A question from a motorist

Equipment and On Road Behaviour, Laws and Rules. Cycling Promotion and Advocacy

Re: A question from a motorist

Postby AndyTheMan » Tue Aug 21, 2012 7:43 pm

BillWatson wrote:Thank You all for your comments,
I would like to thank all those who took the time to outline their reasons. I would especially like to thank AndyTheMan, who outlined the issues very clearly.
Unfortunately it seems that my standards of “well reasoned argument” are a bit higher than they should be. However this discussion has been very educational and I thank you for your time.

What I take away from this, is that if road cyclist want to reduce the animosity that other road uses feel towards them, either warranted or not, then they will have be responsible for the “1%” that create the problem. How the cycling community does this is up to you.


Bill,

I think people are perhaps a little harsh on this topic because of two things:

FIRST, we have been through all this a billion times (I mean cyclists, not just this thread). There have been hundreds or articles, opinion pieces, forums, reviews and the like on the topic of bike rego. Not one of them have ever concluded that it's workable. The basic reasons ARE set out in this post, including cost, impracticality and having no real benefit.

The main benefit you seen to see is the ability to recognize bad riders, but it's one he'll of a cost for little (some would say nearly no) benefit. The other benefit that you state is that it will give cyclists some sense of being 'equal' to the road....in my view that's not going to happen, just the same that people hate Volvo drivers, caravans or taxis....(although I see some sense I. The argument).

SECOND, people on this forum have to deal with this argument every day, all day. Many times we get stuff thrown at us, are run off the road, people on here have been seriously injured and some have died (many on here would know a cyclist that's died or been seriously injured). You know what usually gets said just after an accident?! "you guys really should have rego if your on the road!"

So don't take comments to heart. Cyclist on here are literally put in life threatening situations every day by drivers, all of whom are registered, licensed, and identifiable..... But not held to account.

You will have to take it as fact that rego doesn't work for cyclists. The essential arguments are that it's expensive, impractical and will have no real benefit.

If there was any benefit at all, you can rest assured that it would be law by now, as it's every shock jocks favorite line.

Could I respectfully ask how you think a workable rego for cyclists might work, what the costs might be, and what the benefits are? As no one else has (on this forum, in parliamentary papers, transport policy discussion papers or otherwise) been able to make it work.

Here's a thought for you though. In Sydney more than 25,000 people cycle to work every day.... If increasing costs (such as rego) were put in place it's said that many would simply leave the bike at home, adding 20-odd thousand cars to the road - costing tons more in road maintenance, congestion etc.....that's one key argument against rego schemes (ie it would actually be BAD for transport)
AndyTheMan
 
Posts: 259
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 10:52 am

by BNA » Tue Aug 21, 2012 8:03 pm

BNA
 

Re: A question from a motorist

Postby greyhoundtom » Tue Aug 21, 2012 8:03 pm

The real problem is that far too many motorists do not see cyclists as genuine road users, and as such treat cyclists as a nuisance that they want off THEIR roads.

In the past three years riding my bike and doing my very best not to cause unnecessary angst to motorists, I have still had to put up with being rear ended which put me into hospital overnight, close shaved by a bus that pushed me into the scrub on the side of the road, had a truck driver going at least 100 km per hour on an eighty Km per hour road, with no intention of stopping, and due to oncoming traffic havving no chance of passing me legally, continuously hold down his horn untill I ran off the road to stop from being killed.

If I thought for one second, that bikes having a registration plate on them would fix that, and that it would make motorists consider a bicycle their equal on the road I would be extremely happy to pay registration for my bike.
User avatar
greyhoundtom
 
Posts: 2681
Joined: Sun May 31, 2009 6:28 am
Location: Narre Warren, Victoria

Re: A question from a motorist

Postby damhooligan » Tue Aug 21, 2012 8:04 pm

BillWatson wrote:I still have not seen a valid reason (aside from cost, which would be significant) for not registering bikes.


They have been mentioned, BUT you have to be willing to see them.
I think you fail in that aspect.

