mower along a road and see how long you can do it before the plod pulls you up. Ever wonder why the council grass mowers use footpaths instead of the road to get to where they work? But

I see plenty of mowers driving along the roads, they are slower than cyclists. Why would the police pull them over? They are just as entitled to drive on the road as you are, and cyclists are. But nobody posts ill-informed rants on RiotACT about them, only about cyclists.

wildturkeycanoe said :

tim_c said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

Nilrem said :

When cycling, it is problematic to keep as far left as you can. Motorists then try to stay in the lane when overtaking, and often pass dangerously close. And because you are keeping as far left as you can, there is no more room for evasive action. This is why I often ride about a metre from the kerb. I find when I do this, people are more consciously overtaking, and there are fewer people passing dangerously close. I have been cycling for years and this has been my observation. When I am driving my car, I always make sure that I leave a big gap, two or three metres, when overtaking, even if this means partially using the adjacent lane. If there is too much traffic to do this, I just wait until overtaking is possible. It is safer. When you get anoyed with cyclists, just try to imagine that every cyclist was driving a car instead. Traffic would be even worse, and we would all suffer from the increased congestion.

When cyclists ride on the road and a car cannot pass because it is unsafe as there isn’t enough room or the other lane has traffic, do you know what the consequences are?
The car behind the cyclist slows from 60-70km/h to the cyclists’ speed, say 20km/h. The car behind them hits the anchors, the car behind and so on. Eventually, about six cars back the traffic has almost come to a standstill thanks to the concertina effect and then you have people trying to change lanes because they want to keep moving. It causes CHAOS, but cyclists do not understand this, because they are “entitled” to ride on the roads.
Yesterday afternoon on Southern Cross Dr I had this exact thing happen, though there were 2 riders side by side using half the lane. I had to slow down to 25 because cars in the right lane were passing me. Then I had to accelerate back to 60 again once I could pass. I wore out my brakes and used more fuel, albeit in a tiny portion, but over the lifetime of each and every person who has to work around cyclists on the roads I wonder how much cars end up adding to the global warming problem because of cyclists. In any case, the riders inconsiderately kept chatting away, oblivious to the obstruction they were causing, though legally of course.

It sounds like you might need to look a bit further ahead when you’re driving.

I was looking plenty ahead, which is why I said I slowed down, it isn’t like I have four spot Brembo calipers with 8 inch wide slicks for traction on my little 4 cyl, I slowed down nice and quickly but not every car behind will be able to see the cause of the “obstruction” ahead. Unlike when a semi, bus or articulated vehicle is on the road, cyclists won’t be visible to traffic four or five cars behind. If you drove around in a car doing 30km/h on any 60 or 80 zone in Canberra, apart from causing some serious traffic congestion problems, you’d probably get dobbed in and fined for doing so. Why can cyclists get away with the same thing whilst they don’t have any other obligations to the road rules such as registration, licensing or insurance? Try riding a mower along a road and see how long you can do it before the plod pulls you up. Ever wonder why the council grass mowers use footpaths instead of the road to get to where they work? But yet, cycling is perfectly acceptable way to cause accidents and disrupt the life of every motorist.
Horses are legally allowed on our roads, but horse people are smarter than to take their four legged creatures into the path of 1 tonne petrol and diesel powered machines. Why don’t cyclists have the same horse-sense.
I wonder what would happen if cyclists tempted fate and tried riding two abreast on the Kings Hwy?

Big brembo brakes and wide wheels on your little 4 cyl? Sounds like your car shouldn’t be on the road.

wildturkeycanoe said :

Why can cyclists get away with the same thing whilst they don’t have any other obligations to the road rules such as registration, licensing or insurance?

Perhaps because our elected representation think they are elected dictators.
Who only have token consultation and only when it suits them.

They don’t really care about road safety, until someone points out that its also covered in their job.

Take the European traffic lights. They look better, because they don’t have the black border. However they are useless because of glare and background distractions.
We got them, then decided we needed to cover them over with standard black borders.

Maybe as a result of a higher number of members, we can expect more unenforceable laws?

cbrmale said :

Maya123 said :

Grimm said :

Maya123 said :

gazket said :

Cotter road shall be fun for drivers. There are kilometers of double yellow lines, long long and longer uphill sections and a 2 meter width of road. Enjoy your Cotter tourist drive at walking pace.

Cotter road shall be fun for people using bicycles. There are kilometres (spelling corrected) of double yellow lines, long long and longer uphill sections and a 2 meter width of road, and some drivers who are not willing to share and are a danger to other road users. Enjoy your Cotter tourist trip with dangerous, selfish drivers who don’t care if they endanger you.

Pretty sure it isn’t people in cars riding 3 abreast at 20km/h in a 100 zone full of blind corners and then complaining. Apart from putting themselves in danger, it is outright inconsiderate and selfish. Use some bloody common sense and ride single file on such a narrow road. Won’t bother me a bit when you bounce off my bull bar.

Sharing the road means not being a traffic hazard, and not unnecessarily endangering yourself and other people. It works both ways and shouldn’t all be up to people in cars to be courteous and sensible.

I hope you are just acting like a troll trying to get a reaction. I quote, “Won’t bother me a bit when you bounce off my bull bar.” If not, you are displaying strong psychopathic behaviour. I would be devastated if I injured someone.

I was tempted to ask you the question I posed and no-one has answered, but if you are a troll, or worse, I’m not sure you can honestly answer it. (I am now wondering if this will be censored, despite my answering a literally murderous, callous comment.)
My previous comment: “But I did know this aggression against people who use bicycles would be fore and centre here. Sad and selfish. Why are you like this? Don’t say it’s the people cycling. It’s not. It’s in you. So, why are you like this? What do you get out of being this hateful?”

