The constant smear campaign against cycling

User avatar
kb
Posts: 2328
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2011 3:22 pm

The constant smear campaign against cycling

Postby kb » Sun Jan 24, 2016 9:25 am

softy wrote:No no no....
...
Motorists may do dumb things as well, but rarely does it limit the observers passage along their lane.

...

No. I've had someone complain they can't do a simple overtake to get past when there was no traffic only to do exactly that 100m down the road for a parked car.

softy wrote:The reality is the only way this will be addressed is if bicycle lanes are everywhere and bicycles are off the main carriageway or on there own shoulder (seperated) from cars. I can't see attidudes changing anytime soon.

Cycling needs to be recognised as a legitimate use of the _existing_ infrastructure. Certainly more so than regularly dumping your car at the side of the road for convenience :-(
Image

human909
Posts: 8275
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am

Re: The constant smear campaign against cycling

Postby human909 » Sun Jan 24, 2016 11:04 am

trailgumby wrote:It can be done. It just takes leadership from pollies and influencers to tell the anti-cyclist bleaters to shut the hell up and get over themselves and their entitlement mentality.

It's been done with domestic violence. It can be done with road violence.

Other things like fairer road laws that reflect the relative levels of risk and consequence among the various classes of road users would help, and I expect increase compliance. Getting 6 seconds
of green light every two minutes at every bike lane intersection is a recipe for provoking civil disobedience.


Absolutely. It can be done in Australia. And we really have done quite well on speeding and alcohol. As far as acceptance and good behaviour towards cyclists, in the high cycling areas of Melbourne it has happened already in my experience. Simply because of the shear volume of cyclists. But that is the exception rather than the rule.

What is disturbing though is the political leadership in NSW that is pushing the OPPOSITE direction. From my observations most of the other states are at least moving slowly in the right direction from the political leadership.

User avatar
Kalgrm
Super Mod
Super Mod
Posts: 9653
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 5:21 pm
Location: Success, WA
Contact:

Re: The constant smear campaign against cycling

Postby Kalgrm » Sun Jan 24, 2016 11:14 am

trailgumby wrote:It can be done. It just takes leadership from pollies and influencers to tell the anti-cyclist bleaters to shut the hell up and get over themselves and their entitlement mentality.

Pollies only do that sort of thing when there are votes in it. They do the opposite when they think there are votes in it (e.g. NSW at the moment).

How many (exclusive) car drivers are there? How many people regularly ride bikes? Where are the votes going to come from?

Don't expect political relief any time soon.
Think outside the double triangle.
---------------------
Music was better when ugly people were allowed to make it ....

uart
Posts: 965
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2016 9:15 pm
Location: Newcastle

Re: The constant smear campaign against cycling

Postby uart » Sun Jan 24, 2016 4:19 pm

BJL wrote:Moreover, I believe that the constant smear campaign against cyclists is endangering our lives. Darren Hinch for example saying we're 'cockroaches on wheels' and 'should be exterminated'. He is someone who has blood on his hands and should be jail for inciting hatred. But the bogan element of this country are right behind him and now believe they're right when abusing cyclists.

Yes, there's no doubt in my mind that these bad attitudes, inflamed by the shock jocks et al, are endangering cyclist lives everyday.

Take a look at this Media Watch clip. Some of it is almost unbelievable. :evil:

http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/tv/mediawat ... _bikes.mp4

softy
Posts: 1663
Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2014 3:44 pm

Re: The constant smear campaign against cycling

Postby softy » Sun Jan 24, 2016 5:59 pm

Media watch is spot on, same old same old when you mention cycling at a BBQ.

It is not as if they really have a good reason, just it is dangerous for cyclist to be on the road, is the commom statement and they say it is dangerous to pass them and they worry about hitting them.

Reading between the lines they obviously didn't change lanes properly otherwise why would you be woried about hitting them the cyclist.

