Moron Motorists #3

User avatar
ColinOldnCranky
Posts: 6098
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 4:58 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby ColinOldnCranky » Mon Aug 06, 2018 9:05 pm

human909 wrote:I'm confused why having cars pass cyclists in marked lanes on the left is terrible infrastructure. Is it innately more dangerous than cars passing cyclist on the right?


I agree with you Human. When I used to ride a bike to work going straight ahead at controlled intersections were moments of anxiety, especially as I was having to give some attention to clipping the cleats. I'd much rather have the cars turn left from my left side.

Maybe the post was concerned about the distance, but that's just a function of the limited road space. And that is always going to be problematic where we are retrofitting the roads to accommodation bikes. The infrastructure is good, just not perfect - perfect would be total separation of peds from cycles and cycles from cars.
Unchain yourself-Ride a unicycle
Image

User avatar
antigee
Posts: 520
Joined: Sun Sep 01, 2013 10:58 am
Location: just off the Yarra Trail but not lurking in the bushes

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby antigee » Mon Aug 06, 2018 10:10 pm

ColinOldnCranky wrote:.................Maybe the post was concerned about the distance, but that's just a function of the limited road space. And that is always going to be problematic where we are retrofitting the roads to accommodation bikes. The infrastructure is good, just not perfect - perfect would be total separation of peds from cycles and cycles from cars.


a problem is when the bicycle lane is wider then cars will use it - I've had that at this junction in Melbourne (from the city, left side) which has long delays to cross traffic so anything goes - not sure what solution is - suspect that bollards that could cause damage to vehicles and make sure maintain lane but allow escape room for cyclists would work but not seen a junction laid out like that (?)

https://goo.gl/maps/7tj5vxkhqsx

Incidentally the east side (right of pic) cycle lane used to be to the left of the predominantly left turning traffic - had some debate (mostly taxi drivers) when was like that as I would just line up in the vehicles and take the lane to go straight ahead ignoring "my lane" good that its been sorted

User avatar
recumbenteer
Posts: 534
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2008 4:36 pm
Location: Fairfield 2165
Contact:

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby recumbenteer » Tue Aug 07, 2018 9:29 pm

rangersac wrote:
recumbenteer wrote:Meanwhile, back in the Rocket.....


Jesus, I am impressed you didn't respond with a volley of choice epithets.



35yrs of motorcycling has taught me, "an inch is as good as a mile", and keep those "Spidey senses" on full power ALL the time...

Yelling & screaming, may be a release in the moment, but hopefully the "shock to the Driver" might give them something to think about & maybe change some part of their behaviour....

*wishful thinking* I know
http://rvvelonaut.blogspot.com.au/
Speedwell GTS Deluxe
Bates Royal Star
CoolCruza
Rotovelo

BJL
Posts: 605
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2012 6:45 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby BJL » Wed Aug 08, 2018 8:25 am

ColinOldnCranky wrote:Maybe the post was concerned about the distance, but that's just a function of the limited road space. And that is always going to be problematic where we are retrofitting the roads to accommodation bikes. \


Is this what is actually happening though? Roads, and bicycles, were around before motor vehicles and the way I see it, roads are being retrofitted to accommodate motor vehicles. Maybe I'm being a little too argumentative this morning but the way you've written it underlines the whole notion in this idiot nation that 'roads are for cars'.

But more to the point, are the roads being retrofitted to accommodate a form of transport or to accommodate the selfish, ignorant, dangerous attitude of many motorists who refuse to share the roads?

