Moron Motorists #3

[Xplora]

Country boy? Distracted by kangaroos? Act of God? Thinking about mowing the grass? ^^^^

[find_bruce]

Country boy? Distracted by kangaroos? Act of God? Thinking about mowing the grass? ^^^^

Top paddock, roos loose therin

[Ross]

.061 is low range and sacking someone is a very serious step, particularly a sergeant who has obviously dedicated his career to the police.

So he was just a little bit drunk and potentially could of just killed someone a little bit? that makes it ok then. Being a police officer is a very serious job, driving a car is a serious activity. Driving a car while under the influence of alcohol is a serious offence. Being a police officer you need to lead by example and not perform illegal activities. The officer concerned is a sergeant who presumably has been in the force for a number of years and should know that this behavior is unacceptable. If he was such a dedicated career man then he wouldn't of committed the offence in the first place. What message does it send to the general public when a police officer is caught DUI?

[WarbyD]

.061 is low range and sacking someone is a very serious step, particularly a sergeant who has obviously dedicated his career to the police.

So he was just a little bit drunk and potentially could of just killed someone a little bit? that makes it ok then. Being a police officer is a very serious job, driving a car is a serious activity. Driving a car while under the influence of alcohol is a serious offence. Being a police officer you need to lead by example and not perform illegal activities. The officer concerned is a sergeant who presumably has been in the force for a number of years and should know that this behavior is unacceptable. If he was such a dedicated career man then he wouldn't of committed the offence in the first place. What message does it send to the general public when a police officer is caught DUI?

That they're human and make mistakes too?

As long as he isn't treated leniently because of being a police officer, which I'm sure won't be the case, and is disciplined as appropriate under the terms of his employment, what is the problem?

[biker jk]

Driver who killed two people receives a paltry three year gaol sentence and is eligible for parole in 18-months. This continues the run of grossly inadequate sentences for negligent drivers killing people. These are not "accidents".

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-04-24/t ... al/5409014

[biker jk]

So Buddy Franklin wiped out 3 parked cars last night.

He wasn't under the influence. How else does this happen? Texting?

It was four cars. He said he wasn't texting but just didn't see a car on the left. Mind you, he did have a seizure in January.

[jules21]

It was four cars. He said he wasn't texting but just didn't see a car on the left. Mind you, he did have a seizure in January.

apparently he's lost the taste for chops a lot these days

[Ross]

.061 is low range and sacking someone is a very serious step, particularly a sergeant who has obviously dedicated his career to the police.

So he was just a little bit drunk and potentially could of just killed someone a little bit? that makes it ok then. Being a police officer is a very serious job, driving a car is a serious activity. Driving a car while under the influence of alcohol is a serious offence. Being a police officer you need to lead by example and not perform illegal activities. The officer concerned is a sergeant who presumably has been in the force for a number of years and should know that this behavior is unacceptable. If he was such a dedicated career man then he wouldn't of committed the offence in the first place. What message does it send to the general public when a police officer is caught DUI?

That they're human and make mistakes too?

As long as he isn't treated leniently because of being a police officer, which I'm sure won't be the case, and is disciplined as appropriate under the terms of his employment, what is the problem?

It's not a "mistake" to have 3 or 4 drinks and then go and drive a car. It's a deliberate act. A police officer knows better than probably anyone that this is a wrong and illegal thing to do. He has failed at his job. His job is to uphold the law.

[il padrone]

Driver who killed two people receives a paltry three year gaol sentence and is eligible for parole in 18-months. This continues the run of grossly inadequate sentences for negligent drivers killing people. These are not "accidents".

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-04-24/t ... al/5409014

It will be interesting to hear what the sentence handed down is for this comparable collision that has produced a conviction for dangerous driving causing death.

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/truck ... 374hr.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Ross]

I hear Summernight's friend copped a fine

https://www.bicyclenetwork.com.au/gener ... ooringfine" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[g-boaf]

I had a lady in a Toyota Prado turn out of a side street straight in front of me this afternoon. I had a feeling she might - so I was ready to get on the brakes in a hurry. Just as well I was prepared for it. If I was a bus or a truck, would she have done the same?

Seriously, she even made eye contact with me. Just absolutely stupid, inconsiderate driving. But par for the course these days.

[kenwstr]

Well, It's tame I guess but what do car drivers expect cyclists to do. It's the attitude of total disregard I find really disturbing. I have been visiting relies over the Easter/ANZAC period so travelling around. While staying in Mollymook I did some rides up to Clyde Ridge on the Woodstock Rd out of Milton and back. Anyhow, coming back into Mollymook Easter Sunday on Matron Porter Dr, nearing the end of the verge up out of Frogs Hollow, I look behind and see a few cars well behind so I indicate and move over to the right and occupy the right lane indicating to turn right into Garside Rd. Another bunch of cars appears coming the other way on Matron Porter so I stop to wait for my opportunity to turn just as any of the other traffic would in these circumstances. The road is wide at this point so plenty of space for cars to pass other cars etc. But I'm on a bike and have cars passing on both sides now which is fine given the room there but I get yelled at from 4 separate cars to "get off....".

