Cyclists allowed to ride on the footpath

Postby Kalgrm » Mon Sep 22, 2008 4:15 pm

kwv,

There are many instances of inconsistencies in various legislation across Australia. They come about because laws evolve over time - they aren't often completely thrown out and replaced with a new set of laws.

I'd guess that cyclists riding on footpaths in QLD is carried over from some previous laws and was never removed as it should have been.

Why don't you write to your local MP and ask them to look into it? There isn't really very much we can do as an internet forum except argue amongst ourselves - if you want to change things, you'll need to tackle it for yourself.

Cheers,
Graeme
Think outside the double triangle.
---------------------------------------
My web site: www.scenebyhird.com
---------------------------------------
The Bicycle Transportation Alliance
User avatar
Kalgrm
Super Mod
Super Mod
 
Posts: 9236
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 5:21 pm
Location: Spearwood, 9km SE of Fremantle, WA

by BNA » Mon Sep 22, 2008 4:16 pm

BNA
 

Postby kwv » Mon Sep 22, 2008 4:16 pm

Kalgrm wrote:kwv,

Matt's comment was based on the fact that the issue IS controversial and it was your first ever post on the forum (welcome, by the way).

What was your original question? What would you like us to comment on?

The law in QLD is that riders can use the footpath. As far as I know, that's the only state in Oz where it is legal to do so. No cyclists are breaking the law when they ride their bikes on the footpaths in QLD.

That's why you received little response from the authorities you contacted.

Cheers,
Graeme


Graeme,
Thanks for the welcome I think?

And if you look at my orginal comment you would have noticed my orginal question?

Also get out into the real world and check that not only is The ACT where this happens.

But you would have noticed cyclists are in fact breaking the law, when they ride straight onto a pedestrians (not cyclist crossing) crossing, as you supposed to walk your bike across.

And did you check facts before replying?

No I didn't think so.

As you don't know why I received little,no or poor response from the authorities I contacted.
kwv
 

Postby Kalgrm » Mon Sep 22, 2008 4:17 pm

kwv wrote:
Kalgrm wrote:
eliza wrote:where's kwv gone?
maybe she/he was a troll?! :shock:

kwv is probably waiting to see how we respond and waiting to find out if we are going to insult him or her some more. I think I can understand the reaction, given the icy reception offered.

Cheers,
Graeme


Reading your own comments Graeme, we all can see how you react when you cannot face someone expressing an opinion and asking question, you do not like?

Now got anything useful to write on my opinion or are you going to be ice cold again?

Okay kwv,

I'll stop defending you now. You're on your own.

Good luck against the wolves.

Graeme
Think outside the double triangle.
---------------------------------------
My web site: www.scenebyhird.com
---------------------------------------
The Bicycle Transportation Alliance
User avatar
Kalgrm
Super Mod
Super Mod
 
Posts: 9236
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 5:21 pm
Location: Spearwood, 9km SE of Fremantle, WA

Postby eliza » Mon Sep 22, 2008 4:18 pm

Mulger bill wrote:Layered traffic lights would be a great idea, you can DIY if you be so inclined :wink:


yes, i am so inclined.
but are you just talking about running the red light?
what is the diy inclination you are referring to? :?
Melancholy is incompatible with bicycling. ~James E. Starrs
eliza
 
Posts: 80
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 5:17 pm
Location: sunnybank hills

Postby kwv » Mon Sep 22, 2008 4:18 pm

Kalgrm wrote:kwv,

There are many instances of inconsistencies in various legislation across Australia. They come about because laws evolve over time - they aren't often completely thrown out and replaced with a new set of laws.

I'd guess that cyclists riding on footpaths in QLD is carried over from some previous laws and was never removed as it should have been.

Why don't you write to your local MP and ask them to look into it? There isn't really very much we can do as an internet forum except argue amongst ourselves - if you want to change things, you'll need to tackle it for yourself.

Cheers,
Graeme


Graeme,
I think you should check the facts especially the laws, as the law allowing cyclists to ride on the footpath is not a law carried over fron previous law, but a new law.

