Look, every day I go to bed at strange hours, out of the regular cyclist waking hours (4-5am)
I wake up every morning at 5am, not from trucks, not from cars, from people yelling at each other on their bicycles while riding through St.Lucia.

It's summer right now, and it's too hot to close the doors outside, the delicious cool which is the morning dew helps regulate my body temperature which the various machines in my house try to counter. I like to sleep cold so a sheet or maybe if i'm lucky a blanket can cover my body. But it's neither the heat nor the cold that wake me in the morning, it's the three word sentences which cause my lack of sleep.

Just shut up while you ride your bike ok? Or ride on that fantastic bike/walking path that has been constructed with thousands of taxpayer dollars. That has a sound barrier constructed through trees bushes and tall grass which separates you from my home. It keeps you quiet. There is no reason for you not to use it, and I thought you were into cycling because you liked getting fit. So the extra 5-10 meters that you would travel using it you should relish right?

Apparently not.

Shh. I'm trying to sleep.

I like it on weekends when they take up the whole road out at samford and wont move.

Iv started either splitting between them (they don't like that) or I sneak up with my clutch in and drop the clutch next to them (they REALLY don't like that)

I don't mind single file but move the f*** out of the way. This happened one day in the car too, riding side by side and I couldn't get past, after about 10 mins of doing 40- I beeped them, one turned around and gave me the finger.

I scooped up a bunch of silver change I had, pegged it out the window and listened to the ping ping ping. Funnily enough he moved then.

Or put up a sign.

trying to avoid unneccessary attention. You know those bicycle types. they're real rebels.

Edit: ps you do realise they ride in packs of 15-30

Holy s*** Spook that photo is nasty. Man.

skythra, bucket of waterbombs by the front door before you go to bed ;)

seriously though, i get so f*****g cranky when i can't sleep/get woken up. i'd be f*****g furious if i was you - i'd seriously do something. cyclists gtfo.

skythra, wear ear plugs - that's what I have to do to ignore the cars/buses/trucks/motorbikes/scooters that drives past my house every morning (and midnight). Also, I find it very hard to believe that yelling cyclists make more noise than cars. Please record some audio.

Or ride on that fantastic bike/walking path that has been constructed with thousands of taxpayer dollars. That has a sound barrier constructed through trees bushes and tall grass which separates you from my home. It keeps you quiet. There is no reason for you not to use it, and I thought you were into cycling because you liked getting fit. So the extra 5-10 meters that you would travel using it you should relish right?

Which bike path are you talking about? The only bike paths I know around St Lucia are the ROADS. Seriously Council... you're idea of a bike lane is just painting a picture of a bike on a lane of traffic?

I don't mind single file but move the f*** out of the way. This happened one day in the car too, riding side by side and I couldn't get past, after about 10 mins of doing 40- I beeped them, one turned around and gave me the finger.

I scooped up a bunch of silver change I had, pegged it out the window and listened to the ping ping ping. Funnily enough he moved then.

Riders are legally allowed to ride in twos and they are not obliged to travel at the speed limit - if they're riding more than two across, you should report them, just like you'd report a dangerous driver.

Don't get s***** at the riders - Brisbane City Council hates riders AND drivers. For the most part the riders are doing the right thing on the roads and more often than not the drivers don't know the road rules. If you don't know the road rules, you shouldn't be driving a car.

agreed... and GET OFF THE F*****G ROAD YOU C****

qft

Ah, a typical morning on the Internet. It looks like we've uncovered another sociopath.

I'm a cyclist and even I hate the groups or obnoxious c****.

I ride solo at an appropiate time (5-6 in summer before work traffic, 9+ in winter to avoid school) and choose a route that allows me to avoid taking up a lane.

I take up a lane 5% tops and that's due to roadworks, small bridges, roundabouts, dodgey corners and whenever I'm out of options and it's only for 10-15 seconds at the most.

I never understood all these knobs riding in packs, GTFO off the road... no wonder you need to ride for 3 hours and s*** everyone off, you're riding f*****g 30km/hr /shrug.

I'm a cyclist and even I hate the groups or obnoxious c****.

Groups don't bother me - it's when they ride more than two across that is annoying.

Reminds me of a Yarra Trams guy giving a cyclist a bit of curry a few weeks ago. 9/10 bike riders use the tramways in the city to scoot around which doesn't impact tram times and keeps the cyclists away from dangerous cars and footpaths but this one bloke stopped between two trams at the Flinders St / St Kilda Road stop and was taking a while to get going.

The YT guy gets on the PA and says "You on the bike, don't worry about using the bike paths the government has spent millions of dollars building for you as you can hold up trams with hundreds of people on them by being in my lane - also don't get hit, too much paperwork to fill out.. Thanks.".

if they're riding more than two across, you should report them, just like you'd report a dangerous driver.

The problem is how are you going to do that? Not like you could just tell the cops that some chap in a neon green spandex outfit is cycling dangerously... probably would be 20 other neon green spandex cyclists elsewhere.

Scooters for everyone!

http://img683.imageshack.us/img683/5524/scooters.jpg

Today I rode to uni around the back way past the golf course for the first time - are you referring to the bike path that's along the golf course? I have no idea where that starts or ends... but I might be able to use it.

Yeah I am, it begins

View Larger Map

about there. Right where "the esplanade" turns to "hillside terrace" there are plans to finish making it to the uni. god know why it stops there. I bet if they cut out some hills, cyclists will use it over the rather annoying hills.

A few years ago my younger brother got clipped by a dumb b**** in an excel in jimboomba on bamboo drive with no one else on the road while he was half on the grass / gravel. Poor c*** slide up the bonnet cracking the windscreen denting bonnet the roof, and ripping the rear wiper and spolier clean off the car at about 50km an hour. Car came to a halt and he proceeded to threatened in a rage to kill all the occupants who took off pretty quick but then had a cheek to spend him for the repairs. I imagine that he was pretty unreasonable after been hit by a car at the time.

Costs of mental and physical injury are going to be far beyond that of the car costs. Especially when the law is VERY specific that cyclists are basically vehicles and hitting them is almost 100% always the drivers fault. A cyclist hitting a car does next to no damage. A car hitting a cyclist does a lot.

Hi Mephz, if the problem you're suggesting that cyclists create is that drivers have to drive more carefully, then I agree. Also, as I already said, I can out accelerate most cars up to about 20 - 30 km/h, at which point I can pull close to the curb so cars that then catch up can over take me.

Every time I ride past one in the same lane as they take up we are too close together and that's whilst i'm on the outer edge of the lane, let alone a car and a cyclist, fortunately, in the event of an accident, you'll be the one wearing searing hot exhaust pipes and 150kg of cycle frame, not me.

I've often wondered about this - are cyclists just donors on wheels like motobike riders? Not sure... But my guess is that far more motorbike riders die compared to cyclists, purely because motorbike riders go much faster.

yeah, sure, gonna go biking with my pals in complete silence so i don't wake up some grumpy tard

sif

I hate it when knobshine bike riders ride on the bikelane line. You have the whole bike lane, why not use it? Actually why get closer to an object that can and will destroy you easily.

Apart from that I don't mind them. Nothing's cuter than seeing a father truck along with his son or daughter in the back.

it'd be funny if they were having conversations about aids

skythra, it's informed speculation. You go on to say that motorcyclists help traffic - that's fine, I wasn't commenting at all on that. I was simply asking who is more likely to die, a cyclist or a motorcyclist. My speculation is that motorcyclists will be more likely to die because they travel faster.

The reason motorcycles die is because of the people riding them. Given a different country, we'd have much more awareness of them, and if more people rode them instead of just the fringe, we'd even have better stats. If motorbikes weren't available, the same people would die from driving a car.

Studies have shown that it's not "the people who ride them" but it's that people who ride them go faster. A colleague has done the research with two groups of people - people who only drive cars and people who only ride bikes. They get both groups to drive a car around, and they get both group to ride a bike around (both simulated iirc). Both groups kept to the speed limit when driving the car, but both groups continually went over the speed limit while on the motorbike.

I was simply asking who is more likely to die

statisics say yes motorbikes are more likely to be involved in a accident resulting in death.

Here's a question: Am I more likely to die if I ride a bicycle or a motorcycle?

He did manage to do 4-5k worth of damage to the s***box and all he got was a slightly bent rim (20inch DJ bike) and some bruises and a busted hand. He was wearing body armor though under his jersey because he suffered a back injury (at work) some years beforehand but doesn't want to live in a bubble as he puts it and still wants to ride regardless

I'm glad to hear he had very suitable protection, thank god that motorist didn't do so much damage to him...

statisics say yes motorbikes are more likely to be involved in a accident resulting in death.

Here's a question: Am I more likely to die if I ride a bicycle or a motorcycle?

Didn't you answer your own question before you even asked it?

Regardless of vehicle combine enough speed with enough impact then you have no f*****g chance

I think that's near impossible to answer isn't it?

Are the statistics adjusted for the differences between bikes and motorbikes? Like how many km's are travelled per injury, how many users etc? It's impossible to compare and draw a conclusion.

I'd also go out on a limb and say that a bicycle rider would have similar chance of injury on either bike or motorbike. As I suspect this person would be more responsible on the motorbike and wouldn't be riding one for the trill seeking but merely for the transport.

My brother in-law died in a single vehicle motorbike crash and he was a thrill seeker. I don't think many thrll seekers go for the pushbikes and most thrill seekers have limited experience which leads to their demise.

If you are simply using both methods as transport/fitness and keeping everything else constant (ie covering same distances, times on roads etc), I think the greater chances of injury or death would be leaning towards the pushbike.

