Thread: Cyclists.

This topic comes up on social media a lot and it always ends up as a heated slanging match.

The main issue is that people seem to have become less tolerant of others on the road. I would be lying if I said that cyclists have annoyed me at some time or another but in the end it comes down to being courteous of others using the road.

Some people also forget that whilst cyclists don't pay rego for every bike you have to steer around it is one less car contesting your road to work.

Thanks guys. I was speaking to the SIL about it over Xmas and he really was very lucky. Because he was in serious training he had the latest gidget which records your speed etc every second.


He was in the bike lane and the car just turned right in front of him. He only had enough to brace for the impact. The data recorder had him going from 40km/hr to zero in the 1 second recording parameter.

Originally Posted by sam_d

Interesting you should say this as I was only thinking about this thread on a short while ago.

That particular thread contains boasts and admissions of law breaking, admissions of being ignorant of laws and plenty of anecdotes about other road users breaking the law and driving dangerously. Yet these are all forgotten when a chance to moan about cyclists appears.

Common curtesy from both sides could defuse a situation before it arises.

Originally Posted by Ace

This topic comes up on social media a lot and it always ends up as a heated slanging match.

The main issue is that people seem to have become less tolerant of others on the road. I would be lying if I said that cyclists have annoyed me at some time or another but in the end it comes down to being courteous of others using the road.

Some people also forget that whilst cyclists don't pay rego for every bike you have to steer around it is one less car contesting your road to work.

If they drove their car at 5-40 kph in 60-80 kph zones they would get booked.
Tolerance and understanding is a 2 way street. Riding on cycleways not in the middle of the vehicle lane would be nice. Realising they are not as quick to accelerate as a motorbike, car, electric wheelchair so should not cut to the front at traffic lights would be considerate. Realise that a flow on from slowing/jamming up traffic is actually more fuel use and more minor pranks.
Stop trying to muddy the water and understand most are complaining about their conduct in busy areas which should require rego, not kids riding in the burbs. So rego only for bikes on 4 lane roads, or within x km of CBD and any road over 60kph.
No child should be riding their bmx next to high speed traffic, only adults should be able to self nominate for a Darwin award.

Originally Posted by frantic

If they drove their car at 5-40 kph in 60-80 kph zones they would get booked.
Tolerance and understanding is a 2 way street. Riding on cycleways not in the middle of the vehicle lane would be nice. Realising they are not as quick to accelerate as a motorbike, car, electric wheelchair so should not cut to the front at traffic lights would be considerate. Realise that a flow on from slowing/jamming up traffic is actually more fuel use and more minor pranks.
Stop trying to muddy the water and understand most are complaining about their conduct in busy areas which should require rego, not kids riding in the burbs. So rego only for bikes on 4 lane roads, or within x km of CBD and any road over 60kph.
No child should be riding their bmx next to high speed traffic, only adults should be able to self nominate for a Darwin award.

No they wouldn't.

Driving too slowly is not Law in Australia although it is in some other countries.

Increased fuel use is not a consideration in road management. In fact I was at a party some years ago and the topic got on to syncronisation of traffic lights (or lack thereof) and how it only adds to driver frustration and increased fuel use and the morons who manage it. One of the people in the group piped up and said: "well that would be me then" he was one of the mythical RTA employees who control traffic light synchronisation. His information was that their instructions from the road safety committees was that they were to limit the number of consecutive green lights that a motorist encounters. The reason was that consecutive green lights encourages speeding and increasing red lights "calmed" the traffic. I have no idea if the committee's instructions were based upon research or the opinion of individuals like Harold Scruby who seem to populate committees such as these.

Originally Posted by Lotz-A-Landies

Driving too slowly is not Law in Australia although it is in some other countries.

There might not be a law covering driving too slowly, but there are other laws which could be applied, like obstructing traffic, or it could constitute dangerous driving.

It is illegal to drive so slowly that you unreasonably obstruct the
path of the vehicle behind eg driving at 20 km/h in
an 80 km/h zone when there is no reason to do so

Originally Posted by d2dave

There might not be a law covering driving too slowly, but there are other laws which could be applied, like obstructing traffic, or it could constitute dangerous driving.

There may be other laws but there isn't a ticket in them.

You can almost guarantee that such an alternative charge will be challenged in court. This means that the police officer will have to write briefing notes for the police prosecutor and attend court for the day, irrespective of whether he is on duty or not. Most police will choose not to issue the ticket and save the trouble of prosecuting the offence in court.