News & Discussion: Roads & Traffic

[mshagg]

What some people will do to avoid paying for something.

I assume you mean paying for a license, although that's meeting you more than half way given the goalpoasts in this discussion seem to be pretty mobile.

Every study into the matter settles on the figure that 4 out of 5 incidents between cars and cyclists have the motorist at-fault. The road toll is ~1200 per annum, almost entirely made up of licensed drivers colliding with one another, or stationary objects. Presumably these motorists all have paid for a drivers license, yet it seemingly does little for the "safety of their behaviour"?

Do you really think a licensing regime addresses non-compliance? Do you think clowns who blow through red lights on a push bike do so because they don't know that it's an offense to do so? SAPOL announced today they caught 48 drivers a day using a mobile phone behind the wheel in February. That's a staggering 17,000 people a year - and only represents the percentage that SAPOL are catching - most of whom, it is reasonable to assume, are "paying for" their right to use the road. 15 a day are being caught not wearing seat belts, the single biggest contributor to your chances of dying in a crash. But it's ok because they've "paid to use the roads"? What behavioural change are you suggesting would come from a licensing regime?

[rev]

How many motorists do I see breaking road rules every day? Lots. But there's already a system and mechanisms in place to deal with that. Is there some reason you don't think cyclists who now use the same roads as motorists, shouldn't be held accountable as well?

SAPOL issued 800 infringements to 400 odd cyclists during a three week period that coincided with the TDU. To suggest cyclists are not accountable is to hold a very distorted view of reality.

Geez Louise.
It's like I'm posting in a foreign tongue.

I get it, you are pro cycling on the roads and to hell with cars. All cars are evil spawns of satan him self, and satan's minions possess not only the vehicles computers but the drivers as well. We motorists are devils. We get it.

But just because police conducted an operation targeting cyclists during a brief period of time, doesn't mean there is a system in place that holds them accountable for their actions while riding their bikes on public roads as there is with motorists.

If Bob sees a motorist breaking the road rules, he can take down the motorists rego and report him to the police.
If Bob sees a cyclist breaking the road rules, Bob can't report it to the police because there is nothing to identify that cyclist, like a registration plate.

How much simpler can it be put?
Do I have to get a niece or nephew to do some crayola art work for you people to understand?


How can you ride on the road, without first having to obtain a license?
I have a drivers license, I still had to go do practical sessions to get a motorbike license. Very costly in fact.
Because riding a motorbike is not like driving a car.
Just like riding your bike is not like driving your car.
So the argument that's been used in this thread, that you already have a car license, should exclude you from having to get a bike license, is flawed.

And the fact that 400 cyclists were pinged by the cops during a single operation, should tell you that some regulation is needed.

If motorbikes or cars were unlicensed and unregistered, and 400 were pinged in one operation, there would be many calling for something to be done.
But the lefty socialist greeny loser pc mentality that's got this country in a vice grip and is ruining it bit by bit has ensured the same thing wont happen with regards to cycling hoons.

We should seriously consider swapping the TDU for the F1 with Melbourne. Maybe all the lycra hoons will piss off with that over hyped event.

[realstretts]

If Bob sees a motorist breaking the road rules, he can take down the motorists rego and report him to the police.

Please, do this, and then see what the cops do about it - which will be absolutely nothing, because they did not see it. They cannot prosecute or take action on what another person from the public claims happened on a road, unless there was a crash or someone was injured/killed. So many drivers run reds or infringe on traffic regulations everyday that if they went after every single thing they'd run out of resources real quick. They'll only follow up on traffic infringements that have been observed by law enforcement. That is ludicrous and I find it hilarious you think cops would take action on a traffic infringement on the sole basis a member of the public saw it.

I know. Because i've provided video evidence of a car almost cleaning me up, with clear view of rego plate. And the cops did sweet fuck all. Imagine what they would do if you simply stated you saw it with your own eyes, without video evidence. They'd laugh you out of the building.

Unless someone is killed or seriously injured they will not do anything unless they see it out on the beat

[rev]

If Bob sees a motorist breaking the road rules, he can take down the motorists rego and report him to the police.

Please, do this, and then see what the cops do about it - which will be absolutely nothing, because they did not see it. They cannot prosecute or take action on what another person from the public claims happened on a road, unless there was a crash or someone was injured/killed. So many drivers run reds or infringe on traffic regulations everyday that if they went after every single thing they'd run out of resources real quick. They'll only follow up on traffic infringements that have been observed by law enforcement. That is ludicrous and I find it hilarious you think cops would take action on a traffic infringement on the sole basis a member of the public saw it.

I know. Because i've provided video evidence of a car almost cleaning me up, with clear view of rego plate. And the cops did sweet fuck all. Imagine what they would do if you simply stated you saw it with your own eyes, without video evidence. They'd laugh you out of the building.