Even worst, some cyclists defend riding in the gutter, believing this is riding defensively?? Huh!

User avatar
hfinger
Posts: 22
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 10:27 am
Location: Camberwell,

Re: The constant smear campaign against cycling

Postby hfinger » Sun Jan 24, 2016 6:02 pm

Boy, it sure feels good to get your rage/frustration/victimisation off your chest, don't it? Personally, I have found the large majority off drivers sympathetic and helpful. Several times they have stopped, leapt from their vehicles, and given assistance when I have fallen on the road because of my own actions.

Frequently pedestrians and drivers have stopped to let me cross even when they had right of way. Recently I was standing on a footpath well clear of the road waiting for some friends to catch up, when I turned around only to find that a big burly truck driver had waited to allow me to cross although I wasn't showing any intention to do so.

We can all encourage the goodwill out there by giving a smile and wave to drivers even when they are doing what they are obliged to by law. When pedestrians step of the path unnecessarily, call out "Thanks!" as you pass. Sometimes stop and tell them that the bell is not to frighten them but only to let them know you are there, intended to avoid an unintended step in front of you.

It can be a good ice-breaker to explain that cyclists have a very good reason not to run into peds -- they are likely to be badly injured!

softy
Posts: 1663
Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2014 3:44 pm

Re: The constant smear campaign against cycling

Postby softy » Sun Jan 24, 2016 6:12 pm

Well all i can say, i am meeting different drivers,

A lot think it is quite humorous to intemidate peds and cyclists.
I live on a fairly busy road, and even when mowing the lawn, i get hoots and items thrown, when i am doing the verge.

some drivers think it is just amusing to punshment pass.

BIG JOKE ha ha.....

User avatar
AlexHuggs
Posts: 376
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2015 11:12 pm
Location: Perth, WA

Re: The constant smear campaign against cycling

Postby AlexHuggs » Sun Jan 24, 2016 6:22 pm

I think it would be interesting to see the cities and demographics regarding the various responses we get from drivers. Most of my commute is on share paths, a little on bike lanes/shoulders, and a few hundred metres on the road. Admittedly I've only ridden about 1000 km since I've started commuting, and usually the same route, but I could count the number of hostile motorists on one hand, and the number of dangerously thoughtless on the other. The vast majority are courteous and considerate. But I supposed the 1% can make life miserable if you encounter them all at once.

That said, I do think the media is a problem as are some politicians. And I still say the perception this country has of cycling being associated with sports doesn't help either (I mostly blame the media for that, along with the lack of a high-profile transport cycling association).

human909
Posts: 8275
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am

Re: The constant smear campaign against cycling

Postby human909 » Sun Jan 24, 2016 7:00 pm

hfinger wrote:Boy, it sure feels good to get your rage/frustration/victimisation off your chest, don't it? Personally, I have found the large majority off drivers sympathetic and helpful. Several times they have stopped, leapt from their vehicles, and given assistance when I have fallen on the road because of my own actions.

Yep. Most of my rides are fine. Most motorists give me a safe passing distance.

But all it takes is one person who comes within cm of killing you to make it an unpleasant ride. Or in today's case the abuse and threatening behaviour I received when I made it clear that there WASN'T enough space to pass me safely.

Cyclist should not feel at risk on the roads.

User avatar
hfinger
Posts: 22
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 10:27 am
Location: Camberwell,

Re: The constant smear campaign against cycling

Postby hfinger » Sun Jan 24, 2016 7:16 pm

I totally agree with you. I was almost killed by a person driving a 20 m caravan with a Nissan Micra on the back of his dual cab. He went wide to pass but as soon as his vehicle was past, he pulled in, giving me about 30 cm of tarmac. Unnerving to watch a 20 m caravan slide past 12 cm from your bar-end.

The point is that most people who call out "Smidsy" really don't see you for sound principles of psychology beyond the scope of this post to explain.

