Jump to content
nuked

New Rules for NSW cyclists

Recommended Posts

.

 

 

 

Doesn't anyone care that they can't ride a bicycle without the possibility of being stopped by police?

The Police can do that now anyway, so it makes no difference.

 

The police can chose to pull over any local group ride and site all IDs, every week if they like. You all have a bell or a horn on your bikes... right? Co's they might check those while they are there.

The Police can do that now anyway, so it makes no difference.

 

Cycling is far closer to walking than operating a motor vehicle of any kind, this is obvious. Would you also have no problem if the Government decided you couldn't walk without ID...?

Closer to walking but it's not walking. A cyclist is (& always has been) classed as a vehicle & using open road ways. A work mate today was telling me about a policeman that pulled up beside him and mentioned "Your m/cycle is a bit loud isn't it" during a brief discussion he flipped his siren on and promptly moved on to a person who had just crossed willy nilly across Pitt st (in Sydney City) and pulled them up for crossing on foot stopping traffic. Not related to ID but just a story to say they do pull up pedestrians from time to time. I don't know if the person was charged.

 

Seriously, this is madness, people should think for themselves. Just because something is legal or illegal doesn't make it right or wrong or for that matter sensible.

What defines wrong & right if it's not the Law that does so? Sensible or Effective law etc. is another question and is a yes & no answer. I can say effective and you can say not and both of us can be right depending on our own experiences.

 

The points presented by Alex are logical, sensible and well articulated. The opposition to his arguments appear to be based on a feeling of associated guilt for the traffic offences that other cyclists commit. An associated guilt that no other class of road user has.

The Opposite can be said that any of the "Against' folk could be saying so due to their own personal bad(?) experiences and those 'For' have no concern but don't like being stereotyped as one who ignores the rules.

It all depends how you want to read/interpret what people say. Both ways could be right and both wrong in that type of interpretation.

Personally do I feel guilty if somebody runs a red? No I don't, however it annoys me because then as a cyclist I get stereotyped as a red light runner. "You bloody cyclists all run red lights" We've all heard that or similar statement.

 

(edit : typo)

Edited by TrevS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you have to carry ID when you ride your horse to the pub ?

Funny thing. A bloke was booked for drink riding near my place back mid 80's. Classic.

 

FM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny thing. A bloke was booked for drink riding near my place back mid 80's. Classic.

 

FM

 

remember when I was a kid a fellow was also booked for drunk riding. the police said they wouldn't have bothered normally but he decided he wanted another drink and tried to ride back into the pub.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Doesn't anyone care that they can't ride a bicycle without the possibility of being stopped by police?

The Police can do that now anyway, so it makes no difference.

 

The police can chose to pull over any local group ride and site all IDs, every week if they like. You all have a bell or a horn on your bikes... right? Co's they might check those while they are there.

The Police can do that now anyway, so it makes no difference.

 

 

I don't think they can Trev. Police can only request ID if you are committing or are suspected of committing or about to commit a crime.

 

If you are riding your bike now and are not running red lights or ramming other road vehicles from not seeing them the police have no right or reason to pull you over and ask for ID. Once these laws are in place they can do it any time and twice in one ride if they like.

 

If a group rides past the local area commanders house at 6am and wakes up his wife every morning he might ask the Highway patrol to check IDs for the whole bunch at the top of his street every morning for a month until they change their course. Not saying that would happen, just a theoretical...

 

As I said before, the only form of travel left to NSW citizens who are minding their own business and not breaking road rules without the possibility of Police stopping them for an formal ID check is on foot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was reading the newspaper at the local coffee shop last week. There was an ad paid for by the RMS on the new cycling laws, it listed 4 of the new laws in the ad. The 1 meter law wasn't one of the four.

 

Can the message to road users be any clearer? - "Cyclists, get off the road, you are a nuisance and annoy the rest of us!" Because that is what this is all about you know, it is not safety at all, a bunch of people are annoyed by cyclists that's all. Cyclists aren't a risk to the other vehicles on the road, they don't cause traffic jams, or pollute or create pot holes but they do annoy some people.

