Thread: Cyclist aware drivers... are you one?

Yep, what do they call it, skylarking.
Saw a good one one morning around eightish. I was on an old W class tram, middle of winter, quite cold and gray. Two coppers were walking slowly side by side, not too close together, walking their beat in heavy great coats.
Enter our protagonist. An old, wrinkly, sinewy, fit jogger in shorts and a singlet.
Jogging up behind the coppers, arms elevated, the jogger jogged between the coppers tipping off both hats as he passed between them and immediately broke into a sprint with his chin in the air. A scream to watch.
The coppers tried to give chase but didn't have a hope. They gave up.
Made my day, made my week.
This sort of thing happens all the time.

Leonard Teale would have caught the jogger, showing my age

Originally Posted by bob10

until you pay for the privilege , stay on the bike paths. Just a thought. Bob

Bob, the nearest bike path to me is probably 300km away.

I'm starting to think that the 'bikes must pay rego' brigade is all about someone seeming to be getting a benefit 'they' aren't.

In other words, simple jealousy.

FWIW I pay well for roads through my Land Rover rego, $500/year of that is motor vehicle tax as I use the Deefer for work, we all pay fuel excise, etc.

Another thought, cars, and particularly trucks damage the roads quite a bit.
Trucks pay for some of this this through higher charges.

A bike doesn't damage the road one bit.
It produces no pollution in use (except for the riders flatulence)
It reduces the load on the health care system by increasing the fitness level of the user (except when hit by a car)

Originally Posted by rick130

FWIW I pay well for roads through my Land Rover rego...

No, you don't pay for the road through rego. Rego does not pay for the roads. I can't believe how many times this needs to be said.

The roads and their maintenance are paid for through general taxation and local rates. Rego does not pay for roads.

However, you do pay for the roads from the taxes you pay. Everyone who pays taxes contributes to the roads.

People who don't own their own private motor vehicle actually subsidise those of us who do.

Next time people start to say cyclists are 'getting something for free' I suggest they try and educate themselves as to how the roads are funded and realise that cyclists who aren't also drivers are net contributors to the system.

I thought the argument for rego on this post was all about accountability. Being identifiable via the rego. I'd suggest it would be next to useless to have a licence plate on a bike. It simply wouldn't be visable. You would have to have a number plate light for night riding. Or have I misinterpreted the points being made pro rego?

Originally Posted by davidsonsm

I thought the argument for rego on this post was all about accountability. Being identifiable via the rego. I'd suggest it would be next to useless to have a licence plate on a bike. It simply wouldn't be visable. You would have to have a number plate light for night driving. Or have I misinterpreted the points being made pro rego?

Well, given the story only a few posts back, do you think that joggers should wear rego plates too?

The main issue with rego isn't one of identification or accountability. The heart of the matter is that some people mistakenly think that cyclists are getting something for free.

And the original subject if this thread was about being 'cyclist aware' but instead it has turned into a jamboree of ignorance.

I believe the rego issue is a side bar discussion and has nothing to do with drivers being aware of cyclists - and vice versa for that matter.

I guess what I'm concluding through this thread is that cyclists are begging for tolerance above and beyond. Cyclists need greater allowance and can't be judged by car driving standards. Bikes are more exposed than pedestrians. However the posts on here seem to judge cyclists as though they were a car. If there's any substance to that conclusion, then that is what needs to change. Unfortunately, unless we're all killed by vehicles, we're here to stay. Extra allowance please.

Originally Posted by sam_d

No, you don't pay for the road through rego. Rego does not pay for the roads. I can't believe how many times this needs to be said.

The roads and their maintenance are paid for through general taxation and local rates. Rego does not pay for roads.

Rego on my Defender is something like $136, motor vehicle tax or levy, can't recall the wording ATM is over $500 and I pay that at rego time, it's part of my registration and listed on the rego paper.

Whether it goes into consolidated revenue or not is immaterial, my point was that I already pay through direct and indirect taxation for roads, etc.

We're singing from the same song sheet regarding bike registration, and as said a bike plate would be tiny and almost impossible to read.
If it was large enough to read it would be a danger to the rider and pedestrians.

Bicycle rego would be like the tv licence in the UK, just dumb.