User avatar
pj
Posts: 61
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2018 10:36 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby pj » Wed Aug 08, 2018 8:59 am

A selection of turds from the last week






User avatar
Thoglette
Posts: 4118
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:01 pm

Absolute psyco - The Guardian

Postby Thoglette » Wed Aug 08, 2018 11:41 am

Stop handing them the stick! - Dave Moulton
"People are worthy of respect, ideas are not." Peter Ellerton, UQ

User avatar
mikesbytes
Super Mod
Super Mod
Posts: 19085
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:42 pm
Location: Tempe, Sydney
Contact:

Re: Absolute psyco - The Guardian

Postby mikesbytes » Wed Aug 08, 2018 1:05 pm


I'm wondering if the car was actually stolen or the driver is known to the owner
If the R-1 rule is broken, what happens to N+1?

fat and old
Posts: 3536
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2014 12:06 pm
Location: Mill Park

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby fat and old » Wed Aug 08, 2018 6:53 pm

This rotten bitch was mentioned here when it happened. Be prepared to be outraged....

https://www.theage.com.au/national/vict ... 4zw74.html

User avatar
Mulger bill
Super Mod
Super Mod
Posts: 29011
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:41 pm
Location: Sunbury Vic

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby Mulger bill » Wed Aug 08, 2018 7:08 pm

fat and old wrote:This rotten bitch was mentioned here when it happened. Be prepared to be outraged....

https://www.theage.com.au/national/vict ... 4zw74.html

Now we know for sure exactly how much this govt and its instruments care for vulnerable road users. Stuffall Bullpoo excuses for days!

Speaking of days, they allege that drugs (including alcohol) had no bearing on the hit or scumbagettes decision to run.
With no contact for FOUR days, HOW DO THEY KNOW? Her word?
Bollocks :evil:
...whatever the road rules, self-preservation is the absolute priority for a cyclist when mixing it with motorised traffic.
London Boy 29/12/2011

uart
Posts: 1495
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2016 9:15 pm
Location: Newcastle

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby uart » Wed Aug 08, 2018 8:34 pm

fat and old wrote:This rotten bitch was mentioned here when it happened. Be prepared to be outraged....

https://www.theage.com.au/national/vict ... 4zw74.html


"Prosecutor Robyn Harper said that, instead of jail, Nguyen should lose her licence for four years and partake in community service and road trauma awareness programs"

Sounds like par for the course unfortunately. :( Very rarely any jail time given for killing or maiming cyclists in Australia.

User avatar
ColinOldnCranky
Posts: 6098
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 4:58 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby ColinOldnCranky » Wed Aug 08, 2018 11:04 pm

BJL wrote:
ColinOldnCranky wrote:Maybe the post was concerned about the distance, but that's just a function of the limited road space. And that is always going to be problematic where we are retrofitting the roads to accommodation bikes. \


Is this what is actually happening though? Roads, and bicycles, were around before motor vehicles and the way I see it, roads are being retrofitted to accommodate motor vehicles?

Really BJL? I hope you are just being pedantic more than serious because the counter is obvious. How far back are you willing to go? To a time when our bike space was "retrofitted" over cycle routes? Cycle routes over the whole of the continent occupied first by nomadic aboriginal nations? It's hardly retrofitting when we are building and expanding our towns and cities who's boundaries would be unrecognisable to a citizen of the 1920s. 1030s! 1940s!...

Most of suburbia and elsewhere in Oz that have had roads added in the last eight or more years have been added onto land that never had a bike on it. And now needs retrofitting for bikes and not vice-versa.
Unchain yourself-Ride a unicycle
Image

User avatar
mikesbytes
Super Mod
Super Mod
Posts: 19085
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:42 pm
Location: Tempe, Sydney
Contact:

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby mikesbytes » Thu Aug 09, 2018 8:57 am

fat and old wrote:This rotten bitch was mentioned here when it happened. Be prepared to be outraged....

https://www.theage.com.au/national/vict ... 4zw74.html

Stated that she didn't know that she had hit the girl despite that the girl hitting her windscreen
If the R-1 rule is broken, what happens to N+1?