 

I was riding in Brisbane a few weeks back and it is a totally different world(much, much more cyclist friendly) to where I ride, the 1 meter rule might have helped Brisbane riders because the city is already cyclist friendly. It won't help NSW because nobody will know about it or care because the government is promoting the fact that cyclists are annoying and need to be controlled and brought in to line, they even use news paper ads to promote that message.

 

It is OK to change your position on this. The laws are wrong and will not make cyclists safer. I encourage all cyclist to oppose them and write to your local MP while you still can.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was reading the newspaper at the local coffee shop last week. There was an ad paid for by the RMS on the new cycling laws, it listed 4 of the new laws in the ad. The 1 meter law wasn't one of the four.

 

I've heard loads and loads of adds on the radio where they only state 1 of the new laws.

The 1 metre rule, for both motorists to cyclist & cyclist to pedestrian.

It's also being advertised on TV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I don't think they can Trev. Police can only request ID if you are committing or are suspected of committing or about to commit a crime.

Yep, pretty sure sure your right, I failed to add something along those lines. Meaning they could pull you over and ask for ID if they had reason such as a traffic offence.

 

Where as with the new law they could pull you over for an ID check alone should they chose to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've heard loads and loads of adds on the radio where they only state 1 of the new laws.

The 1 metre rule, for both motorists to cyclist & cyclist to pedestrian.

It's also being advertised on TV

 

Ah OK, I don't do Radio or TV... That's good to hear. Still. I think it should be included in every release regarding these updated laws as it is the only one that offers the actual possibility of improved safety.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've heard loads and loads of adds on the radio where they only state 1 of the new laws.

The 1 metre rule, for both motorists to cyclist & cyclist to pedestrian.

It's also being advertised on TV

I've heard the add on the radio. The add goes in to detail about the fines for the infringements and the 1m rule is mentioned as a footnote at the end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My observations on the 1m rule (1.5m for >60kph):

 

In Queensland it was introduced (as a 2-year trial) along with a good education campaign by the government. There were a few other changes to rules regarding cyclists at the same time, but the talk was definitely about the 1m rule. My feeling was that it really made a difference: people got a bit more thoughtful about how closely they passed cyclists, and a lot of them started giving more room. It didn't stop the occasional dick-head who just hates cyclists and couldn't give a f**k - they passed too close before and still do.

 

In South Australia it was recently introduced (this time permanently, rather than as a trial), but at the same time as riders were allowed on the footpath. (They had always been in Queensland). Somehow this completely distracted from the 1m separation as the South Aussies got all excited about the peletons on lycra racers that would be bowling down grandmothers on the footpaths... The result (observed from a couple of weeks riding around in Adelaide, both in lycra, and on an upright casual bike) - it didn't really make much difference to driver behaviour. I received more close passes (that felt accidental rather than deliberate) in Adelaide than I have for over a year in Brisbane.

 

In NSW, the situation seems worse: all the publicity and talk appears to have been around how annoying cyclists are and how much they should be fined and harassed for daring to ride on "our" roads. I don't expect the introduction of the 1m passing rule will have any positive.

 

I have made a point of talking to a number of Queensland MPs encouraging them to permanently instate the 1m rule at the end of the trial period. Hopefully this will come with more publicity.

To be clear, the 1m rule is not a panacea, but having more drivers actually thinking about what is a safe passing distance is a good thing!

 

I realise that many people posting here don't care, because they get dressed up to go riding (training) anyway, and always carry ID, and get to choose where they ride, but trust me, the new laws in NSW will be to the detriment of utility cyclists who just want to ride a bike for transport. This is a crying shame.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I keep saying, this policy approach reinforces in the broader public's mind the false ideological notion that cycling and cyclists are a problem that needs fixing.

 

It's a crying shame that once again ideology rules over an evidence based approach to policy. If it didn't it would be clear that cyclists and cycling are a solution to better communities, and we'd all be far better off to invest in ways to foster and encourage more cycling, not less.

