Moron Motorists #3

open topic, for anything cycling related.

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby trailgumby » Sat Nov 30, 2013 11:14 am

Here's the incident from Wednesday night.

Before the arguments start about lights, I had AyUps on my helmet so I'm legally compliant. Was that enough? Maybe not. Nevertheless I think the issue was this P-plater just didn't look.

To add to the general sense of bizarrity(TM) is that I haven't used the camera for months. I put it on this morning with the thought "Silly season is about to start (ie, leadup to Christmas), maybe I should put on the camera." This was one of 3 incidents of the evening.

The first was nearly being hit head-on by a Coles delivery van because he was right over in the contra-flow bike lane in Middlemiss St Milsons Point. The traffic was really aggressive - I got caught unable to merge into the centre lane outside the Oaks Hotel at Neutral bay and was stuck behind parked cars for several minutes. Unbelievable for 9 oclock at night.

"People have a right to their own opinions, but not their own facts. Evidence must be located, not created, and opinions not backed by evidence cannot be given much weight." -- James W Loewen

http://www.facebook.com/Drive2WorkDay
User avatar
trailgumby
 
Posts: 10335
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 4:30 pm
Location: Northern Beaches, Sydney

by BNA » Sat Nov 30, 2013 11:23 am

BNA
 

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby il padrone » Sat Nov 30, 2013 11:23 am

BianchiCam wrote:Padrone, with the rate he was comin and the fact an oncoming car coming down, 'wiggling' was the last thing I was going to attempt. It's

Like I said, distance is everything when doing this. You need the 200m or so. The situation you faced (oncoming vehcle) is just the situation where the wiggle is effectve and of benefit to your safety. Last thing you want is a high-speed close-shave, and the oncoming car adds even more risk. I find that I make a nice wiggle (even with fast-moving trucks) when they are a good distance back, and they will back off and/or change lanes to overtake, subject to the oncoming traffic. Where there is oncoming traffic they must and do slow down until safe.

Just my experience on open roads over the past 30 years or so.
Riding bikes in traffic - what seems dangerous is usually safe; what seems safe is often more dangerous.
User avatar
il padrone
 
Posts: 18503
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby Lukeyboy » Sat Nov 30, 2013 12:40 pm

The boomgates up the road were activated and the lights at the intersection before started to change. One car was already braking before it went yellow but as soon as it did the brake lights went off. No big issue with that. But that was quickly followed by a Rav 4 cutting across the lane before braking then accelerating. I turned off but I decided to turn back to see how far the numpty got for his efforts. By the time I got back the traffic had just got the green light to go.

Image
User avatar
Lukeyboy
 
Posts: 2304
Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 2:38 am
Location: Brisbane

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby InTheWoods » Sat Nov 30, 2013 3:03 pm



This guy just flies around the corner, lucky I wasn't directly in the way because he could see me till the last moment.

100 meters down the road, I watch as he slows for a red light to let a turning car through, then just blows straight through the red light. Because as we all know, its only cyclists that run reds and if only we had registration we'd never do it :roll: (not that I do run red lights)

Silly driving but almost not worth uploading. Its a rainy day, what else is there to do.
Image
User avatar
InTheWoods
 
Posts: 1456
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 2:34 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby mattwilkinson » Sun Dec 01, 2013 1:53 pm

Not sure if this has already been covered but 7 News covered a Cycling Law story,

At the end they showed the video a member had posted up a while back here, Where a bus went past him by inches doing around 100
I wonder if they asked to use his video or not,

http://au.news.yahoo.com/qld/video/watc ... ling-laws/

It's near the end
Image
User avatar
mattwilkinson
 
Posts: 297
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 3:32 pm
Location: Bendigo, Victoria

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby InTheWoods » Sun Dec 01, 2013 2:10 pm

mattwilkinson wrote:Not sure if this has already been covered but 7 News covered a Cycling Law story,

At the end they showed the video a member had posted up a while back here, Where a bus went past him by inches doing around 100
I wonder if they asked to use his video or not,

http://au.news.yahoo.com/qld/video/watc ... ling-laws/

It's near the end


I don't believe its necessary to ask if the video is already in the public domain. Channel 7 have now shown that bus video and a couple of others on at least 3 different occasions now. Some of the videos shown were from submissions to the cycling inquiry, I think channel 7 read some submissions and found the youtube links. One of the vids was mine, and they didn't ask me, but I totally didn't mind.
Image
User avatar
InTheWoods
 