User avatar
silentC
Posts: 2402
Joined: Mon May 05, 2014 5:24 pm
Location: Far South Coast NSW

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby silentC » Thu Aug 09, 2018 9:38 am

She prayed at the temple for the welfare of the child, what more could you ask?
"If your next bike does not have disc brakes, the bike after that certainly will"
- Me

fat and old
Posts: 3536
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2014 12:06 pm
Location: Mill Park

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby fat and old » Thu Aug 09, 2018 9:50 am

In cases like these, I have no issue with presumed liability. Civil or criminal.

For the prosecutor

BJL
Posts: 605
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2012 6:45 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby BJL » Thu Aug 09, 2018 9:54 am

ColinOldnCranky wrote:
BJL wrote:
ColinOldnCranky wrote:Maybe the post was concerned about the distance, but that's just a function of the limited road space. And that is always going to be problematic where we are retrofitting the roads to accommodation bikes. \


Is this what is actually happening though? Roads, and bicycles, were around before motor vehicles and the way I see it, roads are being retrofitted to accommodate motor vehicles?

Really BJL? I hope you are just being pedantic more than serious because the counter is obvious. How far back are you willing to go? To a time when our bike space was "retrofitted" over cycle routes? Cycle routes over the whole of the continent occupied first by nomadic aboriginal nations? It's hardly retrofitting when we are building and expanding our towns and cities who's boundaries would be unrecognisable to a citizen of the 1920s. 1030s! 1940s!...

Most of suburbia and elsewhere in Oz that have had roads added in the last eight or more years have been added onto land that never had a bike on it. And now needs retrofitting for bikes and not vice-versa.


Maybe I'm SICK TO DEATH of the default notion that you and others like you seem to have taken on, and that's that 'roads are for CARS' and therefore need to be 'retrofitted' for bicycles. It's the piss poor attitude shown towards cyclists by motorists that needs to be addressed.

And as far as I can see, the vast majority of the roads out there are perfectly suitable for bicycles. But many of these same roads are in fact, dangerous for motorists to use. But it doesn't matter because roads are for cars and bikes can get the hell out of the way.

ROADS ARE FOR PEOPLE. And to prove the point, I'd love to get a group of 50-100 walkers to come with for a walk across the Black Spur in Victoria from Healesville to Narbethong. Or maybe a large group of cyclists. Guess what? The road is the ONLY way through there. There's no footpath or 'retrofitted' bicycle infrastructure through there so guess where we'd be walking or riding? That's right, ON the road. As per the intended use of the road network. For PEOPLE to get around. Same with the 1/20 from The Basin to Sassafras.

What would you do about it? A large group of PEOPLE legally walking along the road? Remove our basic human right to freedom of movement?

It's about time motorists had the point shoved right down their idiot throats that the roads are NOT theirs and forced to either accept it and share the roads in a safe and responsible manner, or MOTORISTS can get off the roads.

Screw you and your 'roads are for cars' default attitude.

And if you think I'm being pedantic over the last few decades where motor vehicles have been commonplace, you should go check out the middle east or any of our esteemed religions. They'll argue with you over stuff from hundreds and even thousands of years back.

fat and old
Posts: 3536
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2014 12:06 pm
Location: Mill Park

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby fat and old » Thu Aug 09, 2018 10:20 am

Via Appia!!!

AdelaidePeter
Posts: 409
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 11:13 am

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby AdelaidePeter » Thu Aug 09, 2018 10:30 am

BJL wrote:
ColinOldnCranky wrote:
BJL wrote:
Is this what is actually happening though? Roads, and bicycles, were around before motor vehicles and the way I see it, roads are being retrofitted to accommodate motor vehicles?

Really BJL? I hope you are just being pedantic more than serious because the counter is obvious. How far back are you willing to go? To a time when our bike space was "retrofitted" over cycle routes? Cycle routes over the whole of the continent occupied first by nomadic aboriginal nations? It's hardly retrofitting when we are building and expanding our towns and cities who's boundaries would be unrecognisable to a citizen of the 1920s. 1030s! 1940s!...