Yeah motorbike in theory go faster but we all need to observe speed limits and road rules and out of the modes of transport I see more cyclists breaking the law than motorcyclists. (speeding, red lights etc)

last edited by mission at 10:48:52 23/Mar/10

cyclists absolutely s*** me, they are so inconsiderate. They go at the front of the traffic lights so that when it goes green you have to wait 20 seconds for them to piss out of the way, which means bugger all cars get through. I sit at some lights for 5 rounds of lights, it's bulls***.
Plenty of other reasons why I hate them though. They punce around in their silly little outfits like they think they're spiderman or something.
But yeah mainly they should stay off the roads, one day I will rage and simply kill one.

It's very hard to agree with this for a couple of reasons: 1) what constitutes a "bad cyclist"? 2) I've nearly been killed a couple of times while on my bike because of bad drivers (not looking before turning into traffic/looking but not caring that there's a bike); 3) the near misses I see that I'm not involved in are never because the bike rider was breaking road rules.

Also, don't forget confirmation bias.

Confirmation bias: something that happens to other people.

He swerved into a driveway last second.

Reminds me of some d******* without lights who went the wrong way through a roundabout nearly into my car because he wanted to turn right.

They should force cyclists to register their bikes for road use. Allows for accountability when it comes to traffic incidents, theft and the like and generates revenue to use for improving cycling pathways and building of new cycle tracks around the city.

So, thermite, if I understand you correctly, you're point that cyclists are inconsiderate will be proven when I get run over?

Reminds me of some d******* without lights who went the wrong way through a roundabout nearly into my car because he wanted to turn right.

THAT is the worst thing that cyclists do, IMO. Riding without lights and riding without helmets. They are the really dangerous cyclists.

So, thermite, if I understand you correctly, you're point that cyclists are inconsiderate will be proven when I get run over?

You don't understand me correctly. Cyclists should stay on bike paths. Or not exist. They are not a motor vehicle, they don't fit in. It's dangerous for them, and frankly if I accidently smush one it will further damage me psychologically. It's like asking an elephant to be considerate of ants during a stampede.

At least they're not as bad as jaywalkers who cross diagonally with their back turned to traffic. What is with THAT s***. They don't even hear you coming.

nothing worse than a cyclist that comes up your left side while you're trying to make a left turn.

or when you're a cyclist going straight and a car overtakes you and then turns left on you. happened to me yesterday..

For the record, I don't know any cyclists who enjoy riding on the road

There's a S***LOAD of them.

I ride on the road because it's the only way to train properly but I don't like it.

Also glynd you suck balls, you're in the wrong, the cyclist is going straight and you want to cut him off :S

Billy when they cyclists start obeying road rules themselves we will be happy. Just the other day I went to turn left and a cyclist was on my left trying to overtake me, He was behind me, I had right of way. HE should have slotted in behind my car and let me turn left. Instead I had to let him pass or I would have hit him turning.

F***en s**** me.

when drivers break the road rules it gives me the s****, I'm not terrified that I'm going to kill them due to their mistake, however.

Unless the cyclist was in a dedicated lane, then yes the cyclist should have been behind the car lane in the car lane and not coming up the inside of the car.

That's the thing, so many cyclists don't follow road rules and wonder why the general feeling towards them is rage.

When I used to ride to work I'd see it all the time, hell I even did the wrong thing at times.

But the end result is, and in my opinion it doesn't matter whose fault it is, riding on the road is dangerous and the cyclist will be the one whose life will get f***ed up should something happen.

last edited by mission at 11:51:29 23/Mar/10

Unless the cyclist was in a dedicated lane, then yes the cyclist should have been behind the car lane in the car lane and not coming up the inside of the car.

I assumed a bike lane.

I'm in the situation (as the rider) quite often and what really s**** me is they zoom in front of you and don't indicate TILL they start turning... fail. If I'm approach a place where its possible for a car to turn (which is every few seconds essentially) I'm not going to slow down and slot in behind cars unless they clearly have an indicator on.

Don't get pissy with us if you slow down to turning speed and put your indicator on for 1-2 blinks and suddenly there's a cyclist to the left of you.

If your indicator was on for a reasonable amount of time and visible to the rider and if he didn't have a bike lane and still went up your left hand side, then he's a c***... cyclist aside he's just being a c***.

last edited by CHUB at 11:54:41 23/Mar/10

I'm so sick of cyclists in St Lucia, great to see a thread on it. A few do the right thing and switch between road and path where possible, others sit on the road the entire time blocking half a lane at peak time (which means 100% of a lane since you can't fit a car in the remaining space) while doing 2km/h uphill.

Love this intersection here when driving towards UQ in the left lane - you have limited visibility over the curve in the road. Douchebag cyclists usually come in from the left road, ignore their red light completely and turn into the road IN MY PATH while I'm driving through the intersection. Seriously, die!

http://homepage.powerup.com.au/~boldajis/images/cycl.jpg

To avoid all this crap I tend to go the Carmody + Prospect Tce backstreet path these days.

when drivers break the road rules it gives me the s****, I'm not terrified that I'm going to kill them due to their mistake, however.

reinforcing this point here.

Douchebag cyclists usually come in from the left road, ignore their red light completely and turn into the road IN MY PATH while I'm driving through the intersection. Seriously, die!

They're in the wrong, if you clean them up with your car, not sympathy from me.

I personally don't ever go through red lights but in situations where they're by themself turning left I don't really mind if they come to a stop/look for traffic and roll on through safely... it's not right but I accept it... riding through it though is a big no-no.

I never ride a bike, I always drive a car - but what blahnana said

I hate c**** that cross at red men
then they get s***** when I blast my horn at them and wonder wtf I'm doing

So much wank in this thread. Here's the facts:

heh blahnana knows the score

Also, in regards to OP: I recall a diagram in another thread with a handy flowchart on how to achieve happiness. It basically said if you're not happy change something (earplugs, close door & air con, move house, etc). Complaining about it to us isn't going to make the cyclists any quieter.

Yeah a single rider reduces congestion, without a doubt. The difference is that the big packs of people on bikes arn't commuting, they're using the road as a place of leisure, which it is not, and are definitely contributing to congestion.

If bike riders had to register their vehicle just like any other vehicle that use roads I wouldn't have any problems. I can't say I've ever had any really bad bike riders in the way though, most are considerate enough to slow down or let cars past like Billy said he does or most of the time it's safe enough to pass them. Occasionally one will slow up the works for a bit (and as Murphy's law has it, it's always when I'm running late heh) but it's mostly ok.

On a side note, anyone know why one lane of Coro drive outbound was blocked off Sunday morning for bike riders? Is that just a weekly ride thing or was there a special event on? Seemed pretty cool!

if the problem you're suggesting that cyclists create is that drivers have to drive more carefully, then I agree.

Your COMPLETELY ignoring the fact that the cyclist takes up enough of the lane, that a car cannot safely fit in the same lane (leaving the cyclist enough room to be safe), therefore, the car has to either trudge a long at the same, slow pace, or wait for a gap and half merge/change lanes in to the one next to them.

As I said, even on a motorbike, which is 1/4 of the width of an average sedan, there is barely 1m gap between my handlebars and the cyclist, and that would be with my tyres virtually on the cat-eye's/painted lane lines on the other side of the lane.

Footpaths are not for bicycles

Its not illegal to ride on the footpath in QLD. So do it.
If dodging pedestrians is too much to handle, or cycling safely around them..... why should cars be expected to do the same around you hmmm?

And on a bicycle, its not hard to go off road for a moment and let pedestrians keep using the footpath.
If you're using a 1mm wide "road" tyre and can't even step off a footpath onto the grass for 2 meters, then get a mountain bike and stop being a douche?

The attitude from cyclists here seems to be of extremely inflated self importance.


The argument on whether more cyclists or more motorbike riders are killed is also a null question to ask.
You may as well ask the question, are you more likely to get mauled by a Lion in Africa or in Antarctica?

I'd argue there are more motorbikes on the road, than there are cyclists on the road, at any given point in time.

Footpath, that's where you should be, there's nothing wrong with it... use it.

Yeah it doesn't matter what the law is or what their rights are or how it has been historically. In practice it just doesn't work, it's too dangerous. If a cyclist and a pedestrian collide it is much less of a problem than if a car runs over a cyclist.
There should definitely be more bike paths and safe routes for cyclists. Once there is sufficient infrastructure to get pushbikes off the motorways, then we can start changing the rules. At the moment though it might be a bit unreasonable to ask for that.

Its not illegal to ride on the footpath in QLD. So do it.
If dodging pedestrians is too much to handle, or cycling safely around them..... why should cars be expected to do the same around you hmmm?

And on a bicycle, its not hard to go off road for a moment and let pedestrians keep using the footpath.
If you're using a 1mm wide "road" tyre and can't even step off a footpath onto the grass for 2 meters, then get a mountain bike and stop being a douche?

Wow, retarded post of the thread goes to Mephz hands down.

That's just so much fail I'm not even going to attempt to debate.

I think there should be more dedicated infrastructure to support cyslists so that this clash with motorists isn't as big an issue. Development of this infrastructure could be paid for by compulsory registration & licensing of bicycles.

Both sides have valid points. The actual problem is that cyclists are relatively slow moving, fragile bags of water sharing the road with massive lumps of metal travelling very fast. We should separate them purely for basic safety let alone angst and road rage.

Wow - I had assumed you would! Can't you be booked for speeding on a bicycle?

teq, I think that you do??? It's just that there's not always cops around to actually do it. Drivers can run red lights too, and most of the time they'll get away with it...

I am driving something that will kill you.

Therefore, logic dictates you should take as much care as possible to ensure that doesn't happen.

