Daniel Meers - GoldCoast.com.au - Guilty of Inciting Hatred

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

Re: Daniel Meers - GoldCoast.com.au - Guilty of Inciting Hat

Postby find_bruce » Sat Dec 15, 2012 6:23 am

Citywomble you are absolutely correct about far too many motorists and cyclists (and for that matter pedestrians) being wrong about who must give way at an intersection, just as long as you include yourself in that number

There are different rules for different kinds of intersections, but the basic rule is summarised in NSW Road Rule 353
NSW Road Rule 353 References to pedestrians crossing a road wrote:(1) If a driver who is turning from a road at an intersection is required to give way to a pedestrian who is crossing the road that the driver is entering, the driver is only required to give way to the pedestrian if the pedestrian’s line of travel in crossing the road is essentially perpendicular to the edges of the road the driver is entering—the driver is not required to give way to a pedestrian who is crossing the road the driver is leaving.

While this is a NSW specific rule, it reflects the rest of the Australian Road Rules, eg rule 73 dealing with T intersections like the one shown in the photo
NSW Road Rule 73 Giving way at a T-intersection wrote:(2) If the driver is turning left (except if the driver is using a slip lane) or right from the terminating road into the continuing road, the driver must give way to:
(b) any pedestrian who is crossing the continuing road at or near the intersection.

(4) If the driver is turning left (except if the driver is using a slip lane) from the continuing road into the terminating road, the driver must give way to any pedestrian who is crossing the terminating road at or near the intersection.

(6) If the driver is turning right from the continuing road into the terminating road, the driver must give way to:
(b) any pedestrian who is crossing the terminating road at or near the intersection.

Our WA friends will find the same provision in regulation 53 of the Road Traffic Code 2000 (WA).

There are however important differences between the road rules and negligence. Any reasonable person driving a motor vehicle understands that they should avoid running over people, even if that person may be breaking a road rule & even if the person is lying drunk in the middle of the road.
Image
User avatar
find_bruce
 
Posts: 3732
Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 8:42 pm
Location: Sydney

by BNA » Sat Dec 15, 2012 6:35 am

BNA
 

Re: Daniel Meers - GoldCoast.com.au - Guilty of Inciting Hat

Postby il padrone » Sat Dec 15, 2012 6:35 am

citywomble wrote:Any vehicle turning out of the side street has to give way to pedestrians crossing the road being joined. No exceptions, all states and territories.

Any vehicle turning into the side street has to give way to pedestrians crossing the road being left.

Subtle difference in the rule. You are basically required to treat the parallel footpath on your road as like another lane, and give way before crossing it.
Riding bikes in traffic - what seems dangerous is usually safe; what seems safe is often more dangerous.
User avatar
il padrone
 
Posts: 18404
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: Daniel Meers - GoldCoast.com.au - Guilty of Inciting Hat

Postby Zynster » Sun Dec 16, 2012 9:59 am

Daniel Meers wrote:THE time has come to declare war on cyclists.

A few days later:
ABC News wrote:Police allege the driver of the car hit the cyclist with his car twice - leaving the 24-year-old rider with a broken leg and elbow.

It is also alleged he got out of the car and assaulted the rider while he lay injured on the road.

A Gold Coast man has been charged with attempted murder, assaults occasioning bodily harm, deprivation of liberty, dangerous operation of a vehicle and driving without a licence.


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-12-16/d ... st/4430136
Fausto Coppi Reparto Corse | Giant Farrago Cross
User avatar
Zynster
 
Posts: 1101
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 4:50 pm
Location: West End, Brisbane

Re: Daniel Meers - GoldCoast.com.au - Guilty of Inciting Hat

Postby Mulger bill » Sun Dec 16, 2012 10:08 am

Zynster wrote:
Daniel Meers wrote:THE time has come to declare war on cyclists.

A few days later:
ABC News wrote:Police allege the driver of the car hit the cyclist with his car twice - leaving the 24-year-old rider with a broken leg and elbow.

It is also alleged he got out of the car and assaulted the rider while he lay injured on the road.

A Gold Coast man has been charged with attempted murder, assaults occasioning bodily harm, deprivation of liberty, dangerous operation of a vehicle and driving without a licence.