Now complaints I hear from car drivers is cyclists should obey the road rules just like car drivers have too and that is exactly what I was doing. So if this is really the beef of car drivers, then I should have been appreciated for doing the right thing but instead I get abused. So obviously this is not the issue they have with me. The issue is they hate all cyclists just for being cyclists. It has nothing whatsoever to do with obeying the road rules or anything else they can dress up in a socially acceptable way. It is just simple blind and unreasonable hatred and that's the truth of it. I's just that they can't say so publicly with any credibility.

It's the same reason a car changed lanes to deliberately close pass and blast me while I was in the process of exiting the roadway in Canberra the week before.
Heck I was actually getting off Morson Drive when he did this. What is wrong with these people that they don't see other road users as people?

When I learned to drive, cars had to give way to other vulnerable road users like pedestrians. If for example a Ped was waiting to cross a road, a driver had to stop to let them cross. It didn't matter if it was a crossing or not, peds always had right of way regardless. If it was a crossing, you had to wait until the entire crossing was free of peds before you could proceed to drive. That's right, even if a ped was on the other side of the crossing to you, you were not permitted to drive across that crossing. Things have changed (it seems) and now we have councils putting up signs at crossings that say peds have to give way to cars! What absolute rot is that, it just reinforces the wrong message in drivers brains and breads the wrong attitude of disregards towards other people. It should be simple, you are not allowed to injure or kill other people.

Regards,
Ken

[human909]

Hear, hear!

I was astounded recently when I visited Sydney to discover that throughout the city side streets they have <LOOK> signs for pedestrians. While looking isn't a bad idea it does seem to be a little contrary to the fact that the traffic must give way to the crossing pedestrians. Somehow in Sydney it seems that cars have priority of pedestrians at these streets.

[outnabike]

I look behind and see a few cars well behind so I indicate and mover over the right and occupy the right line indicating to turn right into Garside Rd. Another bunch of cars appears coming the other way on Matron Porter so I stop to wait for my opportunity to turn just as any of the other traffic would in these circumstances. The road is wide at this point so plenty of space for cars to pass other cars etc. But I'm on a bike and have cars passing on both sides now which is fine given the room there but I get yelled at from 4 separate cars to "get off....".
Regards,
Ken

Snipped,

Hi Ken,
Same with me, I find turning right is a red rag to a bull with some motorists, they want you in the left lane !!!!
I have to be in the right lane or right side of the road to turn, I have the arm out to signal. My bike has a stand light which to the average idiot would look like a stop light; yet they haven't got the where with all just to skirt around and take it in their stride.
If a car is in the middle of the road with its right indicator on it's Ok.
Hate is a powerful emotion and easier to apply than patience.

[kenwstr]

Yeh, It's the attitude that gets me and to be fair, it's not just motorists. I just don't get cyclists who run red lights or cycle through crossings dodging around Peds. It seems pretty common but it's the same attitude of disregard for other people and it's not on IMO. This behavior is not doing yourself or other cyclists any favors. It build up resentment in the community. A good number of those peds you just close shaved parked their car earlier and will return to it with resentment towards cyclists because of what you did. Every driver stopped at the lights or crossing saw what you did and now is now disgusted with cyclists. There is a reason for doing unto others as you would have them do unto you. What goes around comes around as they say. It's not about justification, it's human nature so how about doing your bit by stopping the road war escalation with you and behave correctly on the road.


Regards,
Ken

[queequeg]

Hear, hear!

I was astounded recently when I visited Sydney to discover that throughout the city side streets they have <LOOK> signs for pedestrians. While looking isn't a bad idea it does seem to be a little contrary to the fact that the traffic must give way to the crossing pedestrians. Somehow in Sydney it seems that cars have priority of pedestrians at these streets.

Those "Look" signs with Arrows appeared for the 2000 Olympics, mostly for international visitors who might drive on the other side of the road. From that point of view they are fine, but these signs are not saying you have give way to cars but are just a reminder not to step out without looking.

[human909]

Yeh, It's the attitude that gets me and to be fair, it's not just motorists. I just don't get cyclists who run red lights or cycle through crossings dodging around Peds. It seems pretty common but it's the same attitude of disregard for other people and it's not on IMO. This behavior is not doing yourself or other cyclists any favors. It build up resentment in the community. A good number of those peds you just close shaved parked their car earlier and will return to it with resentment towards cyclists because of what you did. Every driver stopped at the lights or crossing saw what you did and now is now disgusted with cyclists. There is a reason for doing unto others as you would have them do unto you. What goes around comes around as they say. It's not about justification, it's human nature so how about doing your bit by stopping the road war escalation with you and behave correctly on the road.

Except the vast majority of cyclists going through red lights are not close shaving pedestrians and are not putting their lives at risk. Furthermore the vast majority aren't doing this anywhere near pedestrians. They do it at empty intersections when there the only harm being done is by the red light delaying traffic.

