Australian Cycling Forums - Bicycles Network Australia

So it's official. There will be no demerit points attached to dooring a cyclist, with a policy review in 2014.
This from the The Age via the Amy Gillett Foundation:
http://m.theage.com.au/victoria/no-loss ... 24ypg.html,
And this in response to my asking BNV why they were so strongly oppsed to a demeritable rule and meaningful deterrant:
http://www.bicyclenetwork.com.au/genera ... ing/93916/
They suggested that we read the last 2 paragraphs.

Discuss.

Why couldn't the ABC name the motorist who killed the cyclist by dooring them?

Because only the offender had any rights in this case.

The 2nd Womble wrote:Because only the offender had any rights in this case.

convicted offender?? I thought one of the biggest outrages was that the driver who opened the door into James Cross was never fined or charged.

I can't see the problem with saying "Miss >insert name< opened a door into a passing cyclist who was thrown under the wheels of a truck died an agonising death over X minutes. Miss >insert name< was not given the token $60 fine because she clearly suffered enough. Certainly she didn't die. Nor did she suffer any injuries but she was inconvenienced in getting to her very important meeting/ picking up the kids / getting to work."

Like all laws, it's worthless if not enforced. Too many peoples don't give a rats.

What's the chance of unmarked plodcycles with cameras cruising the streets? Reckon they'd make a few quid in StKilda Rd and Collins St.

find_bruce wrote:

The 2nd Womble wrote:Because only the offender had any rights in this case.

convicted offender?? I thought one of the biggest outrages was that the driver who opened the door into James Cross was never fined or charged.

Yeah, edited that but you picked up on it first.

Mulger bill wrote:Like all laws, it's worthless if not enforced. Too many peoples don't give a rats.

What's the chance of unmarked plodcycles with cameras cruising the streets? Reckon they'd make a few quid in StKilda Rd and Collins St.

It does seem to be the case that if demerit points apply to an offence, that theres more chance of the Police taking the offence more seriously as was said.

The 2nd Womble wrote:

Mulger bill wrote:Like all laws, it's worthless if not enforced. Too many peoples don't give a rats.

What's the chance of unmarked plodcycles with cameras cruising the streets? Reckon they'd make a few quid in StKilda Rd and Collins St.

It does seem to be the case that if demerit points apply to an offence, that theres more chance of the Police taking the offence more seriously as was said.

OK then, let's hope the suggested review in 2014 decides to go this way. Don't see what the problem is anyway, if the doorer is a minor, point the driver.

The person opening the door may not be the driver's child, or may be an adult but have no licence to drive, thus no demerits can be applied. The equity of such a penalty is poor.

il padrone wrote:The person opening the door may not be the driver's child, or may be an adult but have no licence to drive, thus no demerits can be applied. The equity of such a penalty is poor.

The "inequity" applies to seatbelts and other offences. The Government doesn't have any issues there.

il padrone wrote:The person opening the door may not be the driver's child, or may be an adult but have no licence to drive, thus no demerits can be applied. The equity of such a penalty is poor.

Cyclists do not have to have a drivers licence but are penalised the same if they get caught riding through a red light

OT but....

Vicroads wrote:Drive on the wrong side of double lines or a divided road - 3 pts

Bejeebus! 95%+ of motorists should be earning demerits on a daily basis!! I see this routinely on country roads where they must-get-past-cyclist

KonaCommuter wrote:Cyclists do not have to have a drivers licence but are penalised the same if they get caught riding through a red light

Yes but that's because we are all legally drivers and demerit offences are driving offences. Opening a car door by a passenger is not.

il padrone wrote:

KonaCommuter wrote:Cyclists do not have to have a drivers licence but are penalised the same if they get caught riding through a red light

Yes but that's because we are all legally drivers and demerit offences are driving offences. Opening a car door by a passenger is not.

Actually, you can't commit a demerit points offence on a bicycle in Queensland by definition. The Driver Licensing regs say so.

Anyway, points shmoints. Why not make injury a circumstance of aggravation? Why not do that for road rules in general? Break a rule and someone gets hurt you go to goal, get DQ'ed for years, whatever. That'd mean taking breaches of the road rules seriously. I can't see governments doing that anytime soon. Pity.

Can anyone suggest why there is not a direct link between the severity of a fine and the number of demerit points?

Especially for what seem like fairly similar offences? For example:

Failure to give way to a pedestrian
3 demerit points
$246.47 fine

'Dooring'
0 demerit points
$352.10 fine

http://vicroads.vic.gov.au/NR/rdonlyres ... 201213.pdf

The 2nd Womble wrote: And this in response to my asking BNV why they were so strongly oppsed to a demeritable rule and meaningful deterrant:
http://www.bicyclenetwork.com.au/genera ... ing/93916/
They suggested that we read the last 2 paragraphs.

The last two paragraphs of what, exactly, The 2nd Womble? I followed the link, but couldn't see anything which addressed the specific issue which you raised. I'm bemused by the policy - I'm even more bemused that BNV would support it, and I'd love to hear its justification.

The 2nd Womble wrote:So it's official. There will be no demerit points attached to dooring a cyclist, with a policy review in 2014.
This from the The Age via the Amy Gillett Foundation:
http://m.theage.com.au/victoria/no-loss ... 24ypg.html,
And this in response to my asking BNV why they were so strongly oppsed to a demeritable rule and meaningful deterrant:
http://www.bicyclenetwork.com.au/genera ... ing/93916/
They suggested that we read the last 2 paragraphs.

Discuss.