And reading your own comments, you are good at arguing when facing reality?
kwv
 

Postby kwv » Mon Sep 22, 2008 4:21 pm

Kalgrm wrote:
kwv wrote:
Kalgrm wrote:
eliza wrote:where's kwv gone?
maybe she/he was a troll?! :shock:

kwv is probably waiting to see how we respond and waiting to find out if we are going to insult him or her some more. I think I can understand the reaction, given the icy reception offered.

Cheers,
Graeme


Reading your own comments Graeme, we all can see how you react when you cannot face someone expressing an opinion and asking question, you do not like?

Now got anything useful to write on my opinion or are you going to be ice cold again?

Okay kwv,

I'll stop defending you now. You're on your own.

Good luck against the wolves.

Graeme


Graeme,
I don't need someone like you to defend me, but thanks.

But good luck facing reality and getting facts before replying again.

Come in abuse and write stupid comments that prove you don't check facts and then run and hide, how brave is someone Greme?
kwv
 

Postby kwv » Mon Sep 22, 2008 4:26 pm

Aushiker wrote:
eliza wrote:where's kwv gone?


Riding? I don't think a day or two delay in replying is a big deal.

Andrew


Hi Andrew,
Yes I don't think a day or two delay in replying is a big deal, but I think Eliza misses me? :wink:

But i think it has something to do with not having Internet Access at home.
kwv
 

Re: Cyclists allowed to ride on the footpath

Postby Kalgrm » Mon Sep 22, 2008 4:27 pm

kwv wrote:As I got a very poor, slow and no response from Brisbane Council especially The CEO and The Lord Mayor, but the cycling Unit of Queensland Transport and The Minister for Transport.

Because they don't really care if lives are at risk and many cyclists break the law?

Can someone explain how can allowing cyclists to ride a legal road vehicle on the footpath be a sane and safe idea?

Especially when not only just a few cyclists but many ride in a very dangerous manner.

Such as against the red and straight off the footpath onto a pedestrians crossing especially at The Intersection of Vulture and Biundary St West End and The crossing on North Quay end of Victoria Bridge?


But a USA based cyclists group said allowing cyclists to ride on the footpath is a stupid and dangerous idea.

PS Yes there are drivers who run the red, so why do some cyclists thinks this an excuse to do the same?

PPS If they don't change The Local Laws so cyclists are not allowed to ride an legal road vehicle on the footpath, maybe there should a new law allowing motorists to drive and park an legal road vehicle (The Car) on the footpath?

Regarding your first post, quoted above: All questions are highlighted, and few of them are coherent enough to answer. The blue one is coherent enough, so I'll tackle that.

Answer: it isn't safe or sane, which is why it is not legal in most parts of Australia

The red one: Surely that's rhetorical, isn't it? Bad riders are everywhere, just as there are bad drivers. That obviously doesn't make either group's actions legal. What makes you think we can answer it logically?

Graeme
Think outside the double triangle.
---------------------------------------
My web site: www.scenebyhird.com
---------------------------------------
The Bicycle Transportation Alliance
User avatar
Kalgrm
Super Mod
Super Mod
 
Posts: 9236
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 5:21 pm
Location: Spearwood, 9km SE of Fremantle, WA

Postby kwv » Mon Sep 22, 2008 4:28 pm

eliza wrote:where's kwv gone?
maybe she/he was a troll?! :shock:


zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
kwv
 

Postby Aushiker » Mon Sep 22, 2008 4:29 pm

kwv wrote:Graeme,
I don't need someone like you to defend me, but thanks.

But good luck facing reality and getting facts before replying again.

Come in abuse and write stupid comments that prove you don't check facts and then run and hide, how brave is someone Greme?


With the greatest respect, maybe you should go back and read what Graeme wrote and the context in which he wrote it. He was supporting you and for that you abuse him, all within eight posts! I guess you took a bit of trouble to get to now him first :wink: . Not nice at all, me thinks

Oh thanks for clarifying your opening post.