BillWatson wrote:We need to encourage cycling


Oh yes, we do.
And I wil follow this up with a valid reason for not registering bikes.
Registration for bikes wil not encourage cycling.

Cycling is a cheap and easy alternative to driving.
Add registratition, and all off the benefits are gone, straight away.
Not easy, cos you have to register first , not cheap , cos you gotta pay..
It wil not encourage cycling !!

Secondly,

BillWatson wrote:If I may I would like to pose a couple of hypothetical for general discussion

1. On a nice sunny day on a a shared bike path a mother and young child are walking along the left hand side of the path. 2 cyclists riding two abreast, and at speed , fly past and without sounding their bell. One of the riders hits the small child with his peddle causing very bad injuries. Then races on without stopping. Question, how is the mother to hold the cyclist to account for this?
.



Lets hypothetically assume we have rego for cyclist.
And we replay the same scenario...

The cyclist could been riding without rego, its not uncommon for riders to break the law, so why not this one...
the rego could not have been visible...
And if it was perfectly visible, you got realisticly 1 split second to look at the rego, remember it...
if not he is gone and you got nothing...

And then, even if you got the rego, you wil have to go to the police, and it wil be he said she said...
if the cyclist claims, I did not do it.. :?:
then what ??
Being able to provide a rego number proves nothing..

Having a rego does not always result in the bad person being 'punished'

I can give you an example of a cyclist pov, ...
Often there are situations, where cars are doing something wrong , AND putting the cyclist in a dangerous situation.
Often the cyclist has video, and the rego of the car.
They go to the police.
Result, NOTHING HAPPENS !!!

If you want to change things, dont ask for rego for cyclist.
ask the police to do what they are payed to do,
THEIR JOB !!
The dutch have one word to describe the aussie MHL, this word is ;
SCHIJNVEILIGHEID !!
User avatar
damhooligan
 
Posts: 3409
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 4:16 pm
Location: melbourne

Re: A question from a motorist

Postby Alien27 » Tue Aug 21, 2012 8:11 pm

If cost Is taken out of the equation then I would agree with bike rego's. In fact taking cost out of the equation I believe pedestrians should have rego's. Something simple like a clip on number front and back for both cyclists and pedestrians should suffice.

Of coarse if cost was really no option why not just install a GPS smart chip under everyone's skin so everyone can be held accountable for their actions all the time? That is where this argument logically takes itself... In favour of that?

In all seriousness though it wouldn't bother me if i had to ware a clip on cloth number plate. Come to think of if having a chip wouldn't bother me either.
Tom
Image
User avatar
Alien27
 
Posts: 223
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2012 5:59 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: A question from a motorist

Postby jimsheedy » Tue Aug 21, 2012 8:20 pm

Ive only read the first two pages of the thread so i apologise if this has already been stated.

The fact is that vehicle registration was not introduced for Identifying wrong doers or vehicle ownership or to pay for roads. It was and is quite simply a Tax for owning a car.
Image
User avatar
jimsheedy
 
Posts: 781
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2010 9:01 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: A question from a motorist

Postby KenGS » Tue Aug 21, 2012 8:22 pm

Alien27 wrote:If cost Is taken out of the equation then I would agree with bike rego's. In fact taking cost out of the equation I believe pedestrians should have rego's. Something simple like a clip on number front and back for both cyclists and pedestrians should suffice.

Of coarse if cost was really no option why not just install a GPS smart chip under everyone's skin so everyone can be held accountable for their actions all the time? That is where this argument logically takes itself... In favour of that?

In all seriousness though it wouldn't bother me if i had to ware a clip on cloth number plate. Come to think of if having a chip wouldn't bother me either.

Some people already have a chip installed on their scapula
--Ken
Helmets! Bells! Rego!
User avatar
KenGS
 
Posts: 1463
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 10:31 pm
Location: Rosanna, Victoria

Re: A question from a motorist

Postby KonaCommuter » Tue Aug 21, 2012 8:28 pm

Pax wrote:
Now will I offend people if I am the first one who calls a "TROLL ALERT" out loud?? (even though many have probably thought it from the beginning of the thread, but briefly gave it the benefit of the doubt).