Posts: 1456
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 2:34 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby Lukeyboy » Sun Dec 01, 2013 2:27 pm

InTheWoods wrote:
mattwilkinson wrote:Not sure if this has already been covered but 7 News covered a Cycling Law story,

At the end they showed the video a member had posted up a while back here, Where a bus went past him by inches doing around 100
I wonder if they asked to use his video or not,

http://au.news.yahoo.com/qld/video/watc ... ling-laws/

It's near the end


I don't believe its necessary to ask if the video is already in the public domain. Channel 7 have now shown that bus video and a couple of others on at least 3 different occasions now. Some of the videos shown were from submissions to the cycling inquiry, I think channel 7 read some submissions and found the youtube links. One of the vids was mine, and they didn't ask me, but I totally didn't mind.



No difference. The laws here regarding news media can very very easily get around a lot that due to a clause in Australian copyright under the use of fair dealing for the purpose of reporting news. A while ago channel 10 aired about 30 seconds of unauthorized freelance video footage which was supposed to cost $65 per second. When the bloke sent channel 10 a receipt their lawyers brushed him off stating that clause in the copyright act.
Last edited by Lukeyboy on Sun Dec 01, 2013 2:40 pm, edited 5 times in total.
Image
User avatar
Lukeyboy
 
Posts: 2304
Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 2:38 am
Location: Brisbane

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby trailgumby » Sun Dec 01, 2013 2:30 pm

http://au.news.yahoo.com/qld/video/watc ... ling-laws/

I can't believe what I just heard come out of Ben Wilson's mouth. The man is an idiot. What is BQ doing keeping that muppet in a job? :roll:
"People have a right to their own opinions, but not their own facts. Evidence must be located, not created, and opinions not backed by evidence cannot be given much weight." -- James W Loewen

http://www.facebook.com/Drive2WorkDay
User avatar
trailgumby
 
Posts: 10335
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 4:30 pm
Location: Northern Beaches, Sydney

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby cowled » Sun Dec 01, 2013 2:35 pm

trailgumby wrote:http://au.news.yahoo.com/qld/video/watch/20076435/qld-reassesses-cycling-laws/

I can't believe what I just heard come out of Ben Wilson's mouth. The man is an idiot. What is BQ doing keeping that muppet in a job? :roll:


Indeed. I have no idea why BQ are so vocally opposed to the passing rule. He might be correct but that's not a good enough reason to publicly oppose such a positive change to the law.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk
cowled
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 9:33 am

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby zero » Sun Dec 01, 2013 2:39 pm

cowled wrote:
trailgumby wrote:http://au.news.yahoo.com/qld/video/watch/20076435/qld-reassesses-cycling-laws/

I can't believe what I just heard come out of Ben Wilson's mouth. The man is an idiot. What is BQ doing keeping that muppet in a job? :roll:


Indeed. I have no idea why BQ are so vocally opposed to the passing rule. He might be correct but that's not a good enough reason to publicly oppose such a positive change to the law.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk


Is he against the law, or pointing out as I have on numerous occasions that its a difficult / near impossible law to enforce ?
zero
 
Posts: 2635
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 1:54 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby cowled » Sun Dec 01, 2013 2:48 pm

zero wrote:Is he against the law, or pointing out as I have on numerous occasions that its a difficult / near impossible law to enforce ?


I think he is of the view that the existing laws should be properly enforced, in which case the 1m rule would be unnecessary. Also BQ have repeatedly stated that there is no evidence that these laws actually reduce the number of deaths on our roads. I'm not sure that he is right on that point, but it is damn near impossible to prove that he's wrong because there is not enough data.

IMHO BQ should have kept their damn mouth shut on this issue. There is no doubt in my mind that the 1m rule will be a good thing for cycling.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk
cowled
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 9:33 am

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby biker jk » Sun Dec 01, 2013 2:51 pm

zero wrote:
cowled wrote:
trailgumby wrote:http://au.news.yahoo.com/qld/video/watch/20076435/qld-reassesses-cycling-laws/

I can't believe what I just heard come out of Ben Wilson's mouth. The man is an idiot. What is BQ doing keeping that muppet in a job? :roll:


Indeed. I have no idea why BQ are so vocally opposed to the passing rule. He might be correct but that's not a good enough reason to publicly oppose such a positive change to the law.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk


Is he against the law, or pointing out as I have on numerous occasions that its a difficult / near impossible law to enforce ?