Most of suburbia and elsewhere in Oz that have had roads added in the last eight or more years have been added onto land that never had a bike on it. And now needs retrofitting for bikes and not vice-versa.


Maybe I'm SICK TO DEATH of the default notion that you and others like you seem to have taken on, and that's that 'roads are for CARS' and therefore need to be 'retrofitted' for bicycles. It's the piss poor attitude shown towards cyclists by motorists that needs to be addressed.


I can't speak for Colin, but my take on this is that most roads (and pretty well all roads built post-WWII) were designed and built for cars. Whether they should have been designed and built for cars is another matter. And that doesn't mean other road users are not entitled to use them. But I don't see how you can dispute the notion that they were designed and built with cars in mind. And because bicycle lanes were not in the original design, adding them is retrofitting, by definition.

fat and old
Posts: 3536
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2014 12:06 pm
Location: Mill Park

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby fat and old » Thu Aug 09, 2018 11:19 am

When in doubt, look to our European superiors!!

The Eurostat, ITF and UNECE Glossary for Transport Statistics Illustrated defines a road as a "Line of communication (travelled way) open to public traffic, primarily for the use of road motor vehicles, using a stabilized base other than rails or air strips. [...] Included are paved roads and other roads with a stabilized base, e.g. gravel roads. Roads also cover streets, bridges, tunnels, supporting structures, junctions, crossings and interchanges. Toll roads are also included. Excluded are dedicated cycle lanes."[3]


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road

There ya go!

User avatar
Thoglette
Posts: 4118
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:01 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby Thoglette » Thu Aug 09, 2018 2:04 pm

AdelaidePeter wrote:
BJL wrote: 'roads are for CARS' and therefore need to be 'retrofitted' for bicycles.

that most roads (and pretty well all roads built post-WWII) were designed and built for cars.


Which is not the same thing. It's not even close to the same thing. No wonder you two are having an argument. :shock:

The whole argument is silly as the stroke of a pen (backed up with a little enforcement) is all the "retrofitting" that is ever "required".

Take a deep breath and read some Wittgentein :D
Stop handing them the stick! - Dave Moulton
"People are worthy of respect, ideas are not." Peter Ellerton, UQ

User avatar
ColinOldnCranky
Posts: 6098
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 4:58 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby ColinOldnCranky » Thu Aug 09, 2018 7:10 pm

BJL wrote:Maybe I'm SICK TO DEATH of the default notion that you and others like you seem to have taken on, and that's that 'roads are for CARS' and therefore need to be 'retrofitted' for bicycles. It's the piss poor attitude shown towards cyclists by motorists that needs to be addressed.


Geez Beej you DO have a sizeable chip and a lot of anger. And neither likely to improve things at all.

You've no idea of who or what I am, my riding history and, from the comment above, my beliefs. But I'd reckon that I was gaining experience on busy roads longer than most here and well before anyone else worried about bike friendly infrastructure.

I suspect that there would be more that we agree on than disagree. So maybe a pretense of respect for others (including even motorists) would be more productive than spraying with bile those who do not align exactly and at every moment in time with your thoughts.

And maybe some respect for those servants of society who are charged with planning for better outcomes. Planners and policy sorts are the ones who have to try and make old systems work in a changed world. You know? Compromise satisfying no-one completely but improving things for all. They can't afford to get angry and wipe out the needs of half the community. Hell, some of those people may even be cyclists. :o

It appears that further discussion is not going to achieve anything other than more anger so I bid you good luck and happy trails.
Unchain yourself-Ride a unicycle
Image

User avatar
ColinOldnCranky
Posts: 6098
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 4:58 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby ColinOldnCranky » Thu Aug 09, 2018 7:18 pm

AdelaidePeter wrote:
BJL wrote:
ColinOldnCranky wrote:Really BJL? I hope you are just being pedantic more than serious because the counter is obvious. How far back are you willing to go? To a time when our bike space was "retrofitted" over cycle routes? Cycle routes over the whole of the continent occupied first by nomadic aboriginal nations? It's hardly retrofitting when we are building and expanding our towns and cities who's boundaries would be unrecognisable to a citizen of the 1920s. 1030s! 1940s!...

