New Qld Bike Laws

[smidsy]

Anyone else agree with that these laws are stupid and unworkable.
I had a situation today of two bike nazi's riding side by side on a single lane road with a median strip.
My choices were ignore the new law by about 900mm or crawl at cycle speed for most of k to a short patch of two lane road at a roundabout.
Suffice to say I ignored the new law - which actually comes in to effect tommorrow so I was still legal.

But who exactly is going to judge what a meter is, yeah if you're obscenely close it's obvious but if you think you're at the meter and the cop says 800 or 900mm.
$330 is a hell of a fine for what is going to be a judgement call from a cop.

[Evanism]

Who will judge?

Your insurance company and your wallet....or mortgage.

I'm a cyclist, there are many others I know on the forum who are too. GoPro cameras front and back. A huge number of cyclists now actively record everything.

We will sue you. We will report you. We will bleed you dry. We will bombard the police with every infraction and complain (via a VERY convenient online reporting system) every single time and demand a response, every single time.

Sure. Hit us and make us bleed, haha, but ensure you recover both cameras for they will be instantly provided to the lawyers to bleed you dry, financially. Your fifth $20k payout will slow you down.

I'm far more aggressive than others with this, but I'm sick to death of the bastards who think their agro driving attitudes trump my right to safety. Yes, I'm an aggressive litigant and I ENJOY IT.

(I also drive a 6L Black HSV, so I know about speed)

[Christos]

.... GoPro cameras front and back. A huge number of cyclists now actively record everything....

How big are the cameras? It has been a long while since I last rode a bike.

[FenceFurniture]

I have a bit of a mixed position on this issue.

I wouldn't want to go within a metre of bicyclists anyway. What if they have a wobbly and scratch my car?

I would have thought that riding two abreast was illegal. Buggered if I know why it's the desirable way to ride (please don't tell me it's so they can talk), given that the cyclists are exposing themselves to greater proximity to the car traffic. If it were me on the bike I'd want to be as far away from cars as possible. Defensive driving (or riding) is about accounting for the other person's potential stupidity.

I agree that cyclists should have the same penalties as car drivers - they are both vehicles using the roadway. There is merit to the idea of licensing cyclists - can't see a reason why not.

When I used to drive into or near to the city for work I could never understand why someone would want to be out all the immediate pollution and noise (think buses), and be so vulnerable.

Perhaps the Qld Police should issue some guidelines on what to do in a situation like the two abreast thing. Assuming it's illegal, and there's no room to pass allowing for a metre gap, my strategy would be to advise the cyclists with a polite toot (i.e. a very short one) that I wanted to pass. If they didn't co-operate by becoming single file (and legal) then I'd be pretty sure that longer blasts of a horn might persuade them - they are directly exposed to the noise.

If they didn't, then they would just be being bloody minded.

[dabbler]

Take a look at this web page, in particular the second sentence, first para.

http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/Travel-and...-cyclists.aspx

Then maybe take a Bex and have a little lie down.

[FenceFurniture]

To me that just emphasises that they should be licensed.

Further down:
"You must

• not ride more than two abreast unless overtaking
• ride within 1.5 m of the other rider if riding two abreast."

Reckon that first law needs to be addressed in the light of the new 1 metre law. Single file should be fine. Otherwise the two cyclists would take up about 3.5 metres of the road width (presumably 1m from the kerb, minimum 1.5m from the other cyclist, and 1m from the cars.

Somebody hasn't thought it through properly.

[dabbler]

When cyclists become licensed, what will car drivers moan about ? Right now, it says they have every right to be there.

[FenceFurniture]

No, not disputing that at all. Just saying that if the playing field is level, then it should be the same requirements for all (re licensing).

[dabbler]

Licensing is a whole different issue and opens a real can of worms. I'm not saying it's not part of the whole "cyclists on roads" debate, just that it clouds this part of that debate.

Many motorists simply don't appreciate other people have road rights too, including anything slower and/or smaller than them.

This law is intended to save live and limb. What's wrong with that ?

