Lane splitting

TimC said:

On 2006-01-24, Random Data (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:

Quoted message said:

Glen F said:

1. The "no cycling across road on a pedestrian crossing"
issue remains unaddressed (Rule 248). This must be the most widely
ignored rule in the book. Yet they fix it for rollerbladers!

It's impractical for a rollerblader to remove their skates. It'll scuff
your shiny cleats to walk across an intersection, but it's not like it's
hard to get off the bike. I think it's a reasonable rule, and I'll cop it
sweet if I get done for it on the rare occasions I ride across one.

For those of us in silly road cleats, I beleive it is actually far
more dangerous for us to get off and walk (maybe I'm just
uncoordinated), and as such, always proceed cautiosly on the bike
instead.

There was a temporary detour ramp along the Coro Dr bikeway in Bne, nice
shiny slippery coating, there was NO WAY I was going to get off my bike.
Soon enough the sign changed from "Cyclists must dismount" to "cyclists
must reduce speed"

Tam

percrime said:

And I spose
it wouldnt hurt if they used bike lanes provided they kept out of the
way of pushies.

I often see motorcyclists and scooterists (?) using on-road bike lanes to get to the front of a traffic queue and you know what? I can't say I mind. I can't think of a logical reason why they should be denied that road space so where's the harm?

Quoted post said:

And if you can ride a
bike in traffic you can stay alive on a motorcycle.

IMO it takes a lot more skill to ride a motorcycle safely in traffic that in does to ride a bicycle safely in traffic. Everything just happens so much faster!.

Quoted post said:

7am tomorrow Eaun. Kathy is gunna come. Suzie is getting her fired
up. Ian says he will come.. but you know 🙂

Hmm, hold the track pump hostage or give it back and use it as an excuse to hit him up in the monring? >;-)

On 2006-01-24, percrime (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:

Quoted message said:

The speaker at the end. Not a good public speaker. He said he thought
motorcyclists should be treated like cyclists to some extent under the
road laws. To bring it back on topic. What do people think?

Why on earth would you want to be treated like cyclists on the road?
You're not riding toys!

Quoted message said:

I guess
I myself have no objection as far as lanesplitting goes. And I spose
it wouldnt hurt if they used bike lanes provided they kept out of the
way of pushies. I dont.

At the current stage, it would be unexpected enough from the cyclists
perspective that it would be a bad idea. I'm not convinced it could
ever be a good idea.

You really would have to limit what the motorcycle is allowed to do.
No fast speeds (over 30?). No stupid non-cyclist like fast
accelarations. If they want to ride the bike lane, the would have to
stay on the bike lane -- cyclists are obliged to use, as far as
practical, the bike lane, and base their expectations on that, so you
can't keep zipping in and out at your convenience. And you want to be
careful that motorbike aren't equally /obliged/ to use, as far as
practical, any bike lanes.

But there would be one good side effect of such an obligation -- bike
lanes would then have to become wide enough to cater to motorbikes,
which can't be a bad thing 🙂

--
TimC
Stapp's (of Murphy's law fame) Law: the universal aptitude for
ineptitude makes any human accomplishment an incredible miracle.

Quoted message said:

And I spose
it wouldnt hurt if they used bike lanes provided they kept out of the
way of pushies.

I often see motorcyclists and scooterists (?) using on-road bike lanes
to get to the front of a traffic queue and you know what? I can't say
I
mind. I can't think of a logical reason why they should be denied that

road space so where's the harm?

Yeah I guess. I have always made a point of NOT doing it on the
motorbike just from the viewpoint of trying not to be rude. But so
long as you are polite. Curious to hear opinions

Quoted message said:

And if you can ride a
bike in traffic you can stay alive on a motorcycle.

IMO it takes a lot more skill to ride a motorcycle safely in traffic
that in does to ride a bicycle safely in traffic. Everything just
happens so much faster!.

Well It can 🙂 And in my evil past I have been at the cutting edge of
that. But it doesnt have too. Anyway my point is that the essential
skills are the same.

Conversely its easier to ride a motorcycle really slow.

