get out of the bike lane

Discussion in 'Australia and New Zealand' started by Arpit, Oct 20, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Arpit

    Arpit Guest

    Tags:


  2. Alan Erskine

    Alan Erskine Guest

    Is it illegal to park in bike lanes in Melbourne? If so, the police can put the speed cameras away
    and make a hoooogh amount of dough in Charman Road and Beach Road.

    --
    Alan Erskine alanterskine(at)hotmail.com

    Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad - the new Hitler
    www.optusnet.com.au/news/story/abc/20031017/12/domestic/969056.inp

    "Arpit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > I saw http://getoutofthebikelane.com/ and im gonna make one for australia, well, NSW.
    >
    > Comments anyone?
     
  3. Arpit

    Arpit Guest

    Dunno, ill check, but its illegal in NSW

    On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 03:18:15 +1000, "Alan Erskine" <[email protected]> wrote:

    >Is it illegal to park in bike lanes in Melbourne? If so, the police can put the speed cameras away
    >and make a hoooogh amount of dough in Charman Road and Beach Road.
     
  4. Paul_MCMLIX

    Paul_MCMLIX New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26
    Likes Received:
    0
    I had a bit of a look at that site, and it seems to me that the vast majority of vehicles photgraphed are vans and trucks, presumably being driven by some poor bastard who is only trying to make a delivery and earn a living. While I agree that there are a LOT of moronic drivers out there who do stupid things, (like the driver of a semi-trailer who overtook and then turned in front of me just 2 days ago...causing me to almost soil my undies) I reckon there has to be a bit of understanding and tolerance from cyclists as well.

    By all means, if you want to expose drivers doing stupid or illegal things, go right ahead....but lets not go overboard.
     
  5. Arpit

    Arpit Guest

    UNDIE SOILER! ahem ;)

    On 23 Oct 2003 09:10:24 +0950, Paul_MCMLIX <[email protected]> wrote:

    >I had a bit of a look at that site, and it seems to me that the vast majority of vehicles
    >photgraphed are vans and trucks, presumably being driven by some poor bastard who is only trying to
    >make a delivery and earn a living. While I agree that there are a LOT of moronic drivers out there
    >who do stupid things, (like the driver of a semi-trailer who overtook and then turned in front of
    >me just 2 days ago...causing me to almost soil my undies) I reckon there has to be a bit of
    >understanding and tolerance from cyclists as well.
    >
    >By all means, if you want to expose drivers doing stupid or illegal things, go right ahead....but
    >lets not go overboard.
     
  6. Roofi

    Roofi Guest

    It's illegal to block bike lanes and also illegal to travel in them for more than a certain
    distance (50m?)

    Taxis -grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

    Don't mind sharing with motor cycles down St Kilda Rd, but only if they ride at a respectable speed
    in peak hour.

    "Alan Erskine" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]... Is it illegal to park in bike lanes in
    Melbourne? If so, the police can put the speed cameras away and make a hoooogh amount of dough in
    Charman Road and Beach Road.

    --
    Alan Erskine alanterskine(at)hotmail.com

    Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad - the new Hitler
    www.optusnet.com.au/news/story/abc/20031017/12/domestic/969056.inp

    "Arpit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > I saw http://getoutofthebikelane.com/ and im gonna make one for australia, well, NSW.
    >
    > Comments anyone?
     
  7. Paul_MCMLIX

    Paul_MCMLIX New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26
    Likes Received:
    0
    It's easy to say "It's illegal to park in bike lanes"..or "it's illegal to do this or that or whatever" ...or "it's illegal to fart in the bath"....but can you QUOTE the legislation that says this??? I haven't gone looking for it, nor do I intend to...but if you can quote it I'll be impressed.


    by the way ..I only ALMOST soiled them...
     
  8. Fred Nieman

    Fred Nieman Guest

    Yep, looks like it's 50 metres. <gets up on high horse> 50 metres too many, I say! </high horse>

    Australian Road Rules [NSW regulations]

    Division 6 - Driving in marked lanes designated for special purposes 153 Bicycle lanes
    (1) A driver (except the rider of a bicycle) must not drive in a bicycle lane, unless the driver is
    permitted to drive in the bicycle lane under this rule or rule 158.
    http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_reg/arr210/s153.html

    ROAD SAFETY (TRAFFIC) REGULATIONS 1988 (Victoria)
    2. Driving in a bicycle lane

    (3) Despite regulation 502 and except as provided by sub-regulation (2), the driver of a vehicle
    other than a bicycle must not drive the vehicle in a bicycle lane.

    Penalty: 2 penalty units.

