Moron Motorists #3

open topic, for anything cycling related.

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby wellington_street » Wed Apr 30, 2014 12:11 pm

InTheWoods wrote:I don't think you understood what I meant.

You said
il padrone wrote: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.


And I said no that isn't always true. As rule 82 says (which I quoted), you cannot proceed at a zebra crossing even if the crossing is clear in front of you, if there is another car travelling in the same direction as you that has, is, or is the process of stopping to give way to somebody on the crossing.

As agreed, at childrens crossings you cannot proceed until the entire crossing is fully clear.


That would mean if there were two vehicles stopped at a crossing, it would be illegal for either vehicle to move unless they both moved at the exact same time??
wellington_street
 
Posts: 942
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 12:25 pm

by BNA » Wed Apr 30, 2014 12:15 pm

BNA
 

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby alexander » Wed Apr 30, 2014 12:15 pm

SheikYerbouti wrote:
alexander wrote:Seems another person has been hit and is now in critical condition.


The pic in this story http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/cyclist-fight ... zr1px.html can lead to believing that the postie may have been turning left, and if the cyclist came up their left hand side as they turned, the driver may not have seen him, and has caught him under their left size. Disclaimer, I drive trucks and they have big blind spots of person size down low on the left - cyclists have to understand where vehicle blind spots are and stay out of them. Regardless of what happened and whose fault it is I hope the poor guy is going to be OK.


true, I hadn't taken that into consideration. so additional option;

4. Cyclists and truck both traveling north, truck turns left, and cyclists doesn't see it or doesn't compensate enough, and gets dragged under truck.

I think this is more likely, now as I consider the damage, and where the cyclist ended up under the truck.
If you've got a $10 head, get a $10 helmet
alexander
 
Posts: 359
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 10:56 am
Location: Footscray

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby wellington_street » Wed Apr 30, 2014 12:18 pm

It's a very tight turn from Princes (nb) into May Street so it wouldn't surprise me if the truck has straddled the left and middle lanes to make the left turn. Cyclist comes up the left side and tries to pass? Real stupid behaviour.
wellington_street
 
Posts: 942
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 12:25 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby InTheWoods » Wed Apr 30, 2014 12:19 pm

wellington_street wrote:
InTheWoods wrote:I don't think you understood what I meant.

You said
il padrone wrote: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.


And I said no that isn't always true. As rule 82 says (which I quoted), you cannot proceed at a zebra crossing even if the crossing is clear in front of you, if there is another car travelling in the same direction as you that has, is, or is the process of stopping to give way to somebody on the crossing.

As agreed, at childrens crossings you cannot proceed until the entire crossing is fully clear.


That would mean if there were two vehicles stopped at a crossing, it would be illegal for either vehicle to move unless they both moved at the exact same time??


No? The exact words are "and is stopping, or has stopped", and you are simply not allowed to pass or overtake them.
Image
User avatar
InTheWoods
 
Posts: 1377
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 2:34 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby wellington_street » Wed Apr 30, 2014 12:28 pm

InTheWoods wrote:No? The exact words are "and is stopping, or has stopped", and you are simply not allowed to pass or overtake them.


Yeah, so if two vehicles have stopped, then if either vehicle proceeds it is passing a vehicle which has stopped to give way, which is illegal.
wellington_street
 
Posts: 942
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 12:25 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby jasonc » Wed Apr 30, 2014 12:46 pm

wellington_street wrote:
InTheWoods wrote:No? The exact words are "and is stopping, or has stopped", and you are simply not allowed to pass or overtake them.


Yeah, so if two vehicles have stopped, then if either vehicle proceeds it is passing a vehicle which has stopped to give way, which is illegal.


Please re-read what ITW wrote and then read your statement again.
Image
jasonc
 
Posts: 5603
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2011 2:40 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby SheikYerbouti » Wed Apr 30, 2014 12:48 pm

wellington_street wrote:Yeah, so if two vehicles have stopped, then if either vehicle proceeds it is passing a vehicle which has stopped to give way, which is illegal.



Bush lawyer time, eh?
" if there is another car travelling in the same direction as you that has, is, or is in the process of stopping to give way to somebody on the crossing."
Once the crossing is clear you're not giving way anymore, see? So off you go.
SheikYerbouti
 
Posts: 90
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2014 10:47 am

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby wellington_street » Wed Apr 30, 2014 1:02 pm

If the vehicle has not yet moved off, it has still stopped to give way. Just because the pedestrian has left the crossing, doesn't mean the vehicle is no longer stopped to give way.
wellington_street
 
Posts: 942
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 12:25 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby jasonc » Wed Apr 30, 2014 1:18 pm

wellington_street wrote:If the vehicle has not yet moved off, it has still stopped to give way. Just because the pedestrian has left the crossing, doesn't mean the vehicle is no longer stopped to give way.


really?