When I was in the Netherlands recently (where everyone rides bikes) I found out that if a bike rider is injured in a car accident it is ALWAYS assumed to be the drivers fault (until proved otherwise)

therefore, the car has to either trudge a long at the same, slow pace, or wait for a gap and half merge/change lanes in to the one next to them.

Wow! They might have to wait entire MINUTES!

One of my old collegues lived in a few countries around europe, mostly Scandinavia and he reckoned that they payed insurance or rego or the 2 possibly combined and it was like $60 a year or soemthing.

That figure might have been in euros I couldnt understand his romanian accent half the time.

if you fall over on a foot path you're going to scrape your knee ..

Or I clean up a pram or little kid @ 50km/hr.

Paths are not practical in the slightest for a competitive cyclist or anyone at a reasonable level, VERY dangerous.

slow motorbikes are banned from they highway, they're still capable of doing 50km/hr (ie, half the speed limit)
if you can't muster 30km/hr in a 60 zone, get the f*** off the road

I agree, if you're below 30km/hr you shouldn't really be on any road.

I try to average 35-36km/hr so when you factor in hills and lights I try to do 40km/hr+ in a 60 zone at all times.

last edited by CHUB at 14:19:46 23/Mar/10

or cyclists shouldn't put themselves in a position where they can become fodder for cars?
if a cyclist trips over or their foot comes out of their pedals etc, they fall and a car runs over them - that driver will never forget that
if you fall over on a foot path you're going to scrape your knee ..

Haha, no s***, but a) the cyclist does know the danger and most of them avoid the road as much as they can and b) How often does it happen that a car hits a cyclist? How often does a car hit another car and someone is killed? Or a motorcycle?

If you're worried about the car drivers' feelings, there's only one solution for them: stop driving. There's a bigger chance they're going to hit another car and damage the driver, or a pole, than hit and kill a cyclist.

slow motorbikes are banned from they highway, they're still capable of doing 50km/hr (ie, half the speed limit)
if you can't muster 30km/hr in a 60 zone, get the f*** off the road

Great theory, but you're talking about lots of trucks and buses going up hills here... maybe you should have that argument with them? Maybe you just want everyone off the road but hiluxes?

Great thread to see!!

I'm a daily bicyclist to work and regularly hit the roads on the weekends for a proper burn-in.

Regular, conscientious riders understand that we need to observably respect the rule of the road (as in, not diss red lights, cut people off, etc). Yes there are idiots but there are idiots everywhere, moreso behind the protection of a car.

If bikers would be fined for caning through lights, hell yeah, if it meant drivers got a bit more respect for them. But a bike does 100mph while a commuter bike does 15mph. They aren't going to get a huge rise on you by cheating the lights a little bit (actually, wouldn't it make sense for them to do so..?)

Bike culture has alot to offer and Brisbane would be even more of a fantastic city to actively promote safe healthy & fun biking.

wat

Seriously "grouse"? who in their right mind still uses that word?!

Seriously "grouse"? who in their right mind still uses that word?!

Someone with a stuck caps key

I dunno about QLD but here in Syd im pretty sure your not allowed to Cycle on the footpath,hence the bike lanes.
I'm not too fussed about groups of cyclists taking up the lane unless there's a d******* who thinks its sweet to teter on the double lines into the lane next to him.
Why some a****** feels the need to flirt with death by truck I have no idea.

FINAL THOUGHT... EVEN BOGANS HATE YOU

You wouldn't happen to have been for a stroll past Bob Jane T-mart in Oakleigh recently by chance?

Scooter I see your point, but tbh I'd rather risk a flat riding over some rubbish and s*** rather than become a smear of guts all over my wheels.

I think the best thing about getting bikes registered is accountability. If an accident occurs people know who the cyclist was if he disseapears because someone got his rego number.

In the incident mentioned on 60 minutes a cyclist boarded a council bus and bashed a driver over road rage. They were never able to identify the cyclist because obviously he had no rego on his bike for anyone to identify him with.

This is only an example I am using. I respect both parties right to be safe on the road but we need cyclists to be registered and signed so we know who is riding where and when, just like drivers.

if you fall over on a foot path you're going to scrape your knee ..

Or I clean up a pram or little kid @ 50km/hr.

So its up to a car to be responsible for a bicycle, but not for a bicycle to be resoponsible for pedestrians? The difference in speed (velocity) is much going to be the same, but the forces (thanks to massively reduced mass) is much less.

I don't care about the people who aren't slowing me down, but the rules state that I MUST ride on the road, despite being a s*** cyclist and not very fast, often going uphill at 20kph max. Some which have blind corners at the crest so the cars MUST stay behind me or be in a dangerous situation but the footpath which is never walked on winks at me suggestively not even a meter away.

Confirmation bias: something that happens to other people.

i lol'd.

Wow, how are people not getting this - riders are legally allowed to take up that lane of traffic, Minxy.

i don't think anyone is arguing that it's illegal, people are arguing that it holds up traffic, generally pisses everyone else around them off and is widely considered to be a colossal d*** move (or at least when the roads are busy anyway).

Therefore, logic dictates you should take as much care as possible to ensure that doesn't happen.

Logic dictates that both parties need to take all necessary precautions to stop any accidents happening. For example, not veering off to one side of the lane.

Nice try.

Next time, try a more logical argument.

Paths are not practical in the slightest for a competitive cyclist or anyone at a reasonable level, VERY dangerous.

Well, I'm not allowed to race a car on a street either, I'm supposed to go to a track.
So...Cyclists want to train, go to a track designed for it an get off the roads.

hehe, suggesting thermite use logic

Yes but you think logic means to agree with Jim

Yes but you think logic means to agree with Jim

false

Therefore, logic dictates you should take as much care as possible to ensure that doesn't happen.

I drive safe all the time. What you call 'logic' is really ignorance. I am not the problem, the cyclist is the one being unsafe.

do you ever wonder about everyone disagreeing with almost everything you say? serious question. Surely at some point you have to start questioning your core values.

Fortunately, the law is not on your side. I just hope you don't kill or hurt someone to find that out the hard way. Respect other people and do no harm

tldr

Basically, you live on a main road...not really sure what you expect? Everyone to f***** tip toe past your window and sprinkle some magical fairy sleeping dust on your nose?

If you werent a total f***** pussy you would do something about it, as irrational as it would be to do so.

Did crying on the forum make you feel better?

do you ever wonder about everyone disagreeing with almost everything you say? serious question. Surely at some point you have to start questioning your core values.

Just because something is popular doesn't make it right. Nobody has demonstrated good reasons to disagree with me, other than to make wisecracks and be argumentative. I don't even think Billy really tried to process what I said. He just saw that I was on the other side of the fence and didn't like it.
See how I address points other people make, whereas you just have a go at me without responding to the actual things I've said. Or, if you do respond you pick out one thing ignoring everything else I've said. My last response to you was a rehash of a previous statement I made, which you should have read and saved me the effort.
I usually try to at least give a good reason for why I think what I think, most of the responses are just "hur dur dur ... some insult here", no real valid debate. Plus, I know people, and people are stupid. They're forever coming up to me and saying something along the lines of "Hey, if you're such a smart guy, and you are, how come you're so wrong about that thing I disagree with you on?". What can you do.
Besides there are plenty of people who agree with me here. And nobody I have driven with IRL has claimed a counter position on this either. I think this comment is your worst argument strategy yet, trog. You know, other than just deleting the posts.

Fortunately, the law is not on your side. I just hope you don't kill or hurt someone to find that out the hard way. Respect other people and do no harm

Why does the law thing keep coming up? Do you people think if something is legal then it is a smart thing to do? I think if I kill or hurt a cyclist it won't have anything to do with disrespect either. You really think I want that in my head? You think I want to get out and pry a bloody bike helmet out from behind my tyre in my work clothes?


last edited by thermite at 22:09:36 23/Mar/10

How is that relevant to anything we are talking about?

Once again for those who didn't read:

You're driving along nice and slow and careful. It doesn't matter how slow you go, if a cyclist is near you, hits a gutter, a pothole, has a bad bowel movement, gets distracted by a bird, f*****g anything, he's under your wheel.

You cannot stop that!

All the other stuff just adds to that, the darting and weaving, and holding up the traffic at the lights. It adds more uncertainty and danger. They're not as visible as vehicles. They can't accelerate quickly enough to keep up in a tough situation. Even if I drive a slow old car I feel disadvantaged and in danger because of the acceleration problem.

That is the issue, not the bit about me raging and running them down on purpose. Sif.

I care just as much about their safety as anything else. People just aren't careful enough for this to work. Cyclists aren't licenced, some of them look like absolute noobs, they choose to do very risky things, I just can't trust that it is going to be fine, it makes me nervous to go past them every single time. The roads are narrow enough as it is, there is no room for an arc that they can fall over in without me squishing them.

last edited by thermite at 21:49:07 23/Mar/10

If you can't drive around a f*****g cyclist, or 30 for that matter

I missed the post where Thermite said he ran over cyclists all the time because he can't go around them, i'm sure i would have remembered laughing and smiling.

You're driving along nice and slow and careful. It doesn't matter how slow you go, if a cyclist is near you, hits a gutter, a pothole, has a bad bowel movement, gets distracted by a bird, f*****g anything, he's under your wheel.

That's why the law specifically says you have to give the cyclist enough room. Enough room. Doesn't specify a distance. If you're going to try to overtake him in his lane, you better know none of that's going to happen. Same goes for any vehicle you try and pass like that.