Regards
Andrew
"Pedal-pounding pounce" - D. Fluellen - West Australian 13/1/14
Image
User avatar
Aushiker
 
Posts: 20188
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 1:55 pm
Location: Fremantle, WA

Postby eliza » Mon Sep 22, 2008 4:41 pm

kwv wrote: I think Eliza misses me? :wink:


wot?!
don't wink at me.
Melancholy is incompatible with bicycling. ~James E. Starrs
eliza
 
Posts: 80
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 5:17 pm
Location: sunnybank hills

Postby Kalgrm » Mon Sep 22, 2008 4:51 pm

kwv wrote:Graeme,
I don't need someone like you to defend me, but thanks.

But good luck facing reality and getting facts before replying again.

Come in abuse and write stupid comments that prove you don't check facts and then run and hide, how brave is someone Greme?

"You're heading the right way for a smacked bottom, Donkey."


If you want to act like a child, expect to get treated like one.

Graeme
Think outside the double triangle.
---------------------------------------
My web site: www.scenebyhird.com
---------------------------------------
The Bicycle Transportation Alliance
User avatar
Kalgrm
Super Mod
Super Mod
 
Posts: 9236
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 5:21 pm
Location: Spearwood, 9km SE of Fremantle, WA

Postby baarg » Mon Sep 22, 2008 5:00 pm

Aushiker wrote:
kwv wrote:Graeme,
I don't need someone like you to defend me, but thanks.

But good luck facing reality and getting facts before replying again.

Come in abuse and write stupid comments that prove you don't check facts and then run and hide, how brave is someone Greme?


With the greatest respect, maybe you should go back and read what Graeme wrote and the context in which he wrote it. He was supporting you and for that you abuse him, all within eight posts! I guess you took a bit of trouble to get to now him first :wink: . Not nice at all, me thinks

Oh thanks for clarifying your opening post.

Regards
Andrew


+1!!!!
I honestly read all this post with a WT?! face! :shock:
User avatar
baarg
 
Posts: 63
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2008 6:04 pm
Location: Brisbane

Postby kwv » Mon Sep 22, 2008 5:41 pm

Kalgrm wrote:
kwv wrote:Graeme,
I don't need someone like you to defend me, but thanks.

But good luck facing reality and getting facts before replying again.

Come in abuse and write stupid comments that prove you don't check facts and then run and hide, how brave is someone Greme?

"You're heading the right way for a smacked bottom, Donkey."


If you want to act like a child, expect to get treated like one.

Graeme


Graeme me act like an child?

Have you read your own comments?

And so if you don't like others expressing an opinion, as proven by your stupid comments then don't reply.
kwv
 

Postby kwv » Mon Sep 22, 2008 5:44 pm

eliza wrote:
kwv wrote: I think Eliza misses me? :wink:


wot?!
don't wink at me.


And don't claim I am a troll Liz.

Simple.
kwv
 

Postby kwv » Mon Sep 22, 2008 5:49 pm

Aushiker wrote:
kwv wrote:Graeme,
I don't need someone like you to defend me, but thanks.

But good luck facing reality and getting facts before replying again.

Come in abuse and write stupid comments that prove you don't check facts and then run and hide, how brave is someone Greme?


With the greatest respect, maybe you should go back and read what Graeme wrote and the context in which he wrote it. He was supporting you and for that you abuse him, all within eight posts! I guess you took a bit of trouble to get to now him first :wink: . Not nice at all, me thinks

Oh thanks for clarifying your opening post.

Regards
Andrew


Hi Andrew and you are welcome regarding clarifying my opening post.

And I well say sorry to Graeme if someone can point out without changing the words, when he was fact defending me, as I don't think writing stupid comments was defending someone?

Also I think Graeme should say sorry for going off track (ok the bike path) and writing comments that was not Logical and not related to my opinion.
kwv
 

Re: Cyclists allowed to ride on the footpath

Postby kwv » Mon Sep 22, 2008 5:53 pm

Kalgrm wrote:
kwv wrote:As I got a very poor, slow and no response from Brisbane Council especially The CEO and The Lord Mayor, but the cycling Unit of Queensland Transport and The Minister for Transport.

