Australia and New Zealand · Public discussion

Cyclists break the road rules...

Started by scotty72 · · Last activity · 56 posts · 3,567 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Australia and New Zealand
Published
12 January 2008
Last activity
16 January 2008
Original author
scotty72
Posts
56
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
3,567
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–20 of 56
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. ... but motorists never do, right.

    Are you as sick of the constant whinge about 'cyclists break the law, so lets register them and that will solve it' [censored]?

    Cars are registered. Doesn't stop them CONSTANTLY breaking the law.

    watch this (about 1min 50 sec)

  2. scotty72 said:

    .. but motorists never do, right.
    '


    (

    )

    Where are the cops when all this is happening?

    Do they get more money with speeding, or was the doughnut shop open that day?
    --
    Linux Registered User # 302622
    <http://counter.li.org>

  3. hehehe

    I suppose they can't be everywhere

    This was just a random intersection (near my home) at a random time of the day. It could have been anywhere, anytime.

    Motorists do it all day long.

    SCotty

    quote='John Tserkezis'scotty72 said:

    .. but motorists never do, right.
    '


    (

    )

    Where are the cops when all this is happening?

    Do they get more money with speeding, or was the doughnut shop open that day?
    --
    Linux Registered User # 302622
    <http://counter.li.org>[/QUOTE]

  4. scotty72 said:

    ... but motorists never do, right.

    Are you as sick of the constant whinge about 'cyclists break the law, so lets register them and that will solve it' [censored]?

    Cars are registered. Doesn't stop them CONSTANTLY breaking the law.

    watch this (about 1min 50 sec)

    Reminds me of the recent 'cyclists riding faster than 10kph along Southbank shock horror scoop'. The police blitzed cyclists along Southbank with a radar gun, from memory one or two received cautions and not entirely sure if any fines were actually handed out. Meanwhile, a friend present watching the police action, took numerous photos of drivers on Queensbridge using their mobile phone while in the act of driving. Go figure.

  5. cfsmtb said:

    Reminds me of the recent 'cyclists riding faster than 10kph along
    Southbank shock horror scoop'. The police blitzed cyclists along
    Southbank with a radar gun, from memory one or two received cautions and
    not entirely sure if any fines were actually handed out.

    This only applies in NSW, not sure if there are any funny legal gotchas
    anywhere else.

    On a bike path, police have no jurisdiction on speed control.

    A cyclist in theory could do 70Km/h and could not be touched. On the roads,
    a cyclist must comply with the same road rules as cars, with the exception of
    there are no demerit points applicable, only fines.

    Quoted message said:

    Meanwhile, a
    friend present watching the police action, took numerous photos of
    drivers on Queensbridge using their mobile phone while in the act of
    driving. Go figure.

    Sigh. Police have certain provisions over the normal road rules in the
    course of their job above normal motorists.

    Such as using sirens and lights to go through red lights to get to their
    local doughnut shop before it closes. As by the evidence that they have been
    witnessed doing this a number of times, with no reported fines or reprimands.

    On the other hand, firies using the fire engine to give a friend guest a
    "joy ride" to the local pizza shop to pick up everyone's lunch order is
    certainly NOT allowed. As is evident a newspaper report wrote about it, and
    said firies were fined soon afterwards.

    A slightly unrelated case of people being booked for travelling on a bus
    lane. Normally you'd think this was a case of shut up and take it. However,
    this was during road works, where the only way out of people's own houses to
    get to work was via the bus lane that was left intact at the time.
    The law is the law, and EVERYONE (all the locals) was booked.

    I understand police require flexibility on normal road rules to do their
    job, otherwise nothing will get done, however, abusing it is another story.
    Even if it IS done to the letter of the law. Quotas anyone?
    --
    Linux Registered User # 302622
    <http://counter.li.org>

  6. "John Tserkezis" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    cfsmtb said:

    Reminds me of the recent 'cyclists riding faster than 10kph along
    Southbank shock horror scoop'. The police blitzed cyclists along
    Southbank with a radar gun, from memory one or two received cautions and
    not entirely sure if any fines were actually handed out.

    This only applies in NSW, not sure if there are any funny legal gotchas
    anywhere else.

    On a bike path, police have no jurisdiction on speed control.

    A cyclist in theory could do 70Km/h and could not be touched. On the


    roads,

    Quoted message said:

    a cyclist must comply with the same road rules as cars, with the exception


    of

    Quoted message said:

    there are no demerit points applicable, only fines.

    Quoted message said:

    Meanwhile, a
    friend present watching the police action, took numerous photos of
    drivers on Queensbridge using their mobile phone while in the act of
    driving. Go figure.

    Sigh. Police have certain provisions over the normal road rules in the
    course of their job above normal motorists.