What he means is if bicycle riders are two abreast just after the crest of a hill or just after a blind curve, then they run a real risk of being hit from behind by a car or other vehicle travelling at five times their speed. Anyone who has driven on Cotter Road or nearby country roads in New South Wales will have seen this behaviour in spades, and it really is dangerous for the bicycle riders involved. Even single file is dangerous on many country roads especially with trucks coming from behind, but two abreast is lethal.

I don’t believe anyone wants to run bicycle riders down, but sometimes it seems like they deliberately challenge us not to.

No, what Grimm wrote was, “Won’t bother me a bit when you bounce off my bull bar.”
Even if it wasn’t my fault and I hit someone it would bother me. I don’t believe Grimm means what you wrote. He means, (his words), “Won’t bother me a bit when you bounce off my bull bar.”

Mysteryman said :

Grimm said :

Maya123 said :

gazket said :

Cotter road shall be fun for drivers. There are kilometers of double yellow lines, long long and longer uphill sections and a 2 meter width of road. Enjoy your Cotter tourist drive at walking pace.

Cotter road shall be fun for people using bicycles. There are kilometres (spelling corrected) of double yellow lines, long long and longer uphill sections and a 2 meter width of road, and some drivers who are not willing to share and are a danger to other road users. Enjoy your Cotter tourist trip with dangerous, selfish drivers who don’t care if they endanger you.

Pretty sure it isn’t people in cars riding 3 abreast at 20km/h in a 100 zone full of blind corners and then complaining. Apart from putting themselves in danger, it is outright inconsiderate and selfish. Use some bloody common sense and ride single file on such a narrow road. Won’t bother me a bit when you bounce off my bull bar.

Sharing the road means not being a traffic hazard, and not unnecessarily endangering yourself and other people. It works both ways and shouldn’t all be up to people in cars to be courteous and sensible.

Absolutely. It’s a shame that so many of the people around here don’t understand the importance of mutual respect – particularly those harping on, and on, and on, about evil cars and the forever virtuous cyclists and pedestrians.

This is the the real issue. People stubbornly exercising ‘their rights’ over using their brains just fuels the fire.

There are plenty of cyclists, and motorists, who seem to have a knack for looking where they’re going, communicating using eye contact and some brief waves, and making the process of transporting ourselves easy and stress-free. Then there are the others…

tim_c said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

Nilrem said :

When cycling, it is problematic to keep as far left as you can. Motorists then try to stay in the lane when overtaking, and often pass dangerously close. And because you are keeping as far left as you can, there is no more room for evasive action. This is why I often ride about a metre from the kerb. I find when I do this, people are more consciously overtaking, and there are fewer people passing dangerously close. I have been cycling for years and this has been my observation. When I am driving my car, I always make sure that I leave a big gap, two or three metres, when overtaking, even if this means partially using the adjacent lane. If there is too much traffic to do this, I just wait until overtaking is possible. It is safer. When you get anoyed with cyclists, just try to imagine that every cyclist was driving a car instead. Traffic would be even worse, and we would all suffer from the increased congestion.

When cyclists ride on the road and a car cannot pass because it is unsafe as there isn’t enough room or the other lane has traffic, do you know what the consequences are?
The car behind the cyclist slows from 60-70km/h to the cyclists’ speed, say 20km/h. The car behind them hits the anchors, the car behind and so on. Eventually, about six cars back the traffic has almost come to a standstill thanks to the concertina effect and then you have people trying to change lanes because they want to keep moving. It causes CHAOS, but cyclists do not understand this, because they are “entitled” to ride on the roads.
Yesterday afternoon on Southern Cross Dr I had this exact thing happen, though there were 2 riders side by side using half the lane. I had to slow down to 25 because cars in the right lane were passing me. Then I had to accelerate back to 60 again once I could pass. I wore out my brakes and used more fuel, albeit in a tiny portion, but over the lifetime of each and every person who has to work around cyclists on the roads I wonder how much cars end up adding to the global warming problem because of cyclists. In any case, the riders inconsiderately kept chatting away, oblivious to the obstruction they were causing, though legally of course.

It sounds like you might need to look a bit further ahead when you’re driving.

I was looking plenty ahead, which is why I said I slowed down, it isn’t like I have four spot Brembo calipers with 8 inch wide slicks for traction on my little 4 cyl, I slowed down nice and quickly but not every car behind will be able to see the cause of the “obstruction” ahead. Unlike when a semi, bus or articulated vehicle is on the road, cyclists won’t be visible to traffic four or five cars behind. If you drove around in a car doing 30km/h on any 60 or 80 zone in Canberra, apart from causing some serious traffic congestion problems, you’d probably get dobbed in and fined for doing so. Why can cyclists get away with the same thing whilst they don’t have any other obligations to the road rules such as registration, licensing or insurance? Try riding a mower along a road and see how long you can do it before the plod pulls you up. Ever wonder why the council grass mowers use footpaths instead of the road to get to where they work? But yet, cycling is perfectly acceptable way to cause accidents and disrupt the life of every motorist.
Horses are legally allowed on our roads, but horse people are smarter than to take their four legged creatures into the path of 1 tonne petrol and diesel powered machines. Why don’t cyclists have the same horse-sense.
I wonder what would happen if cyclists tempted fate and tried riding two abreast on the Kings Hwy?

Maya123 said :

Grimm said :

Maya123 said :

gazket said :

Cotter road shall be fun for drivers. There are kilometers of double yellow lines, long long and longer uphill sections and a 2 meter width of road. Enjoy your Cotter tourist drive at walking pace.

