A Meter Matters Online Petition
- The 2nd Womble
- Posts: 3058
- Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2011 1:21 pm
- Location: Brisbane
- Contact:
Re: A Meter Matters Online Petition
Postby The 2nd Womble » Wed Jul 03, 2013 3:51 pm
Singapore
Ireland:
NZ:
Spain:
And France:
Then there are other European countries that also successfully enforce 1m. Our police are as well equipped as any police force in the western world, so enforcement should not be an argument.
Huge fan of booted RGers who just can't help themselves
- exadios
- Posts: 515
- Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 2:07 am
- Location: Melville, WA
- Contact:
Re: A Meter Matters Online Petition
Postby exadios » Wed Jul 03, 2013 6:17 pm
Which laws are you refering to?The 2nd Womble wrote: Indeed it is the current law that is unenforceable, and prosecutions/fines are only considered once the cyclist has already been hit.
If minimum safe passing distance laws are successfully enforced around the world then they can be enforced here as well. The fact that so many road rules rely on time/distance and are also enforceable in every state and territory in this country shoots the argument of enforceability to shreds.
Doing nothing and not modifying or replacing 144 is worse than any change at all.
- exadios
- Posts: 515
- Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 2:07 am
- Location: Melville, WA
- Contact:
Re: A Meter Matters Online Petition
Postby exadios » Wed Jul 03, 2013 6:23 pm
None of the photos show enforcement of any law.The 2nd Womble wrote:1.5 is successfully enforced in:
Singapore
Ireland:
NZ:
Spain:
And France:
Then there are other European countries that also successfully enforce 1m. Our police are as well equipped as any police force in the western world, so enforcement should not be an argument.
- Aushiker
- Posts: 22396
- Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 1:55 pm
- Location: Walyalup land
- Contact:
Re: A Meter Matters Online Petition
Postby Aushiker » Wed Jul 03, 2013 6:43 pm
The 2nd Womble wrote:The Pollett verdict is one that BNV must support in that case.Aushiker wrote:Bicycle Victoria on safe passing distances ... http://www.bicyclenetwork.com.au/genera ... ing/10568/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Would love to see some evidence of actual prosecutions based on these more effective existing laws. My experience with the Police suggests otherwise.(Bicycle Network Victoria opposes such laws because they are less effective than existing 'safe passing distance' laws, which can take into consideration other factors such as speed.)
Andrew
Andrew
Aushiker.com
- The 2nd Womble
- Posts: 3058
- Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2011 1:21 pm
- Location: Brisbane
- Contact:
Re: A Meter Matters Online Petition
Postby The 2nd Womble » Wed Jul 03, 2013 7:06 pm
Do you honestly think I posted these to prove their enforcement?exadios wrote:Which laws are you refering to?The 2nd Womble wrote: Indeed it is the current law that is unenforceable, and prosecutions/fines are only considered once the cyclist has already been hit.
If minimum safe passing distance laws are successfully enforced around the world then they can be enforced here as well. The fact that so many road rules rely on time/distance and are also enforceable in every state and territory in this country shoots the argument of enforceability to shreds.
Doing nothing and not modifying or replacing 144 is worse than any change at all.
Huge fan of booted RGers who just can't help themselves
-
- Posts: 323
- Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 2:10 pm
Re: A Meter Matters Online Petition
Postby LM324 » Wed Jul 03, 2013 8:44 pm
From your post, I think you support the 1.5 metres. If 10 cm is the difference between what is considered a safe pass and what "I perceive that the vehicle has shaved my by passing too close" then 1 metre is just not enough. If a vehicle passes within 1.5 metres but the rider is still comfortable and it is a safe pass, I doubt they will report it to the police. If someone passes at 90cm and the rider feels that this is too close and unsafe, they will have a better chance arguing to the police that the driver overtook 60cm closer than what the law says as opposed to 10cm.exadios wrote:
The minimum passing distance law need not supplant or revoke the existing safe passing requirements. The specific and more general requirements can coexist.
I have two problems with any minimum passing legislation. The first problem with the minimum passing law is that it is unenforcable. For instance, a vehicle passes me with a distance of 900mm. I perceive that the vehicle has shaved my by passing too close anf I estimate the distance as 800mm. I go to the police and make a report. They, quite reasonably, ask for any evidence to support my claim. I tell them that I used my calibrated eyeball to estimate the distance. After the officers recover sufficiently from their mirth to regain a standing position they suggest that I leave my eyeball with them and they will check it out. The problem is that it is the prosecution must prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt and 1 meter is an objective standard requiring objective data as evidence.
