Thread: Cyclists.

Originally Posted by Homestar

Ah, so now the conspiracy against cyclists extends to the entire Police force as well? I'm sure that's why he left the scene then, didn't want those biased Coppers asking him uncomfortable questions about why he smashed the mirror off someone's car - I get it now.

Oh good grief, good old black-and-white thinking comes out again.

You do understand about the fact that evidence existing of many uncaring police officers doesn't negate the existence of those that do indeed care deeply about justice for everyone? That the average cyclist's experience with the police might possibly indicate a systemic problem with their general indifference to justice? That police resources might be biased towards the wealthier classes?

Signing on as a police officer doesn't automatically make you a saint, neither does it automatically make you a crook. After all, the police force simply reflects our mainstream society of predominately conservative thinking. There is no longer a selection pressure to have a majority of old fashioned police officers who care about justice for all, including those they see as a lower class.

I don't inhabit the mind of the mirror smashing bloke but I can at least imagine where he's coming from. He may indeed be a complete tosser but there is precedence for his act of desperation. Deal with the problem from both sides of the argument please, not just from a lofty pedestal of police infallibility. It's a shallow argument.

Originally Posted by Disco Muppet

Drivers, don't be dicks! Cyclists, don't be dicks! Everybody! Don't be a dick! Problem solved. Let's go have a cuppa Sent from my HTC One using AULRO mobile app

Bwaa ha ha....not this thread, it's gunna go longer, harder and in more circles than the Defender vs Disco thread.

I know right...Now we're moving on to the real issue; police as a weapon of class warfare....


Sent from my HTC One using AULRO mobile app

Originally Posted by Mick_Marsh

All supposition on your part.
Yes, I would like to hear the cyclists side of the story, and so would the police.
And yet, the cyclist has not seen fit to come forward and give his side of the story.

We might never know. The cyclist might lose his license over it.
Offenders risk losing their licence
Pity he'll still be able to ride his bike.

Of course it's supposition, that was my point. There is an article which leads everyone to lay 100% blame on the other party based on 50% of the information.

The cyclist did himself a real disservice by losing his cool because as soon as he actually damaged the woman's car, he effectively committed the greater offense of wilful damage. But no, he wouldn't lose his license for the action as demerit points only apply to licensed motoring offenses (at least in Qld). Since a license is not required to ride a bicycle, then you cannot receive demerit points on your drivers' license for cycling offenses in the same way a horse rider cannot lose demerit points.

BTW, the article you linked to relates to the idea of courts deciding to suspend peoples' drivers licenses for road rage which could then be expanded to apply to a range of non-motoring offenses. The idea is not targeted at cycling, but could apply to our mate in the article even if he was walking due to road rage.

Originally Posted by solmanic

Of course it's supposition, that was my point. There is an article which leads everyone to lay 100% blame on the other party based on 50% of the information.

The cyclist did himself a real disservice by losing his cool because as soon as he actually damaged the woman's car, he effectively committed the greater offense of wilful damage. But no, he wouldn't lose his license for the action as demerit points only apply to licensed motoring offenses (at least in Qld). Since a license is not required to ride a bicycle, then you cannot receive demerit points on your drivers' license for cycling offenses in the same way a horse rider cannot lose demerit points.

BTW, the article you linked to relates to the idea of courts deciding to suspend peoples' drivers licenses for road rage which could then be expanded to apply to a range of non-motoring offenses. The idea is not targeted at cycling, but could apply to our mate in the article even if he was walking due to road rage.

Perhaps it should.
To use the road car drivers and truck drivers must be licensed. Why not cyclists?
Fair is fair. The law should be applied to all road users equally.

Oh, in the national road rules, they are. A cyclist can accrue points on their car license. Sadly, they don't require a license to ride a bike. Perhaps they should.

Originally Posted by Mick_Marsh

Perhaps it should.
To use the road car drivers and truck drivers must be licensed. Why not cyclists?
Fair is fair. The law should be applied to all road users equally.

Oh, in the national road rules, they are. A cyclist can accrue points on their car license. Sadly, they don't require a license to ride a bike. Perhaps they should.

So if you lose your car licence,you can't ride the pushy?

That would be a PITA for many

AFAIK if a cyclist, or any other motorists runs up your arse when you tap the brakes it's their fault?

Originally Posted by frantic

AFAIK if a cyclist, or any other motorists runs up your arse when you tap the brakes it's their fault?

trick question
it's always the cyclist fault.