Cotter road shall be fun for people using bicycles. There are kilometres (spelling corrected) of double yellow lines, long long and longer uphill sections and a 2 meter width of road, and some drivers who are not willing to share and are a danger to other road users. Enjoy your Cotter tourist trip with dangerous, selfish drivers who don’t care if they endanger you.

Pretty sure it isn’t people in cars riding 3 abreast at 20km/h in a 100 zone full of blind corners and then complaining. Apart from putting themselves in danger, it is outright inconsiderate and selfish. Use some bloody common sense and ride single file on such a narrow road. Won’t bother me a bit when you bounce off my bull bar.

Sharing the road means not being a traffic hazard, and not unnecessarily endangering yourself and other people. It works both ways and shouldn’t all be up to people in cars to be courteous and sensible.

I hope you are just acting like a troll trying to get a reaction. I quote, “Won’t bother me a bit when you bounce off my bull bar.” If not, you are displaying strong psychopathic behaviour. I would be devastated if I injured someone.

I was tempted to ask you the question I posed and no-one has answered, but if you are a troll, or worse, I’m not sure you can honestly answer it. (I am now wondering if this will be censored, despite my answering a literally murderous, callous comment.)
My previous comment: “But I did know this aggression against people who use bicycles would be fore and centre here. Sad and selfish. Why are you like this? Don’t say it’s the people cycling. It’s not. It’s in you. So, why are you like this? What do you get out of being this hateful?”

What he means is if bicycle riders are two abreast just after the crest of a hill or just after a blind curve, then they run a real risk of being hit from behind by a car or other vehicle travelling at five times their speed. Anyone who has driven on Cotter Road or nearby country roads in New South Wales will have seen this behaviour in spades, and it really is dangerous for the bicycle riders involved. Even single file is dangerous on many country roads especially with trucks coming from behind, but two abreast is lethal.

I don’t believe anyone wants to run bicycle riders down, but sometimes it seems like they deliberately challenge us not to.

Ghettosmurf87 said :

Grimm said :

rubaiyat said :

Grimm said :

…shouldn’t all be up to people in cars to be courteous and sensible.

As unlikely as that is in Canberra.

Might not be the case if people weren’t tired of inconsiderate cyclists with their “We are entitled to use the road” mentality.

And this is where your argument is let down, because you equate bad driver behaviour as the fault of inconsiderate cyclists.

While inconsiderate cyclists are undoubtedly irritating, the prevalence of bad driver behaviour that is liable to cause serious damage and for which the driver gives no consideration to the possibility of this outcome is extremely high. The common factor in aggression against cyclists is not the cyclist, it is poorly behaved and controlled drivers.

this is not to say that cyclists are faultless and do not need to be considerate of what they are doing and the effect it has on those around them, but most drivers who get irritated and aggressive at cyclists also do so to other road-users in cars, trucks, busses etc too.

This is not the case at all. There are far too many cyclists who go out of their way to antagonise other road users. Many of those road users don’t get aggressive back at the cyclists, but they do carry grudges about inconsiderate behaviour.

My wife is one of the most placid people I have the privilege to know, and she is totally over cyclists riding two abreast on busy Gungahlin Drive, ignoring the cycle lane and the parallel cycle path and creating major traffic congestion instead. How can anyone justify not riding in the cycle lane but two abreast on the traffic lane? Not once but many times a week. Not only does this create congestion for cars, it also delays bus services.

My sister from Melbourne arrived red-faced, and the first thing she said was ‘the bicycle riders here are crazy!’. There were out of the bicycle lane and on the traffic lane of the 110km/h Federal Highway, and she got a chance to test her emergency braking abilities.

I have been to Amsterdam and to Copenhagen where there is a world of difference between bicycle riders in those cities and the aggressive, lycra-clad hoons that we have to deal with. I have also been to Britain and seen aggressive riding there, and the stand-off between British drivers and British riders is just as bad as here.

Riders who ignore designated cycle lanes to willfully create major traffic congestion are doing themselves no favours, and such behaviour by not all but enough bicycle riders will continue to fuel this us against them debate. Lets post more pictures of bicycle commuting in Amsterdam: steady, considerate and courteous, and hope that the message gets through. There is enough room for all of us on the road, and if we can do away with selfish and aggressive riding then the rewards will come in a hundred different ways.

Finally for those motorists who do the wrong thing, I am sure that more and more bicycle riders wear helmet cameras, I have one on my motorcycle helmet, and if you transgress the new one-metre space then there may be consequences from that.

wildturkeycanoe said :

Nilrem said :

When cycling, it is problematic to keep as far left as you can. Motorists then try to stay in the lane when overtaking, and often pass dangerously close. And because you are keeping as far left as you can, there is no more room for evasive action. This is why I often ride about a metre from the kerb. I find when I do this, people are more consciously overtaking, and there are fewer people passing dangerously close. I have been cycling for years and this has been my observation. When I am driving my car, I always make sure that I leave a big gap, two or three metres, when overtaking, even if this means partially using the adjacent lane. If there is too much traffic to do this, I just wait until overtaking is possible. It is safer. When you get anoyed with cyclists, just try to imagine that every cyclist was driving a car instead. Traffic would be even worse, and we would all suffer from the increased congestion.