In the video he suggests it's not implementable. I don' t think this is the point. It's about changing mentality about what is a safe when passing a cyclist. I would have thought that all cycling organisations would support this cause.
User avatar
biker jk
 
Posts: 2691
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby myforwik » Sun Dec 01, 2013 9:49 pm

I am sort of torn on the minimum distance. I think it will make most situations way safer, but i still don't see it being practical.

i just think about all the 70km/hr multilane roads i sometimes ride on, if drivers are really going to give me 1.5 meters, it would mean i basically take up the whole left lane. that in peak hour every one will have to move to the right lane to get past... i cant picture it.

i fear that it will just become a risk that drivers take. They might know if they hit me, they cant use the 'i thought it was a safe distance' defence anymore, but they will still roll the dice and back themselves not to hit us.

i also think 1m is the sort of exact distance people completely cant interpret. i can see the police giving the benefit of the doubt to the drivers all the way down to probably 1 foot.
myforwik
 
Posts: 287
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 7:08 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby human909 » Sun Dec 01, 2013 10:17 pm

myforwik wrote:i just think about all the 70km/hr multilane roads i sometimes ride on, if drivers are really going to give me 1.5 meters, it would mean i basically take up the whole left lane. that in peak hour every one will have to move to the right lane to get past... i cant picture it.


That is the point! Motorists need to give cyclists more space! The alternative is more deaths. The reality is that simple.

I rode 70km on the weekend and by keeping appropriate road position 99.5% of the cars changed into the right hand lane and passed appropriately.
human909
 
Posts: 4893
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:48 am

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby il padrone » Sun Dec 01, 2013 10:20 pm

human909 wrote:by keeping appropriate road position 99.5% of the cars changed into the right hand lane and passed appropriately.

+1

This is the same approach I take and I have few concerns - even on open rural 100kmh roads, or busy urban 70-80km multi-lane roads.
Riding bikes in traffic - what seems dangerous is usually safe; what seems safe is often more dangerous.
User avatar
il padrone
 
Posts: 18503
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby arkle » Mon Dec 02, 2013 1:58 am

zero wrote:
cowled wrote:
trailgumby wrote:http://au.news.yahoo.com/qld/video/watch/20076435/qld-reassesses-cycling-laws/

I can't believe what I just heard come out of Ben Wilson's mouth. The man is an idiot. What is BQ doing keeping that muppet in a job? :roll:


Indeed. I have no idea why BQ are so vocally opposed to the passing rule. He might be correct but that's not a good enough reason to publicly oppose such a positive change to the law.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk


Is he against the law, or pointing out as I have on numerous occasions that its a difficult / near impossible law to enforce ?


I don't see the passing law as a regulation that will be enforced in every situation, but as a wake up call and deterrent to those drivers who currently deliberately close shave cyclists to scare or intimidate them, or to overtake them when there is not enough space. The law would become very enforcible after a collision like cowled's, but with drivers knowing that such a law now exists, I think they''d be more careful in the future because they'd have no defence.

arkle
arkle
 
Posts: 673
Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 1:46 pm
Location: Bridgewater, SA

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby Wakatuki » Mon Dec 02, 2013 6:29 am

Didn't do much riding this weekend, but since the news article I have only encountered one MM and he obviously had a grudge, thankfully all took place at low speed three of us in the pack and he was after us all. Even grandpa walking his dog shouted at him. Other than him all nice wide passes, most well over the line or hanging back till safe. It seems motorists think the law is already imposed. Oh and BQ are morons. :lol:
User avatar
Wakatuki
 
Posts: 784
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2012 5:15 pm
Location: Qld

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby jules21 » Mon Dec 02, 2013 9:46 am

arkle wrote:The law would become very enforcible after a collision like cowled's, but with drivers knowing that such a law now exists, I think they''d be more careful in the future because they'd have no defence.

