Time to ban all 4WD

Wow!! Your going to cop it!

Hahahaha

Yes Hairy, and I am going to start it !

Your a twit, Wayne.

Do you pay for the roads that you are clearly tearing up in your rig profile?

I have two vehicles which I pay taxes through the nose with, and I ride a bike to work on average once a year. As if bikes will ever have to pay rego, in this economic climate. There is a mass push to bikes, not from! Liek them or hate them, be prepared to see more of them around, and motorbikes, and scooters, and rollerblades.

Stop doing this forum an injustice by portraying yourself as a sterotypical 4wd yobbo.

Go for them Wayne
Sic
It would be interesting to know what really happened.

Saw a kid hit by a car outside my home and everyone was having a go at the driver until I informed them that the kid was hooning down the footpath and simply swerved out onto the road into the front guard of the vehicle definately not the drivers fault.

Spider,

Lighten up laddie!

Spider,
I pay rego on three vehicles and if i had 4 i would expect to do the same for all of my road going vehicles be they cycles or unicycles for that matter. I wouldn't expect it cost the same as a car but the roadworthy and some form of ID is my main concern.

Rego validates my vehicles as road worthy. My brakes are good, my tyres are good, my lights work. This gives me the right to drive on the road because my vehicle is certified safe for me and others, including you on your cycle.
Now, with that rego comes a very bloody visible REGO PLATE (day and night) with a number that lets all law enforcement officers know where i live and where to send a fine if i breach a road rule. This is a marvellous way to ensure that the driver of the vehicle will be careful to abide by the road rules and there will be consequences if he doesn't.

Cyclists have no such constraints on their road manners and i see them regularly run red lights while we have to sit there til they go green and then we have to catch up to them again and try to get past them again in as safe a manner as possible...again.

If the road rules were enforceable on cyclists because there was an unambiguous method of identifying a rider we would see a marked improvement in THEIR respect for other road users. Consequences are a magic way of ensuring responsibilty.

If this view makes me a twit then i am guilty as charged and proud of it...

“I think your stirring for an argument?”

Yep, indeed. Those who reading my posts new very well that I am die hard anticyclist who enjoy cycling only on bike path.

Cheers.

Hey..Im the first to say if cyclists want motorists to treat them with respect and give way to them ,they also need to abide by the road rules.
And in saying that........I ride a motorbike and wouldnt dream of rideing up the centre of the lanes at traffic lights...Hahahaha

G'day Hairy,
I bet you will at least STOP at those traffic lights.... the majority of health nuts i see breathing the copious amounts of CO into their healthy lungs have trouble seeing red lights. Then they bitch about not getting the respect they deserve from those of us who are burdened witrh the responsibilty of complying with the road rules. Well i say they do...

Once a long time ago though it did do me good to see a whole swag of Centennial Park Wankers get pulled up by a cop for running a red, it put a smile on my dial for a week. But that was only once and it was a long time ago, i need to see some more justice regularly.

“Serg i think you just like stirring things up on here”

Borgy, I should confess, if in mood I do :-))))))

Cheers
Serg

Bloody hell Serg , your'e as bad as me ...lol

Wrong, mate - I am worst LOL. Probably (just probably!) you may have slight edge because of your age :-)))))))) But I am catching up quickly!

Cheers
Serg

push bike riders...Red Light runners

Ah go on Eric,
you have to travel the same roads i do around here.

100% correct and came from common sense. But as I said earlier today common sense not that common nowadays. And they believe that they have “rights”.

That's right they have the right to stay home and stay safe

So when Serge's 4WD ends up under a B-Double on the Hume highway I guess we all get to post that he should have repsected the 'it's bigger than me' theory and he got in the way.

All we know about this is that someone has died as the result of an accident, no other information is in the link you have posted.

I guess its all very funny, until it is your son or father.......

Landy!

Where you pull it from?!?!? I DO respect “bigger then me” theory and always steer away from B-Doubles! In the same manner I steer so far away from any “bigger then me” when I am riding bike, that I am not even use roads! Is it not clear from my replay?

And on serious note. In this particular incident we do not know who is right and who is wrong “by law”– may be rider or may be driver. IMHO rider fault by definition – he should avoid to use road at evenings. Sadly, but most certainly they make driver faulty.

Cheers
Serg

Well if the one you don't see gets you..............I'll refrain from being the first to post...

No-o-o-o. Do it. May be someone will learn from my mistake.

Oh, an BTW my will in this forum – do not blame B-Double driver if it happens.

I also abide by the "bigger than me" rule. If I see a semi/b-double/road train coming through a round-a-bout where I have the "legal" right-of-way, I'm not silly enough to just drive blindly ahead knowing full-well that he is gunna collect me as his new bonnet ornament. No! I slow down and stop if necessary and give him a friendly wave. In fact, if I'm quick enough on the UHF, I'll usually say something like ...."you're right mate, bring her on through"......