Btw, pretty much all those scenarios go for both motorcyclists (I guess that won't gain any traction with you) and pretty much anyone driving a car going in the opposite direction to you. If one of those happens on a motorway, there's just as much chance of you being obliterated in a 200km/hr crash. Your arguments don't hold water, you're a joke, and rightly so.

haha - way to waste time and effort on anger at cyclists - yeah plenty of them are d****, but i have way more trouble with other drivers. i deal with both the same way, make sure i don't hit them, and continue on my merry way. if you are running so late that you are stuck behind a cyclist for 2 mins and it upsets your day, you're the idiot, not the cyclist. learn to plan/schedule better, or just harden the f*** up. its a couple of minutes. only thing that annoys me is the non indication/going through red lights - these things annoy me equally when drivers do them.

i make sure i go as carefully around them as possible, if that takes me a few extra seconds to avoid both them and another vehicle, so be it. cos as pointed out, anything happens and they are under the car, they are gone and I am fine, and I don't want to live with that.

ps. on original topic, as suggested get some earplugs - had to get some for noisy roommates who worked odd hours and they work like a charm, i found them easy to get used to as well.

And nobody I have driven with IRL has claimed a counter position on this either. I think this comment is your worst argument strategy yet, trog. You know, other than just deleting the posts.

OK tiger, keep on truckin'. Everyone has actually pointed out, in painstaking detail, why what you are saying does not gel with the real world.

Do you people think if something is legal then it is a smart thing to do?

You're strawmaning all over the place. Noone is saying 'because riding on the roads is legal, everyone should run out and do it immediately and try to ride as close to thermite as possible so maybe his spastic handwaving while he's babbling another stream of incoherent drivel will cause him to twitch the wrong way and mow down a peleton or two'.

The law is, you need to respect bicycle riders on the road if you are a driver. Your posts clearly demonstrate that you aren't prepared to respect them. You are saying that the mere virtue of the fact that they would like to ride on the road means that all the fault is always theirs in the event of an accident. You are saying that, because of this, you feel you have no responsibility to even try to drive safely or give bike riders a few extra meters or wait an extra 5 seconds to get into a safe bit of the road before overtaking.

You think I want to get out and pry a bloody bike helmet out from behind my tyre in my work clothes?

Yes, I can see how that would inconvenience you.

man just rereading over some of your other comments and they're rife for decimation, including the one where you say that you wish you'd sped up to cause an accident with a bike rider. It's like arguing with Gal all over again

Cars should be banned, bicycles should own the roads.
It will prevent global collapse from peak oil, cure the obesity crisis, reduce medicare levy and produce hotter women. Though, psychiatrists will be out of the job because lazy f**** won't be depressed anymore.

Nowhere do I say I am worried that I will make a mistake.

I know - that's what is worrying everyone

edit: for values of 'everyone' that care about what happens to bike riders and feel they deserve the same rights as drivers

Yeah that did piss me off, and I do sometimes think about what would have happened if I had sped up, and maybe it would teach people a lesson

dude

seriously

Yes, no one is saying that. Me neither. Nowhere do I say I am worried that I will make a mistake. That is the strawman right there. It's really easy to ignore everything I have said and then accuse me of f*****g my driving up. Totally changing what my argument was.

you're argument just appears to be, it's entirely the rider's fault if they are injured riding on the road. Am I missing something or is that it?

that's not an argument though, that's a statement of fact, and serves as demonstration as to why the road rules are as they are!

Having rules is great, but people are fallible. Riding a bicycle on a public road is a pretty dangerous activity.

I still think that we need to separate flesh and metal better than we do, would we accept that level of danger in a workplace? 100% agree that all people operating a vehicle on a public road need to be licensed and all vehicles registered.

So you agree the risk of riding a bike on the road is at least the same, if not greater than driving a car, but stricter regulation of that activity is over the top?

S*** I get in my car and I'm scared on the road looking at the average quality of drivers. I think trying to encourage people to become better, more aware, less selfish drivers should be a really big focus for our roads.

I deal with it for 10 hours a day, it's f***ed and I'm literally scared that $25/hr isn't worth the amount of close calls I encounter daily.

Not even a big fix is needed...

Chubs plan to road safety

1. LEAVE A F*****G GAP YOU C****, 3+ seconds, for f**** sake.
2. Drive defensively, don't assume

= I win, problems solved, no more people die.

So you agree the risk of riding a bike on the road is at least the same, if not greater than driving a car, but stricter regulation of that activity is over the top?

I think stricter regulation would be good, except on the car side, not on the bike rider side. Though, as I said, I think licenses for bike riders on the road aren't a bad idea.

I think the risk of riding a bike on the road is probably greater than driving the car, but it's a fact that I attribute almost exclusively to the fact that most people don't drive safely around bicyclists. This is based on talking to a bunch of riders (including BillyH who I live with and get to wonder every day if he'll make it home in one piece) and observing the absolutely woeful driving behaviours of many people on the road.

I'm all for more dedicated bike lanes etc as well. They did it in Paris, much to the disgust of the drivers, but now they have a system with bikes everyone and everyone loves it.

Bike registration is about ensuring that vehicles on roads are marked with identifiers. You should be able to get the number plate of a bicycle rider who caused a fatal road accident, right?

This just sounds like one of those things that happens so infrequently it wouldn't be worth the effort and overhead of the system. Maybe I'm wrong about this, but I've personally never, ever, ever had an occasion to want to get the rego of a bike rider, and until this thread, never had a single conversation with someone that had either.

This just sounds like one of those things that happens so infrequently

The notion of fatal car accident caused by a rider is unlikely, but the idea of a bike rider breaking the law, is a justifiable and common practice.

I saw a rider the other day look left, look right and ride through a red light and nearly into a car. He nearly killed himself to save 30 seconds, and that's what a lot of car drivers remember, incidents like that. You don't spend your time rememebring the guys who were on the bikepaths, or were off to the side in an 80 zone, or whatever. You only remember the bad ones which stick out.

I think currently there is a lot of frustration because as some of these cyclists are breaking the law, or being just plain traffic hazards and inconsiderate, there is no current way for them to get into trouble. The only time you hear about a cyclist in trouble, if he was caught drink cycling home, and the news makes a soft story.

I don't think it's fair that they can avoid all responsibility for the law, while expecting drivers to obey the law to the letter.

Of course I still want to re-iterate that this isn't all, nor a majority of riders, but there are some real jerks out there, and they give cyclists a bad name. I know, I'm probably one of them if you see me riding along hillside terrace, i try to stay left but sometimes there's not a lot of space.

Of course I still want to re-iterate that this isn't all, nor a majority of riders, but there are some real jerks out there, and they give cyclists a bad name. I know, I'm probably one of them if you see me riding along hillside terrace, i try to stay left but sometimes there's not a lot of space.

I'm here saying that doesn't make you a jerk. Because our laws say that society thinks you're not a jerk.

I think currently there is a lot of frustration because as some of these cyclists are breaking the law, or being just plain traffic hazards and inconsiderate, there is no current way for them to get into trouble. The only time you hear about a cyclist in trouble, if he was caught drink cycling home, and the news makes a soft story.

That's your perception, but a) there are bicycle cops who spend time pulling cyclists over and b) they are accountable to the same extent that any car driver is accountable: if a cop sees them they'll get busted. They'll also get busted if they end up in an accident, because the police will be called and can lay charges, just like any vehicular accident.

If you really want accountability, it doesn't lie with licensing, that's the s*** answer to all society's woes, and as I pointed out it won't get you what you want.

The only example of a time that Bike Registration/Number plates MIGHT be useful (because it still relies on someone seeing the plate), is that really rare occasion of someone getting on a bus and laying the beat down. Realistically that doesn't happen often, and not only that, it happens with car drivers as it is, and they have all these things you want. They have registration, they have licenses, and it still happens that car drivers commit crimes and then get away with it.

The kind of person that does that is scum, it has nothing to do with being a cyclist. People escape the law with stuff like that all the time.

I urge you again to read this:

On other topics, bike rego might be a decent idea, but what will actually be gained by it?

Those who are annoyed by bikes slowing them down, won't feel any better. They'll look at the piddling sum the bikes are paying and complain that it's not enough, that they shouldn't get to use the road. It won't end till the bikes are gone, and as I've pointed out it's actually a good thing that bikes are taking people to work.

Those who are annoyed by bikes that run red lights or otherwise infringe traffic rules, still won't get to do anything. I don't think there's a method to do anything about a car that you think ran a red light in Brisbane is there? Why will it help discourage bikes that have number plates?

And on the note of bike licenses (so that those freakin bikes will know the traffic rules)... well I'm willing to bet you that 99% of the cyclists out there that are annoying by ignoring road rules know the rules just fine... because they probably have a vehicle license already.

It sounds great in theory, but I don't think it'll do anything to achieve what you want it to.

And for this one:

"Not worth the effort" is a funny assertion, given that vehicle registration is also a tax - one that bicycle riders don't pay even though they are an equal-rights user of the road infrastructure :)

Trying to find a bicycle rider that rides on the road and doesn't already pay road registration will be a fool's errand.

Yes, bicycles have equal rights on the road but aren't charged directly. Most of them are contributing to the roads anyway, but not contributing to wear and tear, and helping traffic congestion. You're arguing counter to your own intentions, you want less road congestion, not more.

The notion of fatal car accident caused by a rider is unlikely, but the idea of a bike rider breaking the law, is a justifiable and common practice.

I disagree that it's common and think that it's more about your perception of what is common, but what I really wanted to point out that is when a bike rider breaks the law, the police have every right to stop them just like car drivers (and they do, I've seen it). Maybe they don't bust all the cyclists you see doing the wrong thing, but that's the same for car drivers.

The time I hit a cyclist was when I was already turning left, with my indicator having been on for a few seconds, and a cyclist tried to pass me on the left. His fault entirely, and he gave me no trouble.