When people become more accustomed to cyclists this well change. And we can help cyclists be more noticeable by being nice to drivers and peds. This will all help to reach critical mind-mass.

User avatar
il padrone
Posts: 22931
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: The constant smear campaign against cycling

Postby il padrone » Sun Jan 24, 2016 7:26 pm

Sometimes you make yourself more noticeable by being a bit blunt towards drivers, rather than 'Mr NiceGuy'. Like indicating very clearly, and moving out to occupy space when entering a narrowed section of road, roundabout, or chicane. The typical driver may often take this as rudeness and arrogance, as you have been cheeky enough to slow them down for 5.3 seconds. But I would say "Tough titty, bud!"

Put yourself out there, wide in the road lane, so that you are very clearly seen.
Mandatory helmet law?
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."

User avatar
ColinOldnCranky
Posts: 5919
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 4:58 pm

Re: The constant smear campaign against cycling

Postby ColinOldnCranky » Sun Jan 24, 2016 7:52 pm

hfinger wrote:I totally agree with you. I was almost killed by a person driving a 20 m caravan with a Nissan Micra on the back of his dual cab. He went wide to pass but as soon as his vehicle was past, he pulled in, giving me about 30 cm of tarmac. Unnerving to watch a 20 m caravan slide past 12 cm from your bar-end.

The point is that most people who call out "Smidsy" really don't see you for sound principles of psychology beyond the scope of this post to explain.

When people become more accustomed to cyclists this well change. And we can help cyclists be more noticeable by being nice to drivers and peds. This will all help to reach critical mind-mass.

20 foot I think you mean. :)

If he had a Micra on the back of his dual cab then, London to a brick, he was loaded outside of legal limits. These days most people towing loaded caravans with anything but a dual-cab or truck, full load of fuel and bull bars, tow bars and roof racks will be driving outside legal limits, mostly thinking that they are not.

Dealing with caravans is a bit like dealing with trucks and buses.
Unchain yourself-Ride a unicycle
Image

User avatar
Mulger bill
Super Mod
Super Mod
Posts: 28906
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:41 pm
Location: Sunbury Vic

Re: The constant smear campaign against cycling

Postby Mulger bill » Sun Jan 24, 2016 8:26 pm

il padrone wrote:Put yourself out there, wide in the road lane, so that you are very clearly seen.

This. Most smokeboxers aren't actively looking for riders (or anything small enough to not pose a threat).
The only way to beat this issue IMO is to ride where they expect to see something.
...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
hfinger
Posts: 22
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 10:27 am
Location: Camberwell,

Re: The constant smear campaign against cycling

Postby hfinger » Sun Jan 24, 2016 10:25 pm

ColinOldnCranky wrote:
hfinger wrote:I totally agree with you. I was almost killed by a person driving a 20 m caravan with a Nissan Micra on the back of his dual cab. He went wide to pass but as soon as his vehicle was past, he pulled in, giving me about 30 cm of tarmac. Unnerving to watch a 20 m caravan slide past 12 cm from your bar-end.

The point is that most people who call out "Smidsy" really don't see you for sound principles of psychology beyond the scope of this post to explain.

When people become more accustomed to cyclists this well change. And we can help cyclists be more noticeable by being nice to drivers and peds. This will all help to reach critical mind-mass.

20 foot I think you mean. :)

If he had a Micra on the back of his dual cab then, London to a brick, he was loaded outside of legal limits. These days most people towing loaded caravans with anything but a dual-cab or truck, full load of fuel and bull bars, tow bars and roof racks will be driving outside legal limits, mostly thinking that they are not.

Dealing with caravans is a bit like dealing with trucks and buses.

20 m with triple bogies. Mind you, I was too busy staying alive to take accurate measurements. 8^) Could be 15 m; the thing was gigantic, with those "rooms" that slide out from the sides.