By the same token, when faced with a similar situation and the vehicle over which I have right-of-way is smaller than my Patrol, (eg: a bike or small car etc), then I EXPECT it to give-way to me (because I am bigger AND I have the law on my side). Needless to say, that even then, if I don't think the driver is going to be able to stop in time etc, I don't simply go ahead and have an accident just cos I'm in the right!!!!

Whatever happened to common sense?

I remember abusing a cyclist in Canberra many years ago. He was riding on Adelaide Avenue near the Royal Aust Mint. Anyone who knows that stretch of road, will know that there is a perfectly good bike path about 15 feet from the side of the road. I blasted my air horns at him as I passed as close as I safely could.......once I got far enough in front of him I stopped off the shoulder, got out and abused the living crap out of him as he approached me and he continued riding. It didn't have any affect on his attitude to the road etc, but by hell it made ME feel a lot better!!! After he passed and I got going again, I tail-gated him for a few hundred meters, blasted him a few more times and then kept going. D!ckhead!!

I'm all for common sense...and I'd give a B-double all the respect it deserves, but if there is an accident and it is at fault then the law should prevail..as it stands. Or do we advocate that we change the road rules to say if it is bigger you're in the wrong if you get hit end of story......

Regretably I bit when the topic was posted..the post was designed to be inflamatory and shows how little respect some have for other road users....no wonder 4WD get a bad name in the press.

Roachie

I do not understand why truck drivers get a bad reputation when they display such rational behaviour!!?
It may interest you to know that bike paths are also frequented by pedestrians, dogs etc, all of which have a tendency to wander all over the path. This makes these paths near useless at times for cycling, so the road is a better option (certain motorists aside).
I do not know if this was the case here and it does not matter - I do not understand why some motorists seem to feel threatened by some-one on a push bike - exactly what was this guy doing to so enrage you (apart from being on a road)?

Roachie

From what you have described this cyclist was doing nothing wrong. yet you felt it was your obligation right to:
1. blast your horn at the cyclist (which is illegal)
2. pass too close - must be at least 1 metre (again illegal)
3. Get out of you car and yell (again illegal - roadrage laws)
4. tailgate (once more illegal)

With such a temper and attitude, perhaps you should stay (with all your gadgets) at home, and leave the road to people who have a greater respect for other human beings.

Quote from IanM: "I do not understand why some motorists seem to feel threatened by some-one on a push bike - exactly what was this guy doing to so enrage you (apart from being on a road)?"

Ian, it's not so much a case of feeling "threatened by the cyclist". It more a case that he is deliberately putting himself in harms way on a busy main road (Adelaide Avenue is one of the main artial roads joining the main city with the satelite areas of Woden and Tuggeranong). With 2 lanes of traffic all heading south at 80k/h, this clown (and many more just like him) likes to ride on the road, expecting car drivers to either brake severely (with the possiblity of causing a rear-end collision or series of same), or for the car drivers to veer onto the opposite lane of traffic, thus icurring the risk of side-swiping a car in the next lane. Of course, if the nasty car driver should happen to mis-judge the situation and bump the bike, there is a better than even chance that the bike rider will come off 2nd best and the car driver (especially if the "car" is actually a 4x4 or truck etc) will be vilified for being anti-social on the road. It is the threat of being taken to court for knocking one of these clowns off his bike (and probably killing him) that worries me and makes my blood boil.

Quote from Robak: "From what you have described this cyclist was doing nothing wrong. yet you felt it was your obligation right to:
1. blast your horn at the cyclist (which is illegal)
2. pass too close - must be at least 1 metre (again illegal)
3. Get out of you car and yell (again illegal - roadrage laws)
4. tailgate (once more illegal)

With such a temper and attitude, perhaps you should stay (with all your gadgets) at home, and leave the road to people who have a greater respect for other human beings. "

My response to your points.......

1. I wouldn't have thought it was illegal to blow the horn to worn another road user about an imminent danger about which they were not previously aware.

2. Slightly difficult to allow any further distance when there is heaps of other traffic on this busy main road. If I had of moved to pass this peanut with a 1 meter gap, I would almost certainly have hit a vehicle in the next lane. If I'm gunna risk hitting some other road user and I've got a choice, let me tell you, it's gunna be the smallest "target" I can find; especially when I consider the "target" should not be there in the 1st place as the taxes I pay have helped to fund a perfectly good bike path only a matter of meters away from where this idiot was riding and there was nobody else using that path at that time.

3. Road rage laws were not in place 18 odd years ago when this incident took place. I consider I was conducting an on-the-road education campaign.

4. Tail gating? I would have been at least 3 meters behind the bike when I was doing this. It was designed to "remind" him that the road is where the "big boys" hang out, not the bikes.