Quoted message said:

7am tomorrow Eaun. Kathy is gunna come. Suzie is getting her fired
up. Ian says he will come.. but you know 🙂

Hmm, hold the track pump hostage or give it back and use it as an
excuse to hit him up in the monring? >;-)

Track pump? Oh you mean my new track pump that Ian gave me. 🙂
You think I should tell him I have it?

Dave

Quoted message said:

The speaker at the end. Not a good public speaker. He said he thought
motorcyclists should be treated like cyclists to some extent under the
road laws. To bring it back on topic. What do people think?

Why on earth would you want to be treated like cyclists on the road?
You're not riding toys!

Tim ???????

Quoted message said:

I guess
I myself have no objection as far as lanesplitting goes. And I spose
it wouldnt hurt if they used bike lanes provided they kept out of the
way of pushies. I dont.

At the current stage, it would be unexpected enough from the cyclists
perspective that it would be a bad idea. I'm not convinced it could
ever be a good idea.

You really would have to limit what the motorcycle is allowed to do.
No fast speeds (over 30?). No stupid non-cyclist like fast
accelarations. If they want to ride the bike lane, the would have to
stay on the bike lane -- cyclists are obliged to use, as far as
practical, the bike lane, and base their expectations on that, so you
can't keep zipping in and out at your convenience. And you want to be
careful that motorbike aren't equally /obliged/ to use, as far as
practical, any bike lanes.

Tim the idea is to be able to go up the left same as a bicycle can.. ok
thats a no brainer. 🙂 Use the bike lane where practicable. Obviously
if a bike is their overtaking em in that lane aint gunna happen so it
will be self limiting like that. Motorcylists will move out of the
way for faster lane splitters as a matter of course. We actually are
really good at self regulation like that, so scaring cyclists is
unlikely. Hitting em aint going to happen, we dont ride like that. Do
you see what I mean? For example its difficult to overtake on aubaun
rd on the motorcycle.. I do it 3 or 4 cars at a time on stealth Kat.
stooging down the bike lane at 20 kph would be a win if legal. Stop
next to any cyclist at the red light. Once its green we are gone.
Its not dangerous and I speak from the perspective of one who really
does know. And its rarely going to hold up a cyclist. Less rarely than
the mountain bikers on aubaun rd. 🙂 The question is is it rude?

But there would be one good side effect of such an obligation -- bike
lanes would then have to become wide enough to cater to motorbikes,
which can't be a bad thing 🙂

Tim they are 🙂 My motorbike is about a foot wider than the pushy.
And I rarely pass anything with less than a foots clearance. on the
pushy.. never at speed.

Incidently did you want a ride sometime on the back seat?

Dave

On 2006-01-25, percrime (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

And if you can ride a
bike in traffic you can stay alive on a motorcycle.

IMO it takes a lot more skill to ride a motorcycle safely in traffic
that in does to ride a bicycle safely in traffic. Everything just
happens so much faster!.

Well It can 🙂 And in my evil past I have been at the cutting edge of
that. But it doesnt have too. Anyway my point is that the essential
skills are the same.

Cutting edge? Literally? Hope you cleaned the wounds 🙂

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

7am tomorrow Eaun. Kathy is gunna come. Suzie is getting her fired
up. Ian says he will come.. but you know 🙂

Hmm, hold the track pump hostage or give it back and use it as an
excuse to hit him up in the monring? >;-)

Track pump? Oh you mean my new track pump that Ian gave me. 🙂
You think I should tell him I have it?

Nah. Just say someone broke into his flat and stole just the track
pump. He'll understand.

--
TimC
"Some people think that noise abatement should be a higher priority for ATC. I
say safety is noise abatement. You have no idea how much noise it makes to have
a 737 fall out of the sky after an accident." -- anon. air traffic controller

Glen F said:

Have you ever actually seen a car turning right from a busy road
stop and give way to a ped already crossing the side street?
Stop across traffic?

Not often, however the vehicle should not initiate the turn if there is a
pedestrian crossing the side street. I don't. There is another rule that
covers this, something about not going somewhere where your exit from the
turn is blocked, as it would be by a pedestrian.

Quoted message said:

Or even one that was turning left? Stop
and hold up traffic behind?

Every day.

Quoted message said:

What about at a less busy intersection. Seen a car turn right
and stop for a ped crossing the street they're turning in to?
Really? Where was that?

As above, the vehicle may not initiaite the turn if the exit is blocked.