Totally reasonable. I don't know where the misery about hitting cyclists by accident comes from. If you drive with due care and attention, you've done what you can, so you're fine. If you drive with due care and attention, you'll be just fine after an accident, because you know you did what you could. The law will agree with you.

Basically, there's going to be more bicycles out and about. That's because the traffic situation is going to get worse and worse in SEQ, and bicycles will be a helpful (helpful as in Brisbane will cease to function without them) way of some people commuting.

More bike paths will help. Better attitudes from car drivers will help. Maybe the laws will change someday, but while they don't, these haters are getting upset about really wasteful stuff. However, more bikes will cause more bike policing. If you really want change, mail your minister and don't come saying stupid s*** in forums where people can point out how stupid most of your reasons are, how shallow your arguments, and how wasteful your rage.

Exactly - if you're scared sitting in a metal cage, how would you feel on a bike? The answer can't always be education & development of society. We're just monkeys and rules alone don't suffice - or we wouldn't need air bags and ABS and barriers to stop cars from having head on collisions on freeways, or yellow vests for guys digging up the roads.

Risk is everywhere. There's no point to try and eliminate all risk from our lives, you'll end up with one part completely stale society who thinks they've earned the right to never die, and one part society that spends their time actively trying to increase their risk because life is too boring. Don't believe me? Have a look around. Not only that, but those who can't afford the right to live in the former (because risk-free living requires money and plenty of it for your cages, your fences, your padding, your insurance) will get angrier and angrier that they live dangerously and maybe eventually they'll get so angry they tear down your lovely risk-free society.


This whole argument about cyclists doing things and wanting to hit them reminds me of something else. How do you feel about pedestrians on the road?

See, sometimes pedestrians do stupid stuff on the road. They try and cross the road in the middle of traffic, they get drunk and wander about in the valley... sometimes I'm driving along and a pedestrian just walks out in front of me! I make me just want to!!!...

Stop and let them pass. Not only because I know the law (pedestrians ALWAYS have right of way), but because I don't want any accidents. Sometimes pedestrians do stupid stuff, and even driving through the Valley late at night near the mall with all those people over the road completely drunk doesn't make me want to run any of them down. I wish they'd get out of my way, but I acknowledge that I am the one who has the duty of care there, and I wait for them to pass.

Same for pedestrians who try to cross a busy road and get stuck in the middle. I stop my car/motorcycle, I let them pass, because I can make their situation safer by holding up the lane behind me with my car. It doesn't matter that I don't agree with their choice to cross the road there. I can make their situation safer, and I never think about hitting them, or scaring them, or anything. It beggars me that people think otherwise, but I've experienced it at least twice.

Someone complained about cyclists thinking so much of themselves... I say such people exist everywhere and it has nothing to do with cycling.


This thread is going to keep going nowhere as long as people refuse to read the posts that come before them. Nuke everything that comes after my post right here imo.

last edited by trog at 12:27:40 24/Mar/10

I dont think we need it for identification. I just think that people who want equal share of the infrastructure should also share the costs.

blahnana - l2closetags.

Scooter, try to find a cyclist that uses the road and doesn't already pay rego.

it would be awesome if bikes paid rego and this money was used to build bike lanes to keep the f*****s off the road.

Knowing Bligh it wouldn't be allocated properly.
However, as I said in my first post in this tread. Make them pay and build proper, dedicated Bikeways. It's not like I expect them to pay V8 Disco 4WD type rego (which is probably over 1k next year, right nF?). But they should be paying something for it if they expect to be able to use it.

Everybody wins.

I'm sorry, trog and Bily said that in their expoerience its motorists that dson't folow the rules / behave so it must be true. Your observations don't count - Bily is a PhD student after all.

dude how often do you drive? I drive maybe 10km a week and in that tiny, teensy, distance I see people breaking the rules all the time - speeding, tailgating, cutting people off, failing to give way (my personal f*****g pet hate).

That bike path along the golf course is always packed with pedestrians; it has no useful markings to delineate where the slow moving peds should go and where the bikes should go. Even I run along there totally unaware of bikes. I'm completely unsurprised it's unused; the road there (when I see it, anyway) doesn't exactly get a s***load of traffic (maybe @ school time its different when people are going into st peters)?

I pay two regos too Scooter. And I cycle to work most of the time (4/5 days a week). My point is that you're off the mark trying to say that cyclists don't pay for the road infrastructure. They do, and so from the point of view of wear and tear on the road that they cause, paying for traffic lights, pedestrian crossings, etc, they've paid their dues.

I disagree that people in this thread have shown that bikes need their own infrastructure. What we've got in this thread is a couple of people strutting around whining about what is a relatively infrequent and minor inconvenience to their travel on the road. It's easy to get wound up at something that happens like that because it's unique, but by FAR the greatest thing holding up cars is... other cars. If you look at your trip to whereever, and think about what's actually holding you up... 99.99% of your travel time is eaten up because of other cars. But other cars can't be blamed because they're like you. So of course, cyclists bear the brunt of the rage at wasting time stuck in traffic. It's the easy option.

However, on the point of bicycle infrastructure;

When there is infrastructure for bikes to get anywhere to anywhere without using the road, you'll have a point that cyclists should be using that. It will be completely reasonable to have bikes off the road everywhere that such facilities exist. As people have pointed out, they're not allowed on freeways where these facilities exist specifically to get cars quickly from one place to another. Even at the moment, if bikes are legitimately holding up traffic and special bike facilities exist parallel to a road then you'd have a point. Coronation Drive is a good example of this.

But then, Coro Drive is a good example of what cyclists do when actual infrastructure for them exists. They use it. People ride a few blocks out of their way to use the Coro Drive bikeway. I couldn't say that I'm ever held up on Coro Drive by a cyclist going to slow. Sure, sometimes I see the peletons out there on Coro Drive, but I only see them because I drive Coro Drive sometimes very early in the morning when there's plenty of room for cars to be in other lanes.

The point is, you're shooting yourself in the foot. The people in this thread are advocating banning bikes from the road first, and then some point in the future maybe infrastructure will exist. This is wasteful for two reasons.

1) Congestion and pollution. Putting all those people riding bikes onto the road is just going to worsen the situation on the roads, and increase problems for drivers.

2) Reduction of people riding in the short-term will break down other infrastructure. If cyclists can't ride on the road sometimes, then cycling stops being a viable alternative to other forms of transport. If that happens, bike stores start winding down because of less business. People find other methods of doing things and see cycling as a non-viable method of transport. Children grow up thinking it's not a method of transport and so never get interested in learning to ride. It sounds far fetched, but even elements of these things will simply increase pressure on car road use. Sure, maybe eventually infrastructure will exist, but by gutting the commuters now, you're basically breaking momentum that is nothing but a good thing for car drivers.



I haven't talked about solutions much in this thread, but the solution really is to create an incentive for more cyclists, rather than the opposite. More cyclists will drop congestion and road use. More cyclists will reduce the single-vehicle load on Brisbane's roads. More cyclists will reduce pollution, and hopefully contribute to a reduction in obesity. All things that cost money to the taxpayers in general over time. So from that point of view, cycling is a good thing, and shouldn't be taxed, but instead have more money pointed towards it.

And before you cry foul about that, consider this: forward-thinking people in this city agree with me. That's what your City Council is doing right now.

So, car drivers must learn to accept cyclists on the road where good alternatives do not exist. Footpaths are not a solution to cyclists riding on the road, most of them are unsafe for travel by cyclists, and reduce cycling as a viable alternative. Where they are suitable for travel, you'll probably find cyclists traversing them. As I do, where ever I can.

Also, I haven't given my opinion on what I think cyclists should do.

I ride the way I think good cyclists should. I go out of my way to ride on bike paths. If good footpaths exist that don't suffer from pedestrian congestion or possible reversing cars I use them because I know that in this State, that's ok as long as I give way to pedestrians. Having said all that, I still have to ride 7-8 k's every day on the road. And I will defend my right to do so.

Those who are haters are going to have to accept that with the population in SEQ going the way it is, cars will be banned/taxed long before bicycles are.

It doesn't work though. Just like the bike path along the esplanade in St Lucia along the side of the golf course. They built a bike path along there and probably 1/10 of cyclists use it. The rest just sit in the lane and make you travel at 20km/h, or overtake in the other lane around blind corners and hills into oncoming traffic.

It does work, look at Coro drive. The problem is that particular path was never designed as a commuter path, it's not designed to go from somewhere to somewhere. It's designed to wind along and give pedestrians lovely looks at the scenery, past the barbecues, over the road, along past the entrance to the golf course... and then ENDS right where a bike path would be useful, along that twisty narrow bit all the way to uni. So of course bikes don't use it, because it's a token effort at a bikeway, and they have to get back on the road as soon as it ends anyway.

For the record, no one makes you overtake in the other lane around blind corners and hills into oncoming traffic. You make that choice yourself.

The Rego's you pay are specifically on Car/Motor vehicles? So that money (presumably) gets used to build more roads for Cars/Motor vehicles.

I think we need a much stronger network specifically designed for Bikes. I think all Main Roads roads should have Cyclists taken into consideration for not only the design, but Pre-Design investigations (road reserves etc.) However, I know that money for such endeavours cant just be pulled out of your arse. For these new networks, specifically for Bikes, there needs to be funding.

People seem to be either: "Cars are unsafe" or "Bikes are unsafe." I think that Cars and bikes sharing the same limited space with people that don't respect each other is unsafe. I'm a realist though, I know that you wont EVER get all motorists respecting Cyclists just like you wont EVER get all Cyclists to do the right thing (like you seem too) by also respecting the rules of the road and massive metal hurty things.