I freely admit that when I lived in Canberra I had a bit of a temper (can you blame ANYBODY who has to live in that god-forsaken place for having a temper...hahaha). Anyway, I have mellowed since then and it is now my considered opinion that any town with a set of traffic lights is too big for me to live in.

In closing, I have 3 young lads that all ride their bikes to school. They are aware that they are on the bottom of the food chain when it comes to riding on the roads or crossing them. They have been taught to give way to EVERYBODY. I would be devastated if anything were to happen to them on the road (of course)....but I'd like to think I'd be understanding enough to not blame the driver of a vehicle if my boy did something stupid and came off 2nd best....... (touch wood I hope I never have to test this theory).

Take it easy and chill out.

Roachie

IanM,

So to avid your own “impracticality” and “inconvenience” you happily use road instead of dedicated path putting into inconvenience dozens of drivers and after all you wonder where they have such wrong attitude toward bikeriders. Funny indeed.

Cheers
Serg

IanM
I think I'd rather get run over by the dog than a truck.

IanM

You said;
"It may interest you to know that bike paths are also frequented by pedestrians, dogs etc, all of which have a tendency to wander all over the path. This makes these paths near useless at times for cycling, so the road is a better option"

I say;
If that is the case then I might drive my 4wd and car in the bike lanes/paths cos there are drunk drivers who swerve over the road and stray dogs running across the road.

Just my thought

Cheers Luke

Hey Serge…..

A number of years ago I had the misfortune to be hit by a car whilst out training on my bike. Tomorrow is the anniversary as it happens. Now bleep happens and I’ve moved on…but let me say this.

I was well illuminated, within the road rules, and exercising all the caution I do on the basis that there are people in cars who simply should be allowed on the road, in short people with your type of attitude. The guy that hit me was drunk and not only did he hit me with the car by cutting across an intersection causing massive injuries, he also left the scene without endeavouring to do anything to assist. Fortunately there were a number of cars that witnessed this and I survived to tell that tale.

Let me tell you, there is no place on the road for drunk drivers either………..

Today, someone else and their family are in the same boat as I was……..you argue he shouldn’t be there. Personally I just hope he pulls through.

meant to say...'should not be allowec on the road'.

Landy,

Where on the earth you get an idea that I advocate drunk drivers? I personally understand only one level of alcohol in blood while driving 0.00. Regardless age, gender, experience etc – trucky and bus drivers can do it, so certainly everyone else can as well. I avoid to drink even can of beer if I intend to drive.
But actually your unfortunate example supports my point of view – you will be injured if you would be on footpath – illegal, but safer. 40 km/hr collision is nothing if we talking cat to car, but can be fatal in case of bicyclist. So get off the road!

Cheers
Serg

And your response supports my view...your a dick#ead!

BTW, by your own admission your original post was designed to 'inflame and provoke'.

Consider me provoked and inflammed........

“And your response supports my view...your a dick#ead!”
Oh, Landy, it is very moot and unclear argument indeed! If you have been checkmated by your own logic, just admit it instead of insult opponent for nothing!

BTW there is obvious typo and should read “you will NOT be injured if you ride on footpath”

Cheers
Serg

I don't consider you an 'opponent' - you're just a plain and simple dick#head.....

See ya

Landy, you are not polite. I have given you very good argument and you instead of defending your position fall into primitive path of abusing the opponent. You are not going to win with such tactic, mate.

Cheers
Serg

Serge

Look below at follow up - I have used your line of logic there.

Now I am starting to understand Roachie's truck and the reasoning behind the size of it hehehehehehehe!!!!

Roachie,

It is actually illegal to blast your horn at a cyclist, but nevertheless thank you for your calm response. It's good to see you've calmed down.

R

p.s.

It may be interesting to note that the last time serg brought this up was when that driver swerved and stopped in front of a group of cyclists causing a crash.

He has now failed to show up in court not once but twice.

In Victoria the law states

"You must only use your horn if it is necessary to warn other road users of the approach or position of your vehicle."

Certainly not illegal to blow your horn at cyclists in Vic.

I doubt it is anywhere else either.

Jim.

Jim

QLD road rules ...

"Do not sound your horn at cyclists—it may startle them and make them fall."

http://www.transport.qld.gov.au/resources/file/ebcb6701eff9247/Pdf_yk_complete.pdf

It's common sense.

Also from that site

"Using your horn
You may only use the horn of your vehicle to warn other road users of your
approach or the position of your vehicle."

Contradictory rules.

Read this:

Five surgeons from big cities are discussing who makes the best patients to operate on.

The first surgeon, from New York, says, 'I like to see accountants on my operating table, because when you open them up, everything inside is numbered.'

The second, from Chicago, responds, 'Yeah, but you should try
electricians! Everything inside them is colour coded.'

The third surgeon, from Dallas, says, 'No, I really think
librarians are the best, everything inside them is in alphabetical
order.'