When cyclists ride on the road and a car cannot pass because it is unsafe as there isn’t enough room or the other lane has traffic, do you know what the consequences are?
The car behind the cyclist slows from 60-70km/h to the cyclists’ speed, say 20km/h. The car behind them hits the anchors, the car behind and so on. Eventually, about six cars back the traffic has almost come to a standstill thanks to the concertina effect and then you have people trying to change lanes because they want to keep moving. It causes CHAOS, but cyclists do not understand this, because they are “entitled” to ride on the roads.
Yesterday afternoon on Southern Cross Dr I had this exact thing happen, though there were 2 riders side by side using half the lane. I had to slow down to 25 because cars in the right lane were passing me. Then I had to accelerate back to 60 again once I could pass. I wore out my brakes and used more fuel, albeit in a tiny portion, but over the lifetime of each and every person who has to work around cyclists on the roads I wonder how much cars end up adding to the global warming problem because of cyclists. In any case, the riders inconsiderately kept chatting away, oblivious to the obstruction they were causing, though legally of course.

It sounds like you might need to look a bit further ahead when you’re driving.

Dame Canberra said :

Are we sure it’s drivers who need new laws? Spotted on Brisbane Avenue yesterday: https://www.facebook.com/12062CC/photos/a.170720876272947.43079.115088311836204/1116154208396271/?type=1&theater

It’s already illegal to unreasonably obstruct traffic. But if no one is going to obey or enforce the current laws, why should we think it will be any different with a whole bunch of new laws? Even if they do enforce it, we’ll get a bunch of whingers on the RiotACT complaining that they got fined, and an opinion poll that shows the majority of RA readers think the Police should be more lenient.

The ACT Government is already demonstrating that it cannot enforce the current road rules (what are speed humps for, afterall?). Why should they think about introducing new laws that are even harder (more subjective) to enforce?

The ACT Government cannot even accurately assess 3m or less between a parked car and a pair pf painted unbroken lines – how do they think they can accurately assess 1m or less between two moving vehicles?

rubaiyat said :

Bertie was priceless:

“It has been said that man is a rational animal. All my life I have been searching for evidence which could support this.”

? Bertrand Russell

“The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt.” – Bertrand Russell

I remember this quote when I read your rants about cars.

Bertie was priceless:

“It has been said that man is a rational animal. All my life I have been searching for evidence which could support this.”

? Bertrand Russell

Grimm said :

rubaiyat said :

Grimm said :

…shouldn’t all be up to people in cars to be courteous and sensible.

As unlikely as that is in Canberra.

Might not be the case if people weren’t tired of inconsiderate cyclists with their “We are entitled to use the road” mentality.

And this is where your argument is let down, because you equate bad driver behaviour as the fault of inconsiderate cyclists.

While inconsiderate cyclists are undoubtedly irritating, the prevalence of bad driver behaviour that is liable to cause serious damage and for which the driver gives no consideration to the possibility of this outcome is extremely high. The common factor in aggression against cyclists is not the cyclist, it is poorly behaved and controlled drivers.

this is not to say that cyclists are faultless and do not need to be considerate of what they are doing and the effect it has on those around them, but most drivers who get irritated and aggressive at cyclists also do so to other road-users in cars, trucks, busses etc too.

All depends how the law is trialled – and whether there’s any enforcement planned, or if it’s just for general awareness purposes??

As a cyclist and motorist I’ve noticed all the rules and restrictions that Rattenbury has introduced – mostly related to slowing down traffic. And yet I’ve noticed zero change in behaviour…

Mysteryman said :

Grimm said :

Maya123 said :

gazket said :

Cotter road shall be fun for drivers. There are kilometers of double yellow lines, long long and longer uphill sections and a 2 meter width of road. Enjoy your Cotter tourist drive at walking pace.

Cotter road shall be fun for people using bicycles. There are kilometres (spelling corrected) of double yellow lines, long long and longer uphill sections and a 2 meter width of road, and some drivers who are not willing to share and are a danger to other road users. Enjoy your Cotter tourist trip with dangerous, selfish drivers who don’t care if they endanger you.

Pretty sure it isn’t people in cars riding 3 abreast at 20km/h in a 100 zone full of blind corners and then complaining. Apart from putting themselves in danger, it is outright inconsiderate and selfish. Use some bloody common sense and ride single file on such a narrow road. Won’t bother me a bit when you bounce off my bull bar.

Sharing the road means not being a traffic hazard, and not unnecessarily endangering yourself and other people. It works both ways and shouldn’t all be up to people in cars to be courteous and sensible.

Absolutely. It’s a shame that so many of the people around here don’t understand the importance of mutual respect – particularly those harping on, and on, and on, about evil cars and the forever virtuous cyclists and pedestrians.

You are the one who hyperbolises about “evil cars”. Part of the unthinkability of Light Rail because it would take some of that hydrocarbon tang out of the air.

Cars are useful, they should not be objects of worship. Which is what they have become to many.

With 54% of Canberra devoted to roads and huge amounts of money sunk into the futility that is freeways, enough is enough. Time to put your thinking caps on and come up with something better.

As Bertrand Russell said:

“Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so.”

and

“A stupid man’s report of what a clever man says can never be accurate, because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand.”

Grimm said :

Maya123 said :

gazket said :

Cotter road shall be fun for drivers. There are kilometers of double yellow lines, long long and longer uphill sections and a 2 meter width of road. Enjoy your Cotter tourist drive at walking pace.

Cotter road shall be fun for people using bicycles. There are kilometres (spelling corrected) of double yellow lines, long long and longer uphill sections and a 2 meter width of road, and some drivers who are not willing to share and are a danger to other road users. Enjoy your Cotter tourist trip with dangerous, selfish drivers who don’t care if they endanger you.

Pretty sure it isn’t people in cars riding 3 abreast at 20km/h in a 100 zone full of blind corners and then complaining. Apart from putting themselves in danger, it is outright inconsiderate and selfish. Use some bloody common sense and ride single file on such a narrow road. Won’t bother me a bit when you bounce off my bull bar.

