AndrewBurns wrote:I wonder how many cars went through there in the same time without coming to the legally required full stop.
It always worries me to see as a first response to criticism something like this. Much akin to responding to a report that a woman was beaten by her boyfriend by voicing the question "I wonder if she upset him by...".
It worries me that you consider the to things comparable. It constantly amazes me how anal some of you guys are regarding such rules.
AndrewBurns wrote:I wonder how many cars went through there in the same time without coming to the legally required full stop.
It always worries me to see as a first response to criticism something like this. Much akin to responding to a report that a woman was beaten by her boyfriend by voicing the question "I wonder if she upset him by...".
It worries me that you consider the to things comparable. It constantly amazes me how anal some of you guys are regarding such rules.
I am not sure how you inferred that I am a stickler for rules. Far from it actually.
My point is quite simply that if Andrew has a problem with the application of the rule then address that by all means. But he did not.
But as you don't see the issue that I was raising then it is not likely that I can explain it to you. cest la vis.
ColinOldnCranky wrote:I am not sure how you inferred that I am a stickler for rules. Far from it actually.
My point is quite simply that if Andrew has a problem with the application of the rule then address that by all means. But he did not.
But as you don't see the issue that I was raising then it is not likely that I can explain it to you. cest la vis.
Sigh Colin it's not that I don't have a problem with the application of this rule to bicycles, I do, I just didn't bother bringing it up because the inevitable reply is "too bad that's the law" which is a perfectly valid argument and so I didn't see a point in making such a comment. Don't assume that by not making an argument I hadn't considered or formulated one.
Seeing as it's been brought up now I think the application of this law to cyclists is wrong and personally I think it would be better if the law allowed cyclists to treat stop signs as give-way signs. The reason for this is that cyclists approach intersections at much lower speeds than motor vehicles and have greater visibility. These two factors give cyclists a better view of oncoming traffic and for longer with more time to react if there is another vehicle coming and they need to stop. I would propose that there was nothing dangerous to what a majority of those cyclists in that video were doing and in the same situation a motorist doing the same thing could very well be dangerous. That said this law will certainly never be changed and so cyclists like me who roll through stop signs at walking pace will just have to accept the very occasional fine as consequence.
It's all about what vehicles think they can get away with.
If there were speed cameras every 100 metres and police at every stop sign, vehicles would not speed and would stop at every sign.
It amuses me that people get all pious about getting pinged for these things when (a) they're not the ones copping the fine and (b) most of those cyclists have probably been riding through that stop sign for months and probably rode through it the day after.....
AndrewBurns wrote:... ... Seeing as it's been brought up now I think the application of this law to cyclists is wrong and personally I think it would be better if the law allowed cyclists to treat stop signs as give-way signs.
I agree. I made a similar point earlier wrt to cyclists in cleats. When the need to stop is absolute and a rider then has to reset a foot into a cleat while entering an intersection road that is, presumably, somewhat hazardous (as it has a stop sign) then the rider is in greater risk than if he slowed/stalled sufficient to view any approaching hazards. Most cyclists in cleats develop the skill needed to hold a short stall pretty quickly.
Though I'd hate to hear the outcry from the ratbag element of the driving community if someone suggested an extra privilege to cyclists!!!. It would not be pretty.
ColinOldnCranky wrote: Though I'd hate to hear the outcry from the ratbag element of the driving community if someone suggested an extra privilege to cyclists!!!. It would not be pretty.
Yeah that's why I don't see it ever changing, why would the government go to all the trouble required to change a law specifically for cyclists (who already get at best disdain from them) when the existing law could be viewed as safer anyway.
jcjordan wrote:I cant remember the last time I saw anyone walking on the other than to cross.
Happens every morning in my suburb.
But then we don't have paved footpaths in our residential streets, so most people use the road. Usually they walk facing the oncoming traffic, and say hello to each other too.
You seem to have missed the definitions excerpt above from the Road Rules stating that "Road User" includes riders and pedestrians.
"People have a right to their own opinions, but not their own facts. Evidence must be located, not created, and opinions not backed by evidence cannot be given much weight." -- James W Loewen
jcjordan wrote:I cant remember the last time I saw anyone walking on the other than to cross.
Happens every morning in my suburb.
But then we don't have paved footpaths in our residential streets, so most people use the road. Usually they walk facing the oncoming traffic, and say hello to each other too.