The fourth surgeon, from Los Angeles chimes in: 'You know, I like
construction workers...those guys always understand when you have a few parts left over.'

But the fifth surgeon, from Washington , DC shut them all up when he observed: 'You're all wrong. Politicians are the easiest to operate on. There's no guts, no heart, no balls, no brains and no spine, and the head and the a$$ are interchangeable.'

=========================

Their (road-rules makers, sort of politicianc) have head and a$$ completelly interchangeable.

Cheers
Serg

Jim,

I think in Roachies case he didn't need to use a horn but did it out of frustration rather than reason.

You don't use a horn every time you're behind another car do you?

Robak,

I'm not entering into the argument.

I'm only looking at the laws. I regularly give cyclists a short, sweet toot on the horn as I get to within 50 or 60 yards of them just to let them know I'm coming. I've always seen it as the curteous and safe thing to do, particularly on narrow roads.

Jim.

Jim,

A short "toot" is ok if not used in anger, However cyclists can hear you coming anyway. Any cyclist who rides often will not only know you are there but will be able to estimate your speed (wind noise), the type of car (by engine and tyre noise), your proximity to the gutter (noise location), and your attitude (by your revs). So using your horn to let them know you're there is really unneccessary.

R.

As a cyclist, I do appreciate the "toot".

As a cyclist I can assure you that one does not always hear an approachging vehicle.

I just do what works for me as a driver and a rider.

I'm a 46 YO ex road racer, of no repute LOL

Still love putting on the helmet, knacker squeezing shorts and gloves and going for a ride.

Jim.

I would just like to clarify something at this stage please.....

I have ALWAYS had respect for cyclists (both motor and peddle). In fact my first several "vehicles" were 4 cylinder road bikes (Honda 350/4, 500/4, 750/4, Kwakka 900 and Kwakka 1000). I have always shown riders the respect they deserve.

The incident about which I spoke further up in this thread was solely related to the fact that this goose was choosing NOT to utilise the path that had been put there for the likes of he and his fellow peddle cyclists. Had there not been any such cycle ways available (they are prolific throughout the ACT), then I wouldn't have felt the way I did on that occasion.

Roachie

When cyclists can ride at the speed limit and not impede the progress of other road users then there will be no problem with them using up a lane during peak hour. Where is their respect for other road users at these times.

People are just trying to get to work and don't need the extra stress of dodging these Kamikazes. Not all of us have the Public Transport option and driving is the only way to get there.

No-one wants to hurt anyone else but i don't want to have to factor in an extra 5-10 minutes on 35 minute journey just because there may be some kiddie on a bike choking up a highway lane.

Waynepd.
You are right.
I have a slightly more understanding approach.
If a cyclist can't average greater than 30kph in a 60 zone with flowing traffic then they don't belong there.
A cyclist who ambulates down the road is a pest BUT they don't deserve to be hurt.(Can probably expect it unfortunately)

If I am on a busy road with traffic I ride in the centre of the lane at greatest speed (30-80kph depending on level or slope) If I can't achieve or maintain this I get off the road.

I have inflicted damage to vehicles in the past ONLY when they have delibarately tried to hurt me.
Have been smacked over the back of the head with rolled up newspaper (yeah it sounds funny) doing 55kph in a 60 zone.
Car full of idiots had a right old laugh. 2 k's down the road I'm 150m behind them when they stop at a red light.
Slow speed to 40 k's, left foot of pedal....drivers mirror gone. Give them the salute and move on.
I have had cars sideswipe me at 60 k's (that's my speed) they're going faster, hence the centre of the lane. 2 more mirrors gone there.

Everyone shares the road.
The common sense approach dictates who should be there.

Just my2c

Paul

"A cyclist who ambulates down the road is a pest BUT they don't deserve to be hurt.(Can probably expect it unfortunately)"....

Paul,
There are times when a leisurely ride down the highway would be less of a problem but peak hour in the city and 'burbs is not one of those times, there are simply too many cars driven by people with deadlines and other concerns driving on caffeine suported auto pilot, not an excuse but a reality. And in Sydney's case they are doing it on inadequate roads.

I would never advocate assault on anyone. Those clowns you mentioned deserve to have the book thrown at them.
Again this is where rego numbers can be handy to report abusers.

Waynepd
40 - 80k's is not a leisurely ride.
That's me (in the past) racing to get to work (or somewhere important) on time.

Should have added ambulating in peak times (even though Sydneys' peaks are getting longer and longer.)

Was a tad a younger when dishing my form of justice.

Cheers
Paul

heheheheheh
yeh a mate of mine with a motor cycle used to do that too.
he ripped one mirror off a woman's car as she changed lanes on him and they stopped.

She said "You bastard!!! you ripped my mirror off"
to which he replied "Well, YOU weren't using it were you?"

