Please tell me this guy is going to jail???
- Thread starter simpsonc
- Start date
Can't be that good, he has to put it in park to change over.... yeh sure.886014 said:I hope for his sake the Ford is a little more reliable than it apparently was on Thursday. Though, at least the brakes work! How far does a falcon run on a tank of gas anyway?
Not yet charged but at least he's in the courts.
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,23689759-5001028,00.html
Fairly lame charge and hopefully the police enquiries will lead to further charges being laid if the media reports regarding the occurrence of events are accurate.
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,23689759-5001028,00.html
Fairly lame charge and hopefully the police enquiries will lead to further charges being laid if the media reports regarding the occurrence of events are accurate.
mikesbytes said:
Here's hoping.
Has anyone heard anything about the peleton taking class action if the cops don't do the job? I know it's a lot to ask, but the cycling + car culture has to change in Australia, and maybe if nutters like this are held to account for their ludicrous behaviour, we might get there.
I've spent a bit of time trawling the comments on various news sites on this incident - and it seems like (no surprise) there are an awful lot of people who are leaping to the driver's defense, even before the miserable explanation of their actions on radio.
I just don't want to believe that so many people are so small minded. But after 15 years of road cycling, maybe I should know better?
They could of course be the vocal minority, the "haters" who hate everything. Today it's cyclists, tomorrow it will be immigrants, the following day someone else.
Sadly though, purely my personal opinion is that people like this tend to come from jobs and upbringings where they have no power or control over their lives. Being told what to do all day in dead end jobs they hate. Turn the key of their car and how things change. See a defenceless cyclist or even a bunch and it's game on, who has the power now?
On a brighter note, a survey run by news.com had roughly 60:40 in favour of cyclists' right to do what we do. Maybe there's hope?
Sadly though, purely my personal opinion is that people like this tend to come from jobs and upbringings where they have no power or control over their lives. Being told what to do all day in dead end jobs they hate. Turn the key of their car and how things change. See a defenceless cyclist or even a bunch and it's game on, who has the power now?
On a brighter note, a survey run by news.com had roughly 60:40 in favour of cyclists' right to do what we do. Maybe there's hope?
[
On a brighter note, a survey run by news.com had roughly 60:40 in favour of cyclists' right to do what we do. Maybe there's hope?[/QUOTE]
I totally agree.
I did find it frustrating that one of the news broadcasts - can't remember which station, reported this incident with a summary of the road rules for cyclists. Including that old favourite, "cyclist must use a bike path when one is available". I am sure this is not law in NSW - but I've been wrong before!
I wish there was a peak cycling body with sufficient resources to do a proper advertising campaign to raise the level of understanding! No point in waiting for the gov!! But I dream!!
WD
PS. I came down on my weekend road ride - MY FAULT. Wanted to turn rigth, stayed left to let some traffic pass, dropped a wheel off the shoulder, hit long grass, hit ground! All very quick! Moral - hold your position on the road!!
On a brighter note, a survey run by news.com had roughly 60:40 in favour of cyclists' right to do what we do. Maybe there's hope?[/QUOTE]
I totally agree.
I did find it frustrating that one of the news broadcasts - can't remember which station, reported this incident with a summary of the road rules for cyclists. Including that old favourite, "cyclist must use a bike path when one is available". I am sure this is not law in NSW - but I've been wrong before!
I wish there was a peak cycling body with sufficient resources to do a proper advertising campaign to raise the level of understanding! No point in waiting for the gov!! But I dream!!
WD
PS. I came down on my weekend road ride - MY FAULT. Wanted to turn rigth, stayed left to let some traffic pass, dropped a wheel off the shoulder, hit long grass, hit ground! All very quick! Moral - hold your position on the road!!
Only when it is suitable to use it. IE you don't have to do 40kph in a door zone because some bright spark decided to paint a white line.warday said:
The Australian Road Rules as they apply to cyclists are here http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/rulesregulations/downloads/p15.pdf I would urge EVERY cyclists to read and know these rules and abide by them. While they state "additional rules" they are in fact variations of the road rules and again, we should all have a pretty good knowledge of the Australian Road Rules.
