Cycle Registration Floated

[GTR-N1]

I hearken back to Mark Skaife's comments 3 yrs ago where he complained about overregulation of motorists whilst...

a) quality of roads is poor > requiring infrastructure as mentioned by you guys already > road upgrades and

b) driver education is woeful.

1992: A high school D&T teacher was killed whilst cycling on the GWH Valley Hts on his way to Springwood HS. It was found that he was clipped by a rear vision mirror of a 5-tonner.

Cyclist, motorist education > awareness > responsibility is necessary NOW!

After gaining one's licence, one shouldn't have to wait until one's licence is lost to have to go to shock-n-awe "traffic offender" groups!

After gaining one's licence, cyclists, car/truck/bus drivers should be all put into a room and have a 2 hour growth group > and you're not allowed outta there until you've acknowledged something!

[niZmO_Man]

Too bad that's not profitable, I mean, doable eh?

[Daleo]

The Honda Gold Wing is already fitted with an airbag system, and there are several wearable airbag systems (integrated into bike jackets) on the market.

The wearable airbags are utilised by MotoGP and WSBK riders and are quite effective these sense inertia & have gyro's integrated. Not cheap though. There are simpler ones that use a tether to the motorcycle; & if you tear away the tether; the system assumes you left the bike at a fair rate of knots, and inflates a neck collar, and back & chest protection.

Most riders are not fatally injured by impact to the ground, but as they make high speed contact with the external surfaces of motor vehicles, or as they are crushed & torn by the vehicle going over them.

Avoiding impact with a cyclists in the first place is a far better action plan than placing the onus on a cyclist to wear hot, restrictive clothing with armour & explosive charges; just so they can survive an impact they should never have been exposed to.

[Hank Scorpio]

I'm not reading 5 pages but....

- YES. Bikes that get ridden on the road should have plates and be forced to pay rego. If they want to use the infrastructure, they have to pay. I pay rego on 2 cars, most can pay rego on a car and a bike. This should contain compulsary 3rd party insurance and be in the same car system.

- No minimum age exemption, want to ride on the road, pay rego or GTFO.

- No fines for riding on the sidewalk, it should be encouraged. Cyclists know to be wary of pedestrians and they are better off on footpaths for their own safety and traffic congestion.

- Kunce on bikes are always holding up traffic and breaking basic road rules. If they were held accountable for their actions and could be fined, excellent! This includes people who ride to the front of traffic at the lights and then hold up cars when the light turns green and people who ride more than 1 abreast.

[oweban]

i'm responding to some stuff on page 1, but:

sure cyclists pay for rego on their cars as well, but they can only use one at once

i own two cars, by that reasoning i should only have to pay one set of rego?

[Hank Scorpio]

i'm responding to some stuff on page 1, but:

sure cyclists pay for rego on their cars as well, but they can only use one at once

i own two cars, by that reasoning i should only have to pay one set of rego?

+11ty

My FC hasn't seen the road in over a year, still pay rego on it though.

[GTR-N1]

Going into politics as an Independent Owen?

One rego on my R32, my R34, my bike and 4W scooter will do just nicely thanks

[zoomzoom]

I wouldn't pay for rego. I don't even bother with a helmet. I have a car, motorcycle and bicycle. My approach on the pushbike is simply to avoid cars as much as possible. Bikes and pedestrians are far more compatible traffic, since you can ride at walking pace. The worst situations Ive had around pedestrians is them passing a few nasty comments about me being around pedestrians. Ive never had police take interest in me for not wearing a helmet, surely even they must think it a useless law given how Australia is globally one of the odd ones when it comes to pushbike laws.

So rego? Why? My risk of injuring others is negligible and my impact on the road in terms of wear and tear on the infrastructure is also negligible. I ask little and expect little. I do see a lot of entitlement and anger amongst cyclists. I can understand the anger as a motorcyclist, but the special treatment given to cyclists on political grounds does rub people the wrong way.

[Birds]

This infograph discriminates against tandem cyclists; we are a proud minority and we WILL be heard!