Meant to add that you would be one of the responsible riders and probably wouldn't object to having an ID attached to your bike as you adhere to the rules and attempt to do the right thing.

Paul C ,
I have driven down the same creek in your PIC 1 on a 4WD training day .
Willie

Mine was also on a training day.
Not a bad spot!

Oldcoolone,

Reality is – I do not use road when cycling and I strongly believe that cars and bicycle must use separate path everywhere where speed is more then 50 km/hr. And you damn right – “4WD runs into cycle” and no way “Drunk cyclist jump under 4WD” – this is exactly reason of my first sentence.

Cheers
Serg

Spot on Old Girl & Robak. Serg started this crap recently on this site after another cycle incident. From my point of view Serg is just on for a chit stir & ought to piss off or keep his comments on other peoples misfortune to himself.
It's disappointing also to read comments from otherwise seemingly normal, rational people, who now seem to have lost the ability to show compassion by way of supporting this dick heads comments.
If comment needs to be made, let it be constructive, meaningful & take into consideration the need & rights of all road users.
Just my opinion.

Robak,

Do not make any mistake - I am sorry for poor fellow. However each and every time when something like that happens TDC start another “kill 5” or whatever cr@p instead of proper “Get of the road!”. And yes, it p15535 me.

Serg

Barry,

I appreciate your comment that I am abnormal and irrational dick head who started this crap “for a chit stir & ought to piss off or keep his comments on other peoples misfortune to himself.” Constructive comment? What is yours? Mine is simple – get cyclist off the road with 70 or more km/hr speed limit and from 60 km/hr one without dedicated separates (not shared!) bike strip.

Serg

What part of piss off do you have difficulty in understanding?

Some of the above comments are so silly as to be not worth a reply, but the lack of thought exhibited by some is amazing.
Did any-one ever consider that every person commuting by bike is one less car on the road, thus less congestion?
That a bike (legally ridden) will nearly always be quicker in peak hour than a car, because of that congestion?
To people like Serg, if you can get those dedicated bike lanes built that are actually in usefull areas, I will use them. Until then, grow up and treat all road users with respect.
It comes as no surprise that 4WD's have a bad reputation as bully boys when you read some of the nonsense put forward here.

Some cretins ride bikes on the main road (80 km road) in presence of service road (each and every day can be observed on Springvale Rd in Melbourne. They slow down traffic (road very busy and in places hilly, thus bikes move very slow) and I personally witnessed how one clown was holding bus whole of people – poor drive could not jump next line because it too big. But even if he could, he will be forced to go back to pick up or drop off passengers. Probably it is “decrease congestion”, but certainly not by my criteria!

Serg

I am actually coming around to Serges point of view - I like the line of logic it follows. Some cyclists cause problems for motorists, thus they should all be banned from the road.
Lets apply that to 4WDing now. Some cretins in 4WD's make a mess of bush tracks, drive off the road and wreck the bush - the solution (Serge style) is obvious - ban all 4WD's from dirt roads! Problem solved - thanks Serge!!

Sort of true, BTW. Problem only - as far as I observed it those “some 4WD-ers” in absolute minority – even in busiest campsites there are no rubbish. Far you going in the bush, more this apply. It is strongly appears to me that more people like “go far and beyond” more they appreciate nature. Same applicable to tracks – I have not seen remote track deliberately damaged “for fun”. However in close proximity to Melbourne (Yarra Rangers for example) I have seen track badly damaged by brigade “4WD as sport”. Thus I would agree here – lets close those track and lets move “4WD as sport” brigade into quarry. They far too lazy to drive more then 100 km from megapolis. But people who use 4WD to get into places rather then “as sport” will not be much disadvantages by such decision.

Bicycles are different story. More then half of those who ride on busy roads in peak hours plainly brainless. As least because such “exercise” when they inhale whole bouquet of poisons exhausts gases actually make more damage to them then quiet smoke on the bench in park! After observing such irrational behavior how I could expect them to behave rationally on the road?!? Get them off!

Cheers
Serg

Get off your high horse Robak and Barry
No-one here wants the rider to die ,be maimed for life or whatever else. I would say that everyone here feels pity for his family and for him and hopes he has a speedy recovery.

I am surprised that you, as members here, would need that pointed out to you. The members here are decent types at heart and you would know that if you have paid attention during your membership time here.

The points being made are based on long years of tolerance and patience that is wearing thin from both sides, nothing more or less than that. In fact the main blame really rests on the fact that our road systems were never designed to allow for the vehicular traffic they are required to carry and these types of accidents will be a fact of life until they are improved.

Wayne

People on the high horse are the ones who justify putting innocent people in danger because they saw someone, sometime, somewhere run a red light. There would be very little (if any) members here that don't break road rules everytime they drive, (like speeding, following too closely, illegal modifications, not stopping on amber lights etc, ) So these poeple like to "bend" the rules when it suits them yet hop on their high horse when they have an agenda to pan out.