Quoted message said:

That's the state of it. Sensible? Widely known? Clearly
understood by all? I suggest not...

You obviously understand it, I understand it, everybody I know understands
it. OK, maybe not all understand it.

Theo

On 2006-01-25, percrime (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The speaker at the end. Not a good public speaker. He said he thought
motorcyclists should be treated like cyclists to some extent under the
road laws. To bring it back on topic. What do people think?

Why on earth would you want to be treated like cyclists on the road?
You're not riding toys!

Tim ???????

I knew I should have put that </driver's train of thought> tag in 🙂

P.S. You're using google groups aren't you? It is stuffing up the
quoting of who you are replying to. You can't see what it is that is
going wrong with your quotes?

Quoted message said:

Tim the idea is to be able to go up the left same as a bicycle can.. ok
thats a no brainer. 🙂 Use the bike lane where practicable.

I was just thinking the other day that on roads wide enough, there
should be a bike lane, a motorbike lane, and then any other room that
is left should be car lanes. Of course, when there is a motorbike
lane, you must not oblige motorcyclists to use it, because otherwise
you end up with the situation where you have one bike lane, 2 or 3 car
lanes, cars that are able to overtake, but motorbikes that can't --
and all the other stupid [censored] that happens with current bike lanes.

Perhaps using the bike lane, with the proviso that the standard
dealing with widths is updated to deal with the extra foot from your
motorbike, would be good enough.

Quoted message said:

does know. And its rarely going to hold up a cyclist. Less rarely than
the mountain bikers on aubaun rd. 🙂 The question is is it rude?

Did we tell that guy "calm blue oceans"? 🙂

Quoted message said:

Incidently did you want a ride sometime on the back seat?

Hmmm. Sounds like much fun. You got gear I can wear?

--
TimC
I'm sorry. The number you have reached is imaginary. Please rotate your
phone 90 degrees and try again. -- MIT's phone switch

Quoted message said:

I knew I should have put that </driver's train of thought> tag in 🙂

Quoted message said:

P.S. You're using google groups aren't you? It is stuffing up the
quoting of who you are replying to. You can't see what it is that is
going wrong with your quotes?

Yeah I am and yeah I know. Sorry. Its the only way I have managed to
get posting to work from work. I,ll sort it
sooner or later. But apologies to all.

Quoted message said:

Tim the idea is to be able to go up the left same as a bicycle can.. ok
thats a no brainer. 🙂 Use the bike lane where practicable.

Quoted message said:

I was just thinking the other day that on roads wide enough, there
should be a bike lane, a motorbike lane, and then any other room that
is left should be car lanes. Of course, when there is a motorbike
lane, you must not oblige motorcyclists to use it, because otherwise
you end up with the situation where you have one bike lane, 2 or 3 car
lanes, cars that are able to overtake, but motorbikes that can't --
and all the other stupid [censored] that happens with current bike lanes.

Quoted message said:

Perhaps using the bike lane, with the proviso that the standard
dealing with widths is updated to deal with the extra foot from your
motorbike, would be good enough.

I think so. Mostly dont need that extra foot either. Cept on
Heidlelberg rd. Bicycles should
have priority over motorcycles. But you might even find a motorcycle
usefull ocasionally.
Anyone opens their door on Stealth Kat is gunna need a new door. 🙂

Quoted message said:

does know. And its rarely going to hold up a cyclist. Less rarely than
the mountain bikers on aubaun rd. 🙂 The question is is it rude?

Quoted message said:

Did we tell that guy "calm blue oceans"? 🙂

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Incidently did you want a ride sometime on the back seat?

Quoted message said:

Hmmm. Sounds like much fun. You got gear I can wear?

Yeah of course. I have been doing this a LOOONNNGGG time

Dave

--

Gemma_k said:

I have serious concerns with the proposed legislation. It will force the
vulnerable road user (the motorcyclist) to completely change lanes to
overtake another motor vehicle 'for their safety'. But it does not force
the less vulnerable road user (car, truck, bus etc) to do the same in return
when overtaking the vulnerable road user (bicycle or motorcycle).

I'm a cyclist, a car driver, and a truck driver. In over 30 years of
driving, I think I can probably count the number of times I've overtaken
a motorcycle on one finger, and probably still have a finger spare.