User avatar
hfinger
Posts: 22
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 10:27 am
Location: Camberwell,

Re: The constant smear campaign against cycling

Postby hfinger » Sun Jan 24, 2016 10:29 pm

Mulger bill wrote:
il padrone wrote:Put yourself out there, wide in the road lane, so that you are very clearly seen.

This. Most smokeboxers aren't actively looking for riders (or anything small enough to not pose a threat).
The only way to beat this issue IMO is to ride where they expect to see something.

He DID see me but, instead of waiting until the entire rig was clear of me, he pulled in when only the dual cab was clear. Very enlightening watching the side of a caravan snuggling up to you.

User avatar
ColinOldnCranky
Posts: 5919
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 4:58 pm

Re: The constant smear campaign against cycling

Postby ColinOldnCranky » Mon Jan 25, 2016 1:57 am

hfinger wrote:20 m with triple bogies. Mind you, I was too busy staying alive to take accurate measurements. 8^) Could be 15 m; the thing was gigantic, with those "rooms" that slide out from the sides.


It's a bit off topic but here goes. As a reference, a single trailer semi's will be about 16m and that includes the prime mover in front. Caravans will VERY occasionally hit 28" plus about three foot draw bar at the front. I can't recall in which decade i would last have seen one of those. :D

It's almost a universal failure (IMO) is to gauge distances (and speeds too) correctly without training. Until we have to measure up for floor treatments most home owners will rate their room dimensions bigger than they are. Which we need to be cognisant of when mixing with cars as drivers are just the same as the rest of us, they suck at distances and speeds.

Anyway, we should get back to topic now.
Unchain yourself-Ride a unicycle
Image

User avatar
il padrone
Posts: 22931
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: The constant smear campaign against cycling

Postby il padrone » Mon Jan 25, 2016 8:17 pm

Smear campaigns never seem to grow legs in Amsterdam ???

:P

Mandatory helmet law?
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."

softy
Posts: 1663
Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2014 3:44 pm

Re: The constant smear campaign against cycling

Postby softy » Mon Jan 25, 2016 9:27 pm

Hee hee,

No wonder the dutch don't use helmets, their all to drank to be able to fasten up the buckle! :lol:

User avatar
ColinOldnCranky
Posts: 5919
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 4:58 pm

Re: The constant smear campaign against cycling

Postby ColinOldnCranky » Tue Jan 26, 2016 3:02 pm

il padrone wrote:Smear campaigns never seem to grow legs in Amsterdam ???

:P



Some cyclists would do well to consider the passage from 3:20 to 3:50 and then apply it to their own attitudes to pedestrians on shared paths.
Unchain yourself-Ride a unicycle
Image

g-boaf
Posts: 8824
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2011 6:11 pm

Re: The constant smear campaign against cycling

Postby g-boaf » Tue Jan 26, 2016 3:56 pm

ColinOldnCranky wrote:
il padrone wrote:Smear campaigns never seem to grow legs in Amsterdam ???

:P

[].be/XypDTdd4qr0[/]


Some cyclists would do well to consider the passage from 3:20 to 3:50 and then apply it to their own attitudes to pedestrians on shared paths.


The best way to approach pedestrians is to treat them all as totally unpredictable and with caution. That obviously might not make some of them too happy, but when you are dealing with those who have headphones blasting away so loudly you can hear that they are in a sky full of stars with a heavenly view, it is the safest way.

That means going at walking speed unless there is heaps of room to go around them.

User avatar
trailgumby
Posts: 12871
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 5:30 pm
Location: Northern Beaches, Sydney
Contact:

Re: The constant smear campaign against cycling

Postby trailgumby » Tue Jan 26, 2016 4:54 pm

g-boaf wrote:The best way to approach pedestrians is to treat them all as totally unpredictable and with caution. That obviously might not make some of them too happy, but when you are dealing with those who have headphones blasting away so loudly you can hear that they are in a sky full of stars with a heavenly view, it is the safest way.

Indeed.