Sharing the road means not being a traffic hazard, and not unnecessarily endangering yourself and other people. It works both ways and shouldn’t all be up to people in cars to be courteous and sensible.

I hope you are just acting like a troll trying to get a reaction. I quote, “Won’t bother me a bit when you bounce off my bull bar.” If not, you are displaying strong psychopathic behaviour. I would be devastated if I injured someone.

I was tempted to ask you the question I posed and no-one has answered, but if you are a troll, or worse, I’m not sure you can honestly answer it. (I am now wondering if this will be censored, despite my answering a literally murderous, callous comment.)
My previous comment: “But I did know this aggression against people who use bicycles would be fore and centre here. Sad and selfish. Why are you like this? Don’t say it’s the people cycling. It’s not. It’s in you. So, why are you like this? What do you get out of being this hateful?”

Grimm said :

rubaiyat said :

Grimm said :

…shouldn’t all be up to people in cars to be courteous and sensible.

As unlikely as that is in Canberra.

Might not be the case if people weren’t tired of inconsiderate cyclists with their “We are entitled to use the road” mentality.

I don’t care if people want to ride on the road. That’s fine. Just understand that you also have a responsibility to keep yourself safe and not impede other road users. Keep as far left as is practical. Ride single file where doing otherwise blocks a lane. It’s really not all that hard, and if it is done, I would imagine the number of people hating cyclists on the road would decrease daily.

Riding as far left as possible is a recipe for getting run off the road by drivers.

In built up areas it is also a great way to get your wheel stick in grates, broken glass or have a dozy person swing open their car door in your face.

Canberra drivers are terrible and inconsiderate to each other let alone cyclists or people trying to use pedestrain crossings. They seem to lack basic courtesy, overtake on the blind left, don’t move over to let merging cars in even when there is ample room and either creep around at 40km or impatiently speed and overtake dangerously.

My very first day in Canberra driving to work I witnessed two drivers road raging at the intersection of Hindmarsh Drive and Canberra Ave Fyshwick. 4 lanes of roadway, I was the 3rd car, and they were arguing over the road!

Hasn’t changed since that day.

Grimm said :

Maya123 said :

gazket said :

Cotter road shall be fun for drivers. There are kilometers of double yellow lines, long long and longer uphill sections and a 2 meter width of road. Enjoy your Cotter tourist drive at walking pace.

Cotter road shall be fun for people using bicycles. There are kilometres (spelling corrected) of double yellow lines, long long and longer uphill sections and a 2 meter width of road, and some drivers who are not willing to share and are a danger to other road users. Enjoy your Cotter tourist trip with dangerous, selfish drivers who don’t care if they endanger you.

Pretty sure it isn’t people in cars riding 3 abreast at 20km/h in a 100 zone full of blind corners and then complaining. Apart from putting themselves in danger, it is outright inconsiderate and selfish. Use some bloody common sense and ride single file on such a narrow road. Won’t bother me a bit when you bounce off my bull bar.

Sharing the road means not being a traffic hazard, and not unnecessarily endangering yourself and other people. It works both ways and shouldn’t all be up to people in cars to be courteous and sensible.

Absolutely. It’s a shame that so many of the people around here don’t understand the importance of mutual respect – particularly those harping on, and on, and on, about evil cars and the forever virtuous cyclists and pedestrians.

rubaiyat said :

Grimm said :

…shouldn’t all be up to people in cars to be courteous and sensible.

As unlikely as that is in Canberra.

Might not be the case if people weren’t tired of inconsiderate cyclists with their “We are entitled to use the road” mentality.

I don’t care if people want to ride on the road. That’s fine. Just understand that you also have a responsibility to keep yourself safe and not impede other road users. Keep as far left as is practical. Ride single file where doing otherwise blocks a lane. It’s really not all that hard, and if it is done, I would imagine the number of people hating cyclists on the road would decrease daily.

Grimm said :

…shouldn’t all be up to people in cars to be courteous and sensible.

As unlikely as that is in Canberra.

Grimm said :

Sharing the road means not being a traffic hazard, and not unnecessarily endangering yourself and other people. It works both ways and shouldn’t all be up to people in cars to be courteous and sensible.

Isn’t there a rule about pulling over and letting others pass if you are 30k below the speed limit? Not that a lot of car drives know about it, either.

Maya123 said :

gazket said :

Cotter road shall be fun for drivers. There are kilometers of double yellow lines, long long and longer uphill sections and a 2 meter width of road. Enjoy your Cotter tourist drive at walking pace.

Cotter road shall be fun for people using bicycles. There are kilometres (spelling corrected) of double yellow lines, long long and longer uphill sections and a 2 meter width of road, and some drivers who are not willing to share and are a danger to other road users. Enjoy your Cotter tourist trip with dangerous, selfish drivers who don’t care if they endanger you.

Pretty sure it isn’t people in cars riding 3 abreast at 20km/h in a 100 zone full of blind corners and then complaining. Apart from putting themselves in danger, it is outright inconsiderate and selfish. Use some bloody common sense and ride single file on such a narrow road. Won’t bother me a bit when you bounce off my bull bar.

Sharing the road means not being a traffic hazard, and not unnecessarily endangering yourself and other people. It works both ways and shouldn’t all be up to people in cars to be courteous and sensible.

wildturkeycanoe said :

Nilrem said :

When cycling, it is problematic to keep as far left as you can. Motorists then try to stay in the lane when overtaking, and often pass dangerously close. And because you are keeping as far left as you can, there is no more room for evasive action. This is why I often ride about a metre from the kerb. I find when I do this, people are more consciously overtaking, and there are fewer people passing dangerously close. I have been cycling for years and this has been my observation. When I am driving my car, I always make sure that I leave a big gap, two or three metres, when overtaking, even if this means partially using the adjacent lane. If there is too much traffic to do this, I just wait until overtaking is possible. It is safer. When you get anoyed with cyclists, just try to imagine that every cyclist was driving a car instead. Traffic would be even worse, and we would all suffer from the increased congestion.

