New (Lowered) Bicycle Fines in WA starting next Monday!



M

M Bison

Guest
Happened to come along this page during my travels around the big bad
intarweb:

http://www.officeofroadsafety.wa.gov.au/penalties/miscellaneous.html

Under "Bicycle Riders" :

Not stopping for red bicycle light:
New Fine: $50
Old Fine $150

Not stopping for a yellow bicycle light:
New Fine: $50
Old Fine: $100

Does this apply to all orange/red lights....? I know they put in a few red
and green bicycle lights around the city and a couple of surrounding
suburbs, but no orange bicycle lights.
 

SomeGuy

New Member
May 18, 2004
490
0
0
35
M Bison said:
Not stopping for red bicycle light:
New Fine: $50
Old Fine $150

Interesting. I do feel the $215 I was fined for 'fail to obey traffic lights' (Victoria) was a little over the top. Given the lower level of danger to the public a bicycle poses vs a car in that situation, I feel diferent fines are certainly justified.

Does this apply to all orange/red lights....? I know they put in a few red
and green bicycle lights around the city and a couple of surrounding
suburbs, but no orange bicycle lights.

It seems strange they'd specify 'bicycle light' if they meant all traffic lights. Perhaps they put the orange light fine in there in case they install orange bike lights in the future.
 
B

BrettS

Guest
M Bison wrote:
> Happened to come along this page during my travels around the big bad
> intarweb:
>
> http://www.officeofroadsafety.wa.gov.au/penalties/miscellaneous.html
>
> Under "Bicycle Riders" :
>
> Not stopping for red bicycle light:
> New Fine: $50
> Old Fine $150
>
> Not stopping for a yellow bicycle light:
> New Fine: $50
> Old Fine: $100
>
> Does this apply to all orange/red lights....? I know they put in a few red
> and green bicycle lights around the city and a couple of surrounding
> suburbs, but no orange bicycle lights.
>



This is not a big deal, considering I have only seen one set of bicycle
lights in Perth (West Coast Highway)

--
BrettS
 
G

Gemma_k

Guest
"SomeGuy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
>
> M Bison Wrote:
>> Not stopping for red bicycle light:
>> New Fine: $50
>> Old Fine $150

>
> Interesting. I do feel the $215 I was fined for 'fail to obey traffic
> lights' (Victoria) was a little over the top. Given the lower level of
> danger to the public a bicycle poses vs a car in that situation, I feel
> diferent fines are certainly justified.


Hrm, interesting. In SA, we are the only state where you can incur demerit
points for some offences.
So you'd be three points less off your license (or a knockback if you were
to go sit for your license!)
What do you reckon is worse, the fine or the points?
Gemm
 
B

Bleve

Guest
SomeGuy wrote:

> M Bison Wrote:
> > Not stopping for red bicycle light:
> > New Fine: $50
> > Old Fine $150

>
> Interesting. I do feel the $215 I was fined for 'fail to obey traffic
> lights' (Victoria) was a little over the top. Given the lower level of
> danger to the public a bicycle poses vs a car in that situation, I feel
> diferent fines are certainly justified.


Why? It's just as illegal, and just as deliberate. Maybe if a car goes
through at 10km/h it's ok? How about a sliding scale, based on danger
represented? Maybe a Vespa gets 2 units, a 4wd with a bullbar 8? And
mum on the mobile phone, in a 4wd, with a bullbar, gets 10?
 

SomeGuy

New Member
May 18, 2004
490
0
0
35
Bleve said:
Why? It's just as illegal, and just as deliberate.

Becauses traffic fines are based on a scale of irresponsiblity and danger posed to the community. The higher you are over the speed limit the more the fine is, and the same applies with drink drivers. So why not apply the same logic to fines for running red lights?
 
B

Bleve

Guest
SomeGuy wrote:

> Bleve Wrote:
> > Why? It's just as illegal, and just as deliberate.

>
> Becauses traffic fines are based on a scale of irresponsiblity and
> danger posed to the community. The higher you are over the speed limit
> the more the fine is, and the same applies with drink drivers. So why
> not apply the same logic to fines for running red lights?


Without wishing to bog down in semantics, the degree of punishment for
speeding and drink driving are a reflection of the possibility of human
error - eg: if you're doing 5km/h over the limit, it may be accidental,
but if you're doing 60km/h over the limit, it's not. Same with the
BAC, if you're 0.07, you may have just miscalculated, if you're 0.15,
you're roaring drunk and the room for mitigation is diminished.
They're also relatively easy to detect (yes, it's easy to tell that
you're on a bike, not driving a landbarge with a bullbar, when you go
through a red light)

If the act is deliberate, it should have the same punishment, IMO.
 
T

Theo Bekkers

Guest
BrettS wrote:

> This is not a big deal, considering I have only seen one set of
> bicycle lights in Perth (West Coast Highway)


I'm fairly sure there's at least two on the Perth foreshore, on at Riverside
Drive and Vic Ave, and one at Plain St.