Unless someone is killed or seriously injured they will not do anything unless they see it out on the beat

Here we go again, another one who can't read.

Please go read my post again, and tell where I said I think the police will take action.
In fact no, don't bother going back and reading it, I'll copy-paste it for you right here, this time I'll make it stand out so you have no excuse and can actually read it.

If Bob sees a motorist breaking the road rules, he can take down the motorists rego and report him to the police.

Now feel free to point out where I said that the police will do something about the report.

No, can't find it? Gee I wonder why.

As for your "I reported someone with video proof and the cops did nothing"...based on the fact you got my post so wrong, I doubt the other driver did anything wrong in the eyes of the law, hence why the police did nothing wrong. Feel free to post the video, I don't care either way about your experience.

https://www.police.sa.gov.au/your-safet ... us-driving

When making a report provide the:

time, date and location of the incident
vehicle details, including registration number and description of the vehicle
details of the driving behaviour that you thought was dangerous
contact details of any witnesses.

Be prepared to give your name and contact details.
What is dangerous driving?

Dangerous driving includes:

tailgating
running red lights
speeding
burnouts
donuts
snaking

[Goodsy]

there's no footpaths out here so I have to jog on the street, will I need to register my shoes and wear a license plate on my ass? bicycles aren't in the same category as cars and motorbikes they in their own category of personnel transport and to try and lump them in with something that they're not is just silly.

People putting lawnmower engines on a bicycle is a different story

[rev]

there's no footpaths out here so I have to jog on the street, will I need to register my shoes and wear a license plate on my ass? bicycles aren't in the same category as cars and motorbikes they in their own category of personnel transport and to try and lump them in with something that they're not is just silly.

People putting lawnmower engines on a bicycle is a different story

So you place a motorbike and a car in the same category?
Personal transport? That's exactly one of the uses of a motorbike and a car.
How am I trying to lump push bikes in with motor vehicles?

A truck weighs more then a car, it is harder to drive, it takes longer to stop and accelerate.
A car weighs more then a motorbike, it takes longer to stop, is harder to maneuver.
A motorbike weighs less then the above. It is contrary to popular belief, not as easy as riding your push bike. You may have a car license and know the road rules, but that doesn't qualify you to ride a motorbike.
A push bike weighs less then all motor vehicles on the road. It is harder to see then other vehicles on the road. Other vehicles on the road have indicators which allow other road users to know that the vehicle ahead is turning left or right, or slowing down. A push bike does not have these features.
At night it is difficult to see the riders, despite many having their flashing lights. There is still no way to know which way they will turn.
They are required to use their hands to give signals to other road users. But you almost never see them doing that. They just swerve in front of other vehicles, cut across roads, etc.

I've come to the conclusion that the cyclists on this forum who are arguing with me, are guilty of being dangerous road users on their push bikes.
What other reason would anyone have to argue against common sense and logic being used to make the roads safer for all road users and creating a balanced system of accountability where every road user can be held accountable for their behavior on the roads?

No footpath? Maybe you should talk to your council about that.
Or maybe you should go jogging where there IS a footpath. Common sense really. Do I want to be jogging/walking/running on a road with vehicles flying past me(I assume you aren't superhuman and can't sustain speeds of 60kmh on your feet), that will likely leave me in a wheelchair at best or worse kill me...? Or should be a bit more sensible and use some common sense and logic and go jogging in a park or chose a route that has footpaths and therefore minimizes the risk to me?

Hmmm, tough choice.

[Llessur2002]

If Bob sees a motorist breaking the road rules, he can take down the motorists rego and report him to the police.

Please, do this, and then see what the cops do about it - which will be absolutely nothing, because they did not see it.

Here we go again, another one who can't read.

Please go read my post again, and tell where I said I think the police will take action.
In fact no, don't bother going back and reading it, I'll copy-paste it for you right here, this time I'll make it stand out so you have no excuse and can actually read it.

If Bob sees a motorist breaking the road rules, he can take down the motorists rego and report him to the police.

Now feel free to point out where I said that the police will do something about the report.

No, can't find it? Gee I wonder why.

So what's the point?

If you openly admit in big bold coloured text that you know the cops won't do anything about it then how can you advocate that a rego scheme for cyclists will "make cyclists accountable for their actions". No action by the cops = no accountability = your whole argument does not stack up.

I go back to my previous suggestion that you're really looking either to: a) level the playing field between cars and cyclists in terms of red tape required to use the roads or b) hoping to discourage road users who have a you perceive to be spoiling your driving experience. I presume given your username you're a motoring enthusiast (I ruled out vicar) so maybe the latter?

[Goodsy]

there's no footpaths out here so I have to jog on the street, will I need to register my shoes and wear a license plate on my ass? bicycles aren't in the same category as cars and motorbikes they in their own category of personnel transport and to try and lump them in with something that they're not is just silly.

