The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

open topic, for anything cycling related.

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby wellington_street » Sat Feb 15, 2014 8:03 pm

tekapo wrote:
wellington_street wrote:Minor one, but I was waiting at a set of lights to ride across the crossing, sitting there by myself. Dumb ped walks up to wait for the signals as well and thinks the best place to stand is about 30cm in front of my front wheel. I let out a bemused "really?" but dumb ped was very much deafened by her ipod. You'd think it would be common sense to let the faster vehicle go first and get out of the way, or at the very least not stand so close to a bike :nuts:


Well, cyclists filters to the front of the lights getting in the way of the "faster" vehicles, and gets real close to the cars as well. Not sure what the fuss is about ped getting to the front at ped crossings.


A fair comparison - my situation was akin to me (as a cyclist) filtering past the single car waiting at the lights, and then holding them as they wait to get past after it goes green. I don't do this though, because I try to be considerate to my fellow road users. I just thought what the pedestrian did was rather rude and pointless - the only purpose seemed to be to introduce an unnecessary conflict.
wellington_street
 
Posts: 765
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 12:25 pm

by BNA » Sat Feb 15, 2014 11:11 pm

BNA
 

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby Myrtone » Sat Feb 15, 2014 11:11 pm

nezumi wrote:I don't hold to human909's rationale that my attitude as a pedestrian, being the more vulnerable party and inconveniencing a rule breaking cyclist, is the same as a vehicle driver utilising their vehicle to dominate a cyclist who is behaving in line with the rules. The stance I take is a preventative one - there is little opportunity to talk to the offendors and address the concern directly, so I inconvenience them in the hope that they use the road instead of the footpath. As mentioned, this is due to too many encounters with people riding bikes on the footpath in a manner which places me at risk.


There is also a difference between a motor vehicle (not facing a red light or exceeding the (maximum) speed limit) hitting a jaywalking pedestrian, and a motor vehicle running a red light and hitting someone with a green man. If you cross illegally and get hit by a vehicle going straight ahead and at a constant speed not over the limit, its a case of you harming yourself, not the motorist harming you (as opposed to allowing you to come to harm through inaction). In fact, a jaywalker actually has no formal right of way protection except over turning vehicles (in New South Wales), or over vehicles making unprotected turns (in (some) other states). An unprotected turn is any turn not protected by a green arrow.

As an aside, the notion of something "not harming anyone" if the person is only putting themself at risk is a spurious one. By placing themself at risk, a person is increasing the liklihood of requiring medical treatment, which draws from public funds and limited resources.


Maybe we need more anti-jaywalking fences, and more grade separated crossings for pedestrians, at least in the CBD.
Myrtone
 
Posts: 77
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2010 7:12 pm

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby hudnut » Sat Feb 15, 2014 11:32 pm

Myrtone wrote:
nezumi wrote:I don't hold to human909's rationale that my attitude as a pedestrian, being the more vulnerable party and inconveniencing a rule breaking cyclist, is the same as a vehicle driver utilising their vehicle to dominate a cyclist who is behaving in line with the rules. The stance I take is a preventative one - there is little opportunity to talk to the offendors and address the concern directly, so I inconvenience them in the hope that they use the road instead of the footpath. As mentioned, this is due to too many encounters with people riding bikes on the footpath in a manner which places me at risk.


There is also a difference between a motor vehicle (not facing a red light or exceeding the (maximum) speed limit) hitting a jaywalking pedestrian, and a motor vehicle running a red light and hitting someone with a green man. If you cross illegally and get hit by a vehicle going straight ahead and at a constant speed not over the limit, its a case of you harming yourself, not the motorist harming you (as opposed to allowing you to come to harm through inaction). In fact, a jaywalker actually has no formal right of way protection except over turning vehicles (in New South Wales), or over vehicles making unprotected turns (in (some) other states). An unprotected turn is any turn not protected by a green arrow.

As an aside, the notion of something "not harming anyone" if the person is only putting themself at risk is a spurious one. By placing themself at risk, a person is increasing the liklihood of requiring medical treatment, which draws from public funds and limited resources.