Most of suburbia and elsewhere in Oz that have had roads added in the last eight or more years have been added onto land that never had a bike on it. And now needs retrofitting for bikes and not vice-versa.


Maybe I'm SICK TO DEATH of the default notion that you and others like you seem to have taken on, and that's that 'roads are for CARS' and therefore need to be 'retrofitted' for bicycles. It's the piss poor attitude shown towards cyclists by motorists that needs to be addressed.


I can't speak for Colin, but my take on this is that most roads (and pretty well all roads built post-WWII) were designed and built for cars. Whether they should have been designed and built for cars is another matter. And that doesn't mean other road users are not entitled to use them. But I don't see how you can dispute the notion that they were designed and built with cars in mind. And because bicycle lanes were not in the original design, adding them is retrofitting, by definition.

Actually Peter, you have spoken very well for me. :D
Unchain yourself-Ride a unicycle
Image

ironhanglider
Posts: 2345
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 9:44 pm
Location: Middle East, Melbourne

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby ironhanglider » Thu Aug 09, 2018 8:17 pm

Thoglette wrote:
Take a deep breath and read some Wittgenstein :D


Who was a boozy swine,
And just as sloshed as Schlegel.

Cheers,

Cameron.
Image

human909
Posts: 8915
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby human909 » Thu Aug 09, 2018 10:57 pm

Retrofitting or non retrofitting just sounds like semantics. However BJL has a very good point that many of you seem to be missing.

There are a great many roads including old city roads and major highways that were built well before cars. In fact in the case of highways like BJL says they are often the ONLY route between destinations.

Quoted for its strongly made point.
BJL wrote:And as far as I can see, the vast majority of the roads out there are perfectly suitable for bicycles. But many of these same roads are in fact, dangerous for motorists to use. But it doesn't matter because roads are for cars and bikes can get the hell out of the way.

ROADS ARE FOR PEOPLE. And to prove the point, I'd love to get a group of 50-100 walkers to come with for a walk across the Black Spur in Victoria from Healesville to Narbethong. Or maybe a large group of cyclists. Guess what? The road is the ONLY way through there. There's no footpath or 'retrofitted' bicycle infrastructure through there so guess where we'd be walking or riding? That's right, ON the road. As per the intended use of the road network. For PEOPLE to get around. Same with the 1/20 from The Basin to Sassafras.

What would you do about it? A large group of PEOPLE legally walking along the road? Remove our basic human right to freedom of movement?

It's about time motorists had the point shoved right down their idiot throats that the roads are NOT theirs and forced to either accept it and share the roads in a safe and responsible manner, or MOTORISTS can get off the roads.


For those who don't know the Black Spur. It is 30km of tight windy road with safety for road users not in cages. How low has the road been around? Over 150 years.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narbethong,_Victoria

Same could be said for the Great Western Highway out of Sydney......

User avatar
Thoglette
Posts: 4118
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:01 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby Thoglette » Fri Aug 10, 2018 11:06 am

ironhanglider wrote:Who was a boozy swine,
And just as sloshed as Schlegel.
Cheers

:-) ImageImageImage
Stop handing them the stick! - Dave Moulton
"People are worthy of respect, ideas are not." Peter Ellerton, UQ

User avatar
mikesbytes
Super Mod
Super Mod
Posts: 19085
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:42 pm
Location: Tempe, Sydney
Contact:

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby mikesbytes » Fri Aug 10, 2018 12:19 pm

Yeh but its a bit like as a kid you swam in the local creek but then they introduced crocodiles
If the R-1 rule is broken, what happens to N+1?

Return to “General Cycling Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users