People putting lawnmower engines on a bicycle is a different story

A push bike weighs less then all motor vehicles on the road. It is harder to see then other vehicles on the road. Other vehicles on the road have indicators which allow other road users to know that the vehicle ahead is turning left or right, or slowing down. A push bike does not have these features.
At night it is difficult to see the riders, despite many having their flashing lights. There is still no way to know which way they will turn.
They are required to use their hands to give signals to other road users. But you almost never see them doing that. They just swerve in front of other vehicles, cut across roads, etc.

If you run over a cyclist the worst that's going to happen to you is a scuff mark on your front bumper. Buy a dashcam and prove that they were at fault, maybe even change the laws so cyclists have a duty of care and are assumed to be at fault unless it can be proven otherwise.

I've come to the conclusion that the cyclists on this forum who are arguing with me, are guilty of being dangerous road users on their push bikes.
What other reason would anyone have to argue against common sense and logic being used to make the roads safer for all road users and creating a balanced system of accountability where every road user can be held accountable for their behavior on the roads?

I'm not a cyclist, I don't even own a bike. Every encounter with a cyclist that I've had was fine. The only time that it was a little bit of an inconvenience was driving on a two lane 80kph road with oncoming traffic so I had to slow down and wait for the traffic to pass to give them cyclist the 1m gap, it added maybe 3 or 4 seconds to my drive

No footpath? Maybe you should talk to your council about that.
Or maybe you should go jogging where there IS a footpath. Common sense really. Do I want to be jogging/walking/running on a road with vehicles flying past me(I assume you aren't superhuman and can't sustain speeds of 60kmh on your feet), that will likely leave me in a wheelchair at best or worse kill me...? Or should be a bit more sensible and use some common sense and logic and go jogging in a park or chose a route that has footpaths and therefore minimizes the risk to me?

Hmmm, tough choice.

I doubt the Mallala council is going to put in footpaths before they seal my road and add gutters/stormwater drains

[realstretts]

If Bob sees a motorist breaking the road rules, he can take down the motorists rego and report him to the police.

Please, do this, and then see what the cops do about it - which will be absolutely nothing, because they did not see it. They cannot prosecute or take action on what another person from the public claims happened on a road, unless there was a crash or someone was injured/killed. So many drivers run reds or infringe on traffic regulations everyday that if they went after every single thing they'd run out of resources real quick. They'll only follow up on traffic infringements that have been observed by law enforcement. That is ludicrous and I find it hilarious you think cops would take action on a traffic infringement on the sole basis a member of the public saw it.

I know. Because i've provided video evidence of a car almost cleaning me up, with clear view of rego plate. And the cops did sweet fuck all. Imagine what they would do if you simply stated you saw it with your own eyes, without video evidence. They'd laugh you out of the building.

Unless someone is killed or seriously injured they will not do anything unless they see it out on the beat

Here we go again, another one who can't read.

Please go read my post again, and tell where I said I think the police will take action.
In fact no, don't bother going back and reading it, I'll copy-paste it for you right here, this time I'll make it stand out so you have no excuse and can actually read it.

If Bob sees a motorist breaking the road rules, he can take down the motorists rego and report him to the police.

Now feel free to point out where I said that the police will do something about the report.

No, can't find it? Gee I wonder why.

As for your "I reported someone with video proof and the cops did nothing"...based on the fact you got my post so wrong, I doubt the other driver did anything wrong in the eyes of the law, hence why the police did nothing wrong. Feel free to post the video, I don't care either way about your experience.

https://www.police.sa.gov.au/your-safet ... us-driving

When making a report provide the:

time, date and location of the incident
vehicle details, including registration number and description of the vehicle
details of the driving behaviour that you thought was dangerous
contact details of any witnesses.

Be prepared to give your name and contact details.
What is dangerous driving?

Dangerous driving includes:

tailgating
running red lights
speeding
burnouts
donuts
snaking

Dangerous driving also constitutes passing a cyclist within one meter, of which there are numerous examples online of reports being made with video evidence that police will not even bother with a citizen report. It isn't even about them taking action, it's that the act of doing so is futile unless there is sufficient evidence.

I'd link you but I'm sure you will not even click through to checking them out.

Hey, why not, here is a compilation of BianchiCams close passes, which clearly evidence dangerous driving - of which no police acted upon when presented with this evidence.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTohN7n4rl0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTohN7n4rl0[/youtube]

I highly doubt you have reported any motorist or cyclist indiscretions to the police over the last 12 months.... it is simply a mechanism for you to attempt to justify an illogical, ineffectual and absurd imposition on a healthy activity, an activity where no where else in the world is such an imposition placed on that very section of society for very good reasons.