Colour me skeptical but this wall of text

BillWatson wrote:Hi All,
Thank You for your comments, However as yet no one has formulated an effective argument against registration. No one has discussed the hypotheticals I proposed in any meaningful manner, the question connected was how were the people supposed to hold the offender to account, and no one has attempted to discuss that, so I can assume that these are situations, should they occur, that would have befitted from registration.
As for the size of the plate, if an old bloke like me can read the brand on a moving bike, and the names on a riders jersey from my window, (I can even read the rego on a fast moving motorbike) then one may assume that a plate could be seen.

Now to KenGS, I have fronted the Magistrates court twice in relation to reporting dangerous drivers to the Police (both time I had video evidence).

From what I can see in this thread, and others in this forum is that cyclist, at least in this community, want to be able to hold motorists and pedestrians to account for their offences, but do not want others to have the same right regarding the cyclist.
There appears to be a distinct double standard regarding obeying the road rules, cyclists (and I will use this term as a very general label and in no way infer that all, or even most are like this) want to be able to pick and choose what rules they follow, (i.e, the comments of Human909 on the “Ninja Day” thread, or by the signature of Mulger bill, who quotes ..”whatever the road rules, self-preservation is the absolute priority for a cyclist when mixing it with motorised traffic.
London Boy 29/12/2011”. The comments of il padrone in this thread and others (and I take some dramatic licence here) believe that drivers and pedestrians should be taken to task for offences against cyclist, but when it is the cyclist at fault, then it is case of sh*t happens. Does this mean that motorcyclist can follow the same guidelines? How about small cars? Can a young person on a small scooter uses the cycle way as it is in their best interest, this is illegal but in the interest of self preservation why not according to some? Ridiculous but I hope you see my point (however if someone was to do this, you could record their plate and report them to police).

As I said earlier, no one has yet to form an effective augment against registration (cost is significant, but not the sole reason to dismiss it). It is just my belief, but if the cycling community wants to be regarded as an equal on the roads (as they should be) then they need to have the same responsibilities as all other road users. This includes following the road rules as any other vehicle should, and being able to be held accountable if they cause offence.
Perception is a powerful thing, and the way the wider community sees you can make all the difference. Lets face it, road cyclist are looked upon very negatively by many other road users, but why do you think this is?
The actions of a the few unfortunately reflect back on the many, (this is taken to the extreme when you look at community attitudes toward the Islamic Faith, and before you jump on me I only say this to high light how the actions of a few can harm the many and has nothing tho do with any form of registration). So if having a bike registration system changes that negative attitude, or re-enforcers the idea in the wider community that cyclists have the same rights as motorists, them why is this a bad thing?



Doesn't gel with the earlier

BillWatson wrote:
Please forgive the grammatical errors from an old bloke on a tablet pc.
2012 Oppy A4
User avatar
KonaCommuter
 
Posts: 978
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2011 8:28 pm
Location: Brisbane Northside

Re: A question from a motorist

Postby Mulger bill » Tue Aug 21, 2012 8:34 pm

greyhoundtom wrote:If I thought for one second, that bikes having a registration plate on them would fix that, and that it would make motorists consider a bicycle their equal on the road I would be extremely happy to pay registration for my bike.


Yes!!!
You and me both brother.

Of course, we both know we've got more chance of wheeling a barrowload of smoke across the Westgate bridge.

Shaun
...whatever the road rules, self-preservation is the absolute priority for a cyclist when mixing it with motorised traffic.
London Boy 29/12/2011
User avatar
Mulger bill
Super Mod
Super Mod
 
Posts: 26340
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:41 pm
Location: Sunbury Vic

Re: A question from a motorist

Postby ldrcycles » Tue Aug 21, 2012 8:36 pm

Sounds like Motorist again really doesn't it.