I had to tap a female iZombie on the shoulder to get past her on the Spit Bridge shared path today. Despite tinging the bell three times, asking loudly "excuse me can I get past please?" twice, she had no idea I was there until I touched her. Then, she jumped. Unfortunately, not quite high enough to make it over the fence and into the water. Disappointing, that. :lol:

BJL
Posts: 470
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2012 6:45 pm

Re: The constant smear campaign against cycling

Postby BJL » Fri Jan 29, 2016 1:07 pm

It was a stupid decision to begin with and ended almost in tears predictably enough, but today I had the self imposed misfortune of reading Australia's official anti-cycling newspaper, commonly known as the Herald Sun (Melbourne) and in particular, the 'Your Say' pages. :(

One letter in particular caught my attention regarding the recent deaths as a result of drag racing on the Western Ring road. According to the author, part of the blame lies with the hoons having nowhere to go and race their cars. Apparently race tracks like Sandown and Calder are being left idle because of the millions of dollars spent on cycling and skateboarding infrastructure! Talk about shifting the blame. This would be like Gena Rinehart blaming the office temp on $20 an hour for her no longer being Australia's richest person (also in today's Hun). What is spent on cycling and skateboarding is less than a drop in the ocean compared to what's spent on motorists. Why didn't he mention the millions spent on tennis, or football, the arts, defense, pollies rorts, or even health and education? Yep, let's make cyclists (and skateboarders) the scapegoat.

The fact that this is printed in a major newspaper and once again, is a letter designed to direct anger towards the cycling community for no other reason than that we exist is disgraceful.

If the letter was written by a random nuff nuff, it might not matter but the author identifies himself as a member of the 'Independent Riders Group'. He doesn't say if he holds a position within that group but he should know better than to blame others for the bad behaviour of members of his own organization or hoon drivers. It's not the fault of cyclists that motorists often display poor behaviour.

Stuff like this continues to pop up and continues to endanger cyclists by validating negative attitudes towards cyclists.

User avatar
mikesbytes
Super Mod
Super Mod
Posts: 18452
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:42 pm
Location: Tempe, Sydney
Contact:

Re: The constant smear campaign against cycling

Postby mikesbytes » Fri Jan 29, 2016 1:29 pm

That's a classic smear article. Anything that desires more funding can be blamed on something else's funding not going to their funding pool. While they are at it why didn't the blame the hospital queue for stomach stapling on the funding of cycling infrastructure spending.
If the R-1 rule is broken, what happens to N+1?

User avatar
il padrone
Posts: 22931
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: The constant smear campaign against cycling

Postby il padrone » Fri Jan 29, 2016 2:13 pm

More Feral-Hun kybosh !!

A TAX on cars entering the city will drive people away from Melbourne. As a policy, it’s a dead end. It suits activist inner-Melbourne councils, who oppose cars and want to see the city crisscrossed by cyclists.


But councils such as Yarra, Port Phillip, Stonnington and Maribyrnong, and the car haters on Melbourne City Council, either don’t understand that not everyone rides a bike, or they don’t give a damn.
Mandatory helmet law?
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."

human909
Posts: 8275
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am

Re: The constant smear campaign against cycling

Postby human909 » Fri Jan 29, 2016 2:23 pm

il padrone wrote:More Feral-Hun kybosh !!

A TAX on cars entering the city will drive people away from Melbourne. As a policy, it’s a dead end. It suits activist inner-Melbourne councils, who oppose cars and want to see the city crisscrossed by cyclists.


But councils such as Yarra, Port Phillip, Stonnington and Maribyrnong, and the car haters on Melbourne City Council, either don’t understand that not everyone rides a bike, or they don’t give a damn.

For the Herald Sun, it actually has far less frothing at the mouth than expected.

Of course all this is precipitated by TWO words in a 52 page document that suggest "congestion levy" as one of many possibilities.
http://www.connectstonnington.vic.gov.a ... 6/download

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Cyclophiliac