- exadios
- Posts: 515
- Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 2:07 am
- Location: Melville, WA
- Contact:
Re: A Meter Matters Online Petition
Postby exadios » Wed Jul 03, 2013 10:57 pm
No, the 1.5 meter rule has exactly the same problems as the 1 meter rule.Philipthelam wrote:From your post, I think you support the 1.5 metres. If 10 cm is the difference between what is considered a safe pass and what "I perceive that the vehicle has shaved my by passing too close" then 1 metre is just not enough. If a vehicle passes within 1.5 metres but the rider is still comfortable and it is a safe pass, I doubt they will report it to the police. If someone passes at 90cm and the rider feels that this is too close and unsafe, they will have a better chance arguing to the police that the driver overtook 60cm closer than what the law says as opposed to 10cm.exadios wrote:
The minimum passing distance law need not supplant or revoke the existing safe passing requirements. The specific and more general requirements can coexist.
I have two problems with any minimum passing legislation. The first problem with the minimum passing law is that it is unenforcable. For instance, a vehicle passes me with a distance of 900mm. I perceive that the vehicle has shaved my by passing too close anf I estimate the distance as 800mm. I go to the police and make a report. They, quite reasonably, ask for any evidence to support my claim. I tell them that I used my calibrated eyeball to estimate the distance. After the officers recover sufficiently from their mirth to regain a standing position they suggest that I leave my eyeball with them and they will check it out. The problem is that it is the prosecution must prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt and 1 meter is an objective standard requiring objective data as evidence.
If it is an offence to pass less than 1.5 meters then it is necessary to prove in court (and not to the police as you seem to believe) beyond reasonable doubt that the vehicle passed at less than the minimum. So, imagine that you are the prosecuting counsel. Make your case.
- schroeds
- Posts: 879
- Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 9:58 pm
Re: A Meter Matters Online Petition
Postby schroeds » Fri Aug 09, 2013 2:56 pm
...except it encourages drivers to give you an extra half a meter.exadios wrote: No, the 1.5 meter rule has exactly the same problems as the 1 meter rule..
Encouragement which could save your life. Laws provide provide good guidance to people about what society expects....regardless of whether they are difficult to prosecute. The purpose of the law is not to put drivers in jail, it's to keep cyclists safer.
- InTheWoods
- Posts: 1900
- Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 2:34 pm
- Location: Brisbane
Re: A Meter Matters Online Petition
Postby InTheWoods » Fri Aug 09, 2013 4:07 pm
- Dropbear20
- Posts: 124
- Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 11:21 am
- Location: Singapore
Re: A Meter Matters Online Petition
Postby Dropbear20 » Thu Aug 22, 2013 4:03 pm
It may be law here but I haven't seen it enforced, and in fact like most road rules here it seems to be optional. The chances of this being enforced is very slim when basic things like indicating, staying withing your lane, stopping at red lights/stop etc etc are not or don't appear to be.The 2nd Womble wrote:1.5 is successfully enforced in:
Singapore
- The 2nd Womble
- Posts: 3058
- Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2011 1:21 pm
- Location: Brisbane
- Contact:
Re: A Meter Matters Online Petition
Postby The 2nd Womble » Thu Aug 22, 2013 4:40 pm
Are you in Singapore or Brisbane ATM? Sounds like the day I just had. In fact I passed some muppets in a clapped out blue Festiva HOLDING ONTO the queen ensemble on his roof heading westbound on the Ippy just short of Redbank.Dropbear20 wrote:It may be law here but I haven't seen it enforced, and in fact like most road rules here it seems to be optional. The chances of this being enforced is very slim when basic things like indicating, staying withing your lane, stopping at red lights/stop etc etc are not or don't appear to be.The 2nd Womble wrote:1.5 is successfully enforced in:
Singapore
Huge fan of booted RGers who just can't help themselves
- antigee
- Posts: 1033
- Joined: Sun Sep 01, 2013 10:58 am
- Location: just off the Yarra Trail but not lurking in the bushes
Re: A Meter Matters Online Petition
Postby antigee » Tue Sep 03, 2013 8:35 pm
* yes I know this isn't true but I'm pretty sure a lot of people believe it to be
- exadios
- Posts: 515
- Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 2:07 am
- Location: Melville, WA
- Contact:
- InTheWoods
- Posts: 1900
- Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 2:34 pm
- Location: Brisbane
Re: A Meter Matters Online Petition
Postby InTheWoods » Mon Sep 09, 2013 2:40 pm
I'm also not keen on "share the road" as a message, because I suspect motorists see it as meaning cyclists should share the road by getting out of the way or riding as far left as possible (even on multilane roads) - they don't see the message as being directed at *them*.antigee wrote:was sitting at a busy set of lights in Melbourne today and there was a large poster promoting the 1m matter slogan - think the problem with 1m matters rather than 1.5m is that 1m is too close to the width of the bike lanes which I try to ride far enough out to be able to react to door opening which puts me to close to traffic - I have a feeling 1m matters to safely pass easily becomes give 1m to bikes. (full stop) Would be interesting to know if the ad agency did any forum/feedback on how they were interpreted before using them - I'm pretty sure some people think "the share the road" posters with cyclists two a breast is a reminder to cyclists not to ride 2 a breast because it is illegal is not sharing and stops other people using the road safely*
* yes I know this isn't true but I'm pretty sure a lot of people believe it to be
Re 1m or 1.5m matters, that is always in reference to 1/1.5 meters from the right side of the cyclist to the left side of the car, ie a 1/1.5 meter space in between. Not a 1 meter wide space for the cyclist to fit into with car whizzing by 20 cm away.