[Hank Scorpio]

I wouldn't pay for rego. I don't even bother with a helmet. I have a car, motorcycle and bicycle. My approach on the pushbike is simply to avoid cars as much as possible. Bikes and pedestrians are far more compatible traffic, since you can ride at walking pace. The worst situations Ive had around pedestrians is them passing a few nasty comments about me being around pedestrians. Ive never had police take interest in me for not wearing a helmet, surely even they must think it a useless law given how Australia is globally one of the odd ones when it comes to pushbike laws.

So rego? Why? My risk of injuring others is negligible and my impact on the road in terms of wear and tear on the infrastructure is also negligible. I ask little and expect little. I do see a lot of entitlement and anger amongst cyclists. I can understand the anger as a motorcyclist, but the special treatment given to cyclists on political grounds does rub people the wrong way.

Why rego? Because your scungy cyclist mates don't have the same level headedness and respect that you seem to have. You're obviously trying to do the right thing and I admire that, but the 11ty other lycra clad mouth breathers are NOT and clearly need a kick in the ass.

Slightly off topic but gate next to annoying cyclists is the greatest thing in the world

Edited May 5, 2014 by Hank Scorpio

[XKLABA]

Terry, its a good idea but who pays for it, god knows there are a lot of drivers that would benifit from extra driver training, but to set up a corse for millions of people would cost billions of dollars and who has to wear it, the tax payer or is it something that should be done at time of licensing and making families that are already struggling financially fork out for it, and how would that help now with the millions of drivers that are already set in their ways and for what a few hundred or maybe thousand push bike riders that don't want to take responsibility for they own safety and ride on roads that aren't setup for them and then expect others to avoid them

I agree the infustructor just isn't there for push bike riders and that is just how it is ATM, but as the new roads are getting built they are starting to accommodate for them, like the M7, and as much as you have to slow down for over passes and what not isnt the safety factory of that better then dodging car on narrow roads and on/off ramps

but they can only use one at oncei own two cars, by that reasoning i should only have to pay one set of rego?

That would be nice, I have 7 regos each year but I can only drive one at a time, put the rego on the driver would save me a butt load

[oweban]

I know that's not a be-all and end-all fix for everything - was just countering one argument.

And I've considered being an independent except you need a ton of cash to start with and the system would chew you up and spit you out. Someone trying to break a duopoly and make things more fair for everyone? OFF WITH THEIR HEAD

[zoomzoom]

Why rego? Because your scungy cyclist mates don't have the same level headedness and respect that you seem to have. You're obviously trying to do the right thing and I admire that, but the 11ty other lycra clad mouth breathers are NOT and clearly need a kick in the ass.

Slightly off topic but gate next to annoying cyclists is the greatest thing in the world

Rego isn't the only solution to that, nor a very good one. It just seems like a government institution responding the only way they know how, ie, to make a bloated system of paperwork and databases, create unnecessary jobs and impose a tax.

[Hank Scorpio]

Rego isn't the only solution to that, nor a very good one. It just seems like a government institution responding the only way they know how, ie, to make a bloated system of paperwork and databases, create unnecessary jobs and impose a tax.

I disagree, rego will make it easier to police and fine dickheads who do the wrong thing on the road. Surely this system would simply piggyback our current one and not stress the current policing infrastructure too much.

[XKLABA]

Avoiding impact with a cyclists in the first place is a far better action plan than placing the onus on a cyclist to wear hot, restrictive clothing with armour & explosive charges; just so they can survive an impact they should never have been exposed to.

Amen, avoiding a collision is by far the best way for pushy rider to live on, but way is the onus on the car drive to avoid someone putting themselves in harms way by riding on roads not designed to have them on it and that is full of cars doing over double the speed of said pushy rider

Just becuase one has the legal right to be a stupid inconsiderate arsehole that doesn't have to give a fark how ones own actions effect others doesn't mean it is morally right and then expect those effected people by ones actions not to get pissed at them

[Daleo]

I'm not reading 5 pages but....

- YES. Bikes that get ridden on the road should have plates and be forced to pay rego. If they want to use the infrastructure, they have to pay. I pay rego on 2 cars, most can pay rego on a car and a bike. This should contain compulsary 3rd party insurance and be in the same car system.

- No minimum age exemption, want to ride on the road, pay rego or GTFO.

- No fines for riding on the sidewalk, it should be encouraged. Cyclists know to be wary of pedestrians and they are better off on footpaths for their own safety and traffic congestion.