When cyclists ride on the road and a car cannot pass because it is unsafe as there isn’t enough room or the other lane has traffic, do you know what the consequences are?
The car behind the cyclist slows from 60-70km/h to the cyclists’ speed, say 20km/h. The car behind them hits the anchors, the car behind and so on. Eventually, about six cars back the traffic has almost come to a standstill thanks to the concertina effect and then you have people trying to change lanes because they want to keep moving. It causes CHAOS, but cyclists do not understand this, because they are “entitled” to ride on the roads.
Yesterday afternoon on Southern Cross Dr I had this exact thing happen, though there were 2 riders side by side using half the lane. I had to slow down to 25 because cars in the right lane were passing me. Then I had to accelerate back to 60 again once I could pass. I wore out my brakes and used more fuel, albeit in a tiny portion, but over the lifetime of each and every person who has to work around cyclists on the roads I wonder how much cars end up adding to the global warming problem because of cyclists. In any case, the riders inconsiderately kept chatting away, oblivious to the obstruction they were causing, though legally of course.

bd84 said :

We’ve done a lot to make the commute safe for cyclists safe, including building bike paths, bike lanes and painting the road green in sections. We’ve even spent an excessive amount to built bike paths and bike lanes in the exact same location next to each other, as seen on the new Majura Parkway. The trouble is this safety can currently be ignored by cyclists who can continue on their merry way riding in the middle of the road next to all these facilities. For example, I watched a man the other week riding down the middle of 2 lanes of a street in the city causing issues for traffic when the purpose built city cycle path was less than 5 metres away, empty.

If they were serious about cyclist safety, they would mandate the use of the facilities designed to provide the safe distance, rather than doing this half assed job of minimum distances.

While I have no issue on most other suburban roads giving distance to cyclists, it’s not usually difficult to do as they’re usually quiet enough, there are some other roads around the place (like rural roads) that are thin, have no road shoulder and many corners which practically limit the safe distance rule as such roads are not safe for cyclists or for drivers. These roads should be made safe for cyclists by adding shoulders or essentially prohibiting them until such time it can be made safe.

They should be implementing a solution that applies to all road users that will garner respect, rather than focusing on only part of the problem with a judgemental “safe distance”.

+1000, this is exactly what should be done. The taxpayer has spent how much on this infrastructure but it still doesn’t satisfy the ego of the pedal brigade. The rest of my thoughts have been spoken here already.
Get off the roads if you don’t feel safe, there’s plenty of footpaths around.

And as for those f*ing pedestrians trying to cross the road when I obviously have somewhere more important to drive, run the b*strds over!

This is Canberra, NOT Sydney or Melbourne! Walking or Cycling will never work here.

Don’t get me going about the people walking slowly around Floriade either, wouldn’t even move, even when I was clearly leaning out of my Jeep taking selfies and they were getting in the picture. Had to drive around them over the beds and park down on the beds by the big pond.

Somebody I know may have seen me walking!

If that gets around I’m really going to let Rattenbury have it! That is so unacceptable in Canberra, we should not have to put up with it!!!

VYBerlinaV8_is_back said :

Ezy said :

I think they should ban cyclists all together. Put them in jail – they obviously all break the law anyway. I can’t stand what they wear when I look at them from inside my car. How dare they. HOW DARE THEY.

You can’t legislate the use of common sense on the roads, as the behaviour of many road users (including cars, trucks, bicycles, motorbikes and pedestrians) regularly demonstrate. What we need is to somehow create and promote a culture of inclusiveness and courtesy, rather than aggressiveness and selfishness.

Sounds very sensible.

gooterz said :

Does this also mean that cyclists can’t ride within 1 metre of a parked car?

Also does this mean that cyclists can’t pass cars waiting at lights they’ll have to wait at the back of the pack.

We should have a law that you can’t get within 1.5 metres of Shane Rattenbury!

How many metres are you required to keep away Groot?

Cyclists should get off the roads and ride somewhere else… wait, we can’t as people are making barbed wire traps across the trails. This is disgusting behaviour.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/barbed-wire-booby-trap-for-cyclists-sprung-20150921-gjrlq7.html

Nilrem said :

When cycling, it is problematic to keep as far left as you can. Motorists then try to stay in the lane when overtaking, and often pass dangerously close. And because you are keeping as far left as you can, there is no more room for evasive action. This is why I often ride about a metre from the kerb. I find when I do this, people are more consciously overtaking, and there are fewer people passing dangerously close. I have been cycling for years and this has been my observation. When I am driving my car, I always make sure that I leave a big gap, two or three metres, when overtaking, even if this means partially using the adjacent lane. If there is too much traffic to do this, I just wait until overtaking is possible. It is safer. When you get anoyed with cyclists, just try to imagine that every cyclist was driving a car instead. Traffic would be even worse, and we would all suffer from the increased congestion.