If there are no observers and no traffic I run red lights all the time. If you wish to stop for them then that is great but don't feel morally superior by doing so. (it is not bettering society in any way shape or form)

Those "Look" signs with Arrows appeared for the 2000 Olympics, mostly for international visitors who might drive on the other side of the road. From that point of view they are fine, but these signs are not saying you have give way to cars but are just a reminder not to step out without looking.

If that was the logic then it still doesn't make good sense. Surely markings of give way to motorists would be more appropriate give that is their obligation yet there are no reminders. (Sadly a significant number of motorists don't realise this obligation, I have actually had to arguing with friends to tell them that they had to give way to pedestrians.)

[il padrone]

The issue is they hate all cyclists just for being cyclists. It has nothing whatsoever to do with obeying the road rules or anything else they can dress up in a socially acceptable way. It is just simple blind and unreasonable hatred and that's the truth of it. I's just that they can't say so publicly with any credibility.

And ain't that the truth of the whole rev-head motorist complaints.

Not much we do will change this, little in the way of riders following all rules, rego-paying cyclists, nor extensive off-road paths will ever change this (actually I reckon the more seperated paths there are the worse it gets). The thing that will make a difference is fairer, safer road rules, with stronger enforcement. Hopefully the Qld rule change will be a part of this.

Personally I have few issues with motoring traffic on my commute and rides, I ride predictably as a vehicle, on the road by preference. But there are still all those disgusting media article comments that are a worry.

[human909]

Personally I have few issues with motoring traffic on my commute and rides, I ride predictably as a vehicle, on the road by preference. But there are still all those disgusting media article comments that are a worry.

I have the same experience on my commutes and rides. I ride in areas which have many cyclists and the motorists are largely very considerate. I have the opposite experience when riding in other areas though, horn blasts and close pass for taking the lane.

[il padrone]

Actually where I commute (Mitcham, Doncaster) there are really hardly any other cyclists. Part of my commute has a bus/bike lane, but for the rest motorists seem to be able to deal reasonably with the situation when I am in the lane in front of them.

I keep on hearing horror storis of incidents from Sydney and Queensland and I wonder Say What is going on in these places ????

[il padrone]

When I learned to drive, cars had to give way to other vulnerable road users like pedestrians. If for example a Ped was waiting to cross a road, a driver had to stop to let them cross. It didn't matter if it was a crossing or not, peds always had right of way regardless. If it was a crossing, you had to wait until the entire crossing was free of peds before you could proceed to drive. That's right, even if a ped was on the other side of the crossing to you, you were not permitted to drive across that crossing. Things have changed (it seems) and now we have councils putting up signs at crossings that say peds have to give way to cars!

Don't know anything about such signs, but the rules on pedestrian crossings have not changed in recent years (Rule 80 and 81). You seem to be mixing up pedestrian and school crossings

School crossings - do not proceed until the crosssing is completely clear (or waved through by the crossing atttendant)

Rule 80(3) If a driver stops at a children's crossing for a hand-held stop sign, the driver must not proceed until there is no pedestrian on or entering the crossing and the holder of the sign—
(a) no longer displays the sign towards the driver; or
(b) otherwise indicates that the driver may proceed.
(4) If a driver stops at a children's crossing for a pedestrian, the driver must not proceed until there is no pedestrian on or entering the crossing.

Pedesstrian (zebra) crossings - proceed once you have given way to any pedestrians on or approaching the crossing

Rule 81(2) A driver must give way to any pedestrian on a pedestrian crossing.

So, with a zebra crossing you may (and have been able to for as long as I can recall) proceed once the crossing has cleared in front of you and no-one is approaching.


I really do prefer the Italian procedure for crossing the road - do NOT look at the traffic, just walk slowly and steadily out; the drivers will stop for you - at any crossing point you choose.

[bychosis]

Yeh, It's the attitude that gets me and to be fair, it's not just motorists. I just don't get cyclists who run red lights or cycle through crossings dodging around Peds. It seems pretty common but it's the same attitude of disregard for other people and it's not on IMO. This behavior is not doing yourself or other cyclists any favors. It build up resentment in the community.

QFT and it's all walks of life. The entitlement attitude: You can't do anything that will delay me because I'm more important, and if you do then you'll pay for it. As opposed to a more considerate/polite community where everyone goes about their business and if there is someone going to affect their business a compromise is made on both sides to ensure that neither is affected much.

[il padrone]

a more considerate/polite community where everyone goes about their business and if there is someone going to affect their business a compromise is made on both sides to ensure that neither is affected much.

Yes, I'd agree with this.


But I cannot see how one road user (cyclist or otherwise) going through a red light next to me, directly interferes with my business. I just stay put, humm a little tune and get on with my ride when the light goes green. I do the same in the car, and while I acknowledge the danger the other's action presents, I do not believe their action leads to ME being somehow held responsible

[trailgumby]

...(actually I reckon the more seperated paths there are the worse it gets). The thing that will make a difference is fairer, safer road rules, with stronger enforcement.

Bullseye, on both.

[jasonc]

...(actually I reckon the more seperated paths there are the worse it gets). The thing that will make a difference is fairer, safer road rules, with stronger enforcement.

Bullseye, on both.

+1