Just to add to the points already made about how registration doesn't work for holding motorists to account, in the last year or so i have been through the ridiculously long process of ringing the police (and on one occasion going into a station) to report dangerous behaviour i have seen whilst driving (i am a professional driver btw). This is what has happened.

1) Motorist tailgated me for 500mtrs. I was sitting exactly on the posted limit. The other driver then overtook me in spite of oncoming traffic, sounding his horn from the moment he moved over the unbroken centre line, then swerved back in within a metre of the front of my car. I provided the police with his rego number.

They contacted him, he denied it, nothing happened.

2) Virtually identical to above, only difference, i happened to be doing 90 in a 100 zone to save fuel. The police officer had a go at me, saying that there was 'no excuse for me not to be doing the limit'. Nothing was done.

3) On a winding country road, a motorbike overtook myself and the car in front of me, doing at least 40 over the limit, just before a blind corner, over unbroken lines.
I had been able to tell from seeing him in my rear view mirror what he was about to do, and managed to get his rego number as he went past. I provided the police with the motorbike rego number AND the rego of the car in front of me. Nothing was done.

Any of these incidents could have easily resulted in serious injury or death, but nothing was done.
When man invented the bicycle he reached the peak of his attainments- Elizabeth West.
User avatar
ldrcycles
 
Posts: 7103
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2010 2:19 pm
Location: Kin Kin, Queensland

Re: A question from a motorist

Postby Oxford » Tue Aug 21, 2012 8:49 pm

Hey Bill, can you guarantee that had I been registered that I would not have suffered the spinal injury I did 11 months ago after being rear ended by a driver which figured I had no rights? Guess not. I second the troll call.
Image
Image
Image

Finally

Image
I could agree with you, but then we would both be wrong.
User avatar
Oxford
 
Posts: 5496
Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2008 1:49 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: A question from a motorist

Postby ColinOldnCranky » Tue Aug 21, 2012 8:50 pm

BillWatson wrote:Hi All,
Thank You for your comments, However as yet no one has formulated an effective argument against registration. No one has discussed the hypotheticals I proposed in any meaningful manner, the question connected was how were the people supposed to hold the offender to account, and no one has attempted to discuss that, so I can assume that these are situations, should they occur, that would have befitted from registration.


I do not know how compelling you are seeking. Mulger Bill posed the question "how many times have you reported an errant red-light runner in a car to the police. The extreme rarity of people doing this is, for me, compelling enough.

On the off chance that you have, you would be a rare exception. No State treasurer is keen to go to the expense of a rego system if people then do not carry out their part of the bargain and actually dob.

BTW when someone does report, the police then ask the complainant if they are prepared to front the court as a witness if charges are laid. The common response is "No, I just think the guy needs to be made aware of it." That ends the matter as far as the cops are concerned.

Anyway, you might try a straw poll of your work mates on that question. I have done it a three times - Work, BBQ and sporting club. Fuzzy recollection - I think I found about none. I myself have seen hundreds of red-light runners. I have only ever reported one driver and that was someone who collided with me and failed to stop.
Unchain yourself-Ride a unicycle
Image
User avatar
ColinOldnCranky
 
Posts: 4937
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:58 pm

Re: A question from a motorist

Postby KonaCommuter » Tue Aug 21, 2012 8:51 pm

ldrcycles wrote:Sounds like Motorist again really doesn't it.

Just to add to the points already made about how registration doesn't work for holding motorists to account, in the last year or so i have been through the ridiculously long process of ringing the police (and on one occasion going into a station) to report dangerous behaviour i have seen whilst driving (i am a professional driver btw). This is what has happened.

1) Motorist tailgated me for 500mtrs. I was sitting exactly on the posted limit. The other driver then overtook me in spite of oncoming traffic, sounding his horn from the moment he moved over the unbroken centre line, then swerved back in within a metre of the front of my car. I provided the police with his rego number.

They contacted him, he denied it, nothing happened.

2) Virtually identical to above, only difference, i happened to be doing 90 in a 100 zone to save fuel. The police officer had a go at me, saying that there was 'no excuse for me not to be doing the limit'. Nothing was done.