Maybe we need more anti-jaywalking fences, and more grade separated crossings for pedestrians, at least in the CBD.


I don't think we do. I think we need people to be responsible for their actions more. Jaywalking increases your chances of being hurt. People should take their earplugs out, look around, and not walk in front of vehicles. This isn't rocket surgery.

I'm at the point where people have got to start reaping what they sow. We are removing the opportunity for people to develop the ability to perform their own risk analysis, and removing their obligation to accept the consequences of their decisions.

The only complicating point is the poor sod who hits them and those who look after them.
I don't have a solution for that.
hudnut
 
Posts: 95
Joined: Tue May 22, 2012 10:47 pm

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby Myrtone » Sat Feb 15, 2014 11:56 pm

hudnut wrote:I don't think we do. I think we need people to be responsible for their actions more. Jaywalking increases your chances of being hurt. People should take their earplugs out, look around, and not walk in front of vehicles. This isn't rocket surgery.

I'm at the point where people have got to start reaping what they sow. We are removing the opportunity for people to develop the ability to perform their own risk analysis, and removing their obligation to accept the consequences of their decisions.

The only complicating point is the poor sod who hits them and those who look after them.
I don't have a solution for that.


Well fences will help, in certain places (such as within 20m of a crosswalk in absence of street parking). In the CBD, an under road path for pedestrians would get them straight from the basement of one building to the basement of one across the road, and overhead one might get them from the 2nd and 3rd floors of one building to those of one across the road.
Myrtone
 
Posts: 77
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2010 7:12 pm

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby biker jk » Sun Feb 16, 2014 8:43 am

Myrtone wrote:
hudnut wrote:I don't think we do. I think we need people to be responsible for their actions more. Jaywalking increases your chances of being hurt. People should take their earplugs out, look around, and not walk in front of vehicles. This isn't rocket surgery.

I'm at the point where people have got to start reaping what they sow. We are removing the opportunity for people to develop the ability to perform their own risk analysis, and removing their obligation to accept the consequences of their decisions.

The only complicating point is the poor sod who hits them and those who look after them.
I don't have a solution for that.


Well fences will help, in certain places (such as within 20m of a crosswalk in absence of street parking). In the CBD, an under road path for pedestrians would get them straight from the basement of one building to the basement of one across the road, and overhead one might get them from the 2nd and 3rd floors of one building to those of one across the road.


We don't need cars in the CBD (apart from delivery vans). There should be a significant congestion charge for cars to enter the CBD.
User avatar
biker jk
 
Posts: 2174
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby Kraeg » Sun Feb 16, 2014 8:55 am

There's a ped crossing near my place that crosses a road I have to cross at least twice on most days. I don't always use it, sometimes crossing the road before or after it (to avoid a fine I do this 21 meters away). It's interesting that the only times I have almost been hit by a car is when using the ped crossing, never when not using it.
Kraeg
 
Posts: 309
Joined: Fri Dec 24, 2010 8:11 pm

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby Biffidus » Sun Feb 16, 2014 9:00 am

What are you guys smoking?

Human909's analogy misses the point entirely. Nezumi's post talks about a vulnerable path user taking action to protect himself against faster moving vehicles. This would be equivalent to a cyclist preventing cars from driving on a bicycle path.

Had Nezumi has been talking about a shared path then the pedestrian's action would be equivalent to a cyclist claiming the lane on a road.

Don't demonise the pedestrian just because there's a bike involved!
User avatar
Biffidus
 
Posts: 636
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 9:20 pm
Location: RADelaide

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby human909 » Sun Feb 16, 2014 9:39 am

Biffidus wrote:What are you guys smoking?

Human909's analogy misses the point entirely. Nezumi's post talks about a vulnerable path user taking action to protect himself against faster moving vehicles. This would be equivalent to a cyclist preventing cars from driving on a bicycle path.


You sure about that? We must be reading different things,

nezumi:
-I will do whatever I can to impede their progress.
-...if I am on foot and have someone on a bike come up on the footpath where they shouldn't be, I will get in there way.

Biffidus wrote:Had Nezumi has been talking about a shared path then the pedestrian's action would be equivalent to a cyclist claiming the lane on a road.