I know that a small rego on bikes couldn't hope to cover the cost of this infrastructure but it does 2 things.
1) It provides a base funding, so the government can look and say "Hey people are paying for this and want it, we should get some more funding in there for it"
2) It gives a big STFU up to people in cars that complain about Bikes using 'their' road because now that the bikes are paying it's 'their' road too. So they have less reason to be self-entitled pricks to Cyclists.

Getting more and more cyclists (most of which will be n00bs at riding) onto already crowded roads is in no-way a solution.

So, car drivers must learn to accept cyclists on the road where good alternatives do not exist.

FYI, I never dissagreed with this. I just think more should be done to create acceptable alternatives.

I think we need a much stronger network specifically designed for Bikes. I think all Main Roads roads should have Cyclists taken into consideration for not only the design, but Pre-Design investigations (road reserves etc.) However, I know that money for such endeavours cant just be pulled out of your arse. For these new networks, specifically for Bikes, there needs to be funding.

Absolutely. And there is funding already, 100 Million over 4 years from the BCC I think it was. But it takes a lot of time to get these things up and going. People need to be cycling now because we need workplaces to put showers in, and society in general to become accustomed to the idea.

People seem to be either: "Cars are unsafe" or "Bikes are unsafe." I think that Cars and bikes sharing the same limited space with people that don't respect each other is unsafe.

I disagree that people in this forum are bipolar like that, most aren't and it's just a couple that are raving. I agree with the latter comment here though.

I'm a realist though, I know that you wont EVER get all motorists respecting Cyclists just like you wont EVER get all Cyclists to do the right thing (like you seem too) by also respecting the rules of the road and massive metal hurty things.

Go back and read my first post if you think that's anything remotely like what I think. My very first words were the equivalent of "d*******s are everywhere, being a cyclist doesn't make you one".

I know that a small rego on bikes couldn't hope to cover the cost of this infrastructure but it does 2 things.
1) It provides a base funding, so the government can look and say "Hey people are paying for this and want it, we should get some more funding in there for it"
2) It gives a big STFU up to people in cars that complain about Bikes using 'their' road because now that the bikes are paying it's 'their' road too. So they have less reason to be self-entitled pricks to Cyclists.

The money from cyclists won't go anywhere towards the infrastructure, there just aren't enough people who see it as viable yet to contribute anything. They'll be involved once the infrastructure is there, but they just can't afford to do it yet. Trying to get people out of their cars and onto bikes, public transport is already hard. The idea is to get them doing that before traffic grinds to a complete halt, because that will allow the services to build up over time. So you have incentives. Bikes are an excellent alternative to driving, but there are some disadvantages. In the short term, bikes escape taxation. In the longer term I could see a tax on bicycles sold in Australia that contributes to cycle infrastructure. Trying to get people to accept that now is not possible because the infrastructure doesn't exist. Imagine if you bought a new car and were told you couldn't drive it anywhere yet, but they're charging you extra because one day you will be. Noone would buy cars.

Getting more and more cyclists (most of which will be n00bs at riding) onto already crowded roads is in no-way a solution.

n00bs don't ride on the road. If you look around, you won't see them there. Because of course they value their safety.

FYI, I never dissagreed with this. I just think more should be done to create acceptable alternatives.

I'm well aware of that, that's why I'm bothering to address your points.

Why did you ignore my pwn blah? :(

Funny how this thread has gone off on so many tangents, which is so typical to any discussion which happens to mention cyclists.

skythra, I'm sorry that you get woken up by cyclists riding near your house, but like others have already mentioned, get some ear plugs or something.

The world is full of people interacting, and that interaction guarantees that everyone's actions will eventually annoy someone else somewhere, you just can't please everyone.

I sometimes get woken by people driving down my road in loud cars/motorbikes. Lets ban loud cars/motorbikes. I sometimes get kept up by neighbors having a loud party into the night. Lets ban parties. I've often gotten woken up by cats fighting loudly in the middle of the night. Lets ban all cats. The possums also wake me up sometimes, lets cull them all.

While we are on the subject, I get annoyed walking behind slow walking people. They slow me down and take up my precious time. I propose we ban everyone who walks slower than me. I also get annoyed by people who just stand to go up an escalator rather than walk up it. YOU HAVE LEGS, USE THEM! Worse still is when they block the escalator so I can't even walk past them up the escalator. So instead I have to stand there like a douche for 30 seconds rather than only taking 10 seconds to get to the top. Guess we should ban that? Or maybe I can express my frustration at having wasted 20 seconds of my time by getting caught behind a slow walker or someone standing on an escalator by shoving them out of the way, or over the side? HOW DARE THEY.

I could think about all these things that slow me down/waste my time/annoy me and have a huge whine to everyone about it and let it turn me into a bitter old man who does nothing but complain about everyone else. Or, what I could do is just face the fact that life isn't always going to go exactly as I want it, and just shrug it off, or find ways to avoid the problem.

i ride every day. *normally* take the bike track along the river. but by the time i turn off george street, down on it, back off at milton, i could of just taken roma street. cars are always backed up near the cop shop, so i fang past them, get down on milton, then turn off towards work.

Has anyone here ridden or driven in a SE Asian country such as Vietnam?
The traffic system works so well. Traffic lights are minimal, everyone merges into each other at intersections.
Bicycles everywhere, it all just meshes beautifully. No roadrage.
I really envy them. They have the balls to let the people look after themselves, instead of a rule book with more pages than the encyclopedia.

Has anyone here ridden or driven in a SE Asian country such as Vietnam?
The traffic system works so well. Traffic lights are minimal, everyone merges into each other at intersections.
Bicycles everywhere, it all just meshes beautifully. No roadrage.
I really envy them. They have the balls to let the people look after themselves, instead of a rule book with more pages than the encyclopedia.

are you freakin' kidding me?

HANOI (AFP) � The World Health Organisation on Wednesday called for Vietnam to minimise the country�s huge human loss in traffic accidents, which has become a national epidemic.

Vietnam reports one of the world�s highest road death tolls, with 33 fatalities a day, resulting in more than 12,300 victims last year, according to the National Traffic Safety Committee.

http://johnib.wordpress.com/2007/04/18/vietnam-has-road-deaths-epidemic-who/ sorry for the lame blog source, couldn't find the original but it's from AFP so it's legit - article from 2007

The National Traffic Safety Committee (NTSC) report more than 12,800 deaths and a further 10,546 injuries from road traffic crashes in 2007 which represents more than 35 deaths per day and a mortality rate of more than 15 per 100,000 population. Despite the magnitude of this burden, other national sources of data including health suggest that the incidence of road traffic mortality is actually much higher than represented by official figures. Official data is reported to underestimate the true burden by at least 30%.

http://www.wpro.who.int/vietnam/sites/dhp/injury/

I would consider myself a particularly cautious driver around cyclists for no other reason than the fact that I really don't want to maim or kill another person, and that is pretty much exactly what is going to happen in a lot of cases when a bike and car "come together". I think Trog is exactly right in saying that for bikes and cars to coexist, motorists need to respect cyclists.

The problem that I have seen with a lot of people I have been in cars with who don't respect cyclists is that their irritation with cyclists on the road stem from those specific cyclists who show no respect to drivers, and hence create a bad impression. Similarly why cyclists treat all motorists like arsehats.

Ironically I had my first near-miss with a cyclist on my way to uni this morning, after reading this discussion yesterday. I had stopped at a traffic light just before the entrance to the centenary motorway, and had left a larger than normal amount of space between me and the car in front as there is a place where the bike-path crosses the road that I didn't want to block. Rather than using the bike lane on the road to the left of the traffic lane, that exits onto the bike path that runs along side the motorway, the cyclist decided to try and fly down between lanes of traffic (2-lane road, so traveling close to oncoming traffic and then tried to cut in-front of me to turn onto the bike path as traffic was taking off from a green light, and doing the turn at speed in the extra space I had left for cyclists to cross the path while the traffic light was red. (I should mention that the bike path crossing there is not an actual crossing, and isn't marked as such for traffic to stop - more just the general section of road that is the shortest path between the end of one section of bike path and the start of the next).

Had the cyclist been using the marked bike lane, he could have exited as he pleased, but because he chose to ignore the marked path and cut between traffic lanes, he almost ended up underneath the front wheel of my car. I was watching for cyclists to my left and right, not flying down between lanes of traffic and trying to cut me off. Thankfully seeing as I was only taking off from a set of lights I was only going slowly, and was able to stop in time.

you agreed, everyone else knows I'm right
when was the last time you saw a cyclist indicate?

I thought so.

Has anyone here ever seen a bicyclist ever be in trouble with the law outside of the very inner city? Perhaps lanesplitting (like motorcyclists and scooters do) or for failing to give way, indicate, riding on the wrong side of a road, riding on the wrong side of a roundabout, riding over the speed limit (like downhill in a 50zone), riding through a red light. (these are all examples of times I've seen bicyclists do wrong).

I think I'd be less annoyed if i HEARD of stories that someone was actually accountable for their actions.

Because while you can keep saying that "They are as responsible to the law as a motorist" the actual accountability process doesn't seem to be quite the same.

I still think that considering the constant growing numbers of camera's at intersections, a cyclist with a rego plate on the back would be caught much the same way a car could. It's only one situation, i know. But it'd make me feel better. Although it really means they just go onto the path, get off their bike, walk 1.5m get onto their bike, ride on the road again.

are you freakin' kidding me?

