As much as it pains me to do this sort of thing, I am posting this thread as a warning for Brisbane Cyclists.
This chick HATES cyclists and apparently owns the road! Came within 30cm of clipping myself and my buddy this morning, even riding single file with a completely empty lane beside her she still swerved at us.
If you see her out there exercise extreme caution.
If you know this woman let her know that she is an idiot and that none of her stupid reasons for her actions are a valid excuse for her actions.
When we caught her at the lights and asked her to explain her actions she explained the following points to us:
* we were in HER lane
* the lane is narrow
* it is dangerous for us to be there
* there is a bike lane that we could have been using instead
Apparently any of these reasons are acceptable reasons for why she is within her rights to veer towards us.
I hope you made a complaint to police. While they may not do as much as you think that is the right course of action against a dangerous driver, whether on a bike or in another vehicle.
Where is that? Indro?
Report her to the police, though why do I think that is a waste of time.
It's idiots like this that get the gaul to take it one step further, from idiots like Magda, Shane-o; and even Spencer Howson on ABC radio keeps bringing up the rego thang.
Grey Street bridge inbound from Southbank.
So there is a "bike path" beside the road but AFAIK we are not compelled to use it.
We were doing about 30km/h, the road was quiet and the right hand lane was empty.
The car continued through toward Kelvin Grove Road before we lost sight of her so I am assuming she was heading to the Northern Suburbs.
Sorry to hear about your close call.
We desperately need a television add campaign to try and change drivers attitudes and make them understand that cyclists are valid road users and have a perfect right to use the lane.
I have had similar incidents myself and when I talked to the car driver I was told they believed cyclists had no legal right to be blocking the road and worse that we were obliged to give way to them. I found this extremely scary since I assumed most motorists realised cyclists were valid road users but just disliked the fact. I have since talked to many of my friends who drive and found this situation is not uncommon and that in most motorists minds there is a grey area which fails to acknowledge a cyclist as another vehicle or indeed even see them as a sort of pedestrian - we are non- entities.
I was glad to see the " 1 meter matters " champaign but think it failed to stress that cyclists are valid road users.
Sadly my own wife (non cyclist) thought I had to use a bikepath if it was available.
When I told her that this was not the case she asked "well how would a motorist know that?".
I guess it is a somewhat fair question as when she got her license there was basically no such thing as bikepath's.
I dont hang much faith on the metre matters campaign. It is too wishy washy and the feedback I have seen on it from the US 3 foot rule is that it has not really had any impact.
I believe that a rule where the driver is always in the wrong until they can prove otherwise may work better.
Sadly it seems that seatbelts, drink driving and speeding are far more important at all levels of Government.
Good thing you caught up to her , hope you explained to her what you thought of her actions
Btw I was impressed at how many cyclists were out this morning around the city, looked to be more bikes than cars heading up and down Highgate hill
Last edited by stats on Thu Jan 26, 2012 1:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Not that I saw.
I would have been less inclined to confront her with kids in the car.
It would be quite scary for them and it is not their fault that their mother is an idiot.
This drives straight to the heart of the aggression against cyclists issue. Drivers do not know the road rules in relation to cyclists.
As a cyclist, I didn't even know the rules until I downloaded the manual and read them.
The govt is responsible for this because they allow people to get licenses, without having to know cyclist's rights.
The solution is pretty obvious, well at least to me.
And even then you only think you know the rules.
Much of the rules are open for interpretation and your interpretation may not be the same as what another person may read.
But to be honest there is no excuse (whether the cyclist is doing something wrong or not) to take matters into your own hands and endanger them purposely.
None of those reasons justifies her actions.
On the other hand, when bike lanes exist, ....................................................................................
It is actually a shared footpath so therefore no different to any other footpath that is NOT specified as no bikes.
If we were to go by that thinking we would never be able to ride on a road where there is a footpath.
An Anti-Police sticker would be better
2012 Oppy A4
Not fun. Glad you made it.
Did she have a vacuous English accent?
...whatever the road rules, self-preservation is the absolute priority for a cyclist when mixing it with motorised traffic.
London Boy 29/12/2011
Nup, it's a bike rack mount, exactly the same as the one we have.
Bike lanes are often inappropriate at best unsafe at worst. A cyclist is a legitimate road user. The mis-understanding of this issue alone is reason enough to justify mandatory periodic retesting for drivers' licences. Dog only knows how many other misconceptions drivers are labouring under
No, I don't think it is a load-leveler.
I think it is the base plate for a bike carrier, the sort which can be folded down to allow the rear door of car to open.
OOPS - looks like I have been narrowly beaten in time to point this out by RobertFrith in the previous post
"Technology gives us much more information but Education is never be able to give us the skill to evaluate it"
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users