Peter

On 2006-01-25, Pete (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:

Quoted message said:

Gemma_k said:

I have serious concerns with the proposed legislation. It will force the
vulnerable road user (the motorcyclist) to completely change lanes to
overtake another motor vehicle 'for their safety'. But it does not force
the less vulnerable road user (car, truck, bus etc) to do the same in return
when overtaking the vulnerable road user (bicycle or motorcycle).

I'm a cyclist, a car driver, and a truck driver. In over 30 years of
driving, I think I can probably count the number of times I've overtaken
a motorcycle on one finger, and probably still have a finger spare.

I dragged off a motorcyclist as a set of lights once. I must have
almost made it the entire way through, too!

--
TimC
Ride by the freeway
Bumper to bumper traffic
A Schadenfreude -- riding Haiku by Duncan Farrow in aus.bicycle

TimC said:

I dragged off a motorcyclist as a set of lights once. I must have
almost made it the entire way through, too!

It doesn't count when the motorcyclist is not aware of it. :-)

Theo

On 2006-01-25, Theo Bekkers (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:

Quoted message said:

TimC said:

I dragged off a motorcyclist as a set of lights once. I must have
almost made it the entire way through, too!

It doesn't count when the motorcyclist is not aware of it. :-)

Sure it does. In the lama's words, everyone is racing against you,
whether they know it or not. Or is it they they are racing for
you...?

--
TimC
It's the _target_ that supposed to go "F00F", not the processor.
-- Mike Andrews, on Pentiums in missiles

TimC said:

On 2006-01-25, Pete (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:

Quoted message said:

Gemma_k said:

I have serious concerns with the proposed legislation. It will force the
vulnerable road user (the motorcyclist) to completely change lanes to
overtake another motor vehicle 'for their safety'. But it does not force
the less vulnerable road user (car, truck, bus etc) to do the same in return
when overtaking the vulnerable road user (bicycle or motorcycle).

I'm a cyclist, a car driver, and a truck driver. In over 30 years of
driving, I think I can probably count the number of times I've overtaken
a motorcycle on one finger, and probably still have a finger spare.

I dragged off a motorcyclist as a set of lights once. I must have
almost made it the entire way through, too!

Riiiigihhtttt.... Tim. Some of those scooters have teeny engines tho 🙂
Btw there were a couple on the ride today on the freeway on 50s. And
they were overpowered for the job 🙂

Btw read the VACC submission.

http://www.ntc.gov.au/rfcDocuments/0092GOV_Au_Road_Rules_Amendments_2006200601241626263885.pdf

It basically says that lane splitting should be legal. BUT it goes on
to say if it were to be made illegal then by the same logic it would
have to be made illegal for cyclists

Dave

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

Quoted message said:

Gemma_k said:

I have serious concerns with the proposed legislation. It will force

the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

vulnerable road user (the motorcyclist) to completely change lanes to
overtake another motor vehicle 'for their safety'. But it does not

force

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the less vulnerable road user (car, truck, bus etc) to do the same in

return

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

when overtaking the vulnerable road user (bicycle or motorcycle).

I'm a cyclist, a car driver, and a truck driver. In over 30 years of
driving, I think I can probably count the number of times I've overtaken
a motorcycle on one finger, and probably still have a finger spare.

I seem to get overtaken all the time when travelling at the speed limit.
Some [censored] have even undertaken me in my lane between me and the kerb (I
travel in the right-hand wheel path on the m/c.)

There must be a name given to the phenomenon that car drivers suffer from.
When I'm the motorcyclist at the front of the queue, accellerate quickly up
to the speed limit once I get the green light (and get a considerable
distance ahead of other traffic) and still all the other traffic magically
catches up to tail gate and/or overtake me before the next set of lights -
whassat called?

Actually, the phenomenon perhaps is speeding :-) or cager envy ;-)

Gemm

Gemma_k said:

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

Quoted message said:

Gemma_k said:

I have serious concerns with the proposed legislation. It will force

the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

vulnerable road user (the motorcyclist) to completely change lanes to
overtake another motor vehicle 'for their safety'. But it does not

force

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the less vulnerable road user (car, truck, bus etc) to do the same in

return

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

when overtaking the vulnerable road user (bicycle or motorcycle).