When cyclists ride on the road and a car cannot pass because it is unsafe as there isn’t enough room or the other lane has traffic, do you know what the consequences are?
The car behind the cyclist slows from 60-70km/h to the cyclists’ speed, say 20km/h. The car behind them hits the anchors, the car behind and so on. Eventually, about six cars back the traffic has almost come to a standstill thanks to the concertina effect and then you have people trying to change lanes because they want to keep moving. It causes CHAOS, but cyclists do not understand this, because they are “entitled” to ride on the roads.
Yesterday afternoon on Southern Cross Dr I had this exact thing happen, though there were 2 riders side by side using half the lane. I had to slow down to 25 because cars in the right lane were passing me. Then I had to accelerate back to 60 again once I could pass. I wore out my brakes and used more fuel, albeit in a tiny portion, but over the lifetime of each and every person who has to work around cyclists on the roads I wonder how much cars end up adding to the global warming problem because of cyclists. In any case, the riders inconsiderately kept chatting away, oblivious to the obstruction they were causing, though legally of course.

bd84 said :

We’ve done a lot to make the commute safe for cyclists safe, including building bike paths, bike lanes and painting the road green in sections. We’ve even spent an excessive amount to built bike paths and bike lanes in the exact same location next to each other, as seen on the new Majura Parkway. The trouble is this safety can currently be ignored by cyclists who can continue on their merry way riding in the middle of the road next to all these facilities. For example, I watched a man the other week riding down the middle of 2 lanes of a street in the city causing issues for traffic when the purpose built city cycle path was less than 5 metres away, empty.

If they were serious about cyclist safety, they would mandate the use of the facilities designed to provide the safe distance, rather than doing this half assed job of minimum distances.

While I have no issue on most other suburban roads giving distance to cyclists, it’s not usually difficult to do as they’re usually quiet enough, there are some other roads around the place (like rural roads) that are thin, have no road shoulder and many corners which practically limit the safe distance rule as such roads are not safe for cyclists or for drivers. These roads should be made safe for cyclists by adding shoulders or essentially prohibiting them until such time it can be made safe.

They should be implementing a solution that applies to all road users that will garner respect, rather than focusing on only part of the problem with a judgemental “safe distance”.

+1000, this is exactly what should be done. The taxpayer has spent how much on this infrastructure but it still doesn’t satisfy the ego of the pedal brigade. The rest of my thoughts have been spoken here already.
Get off the roads if you don’t feel safe, there’s plenty of footpaths around.

VYBerlinaV8_is_back said :

Ezy said :

I think they should ban cyclists all together. Put them in jail – they obviously all break the law anyway. I can’t stand what they wear when I look at them from inside my car. How dare they. HOW DARE THEY.

You can’t legislate the use of common sense on the roads, as the behaviour of many road users (including cars, trucks, bicycles, motorbikes and pedestrians) regularly demonstrate. What we need is to somehow create and promote a culture of inclusiveness and courtesy, rather than aggressiveness and selfishness.

My comment was totally tongue in cheek. I was just trying to fit in. As soon as I saw this discussion piece put up I already knew what sort of comments would be found below.

The comment about ‘does this mean cyclists can’t ride within 1 metre of a parked car?’ – I sure as hell hope most cyclists do this anyway. I know I do. Being doored by a driver who fails to look before opening their door isn’t fun.

another law that will not be enforced. maybe time to revisit the policing agreement? perhaps!

gazket said :

Cotter road shall be fun for drivers. There are kilometers of double yellow lines, long long and longer uphill sections and a 2 meter width of road. Enjoy your Cotter tourist drive at walking pace.

Cotter road shall be fun for people using bicycles. There are kilometres (spelling corrected) of double yellow lines, long long and longer uphill sections and a 2 meter width of road, and some drivers who are not willing to share and are a danger to other road users. Enjoy your Cotter tourist trip with dangerous, selfish drivers who don’t care if they endanger you.

Great rule. It should have been introduced years ago. When I drive I have had no problems leaving a metre gap. If someone has a problem with this they shouldn’t be driving. They are dangerous to other road uses and have an attitude which makes them dangerous drivers. I have both driven and cycled in Europe. When I was cycling I noted how good the drivers in Europe were with giving plenty of space, and many roads there are not wide. They would sit behind me and other people who were using a bicycle until there was space to pass. I never witnessed aggression; it was just the normal thing to do to respect other road users. As I find it is when I drive, whether in Europe or here. It’s called safe driving, and I don’t know why some people have a problem with sharing and wonder how much this selfish attitude spreads to the rest of their life. It’s ugly this attitude.

But I did know this aggression against people who use bicycles would be fore and centre here. Sad and selfish. Why are you like this? Don’t say it’s the people cycling. It’s not. It’s in you. So, why are you like this? What do you get out of being this hateful?

Does this also mean that cyclists can’t ride within 1 metre of a parked car?

Also does this mean that cyclists can’t pass cars waiting at lights they’ll have to wait at the back of the pack.

We should have a law that you can’t get within 1.5 metres of Shane Rattenbury!

Cotter road shall be fun for drivers. There are kilometers of double yellow lines, long long and longer uphill sections and a 2 meter width of road. Enjoy your Cotter tourist drive at walking pace.

I’m sure it sounds like a great idea in theory, but in the real world it’s just a nightmare.
Take a road like Limestone avenue. Theres no room for that, especially between Cowper and Wakefield where the lanes are barely big enough for a large car anyway and there’s no centre median.

It seems that all the rules to keep cyclists safe are rules that cars need to follow. How about a few that cyclists need to follow? I cycle as well as drive, ride motorcycles and use a large truck for work. I adapt depending on the mode of transportation I’m using, rather than expecting the rest of the road users to change to something that simply suits me.

Ezy said :

I think they should ban cyclists all together. Put them in jail – they obviously all break the law anyway. I can’t stand what they wear when I look at them from inside my car. How dare they. HOW DARE THEY.

You can’t legislate the use of common sense on the roads, as the behaviour of many road users (including cars, trucks, bicycles, motorbikes and pedestrians) regularly demonstrate. What we need is to somehow create and promote a culture of inclusiveness and courtesy, rather than aggressiveness and selfishness.