    (4) Sub-regulation (1) does not apply to the driver of a vehicle who-
    (a) is entering the carriageway or is turning or intends to turn from the carriageway in
    accordance with these Regulations; or

    (b) is overtaking on the left of a vehicle which is being turned right or is about to be turned
    to the right from the carriageway; or

    (c) intends to park or leave the vehicle standing where permitted by these Regulations; or

    (d) is driving the vehicle from a parking area or the boundary of the carriageway; or

    (e) is the driver of a public commercial passenger vehicle who intends to stop the vehicle to
    take up or set down passengers-

    if the driver does not enter the bicycle lane except within 50 metres of the place where the
    movement is to take place or leaves the bicycle lane within 50 metres of the place where the
    movement took place. Penalty: 2 penalty units.
    http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/consol_reg/rsr1988290/s516.html

    See also: POLICE v HOWIE No. SCGRG-98-1543 Judgment No. S6991 [1998] SASC 6991 (9 December 1998)
    Howie, apparently a serial parking offender - see: Howie v Marsh (1994) 178 LSJS 314, where he was
    parked in a clearway, and argued the Magna Carta or somesuch - parks in a bike lane, gets a ticket,
    argues, umm, the vibe of the Constitution http://scaleplus.law.gov.au/html/pasteact/1/641/top.htm,
    SA's Finest win. http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/sa/SASC/1998/6991.html

    Umm, any qns, email me at [email protected]

    (<gets down on knees> Please, God/Allah/Buddha/whomever's out there, let that be a joke email
    address </knees>)

    roofi wrote:
    >
    > It's illegal to block bike lanes and also illegal to travel in them for more than a certain
    > distance (50m?)
    >
    > Taxis -grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
    >
    > Don't mind sharing with motor cycles down St Kilda Rd, but only if they ride at a respectable
    > speed in peak hour.
    >
    > "Alan Erskine" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]... Is it illegal to park in bike lanes in
    > Melbourne? If so, the police can put the speed cameras away and make a hoooogh amount of dough in
    > Charman Road and Beach Road.
    >
    > --
    > Alan Erskine alanterskine(at)hotmail.com
    >
    > Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad - the new Hitler
    > www.optusnet.com.au/news/story/abc/20031017/12/domestic/969056.inp
    >
    > "Arpit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]...
    > > I saw http://getoutofthebikelane.com/ and im gonna make one for australia, well, NSW.
    > >
    > > Comments anyone?
     
  9. Arpit

    Arpit Guest

    NSW COnsolidated regulations :australiasn road rules, section 187
    www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/disp.pl/au/legis/nsw/consol_reg/arr210/s187.html?query=%7e+bicycle+lane
    On 23 Oct 2003 23:10:36 +0950, Paul_MCMLIX <[email protected]> wrote:

    >It's easy to say "It's illegal to park in bike lanes"..or "it's illegal to do this or that or
    >whatever" ...or "it's illegal to fart in the bath"....but can you QUOTE the legislation that says
    >this??? I haven't gone looking for it, nor do I intend to...but if you can quote it I'll be
    >impressed.
    >
    >
    >by the way ..I only ALMOST soiled them...
     
  10. Paul_MCMLIX

    Paul_MCMLIX New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, I have now read a whole swag of crap and legalese on this topic. It seems the pertinent section of the Aussie road rules is Part 12, Section 2, with particular reference to rules 167 and 189. Rules 153 and 158 are concerned with driving within bicycle lanes and are irrelevent where parking is concerned.

    To quote a Critical Mass document I read, " A vehicle parked in a bicycle lane is not breaking the law by virtue of this fact alone. However, a vehicle is breaking the law if it is parked between another parked car and the centre of the road ('double-parked'), or if it is parking in a 'No Standing' zone. Therefore it is illegal to park in any bicycle lane that has car parking to its left or has the protection of a 'No Standing' zone."

    So, unless a vehicle is parked contrary to one of these rules, think twice before giving the driver an earful...he (or she) is doing nothing wrong.
     
  11. Paul_MCMLIX

    Paul_MCMLIX New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26
    Likes Received:
    0
    By the way...it puzzles me why people insist on incuding the text of previous posts in their replies. A heap of repetition makes me tired. I KNOW what I said, and if I forget I can go back and read it again..there's no need to quote me.

    Call me picky and fastidious, but that's my nature.
     
  12. Fred Nieman

    Fred Nieman Guest

    Well...

    I guess "usenet etiquette" is an oxymoron, similar to "legal ethics", "religious tolerance", "police
    integrity", "good corporate citizen", "atkins health diet", or "clipless (just to get this remotely
    back on topic) pedals."

