Re: 9000 bike riders fined for breaking road rules

Since 2001, over 90,000 cyclist's have joined Cycling Forums to discuss topics from general cycling to equipment, training, racing and travel or vacation destinations (especially in europe during the tour de france). We also feature an great deals in our online store, 100's of articles, classifieds and product reviews.

"OzCableguy" <ozcableguy@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote in message news:dXBHj.3945$n8.3253@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,23450575-3102,00.html
>
> 9000 bike riders fined for breaking road rules
> Hannah Martin
> March 30, 2008 12:00am


Also noticed this (Qld Road Rules for cyclists):

Riding on the footpath (s288)
In Queensland, cyclists of any age are allowed to:

* ride on a footpath unless prohibited by a 'NO BICYCLES' sign-you [sic] must give way to pedestrians and ride in a manner that does
not inconvenience or endanger other footpath users.
--
Subject to:

Riding to the left of oncoming bicycle riders on a path (s251)
You must:

* always ride your bike to the left of other riders coming towards you on a bikepath, footpath, separated path or shared path.
--
And:

Riding on a footpath or shared path (s250)
You must:

* keep left and give way to pedestrians on footpaths and shared-use paths.
--

Isn't it time NSW caught up to this.

NSW only allows cycling on a footpath:

where permitted by sign, or the cyclist is under 12 years, or cyclist is accompanying a cyclist under 12 years.


[NB: The Australian Road Rules only go this far:

250 Riding on a footpath or shared path
(1) The rider of a bicycle who is 12 years old or older must not ride on a footpath if another law of this jurisdiction prohibits
the rider from riding on the footpath].

--

Time NSW caught up to Qld...

T.

On Mar 30, 4:23 pm, "Tomasso" <Toma...@blank.blank> wrote:
> "OzCableguy" <ozcable...@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote in messagenews:dXBHj.3945$n8.3253@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> >http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,23450575-3102,00.html
>
> > 9000 bike riders fined for breaking road rules
> > Hannah Martin
> > March 30, 2008 12:00am
>
> Also noticed this (Qld Road Rules for cyclists):
>
> Riding on the footpath (s288)
> In Queensland, cyclists of any age are allowed to:
>
> * ride on a footpath unless prohibited by a 'NO BICYCLES' sign-you [sic] must give way to pedestrians and ride in a manner that does
> not inconvenience or endanger other footpath users.
> --
> Subject to:
>
> Riding to the left of oncoming bicycle riders on a path (s251)
> You must:
>
> * always ride your bike to the left of other riders coming towards you on a bikepath, footpath, separated path or shared path.
> --
> And:
>
> Riding on a footpath or shared path (s250)
> You must:
>
> * keep left and give way to pedestrians on footpaths and shared-use paths.
> --
>
> Isn't it time NSW caught up to this.
>
> NSW only allows cycling on a footpath:
>
> where permitted by sign, or the cyclist is under 12 years, or cyclist is accompanying a cyclist under 12 years.
>
> [NB: The Australian Road Rules only go this far:
>
> 250 Riding on a footpath or shared path
> (1) The rider of a bicycle who is 12 years old or older must not ride on a footpath if another law of this jurisdiction prohibits
> the rider from riding on the footpath].
>
> --
>
> Time NSW caught up to Qld...
>
> T.

Especially all those bloody NSW tourists who come up here and get
pissed off with cyclists on the footpaths! ;)

peterw60@gmail.com wrote:
> On Mar 30, 4:23 pm, "Tomasso" <Toma...@blank.blank> wrote:
>> "OzCableguy" <ozcable...@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote in messagenews:dXBHj.3945$n8.3253@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>> http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,23450575-3102,00.html
>>> 9000 bike riders fined for breaking road rules
>>> Hannah Martin
>>> March 30, 2008 12:00am
>> Also noticed this (Qld Road Rules for cyclists):
>>
>> Riding on the footpath (s288)
>> In Queensland, cyclists of any age are allowed to:
>>
>> * ride on a footpath unless prohibited by a 'NO BICYCLES' sign-you [sic] must give way to pedestrians and ride in a manner that does
>> not inconvenience or endanger other footpath users.
>> --
>> Subject to:
>>
>> Riding to the left of oncoming bicycle riders on a path (s251)
>> You must:
>>
>> * always ride your bike to the left of other riders coming towards you on a bikepath, footpath, separated path or shared path.
>> --
>> And:
>>
>> Riding on a footpath or shared path (s250)
>> You must:
>>
>> * keep left and give way to pedestrians on footpaths and shared-use paths.
>> --
>>
>> Isn't it time NSW caught up to this.
>>
>> NSW only allows cycling on a footpath:
>>
>> where permitted by sign, or the cyclist is under 12 years, or cyclist is accompanying a cyclist under 12 years.
>>
>> [NB: The Australian Road Rules only go this far:
>>
>> 250 Riding on a footpath or shared path
>> (1) The rider of a bicycle who is 12 years old or older must not ride on a footpath if another law of this jurisdiction prohibits
>> the rider from riding on the footpath].
>>
>> --
>>
>> Time NSW caught up to Qld...
>>
>> T.
>
> Especially all those bloody NSW tourists who come up here and get
> pissed off with cyclists on the footpaths! ;)
Like almost any other "petty crime" offence, it is most likely that
those who are the focus of the criminal justice system here are our
aboriginal population, our poor and those suffering from a mental
illness. So it is bloody unlikely that the readership of aus.b will be a
representative sample.