Thanks taggs, your post there was far better than anything that i would have said. His post made me angry and yours made me happy.

on a completely unrelated note, I parked on Turbot street yesterday at about 3.30pm just behind central station, as I got out of the car to go pay for my ticket, I damn near cleaned up some girl riding her bike along the foot path there
she came within millimeters of smashing into my drivers door

I damn near cleaned up some girl riding her bike along the foot path there she came within millimeters of smashing into my drivers door

So you lack situational awareness? Opening your door without knowing/checking if there was anything coming.

on a completely unrelated note, I parked on Turbot street yesterday at about 3.30pm just behind central station, as I got out of the car to go pay for my ticket, I damn near cleaned up some girl riding her bike along the foot path there
she came within millimeters of smashing into my drivers door

So basically, you're the worst kind of self-centered dangerous d*** head around.

As a cyclist, getting car doored is about as close to potentially fatal as it gets.

As a motorist, its *your* responsibility to check for cyclists (and cars) before opening a car door. It's this kind of s*** that makes us ride out of bike lanes where there's parked cars, to allow a gap for this to occur randomly. Yet you'll happily b**** and whine because of where we have to ride, but don't have the sense to realise your actions can kill.

are you freakin' kidding me?

Nup.
Sure, they have a high road toll. But a combination of vietnam's flexibility with abit of legislation, it would work very well.
Europe has it down pat with lane filtering being legal. This makes cars much more aware of cyclists & motorcyclists coming out of nowhere.
The problem with Australia is it has such an embedded car culture, that if you don't use a car on the roads, you are strange and foreign, an outsider. Almost an enemy.

Vash you are really really really really, really really, really, really... really. Dumb.

Yeah! And after they get out of the cage of their cars, they can go and buy a plot of land next to some hole filled with water in it! Just make sure you have no debts (and consequently, no assets) first because hey! You gotta be that way! For some reason!

But you don't need assets. You need gold. Yes, an incredibly heavy useless for practical applications metal is what you'll need in the post crash world! Wheelbarrows and wheelbarrows full of it! I have it all planned out, I will grow crops which may take years to grow and in which time I'll starve, but... maybe I can fertilise the gardens with all the spare gold I have lying around!

My latest theory is that the Vietnam traffic system works so well! Even though the statistics say it clearly doesn't! The people who come up with these statistics are probably just the same people who come up with the pages and pages of useless legislation that compared to this perfect utopian vietnam traffic system saves hundreds of hundreds of lives in Australia! Yeah f*** those guys! Maybe it would be better if all these people died. More gold for me and my monkey butlers in my post-society crash farm that I have envisioned! Delicious wine? You betcha!

last edited by fpot at 16:50:19 24/Mar/10

^^ old-skool fpot ringin in his best. wd fpot, gg.

vash was asking for it
hes pretty retarted

breaking the law while someone hits you = your fault that you got hit cause you shouldn't have been there in the first place

Welcome to the thread, thanks for rehashing, keep moving.

on a completely unrelated note, I parked on Turbot street yesterday at about 3.30pm just behind central station, as I got out of the car to go pay for my ticket, I damn near cleaned up some girl riding her bike along the foot path there
she came within millimeters of smashing into my drivers door

This happened to a friend from primary school's father. He was left a paraplegic.

Long story is they lost in court. Driver said not my fault, and if it was, I looked in the mirror and he must have been in the blind spot = taken reasonable care. Driver won convincingly.

Just saying.

http://strangemaps.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/neighbourhood.gif
I think pinky was first to post strangemaps blog (which I've booked marked because it's awesome site).

This image shows that it's possible to live with very little car usage. I'd love to live in a place like london where the tube takes you in walking distance to anywhere you want to go.

I'd also like to live out of my car but that's just a dream.

Everyone crammed in together all pissed off, whadda you lookin at motherf*****, get outta here...

for some reason i found that pretty funny.
I'd be ok with high rise living, if i had a 100% soundproof room that i could put a huge home cinema in, so i didnt have to deal with people complaining.
But its pretty much inevitable for that style of living. Suburbia isn't going to be around for much longer. Its already started in my town, housing blocks areas being bought up to build high rise buildings.
Sydney is severely behind on housing vs population growth.

So riding to uni today I scoped out the bike path skythra referred to near uni, and what a f*****g joke. I was heading from Indro train station towards uni via the golf course. As far as I can tell it's utterly useless, but maybe I'm missing something in which case please point it out.

1) The "bike path" is barely wide enough for a bicycle and a pedestrian, let alone for two bikes to pass each other.
2) Had I used the path I would have had to cross TWO busy roads. One of these crossing was on a blind hill/corner. F*****g ridiculous. (Riders may have to cross more roads if they get on the path earlier than the golf course, but I couldn't see where that was.)
3) These first two points unfortunately make the bike path useless, but to add insult: I couldn't see where the path started at the Indro end - I could only see the entry point near the golf course. The bike path itself is pretty much invisible, and of course no one will use if it they don't know it's there.
4) It doesn't start "about 500 metres from uni", it's closer to 1km from uni in a direction that most cyclists avoid because of hills.
5) The path just disappears at the end where it meets the road...

So I rode along the road (at about 7.20am), and when I was riding parallel to the bike path, I was past by only 1 vehicle, a motorbike. There were no other cars behind me at any stage, but there WERE cars coming in the opposite direction - this is the blind lane I would have to cross on the hill/corner had I used the path.

My two cents: Riders AND drivers shouldn't stand for this nonsense - it's almost a complete waste of money, the path is NOT safer for riders (because of the road crossings), it's in a stupid place and it's too far from uni.

As for teq's story about nearly taking out a cyclist with his door, I've seen this nearly happen many many times, and it's another reason why I don't stick to the side of the lane when riding, especially around built up areas in St Lucia. Kids/students/idiots can't be trusted with checking before they open their doors. In teq's case, she should not have been on the road without a helmet, but logic and common sense dictates that teq still should have checked before opening the door - whether or not she was wearing a helmet (which he didn't know until after he almost hit her) has no baring on your right to open a door on someone.

all im hearing is whinge whinge whinge
if you want better bike paths, pay for them

I don't know what your problem is blahnana, you seem to have taken a liking to me
I never said I want bike free roads, I just said I want bikers to get a clue
indicate, give way, ride at a reasonable speed so as to not cause accidents etc

riding a motorbike on the road is considered pretty dangerous and they have better brakes/acceleration, cyclists need to take as much, if not more care than motorcyclists
basically, if you are riding on the road and you do something stupid which ends up with you dying, I'm probably not going to feel sorry for you

tequila, you seem keen to s*** on this thread by failing to read any prior comments and then just adding your own snarky opinion that has no place in a reasonable discussion. All of your comments until this last one rehash points that were brought up and addressed. You stop doing s***ting on the thread, and we'll stop having a problem.

Like this one you keep bringing up. I addressed that pretty early on in the piece. If you do something wrong and cause an accident, it's your fault. Whether it's the bicycle or the car. Case closed. If you're driving a car and something goes wrong with a cyclist and you do everything you can to avoid an accident... you've done everything you can. Welcome to every situation you're driving on the road. Sometimes people will die. It's a dangerous method of travel, in a way. In another way, the ability to transport people, goods, services long distances has made our lives inestimably safer. So it's a reasonable trade-off.

Riding a bicycle doesn't make you a d***. Being a d*** makes you a d***, and they're everywhere. I want you to stop trying to blame all cyclists for the action of a few, just like I'm smart enough to not blame all drivers for the actions of a few. Go back and read my posts before you comment again.

There are a few narrow-minded people in this thread. I'm bothering to hold you to a higher standard. Stop making me regret that and I'll stop making fun of what you say.

Everyone is forced to keep repeating themselves because nobody here seems to really acknowledge what anyone says or thinks, a lot of putting words into other people's mouths, personal attacks, and misinterpreting stuff. The thread is a lost cause and I've given up on it, nobody really has the time to really debate this properly. There are a lot of factors to this issue, it's absolutely controversial, and people's own experiences seem to quite heavily influence them.
Let's just accept this is QGL and we won't sort anything serious out. There isn't any hope to come to an agreement, if we all agreed about everything there wouldn't be a need for there to be more than one of us.

Thermite, you sunk yourself and your input into this thread with your very first post.

cyclists absolutely s*** me, they are so inconsiderate. They go at the front of the traffic lights so that when it goes green you have to wait 20 seconds for them to piss out of the way, which means bugger all cars get through. I sit at some lights for 5 rounds of lights, it's bulls***.
Plenty of other reasons why I hate them though. They punce around in their silly little outfits like they think they're spiderman or something.
But yeah mainly they should stay off the roads, one day I will rage and simply kill one.

You only have yourself to blame. Garbage in, garbage out.

last edited by blahnana at 12:37:16 25/Mar/10

Everyone is forced to keep repeating themselves because nobody here seems to really acknowledge what anyone says or thinks, a lot of putting words into other people's mouths, personal attacks, and misinterpreting stuff. The thread is a lost cause and I've given up on it, nobody really has the time to really debate this properly. There are a lot of factors to this issue, it's absolutely controversial, and people's own experiences seem to quite heavily influence them.
Let's just accept this is QGL and we won't sort anything serious out. There isn't any hope to come to an agreement, if we all agreed about everything there wouldn't be a need for there to be more than one of us.

Actually, there are a few FACTS regarding the road rules that angry drivers, like yourself, are ignoring in favour of your driver preferences and personal opinions.

Here we go
http://bi.mipo.jsadigital.com.au/Major_Infrastructure_Projects_Office/Transport_projects/Bikeway_projects/St_Lucia_Bikeway_stage_two_.aspx

Also perhaps of interest is you can no longer park here during semester without a permit
http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/bccwr/lib174/transport_projects_st%20lucia_extended_boundary(final)_feb09.pdf

Thermite, you sunk yourself and your input into this thread with your very first post. You only have yourself to blame. Garbage in, garbage out.

Is this meant to be a response to something? Or are you just being an a******? How come you quoted what I said? How was that relevant to the discussion taking place? How did the rest of your post go with that quote?
I don't think you understand how opinions work.