- Mulger bill
- Super Mod
- Posts: 29060
- Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:41 pm
- Location: Sunbury Vic
Re: A Meter Matters Online Petition
Postby Mulger bill » Mon Sep 09, 2013 6:48 pm
Never thought of it that way but it goes a long way towards explaining the attitude of some...InTheWoods wrote:I'm also not keen on "share the road" as a message, because I suspect motorists see it as meaning cyclists should share the road by getting out of the way or riding as far left as possible (even on multilane roads) - they don't see the message as being directed at *them*.
London Boy 29/12/2011
- VRE
- Posts: 582
- Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 9:14 am
- Location: Ringwood North, VIC, Australia
Re: A Meter Matters Online Petition
Postby VRE » Tue Sep 10, 2013 7:16 am
Very similar to the attitude of some pedestrians on shared paths; they seem to think that sharing means that the pedestrians (and their dogs) do what they want and the cyclists have no choice but to put up with it.Mulger bill wrote:Never thought of it that way but it goes a long way towards explaining the attitude of some...InTheWoods wrote:I'm also not keen on "share the road" as a message, because I suspect motorists see it as meaning cyclists should share the road by getting out of the way or riding as far left as possible (even on multilane roads) - they don't see the message as being directed at *them*.
- find_bruce
- Moderator
- Posts: 10593
- Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 8:42 pm
- Location: Sydney
Re: A Meter Matters Online Petition
Postby find_bruce » Tue Sep 10, 2013 7:37 am
- exadios
- Posts: 515
- Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 2:07 am
- Location: Melville, WA
- Contact:
Re: A Meter Matters Online Petition
Postby exadios » Tue Sep 10, 2013 2:31 pm
In WA there are no "path rules" that pedestrians are required to follow. On the other hand cyclists are required to avoid collision with the pedestrians.VRE wrote:Very similar to the attitude of some pedestrians on shared paths; they seem to think that sharing means that the pedestrians (and their dogs) do what they want and the cyclists have no choice but to put up with it.Mulger bill wrote:Never thought of it that way but it goes a long way towards explaining the attitude of some...InTheWoods wrote:I'm also not keen on "share the road" as a message, because I suspect motorists see it as meaning cyclists should share the road by getting out of the way or riding as far left as possible (even on multilane roads) - they don't see the message as being directed at *them*.
- VRE
- Posts: 582
- Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 9:14 am
- Location: Ringwood North, VIC, Australia
Re: A Meter Matters Online Petition
Postby VRE » Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:27 pm
Yes, and as mentioned above by myself and others, many pedestrians use these laws as an excuse not to share the so-called "shared" path.exadios wrote:In WA there are no "path rules" that pedestrians are required to follow. On the other hand cyclists are required to avoid collision with the pedestrians.VRE wrote:InTheWoods wrote:I'm also not keen on "share the road" as a message, because I suspect motorists see it as meaning cyclists should share the road by getting out of the way or riding as far left as possible (even on multilane roads) - they don't see the message as being directed at *them*.Very similar to the attitude of some pedestrians on shared paths; they seem to think that sharing means that the pedestrians (and their dogs) do what they want and the cyclists have no choice but to put up with it.Mulger bill wrote:Never thought of it that way but it goes a long way towards explaining the attitude of some...