Theo
 
T

Theo Bekkers

Guest
Gemma_k wrote:

> Hrm, interesting. In SA, we are the only state where you can incur
> demerit points for some offences.
> So you'd be three points less off your license (or a knockback if you
> were to go sit for your license!)
> What do you reckon is worse, the fine or the points?


Doesn't matter how many points you get on your bike if it's your only form
of transport, you can still ride if you have 1000 points and your licence
has been cancelled for ten years. Doesn't sound fair, does it.

Theo
 
T

Theo Bekkers

Guest
SomeGuy wrote:
> Bleve Wrote:
>> Why? It's just as illegal, and just as deliberate.

>
> Becauses traffic fines are based on a scale of irresponsiblity and
> danger posed to the community. The higher you are over the speed limit
> the more the fine is, and the same applies with drink drivers. So why
> not apply the same logic to fines for running red lights?


But a 60 tonne road train gets the same fine and demerit points for being 20
km/h over the limit as a scooter.
Maybe it should be based on mass. A 45 kg teenage girl on a scooter should
get a smaller fine than a fat person?

Theo
 
Z

Zebee Johnstone

Guest
In aus.bicycle on Thu, 28 Dec 2006 07:39:59 +0900
Theo Bekkers <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Doesn't matter how many points you get on your bike if it's your only form
> of transport, you can still ride if you have 1000 points and your licence
> has been cancelled for ten years. Doesn't sound fair, does it.


clearly it requires a creative answer.

Howabout a lead vest required to be worn, 5kg per point.

Or only allowed to ride a single speed, reducing 2 gear inches per
point.

Zebee
 
Z

Zebee Johnstone

Guest
In aus.bicycle on Thu, 28 Dec 2006 07:44:10 +0900
Theo Bekkers <[email protected]> wrote:
> But a 60 tonne road train gets the same fine and demerit points for being 20
> km/h over the limit as a scooter.
> Maybe it should be based on mass. A 45 kg teenage girl on a scooter should
> get a smaller fine than a fat person?


Don't encourage the weight weenies!

Zebee
 
T

TimC

Guest
On 2006-12-28, Zebee Johnstone (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
> In aus.bicycle on Thu, 28 Dec 2006 07:44:10 +0900
> Theo Bekkers <[email protected]> wrote:
>> But a 60 tonne road train gets the same fine and demerit points for being 20
>> km/h over the limit as a scooter.
>> Maybe it should be based on mass. A 45 kg teenage girl on a scooter should
>> get a smaller fine than a fat person?

>
> Don't encourage the weight weenies!


Just because you'd get a fine twice as much as everyone else here on
lighter bikes, and would have to shave your beard :)

--
TimC
Chuck Norris stops his fixie by putting his beard on the front tire.
....and he'd kill you with his bare hands for mentioning yourself in the
same sentence. -- Donga in aus.bicycle
 

cfsmtb

New Member
Apr 11, 2003
4,963
0
0
Gemma_k said:
Hrm, interesting. In SA, we are the only state where you can incur demerit
points for some offences.
So you'd be three points less off your license (or a knockback if you were
to go sit for your license!)
What do you reckon is worse, the fine or the points?

Depends upon your situation and possible level of car dependance, ie: sole transport option, live in a remote area or for work. An incident occured here in Melboring several years ago at Macaulay station level crossing where two cyclists were riding across the tracks, one hit something on the road and was knocked unconscious in the fall. His partner tried to move him, as the boomgates were descending. He was hit by the train, apparently thrown onto the train platform but survived.

The police attempted to take demerit points off his licence, as they believed he had entered the level crossing *after* the boomgates and warning lights had started. Going off memory for all that, but a happier note was that they both recovered, went onto marry and became aerobics champions, although I can't recall whether that was national or international.
 
R

Resound

Guest
"Gemma_k" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:D[email protected]
>
> "SomeGuy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
>>
>> M Bison Wrote:
>>> Not stopping for red bicycle light:
>>> New Fine: $50
>>> Old Fine $150

>>
>> Interesting. I do feel the $215 I was fined for 'fail to obey traffic
>> lights' (Victoria) was a little over the top. Given the lower level of
>> danger to the public a bicycle poses vs a car in that situation, I feel
>> diferent fines are certainly justified.

>
> Hrm, interesting. In SA, we are the only state where you can incur
> demerit points for some offences.
> So you'd be three points less off your license (or a knockback if you were
> to go sit for your license!)
> What do you reckon is worse, the fine or the points?
> Gemm
>


It's 3 demerit points for running a red light in Vic as well.
 

SomeGuy

New Member
May 18, 2004
490
0
0
35
Gemma_k said:
What do you reckon is worse, the fine or the points?

The fine of course, I only have a drivers licence for ID so the points don't really bother me. The $215 on the other hand could have gone to expanding my stable :).