 

Sydney is too far gone IMO but one hopes smaller and regional NSW communities see the light before they go down this false car dominated policy path to prosperity.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This should make some people happy.

 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-15/helmet-free-cycling-considered-under-act-road-safety-plan/7168288

 

Apparently NT are trialling no helmets on off street paths at the moment. It will be interesting to see what change this makes to ACT cyclist numbers if they allow cyclists to ride in low speed areas without helmets.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the comments Wardy said (3 or 4 posts up)

 

I did a bit of reading about the 1m passing law a few weeks back and it seemed pretty clear that the positive response in Qld was as a result of a strong education/publicity campaign that was implemented at the time the 1m passing law came into effect (the 'stay wider of the rider' thing).

 

Not much impact has really been because of people being fined since the laws were introduced, but the campaign that accompanied the law saw a lot of people reporting better driving behaviour and cars leaving more room/being more polite etc (just as Wardy said he's experienced).

 

So it seems to me a that success in NSW would be accompanied by a strong publicity campaign with a focus on passing safely, the new 1m requirement etc? Can we honestly say that the focus of media/posters/advertising has been on the 1m rule?

 

The VERY FIRST DAY that the laws were mentioned in the media the focus was on the raised fines and ID.

 

It was a deliberate, calculated decision to appease Daily Tele readers and people who listen to Allan Jones - and that's what the media has focussed on.

 

In my view, in NSW the 1m rule will make no difference. The focus has been on the other new laws (helmet fines, ID etc). The overwhelming focus has NOT been on the 1m passing rule, but on all the new responsibilities that cyclists have to abide by.

 

I have personally not seen one advertisement/poster which mentions the 1m rule, but I have seen a lot that mention all the other new offences (including newspaper ads, social media stuff, posters at train stations etc).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is also the jobs of those in the cycling advocacy groups to be spreading the 1m focus on this. Think of all the work the Amy Gillet Foundation has done over the last few years to get the 1m rule this far. All the local groups have been doing though is running around the city getting their photos taken holding up big replicas of licences. It's up to everybody. Start bugging your local member, or the transport minister and tell them this story. You never know, it might work and we could actually see a politician do something worthwhile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the last week I've seen several State Transit buses with huge rear end ads with a to-scale rider and metre measure. It's definitely out there, but how effectively I'm not sure.

 

I'm still to work out how to get a photo ID that is not my current licence because I have more in my head them remembering to transfer it back to my wallet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the last week I've seen several State Transit buses with huge rear end ads with a to-scale rider and metre measure. It's definitely out there, but how effectively I'm not sure.

 

I'm still to work out how to get a photo ID that is not my current licence because I have more in my head them remembering to transfer it back to my wallet.

Do you take your phone with you riding?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They won't accept a photo of your license will they!? Hahaha! If they accept a photo of photo ID it proves the whole concept of ID carry has nothing to do with identifying cyclists at all.

 

No police officer is going to accept a photo on your phone as ID and write an infringement notice using it, no way. They will have to check it first, in which case why can't you just tell them your name for the check like is done now?

 

The whole ID concept is so stupid it is embarrassing. Minister Gay is unfit to hold his position as it is clear he has no logic or reason to support these changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole ID concept is so stupid it is embarrassing.

 

Indeed it is.

 

Minister Gay is unfit to hold his position as it is clear he has no logic or reason to support these changes.

 

It's clearly not a logical policy from a community perspective but for Gay, it's logical from a political self interest POV, and political self interest will always take precedence for a politician (be it votes or donations).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no idea if they will accept a photo. I was going to say everyone I ride with takes there phone. I've never heard of someone leaving there phone in their cycle kit, always seem to remember to take it out. If your Id is with your phone isn't it easy to remember to put it back?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They won't accept a photo of your license will they!? Hahaha! If they accept a photo of photo ID it proves the whole concept of ID carry has nothing to do with identifying cyclists at all.

 

 

And how many ambo's are going to be able to guess your pin to unlock the phone and look at the picture of your ID? Or even know where to find it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×