TAC choose a safe route TV advert

human909
Posts: 8218
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am

Re: TAC choose a safe route TV advert

Postby human909 » Mon Jul 17, 2017 6:18 pm

Do we have advertisements telling other vulnerable groups to go out of their way to avoid dangerous members of the public?

What message would it be sending if we have advertisements telling <insert minority group here> to avoid <insert location here> for their own good?

AdelaidePeter
Posts: 47
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 11:13 am

Re: TAC choose a safe route TV advert

Postby AdelaidePeter » Wed Jul 19, 2017 9:28 am

human909 wrote:Do we have advertisements telling other vulnerable groups to go out of their way to avoid dangerous members of the public?

What message would it be sending if we have advertisements telling <insert minority group here> to avoid <insert location here> for their own good?


We're not a minority group, we participate in a minority activity. The warnings only apply while we're on a bike. Similar warnings would be out if it was common to get around by horseback, which is also legal, but not always advisable. On a more general level, there have been all sorts of public service announcements over the years, advising caution in certain areas of life.

g-boaf
Posts: 8684
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2011 6:11 pm

Re: TAC choose a safe route TV advert

Postby g-boaf » Wed Jul 19, 2017 10:16 am

AdelaidePeter wrote:
human909 wrote:Do we have advertisements telling other vulnerable groups to go out of their way to avoid dangerous members of the public?

What message would it be sending if we have advertisements telling <insert minority group here> to avoid <insert location here> for their own good?


We're not a minority group, we participate in a minority activity. The warnings only apply while we're on a bike. Similar warnings would be out if it was common to get around by horseback, which is also legal, but not always advisable. On a more general level, there have been all sorts of public service announcements over the years, advising caution in certain areas of life.


Cycling is not that much of a minority activity. There are stacks of people riding around near where I work and more than a few where I live (which is not in a trendy inner city area). This whole minority group, minority activity thought has to stop. There is no excuse for the behaviour that is dished out to riders. None at all. Just drive safely around riders, simple as that. Then all routes will be safe.

Interesting all of the "I'm a rider too, but" types who always express extreme outrage to that.

human909
Posts: 8218
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am

Re: TAC choose a safe route TV advert

Postby human909 » Wed Jul 19, 2017 10:58 am

AdelaidePeter wrote:We're not a minority group, we participate in a minority activity.

So a minority group then while we are participating in the activity. (Which is what is being discussed.)

(Which is exactly how I feel when I get abused for simply being a cyclists on the road. But get off my bike and at my destination for sure I am no longer a "minority group".)

g-boaf wrote:Cycling is not that much of a minority activity.

No really it is. Particularly riding for transport, and riding on public roads.

If I take a taxi/car/public transport to work/recreation/the airport that is normal. If I ride a bicycle that is abnormal. I am greeted with shock for riding to the airport. This weekend my bicycle was the only one in the official bicycle racks when I parked and when I left. How many people arriving at the airport each day? (Around 20 thousand inward and outwards movements each day. Yet I was the only bicycle parked at the racks on arrival and return.)

BJL
Posts: 466
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2012 6:45 pm

Re: TAC choose a safe route TV advert

Postby BJL » Wed Jul 19, 2017 5:46 pm

A bit of a rant but hear me out.

Thought I'd post today's little run in with the 'Everything Mornington Peninsula' Fakebook page here. A few days ago, they posted the question 'Cyclists on the Esplanade - Yes or No?' From what I can gather, they're mainly referring to the section between Mount Martha and Safety Beach. For those that don't know, it's a few kilometres of narrow, winding, road with little or no shoulders mainly used by locals or tourists. Along with the post, they used a picture of a group of cyclists who were obviously participating in a group event (numbers on their backs) and riding on the right hand side of the road so it's unclear if those cyclists were even in this country! It's the same tactic used by the turds that started a petition to ban cyclists from riding in The Dandenongs which started off with "This is not about hating cyclists, but" and then used a picture of a pro peleton across the entire road. Like that happens in The Dandenongs :roll: :evil:

So, getting sick of this, I posted the question on their Fakebook page asking 'Motorists on the Esplanade - Yes or No?' along with a picture of a congested LA freeway. Needless to say, it got deleted and I'm now barred from messaging or making comments on their idiot page anymore. That doesn't bother me though. It's the fact they allow people to make comments containing swearing and threats to injure or kill cyclists, but give them a dose of their own medicine and you get blocked. Nothing but cowards.

Why is this on this thread? Because many of the comments of Fakebook claim that the road in question is unsafe for cyclists and pedestrians because it is narrow, winding and lots of blind corners with no shoulder to ride on, along with the usual foul mouthed and thinly veiled threats. So, the road is unsafe for relatively slow moving cyclists and pedestrians who take up very little room on the road, yet it's completely okay for motorists who take up the entire road driving along at the speed limit with absolute disregard for the conditions. Yes, I know! Hard to believe, isn't it :shock: The reality being that it is MOTORISTS who should be banned from using this road. It's not the road that is dangerous for cyclists and pedestrians, it's the motorists.