By the way, since you've answered several of my rhetorical questions already in this thread (rofl, so clever), let me make it clear that none of the things I said above were actually questions. They are things for you to think about.

Actually, there are a few FACTS regarding the road rules that angry drivers, like yourself, are ignoring in favour of your driver preferences and personal opinions.

I don't think anyone is disputing what the law currently is, as has been stated many times. Way to prove my whole point mate. The point being that nobody cares what others say, they just keep reposting the same thing over and over. Yes that includes myself, I never said it didn't (so by pointing it out you're just being argumentative). My first or second post in this thread was me stating that I hadn't read the thread.

I've got a whole bag full of opinions that contradict what the rules are. That's what not being an idiot is all about. For me these are some of the more interesting things to talk about, and also the sources of frustration, since the law doesn't reflect the sort of world/environment I'd like to be in.

I get a bad feeling some of you have a bit of a "Truman Show" thing going on with the law, and your perception of reality - where you think something is right/true because you don't know any better, which is a bit worrying.

last edited by thermite at 13:44:09 25/Mar/10

haha, good luck with that!

Wouldn't the lights take the exact same time on your Motor Bike?
You know Lane splitting is against the law in QLD, right?

I have a motorbike license but I still wouldn't ride to work every day
I've got a wife and child to think of, they cant afford for me to die

Rest of the world certainly can.

Actually, both blah and I have already addressed the rego issue.

Regarding specialist bikelanes and driver education?

1. registratrion is hardly about driver ed. it is about maintenance and construction of roads. move on.
2. bikelanes. By that logic because we pay car rego and you pay nothing the existing lanes ought be car only. move on.

edit: what it is spent on is irrelevant. you're purchasing a license (in a legal sense, not a piece of paper) to use the roadways.

Police do enforce the rules :S

I'm failing to see the flaw in my argument.

1. Registration is a license to use the roadway.
2. For each vehicle a seperate registration is paid.
3. Bicycles are vehicles.
4. Bicycles use the roadway.

Therefore, it's only equitable that cyclists also pay a registration.

I'm not suggesting that it should be same as cars, or anywhere close.

The system is already there. They're a Vehicle. You would just have to ad another Class (or 3, Mountain/Road/BMX) to the existing system.

It's been pointed out that there are Push Bike cops already taking care of riders, it would be no skin off their nose/extra work to fine unregestered vehicles.

what're the logistics of putting a numberplate on a bicycle? how big would it have to be before it was visbile vs how much would it slow down the rider (if at all)

Well it was just an 'I reckon'. The rego costs for a bicycle would be nowhere near a car (surely) and I am kind of aware of how expensive it is to set up a registration system and then enforce it.

I don't really think it is an issue though. I can't really ever see them setting up a registration fee for bicycles.

Do you need a boat license for unpowered watercraft?

No. Nor does it need registration.

Hell I'll pay rego for bikes, for sure... I'll even pay $600-$700 a year, full price as a car.

Then I'm going to ride 20km/hr in the dead centre of a lane 100% of the time.

If that's according to the road rules then go for it - hell do it right now if its legal!

Its the sort of epic transport disruption that the anti-bicycle crowd are looking for to get you off the road :)

as for the under powered water craft not needing licenses, they aren't regularly motoring around hundreds of other cars
they aren't able to boat at night and they can't go over 6 knotts (or is it 10 knotts?)

I'd feel 100x safer in a 5HP boat than I would on a pushy in traffic with motorized 2 tonne steel boxes of death either side of me

also, why can any noob with no clue how to ride a bike, walk into a store, buy said bike, jump on an open ride and start peddling?
isn't that F*****G DANGEROUS for everyone else involved, not to mention the noob rider

as for the under powered water craft not needing licenses, they aren't regularly motoring around hundreds of other cars
they aren't able to boat at night and they can't go over 6 knotts (or is it 10 knotts?)

I'd feel 100x safer in a 5HP boat than I would on a pushy in traffic with motorized 2 tonne steel boxes of death either side of me

also, why can any noob with no clue how to ride a bike, walk into a store, buy said bike, jump on an open ride and start peddling?
isn't that F*****G DANGEROUS for everyone else involved, not to mention the noob rider

You can't help but embarrass yourself. You established you're scared, who cares?

Such noobs could exist riding bikes, but don't. They could exist in their little tinnies too but (mostly) don't. You can't be reasonable and show yourself to be a blusterer. Go bluster somewhere else.

You're taking this pretty personally blah, personal attacks when all I've done is give an opinion that is clearly biased towards that of a motorist (ie, the majority and the ones who have paid for the right to use that carriage way)
At least you give me some luls on an otherwise boring Thursday afternoon ;)

Also, I don't understand what I have to be scared of?
I don't ride push bikes on the road and I don't ride motorbikes in peak hour traffic (nor do I regularly operate a tinny for that matter)
I'm the guy driving a big 4x4 through the city who is inevitably going to crush some idiot on a bike one day because they just don't take riding on the road seriously enough

I also have a boat license, once again I'm the guy in the cruiser who is going to sink the tinny because he didn't give way to me as he doesn't know the rules and I couldn't turn in time?
(allowed to captain any boat without knowing the rules is pure luls)

Both are purely hypothetical situations but both are situations that I'm prepared to deal with should either ever happen, I simply wouldn't allow myself to feel bad if someones own stupidity was the reason behind their death even if it was my car or boat that contributed, so long as I wasn't doing anything to contribute fault

you're on the bottom of the food chain my friend, I'm the top pyramid and It's no mistake that I've ended up there

Hell I'll pay rego for bikes, for sure... I'll even pay $600-$700 a year, full price as a car.
Then I'm going to ride 20km/hr in the dead centre of a lane 100% of the time.

Hhahaha, I love it.

I have a motorbike license but I still wouldn't ride to work every day

Well, better stop driving the car then. Gotta think of your wife and children. You'll get a heart attack when you become fat and lazy. Oh, and cars are dangerous, too.

Check out this link what motorcyclist did in Paris a few weeks ago:

http://ukfrancebikers.com/2010/03/1...ngry-than-ever/

Last month, we published a post where we said that thousands of motorcyclists were expected to demonstrate all over France in protest at a recent Government announcement to fine any bikers caught filtering through the traffic. Well, the demonstrations took place yesterday, 13th March 2010. More than 60 cities and towns saw their roads blocked by thousands of angry bikers who said NON to the French authorities who keep treating motorbikes, scooters and mopeds like cars.

The French Government have recently announced their intention to take draconian measures against bikers who overtake cars and filter in between them in traffic jams by issuing expensive fines. They expect every bike to stay in lane, like cars, behind each other, and not go any faster than them. How stupid is that? Paris, for instance, but also Lille, Lyon, Marseille, Bordeaux and Toulouse are already very congested cities due to the high number of cars in circulation, and the Government is keen to add more pressure on the roads by forcing Powered Two Wheelers (PTW) to behave like cars.

They treat us like cars, we will behave like cars!

La F�d�ration Fran�aise des Motards en Col�re (FFMC - the French Federation of Angry Bikers) urged all motorcyclists on the other side of the Channel to protest and, as a result, France saw a total of 40,000 motorcyclists gathered on the roads yesterday, with 10,000 of them in Paris alone. Parisian motorcyclists joined the FFMC at 2pm at Ch�teau de Vincennes, on the outskirts of Paris. There were already 5,000 bikers at 1.30pm, another 2,200 joined between 1.30pm and 2pm and the rest joined during the demonstration.


If one car = one bike, let's see the results!

Angry bikers took over the whole p�riph�rique (the express road running around the centre of Paris), each occupying the space of one car in each lane. Within minutes, an enormous traffic jam was created by these 10,000 motorcyclists, thus gridlocking the whole of Paris on a busy Saturday afternoon, when Parisians go out to do their shopping and visit friends and relatives. The result was absolutely spectacular, car drivers were stuck in traffic until late in the evening by the time all the traffic jams cleared.

Let�s cause massive disruption in the metro!


Did you say bikers, if not happy, had to take the metro like everyone else? Fine, let's do it!

For anyone who decided to leave their car at home and take the metro instead, unfortunately that didn�t help. In response to a statement made by the French Transport Secretary, Jean-Marc Belotti, who said �If they [bikers] are not happy, they can take the metro like everyone else�, protestors took over the Paris underground network. While some bikers continued to block the roads and cause standstill overground, others went down the underground en masse and occupied an entire train, thus bringing the entire line to a complete stop. We let you imagine the outcome if thousands of motorcyclists left their bike at home and commuted by tube. This is valid in London too, if Westminster City Council continue to stealth tax bikers to park, thus increase the cost of motorcycling. Next time, Mr Belotti will think twice before opening his mouth!

UK France Bikers are very proud indeed of the FFMC and their actions to protect the rights of motorcyclists in France. The FFMC is a real example to follow for everyone. It is now time that public authorities, wherever they are in the world, realise that they�re not above everyone else. To the contrary, they are there to serve the people who elected them.

They inconvenience us, we will inconvenience them! Power to the people!

F*****g good on them. Shows what the traffic is like if they didnt lane-split. Same s*** if cyclists decided to get in their cars all of a sudden.
You could imagine this sort of protest blocking cities if registration was introduced for bicycles.

Wow that is awesome. Why don't we do that in Australia?

I'd be happy to pay rego for bikes, I don't see what the big deal is about rego. In fact all the people I've asked who cycle in to work 2-3 times a week are more than happy to pay rego? Will people stop crying then? I doubt it.. Even 100-200 people blocking a few major roads would do the job :)

last edited by Twisted at 17:26:27 25/Mar/10