[rev]

Christ I swear some people are either intentionally talking out of their rear ends and making things up claiming I said things I clearly havent(even in big bold red text) or they really can't read!!

Btw, so much for claims the Police don't do anything when people report dangerous driving.
There was a high speed chase in Edwardstown today after people reported a female driving dangerously.

Quite a big police response wouldn't you say?

I haven't reported anyone in the last 12 months? Why the last 12 why not the last 13 months?
I've had great success with getting a police response to feral bogan hoons.

See unlike you I don't expect the police to send the STAR group and helicopters the moment I get off the phone with them.

You're right I won't click your links or look at your videos.
I lose interest in annoying individuals who can't read and then attempt to make out I've said things I've clearly not said.

[rev]

I doubt the Mallala council is going to put in footpaths before they seal my road and add gutters/stormwater drains

Ah those minor details hey, they make all the difference in giving a clear picture of the situation.

[realstretts]

Christ I swear some people are either intentionally talking out of their rear ends and making things up claiming I said things I clearly havent(even in big bold red text) or they really can't read!!

Btw, so much for claims the Police don't do anything when people report dangerous driving.
There was a high speed chase in Edwardstown today after people reported a female driving dangerously.

Quite a big police response wouldn't you say?

I haven't reported anyone in the last 12 months? Why the last 12 why not the last 13 months?
I've had great success with getting a police response to feral bogan hoons.

See unlike you I don't expect the police to send the STAR group and helicopters the moment I get off the phone with them.

You're right I won't click your links or look at your videos.
I lose interest in annoying individuals who can't read and then attempt to make out I've said things I've clearly not said.

This just highlights how pointless licensing and/or registering cyclists would be - high speed chase? hah. precisely why cars need licensing and bicycles do not. I have not seen one news story about a cyclist killing a fellow road user because of their dangerous riding. And this is not because of their lack of licensing, it is because it rarely, if ever happens.

Dangerous driving with potential to kill or maim happens on a daily basis. Police have much more reason to go after something like that than a renegade cyclist who runs a few red lights.

Your argument rests on a sole premise, and it is shaky at best

[mshagg]

I've come to the conclusion that the cyclists on this forum who are arguing with me, are guilty of being dangerous road users on their push bikes.

Personally speaking im a mountain biker, which thankfully minimises my exposure to the dangerous (and uniquely australian) attitudes many drivers have regarding vulnerable road users. Incidentally, various levels of government have poured millions of dollars into Adelaide's MTB facilities in recent years... luckily no angry bogans objecting to the 'free ride' we're getting there. Yet.

Your obsession with muscly dudes riding bikes in skin tight clothing is misguided. The enthusiasts will jump through whatever licensing/registration hoops you set up for them... leaving people to come up with a whole new set of reasons to whinge about. They're not just going to go away, which is clearly the intent of regulating the harmless activity of riding a bicycle. The people affected are the mums, dads, kids, students, working commuters etc which are precisely the groups of people we need to encourage into cycling for all of the health, environmental and traffic benefits which an uptake of cycling provides. Its these people who are already put off the idea because of poor attitudes held by some motorists which put cyclists lives at risk.

Great idea swapping the TDU for the F1. Let's get rid of an event which nets the state some $50mil of benefit and replace it with an event which charges the government $70mil for the privilege of hosting

[Waewick]

These conversations remind me a lot of people who are against incentives for renewable energy (or eV cars for that matter) despite coal/petrol/ desiel being provided huge subsidies over the last 100 years.

[drsmith]

I'll comment briefly on the licencing of cyclists on roads.

A road by its nature requires the full attention of all users due to the speeds attained for the effective transport of both people and goods. Therefore, as a matter of basic principal, all users of a road as a transport corridor should be licenced with the exception of simply needing to cross it.

Under that principal, cyclists who use the road should be licenced. This doesn't need to be a difficult process but should also include some education and/or training on road use.

For those with a motor vehicle licence, that could simply include to riding a bicycle with traffic infringements incurred on the bike to apply against that licence holder.

Adults without a motor vehicle licence could simply be required to pass a road rules test (perhaps the sale as a driver's L plate test) and pay a token fee for a bicycle licence. Traffic infringements would also apply with demerit points to count against that person's qualification to apply for a motor vehicle licence.

The licencing process for minors could be handled through the local school with no or a token cost and include road use lessons and the test described above. Such a licence would require parental/guardian consent and penalties for traffic infringements of a minor would apply to the responsible parental/guardians. For this purpose, the licence itself would need to include the name of a parent/guardian.

All licence holders should be required to carry ID when using a road. I note that in SA, cyclists of all age can now legally use the footpath. This is therefore an option for those who don't wish to obtain a licence.

If the same rules and conditions apply to all users of a road and all users have had some form of structured road use education, that's likely to deliver the safest outcome for all.