Hang on, I'm getting there.

Back to the TAC. They tell us to choose the safest route. Well, in this area, this road would be the safest route. The alternative is the Nepean Hwy which is a very busy road with high speed traffic. Cyclists have been killed along the stretch of the Nepean Hwy you'd have to use to get around the Esplanade. So, on one hand we are told to take the safest route whilst at the same time a bunch of idiot self entitled locals who want us banned from the safer route! So which is it?

1Rowdy1
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2017 10:51 am

Re: TAC choose a safe route TV advert

Postby 1Rowdy1 » Wed Jul 19, 2017 6:52 pm

I try to follow safe routes, but around here we have bike paths that just end at some real dangerous sections of road. And I don't believe google maps is really up to date with bike paths/lanes
Cannondale Quick 5
Giant TCR Advanced 2
Polygon Heist 5.0

User avatar
antigee
Posts: 388
Joined: Sun Sep 01, 2013 10:58 am
Location: just off the Yarra Trail but not lurking in the bushes

Re: TAC choose a safe route TV advert

Postby antigee » Thu Aug 10, 2017 1:45 pm

see that TAC have been persuaded by a coalition of Victoria Walks and the Herald Sun to take the advert down from youtube because of the blatant breaking of Vic Parks no cycling on Kane's Bridge rule

plenty of cyclist/pedestrian war type journalism plus the usual comments

google

Herald Sun TAC flouts

if you desire to read without linking to the paywall

TAC continue to defend the message given in the Ad'

BJL
Posts: 466
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2012 6:45 pm

Re: TAC choose a safe route TV advert

Postby BJL » Thu Aug 10, 2017 4:28 pm

The Herald Sun is a joke.

Funny story, the Hun ran a story a few months ago and published a picture of one of their regulars riding a bike without a helmet :shock:

I took a photo and messaged the Freestyle Cyclists Facebook page who put it up :mrgreen:

According to some comments, the lady in the photo has been very anti cyclist in the past. :lol:

gtext
Posts: 31
Joined: Fri Apr 14, 2017 7:20 pm

Re: TAC choose a safe route TV advert

Postby gtext » Thu Oct 19, 2017 5:45 pm

Earlier this year the Victorian government under dopey Dan decided that they would not be implementing a passing distance rule for motorists. Instead they were going to implement an education campaign to make motorists aware.
Guess this has been put in the too hard basket as nothing further has happened with that idea.
Summer and fine weather coming up and therefor potentially more cyclists on the roads.

Philistine
Posts: 89
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2016 1:57 pm

Re: TAC choose a safe route TV advert

Postby Philistine » Fri Oct 20, 2017 10:54 am

gtext wrote: Instead they were going to implement an education campaign to make motorists aware.


Any motorist who needs to be educated into giving cyclists a reasonable space is surely too dumb to be entrusted with the control of a motor vehicle. Of course, "reasonable" is subjective, and I was well pleased when NSW brought in the one metre law, because it provided a fixed measurement. A motorist (or a motorist's lawyer) can always argue in court what is reasonable, but a metre is inarguable.

User avatar
trailgumby
Posts: 12809
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 5:30 pm
Location: Northern Beaches, Sydney
Contact:

Re: TAC choose a safe route TV advert

Postby trailgumby » Fri Oct 20, 2017 12:35 pm

BJL wrote:Back to the TAC. They tell us to choose the safest route. Well, in this area, this road would be the safest route. The alternative is the Nepean Hwy which is a very busy road with high speed traffic. Cyclists have been killed along the stretch of the Nepean Hwy you'd have to use to get around the Esplanade. So, on one hand we are told to take the safest route whilst at the same time a bunch of idiot self entitled locals who want us banned from the safer route! So which is it?

It's simple. It is "We hate cyclists".

"Get off the road!" OK, let me ride on the footpath.
"Get off the footpath!" So gimme separated bike paths
"Why are we wasting $millions on bikepaths?" :evil:

Very few ask "why are we wasting $billions on roads", when it is clear the benefit/cost ratio is marginal, compared to the wildly positive ratio for bike infrastructure.

The psychology runs along the lines of the person in the bigger vehicle with the least vulnerability having the biggest sense of entitlement.

human909
Posts: 8218
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am

Re: TAC choose a safe route TV advert

Postby human909 » Fri Oct 20, 2017 10:29 pm

One minute it is a "safe" route and a major CBD bike route. The next minute it has this to add to the dangers.

Image

I think the TAC should spend more time educating the government about their responsibilities to providing a safe roadway that about lecturing cyclists.

fat and old
Posts: 2853
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2014 12:06 pm
Location: Mill Park

Re: TAC choose a safe route TV advert

Postby fat and old » Sat Oct 21, 2017 12:52 pm

City West Water I'd say. No non-slip coating either.

THIS is a suitable Worksafe issue.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users