I think they should ban cyclists all together. Put them in jail – they obviously all break the law anyway. I can’t stand what they wear when I look at them from inside my car. How dare they. HOW DARE THEY.

Mysteryman said :

Solidarity said :

Won’t make a lick of difference, people who drove to not endanger cyclists left a metre anyway, and people who don’t care are going to continue to not care.

Words can’t and won’t change physics…

Segregated cycle highways would be the answer.

It wouldn’t be the answer, because some cyclists would still feel the need to use the road. After all, that’s what they ride on in the Tour de France, right?

Hang on, it’s not feasible to have segregated cycle highways everywhere. At some point cyclists would still need to use roads.

Solidarity said :

Won’t make a lick of difference, people who drove to not endanger cyclists left a metre anyway, and people who don’t care are going to continue to not care.

Words can’t and won’t change physics…

Segregated cycle highways would be the answer.

It wouldn’t be the answer, because some cyclists would still feel the need to use the road. After all, that’s what they ride on in the Tour de France, right?

Won’t make a lick of difference, people who drove to not endanger cyclists left a metre anyway, and people who don’t care are going to continue to not care.

Words can’t and won’t change physics…

Segregated cycle highways would be the answer.

I think requiring a 1m space when over taking is sensible, PROVIDED that cyclist are not allowed to ride two and three abreast – that behaviour makes overtaking impossible in many situations. Frankly I’m not ok with having cyclists ride 2 wide up a hill they can’t travel faster than 25km/h, or in other situations where they impede the traffic from being able to move at the maximum allowable speed limit. I see it all the time at places like the Cotter, and it’s incredibly selfish behaviour from the peloton wannabes.

I want cyclists to be safe on the road, but I also want other road users to be able to move about freely and without being unnecessarily impeded by the selfish few. It’s possible to have both, but sensible laws are needed and I don’t think the ACT government has the ability to deliver them.

Why not simply state that vehicles of all descriptions need to maintain minimum distances?

We’ve done a lot to make the commute safe for cyclists safe, including building bike paths, bike lanes and painting the road green in sections. We’ve even spent an excessive amount to built bike paths and bike lanes in the exact same location next to each other, as seen on the new Majura Parkway. The trouble is this safety can currently be ignored by cyclists who can continue on their merry way riding in the middle of the road next to all these facilities. For example, I watched a man the other week riding down the middle of 2 lanes of a street in the city causing issues for traffic when the purpose built city cycle path was less than 5 metres away, empty.

If they were serious about cyclist safety, they would mandate the use of the facilities designed to provide the safe distance, rather than doing this half assed job of minimum distances.

While I have no issue on most other suburban roads giving distance to cyclists, it’s not usually difficult to do as they’re usually quiet enough, there are some other roads around the place (like rural roads) that are thin, have no road shoulder and many corners which practically limit the safe distance rule as such roads are not safe for cyclists or for drivers. These roads should be made safe for cyclists by adding shoulders or essentially prohibiting them until such time it can be made safe.

They should be implementing a solution that applies to all road users that will garner respect, rather than focusing on only part of the problem with a judgemental “safe distance”.

Are we sure it’s drivers who need new laws? Spotted on Brisbane Avenue yesterday: https://www.facebook.com/12062CC/photos/a.170720876272947.43079.115088311836204/1116154208396271/?type=1&theater

I hope they make this fair by enforcing the obvious corollary law, which is that bicycles must keep the same minimum distances from cars as cars are required to do from them.

Also, bicycles should be required to maintain legal distances between themselves and other riders, as well as pedestrians.

If you want to know the real reason Canberra cyclists get themselves into trouble, maybe compare a typical picture of cyclists in Amsterdam:
https://bicycledutch.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/amsterdam.jpg
with a typical image of Canberra cyclists:
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/content/dam/images/2/x/7/9/g/image.related.articleLeadwide.620×349.2x7gk.png/1383926400000.jpg

Grimm said :

If anything, I think this is likely to cause more frustration at cyclists and more dislike of them using the roads. Very poorly thought out. Much easier to just fine people who are either overtaking dangerously and unnecessarily close, or cyclists who are being inconsiderate by making themselves a traffic hazard by not keeping as far left as they can, and not riding single file where anything else is dangerous and again, inconsiderate.

As for the pedestrian crossing thing, it just makes what most do now legal.

When cycling, it is problematic to keep as far left as you can. Motorists then try to stay in the lane when overtaking, and often pass dangerously close. And because you are keeping as far left as you can, there is no more room for evasive action. This is why I often ride about a metre from the kerb. I find when I do this, people are more consciously overtaking, and there are fewer people passing dangerously close. I have been cycling for years and this has been my observation. When I am driving my car, I always make sure that I leave a big gap, two or three metres, when overtaking, even if this means partially using the adjacent lane. If there is too much traffic to do this, I just wait until overtaking is possible. It is safer. When you get anoyed with cyclists, just try to imagine that every cyclist was driving a car instead. Traffic would be even worse, and we would all suffer from the increased congestion.

This legislation serves to formalise what counts as “unnecessarily close”.

Yes, there will be some drivers going out of their way to be asses, but there always were. It’s just you don’t talk about them as much because they are in cars, and therefore at least more conformant to your idea of normality.

If anything, I think this is likely to cause more frustration at cyclists and more dislike of them using the roads. Very poorly thought out. Much easier to just fine people who are either overtaking dangerously and unnecessarily close, or cyclists who are being inconsiderate by making themselves a traffic hazard by not keeping as far left as they can, and not riding single file where anything else is dangerous and again, inconsiderate.

As for the pedestrian crossing thing, it just makes what most do now legal.