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-12-16/d ... st/4430136


So "mister" Meres, I hope you're proud that your call to arms has been responded to so promptly and completely.
...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: 25798
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:41 pm
Location: Sunbury Vic

Re: Daniel Meers - GoldCoast.com.au - Guilty of Inciting Hat

Postby InTheWoods » Sun Dec 16, 2012 10:10 am

As shocking as that incident is, it is good to see that he is being charged with attempted murder rather than some lame dangerous driving offence.

Anyway to the original article, so how many people complained to the paper or the australian press council about it? Now might be a time to complain and include this latest story to show what "win the roads back before something really bad happens" looks like... Complaints can be done to the APC online.
Image
User avatar
InTheWoods
 
Posts: 1448
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 2:34 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: Daniel Meers - GoldCoast.com.au - Guilty of Inciting Hat

Postby RonK » Sun Dec 16, 2012 10:25 am

Zynster wrote:
Daniel Meers wrote:THE time has come to declare war on cyclists.

A few days later:
ABC News wrote:Police allege the driver of the car hit the cyclist with his car twice - leaving the 24-year-old rider with a broken leg and elbow.

It is also alleged he got out of the car and assaulted the rider while he lay injured on the road.

A Gold Coast man has been charged with attempted murder, assaults occasioning bodily harm, deprivation of liberty, dangerous operation of a vehicle and driving without a licence.


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-12-16/d ... st/4430136

It's hard to believe this is a road rage incident. Try reading between the lines. Pure speculation, but substitute "Gold Coast man" with "outlaw motorcycle gang member" and you may have a clue why the charge is attempted murder.
Cycle touring blog and tour journals: whispering wheels...
User avatar
RonK
 
Posts: 5352
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 2:08 pm
Location: Brisbane, Queensland

Re: Daniel Meers - GoldCoast.com.au - Guilty of Inciting Hat

Postby Zynster » Sun Dec 16, 2012 11:28 am

I think that if it had been a bikey, the media would have been all over it. Apart for the ABC story, the Whale ran a deeply buried story, and Fairfax ran nothing.

However, I did find this. :shock:
Fausto Coppi Reparto Corse | Giant Farrago Cross
User avatar
Zynster
 
Posts: 1101
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 4:50 pm
Location: West End, Brisbane

Re: Daniel Meers - GoldCoast.com.au - Guilty of Inciting Hat

Postby find_bruce » Sun Dec 16, 2012 12:03 pm

Zynster wrote:I think that if it had been a bikey, the media would have been all over it. Apart for the ABC story, the Whale ran a deeply buried story, and Fairfax ran nothing.

I did find this. :shock:

Pretty rare case where there is a car and cyclist collision and the cyclist comes out better off.

Fairfax just take a while to catch up
Image
User avatar
find_bruce
 
Posts: 3732
Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 8:42 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Daniel Meers - GoldCoast.com.au - Guilty of Inciting Hat

Postby Drunkmonkey » Sun Dec 16, 2012 8:26 pm

RonK wrote:
Zynster wrote:
Daniel Meers wrote:THE time has come to declare war on cyclists.

A few days later:
ABC News wrote:Police allege the driver of the car hit the cyclist with his car twice - leaving the 24-year-old rider with a broken leg and elbow.

It is also alleged he got out of the car and assaulted the rider while he lay injured on the road.

A Gold Coast man has been charged with attempted murder, assaults occasioning bodily harm, deprivation of liberty, dangerous operation of a vehicle and driving without a licence.


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-12-16/d ... st/4430136

It's hard to believe this is a road rage incident. Try reading between the lines. Pure speculation, but substitute "Gold Coast man" with "outlaw motorcycle gang member" and you may have a clue why the charge is attempted murder.


Would you like to speculate on the unreported story of the driver of a 6 tonne Isuzu truck that ran down 2 cyclists in the bike lane on Reedy Creek Rd at 5.30am yesterday?? The truck stopped 200m up the road then drove off.