Regarding the example of a bike path, the mandatory use of one is most certainly NOT a rule I have seen in Australia, though it is in other countries. I would be most grateful if anyone could show me where its use is written. The Australian Road Rules specifically define a bike LANE and state where provided in the same direction blah blah blah, it must be used unless impractical.
What we need to remember is that in the mass of cars, the spotlight is on cyclists and the only way we will EVER change public perceptions is to know and abide by the road rules. The vast, VAST majority of cyclists do the right thing but I cringe any time I see a cyclist jumping a red light etc as I just know he's single-handedly destroyed all the good effort of many cycling advocates. In short, if you wouldn't do it in your car, DON'T do it on your bike. Common sense really.
Regarding the example of a bike path, the mandatory use of one is most certainly NOT a rule I have seen in Australia, though it is in other countries. I would be most grateful if anyone could show me where its use is written. The Australian Road Rules specifically define a bike LANE and state where provided in the same direction blah blah blah, it must be used unless impractical.
What we need to remember is that in the mass of cars, the spotlight is on cyclists and the only way we will EVER change public perceptions is to know and abide by the road rules. The vast, VAST majority of cyclists do the right thing but I cringe any time I see a cyclist jumping a red light etc as I just know he's single-handedly destroyed all the good effort of many cycling advocates. In short, if you wouldn't do it in your car, DON'T do it on your bike. Common sense really.
My Eagle Eyed wife just pointed out that in the story about "Jason" doing a runner, http://livenews.com.au/Articles/2008/05/12/Driver_involved_in_50bicycle_accident_goes_missing
One of the people trying to defend his actions could actually be him! Too funny
One of the people trying to defend his actions could actually be him! Too funny
247 Riding in a bicycle lane on a road886014 said:
(1) The rider of a bicycle riding on a length of road with a bicycle
lane designed for bicycles travelling in the same direction as
the rider must ride in the bicycle lane unless it is impracticable
to do so.
Offence provision.
Note Rule 153 defines a bicycle lane and deals with the use of bicycle
lanes by other vehicles.
(2) In this rule:
road does not include a road-related area.
Note Road-related area includes the shoulder of a road — see rule 13.
You said that you were not aware that the use of a bike lane is mandatory - the section I have pasted makes it clear that it is. Of course, one is always rescued by the term "impracticable". I am uncertain as to whether the provision applies to off-road bike lanes.886014 said:
No, actually I said nothing of the sort. Please read my post again, I said I had seen no rule (at that time) that made use of a bike PATH mandatory. A bike PATH is completely different to a bike LANE. A bike PATH is a separate section of land for the exclusive use of bicycles and possibly pedestrians. The Road Rules define this within a "Road Related Area". A bike LANE is a marked section of the road for the exclusive use of bicycles. BIG difference!
The Rules state that a rider must travel in a bicycle LANE unless impractical. It goes on to state that this rule DOES NOT include a "road related area" (ie a bike path as defined in Rule 13). The upshot of this, unless I am mistaken, is that you have absolutely no obligation as a cyclist to use a bike PATH even if it ran parallel to the road. The media and general public seem to be just as confused on this area, however the rule makes sense. A bike travelling at high speed down a typical bike PATH would be going to the scene of an accident, great place to potter about with your kids though!
The Rules state that a rider must travel in a bicycle LANE unless impractical. It goes on to state that this rule DOES NOT include a "road related area" (ie a bike path as defined in Rule 13). The upshot of this, unless I am mistaken, is that you have absolutely no obligation as a cyclist to use a bike PATH even if it ran parallel to the road. The media and general public seem to be just as confused on this area, however the rule makes sense. A bike travelling at high speed down a typical bike PATH would be going to the scene of an accident, great place to potter about with your kids though!
OK, now I have read your post carefully! I agree that there is no obligation that an off-road path be used, and I never use them myself as they (typically) have no priority at any crossing road and are often clogged with pedestrians.886014 said:
In South Australia I've seen a leaflet in bike shops that basically and clearly reproduces the "additional road rules" as they apply to cyclists, in plain English. I feel Bicycle NSW should be producing the same thing here in NSW and make it available in bike shops, RTA etc etc. In the grand scheme of things it costs peanuts to produce and would at least educate cyclists as to their rights and responsibilities.