Because they don't really care if lives are at risk and many cyclists break the law?

Can someone explain how can allowing cyclists to ride a legal road vehicle on the footpath be a sane and safe idea?

Especially when not only just a few cyclists but many ride in a very dangerous manner.

Such as against the red and straight off the footpath onto a pedestrians crossing especially at The Intersection of Vulture and Biundary St West End and The crossing on North Quay end of Victoria Bridge?


But a USA based cyclists group said allowing cyclists to ride on the footpath is a stupid and dangerous idea.

PS Yes there are drivers who run the red, so why do some cyclists thinks this an excuse to do the same?

PPS If they don't change The Local Laws so cyclists are not allowed to ride an legal road vehicle on the footpath, maybe there should a new law allowing motorists to drive and park an legal road vehicle (The Car) on the footpath?

Regarding your first post, quoted above: All questions are highlighted, and few of them are coherent enough to answer. The blue one is coherent enough, so I'll tackle that.

Answer: it isn't safe or sane, which is why it is not legal in most parts of Australia

The red one: Surely that's rhetorical, isn't it? Bad riders are everywhere, just as there are bad drivers. That obviously doesn't make either group's actions legal. What makes you think we can answer it logically?

Graeme


Yes Graeme this time your comments was coherent enough to answer.

Thanks :-)

Allowing all cyclists to ride on the footpath only in The ACT and QLD depending on The Local Government in QLD, proves it isn't safe and sane?

But isn't there some cyclist's who thinks, if a driver can run the red we can do the same?
kwv
 

Postby kwv » Mon Sep 22, 2008 5:56 pm

Can someone explain how can allowing cyclists to ride a legal road vehicle on the footpath be a sane and safe idea?

Especially when it is not legal in all places of Australia and a USA Cycling group said it is a dangerous and stupid idea.
kwv
 

Postby Lark2004 » Mon Sep 22, 2008 6:04 pm

kwv,

I really don't follow what you expect to come of this post.....

Are you a cyclist who doesn't like seeing other cyclist's breaking the law?

or

Are you a pedestrian who has nearly been/ has been knocked over by a cyclist on a footpath?

Do you think we have some say in Qld's law making process?.... we have about as much say as you do..... and to be honest, with the way many of Brisbane roads are, you are taking your life into your hands to ride on them, when there is the reletive safty of a path a few metre's away.

I drive a truck for a living, and to be honest, I like the fact that many cyclist's use the path in places where the roads aren't safe. Some cyclists will use the road all the time, and I give them as much room as I can, but sometimes this act in itself then puts me at risk, as many motorists don't care about the cyclists, and try to force me back over before I've safley passed. Other times it is not safe to overtake the cyclist at all, and I will slow down until safe to pass, once again, I get abused by other trucks, motorists, even the police on one occasion, for holding them up.

I think you need to do a bit more research before starting up such a provocative post, and also you should provide a bit more information about yourself, so that we can gain some perspective into where you are coming from with all this.
Andrew
User avatar
Lark2004
 
Posts: 1455
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 3:02 pm
Location: Lawnton, 25k north of Brisbane

Postby Kalgrm » Mon Sep 22, 2008 6:08 pm

You must be kidding kwv. Is English not your native language? That may explain why your writing style is so hard to follow. It would also explain why you fail to comprehend what's written in plain English for you to read. If you did learn English as your first language, the only other explanation for your reprehensible behaviour is a sociopathic personality.

Here are some instances of me defending your right to make a tool of yourself.

Kalgrm wrote:Oh, and see that little "Super Mod" icon on the left of the screen, right underneath my name? That means I read a lot of posts on the forum which have little to do with me so I can make sure people are behaving themselves. Forums run more smoothly if good moderation is carried out, and done so in a discrete manner. I needed to nip the "troll" comment in the bud before the thread got taken off into a debate about what a troll is and whether or not kwv is one (I don't think he/she is.) Making a comment which draws the thread back onto topic is better than locking it or deleting posts.