I'm a cyclist, a car driver, and a truck driver. In over 30 years of
driving, I think I can probably count the number of times I've overtaken
a motorcycle on one finger, and probably still have a finger spare.

I seem to get overtaken all the time when travelling at the speed limit.
Some [censored] have even undertaken me in my lane between me and the kerb (I
travel in the right-hand wheel path on the m/c.)

Yep Its ok for cars, Didnt you know? Unlike motorcyclists all car
drivers have a magical feel for the exact width of their vehicle. And
if they make a mistake, again unlike motorcyclists they get hurt
severely for it

Quoted message said:

There must be a name given to the phenomenon that car drivers suffer from.
When I'm the motorcyclist at the front of the queue, accellerate quickly up
to the speed limit once I get the green light (and get a considerable
distance ahead of other traffic) and still all the other traffic magically
catches up to tail gate and/or overtake me before the next set of lights -
whassat called?

Lanesplitting my way to the lanesplitting protest today. Blue pugot..
🙂 Past me at about 110 in 70 zone. I go thru the stopped traffic..
away thru the lights and just before the next set of lights she flies
past. To repeat again. And again. And again. 8 times down the
Burwood highway.

I got on telly too 🙂

Dave

Quoted message said:

Actually, the phenomenon perhaps is speeding :-) or cager envy ;-)

Sometimes they wanna play drag racer 🙂 Bring it on Tim 🙂

Dave

On 2006-01-25, dave (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:

Quoted message said:

TimC said:

On 2006-01-25, Pete (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:

Quoted message said:

Gemma_k wrote:

http://www.ntc.gov.au/rfcDocuments/0092GOV_Au_Road_Rules_Amendments_2006200601241626263885.pdf

It basically says that lane splitting should be legal. BUT it goes on
to say if it were to be made illegal then by the same logic it would
have to be made illegal for cyclists

I saw that. It doesn't mention the beef I have with the legislation:
That if this is truly a safety issue, then vehicles must not be
allowed to pass cyclists half in the cyclist's lane. It is
fundametnally the same thing -- nay, for the cyclist, he can
reasonably assume that the car driver ought not to veer out suddenly
without indicator usage (I know, it doesn't happen this way, but it
should be possible), but a car driver doesn't know that the cyclist is
just about to dodge a pothole, or get knocked around by the wind etc,
so a car driver must give far more room to a cyclist than vice versa,
for safety. And I actually beleive this should be the case anyway,
regardless of whether this /stupid/ peice of legislation is passed or
not.

Perhaps it is worth my while suggesting this to VACC, and getting them
to update their submission?

--
TimC
The path to enlightenment_0.16.5-6 is through apt-get

TimC said:

On 2006-01-25, dave (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:

Quoted message said:

TimC said:

On 2006-01-25, Pete (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:

>Gemma_k wrote:
>

http://www.ntc.gov.au/rfcDocuments/0092GOV_Au_Road_Rules_Amendments_2006200601241626263885.pdf

It basically says that lane splitting should be legal. BUT it goes on
to say if it were to be made illegal then by the same logic it would
have to be made illegal for cyclists

I saw that. It doesn't mention the beef I have with the legislation:
That if this is truly a safety issue, then vehicles must not be
allowed to pass cyclists half in the cyclist's lane. It is
fundametnally the same thing -- nay, for the cyclist, he can
reasonably assume that the car driver ought not to veer out suddenly
without indicator usage (I know, it doesn't happen this way, but it
should be possible), but a car driver doesn't know that the cyclist is
just about to dodge a pothole, or get knocked around by the wind etc,
so a car driver must give far more room to a cyclist than vice versa,
for safety. And I actually beleive this should be the case anyway,
regardless of whether this /stupid/ peice of legislation is passed or
not.

Perhaps it is worth my while suggesting this to VACC, and getting them
to update their submission?

Tim Its not that simple. This is legislation that fundementaly says
the vehicle least at risk (and with least skills and least ability to
judge the width etc of vehicle) gets to make all the decisions about
overtaking and manouvering. Its not that the rules they want to bring
in should also apply to cars which is what you are suggesting. Its much
nastier than that.

See what I mean?