    Such as using sirens and lights to go through red lights to get to their
    local doughnut shop before it closes. As by the evidence that they have


    been

    Quoted message said:

    witnessed doing this a number of times, with no reported fines or


    reprimands.

    Quoted message said:


    On the other hand, firies using the fire engine to give a friend guest a
    "joy ride" to the local pizza shop to pick up everyone's lunch order is
    certainly NOT allowed. As is evident a newspaper report wrote about it,


    and

    Quoted message said:

    said firies were fined soon afterwards.

    A slightly unrelated case of people being booked for travelling on a bus
    lane. Normally you'd think this was a case of shut up and take it.


    However,

    Quoted message said:

    this was during road works, where the only way out of people's own houses


    to

    Quoted message said:

    get to work was via the bus lane that was left intact at the time.
    The law is the law, and EVERYONE (all the locals) was booked.

    I understand police require flexibility on normal road rules to do their
    job, otherwise nothing will get done, however, abusing it is another


    story.

    Quoted message said:

    Even if it IS done to the letter of the law. Quotas anyone?
    --
    Linux Registered User # 302622
    <http://counter.li.org>

    There is always stupid ways of revenue. I can recall getting on a school
    bus. One that turned up early and EMPTY to our school gate at 3pm soley for
    students. All of us in school uniform and then inspectors getting on fining
    anyone over a certain age without proof of concession! In school uniform,
    leaving school on a school bus and we have to prove it??

    Its the same way police on pushies in town are mainly there for courier
    fines and ride past drug deals, jaywalking and other crime right in front of
    them.

  7. In aus.bicycle on Sun, 13 Jan 2008 08:06:19 +1100

    John Tserkezis said:
    cfsmtb said:

    Reminds me of the recent 'cyclists riding faster than 10kph along
    Southbank shock horror scoop'. The police blitzed cyclists along
    Southbank with a radar gun, from memory one or two received cautions and
    not entirely sure if any fines were actually handed out.

    This only applies in NSW, not sure if there are any funny legal gotchas
    anywhere else.

    On a bike path, police have no jurisdiction on speed control.

    A cyclist in theory could do 70Km/h and could not be touched. On the roads,
    a cyclist must comply with the same road rules as cars, with the exception of
    there are no demerit points applicable, only fines.

    What about a shared path? Are there 2 kinds of "path" in NSW? (3
    kinds I suppose, footpath, bike path, shared path? I didn't realise
    there were non-shared paths in NSW, where are some?)

    Quoted message said:

    Sigh. Police have certain provisions over the normal road rules in the
    course of their job above normal motorists.

    My understanding is that they can break pretty well any road rule "in
    the course of their duties". If they are reported doing so, they have
    to justify the action as part of duties. How much justification is
    enough is going to depend....

    Quoted message said:

    Such as using sirens and lights to go through red lights to get to their
    local doughnut shop before it closes. As by the evidence that they have been
    witnessed doing this a number of times, with no reported fines or reprimands.

    I do know a copper (in SA, not NSW) who was honking along with lights
    and siren going when he was called off as there were enough people at
    the incident. So he stopped the lights and pulled over to eat.

    In other words, it isn't always what you think it is.

    Quoted message said:

    A slightly unrelated case of people being booked for travelling on a bus
    lane. Normally you'd think this was a case of shut up and take it. However,
    this was during road works, where the only way out of people's own houses to
    get to work was via the bus lane that was left intact at the time.
    The law is the law, and EVERYONE (all the locals) was booked.

    I believe you are allowed to travel up to 100m before turning. No
    idea what the after turning rule is, doesn't seem to be mentioned
    anywhere that I saw.

    Quoted message said:

    I understand police require flexibility on normal road rules to do their
    job, otherwise nothing will get done, however, abusing it is another story.
    Even if it IS done to the letter of the law. Quotas anyone?

    My understanding is that there are not quotas as such. There are "be
    seen to be doing" and "prove to us you aren't skiving off".

    The Adelaide City Council parking rangers didn't have quotas. What
    they did have was "past performance". So if a bomber wasn't booking
    as many people as had been booked in that area at that time in
    previous years, they would be asked why not. If they had an
    explanation such as a change in parking restrictions or a popular
    business moving, then that was that. If there was none then they'd be
    told to get moving and possibly checked up on to be sure they were
    doing the job, not off having coffee.

    Wouldn't surprise me if the police were the same.

    Zebee

  8. Zebee Johnstone said:

    What about a shared path? Are there 2 kinds of "path" in NSW? (3
    kinds I suppose, footpath, bike path, shared path? I didn't realise
    there were non-shared paths in NSW, where are some?)

    Ok, footpaths are for pedestrians only, with exceptions for wheelchairs,
    (powered or not) those old-fart powered scooter things, for bicycles with the
    proviso they are ridden by someone UNDER 12 years old, and for adults on
    bicycles who are supervising children on bikes who are under 12 years old.