Image
Image
jasonc
 
Posts: 5603
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2011 2:40 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby Ross » Wed Apr 30, 2014 1:20 pm

Man blows .269 after Vic crash

http://www.news.com.au/national/breakin ... um=twitter

A MOTORIST who allegedly fled a road crash in Melbourne blew more than five times the legal blood alcohol limit in a breath test.
Police were called to a three-vehicle crash at Karingal, in Melbourne's south, on Tuesday afternoon and were told one of the drivers had fled the scene. No one was hurt.

They intercepted a driver at a nearby shopping centre and arrested him.

The Langwarrin man, 37, recorded a blood alcohol level of .269 in a breath test at Carrum Downs police station, police say.

He was charged with drink-driving and other traffic offences.

Image
User avatar
Ross
 
Posts: 3672
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 7:53 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby InTheWoods » Wed Apr 30, 2014 1:22 pm

wellington_street wrote:If the vehicle has not yet moved off, it has still stopped to give way. Just because the pedestrian has left the crossing, doesn't mean the vehicle is no longer stopped to give way.


Using that logic, if the other car sits there for another half hour with the engine going, it is still giving way to the pedestrian who has now finished doing their shopping and is coming back the other way?
Image
User avatar
InTheWoods
 
Posts: 1377
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 2:34 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby jasonc » Wed Apr 30, 2014 1:38 pm

InTheWoods wrote:
wellington_street wrote:If the vehicle has not yet moved off, it has still stopped to give way. Just because the pedestrian has left the crossing, doesn't mean the vehicle is no longer stopped to give way.


Using that logic, if the other car sits there for another half hour with the engine going, it is still giving way to the pedestrian who has now finished doing their shopping and is coming back the other way?


then the roads really will be a carpark. perfect
Image
jasonc
 
Posts: 5603
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2011 2:40 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby SheikYerbouti » Wed Apr 30, 2014 1:42 pm

wellington_street wrote:If the vehicle has not yet moved off, it has still stopped to give way. Just because the pedestrian has left the crossing, doesn't mean the vehicle is no longer stopped to give way.


What exactly are you on? I'm not sure I want some, but I'm curious.

http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/maint ... 008+cd+0+N

give way, for a driver or pedestrian, means:
(a) if the driver or pedestrian is stopped—remain stationary until it is safe to proceed


If it is safe to proceed, ie the crossing is clear, you are no longer giving way.

Hand in your licence mate, your inability to understand the basics of the road rules demonstrates a lack of competence.
SheikYerbouti
 
Posts: 90
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2014 10:47 am

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby wellington_street » Wed Apr 30, 2014 2:05 pm

Bit touchy this morning guys, geez.
wellington_street
 
Posts: 942
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 12:25 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby il padrone » Wed Apr 30, 2014 6:10 pm

InTheWoods wrote:
il padrone wrote:That is a different situation, someone who has not yet stopped and/or has not got a full clear view of the crossing. Yes, if someone has stopped to give way to a pedestrian, you too must stop, or else you will be very likely to hit the pedestrian.

After this when the pedestrian(s) are walking clear, you may drive on. For the school crossing (with flags) you must stop until the crossing is completely clear.


I don't think you understood what I meant.

You said
il padrone wrote: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.


And I said no that isn't always true. As rule 82 says (which I quoted), you cannot proceed at a zebra crossing even if the crossing is clear in front of you, if there is another car travelling in the same direction as you that has, is, or is the process of stopping to give way to somebody on the crossing.

As agreed, at childrens crossings you cannot proceed until the entire crossing is fully clear.

Gaaah! Like trying to skin eels.

I think we are arguing in profuse agreement, however...... my earlier comments about the rule as it applies to moving off refer to a situation, at a zebra crossing, where you are stopped already at a crossing ie. there is no overtaking happening. If the crossing is clear for you, you may proceed. You have given way as the rule requires and there is no more need to remain stopped. Rule 82 only refers to overtaking (ie ayour vehicle on approach), not the situation of moving off.

Your comment underlined above refers to a situation where the crossing may not be clear for you ie. another pedestrian now on the crossing. Rule 82 is not applicable.
Last edited by il padrone on Wed Apr 30, 2014 6:24 pm, edited 5 times in total.
Riding bikes in traffic - what seems dangerous is usually safe; what seems safe is often more dangerous.
User avatar
il padrone
 
Posts: 18161
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby bernard.carpenter » Wed Apr 30, 2014 6:13 pm

Red Rider wrote:
bernard.carpenter wrote:My first post. Hills district Sydney. Unfortunately I encounter someone like this quite regularly.
http://youtu.be/8SXTzIWyvbE


"Why don't you get your car and shove it up your ..." Amusing :mrgreen:
Very pointless manoeuvre by car driver. They obviously need to save their patience for the traffic jams :roll:


Yeah, amazing arrogance from BMW driver (what do you expect?!). I've watched the video a couple of times now and notice him weaving left and right busting a gut to get in front. Moron. It always amazes me that no matter how carefully we ride, no matter how quiet the morning traffic (it was "really" quiet that morning), there is always someone who wants to cause grief.
bernard.carpenter
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2014 5:56 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby DavidS » Wed Apr 30, 2014 11:40 pm

Got honked by a car while riding down the middle of the left lane on Glenhuntly Rd just before Nepean Hwy. The lights were red and I needed to get to the right lane to turn right. I really don't understand this - the lights were red and he had to stop not 10 seconds later.