Dave

--
Frank
[email hidden]
Drop DACKS to reply
"TimC" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On 2006-01-25, dave (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:

Quoted message said:

TimC said:

On 2006-01-25, Pete (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:

>Gemma_k wrote:
>

http://www.ntc.gov.au/rfcDocuments/0092GOV_Au_Road_Rules_Amendments_20062006
01241626263885.pdf

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

It basically says that lane splitting should be legal. BUT it goes on
to say if it were to be made illegal then by the same logic it would
have to be made illegal for cyclists

I saw that. It doesn't mention the beef I have with the legislation:
That if this is truly a safety issue, then vehicles must not be
allowed to pass cyclists half in the cyclist's lane. It is
fundametnally the same thing -- nay, for the cyclist, he can
reasonably assume that the car driver ought not to veer out suddenly
without indicator usage (I know, it doesn't happen this way, but it
should be possible), but a car driver doesn't know that the cyclist is
just about to dodge a pothole, or get knocked around by the wind etc,
so a car driver must give far more room to a cyclist than vice versa,
for safety. And I actually beleive this should be the case anyway,
regardless of whether this /stupid/ peice of legislation is passed or
not.

Perhaps it is worth my while suggesting this to VACC, and getting them
to update their submission?

--
TimC
The path to enlightenment_0.16.5-6 is through apt-get

Cynical me tends toward the idea that road rules are mainly there to clarify
who is to blame when something goes wrong. Most of the time, as road users,
we negotiate our space and shared use - some negotiate harder than others
(e.g. agressive Prado drivers!). I doubt that fine detail legislation makes
things very much safer. Rather it tends to mitigate risk, assign blame and
give an idea of what the other road user(s) are *supposed* to do, adding
some predictability to the actions of those who know the law very well.

I reckon (testiculating alert!) that most people have only a broad, often
vague, idea of the law. Witness the way so many indicate incorrectly at
roundabouts, for example. Adding detail such as legislation on lane
splitting will pass over most people - they'll think it doesn't affect them,
they're in cars, so they won't bother to learn about the law. Unfortunately
they'll learn when someone gets clobbered.

Perhaps a set of road-rule questions should be handed out when someone gets
picked up for a traffic violation. Fail the roadside test and your fine is
doubled. That would provide an incentive for people to keep themselves
current and targets those who are prone to breaking the law. Those who don't
get picked up are probably doing the righty anyway...

Me (3 hours behind, in Perth, still decaffeinated, so rambling too much...)

In aus.bicycle on Thu, 26 Jan 2006 06:28:25 +0800

Plodder said:

I reckon (testiculating alert!) that most people have only a broad, often
vague, idea of the law. Witness the way so many indicate incorrectly at
roundabouts, for example. Adding detail such as legislation on lane
splitting will pass over most people - they'll think it doesn't affect them,
they're in cars, so they won't bother to learn about the law. Unfortunately
they'll learn when someone gets clobbered.

I think the premise is correct - most people don't know - but the
comclusion is incorrect.

Why? Cos people aren't being clobbered now!

The legislation isn't for car drivers. It's for cops to pull bikers
over.

Lanesplitting hasn't ever been legal as such - it has always been covered
under "passing too close" or "passing unsafely" if the cops wanted to
do you for it.

However you did have a leg to stand on if you could tie said cop up in
knots about how they reckoned it was too close or unsafe.

By specifically banning it, then there's no way to show you were not
being unsafe, and it also shows legislators in other areas that it's
not sensible to promote powered two wheelers.

Face it, if your choice was between 1/3 of the bods in their
single-occupant cars in cars or on scooters, which would be better
for cyclists?

I'd like to see more two wheelers powered and unpowered out there.
The more there are, the more pressure for decent facilities on and off
the bike, but more importantly the more drivers get used to them being
there.

Which means the more likely they are to process your presence, the more
they are to know what to do if they do comprehend your existence.

I don't know about pushbikes, but there is a study from the UK that
shows drivers who have motorcycle licences or a family member who
rides a motorcycle have significantly fewer car/bike crashes in their
cars than other drivers. I suspect that's going to translate to fewer
car/bicycle crashes too! So the more people on bikes whether petrol
powered or bananna powered, the better it is for all people on bikes.

Zebee