You seem to have missed the definitions excerpt above from the Road Rules stating that "Road User" includes riders and pedestrians.
That definition was actually posted after my comment.
James Veni, Vidi, Vespa -- I Came, I Saw, I Rode Home
I've never seen the point of Stop signs on intersections, T-junctions and the like. Replacing them all with Give Way signs would make a lot more sense and smooth traffic flow.
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
AndrewBurns wrote:... ... Seeing as it's been brought up now I think the application of this law to cyclists is wrong and personally I think it would be better if the law allowed cyclists to treat stop signs as give-way signs.
I agree. I made a similar point earlier wrt to cyclists in cleats. When the need to stop is absolute and a rider then has to reset a foot into a cleat while entering an intersection road that is, presumably, somewhat hazardous (as it has a stop sign) then the rider is in greater risk than if he slowed/stalled sufficient to view any approaching hazards. Most cyclists in cleats develop the skill needed to hold a short stall pretty quickly.
Though I'd hate to hear the outcry from the ratbag element of the driving community if someone suggested an extra privilege to cyclists!!!. It would not be pretty.
+42
Slow roll to worlds shortest trackstand or full stop if needed. The vehicle is stationary long enough for the operator to complete the risk assessment they started 15-20m back.
...whatever the road rules, self-preservation is the absolute priority for a cyclist when mixing it with motorised traffic. London Boy 29/12/2011
ldrcycles wrote:Though you could then argue that if clipless pedals are so hazardous they should be banned for use on the road...
EDIT:just kidding in case it wasn't obvious, don't want to upset anyone.
Kidding as you are, but overall cleats are safer for fast riding. Simple answer is to try as much as possible to be legal but let safety be the priority - that means, imo, that a stall and then continue if safe is the best option. We can all afford a fine or two. Less so a collision with a car.
Dunno about you lot of clearly super-hero status dudes, but I for one DO NOT want to be treated like a car. I want to be treated like a vulnerable road user, very much like a pedestrian. I do not want ANYONE to think that they can run into me without hurting me, cut me off, squeeze me into a curb or otherwise play chicken with me. I am not a car or a car occupant. I do not have a highly engineered steel box with exploding airbags around me. I am squishy and soft and slow, and if you hit me, all the red stuff will run out and make sad marks on the road. Your anger does not make your day better and if you are running late, it's not my fault, it's yours, or the other cars.
Please, treat me like I'm a wheeled pedestrian, and I'll behave like one, except that I will be a lot more visible at night and I won't ride down the road drunk. This means that sometimes, I might need to roll through a stop sign or walk a red light to make a clean getaway, rather than wind up in a mess of trouble with a bunch of cars. Harassing and fining cyclists does not make the world a better place. Those pele are doing more for climate change than anything. If there is truly renewable energy for transportation, or a perpetual motion machine, it is a bicycle.
Ken Ho wrote:Dunno about you lot of clearly super-hero status dudes, but I for one DO NOT want to be treated like a car. I want to be treated like a vulnerable road user, very much like a pedestrian. I do not want ANYONE to think that they can run into me without hurting me, cut me off, squeeze me into a curb or otherwise play chicken with me. I am not a car or a car occupant. I do not have a highly engineered steel box with exploding airbags around me. I am squishy and soft and slow, and if you hit me, all the red stuff will run out and make sad marks on the road. Your anger does not make your day better and if you are running late, it's not my fault, it's yours, or the other cars.
Please, treat me like I'm a wheeled pedestrian, and I'll behave like one, except that I will be a lot more visible at night and I won't ride down the road drunk. This means that sometimes, I might need to roll through a stop sign or walk a red light to make a clean getaway, rather than wind up in a mess of trouble with a bunch of cars. Harassing and fining cyclists does not make the world a better place. Those pele are doing more for climate change than anything. If there is truly renewable energy for transportation, or a perpetual motion machine, it is a bicycle.
That's awesome!!!!
I just may steal some of that to prop up my attempts at advocacy
Ken Ho wrote:Dunno about you lot of clearly super-hero status dudes, but I for one DO NOT want to be treated like a car. I want to be treated like a vulnerable road user, very much like a pedestrian. I do not want ANYONE to think that they can run into me without hurting me, cut me off, squeeze me into a curb or otherwise play chicken with me. I am not a car or a car occupant. I do not have a highly engineered steel box with exploding airbags around me. I am squishy and soft and slow, and if you hit me, all the red stuff will run out and make sad marks on the road. Your anger does not make your day better and if you are running late, it's not my fault, it's yours, or the other cars.