i wouldn't count on that. the existing law already calls for a safe passing distance. while it doesn't have a figure on it, drivers know that hitting a cyclist is not enough distance. even when that has happened, courts (juries) have been reluctant to enforce it. i don't see a 1m rule helping much there. hopefully the benefit will be to educate drivers about the need to leave a safe distance. i understand BQ's skepticism - it's unclear precisely what and how big the benefit of the rule would be. still - it's great to see the govt taking positive action.
Image
User avatar
jules21
 
Posts: 8729
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 10:14 pm
Location: deep in the pain cave

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby arkle » Mon Dec 02, 2013 11:44 am

jules21 wrote:
arkle wrote:The law would become very enforcible after a collision like cowled's, but with drivers knowing that such a law now exists, I think they''d be more careful in the future because they'd have no defence.

i wouldn't count on that. the existing law already calls for a safe passing distance. while it doesn't have a figure on it, drivers know that hitting a cyclist is not enough distance. even when that has happened, courts (juries) have been reluctant to enforce it. i don't see a 1m rule helping much there. hopefully the benefit will be to educate drivers about the need to leave a safe distance. i understand BQ's skepticism - it's unclear precisely what and how big the benefit of the rule would be. still - it's great to see the govt taking positive action.


What I mean is that whereas in cowled's case the most serious offence that the driver could be charged with (in the absence of witnesses or footage) might be "following too closely" for which the penalties are rather lenient, under the new law it would impossible for a driver to claim that he or she left a metre of clearance whilst overtaking, since a collision occurred. It shouldn't be hard to convict someone of that when they are known to have actually made contact with the bicycle. And the penalty is harsher.

arkle
arkle
 
Posts: 673
Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 1:46 pm
Location: Bridgewater, SA

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby wellington_street » Mon Dec 02, 2013 12:08 pm

trailgumby wrote:


No doubt that the moron who changed lanes is at fault, however you could have avoided the incident by not accelerating after the blinker came on.

Funnily enough I was having this same discussion on a motorists forum a few days ago - while you're "in the right", defensive driving/riding is a good idea to avoid incidents from morons.
wellington_street
 
Posts: 994
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 12:25 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby zero » Mon Dec 02, 2013 12:13 pm

arkle wrote:
jules21 wrote:
arkle wrote:The law would become very enforcible after a collision like cowled's, but with drivers knowing that such a law now exists, I think they''d be more careful in the future because they'd have no defence.

i wouldn't count on that. the existing law already calls for a safe passing distance. while it doesn't have a figure on it, drivers know that hitting a cyclist is not enough distance. even when that has happened, courts (juries) have been reluctant to enforce it. i don't see a 1m rule helping much there. hopefully the benefit will be to educate drivers about the need to leave a safe distance. i understand BQ's skepticism - it's unclear precisely what and how big the benefit of the rule would be. still - it's great to see the govt taking positive action.


What I mean is that whereas in cowled's case the most serious offence that the driver could be charged with (in the absence of witnesses or footage) might be "following too closely" for which the penalties are rather lenient, under the new law it would impossible for a driver to claim that he or she left a metre of clearance whilst overtaking, since a collision occurred. It shouldn't be hard to convict someone of that when they are known to have actually made contact with the bicycle. And the penalty is harsher.

arkle


That was police incompetence, which the QLD police don't seem to care about (not even to the minor extent of writing an apology), and is more likely to occur to any perceived minority, and is still just as likely to occur post law change (as the correct charges for the actual evidence had they bothered to gather it was 2x fail to overtake safely, and not 1x follow too closely). Also the massive upper end penalties bandied about are not what is going to appear on an infringement ticket (ie the maximum fine for many offences is very large if its a judge imposing it, and not a police officers infringement ticket).
zero
 
Posts: 2635
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 1:54 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby InTheWoods » Mon Dec 02, 2013 12:48 pm

There is a thread for the qld petition, maybe this discussion could be moved there. But I'll just quote a few relevent things from the actual report tabled to parliament.

The real impact of the introduction of this provision (and accompanying provisions) is in the
education and awareness of the new and amended road rules. It is keenly anticipated that an
appropriate education campaign will assist in stimulating a change in culture from one of a mix of
apathy and aggression to one of mutual respect on the road. Indeed it is imperative that education of
the new road rules not only informs the public of what they need to do in relation to cyclists on the
road, but triggers a dramatic shift in cultural attitudes. (see sections 9 and 10 of this Report for a
detailed discussion on education and cultural change).