Call me a member of the forum police force if you like. I'm here to make sure you and others don't take the law into your own hands on the forum, whether or not you do so when on the road (or footpath, as the case may be in QLD ... ;))


Kalgrm wrote:
eliza wrote:where's kwv gone?
maybe she/he was a troll?! :shock:

kwv is probably waiting to see how we respond and waiting to find out if we are going to insult him or her some more. I think I can understand the reaction, given the icy reception offered.

(In this case, the icy reception was the first reply you received from Matt_Matt, calling you a troll.)

Normally I defend every members' right to post their opinion (as I did earlier for you). It's one of the reasons I was asked to be a moderator. However, now you've pissed me off and I don't give a damn what the other members do to you. My gloves are off too.

As I said clearly and without malice earlier, ask your local MP the question about sanity and safety. We can't change the laws, but he or she can. Winging on here isn't going to change anything. Most of us agree that riding off a footpath into pedestrians is a stupid thing to do. Are you hoping someone will defend the action? Forget it - it won't happen.

Graeme
Think outside the double triangle.
---------------------------------------
My web site: www.scenebyhird.com
---------------------------------------
The Bicycle Transportation Alliance
User avatar
Kalgrm
Super Mod
Super Mod
 
Posts: 9236
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 5:21 pm
Location: Spearwood, 9km SE of Fremantle, WA

Postby kwv » Mon Sep 22, 2008 6:19 pm

Lark2004 wrote:kwv,

I really don't follow what you expect to come of this post.....

Are you a cyclist who doesn't like seeing other cyclist's breaking the law?

or

Are you a pedestrian who has nearly been/ has been knocked over by a cyclist on a footpath?

Do you think we have some say in Qld's law making process?.... we have about as much say as you do..... and to be honest, with the way many of Brisbane roads are, you are taking your life into your hands to ride on them, when there is the reletive safty of a path a few metre's away.

I drive a truck for a living, and to be honest, I like the fact that many cyclist's use the path in places where the roads aren't safe. Some cyclists will use the road all the time, and I give them as much room as I can, but sometimes this act in itself then puts me at risk, as many motorists don't care about the cyclists, and try to force me back over before I've safley passed. Other times it is not safe to overtake the cyclist at all, and I will slow down until safe to pass, once again, I get abused by other trucks, motorists, even the police on one occasion, for holding them up.

I think you need to do a bit more research before starting up such a provocative post, and also you should provide a bit more information about yourself, so that we can gain some perspective into where you are coming from with all this.


Andrew if you must know I am a pedestrian who not only have nearly knocked down but seen so many cyclists break the law and ride off the footpath straight onto the crossing.

And do we really have a say in making of The law?

Also with billions being spent on The Hale Street Bridge, The North-South Tunnel etc etc you can understand why roads are unsafe?

But is riding on the footpath really safe?

Have you forgot about the pedestrians, drivers not looking for cyclists to come down on the path, damaged paths etc etc etc

So from all this especially reading your own comments, Andrew you should do a bit more research especially if you think expressing an opinion is an provocative post.

Because why don't you considered you expressing an opinion as a provocative post?

PS Ok I provided more information if you do the same, like all we know you said you are a truck driver who does the right thing for cyclists?
kwv
 

Postby winona_rider » Mon Sep 22, 2008 6:27 pm

kwv wrote:Can someone explain how can allowing cyclists to ride a legal road vehicle on the footpath be a sane and safe idea?

Especially when it is not legal in all places of Australia and a USA Cycling group said it is a dangerous and stupid idea.


well i justify it thus:
a) i want people riding bikes and if they *feel* safest on a footpath - (and i do concede they might not actually *be* any safer) - i still think they should be free to ride on a footpath
b) there are certain road situations where we riders just can't match it with cars and need alternatives. for instance: having to cross multiple lanes of traffic up hill to turn right (with no hook turn available)
etc etc

and can i just point out too that plenty of cars drive on footpaths (usually to cross them) and for the many years i walked to work i cannot tell you how many times i had to dodge idiot car drivers crossing the footpath without giving way.
User avatar
winona_rider
 
Posts: 1076
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2007 4:26 pm
Location: Brisbane

Postby kwv » Mon Sep 22, 2008 6:33 pm

Kalgrm wrote:You must be kidding kwv. Is English not your native language? That may explain why your writing style is so hard to follow. It would also explain why you fail to comprehend what's written in plain English for you to read. If you did learn English as your first language, the only other explanation for your reprehensible behaviour is a sociopathic personality.