Please, treat me like I'm a wheeled pedestrian, and I'll behave like one, except that I will be a lot more visible at night and I won't ride down the road drunk. This means that sometimes, I might need to roll through a stop sign or walk a red light to make a clean getaway, rather than wind up in a mess of trouble with a bunch of cars. Harassing and fining cyclists does not make the world a better place. Those pele are doing more for climate change than anything. If there is truly renewable energy for transportation, or a perpetual motion machine, it is a bicycle.
Ken Ho wrote:Dunno about you lot of clearly super-hero status dudes, but I for one DO NOT want to be treated like a car. I want to be treated like a vulnerable road user, very much like a pedestrian. I do not want ANYONE to think that they can run into me without hurting me, cut me off, squeeze me into a curb or otherwise play chicken with me. I am not a car or a car occupant. I do not have a highly engineered steel box with exploding airbags around me. I am squishy and soft and slow, and if you hit me, all the red stuff will run out and make sad marks on the road. Your anger does not make your day better and if you are running late, it's not my fault, it's yours, or the other cars.
Please, treat me like I'm a wheeled pedestrian, and I'll behave like one, except that I will be a lot more visible at night and I won't ride down the road drunk. This means that sometimes, I might need to roll through a stop sign or walk a red light to make a clean getaway, rather than wind up in a mess of trouble with a bunch of cars. Harassing and fining cyclists does not make the world a better place. Those pele are doing more for climate change than anything. If there is truly renewable energy for transportation, or a perpetual motion machine, it is a bicycle.
That's awesome!!!!
I just may steal some of that to prop up my attempts at advocacy
Indeed, help yourself, though if you use the whole thing, I would not mind the credit. Just don't use it to support MHL's. I just thought of a new word, "wheel-estrian". Honestly, I think the whole cycle advocacy movement is in grave error with efforts to have us accorded the same status as cars. We are much more like peds than cars, in terms of vulnerability and how we approach traffic.
ldrcycles wrote:Though you could then argue that if clipless pedals are so hazardous they should be banned for use on the road...
EDIT:just kidding in case it wasn't obvious, don't want to upset anyone.
Kidding as you are, but overall cleats are safer for fast riding. Simple answer is to try as much as possible to be legal but let safety be the priority - that means, imo, that a stall and then continue if safe is the best option. We can all afford a fine or two. Less so a collision with a car.
Would riding fast be considered "riding furiously"?
Methinks the term "riding furiously" is one of those broad brush words beloved by politicians, lawyers and the like as a way of being able to ping somebody they have taken a dislike to who hasn't broken any specific law.
g-boaf wrote:...Perhaps cleats and clueless pedals do need to be banned...
Can you post a link to those clueless pedals? Should suit my style perfectly
...whatever the road rules, self-preservation is the absolute priority for a cyclist when mixing it with motorised traffic. London Boy 29/12/2011
g-boaf wrote:...Perhaps cleats and clueless pedallers do need to be banned...
Fixed that for you.
"People have a right to their own opinions, but not their own facts. Evidence must be located, not created, and opinions not backed by evidence cannot be given much weight." -- James W Loewen
Mulger bill wrote:Methinks the term "riding furiously" is one of those broad brush words beloved by politicians, lawyers and the like as a way of being able to ping somebody they have taken a dislike to who hasn't broken any specific law.
g-boaf wrote:...Perhaps cleats and clueless pedals do need to be banned...
Can you post a link to those clueless pedals? Should suit my style perfectly
Oh DOH!! Damn iPhone and auto-correct. Should be clipless pedals
I like the fact that riding furiously is illegal - any person who is quicker than me is riding furiously and therefore is breaking the law!
Last time I rode furiously was after a big ol' elbow shave with a horn chaser. He saw me in his mirror coming up hard with THAT look in me eyes and ran the red
...whatever the road rules, self-preservation is the absolute priority for a cyclist when mixing it with motorised traffic. London Boy 29/12/2011
It constantly amazes me how anal some of you guys are regarding such rules.
It would not be pretty.
Should be clipless pedals 
