Thread: Cyclists.

This not an isolated incident and yes cars run red lights too but they have compulsory third party insurance to cover these sorts of injuries.

Pedestrian Emily Greenwood run down by cyclist

If they want to use the road fine, get registered, display some identification like a rego plate and pay up like every car driver does and take responsibility for the damage you cause to person and property instead of using "its my right to ride" rubbish.

If this bloke did the bolt there would be no way of knowing who he was even if there was a red light camera.

Originally Posted by Chenz

This not an isolated incident and yes cars run red lights too but they have compulsory third party insurance to cover these sorts of injuries.

Pedestrian Emily Greenwood run down by cyclist

If they want to use the road fine, get registered, display some identification like a rego plate and pay up like every car driver does and take responsibility for the damage you cause to person and property instead of using "its my right to ride" rubbish.

If this bloke did the bolt there would be no way of knowing who he was even if there was a red light camera.

A $67 fine! What a joke!

While she is seeking legal advice, Ms Greenwood does not hold out much hope of compensation.
"I am struggling with mounting medical bills as it is," she said.
Like the vast majority of NSW cyclists, according to data from Bicycle NSW, the offender did not have third party or public liability insurance.

All cyclists on the road should be registered with CTP insurance.
Points for offences should be recorded against their license, whether it be their car license or a bicycle licence. If they lose their license THEY SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO RIDE THEIR BIKE. Just as it is for motorists that commit an offence.

Originally Posted by Chenz

This not an isolated incident and yes cars run red lights too but they have compulsory third party insurance to cover these sorts of injuries.

Pedestrian Emily Greenwood run down by cyclist

If they want to use the road fine, get registered, display some identification like a rego plate and pay up like every car driver does and take responsibility for the damage you cause to person and property instead of using "its my right to ride" rubbish.

If this bloke did the bolt there would be no way of knowing who he was even if there was a red light camera.

So obviously all motorists who do a runner are caught, hmm? Except in the real world.

Pretty tiresome spending time pointing out the logic errors in most of the rego/licence/insurance furphies. Except to say I ride a bike, I am insured, I also drive a Land Rover. Like a probable majority of cyclists (substitute /another make/ for Land Rover as required).

I also know that the number of drivers who are penalised because their rego has been reported after some rule breaking is close to zero. Etc. It gets boring explaining all this to people who can't be bothered doing the critical and objective analysis and prefer to rely instead on 'common sense' or basic prejudice.

So we have 2 consecutive posts about accidents involving cyclists. In one article a cyclist is killed and in the other a pedestrian is injured by a cyclist. Yet we have to listen to the moral outrage about cyclists not being registered.

Can someone please explain how a registration plate would have saved that cyclist's life?

Originally Posted by loneranger

Can someone please explain how a registration plate would have saved that cyclist's life?

It wouldn't in the same way this pedestrians life couldn't have been saved when hit by a cyclist.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2007-08-0...-death/2525134

So, what are you suggesting? Cars shouldn't be registered and shouldn't have CTP?

What I am suggesting is with registration and CTP for the cyclist, Ms Greenwood would be able to claim her medical expenses from being hit by the cyclist on the cyclists CTP in the same way she would be able to claim her medical expenses from the CTP with the registration of a car had she been hit by a car.
Cyclists should not be allowed on the road without CTP insurance.

Originally Posted by Mick_Marsh

Cyclists should not be allowed on the road without CTP insurance.

it was a week or two ago in town a cyclist ran a red light (pedestrian crossing) and hit someone crossing the road. looked like a broken wrist. the pedestrian has to pay out of his own pocket until he takes the cyclist to court to pay damages. it was lucky the rider came off his bike too otherwise without rego, he would not of been identified and im pretty sure given the riders attitude he would of ridden off if he could.

Originally Posted by Mick_Marsh

What I am suggesting is with registration and CTP for the cyclist, Ms Greenwood would be able to claim her medical expenses from being hit by the cyclist on the cyclists CTP in the same way she would be able to claim her medical expenses from the CTP with the registration of a car had she been hit by a car.

Yet if Ms Greenwood had no-one to blame other than herself for an injury shed still be out of pocket. Anyone who is not insured for their own risk faces the same problem. And cyclist caused injuries are extremely uncommon compared to motor vehicle inflicted injury.

Originally Posted by Mick_Marsh

Cyclists should not be allowed on the road without CTP insurance.

And once again, if anyone in power could see the benefit of this (unlike your exalted self) it would be THE LAW SOMEWHERE IN THE CIVILISED WORLD. Says something about the real world that you're not getting, doesn't it? There's not enough benefit in such a scheme to justify it.

People just want someone else to blame for their misfortunes instead of preparing themselves for the unforseen in life. It's pathetic.

Originally Posted by bee utey

People just want someone else to blame for their misfortunes instead of preparing themselves for the unforseen in life. It's pathetic.

So, if someone runs into your vehicle with an unregistered vehicle it's "just your bad luck" & you'll take it on the chin or are you paying exorbitant insurance premiums to cover such an event?