[email protected] (dewatf) writes:
> On Tue, 10 Jan 2006 16:53:02 +1100, EuanB
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>Now you're either too lazy to follow up refrences or your deliberately
>>ignoring it to further your own agenda.
>
>>Nothing there about other traffic having to be stopped in order to
>>allow a bicycle to overtake.
> I have read 141. The RTA clearly states "Travelling to the front of a
> line of traffic on the left hand side of the stopped vehicles"
For the second time, it says no such thing. For the second time I am
forced to paste the text of the reference I provided you with which you
are too lazy and ignorant to look up. The complete rule:
141 No overtaking etc to the left of a vehicle
(1) A driver (except the rider of a bicycle) must not overtake a
vehicle to the left of the vehicle unless:
(a) the driver is driving on a multi-lane road and the
vehicle can be safely overtaken in a marked lane to the left
of the vehicle, or
(b) the vehicle is turning right, or making a U-turn from
the centre of the road, and is giving a right change of
direction signal.
Offence provision.
Note. Bicycle, centre of the road, marked lane, multi-lane
road, overtake, right change of direction signal and U-turn
are defined in the dictionary.
(2) The rider of a bicycle must not ride past, or overtake, to
the left of a vehicle that is turning left and is giving a left
change of direction signal.
Offence provision.
Note. Left change of direction signal is defined in the
dictionary.
(3) In this rule:
turning right does not include making a hook turn.
vehicle does not include a tram, a bus travelling along tram
tracks, or any vehicle displaying a do not overtake turning
vehicle sign.
Note 1. Bus, tram and travelling along tram tracks are
defined in the dictionary.
Note 2. Part 4, Division 3 deals with making hook turns.
Note 3. Division 7 of this Part deals with overtaking and
passing trams (and buses travelling along tram tracks). Rule
143 deals with overtaking or passing a vehicle displaying a
do not overtake turning vehicle sign.
Nothing in their about cyclists not being allowed to overtake moving
traffic on the left.
> That is how the RTA interpret the law, its a common sense
> interpretation, most likely backed up by case law, and I'm going with
> there version not yours (for obvious reasons).
No it's not. This is what it starts out with:
Cyclists also have some special rights, which include:
Pay attention now, basic set theory.
I have a buch of special rights as a cyclist. These include overtaking on the
left. That means I can overtake moving traffic on the left. I can overtake
stopped traffic on the left.
I have a bunch of other special rights as well. I'm not going in to
them all as I don't want to wast time going through the exhaustive list,
otherwise known as the set, of my special rights as a cyclist.
Only some of the special rights which apply to cyclists have been
stipulated on the page
http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/trafficin...tsafertocycle/bicyclesafety/cyclingrules.html
It is not an exhuastive list. That is why the word `include' is used,
because only a subset of cyclists special right is illustrated.
>>No one's arguing that the duty of care when overtaking is on the cyclist.
>
> And anyone who can claim they are demonstrating a duty of care by:
> -overtaking taking a vehicle by riding through somewhere the driver
> can't ever see you directly
Seems to be perectly fine for motorists. Wasn't it you that said that
motorists can't be expected to use their mirrors while driving?
> -is quite likely not to pick up cyclist in his mirrors and does not
> expect one to be there
Nothing different from cars there.
> - you are riding for a period through his blind spot where he can't
> ever see you in his mirrors
Again nothing different from cars there either.
> - the driver is quite likely to drift left and run you over at any
> time
Really? Not been my experience.
> - he is perfectly allow to do that drifting over.
He is not allowed to deviate from his course if he's going to cause a
collision. That's that whole duty of care thing you're so ignorant
about and why it is essential to check your blind spot and not rely on
mirrors.
> is completely insane.
If it's insane for cyclists then it's also insane for motorists. They
go through blind spots overtaking, they rely on other road users
maintaining a steady course. Where's the difference?
> So following your duty of care we are back to my and the RTAs
> interpretation that you can pass a stationary vehicle on the left that
> is not signalling it is turning left and in the process of turning.
As established earlier that is not the RTA's interpretation. You're on
your own buddy. Nice try though.
--
Cheers | ~~ __@
Euan | ~~ _-\<,
Melbourne, Australia | ~ (*)/ (*)