One of the cyclists was close to death and had to be revived, has spinal injuries, a punctured lung, broken ribs and shoulder!
Drunkmonkey
 
Posts: 640
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 12:39 pm

Re: Daniel Meers - GoldCoast.com.au - Guilty of Inciting Hat

Postby Mulger bill » Sun Dec 16, 2012 10:14 pm

Jeebers, how many is that in Qld since that article got published? And how many more less serious incidents have gone unreported? :(

Ride safe and watch your backs siblings.
...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: 25798
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:41 pm
Location: Sunbury Vic

Re: Daniel Meers - GoldCoast.com.au - Guilty of Inciting Hat

Postby wellington_street » Mon Dec 17, 2012 11:16 am

citywomble wrote:Wellington street said
It's more likely that the vehicle was coming up the side street and the family crossed in front of it. In that case the pedestrian is required to give way.


He is so wrong, along with far too many motorists and cyclists.
At an intersection, the pedestrian crossing the side street has right of way and the vehicle has to give way. Also
Any vehicle turning out of the side street has to give way to pedestrians crossing the road being joined. No exceptions, all states and territories.


I think you misread my post, citywomble.

I was stating that it looked like the vehicle was driving up the street to the intersection and the pedestrian crossed in front of them. Before turning, not after turning. In this case, the pedestrian is required to give way.
wellington_street
 
Posts: 994
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 12:25 pm

Re: Daniel Meers - GoldCoast.com.au - Guilty of Inciting Hat

Postby gorilla monsoon » Mon Dec 17, 2012 11:56 am

zero wrote:
wellington_street wrote:
It's more likely that the vehicle was coming up the side street and the family crossed in front of it. In that case the pedestrian is required to give way.

Bit difficult to determine this one without some more info...


Driver never observed the child at all - thus car was still accelerating when it hit the child - brake application likely was made well after the impact (1.5 seconds+ for unexpected event) and the thus the car has been turned around and returned to the scene to assist. To be honest - 4wd driver, couldn't possibly imagine they'd run back - that would be like them not doing a lap of the block in case a park opens up right out front next lap. Also I believe its a Q5 - 1800kg personal transport. Not going to be a lot of societal soul searching about the wisdom of 200kw 1800kg high riding, high clearance city cars with a propensity to shove smaller people under them either.


But then again, it's easy to jump to conclusions before any evidence is tendered in court, isn't it? My preference is to consider the facts before deciding on the conclusion.
Some days you are a big, strutting rooster, some days you are a bit chicken and some days you are just a complete cocque. Roger Ramjet: 2009 Giant CRX3 Spockette: 2009 Trek FX 7.3 (WSD, property of Mrs Monsoon) Lady Penelope: 2011 Avanti Cadent 1.0 TdF
User avatar
gorilla monsoon
 
Posts: 2872
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 10:45 am
Location: Central Coast/Lake Macquarie

Re: Daniel Meers - GoldCoast.com.au - Guilty of Inciting Hat

Postby The 2nd Womble » Mon Dec 17, 2012 12:11 pm

Mulger bill wrote:Jeebers, how many is that in Qld since that article got published? And how many more less serious incidents have gone unreported? :(

Ride safe and watch your backs siblings.

The known count stands at 6 separate incidents so far MB. More WILL follow.
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: Daniel Meers - GoldCoast.com.au - Guilty of Inciting Hat

Postby InTheWoods » Mon Dec 17, 2012 12:18 pm

The 2nd Womble wrote:
Mulger bill wrote:Jeebers, how many is that in Qld since that article got published? And how many more less serious incidents have gone unreported? :(

Ride safe and watch your backs siblings.

The known count stands at 6 separate incidents so far MB. More WILL follow.


I must have missed some :( Can you post a list?
Image
User avatar
InTheWoods
 
Posts: 1448
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 2:34 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: Daniel Meers - GoldCoast.com.au - Guilty of Inciting Hat

Postby The 2nd Womble » Mon Dec 17, 2012 12:24 pm

Pregnant lady - eggs thrown.
Attempted murder.
3 of abuse hurled from car windows including 2 swerves. All between SURFERS AND Yatala.
half chewed Sausage roll thrown at teenager in Beenleigh yesterday.
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: Daniel Meers - GoldCoast.com.au - Guilty of Inciting Hat

Postby blkmcs » Mon Dec 17, 2012 12:31 pm

The 2nd Womble wrote:
Mulger bill wrote:Jeebers, how many is that in Qld since that article got published? And how many more less serious incidents have gone unreported? :(

Ride safe and watch your backs siblings.