    A Shared bicycle/pedestrian path allows for bicycles, and anything that is
    classed as a pedestrian (wheelchairs, those old fart scooters and such).

    A bicycle path only, is for bicycles only. There are not too many of these
    around in NSW. Basically, they're as the name says, bikes only. Not sure if
    there is any provision for fines if you're a pedestrian. I would hazard a
    guess not, or if there is, it's never enforced.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Sigh. Police have certain provisions over the normal road rules in the
    course of their job above normal motorists.

    My understanding is that they can break pretty well any road rule "in
    the course of their duties". If they are reported doing so, they have
    to justify the action as part of duties. How much justification is
    enough is going to depend....

    No, they have clear guidelines on what can and can't be done. For instance,
    the red light thing is allowed, as long as they radio base that they've done
    it, likewise for speed cameras.

    However, if it's not a cameraed red light, then it's a case of the tree
    falling in the woods. If a cop car goes through a red light and there is no
    documented evidence it happened, then how do you know if it really happened?

    Quoted message said:

    I do know a copper (in SA, not NSW) who was honking along with lights
    and siren going when he was called off as there were enough people at
    the incident. So he stopped the lights and pulled over to eat.

    Quoted message said:

    In other words, it isn't always what you think it is.

    "If a tree falls in the woods"...

    Quoted message said:

    I believe you are allowed to travel up to 100m before turning. No
    idea what the after turning rule is, doesn't seem to be mentioned
    anywhere that I saw.

    You live there. Your ENTIRE street is blocked off for whatever reason. The
    only operable lane left is a bus lane. This is your job, your work truck, you
    have no options.
    I'm quite sure you won't CARE what Fscking rules apply, but they shouldn't
    apply under these circumstances.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    I understand police require flexibility on normal road rules to do their
    job, otherwise nothing will get done, however, abusing it is another story.
    Even if it IS done to the letter of the law. Quotas anyone?

    Quoted message said:

    My understanding is that there are not quotas as such. There are "be
    seen to be doing" and "prove to us you aren't skiving off".

    Ahem. It's been mentioned on the aus.cars group, (I can't quote because I
    can't remember nor find) A commander speaking to staff before the shift.
    We've had X bookings last month, district X has Y bookings (more). We are not
    going to let them win again are we?

    Quoted message said:

    The Adelaide City Council parking rangers didn't have quotas. What
    they did have was "past performance". So if a bomber wasn't booking
    as many people as had been booked in that area at that time in
    previous years, they would be asked why not. If they had an
    explanation such as a change in parking restrictions or a popular
    business moving, then that was that. If there was none then they'd be
    told to get moving and possibly checked up on to be sure they were
    doing the job, not off having coffee.

    At the end of the day, I'm not playing word games. If it looks like a
    quota, and smells like a quota, and barks like a quota, then....

    Quoted message said:

    Wouldn't surprise me if the police were the same.

    I've mentioned before (can't remember which group) about my neighbour who
    works for the fire dept (the locals, not bush). A large proportion of his
    workmates are ex-cops. When he asked why they moved, invariably, the answer
    was they were disillusioned with the way things were going, it was more about
    making money rather than policing. All of them went in wanting to make the
    community a better place.

    A decade working for the police beat that idea out of them.
    --
    Linux Registered User # 302622
    <http://counter.li.org>

  9. "Zebee Johnstone" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    ...I didn't realise there were non-shared paths in NSW, where are some?

    Harbour Bridge?

  10. Tomasso said:
    Quoted message said:

    ...I didn't realise there were non-shared paths in NSW, where are some?

    Quoted message said:

    Harbour Bridge?

    That one is shared. There are very few non-shared paths, there is one in
    Fairfield, alas it was a million years ago when we passed that one, so can't
    remember exactly where.

    I'm sure there are at least a couple of others, but you get the idea, not many.
    --
    Linux Registered User # 302622
    <http://counter.li.org>

  11. the harbor bridge bike way is not shared

    if fact there are 2 guards on duty at any time who will throw peds off. I've seen them do it.

    Scotty

    quote='John Tserkezis'Tomasso said:
    Quoted message said:

    ...I didn't realise there were non-shared paths in NSW, where are some?

    Quoted message said:

    Harbour Bridge?

    That one is shared. There are very few non-shared paths, there is one in
    Fairfield, alas it was a million years ago when we passed that one, so can't
    remember exactly where.

    I'm sure there are at least a couple of others, but you get the idea, not many.
    --
    Linux Registered User # 302622
    <http://counter.li.org>[/QUOTE]

  12. scotty72 said:

    the harbor bridge bike way is not shared

    Quoted message said:

    if fact there are 2 guards on duty at any time who will throw peds off.
    I've seen them do it.

    I've just been over this morning, and I can't believe that. Are they idiots?