Like you said, the roads are simply not designed correctly so unitl they are, we must respect all other users and realise that our streets have shortcomings.

R.

Robak,

“we must respect all other users”

Golden words – I am first stand behind them and trust that everyone here support me. But how you can then explain your answer to my other port – “because he can”. It contradict each other is not it?

Cheers
Serg

No contradiciton there Serg. "because he can" = "because the law alows him to do that". There wouldn't be too many contradictions in following the law and being respectfull to other road users.

Robak,

You (and all bicyclist advocates for this merit) have very selfish and arrogant approach. You continuously asking for “sharing the road” and “appreciation each other” and so on, but when it comes to the point when you should give courtesy, you immediately recall law. All (and it means ALL) drivers happy to share roads – I do not remember even one intolerant comment toward motorcyclist or scooter riders. Why? Because they do not influent on me at all! On the contrary – I am very happy to have them around because they quickly run away from intersection freeing vital space.

Bicycles riders, however, incredibly intolerant in their majority – they brainlessly want to mess with traffic, slow it down ultimately make traffic as a whole to produce more pollution then if riders will use small cars. For their own selfish benefits they egoistically do not care that they steal vital morning time from dozens and dozens other road users and even from innocent committee on buses. And once one tries to point it out, they immediately tossing their “rights” into my face. So in my humble opinion they deserve even worse reaction from drivers then they got right now. And please forget your (means bicycles community, not your personal) another famous – “Lets everyone ride a bike!”. It not going to happens, as least in Melbourne. Not every working place has a shower; and even if shower room exist it absolutely inadequate if all workers wish to use it in 15 minutes time. Besides some people have to go 50-60km each way – thus killing 2 hours each way each day (very tuff call, BTW!!!) inhaling exhaust gases not really an option.

I am riding bicycle. And I plea you to do what I did – get out of the road voluntary. As least whenever it is possible and definitely during morning peak hours from any road with 70 or more km/h. Then you will have my best courtesy while I am in the car and you need to cross the road. Start evoke your “rights” and do not get upset when I deliberately slow down in front of you to allow you testing what happens in my diesel in full

Best Regards

Serg

Serge
So you are happy to share the road with other vehicles (like scooters etc) as long as they do not inconvenience you in any way - I would have thought that this was the definition of selfish!
Have you never seen any of the countless comparisons of peak hour travel between car and bicycle - almost invariably the bike is quicker, so who is holding up who? Hell, Rob DeCostella was quicker that a car on foot the other day
But I think that this sums you up nicely
"Start evoke your “rights” and do not get upset when I deliberately slow down in front of you to allow you testing what happens in my diesel in full"
No wonder you take so long to get anywhere, showing all those pesky cyclists whats what.
With a disgusting attitude like that, I think even I will adopt the attitude that 4WDers are ignorant pigs who do not deserve to be on the road - take your hulking pollution machine into the bush where it belongs and leave it there!

You are welcome to adopt any attitude, mate. But reality is one “pesky” cyclist can hold dozens ands dozens of people. I personally seen how one annoyed and delayed whole bus that been carrying 80 or so passengers. They never get inconvenienced by other traffic, but they continuously inconvenience ALL OTHER around! So if I try to inconvenience one prick who holding 20 people I get labeled “selfish”, but when this prick inconveniencing 20 people that somehow called “rights” and “law”. Sorry, mate, but it does not seem right to me.

Obviously we can get consensus here, so let stop it and agree to disagree.

Cheers
Serg

Serge, At the risk of prolonging this any more (and god has it gone on!)...

You've made your point. It comes down to this, we're adults and we get to make our own choices. Many of us (cyclists') choose to risk arrogant drivers like yourself. But it is as simple as this if road users, both motorists and cyclists can't abide by the road rules then stay off the road - it is as simple as that.

What surprises me is that only the other day you were arguing that no-one should take your rights away with respect to travelling the Simpson Desert in summer.. Remember you were arguing it was your choice if well prepared. Yet here you are wanting to erode the rights of others......surely not a contradiction, or is it?

Take a look at these two articles, maybe you could get those pesky buses off the road.....they are getting in the way of the cyclists (geez!)

Get on your bike - its faster

Get with the times!

Serg,

I will only continue to answer this because you started this thread in an attempt to stir the pot.

This thread was started (by you) because a cyclist was critically injured when hit from behind by a 4wd. You then steered the arguement that we should not be surprised that this cyclist was hit, and in a way desreved it because you think cyclists wouldn't be on the road.

The fact is the law allows cyclists to be on the road. Just like the law allows your gas guzzling, bullbarred, nature destroying 4wd to be on the road.

So until a law is passed that prohibits you from driving that monstrocity on urban streets you have the "right" to feel safe from retribution..