3) On a winding country road, a motorbike overtook myself and the car in front of me, doing at least 40 over the limit, just before a blind corner, over unbroken lines.
I had been able to tell from seeing him in my rear view mirror what he was about to do, and managed to get his rego number as he went past. I provided the police with the motorbike rego number AND the rego of the car in front of me. Nothing was done.

Any of these incidents could have easily resulted in serious injury or death, but nothing was done.




Contrast that with the response if a nosey neighbour looking through your window, see you handling a rifle then calling the Police.


One area is "boring" Police work which carries no respect from fellow officers (used to be the case that Traffic Branch were called Traffic Dogs by other Police :roll: ) or the public yet 3,500 Aussies are killed and tens of thousands hospitalised (anywhere from the ambo's saying "just to make sure you are OK" to the Doctor saying "Hey, you know what? Sitting down for the rest of your life isn't so bad. Just think how easy it will be to get a good car park") and the amount of work out there is phenomenal. I mean, today whilst eating smoko at the local corner shop If I were a cop I could have given half a dozen tickets for talking on the phone whilst driving (equivalent to a BAC of 0.08)

The other area is "exciting" you get to wear bullet proof vests / black shirts and ski-masks, carry automatic weapons and threaten people with them, you get to rough people up, you get to yell at them, you get to smash and to top it all off you're the envy of every other cop and the public respects you. Best of all you don't have to do this that often.


Bread and butter is boring
2012 Oppy A4
User avatar
KonaCommuter
 
Posts: 978
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2011 8:28 pm
Location: Brisbane Northside

Re: A question from a motorist

Postby The 2nd Womble » Tue Aug 21, 2012 8:53 pm

Western Star Original Butter and sourdough baguette is never boring.
The only good Cyclist is a Bicyclist

Huge fan of booted RGers who just can't help themselves
User avatar
The 2nd Womble
 
Posts: 3058
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2011 1:21 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: A question from a motorist

Postby wurtulla wabbit » Tue Aug 21, 2012 8:56 pm

People sitting 10k under the limit to save fuel selfishly holding other back annoy the life out of me !
As for bike rego and this thread, waste of time.
Buy a bike, instant freedom.
Add in rego, I'd rather walk !
User avatar
wurtulla wabbit
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:08 pm

Re: A question from a motorist

Postby The 2nd Womble » Tue Aug 21, 2012 8:59 pm

wurtulla wabbit wrote:People sitting 10k under the limit to save fuel selfishly holding other back annoy the life out of me !
As for bike rego and this thread, waste of time.
Buy a bike, instant freedom.
Add in rego, I'd rather walk !

Western Star Original Butter and sourdough baguette is never boring.
The only good Cyclist is a Bicyclist

Huge fan of booted RGers who just can't help themselves
User avatar
The 2nd Womble
 
Posts: 3058
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2011 1:21 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: A question from a motorist

Postby barefoot » Tue Aug 21, 2012 9:01 pm

Personally, as a road user, I have no problem with being identifiable and held to account for my actions. I don't see that there would be any great social benefit, but in principle, I don't object.

If anybody can find a way to do this, that isn't such an imposition that it discourages cycling in the community, and that costs so little (to individuals and/or taxpayers) that the costs don't utterly overwhelm the meagre to negligible benefits... then I'll gladly get on board.

Until that happens, it's a pointless hypothetical, and doesn't warrant further discussion.

tim
User avatar
barefoot
 
Posts: 1047
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 10:05 am
Location: Ballarat

Re: A question from a motorist

Postby Addictr3 » Tue Aug 21, 2012 9:02 pm

of course his a TROLL but why was my post deleted on page 2???? like I said before, too long didnt read, his first post was a given, why would a motorist come on here? there too busy making it to the next red light!! :P :P :P :P
If you can't explain it simply, then you don't understand it well enough.
User avatar
Addictr3
 
Posts: 688
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2011 3:26 pm
Location: Manly, Sydney

Re: A question from a motorist

Postby il padrone » Tue Aug 21, 2012 9:03 pm

Image Image

Always good value :mrgreen:
Riding bikes in traffic - what seems dangerous is usually safe; what seems safe is often more dangerous.
User avatar
il padrone
 
Posts: 19612
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: A question from a motorist

Postby ldrcycles » Tue Aug 21, 2012 9:11 pm

wurtulla wabbit wrote:People sitting 10k under the limit to save fuel selfishly holding other back annoy the life out of me !