    Is there NO other way for a pedestrian to get across without using some form
    of paid transport?

    Why do the [censored] still have STAIRS at the northern end? Why are they
    happy to let this poor [censored] (me) with a recumbent trike and plastic cleats
    across, but not a joe-average pedestrian?

    There is only so much boggling my mind can allow for each day. I'm going to
    have a bit of a lay down..
    --
    Linux Registered User # 302622
    <http://counter.li.org>

  13. Yes, peds can get over on the eastern side

    bike on the western

    quote='John Tserkezis'scotty72 said:

    the harbor bridge bike way is not shared

    Quoted message said:

    if fact there are 2 guards on duty at any time who will throw peds off.
    I've seen them do it.

    I've just been over this morning, and I can't believe that. Are they idiots?

    Is there NO other way for a pedestrian to get across without using some form
    of paid transport?

    Why do the [censored] still have STAIRS at the northern end? Why are they
    happy to let this poor [censored] (me) with a recumbent trike and plastic cleats
    across, but not a joe-average pedestrian?

    There is only so much boggling my mind can allow for each day. I'm going to
    have a bit of a lay down..
    --
    Linux Registered User # 302622
    <http://counter.li.org>[/QUOTE]

  14. "scotty72" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:


    Yes, peds can get over on the eastern side

    bike on the western

    That's how it works.

  15. scotty72 said:

    Yes, peds can get over on the eastern side
    bike on the western

    Ah, that explains it.

    I wonder how much lobbying will it take to have escalators installed?
    --
    Linux Registered User # 302622
    <http://counter.li.org>

  16. John Tserkezis said:
    scotty72 said:

    Yes, peds can get over on the eastern side
    bike on the western

    Ah, that explains it.

    I wonder how much lobbying will it take to have escalators installed?

    Have a look at this, SMH, Dec 17 2007:
    http://tinyurl.com/347w7e

    --
    beerwolf

  17. scotty72 said:


    the harbor bridge bike way is not shared

    if fact there are 2 guards on duty at any time who will throw peds off.
    I've seen them do it.

    Now that's what I call zero tolerance!

    --
    beerwolf

  18. In aus.bicycle on Sun, 13 Jan 2008 16:35:56 +1100

    John Tserkezis said:
    Tomasso said:
    Quoted message said:

    ...I didn't realise there were non-shared paths in NSW, where are some?

    Quoted message said:

    Harbour Bridge?

    That one is shared. There are very few non-shared paths, there is one in
    Fairfield, alas it was a million years ago when we passed that one, so can't
    remember exactly where.

    THe bridge one isn't. The peds are supposed to be on the other side.
    I have come across a jogger on the bridge path which annoyed me but at
    least he was wearing lots of reflec so it was easy to tell what he
    was.

    Zebee

  19. In aus.bicycle on Sun, 13 Jan 2008 18:53:07 +1100

    John Tserkezis said:
    scotty72 said:

    Yes, peds can get over on the eastern side
    bike on the western

    Ah, that explains it.

    I wonder how much lobbying will it take to have escalators installed?

    North Sydney council are talking about extending it a fair distance.
    I think they are going to add ramps for on/off.

    Take years though.

    Escalators would be very expensive, won't get them. I'm surprised
    someone hasn't pushed for lifts on the ped side though.

    Trikes are right outside planners understanding I've found, there are
    a couple of places on my regular commute that are very trike
    unfriendly due to the bollard design. One's been fixed, the other
    probably never will be.

    I have no idea if the various bike consulting groups have trikers on
    them, or if the two wheelers know three wheelers so they think "what
    about trikes?"

    Maybe what you need is to find someone who uses a trike cos they are
    disabled, then raise a fuss about how the councils are not living up
    to their obligations.

    Zebee

  20. In aus.bicycle on Sun, 13 Jan 2008 16:23:12 +1100

    John Tserkezis said:


    Quoted message said:

    The Adelaide City Council parking rangers didn't have quotas. What
    they did have was "past performance". So if a bomber wasn't booking
    as many people as had been booked in that area at that time in
    previous years, they would be asked why not. If they had an
    explanation such as a change in parking restrictions or a popular
    business moving, then that was that. If there was none then they'd be
    told to get moving and possibly checked up on to be sure they were
    doing the job, not off having coffee.

    At the end of the day, I'm not playing word games. If it looks like a
    quota, and smells like a quota, and barks like a quota, then....

    Which it isn't, as that description shows. A quota isn't going to
    change depending on circumstances for example.

    How do you propose a council or police force can determine if the
    employees are doing the job or skiving off?

    Dunno about police, but I do know the bomber's job is hard,
    unpleasant, and so difficult to fill. Good recipe for people not
    working just saying they do. What would you do to make sure the
    work's being done?

    Zebee

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.