With your arguement it would be ok for some left wing green group to plant a bomb under your 4wd because... well they just don't like them. And once your family is injured in the explosion you would recieve no sympathy on their greenie forum.

Some people think it's ok for innocent individuals to be targeted and injured because of someones warped ideology of how the world should be. Unfortunately that's the type of person your painting yourself as.

... and by the way, whenever I ride my bike to work. It is I that is stuck behind busses, breathing in their fumes. But that's a price I am willing to pay.
R.

Guys,

With all respect to all of you I will not post in this thread anymore. We can argue up until Armageddon came and will not convince each other. So lets agree to disagree and be friends.

Cheers
Serg

Good idea Serge, especially since you have been shown to contradict yourself.......

Mind you, I won't get caught up in your threads again.......

Serge said

"So lets agree to disagree and be friends."

Agree with the first part - but be friends? I wouldn't have thought so - I like my friends to treat me with respect, on or off my treadly.

That's great to hear Serg. I assume that's also a promise not to start a thread like this the next a cyclist get run over by a 4wd.

I will finish with this:
" A man's worth is not measured by how he treats his friends, but how he treats his enemies."

Keep that in mind the next time you get frustrated (for whatever reason) on the road.

Thank goodness, I've been right through this thread and at last a sensible comment.
Calm down a bit and accept bikes as a part of life, just like traffic lights. Nice if they had their own lanes but often they don't, or if they do, it's totally unsuited to a commuting cyclist.

Topic been beaten to the death (again!), but yet I post one more replay.

“totally unsuited to a commuting cyclist”

Why then you do not ride on residential street or find one that is suited instead of holding and frustrating dozens of drivers and in some instances dozens of other commute in bus? Why do you believe that your time is more important that dozens of other?

Serg

Serg

Because he can.
Just like bull bars are allowed in the city, so are bikes.

R.

Fine. Then please do not ask me why I blow my nigh-powered pneumatic horn on these idiots (that *may* be considered as illegal) or driving exactly in front of them to allow then inhaling everything what came out from my diesel exhaust (no way that can be considered illegal – I just pick up most appropriate safe speed:-))). I can do it because I can. Reaction will always match action :-)

But honestly, I am not that bad. I just hate when people have “rights” instead of brain.

Cheers
Serg

It's just live and let live Serg. I've no doubt that many can recount stupid or selfish behaviour from cyclists but I have no doubt that cyclists can recount stories about 4Wd's.
There's Richard Craniums on both sides of the fence and, from some of comments above, you appear to have taken on the task of representing the 4WD's in this regard.
I'm an ex truck driver who rode bikes for years (gave up because of fumes, one to you!). I now drive a 4WD and curse cyclists who risk their lives in poor visibility but I respect their right to share the road with me.

"Not right, it is perfectly legal."

I wasn't aware that this was legal. Never used to be, when i was a kid we were always told to ride indian file..

This caused the latest cyclist fatality down our way.
Poor bloke was riding beside his mate in a cycling lane and they somehow got tangled up.

One cyclist was flung out into the roadway and was run over by a passing car. This was in a 90km/h zone so the car driver never had a chance to avoid hitting him.

1 life ended and several other lives stuffed in one fell swoop. I still cringe when i see them riding this way.

Are you sue it's legal? I know it never used to be so when did that change?

Following is a link to the NSW RTA site covering bikes.

Can I say that as someone who has ridden bikes a long time and trained regularly on the road, I also share the frustration of other road users when bike riders flaunt the law. But that is an issue for the authorities to control. Unfortuately bike riders who ride through stop signs and red lights do other cyclists no favours as it only creates tensions with other road users.

As a risk management strategy I follow road rules when on the bike as it is a proven way of ensuring that others know what to expect of you and equally you understand how they should react. Most of those I ride with exercise the same policy.

Having said that, it really comes down to all road users showing respect for other road users. As a group (4WDs) we continually find ourselves under attack for any number of things, and especially 4WDs in urban areas with bullbars and we scream blue murder each time someone wants to erode our rights; so we above everyone else should have some sympathy for the rights of other road users such as cyclists.

At the end of the day if you can't abide by the road rules that are set down for all road users than stay off the road. This applies equally to cyclists and other road users......

Cycle rules

Thank You for that link Landy.
And you hit the nail on the head when you said..."ensuring that others know what to expect of you and equally you understand how they should react...."
This is a major difficulty when trying to pass a bike in confined areas, not everyone is good at riding in a straight line. Not everyone reacts predictably to a given situation.
Some can't even talk and ride steadily.

I guess my main thrust with this thread is that there should be accountability for actions for all road users. As someone else said cars still speed and run red lights etc....yes but they run the risk of being booked that bikes have no fear of under the present rules.

