http://www.theage.com.au/news/nation...817069723.html

Good balanced article. No egg throwing noted either.

Can't help but recall Lotte's sighting of a car sticker:

"Is that true, or is your News Limited?"

I want one for the back of my helmet.

Maybe it will frighten off the magpies too.

"PiledHigher"wrote
> http://www.theage.com.au/news/nation...817069723.html

I liked it until this part
We asked everyone to vote on a code of conduct, to respect other roads users
and to be be ambassadors for this great sport," Ms Jacobsen told
theage.com.au.

This 'code of conduct' would be to obey the road rules? And this required a
vote?

Theo

Theo Bekkers <tbekkers@bekkers.com.au> wrote:
>
> This 'code of conduct' would be to obey the road rules? And this required a
> vote?

Yeah. Motorists should consider doing the same thing. You know, voting
to agree not to break those rules that they rationalise away. Yacking on
the mobile and speeding - stuff that's done _all_ the time.

I think cyclists who break the law are no different to motorists who
break the law. Both groups break the laws that they can generally get
away with. Speeding and talking on the phone are generally low risk
(from the perspective of getting caught) laws to break as a motorist. As
a cyclist, shooting reds it also "low risk". Motorists are not any more
lawful than anyone else - they just have a higher risk of being caught.
If they didn't have rego plates, I suspect you'd seem similar levels of
law breaking to that of cyclists.

--
..dt

cfsmtb wrote:

>
> PiledHigher Wrote:
>> http://tinyurl.com/kg7xx
>
>
> Good balanced article. No egg throwing noted either.
>
> Can't help but recall Lotte's sighting of a car sticker:
>
> *"Is that true, or is your News Limited?"*
>
> I want one for the back of my helmet.
>
> Maybe it will frighten off the magpies too.
>
>

I still have a sticker from the 90's:

"Is that the truth or did you read it in the Herald Sun?"

dtmeister wrote:
> Theo Bekkers <tbekkers@bekkers.com.au> wrote:
>
>>This 'code of conduct' would be to obey the road rules? And this required a
>>vote?
>
>
> Yeah. Motorists should consider doing the same thing. You know, voting
> to agree not to break those rules that they rationalise away. Yacking on
> the mobile and speeding - stuff that's done _all_ the time.
>
> I think cyclists who break the law are no different to motorists who
> break the law. Both groups break the laws that they can generally get
> away with. Speeding and talking on the phone are generally low risk
> (from the perspective of getting caught) laws to break as a motorist. As
> a cyclist, shooting reds it also "low risk". Motorists are not any more
> lawful than anyone else - they just have a higher risk of being caught.
> If they didn't have rego plates, I suspect you'd seem similar levels of
> law breaking to that of cyclists.
>

I will go further. I think in many cases they are the same people. A
cyclist who ignores reds is a motorist who ignores reds.

Dave

Theo Bekkers wrote:

> This 'code of conduct' would be to obey the road rules? And this required a
> vote?

They should just make a law making it illegal to disobey the road
rules. That should work.

Travis

RATFLMAO

"That trick NEVER works! (Bullwinkle)"

I wonder if the rider will get his club membership revoked? perhaps they could 'vote' for that...