    In pragmatic terms, if you don't include at least the relevant parts of the post you're replying to,
    it means other readers may have to search and click around a bit to find out what you're rambling on
    about. QV!

    p

    ps: I'm *sure* my pedals are saying "klip...k-less!" when I click into 'em.

    Paul_MCMLIX wrote:
    >
    > By the way...it puzzles me why people insist on incuding the text of previous posts in their
    > replies. A heap of repetition makes me tired. I KNOW what I said, and if I forget I can go back
    > and read it again..there's no need to quote me.
    >
    > Call me picky and fastidious, but that's my nature.
    >
    > --
    > Nil illigitimus carborundum
     
  13. Arpit

    Arpit Guest

    read 187 mate On 24 Oct 2003 17:10:34 +0950, Paul_MCMLIX <[email protected]> wrote:

    >Well, I have now read a whole swag of crap and legalese on this topic. It seems the pertinent
    >section of the Aussie road rules is Part 12, Section 2, with particular reference to rules 167 and
    >189. Rules 153 and 158 are concerned with driving within bicycle lanes and are irrelevent where
    >parking is concerned.
    >
    >To quote a Critical Mass document I read, " A vehicle parked in a bicycle lane is not breaking the
    >law by virtue of this fact alone. However, a vehicle is breaking the law if it is parked between
    >another parked car and the centre of the road ('double-parked'), or if it is parking in a 'No
    >Standing' zone. Therefore it is illegal to park in any bicycle lane that has car parking to its
    >left or has the protection of a 'No Standing' zone."
    >
    >So, unless a vehicle is parked contrary to one of these rules, think twice before giving the driver
    >an earful...he (or she) is doing nothing wrong.
     
  14. Arpit

    Arpit Guest

    On 24 Oct 2003 17:10:34 +0950, Paul_MCMLIX <[email protected]> wrote:

    >Well, I have now read a whole swag of crap and legalese on this topic. It seems the pertinent
    >section of the Aussie road rules is Part 12, Section 2, with particular reference to rules 167 and
    >189. Rules 153 and 158 are concerned with driving within bicycle lanes and are irrelevent where
    >parking is concerned.
    >
    >To quote a Critical Mass document I read, " A vehicle parked in a bicycle lane is not breaking the
    >law by virtue of this fact alone. However, a vehicle is breaking the law if it is parked between
    >another parked car and the centre of the road ('double-parked'), or if it is parking in a 'No
    >Standing' zone. Therefore it is illegal to park in any bicycle lane that has car parking to its
    >left or has the protection of a 'No Standing' zone."
    >
    They are wrong
    >So, unless a vehicle is parked contrary to one of these rules, think twice before giving the driver
    >an earful...he (or she) is doing nothing wrong.
     
  15. K.A. Moylan

    K.A. Moylan Guest

    (Clever reply, part 2 of 2)

    In article <>, Paul_MCMLIX <[email protected]> wrote:

    > By the way...it puzzles me why people insist on incuding the text of previous posts in their
    > replies. A heap of repetition makes me tired. I KNOW what I said, and if I forget I can go back
    > and read it again..there's no need to quote me.
    >
    > Call me picky and fastidious, but that's my nature.

    It gives context to one's own posting. See what I mean?

    --
    K.A. Moylan Canberra, Australia Ski Club: http://www.cccsc.asn.au kamoylan at ozemail dot com dot au
     
  16. K.A. Moylan

    K.A. Moylan Guest

    (Clever reply, part 1 of 2)

    It gives context to one's own posting. See what I mean?

    --
    K.A. Moylan Canberra, Australia Ski Club: http://www.cccsc.asn.au kamoylan at ozemail dot com dot au
     
  17. Hippy

    Hippy Guest

    "K.A. Moylan" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:kamoylan- <snip>
    > It gives context to one's own posting. See what I mean?

    hehehe that's good that one! :)

    hippy "Now, what were we talking about..?"
     
  18. Paul_MCMLIX <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > By the way...it puzzles me why people insist on incuding the text of previous posts in their
    > replies. A heap of repetition makes me tired. I KNOW what I said, and if I forget I can go back
    > and read it again..there's no need to quote me.

    A few more reasons.

    Firstly, when Googling, it is very cumbersome to click around trying to figure out who said what. It
    can also be misleading, because if you delete all the text, and someone has included the
    "X-No-Archive: Yes" directive at the beginning of their post, it can look like you are replying to
    the wrong person.

    Secondly, some folks (like me) use the Hide Read Messages option (or similar) in their newsreader,
    and thus you only get to see that message outside of the hierarchical structure. Read messages don't
    appear. This is important in a ng with lots of traffic.

    Thirdly, it shows specifically which part or the original message you are replying to.
    ---
    DFM
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...