Here are some instances of me defending your right to make a tool of yourself.

Kalgrm wrote:Oh, and see that little "Super Mod" icon on the left of the screen, right underneath my name? That means I read a lot of posts on the forum which have little to do with me so I can make sure people are behaving themselves. Forums run more smoothly if good moderation is carried out, and done so in a discrete manner. I needed to nip the "troll" comment in the bud before the thread got taken off into a debate about what a troll is and whether or not kwv is one (I don't think he/she is.) Making a comment which draws the thread back onto topic is better than locking it or deleting posts.

Call me a member of the forum police force if you like. I'm here to make sure you and others don't take the law into your own hands on the forum, whether or not you do so when on the road (or footpath, as the case may be in QLD ... ;))


Kalgrm wrote:
eliza wrote:where's kwv gone?
maybe she/he was a troll?! :shock:

kwv is probably waiting to see how we respond and waiting to find out if we are going to insult him or her some more. I think I can understand the reaction, given the icy reception offered.

(In this case, the icy reception was the first reply you received from Matt_Matt, calling you a troll.)

Normally I defend every members' right to post their opinion (as I did earlier for you). It's one of the reasons I was asked to be a moderator. However, now you've pissed me off and I don't give a damn what the other members do to you. My gloves are off too.

As I said clearly and without malice earlier, ask your local MP the question about sanity and safety. We can't change the laws, but he or she can. Winging on here isn't going to change anything. Most of us agree that riding off a footpath into pedestrians is a stupid thing to do. Are you hoping someone will defend the action? Forget it - it won't happen.

Graeme


Graeme,
You don't give a damm about me and gloves are off, because you think it is okay to be calling someone a troll because all I done like you, is to express an opinion and be asking questions and I proved in some comments you don't check facts?

Maybe I should call you a troll?

But I won't as I won't sink that low.

And we can't change the laws, are you sure?

Because who reverse the Work Choices Law, us or The MP?

Who has you spoken to to claim "Also Most of us agree that riding off a footpath into pedestrians is a stupid thing to do"?

And in riding straight off the footpath, doesn't that mean someone is defending the action?
kwv
 

Postby kwv » Mon Sep 22, 2008 6:38 pm

winona_rider wrote:
kwv wrote:Can someone explain how can allowing cyclists to ride a legal road vehicle on the footpath be a sane and safe idea?

Especially when it is not legal in all places of Australia and a USA Cycling group said it is a dangerous and stupid idea.


well i justify it thus:
a) i want people riding bikes and if they *feel* safest on a footpath - (and i do concede they might not actually *be* any safer) - i still think they should be free to ride on a footpath
b) there are certain road situations where we riders just can't match it with cars and need alternatives. for instance: having to cross multiple lanes of traffic up hill to turn right (with no hook turn available)
etc etc

and can i just point out too that plenty of cars drive on footpaths (usually to cross them) and for the many years i walked to work i cannot tell you how many times i had to dodge idiot car drivers crossing the footpath without giving way.


WR,
There are some cyclists who thinks they are safer on the footpath, but do they care for others being safe?

And part b, in that the case shouldn't the billions being wasted on tunnels and bridges being spent on more and better share paths?

PS Love your nickname
Last edited by kwv on Mon Sep 22, 2008 6:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
kwv
 

Postby kwv » Mon Sep 22, 2008 6:41 pm

I am wondering if the people who wrote stupid comments and couldn't face someone expressing an opinion, were the cyclists who broke the law by running the red and riding straight off the footpath onto the crossing?
kwv
 

PreviousNext

Return to Queensland

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