Nezumi was not talking about protecting himself against an individual cyclists he was talking about going out of his way to impede a cyclist that was not even interacting with him.

Personally if I see a cyclist on the footpath I would normally step out of their way and let them pass safely. When I very occasionally ride on the footpath (like the 100m before my house) I will move over onto the nature strip to let any pedestrians pass. It is called being polite. Though I can certainly understand your annoyance if you have had run ins with cyclists going high speed on the footpath, that isn't cool.
human909
 
Posts: 4192
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:48 am

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby g-boaf » Sun Feb 16, 2014 10:35 am

Human909 hits the nail on the head about being polite.
Image
g-boaf
 
Posts: 3329
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2011 6:11 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby human909 » Sun Feb 16, 2014 11:30 am

g-boaf wrote:Human909 hits the nail on the head about being polite.


Thanks. :D

I would just like to put out there that I am not trying to portray myself as a shining example of politeness. I can be abrasive in forum discussions and react aggressively to motorists who I perceived have wronged me. I also give strong glares to pedestrians blocking the Swanston St bike only path.

But how I described my behavior previously is an accurate portrayal of my behaviour on footpaths. It doesn't cost anything being polite to strangers on the streets and a smile here and there will make your day better. An adversarial approach to roads, bike paths or footpaths benefits nobody. (I recognise that my previous comment RE Swanston St could be seen as hypocritical in this context.)
human909
 
Posts: 4192
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:48 am

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby Mulger bill » Sun Feb 16, 2014 11:30 am

g-boaf wrote:Human909 hits the nail on the head about being polite.

Bingo, everybody would get around a lot smoother, easier and safer if people would stop being so damn selfish and put some B out there.

Sent from my LG-D802T using Tapatalk
...whatever the road rules, self-preservation is the absolute priority for a cyclist when mixing it with motorised traffic.
London Boy 29/12/2011
User avatar
Mulger bill
Super Mod
Super Mod
 
Posts: 25266
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:41 pm
Location: Sunbury Vic

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby Biffidus » Sun Feb 16, 2014 2:41 pm

Even so, likening it to car drivers being aggressive towards cyclists seems a bit rich.
User avatar
Biffidus
 
Posts: 636
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 9:20 pm
Location: RADelaide

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby TraceyG » Sun Feb 16, 2014 4:01 pm

Dumb cyclist on Pt Nepean Rd at Rosebud last night, almost 11pm riding along in dark clothing and with no lights, rear or front. You might have been in the "bike lane" but that is little consolation if you are cleaned up simply for the lack of a light.

On that note, however, the situation developed into an interesting conversation with my husband about how our own driving and passenger behaviour has changed as we have become more frequent cyclists. We realised that we actively look for cyclists and call "rider up". Not so many years ago we would have resented such backseat driver behaviour from each other but now we appreciate just how vulnerable cyclists are on the roads and how much responsibility we have towards other road users.

That's not to say that we were bad drivers before and I am fairly certain that neither of us ever caused an accident with a cyclist, just that we are more aware and careful now.
TraceyG
 
Posts: 237
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 7:06 pm

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby human909 » Sun Feb 16, 2014 4:41 pm

Biffidus wrote:Even so, likening it to car drivers being aggressive towards cyclists seems a bit rich.


I agree that severity of the action and the level of consequence is at different ends of the scale. But it was the motivation and the attitude that was being likened. :wink:
human909
 
Posts: 4192
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:48 am

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby find_bruce » Mon Feb 17, 2014 2:35 pm

I think this belongs here as I can't find a thread for disgusting or deviant pedestrians. A lovely example of the dumb pedestrian on Sunday on the Naremburn - North Ryde cycleway - some lessons for life
  1. don't walk on the bike path
  2. it may be an accurate reflection of your status in society, but it is not OK to be out in public shaking hands with the unemployed and
  3. I am not ever going to give you a hi five. While there are many reasons for this, surely #2 is enough.