The known count stands at 6 separate incidents so far MB. More WILL follow.

How does this compare to before the article?
Are we to believe that all was sweetness and light until this was published?

If there is any evidence that any offences were committed because of the article then hopefully Mr Meers will feel the full wrath of the law.
Too old to live, too slow to die.
User avatar
blkmcs
 
Posts: 901
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 1:44 pm
Location: Bayswater, WA

Re: Daniel Meers - GoldCoast.com.au - Guilty of Inciting Hat

Postby The 2nd Womble » Mon Dec 17, 2012 12:37 pm

Fair point. The verbal abuse in 2 cases cited "Meers" or "Meersy" but the rest are unable to be directly linked atm
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: Daniel Meers - GoldCoast.com.au - Guilty of Inciting Hat

Postby RonK » Mon Dec 17, 2012 5:44 pm

So my speculation that this was not an unpremeditated random act of road rage is now shown to be correct.

This was a deliberate attack on rival suitor. That he happened to cycling at the time was a coincidence.

Egg on face for all those who rushed to conclude a link with this inflammatory piece of media commentary.
Cycle touring blog and tour journals: whispering wheels...
User avatar
RonK
 
Posts: 5352
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 2:08 pm
Location: Brisbane, Queensland

Re: Daniel Meers - GoldCoast.com.au - Guilty of Inciting Hat

Postby The 2nd Womble » Mon Dec 17, 2012 6:41 pm

Yes, you were right again and posted to reaffirm it for those of us who previously glazed over the other thread.
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: Daniel Meers - GoldCoast.com.au - Guilty of Inciting Hat

Postby winstonw » Mon Dec 17, 2012 7:30 pm

RonK wrote:So my speculation that this was not an unpremeditated random act of road rage is now shown to be correct.

This was a deliberate attack on rival suitor. That he happened to cycling at the time was a coincidence.

Egg on face for all those who rushed to conclude a link with this inflammatory piece of media commentary.


Wrong....if the rival suitor had been walking down the street with a semi automatic rifle, Glenton would have been mad to attack.
However, the apparent suitor was on a bicycle, ergo a defenseless sitting duck, which green lighted Glenton to strike.
Why Glenton determined someone cycling is an easy target, is open to conjecture.
User avatar
winstonw
 
Posts: 1793
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 7:18 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: Daniel Meers - GoldCoast.com.au - Guilty of Inciting Hat

Postby GraemeL » Tue Dec 18, 2012 3:49 pm

Xplora wrote:
Shred931 wrote:It seems as though that child may have ran out onto the road into the path of the car. Looks like a tragic accident not a case of negligent driving.

I believe the entire reason that the speed limit is reduced to 40 in school zones is because that you can't rely on sensible behaviour from minors (under 18!!) near roads. If it is not negligent driving, why slow the cars down? I doubt this kid would have been hit at 40kmh given the intersection... the car was the problem, not the child.

You slow the cars down to 40 because they cannot respond quickly at 60. The car is a terrible vehicle to have around children of any age. A bike wouldn't have had the same issues as an SUV.

The driver can suffer the guilt - our driving rules place the onus of responsibility on the car because a pedestrian can't take measures to control the 2 tonnes of steel. Our school zone rules CLEARLY acknowledge the risk that a car presents to children. If the driver can't adapt to the riskier conditions in a school zone, then they should not be driving. It is not an accident when it is foreseeable.


I wonder what we did BEFORE 40 kph limits around schools, maybe we taught kids about the dangers on roads and how to cross properly.

Graeme
***Looking For Information About Bicycle Cameras ***

* Bicycle Camera FAQ's *** Mounting FAQ’s & DIY Mounts *
GraemeL
 
Posts: 1290
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 3:47 pm
Location: Perth

Re: Daniel Meers - GoldCoast.com.au - Guilty of Inciting Hat

Postby bardygrub » Tue Dec 18, 2012 4:19 pm

winstonw wrote:
RonK wrote:So my speculation that this was not an unpremeditated random act of road rage is now shown to be correct.