I see there was a suggestion for Copenhagen lanes on StKilda Rd on that page. That would be, to put it mildly, f***ing stupid. Copenhagen lanes are incredibly dangerous when you have intersecting streets and lots of driveways, just look at Swanston St. You end up with cars sitting across the bike lanes because the drivers need to get out far enough to see the traffic they want to enter or cross, then they block the bike lane. Once they know that they need to sit across the bike lane to see anything they just go out that far before they start looking for traffic. They just don't work. How do these work in Copenhagen? Maybe they don't have a line of parked cars in between the bike lane and the car lanes.

Given the sheer number of bikes on StKilda Rd I have a solution. The far left lane, plus the current bike lane, should be merged to form one big wide bike lane. It would be safer, wouldn't hold up the cars as they are crawling anyway and would discourage driving along StKilda Rd which is impractical anyway.

DS

Byke wrote:Can anyone suggest why there is not a direct link between the severity of a fine and the number of demerit points?

dooring isn't really a driving offence.

DavidS wrote:
I see there was a suggestion for Copenhagen lanes on StKilda Rd on that page. That would be, to put it mildly, f***ing stupid. Copenhagen lanes are incredibly dangerous when you have intersecting streets and lots of driveways, just look at Swanston St. You end up with cars sitting across the bike lanes because the drivers need to get out far enough to see the traffic they want to enter or cross, then they block the bike lane. Once they know that they need to sit across the bike lane to see anything they just go out that far before they start looking for traffic. They just don't work. How do these work in Copenhagen? Maybe they don't have a line of parked cars in between the bike lane and the car lanes.

Given the sheer number of bikes on StKilda Rd I have a solution. The far left lane, plus the current bike lane, should be merged to form one big wide bike lane. It would be safer, wouldn't hold up the cars as they are crawling anyway and would discourage driving along StKilda Rd which is impractical anyway.

DS

If St Kilda rd was to actually be "copenhagenized", they would get rid of the parking lane in either direction, make the street 24x7 no parking, raise the kerb lane to half kerb height and have a 1 directional, 2 rider wide cycleway, with raised entrances to the side streets to slow cars down.

There are few or no cycletracks in copenhagen. the word "copenhagen lane", in australia can pretty much be read as we have no idea about cycle infrastructure so we are going to use the name of a city that who does to sell you some unsafe rubbish that protects the apparently god given right to store 2m wide private assets in a busy public thoroughfare.

For those wondering about the driver and inaction, search for "Ellen Richards" at http://www.bicyclenetwork.com.au/genera ... ing/10218/

My precis -

Offending driver avoids interviews for three months and lawyers up. Officer prepares charges as she should. Senior officers tell her the charges will not be "authorised", no explanation given. No charges at all. Mrs Respectable free to continue driving, perhaps a little wiser, perhaps not.

On reading this the oft-stated "it doesn't matter what the penalties set are if you are not going to apply them" is hard to ignore. One could be excused for wondering why they don't just include in legislation an exemption for those who drive BMWs and live in "respectable" leafy suburbs. That way we would know where we stand.

Got it one & she probably complains to the other society ladies in her bridge club about how she has suffered terribly since the reckless cyclist killed himself on her car door.

zero wrote:

DavidS wrote:
I see there was a suggestion for Copenhagen lanes on StKilda Rd on that page. That would be, to put it mildly, f***ing stupid. Copenhagen lanes are incredibly dangerous when you have intersecting streets and lots of driveways, just look at Swanston St. You end up with cars sitting across the bike lanes because the drivers need to get out far enough to see the traffic they want to enter or cross, then they block the bike lane. Once they know that they need to sit across the bike lane to see anything they just go out that far before they start looking for traffic. They just don't work. How do these work in Copenhagen? Maybe they don't have a line of parked cars in between the bike lane and the car lanes.

Given the sheer number of bikes on StKilda Rd I have a solution. The far left lane, plus the current bike lane, should be merged to form one big wide bike lane. It would be safer, wouldn't hold up the cars as they are crawling anyway and would discourage driving along StKilda Rd which is impractical anyway.

DS

If St Kilda rd was to actually be "copenhagenized", they would get rid of the parking lane in either direction, make the street 24x7 no parking, raise the kerb lane to half kerb height and have a 1 directional, 2 rider wide cycleway, with raised entrances to the side streets to slow cars down.

There are few or no cycletracks in copenhagen. the word "copenhagen lane", in australia can pretty much be read as we have no idea about cycle infrastructure so we are going to use the name of a city that who does to sell you some unsafe rubbish that protects the apparently god given right to store 2m wide private assets in a busy public thoroughfare.

Interesting. If you take the car parking out and raise the road for the length of the separated bike lane it could work. Should have known the version we have on Swanston St was a half baked co*k up.

DS

zero wrote: If St Kilda rd was to actually be "copenhagenized", they would get rid of the parking lane in either direction, make the street 24x7 no parking, raise the kerb lane to half kerb height and have a 1 directional, 2 rider wide cycleway, with raised entrances to the side streets to slow cars down.

There are few or no cycletracks in copenhagen. the word "copenhagen lane", in australia can pretty much be read as we have no idea about cycle infrastructure so we are going to use the name of a city that who does to sell you some unsafe rubbish that protects the apparently god given right to store 2m wide private assets in a busy public thoroughfare.

Interesting.

I'd always assumed that whatever it is we have on Swanston St at least bore some resemblance to what is done in Copenhagen. If it isn't then BNV (using acronyms on this site is trickier since Bicycle Victoria changed its name) should stop using the term. Because Swanston Street is terrible to ride along, a terrible advertisement for riding on the roads of Melbourne generally, and a terrible waste of what money is being spent on cycling infrastructure.

The more money they poor into Swanston st the worse it gets for cyclists.