[FenceFurniture]

Nothing, nothing at all. Maybe I haven't been clear - I think the law is a good idea. I just think that the two abreast thing needs to be addressed so that the law can be implemented and the two different vehicle types can share the road safely. On a narrow road adding another 1.5m to the cycling width footprint seems all-round crazy to me (just to allow two abreast - how necessary is that?).

[smidsy]

The fact is that agressive cyclists are just as much to blame as cars - how often do you see a line of cars fight their past a cyclist only to come to a red light and have the cyclist ride up the gutter to the front of the que so the cars have to do it all over again.
How often do you see a cyclist get to a red light, hop off and cross with the pedestrians and then get on again.
That silly cow in Melbourne the other week who rode up the side of a cab (no bike lane) and tried to blame the passenger when she got a face full of door - good on the passenger for refusing to give ID.
Those two clowns today that forced me to pass close because they were riding side by side (two guys would be different but this was a guy and a girl and if I was the guy I'd be riding single file cos she had an ass worth looking at for an hour or three)
Do I believe I own the road, no, but it pisses me of the amount of taxes and fees I pay to use the roads yet I am supposed to give way to cyclist who pay nothing when they are riding - and how many millions do councils spend on bike paths.
I ride from time to time (not as often as I should) and when I do I treat cars bikes and everything else motorised with the deference they deserve - see the attached pic of Jeremy Clarksons riding shirt.
Cyclists want equality yet they pay no fees and push bikes have no identification so cyclists can effectively do what they want because they can't be caught unless there's a cop on the spot.
Cyclist want equality, fine lets start with a few hundred bucks for rego each year, another few hundred for competency assessment and a few more bucks for a yearly roadworthy for those states that do it.

My issue with this law is the workability.
In a previous job I was one of three people qualified to evaluate red light camera film in WA, that job entails judging how far beyond the line a car has travelled. I ended up going out on my day off to a heap of intersections with a mate and a tape measure and taking measurements of lines, kerbs, cats eyes, poles and anything else I could find so I would have known distances - because it is bloody hard to judge distance to a fine degree.
I say a metre the cop says 800mm and writes a fine - the courts are going to get busy because I for one would fight it.
What happens if I'm stuck in heavy traffic and a cyclist rides up the side of me.

Remember Evanism Go pro works both ways - we can use it film cyclists behaving like pratts.
As for suing me, mate if I am genuinely in the wrong you wouldn't have to because I would put things right as a matter of course.
But if some cyclist tried to lay a frivilous charge on me, I would burn everything I own and live under a f*cking bridge before I would pay a single cent.


Clarkson.jpg

[dabbler]

Fair enough FF. This is supposedly a two year trial change to Road Rules, so I've no doubt some aspects will be discussed over and over.

[dabbler]

Oh Smidsy. Don't think you own the road but you do think you own more of the road than a cyclist ?

Maybe that should be two Bex and a long lie down.

[FenceFurniture]

.....so I've no doubt some aspects will be discussed over and over.

Cambell Newman discuss things? Really?

To be clear - I think that the two abreast thing should go regardless of any 1 metre law - it's crazy, and invites danger. If I were a cyclist and another pulled into line with me I'd ask him to bugger off (coz if he gets hit, I'd be the next domino). Until you posted the link saying it was legal, I thought it had to be illegal - most surprised by the legality of it.

[ian]

Further down:
"You must

• not ride more than two abreast unless overtaking
• ride within 1.5 m of the other rider if riding two abreast."

Reckon that first law needs to be addressed in the light of the new 1 metre law. Single file should be fine. Otherwise the two cyclists would take up about 3.5 metres of the road width (presumably 1m from the kerb, minimum 1.5m from the other cyclist, and 1m from the cars.

Somebody hasn't thought it through properly.

Hi Brett

Have another look, I make it
about 0.5 to 1m from the left edge of the lane
NO more than 1.5m to the 2nd cyclist
1m clearance
Total somewhere between 3 and 3.5 metres


so to go past the overtaking car driver needs to change lanes -- sounds perfectly reasonable to me ...