- Mulger bill
- Super Mod
- Posts: 29060
- Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:41 pm
- Location: Sunbury Vic
Re: A Meter Matters Online Petition
Postby Mulger bill » Tue Sep 10, 2013 4:47 pm
London Boy 29/12/2011
- exadios
- Posts: 515
- Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 2:07 am
- Location: Melville, WA
- Contact:
Re: A Meter Matters Online Petition
Postby exadios » Tue Sep 10, 2013 4:57 pm
If you want this situation to change then you should lobby for a change in the law.
- g-boaf
- Posts: 21438
- Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2011 6:11 pm
Re: A Meter Matters Online Petition
Postby g-boaf » Tue Sep 10, 2013 5:01 pm
Signed.gauchoracer wrote:Greetings all, A work mate drew my attention to this online petition this morning, and I thought it would be a good idea to let all of you know that it is available, if you did not already know of it...
http://www.change.org/en-AU/petitions/a ... e_petition" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Not designed to work against the good work being done by members of this forum, but more to add another avenue of telling the pollies that we do exist, and we Vote...
Thanks..
Be safe...
Max...
- Aushiker
- Posts: 22396
- Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 1:55 pm
- Location: Walyalup land
- Contact:
Re: A Meter Matters Online Petition
Postby Aushiker » Wed Sep 11, 2013 2:14 pm
Done the same.g-boaf wrote:Signed.gauchoracer wrote:Greetings all, A work mate drew my attention to this online petition this morning, and I thought it would be a good idea to let all of you know that it is available, if you did not already know of it...
http://www.change.org/en-AU/petitions/a ... e_petition" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Not designed to work against the good work being done by members of this forum, but more to add another avenue of telling the pollies that we do exist, and we Vote...
Thanks..
Be safe...
Max...
Andrew
Aushiker.com
- VRE
- Posts: 582
- Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 9:14 am
- Location: Ringwood North, VIC, Australia
Re: A Meter Matters Online Petition
Postby VRE » Thu Sep 12, 2013 7:44 am
No, any asymmetry is just your interpretation. What you call an asymmetry, I call an oversight.exadios wrote:The legal asymmetry is an indication that pedestrians are not required to share the path with cyclists. Cyclists are required to share with pedestrians. So, no excuse is required by the pedestrians.
If you want this situation to change then you should lobby for a change in the law.
- exadios
- Posts: 515
- Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 2:07 am
- Location: Melville, WA
- Contact:
Re: A Meter Matters Online Petition
Postby exadios » Thu Sep 12, 2013 9:51 am
In which case you should lobby to have that "oversight" to be corrected.VRE wrote:No, any asymmetry is just your interpretation. What you call an asymmetry, I call an oversight.exadios wrote:The legal asymmetry is an indication that pedestrians are not required to share the path with cyclists. Cyclists are required to share with pedestrians. So, no excuse is required by the pedestrians.
If you want this situation to change then you should lobby for a change in the law.
Return to “Cycling Safety and Advocacy”
- General Australian Cycling Topics
- Info / announcements
- Buying a bike / parts
- General Cycling Discussion
- The Bike Shed
- Cycling Health
- Cycling Safety and Advocacy
- Women's Cycling
- Bike & Gear Reviews
- Cycling Trade
- Stolen Bikes
- Bicycle FAQs
- The Market Place
- Member to Member Bike and Gear Sales
- Want to Buy, Group Buy, Swap
- My Bikes or Gear Elsewhere
- Serious Biking
- Audax / Randonneuring
- Retro biking
- Commuting
- MTB
- Recumbents
- Fixed Gear/ Single Speed
- Track
- Electric Bicycles
- Cyclocross and Gravel Grinding
- Dragsters / Lowriders / Cruisers
- Children's Bikes
- Cargo Bikes and Utility Cycling
- Road Racing
- Road Biking
- Training
- Time Trial
- Triathlon
- International and National Tours and Events
- Cycle Touring
- Touring Australia
- Touring Overseas
- Touring Bikes and Equipment
- Australia
- Western Australia
- New South Wales
- Queensland
- South Australia
- Victoria
- ACT
- Tasmania
- Northern Territory
- Country & Regional
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
- All times are UTC+10:00
- Top
- Delete cookies
About the Australian Cycling Forums
The Australian Cycling Forums is a welcoming community where you can ask questions and talk about the type of bikes and cycling topics you like.
Bicycles Network Australia
Forum Information
Connect with BNA
This website uses affiliate links to retail platforms including ebay, amazon, proviz and ribble.