Yea isn't it terrible, if you had to sit behind them for 2 kilometres it would cost you all of 7.8 seconds :roll: . 'Limit' is the clue, that's the MAXIMUM speed. You don't HAVE to go everywhere on the limit the whole time.

And btw isn't it strange to hear the above from a 25yr old male?
When man invented the bicycle he reached the peak of his attainments- Elizabeth West.
User avatar
ldrcycles
 
Posts: 7103
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2010 2:19 pm
Location: Kin Kin, Queensland

Re: A question from a motorist

Postby Mulger bill » Tue Aug 21, 2012 9:14 pm

Why Addictr3?

Because at that stage the question (and thread) was still reasonable and your post was not.

For mine degeneration started when a sanctimonious, smart alec link was posted.
...whatever the road rules, self-preservation is the absolute priority for a cyclist when mixing it with motorised traffic.
London Boy 29/12/2011
User avatar
Mulger bill
Super Mod
Super Mod
 
Posts: 26340
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:41 pm
Location: Sunbury Vic

Re: A question from a motorist

Postby The 2nd Womble » Tue Aug 21, 2012 9:28 pm

It's usually me who says that :(
The only good Cyclist is a Bicyclist

Huge fan of booted RGers who just can't help themselves
User avatar
The 2nd Womble
 
Posts: 3058
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2011 1:21 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: A question from a motorist

Postby KenGS » Tue Aug 21, 2012 9:38 pm

Isn't dobbing "unAustralian"
--Ken
Helmets! Bells! Rego!
User avatar
KenGS
 
Posts: 1463
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 10:31 pm
Location: Rosanna, Victoria

Re: A question from a motorist

Postby Baldy » Tue Aug 21, 2012 9:44 pm

Mulger bill wrote:Why Addictr3?

Because at that stage the question (and thread) was still reasonable and your post was not.

For mine degeneration started when a sanctimonious, smart alec link was posted.


Personal attacks when the joke is on them. Signs of a bully.

Of course the obviously doomed thread from the start :roll: going off the rails had nothing to do with your mate getting into a pissing contest with Mr Watson.

To answer Mr Watson's latest version of his question[the original did not get the response he wanted]

Yes, if bike rego was magic I would be happy to be registered.
Baldy
 
Posts: 1669
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 4:55 pm

Re: A question from a motorist

Postby jules21 » Tue Aug 21, 2012 9:52 pm

BillWatson wrote:
jules21 wrote:
BillWatson wrote:..if road cyclist want to reduce the animosity that other road uses feel towards them.. then they will have be responsible for the “1%” that create the problem. How the cycling community does this is up to you.

so what are you doing about the % of motorists who "create the problem"?

Correct me if Im wrong, but there are dedicted Police Divisions in every state to takcle this..

no. i asked what you were doing to "be responsible for the “1%” that create the problem". i'll assume the answer is "nothing" then. yet you seem to demand that cyclists be responsible for other cyclists. that seems like a double standard to me. but then, the whole thread is premised on a double standard isn't it?
Image
User avatar
jules21
 
Posts: 9000
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 10:14 pm
Location: deep in the pain cave

Re: A question from a motorist

Postby Percrime » Tue Aug 21, 2012 10:06 pm

KenGS wrote:Isn't dobbing "unAustralian"


No. Its unaustralian if YOU do it. If I do it its an act of rare courage. And thats true of everyone.
Percrime
 
Posts: 998
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:41 am

PreviousNext

Return to Cycling Safety and Advocacy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users



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

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

> FREE BNA Stickers