If it is a fact that 9000 riders were fined (and that is open to
verification) it almost certainly does not mean that this is evidence
of a public safety issue.

I bet if you wanted to you could run a similar story "24000 pedestrians
fined". Almost certainly the same cohort of offenders, almost certainly
of similar (zero) value in determining a public safety issue.

All I can say is that I haven't purchased a newspaper in the past five
years. Not moy fault. Move on.

On Mar 30, 8:35 pm, Patrick Keogh <patr...@keogh.net.au> wrote:
> peter...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Mar 30, 4:23 pm, "Tomasso" <Toma...@blank.blank> wrote:
> >> "OzCableguy" <ozcable...@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote in messagenews:dXBHj.3945$n8.3253@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> >>>http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,23450575-3102,00.html
> >>> 9000 bike riders fined for breaking road rules
> >>> Hannah Martin
> >>> March 30, 2008 12:00am
> >> Also noticed this (Qld Road Rules for cyclists):
>
> >> Riding on the footpath (s288)
> >> In Queensland, cyclists of any age are allowed to:
>
> >> * ride on a footpath unless prohibited by a 'NO BICYCLES' sign-you [sic] must give way to pedestrians and ride in a manner that does
> >> not inconvenience or endanger other footpath users.
> >> --
> >> Subject to:
>
> >> Riding to the left of oncoming bicycle riders on a path (s251)
> >> You must:
>
> >> * always ride your bike to the left of other riders coming towards you on a bikepath, footpath, separated path or shared path.
> >> --
> >> And:
>
> >> Riding on a footpath or shared path (s250)
> >> You must:
>
> >> * keep left and give way to pedestrians on footpaths and shared-use paths.
> >> --
>
> >> Isn't it time NSW caught up to this.
>
> >> NSW only allows cycling on a footpath:
>
> >> where permitted by sign, or the cyclist is under 12 years, or cyclist is accompanying a cyclist under 12 years.
>
> >> [NB: The Australian Road Rules only go this far:
>
> >> 250 Riding on a footpath or shared path
> >> (1) The rider of a bicycle who is 12 years old or older must not ride on a footpath if another law of this jurisdiction prohibits
> >> the rider from riding on the footpath].
>
> >> --
>
> >> Time NSW caught up to Qld...
>
> >> T.
>
> > Especially all those bloody NSW tourists who come up here and get
> > pissed off with cyclists on the footpaths! ;)
>
> Like almost any other "petty crime" offence, it is most likely that
> those who are the focus of the criminal justice system here are our
> aboriginal population, our poor and those suffering from a mental
> illness. So it is bloody unlikely that the readership of aus.b will be a
> representative sample.
>
> If it is a fact that 9000 riders were fined (and that is open to
> verification) it almost certainly does not mean that this is evidence
> of a public safety issue.
>
> I bet if you wanted to you could run a similar story "24000 pedestrians
> fined". Almost certainly the same cohort of offenders, almost certainly
> of similar (zero) value in determining a public safety issue.
>
> All I can say is that I haven't purchased a newspaper in the past five
> years. Not moy fault. Move on.

You might be onto something, with your hypothesis on who is amongst
the 9000. If it isn't the well-heeled lycra lads or the to-be-affluent
uni students of Brisbane, perhaps it is the put-upon poor, somewhere
out of my view. If that's so, I'm interested. Unbalanced policing
certainly is a public safety issue. So is uncritical journalism. I
hope I elicit a response on the statistical breakdown.