Though I was fairly restrained by telling him "Don't be a Daring Homeboy"
Image
User avatar
find_bruce
 
Posts: 3133
Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 8:42 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby human909 » Mon Feb 17, 2014 3:05 pm

Last edited by human909 on Mon Feb 17, 2014 3:38 pm, edited 4 times in total.
human909
 
Posts: 4192
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:48 am

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby wellington_street » Mon Feb 17, 2014 3:18 pm

Not sure if human909 missed the joke, or is playing along...
wellington_street
 
Posts: 765
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 12:25 pm

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby burger » Mon Feb 17, 2014 3:19 pm

Hope this is a euphamism for 'having a slash' . . . . .
and not a more, ummmmm, graphic personal moment?? :oops: :shock: :roll:

find_bruce wrote:but it is not OK to be out in public shaking hands with the unemployed
The world is round, so what seems like the end may actually be the beginning.
User avatar
burger
 
Posts: 84
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2012 11:35 am

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby human909 » Mon Feb 17, 2014 3:40 pm

wellington_street wrote:Not sure if human909 missed the joke, or is playing along...


If I was playing along, what I did write was quite hilarious and almost witty.

Unfortunately the truth is that I did miss the joke, and so in I removed it. :oops:
human909
 
Posts: 4192
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:48 am

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby wellington_street » Mon Feb 17, 2014 3:43 pm

:lol:

Innocence lost once again...
wellington_street
 
Posts: 765
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 12:25 pm

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby find_bruce » Mon Feb 17, 2014 4:22 pm

While the aforementioned person, lets call him Wayne, appeared to be relieving himself in public, he was not having a slash. I am conscious of both the word sensor and the sensibilities of readers & chose a euphemism that I thought conveyed both the location of Wayne's right hand and what that hand appeared to be doing. Maybe Mr Kerr felt the need for a lengthy personal adjustment or maybe he was just a pervert, I wasn't about to stop and ask.

Either way, eeew.

I apologise for the confusion and indeed for mental image.
Image
User avatar
find_bruce
 
Posts: 3133
Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 8:42 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby alexander » Mon Feb 17, 2014 5:50 pm

posted this over in commuting too, such is my anger right now.

"Well this mornings ride was ruined this afternoon, which was a shame as the weather was even nicer.

I had nothing but moron cyclists overtaking on blind corners. Had it happen 3 times, 3 different guys. All nearly resulting in crashes that would have taken down at least 3-4 people. Had to yell at one of them, and luckily he pulled back just in time, as sure enough, someone came the other way, at speed.

Then a motorcyclist coming up the inside of a truck turning left perpendicular to our crossing. Truck was being nice and letting us cross, but the motorbike was invisible and so were we, as the truck hid us both from each other, cyclist nearly got cleaned up by dumb motorcyclist who wasn't giving way. Again I had to yell because I was back far enough to see it unfolding."
If you've got a $10 head, get a $10 helmet
alexander
 
Posts: 332
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 10:56 am
Location: Footscray

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby Ross » Tue Feb 18, 2014 11:13 am

Image
User avatar
Ross
 
Posts: 3383
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 7:53 pm

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby wellington_street » Tue Feb 18, 2014 11:49 am

^ :lol:

Unsurprisingly to see one of the in-story links is to a story "14 reasons we hate cyclists". Must resist click bait...
wellington_street
 
Posts: 765
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 12:25 pm

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby g-boaf » Tue Feb 18, 2014 12:00 pm

wellington_street wrote:^ :lol:

Unsurprisingly to see one of the in-story links is to a story "14 reasons we hate cyclists". Must resist click bait...


You didn't read the whole thing, did you? People hate cyclists mostly because of our freedom, and the fact we are getting super fit, while they are sitting in their cars. :D
Image
g-boaf
 
Posts: 3329
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2011 6:11 pm
Location: Sydney

PreviousNext

Return to General discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: simmo_hills, Waccofozzy



Support BNA
Click for online shops
Torpedo 7 Torpedo7 AU
Ground Effect Ground Effect NZ
Chain Reaction Cycles CRC UK
Wiggle Wiggle UK
Cycling Express Cycling Express
Ebay Ebay AU
ProBikeKit ProBikeKit UK
Evans Cycles Evans Cycles UK
JensonUSA Jenson USA
JensonUSA Competitive Cyclist