Next to a reduction in fatalities and serious injuries for cyclists on our roads, the most highly
anticipated outcome is for motorists to view cyclists as human beings. It is this cultural shift that may
be the ultimate factor in increasing safety for cyclists on our roads.


And:
4.2.6 Potential benefits of introducing a MOD rule
 recognises that cyclists are physically vulnerable and are need the protection of space
 increased awareness that cyclists are legitimate road users
 establishes a cyclist’s right to space and potentially improves their interactions with
motorists
 increase the level of safety of cyclists by reducing the risk of them being hit or side-swiped
 clarifies the ambiguity in current legislation where overtaking is specified as at a ‘safe
distance’ or the driver is to take ‘due care’
 can be used as an educational tool to increase safe practices through the use of Billboards,
bumper stickers, posters and cycling jerseys
 enforceable if a law enforcement officer or witness observes a driver’s behaviour
 the combination of education and legislation to assist in crystalising cycling safety in the
minds of motorists
 assist in positively changing attitudes and culture in Queensland and potentially Australia
wide

 aids vulnerable road users by addressing a risk factor (passing too closely) that is largely out
of the control of the cyclist themselves
 works in combination with other recommendations which place an onus on the cyclist to
take responsibility (such as wearing bicycle lights).


Difficulty with enforcement and penalty provisions may pose an issue. Research has shown that MOD
laws in other countries are not utilised frequently and that it is the education campaign combined
with the fact that a motorist could face a penalty that aids in changing behaviour.


The Committee would like to stress that its recommendation that a minimum overtaking distance law
be introduced is only one initiative in a holistic approach to addressing cycling issues. The Committee
does not advocate that one law alone or even a series of laws and penalties will solve such a complex
problem. Accordingly, the Committee is attempting to comprehensively address the issue through a
broad set of solutions (discussed elsewhere in this Report) including infrastructure, other road rules
(for example, bicycle riders to wear lights), and education and awareness.


I'll stop there.
Image
User avatar
InTheWoods
 
Posts: 1456
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 2:34 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby arkle » Mon Dec 02, 2013 1:09 pm

wellington_street wrote:
trailgumby wrote:


No doubt that the moron who changed lanes is at fault, however you could have avoided the incident by not accelerating after the blinker came on.

Funnily enough I was having this same discussion on a motorists forum a few days ago - while you're "in the right", defensive driving/riding is a good idea to avoid incidents from morons.


This is what I was talking about in my previous post about cooperation between road users in the UK. If you start indicating to change lanes people will generally go out of their way to let you in with a flash and a smile, rather than ignore the indicator and accelerate up the side of your car and make it difficult for you. The law regarding giving way is balanced by the convenience that cooperation brings to everyone.

arkle
arkle
 
Posts: 673
Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 1:46 pm
Location: Bridgewater, SA

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby DarrylH » Mon Dec 02, 2013 2:24 pm

Also, lights on top of a helmet may be too high to be seen in a rear view mirror at that range. Cars have rules for light height - is there any rule for bikes?
DarrylH
 
Posts: 443
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 4:33 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby jasonc » Mon Dec 02, 2013 2:27 pm

DarrylH wrote:Also, lights on top of a helmet may be too high to be seen in a rear view mirror at that range. Cars have rules for light height - is there any rule for bikes?


TMR just says:

Riding at night (s259)
When riding at night or in hazardous weather conditions with reduced visibility, you must display on your bicycle or yourself


http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/Safety/Queens ... rules.aspx
Image
jasonc
 
Posts: 6062
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2011 2:40 pm
Location: Brisbane

PreviousNext

Return to General discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users



Popular Bike Shops
Torpedo 7 Torpedo7 AU
Ground Effect Ground Effect NZ
Chain Reaction Cycles CRC UK
Wiggle Wiggle UK
Ebay Ebay AU

“Bicycles BNA Twitter
“Bicycles BNA Facebook
“Google+ BNA Google+
“Bicycles BNA Newsletter

> FREE BNA Stickers
> BNA Cycling Kit