open topic, for anything cycling related.
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25 ... 77,00.html
CYCLISTS who kill or seriously injure pedestrians face up to five years in jail or a $68,000 fine under a safety crackdown by the Victorian Government.
From today, there will be tougher penalties for dangerous riding offences and for cyclists who damage property and flee.
Previously, cyclists who rode dangerously or carelessly or failed to stop after damaging property faced fines of between $340 and $570.
Roads Minister Tim Pallas said the new measures were in response to community concerns.
"These new penalties will help police tackle reckless riding by cyclists and reduce the likelihood of pedestrians, other cyclists or drivers suffering serious injury,'' Mr Pallas said.
"We're driving home to cyclists the need for them to obey road laws or be punished.
"There are now harsher consequences for what are serious offences.''
Mr Pallas said the laws put cyclists on a similar footing to motorists when it came to being charged with serious traffic offences.
Other new penalties include a maximum fine of $13,610 and/or 12 months in jail for dangerous riding, and a fine of up to $567 or up to 14 days in jail for damaging property and failing to stop.
The measures are part of the Government's goal to lower the road toll by 30 per cent by 2017.
load of !! BAN ME NOW FOR SWEARING !!. load of !! BAN ME NOW FOR SWEARING !!. !! BAN ME NOW FOR SWEARING !! !! BAN ME NOW FOR SWEARING !! !! BAN ME NOW FOR SWEARING !!.
Enforce road rules, by all means. Compel acquiescence as you wish. Do it evenly. A widely reported tragic incident on the Beach ride doesn't equal a spate of such antics, if I'm not mistaken. Mr Pallas should be made accountable for such craven !! BAN ME NOW FOR SWEARING !! statements.
Definition of the terms reckless cycling, careless cycling and dangerous cycling might help.
But at least mainstream news media is playing a crucial role in puppeting the government AND making me laugh.
Do or do not. There is no try
If that's true, presumably we can kill other road users through gross negligence and get away with a slap on the wrist by claiming we didn't see them...
Those Victorian cyclists are a tough bunch if they cause 1% of serious injuries to pedestrians and drivers. Mr Pallas must think that since reckless driving has been stamped out itâ€™s time to find new targets. Either that or the Vic police have decided pursuit of reckless cyclists is safer than reckless drivers.
What's the betting that within the next 18 months to two years Mr Pallas or whatever his name is will start lobbying for rider licences for cyclists?
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
taxes, and a message to cyclists-
oil companies run the government; so get back into the safety of your car.
so glad I dont live in victoria, and so sad if other states follow this trend.
cycling groups better get their act together soon. so who is going to protest these laws?
If they're serious about this, how about implementing a proper driver education system? They hand car licences to people who can't drive properly, and then fine them for it! It's a completely absurd situation. In Germany, it takes a year of study and practise to earn your licence. Better than a few lessons and a 15 minute test, isn't it?
Anyhow, the first politician who tables the licensing of cyclists will NEVER get my vote.
Surley bike riders which claim equal rights to using road etc should be liable to similar penalties for negligence etc, particuarily when it causes death or damage to property as other road users do.
To me it just seems an alignment as previous penalties are obviously insufficient. Whilst it is a noted case they rider who hit and killed the guy on beach road got away with a slap on the wrist and he was in the wrong running a red light i remember. If a car run a red light and killed a cyclist those who are critisising this announcement would be up in arms if the driver recieved a similar fine.
Ah, well, there's nothing for us to worry about then, is there? Slaps on the wrists all round.
Sounds fair to me.
Fair point - the maximum penalty for negligent driving in NSW is 10 years' jail. At the end of the day, magistrates are highly unlikely to hand out the maximum penalty to anyone not thoroughly deserving it.
Tim Pallas's comments are what makes the whole thing seem a little absurd... Cyclists are typically the ones 'severely injured' by drivers, not the other way around, yet they often get away with it. Fair enough to introduce new laws to make everyone accountable for their actions, but stating that this is part of a campaign to reduce the road toll by 30% is just bizarre - two pedestrians were killed by cyclists in the past decade - unless it's a subversive move aimed at persecuting cyclists until they abandon the road altogether and aren't available to be killed by motorists...
Two dead peds in a decade? Oh my God it's veloanarchy out there!
Gotta slap them naughty cyclists while a truck driver runs a red light, kills eleven, injures many more and traumatises three of my colleagues to the point that two of them are unlikely to ever work in the industry again and gets off scott free.
Not in this Govt.
I WILL NOT vote for this lot at the next election. Populist media driven w4nkers!
...whatever the road rules, self-preservation is the absolute priority for a cyclist when mixing it with motorised traffic.
London Boy 29/12/2011
A lot of cyclists, including on these boards, having been calling for a "Vulnerable Road Users" law.
Well they seem to have introduced something but it only applies to walkers!?!
This should have been implemented as a complete solution, giving riders additional protections.
As it stands, its very tough on us, with no benefits.
Maybe they misunderstood, hence the tough new laws cracking down on freeloading vulnerable road users...
I saw this story just before this thread was started, and decided to have a long think about it before posting.
IMHO, it just puts cyclists in the same category as motor vehicles. It puts meaningful fines on the kind of bad behaviour that we wouldn't accept by car drivers, and we shouldn't accept by other cyclists. The sad part is that these laws are aimed at the minority of cyclists who think that the rules don't apply to them, and a few of them are going to get made an example of so that all cyclists get the message that riding at speed through red lights and crowds of pedestrians is not acceptable. Mind you, they could have tried enforcing the existing laws before deciding to increase the fines.... but I guess it's cheaper to increase fines than increase police presence.
And I'm sure the pedestrians bitch about us cyclists as much as we bitch about the car drivers.
Edit: anti-pedant change.
Last edited by twizzle on Fri Jun 19, 2009 9:46 am, edited 1 time in total.
I ride, therefore I am.
...real cyclists don't have squeaky chains...
So when I'm riding down Swanston St at a perfectly legal 30 kmh and a pedestrian steps straight out in front of me........
Who cops the dangerous cycling fine???
Riding bikes in traffic - what seems dangerous is usually safe; what seems safe is often more dangerous.
Well put. Cyclists are so often wanting to be treated as equal road users. This is part of that. It's the same as the speeding fine v revenue raising argument - if you dont break the law you have nothing to worry about (I on the other hand, have made the odd donation to the governments coffers ). The laws havent changed, just the penalty for breaking it. HTFU I reckon.... In saying that, I still think Tim Pallas is a knob, but I already thought that.
was having this exact conversation just the other day, sparked by a news article about woman complaining that she doesnt have time to give her kids 100 hours (or whatever it is) "instruction". plenty of countries have compulsory driver training. why dont we?!?!?
Ok I am confused...
The Government has recognized cycling as an important means of transport...
So does that mean cycling will get an important means of funding, just like the other road users?
Bicycles are vehicles. This makes us a scapegoat for failed transportation policy. We feel this scapegoating every time auto drivers abuse us.
We have as much right to use the road as anyone else, and do not break laws any more often, than other users. Unfortunately, other users often abuse us.
Why isnâ€™t this clear to either of you?
Who is online