This was a deliberate attack on rival suitor. That he happened to cycling at the time was a coincidence.

Egg on face for all those who rushed to conclude a link with this inflammatory piece of media commentary.


semi automatic rifle, bicycle

Cant remember the last time i seen a gigolo with a semi walking down the street :P
Image
Image
User avatar
bardygrub
 
Posts: 338
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2012 2:33 pm
Location: North East Victoria

Re: Daniel Meers - GoldCoast.com.au - Guilty of Inciting Hat

Postby il padrone » Tue Dec 18, 2012 4:23 pm

GraemeL wrote:I wonder what we did BEFORE 40 kph limits around schools, maybe we taught kids about the dangers on roads and how to cross properly.

KIds walked to school. There were lots of them about. It was obvious that drivers needed to slow down. Most (but not all) schools were on secondary or residential roads. There was (and still is) a clear rule about flagged school crossings, which drivers back then knew and bothered to follow.

Oh, and in many situations there were more child pedestrian deaths than today. Our tiny nuclear families make parents paranoid about their "precious ones", so it seems that the risk of death from traffic and other threats is so much greater today than in the past. Generally these risks are actually much lower.
Riding bikes in traffic - what seems dangerous is usually safe; what seems safe is often more dangerous.
User avatar
il padrone
 
Posts: 18404
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: Daniel Meers - GoldCoast.com.au - Guilty of Inciting Hat

Postby zero » Tue Dec 18, 2012 5:09 pm

GraemeL wrote:
Xplora wrote:
Shred931 wrote:It seems as though that child may have ran out onto the road into the path of the car. Looks like a tragic accident not a case of negligent driving.

I believe the entire reason that the speed limit is reduced to 40 in school zones is because that you can't rely on sensible behaviour from minors (under 18!!) near roads. If it is not negligent driving, why slow the cars down? I doubt this kid would have been hit at 40kmh given the intersection... the car was the problem, not the child.

You slow the cars down to 40 because they cannot respond quickly at 60. The car is a terrible vehicle to have around children of any age. A bike wouldn't have had the same issues as an SUV.

The driver can suffer the guilt - our driving rules place the onus of responsibility on the car because a pedestrian can't take measures to control the 2 tonnes of steel. Our school zone rules CLEARLY acknowledge the risk that a car presents to children. If the driver can't adapt to the riskier conditions in a school zone, then they should not be driving. It is not an accident when it is foreseeable.


I wonder what we did BEFORE 40 kph limits around schools, maybe we taught kids about the dangers on roads and how to cross properly.

Graeme


Over the period 4 years before, till 4 years after the introduction of school zones, total pedestrian fatalities dropped by 29% in NSW (general background reduction), and total school children fatalities by 41%, ie its widely accepted that they are a successful measure.

In any case, this child was crossing the side street properly - ie by NSW law, the driver was required to give way to the child, and the car was probably stopped when the child set out on their crossing, and the child was in the area that motorists should expect pedestrians to be (between the pram ramps).
zero
 
Posts: 2632
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 1:54 pm

Re: Daniel Meers - GoldCoast.com.au - Guilty of Inciting Hat

Postby Zynster » Tue Dec 18, 2012 5:30 pm

RonK wrote:So my speculation that this was not an unpremeditated random act of road rage is now shown to be correct.

This was a deliberate attack on rival suitor. That he happened to cycling at the time was a coincidence.

Egg on face for all those who rushed to conclude a link with this inflammatory piece of media commentary.


As it turned out, it was nothing to do with road rage as originally reported. The post assault was the give away that I think you picked up on. That was personal.

Australians generally have a bad road rage culture. The meekest person will suddenly turn into a snarling F-word spitting demon when confronted with a lane changer with no indicator. Cyclists aren't the only thing in their targets. You'd be pretty naive to think that this opinion piece from Meers isn't going to inflame things though. Some people only need the flimsiest of excuses to vent the rage.
Fausto Coppi Reparto Corse | Giant Farrago Cross
User avatar
Zynster
 
Posts: 1101
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 4:50 pm
Location: West End, Brisbane

PreviousNext

Return to Cycling Safety and Advocacy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: outnabike, toofat



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