What hasn't been touched on yet is:
Regardless of how well you ride and how dilligent you are, accidents happen.
Who pays when a cyclist knocks a little old lady over and puts her in a wheelchair for the rest of her life?
Are you guys insured against injuring people or causing damage to property?

Waynepd

Never having run into a little old lady I am not sure what would happen, but I imagine that the TAC would have some role to fill there.
I agree with you when you say
"And you hit the nail on the head when you said..."ensuring that others know what to expect of you and equally you understand how they should react...."
This is a major difficulty when trying to pass a bike in confined areas, not everyone is good at riding in a straight line. Not everyone reacts predictably to a given situation.
Some can't even talk and ride steadily."
The thing is, those comments apply equally to car drivers, as evidenced by the number of accidents we see each day.
Trust me when I say that those on pushies that do the wrong thing are the despair of those of us that try to right thing - they give all of us the bad name that many on here rant about. But once again, isn't that the same as those who do the wrong thing in their 4WD? Those that intimidate other, smaller, road users (and it does happen) and those that rip up bush tracks in the name of fun - they give all 4WD's a bad name.
All any of us can do is try to do the right thing no matter what our mode of transport - and hope that we do not come across those that have the some-what extreme views exhibited here, among other places, on our travels.

Hi Ian,
i don't know what the TAC is, but i definitely know what would happen if i injure someone with my motor vehicle or damage someone's property.

The insurance i pay yearly in either the comprehensive policy on my vehicle or the COMPULSORY third party portion of my REGO covers these and guarantees that victims are compensated for these results of accidents. PLUS if i am booked i will cop a hefty personal fine and demerit points or even lose the right to drive on the roads for a period of time....That is accountability...

While i would like to think that anyone involved in an accident would stop and render assistance and 'fess up to being at fault, anonimity could make it tempting to slink away and shirk the responsibilty....sometimes human nature is a bitch

That is a good question on insurance for cyclists’ and one that is often overlooked.

Cyclists’ are liable for third party personal injury and property claims – it’s as simple as that. If you have an at fault accident you will be liable to pay, the same as motor vehicle accidents.

Bicycle NSW arranges cover for its members up to a maximum liability of AU$20m.

Cheers

Ok that's great Landy Thanks again.
SO the casual rider like me who wouldn't get on a bike more than twice in 10 years :) and only for a dare. Wouldn't be a member so its up to my honesty and conscience to fork out the dough which could involve selling the family home and other assets in the case of a pemanently crippled victim.

Gee I dunno the flight or fight reflex is starting to kick in here....LOL

I forgot to add, with a nice BIG british type number plate!

Gday Nutta,
So you are saying make them pay for even THINKING of riding on the road ROFLMAO.....

We go to a caravan park every xmas and the kids bikes must be "registered" so any problems either for or against the kids are easily reported to the parents. I have no probs with this idea and can't see why it wouldn't work in the general public.

Cheers, Trevor.

Why does this registration nonsense keep coming up.
Cars are registered, but I seem to notice that it does not stop them speeding, talking on mobile and a whole host of other offenses.
So just because you are registered does not automatically mean you will no longer break the law. (Yes I know you can be identified if you do, but that does not stop the above happening all the time). Where exactly is this rego plate going to go - one that is big enough to be useful and not hide lights etc?
Think about this - my bike weighs about 18kg, my 4WD about 2500 - 140 times as much! 4WD rego is $550 - divide that by 140 and you get $3.90. I would be happy to pay that each year if it would shut up the people that think it would be a good idea. But I reckon the cost to administer such a scheme would far outweigh that $3.90, so the winging would simply transfer to that fact.
Get over it guys, as the cost of petrol rises, and public transport lags behind, there will be more and more bikes on the road.
Perhaps if there were less hulking 4WD's clogging up our streets, congestion would ease and there would be more room for all.
(there you go, a winge for the wingers!).

Gday Ian
$3.90 for rego....
And about $1200 for insurance.....Riding on the road sounds pretty risky?

Nutta,
Never been a fan of the "we have to do it so why shouldnt they" attitude... screwing them isnt going to help you is it?
Wouldnt it make more sense if motorists didnt have to wear rego plates either? That way if they throw rocks at your car, you can run them over and they wont be able to identify you either.
Cruel but fair?

LOL

IanM said........"(Yes I know you can be identified if you do, but that does not stop the above happening all the time)".....

Identification is the point Ian and while it is true it won't stop the die-hard bleep s be they cyclists or motor vehicle drivers, it may serve to control the "honest" ones and provide ACCOUNTABILITY to all road users.

Or should we just apply HAIRYs method and let the Darwin Awards begin. LOL..... Bags not riding in NT

Well here's a thought. They make duplicate car rego plates for bike carriers don't they well then have one made for the bike and the fines go to the owner of the car registered with that number.
That covers wayward children by making their parents responsible (there's that R word again)
Its not even the money side but more the enforced accountability that is needed here.