Later saw a taxi turn across the bike lane on StKilda Rd and hit a cyclist. Luckily very slow and no damage but on StKilda Rd everyone knows there are a lot of bikes and there is no excuse for not looking when turning left.

2 morons in one morning!

DS
Image

Riding: Cannondale Quick Speed 2
User avatar
DavidS
 
Posts: 1311
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 11:24 pm
Location: Melbourne

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby Ross » Thu May 01, 2014 7:23 am

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_sXsXt ... r_embedded

12 yo girl lucky to recieve only cuts and bruises. Driver gets minimal punishment.

More on (geddit?!) story here - http://road.cc/content/news/117675-vide ... -girl-bike
Image
User avatar
Ross
 
Posts: 3672
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 7:53 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby warthog1 » Thu May 01, 2014 8:16 am

bernard.carpenter wrote:My first post. Hills district Sydney. Unfortunately I encounter someone like this quite regularly.
http://youtu.be/8SXTzIWyvbE



BMW driver is a self entitled tosser :roll:

Bit OT sorry, but what rear tyre is that and how goes it, wear and puncture resistance wise?
User avatar
warthog1
 
Posts: 2707
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:40 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby jasonc » Thu May 01, 2014 9:07 am

MM ute driver close shaves me. There was a red light ahead so he gets in front of my mate and moves as far left as he can to stop my mate filtering. I stop behind, notice the window open and yell out "what an A@#$%#$". He obviously hears me and asks me to repeat it. Which I did. He then yanks the handbrake and start to get out. By this time the light has gone green. I ride off. Yes I didn't contribute to the situation, but neither did his close shove. I'm cranky this morning, leave me alone.
Image
jasonc
 
Posts: 5603
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2011 2:40 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby Le Mong » Thu May 01, 2014 10:20 am

warthog1 wrote:
bernard.carpenter wrote:My first post. Hills district Sydney. Unfortunately I encounter someone like this quite regularly.
http://youtu.be/8SXTzIWyvbE



BMW driver is a self entitled tosser :roll:

Bit OT sorry, but what rear tyre is that and how goes it, wear and puncture resistance wise?


I'm guessing this is what he is using.

http://www.giant-bicycles.com/en-au/bik ... 897/66437/
Le Mong
 
Posts: 411
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 5:15 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby human909 » Thu May 01, 2014 10:36 am

Puncture resistance depends more on thickness, thread type&county and puncture stopping underlays.

Coloured tyres are normally a silicon based compound and don't have carbon black. Carbon black has excellent wear and traction properties, alternatives are almost universally inferior.
human909
 
Posts: 4727
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:48 am

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby alexander » Thu May 01, 2014 11:12 am

^ yeah either schwalbe big apples, or big bens
If you've got a $10 head, get a $10 helmet
alexander
 
Posts: 359
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 10:56 am
Location: Footscray

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby zero » Thu May 01, 2014 2:21 pm

bernard.carpenter wrote:
Yeah, amazing arrogance from BMW driver (what do you expect?!). I've watched the video a couple of times now and notice him weaving left and right busting a gut to get in front. Moron. It always amazes me that no matter how carefully we ride, no matter how quiet the morning traffic (it was "really" quiet that morning), there is always someone who wants to cause grief.


Whilst I don't do it myself, I can think about 1000 bicycle riders I've seen who on coming up on that BMW stopped at the lights would pass it and stop in front of it even if the road ahead was clear, so bear in mind that arrogance travels both ways with respect to traffic queues.
zero
 
Posts: 2617
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 1:54 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby dungee » Thu May 01, 2014 2:45 pm

Marto wrote:
herzog wrote:Hopefully they do actually handle it internally rather than simple delete your email.

It's a bit concerning that the poster above commented that it's a generic form letter.

The fact that they even *have* a form letter for this suggests that it's happening frequently enough. It also suggests that whatever they are doing to 'handle it internally' isn't having much of an effect on the behaviour of the drivers.


I've also received that form letter (in response to the "I dont give a s**t about the legislation" episode). It probably sits on their intranet under complaint letters, named cyclist_bus_complaint.doc, with [insert bus route] in the appropriate place.

Doesn't inspire much confidence that anything was done.


Well I received another response for Translink... I suppose I should have expected this.

Thank you for your contact with TransLink about route 267’s bus driver.

As you may be aware, TransLink undertook an investigation into the matters you raised. In consulting with our delivery partner, we were provided with the below information:

“After viewing the footage provided and further consultation with the police, it has been deemed that the driver performed appropriately on this occasion”.

We do apologise for the inconvenience or frustration you have experienced.


I'm not sure how the driving was appropriate? Anyhow back to riding up the middle of the road on Camp HIll, all those angry bus drivers can just queue up behind me at 21kph.
Image
User avatar
dungee
 
Posts: 230
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2011 7:14 pm

PreviousNext

Return to General discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: boss



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



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