- Kunce on bikes are always holding up traffic and breaking basic road rules. If they were held accountable for their actions and could be fined, excellent! This includes people who ride to the front of traffic at the lights and then hold up cars when the light turns green and people who ride more than 1 abreast.

Yes, why read any of the reasoned responses, before regurgitating all the usual bike hating bullshit.

Bikes holding up traffic? That is the best one I've ever heard; because once you get past the pesky cyclists you continued to your destination completely unabated, without having to stop; even once.

Or did you have to stop behind another group of cars going 5 km/h and this allowed the cyclists to catch up.

You're not "held up in traffic"; you ARE traffic.

This infograph discriminates against tandem cyclists; we are a proud minority and we WILL be heard!

OMG Birds; I can't believe I marginalised you like that; what were you saying about tandems being gay?

Tandem unicycle,

Hipster level: Expert.

[XKLABA]

Heathcote rd single lane with 100knph limit double white lines and a steady stream of cars coming the other way and some cock on his pushy doing 30kmph I had to slow the truck to that then sit behind him till there was a gap big enough for me to get around him safely then spend the next ten minutes trying to get back up to speed so yeah held up by a farkin pushy which caused a massive traffic jam

[Daleo]

Amen, avoiding a collision is by far the best way for pushy rider to live on, but way is the onus on the car drive to avoid someone putting themselves in harms way by riding on roads not designed to have them on it and that is full of cars doing over double the speed of said pushy rider

Just because one has the legal right to be a stupid inconsiderate arsehole that doesn't have to give a fark how ones own actions effect others doesn't mean it is morally right and then expect those effected people by ones actions not to get pissed at them

The thing is; the countries that now have exceptionally safe cycling drew a line in the sand, where they decided that human lives were worth more than people being able to drive their cars with impunity.

Amsterdam had a massive spike in the number of children who were killed whilst riding bicycles; the law was changed due to massive public pressure and cars were banned from city centres completely.

They also have laws that assume anyone who hits a cyclist whilst driving a car is AUTOMATICALLY at fault. This doesn't result in cyclists riding bezerk and blaming drivers; it simply results in far less bikes getting hit by cars and riders being injured/killed. Drivers MUST respect the safe passing distances around cyclists, because they know they have a responsibility to make conditions safe for vulnerable road users to move about.

It can happen; we just have to decide what is more important.

"Just because one has the legal right to be a stupid inconsiderate arsehole that doesn't have to give a fark how ones own actions effect others doesn't mean it is morally right and then expect those effected people by ones actions not to get pissed at them"

This comment encapsulates EXACTLY what cyclists think about inconsiderate arseholes in cars, Mick.

The difference is; when a cyclist gets pissed at a driver; the driver doesn't die.

You are making my argument for me.

[Daleo]

Heathcote rd single lane with 100knph limit double white lines and a steady stream of cars coming the other way and some cock on his pushy doing 30kmph I had to slow the truck to that then sit behind him till there was a gap big enough for me to get around him safely then spend the next ten minutes trying to get back up to speed so yeah held up by a farkin pushy which caused a massive traffic jam

Thanks for doing exactly what you are supposed to do when encountering a vulnerable road user.

Did it really take 10 minutes to get back up to speed? Or was it maybe a fair bit less than that; like maybe 30 seconds?

Why have we arrived at a point; where applying the brakes to avoid running a cyclist off the road, has become the option of last resort?

It's hard, I get it. But trust me; his family will appreciate it when he arrives home safe; just like yours does when you arrive home safe.

[Hank Scorpio]

Yes, why read any of the reasoned responses, before regurgitating all the usual bike hating bullshit.

Bikes holding up traffic? That is the best one I've ever heard; because once you get past the pesky cyclists you continued to your destination completely unabated, without having to stop; even once.

Or did you have to stop behind another group of cars going 5 km/h and this allowed the cyclists to catch up.

You're not "held up in traffic"; you ARE traffic.

That's the thing though, I have no dramas continuing past a cyclist doing the speed limit, other motorists however seem to have a real problem with this concept of driving straight, in their lane and past a cyclist not doing the speed limit. They then hold up traffic for the rest of us poor souls who were in the queue at the traffic lights/stop sign etc.

Far easier to deal with the comparatively small amount of cyclists than to re-educate a million odd car drivers to be less shit.