NSW - Drivers and Cyclists - New laws March 2016

[oldmate]

Pmsl

[Jeepers Creepers]

Pmsl

Me too....

The worst part is, that's pushy riders to a T.

[Hairs]

And why the F!!! can't they Aline their led head light not to shine in the eyes of on coming traffic.
Rude, arrogant doddles 

[NewieCamper]

I really object to being forced to carry ID 'so I can be identified in an emergency'. What a crock. The police have the power to compel you to identify yourself. Noone else needs to. In a crash, the hospital will treat you regardless of whether they know your name. Pedestrians, swimmers at the beach etc get into situations that are life threatening and noone is asking them to carry ID. People say that if a cyclist scratches my car i want them identified, well only the police have the authority to ask you to show your ID and they don't need photo ID.

I do carry ID mostly when I ride on the roads, I'm happy to kit up. ie get my phone, wallet, helmet, shoes, gloves, glasses etc. I shouldn't be compelled to ride with ID on the local foreshore pathway with the family, nor if I'm ducking over to a mates house in my T-shirt and thongs (and bloody helmet) for a beverage or two using a bike so I don't end up going DUI on the drive home and save me fuel etc too.

Not one of the fine increases are going to improve safety for cyclists, they are just pandering to the noisy anti cyclist types.

As for the clearance for cyclists, 1m under 60, 1.5 over, the vast majority of the time if a driver waits a few seconds uses the middle or wide pedal to slow, then the right pedal to speed up again we'll all get along nicely and we can all get home safely to our families. A cyclist can move over onto the shoulder when there is space to allow motorised traffic to pass when possible, and again, we can all get home safely to our families.

[wilson79]

, nor if I'm ducking over to a mates house in my T-shirt and thongs (and bloody helmet) for a beverage or two using a bike so I don't end up going DUI on the drive home and save me fuel etc too.

hate to tell you this but you can also be charged with DUI on a bike..

[macca]

All drivers are required to carry ID why should it be any different? In fact I am pretty  sure that no matter what your doing if you can't verify your identity when police ask you can be detained until it can

[Bird]

A cyclist can move over onto the shoulder when there is space to allow motorised traffic to pass when possible

be nice if they did... "BUT ITS MY RIGHT TO RIDE ON THE ROAD... I PAY CAR REGO.. BLAH BLAH "

[edz]

hate to tell you this but you can also be charged with DUI on a bike..

And dont ride a horse under the influence either http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/why-horses-and-alcohol-dont-mix/story-e6freuy9-1111117498616

[Bird]

And dont ride a horse under the influence either http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/why-horses-and-alcohol-dont-mix/story-e6freuy9-1111117498616

and the bloke that got done in Geelong on the motorized lounge, and the dude on the motorized esky!

But I have no time for drink drivers.. arseholes to them.

[cancan]

But then you get good drivers like this.... she was beside me when she punctured her front tyre and down she went.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ORpWYYsP5A&feature=youtu.be

and then absolute idiots
http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/feb/01/driver-caught-on-camera-reversing-into-group-of-perth-cyclists?CMP=soc_567

and then my kind of cycling
https://www.facebook.com/513353885365754/videos/951351518232653/

[NewieCamper]

hate to tell you this but you can also be charged with DUI on a bike..

but you can't be stopped for RBT. The police need some sort of provocation to charge you with DUI, and if you are close to the limit for driving you have enough of your faculties intact to not do something stupid.

be nice if they did... "BUT ITS MY RIGHT TO RIDE ON THE ROAD... I PAY CAR REGO.. BLAH BLAH "

Yes, there are jerks out there that shout and rant and rave, but... and this is the big one, cyclists are entitled to ride on the road, and take an entire lane in doing so. Just because there is someone slower in front of you doesn't give you additional rights to tell them to get out of the way.

The typical driver 'training' we get in this country is that the roads are there to be used at the posted limit and we have come to expect that there should be no delay. Further we are all 'so busy' that eight seconds late getting anywhere appears to be the end of the world. A cyclist, a tractor, a learner, roadworks are all 'obstacles' to get around in most drivers eyes, rather than just part of the traffic scene. Next time you are held up by any of these items check your watch and you might be surprised at how short the delay is. Don't estimate, check a clock.

[gronk]

but you can't be stopped for RBT. The police need some sort of provocation to charge you with DUI, and if you are close to the limit for driving you have enough of your faculties intact to not do something stupid.
 
Just like a car, if they suspect you are drunk or it's a rbt roadside setup, they certainly can pull you over and test you.
If I just duck down to the shops in my car I need ID, so why should it be different for NON paying road users??

[Troopy_03]

but you can't be stopped for RBT. The police need some sort of provocation to charge you with DUI, and if you are close to the limit for driving you have enough of your faculties intact to not do something stupid.
Yes, there are jerks out there that shout and rant and rave, but... and this is the big one, cyclists are entitled to ride on the road, and take an entire lane in doing so. Just because there is someone slower in front of you doesn't give you additional rights to tell them to get out of the way.

The typical driver 'training' we get in this country is that the roads are there to be used at the posted limit and we have come to expect that there should be no delay. Further we are all 'so busy' that eight seconds late getting anywhere appears to be the end of the world. A cyclist, a tractor, a learner, roadworks are all 'obstacles' to get around in most drivers eyes, rather than just part of the traffic scene. Next time you are held up by any of these items check your watch and you might be surprised at how short the delay is. Don't estimate, check a clock.

While I don't doubt that is probably true for RBTs, I can't see any reason why pushy riders shouldn't be RBT'd as well. If they claim equal road use rights, they should have equal restrictions and testing.

[NewieCamper]

While I don't doubt that is probably true for RBTs, I can't see any reason why pushy riders shouldn't be RBT'd as well. If they claim equal road use rights, they should have equal restrictions and testing.

It's to do with risk of harm.
DUI pushy rider falls off, injures self, scratches paint on impact object (house, car, etc)
DUI driver crashes, kills innocent pedestrian, crashes through living room wall.

There are a whole lot of rules around driving a motor vehicle because of the potential to harm, maim, kill. 2 tonnes of metal at 60km/h does a lot more damage than 100kg of pushbike at 20km/h. Straight up physics. How many cyclists kill another road user each year? How many fatalities do motor vehicles cause?

[KingBilly]

but you can't be stopped for RBT. The police need some sort of provocation to charge you with DUI, and if you are close to the limit for driving you have enough of your faculties intact to not do something stupid.

All legislation is on the web, free to anybody who wants to read it  But don't let that stop the bush lawyers speculating.  It gives me a good laugh 

No need to have any "provocation", whatever that is supposed to mean, to pull over any road user for a breath or drug test.  Similarly you can be pulled over for a licence check at any time.  If you have an open licence and can't produce it upon demand, you are given a notice to produce your licence to your local police station withon 24 hours or risk a fine.  Lot easier to carry your licence at all times but it gives those who don't, or forget, an alternative option.

But, if you have committed an offence, the police officer must be satisfied of your identification.  If you can't produce photo ID, easiest is a driver's licence, you run the risk of being arrested.  An infringement notice, tarffic ticket, cannot be issued to an unidentified person.

Oh, and road rules apply to ALL road users, be they vehicle drivers, cyclists or horse riders.

KB

[KingBilly]

It's to do with risk of harm.
DUI pushy rider falls off, injures self, scratches paint on impact object (house, car, etc)
DUI driver crashes, kills innocent pedestrian, crashes through living room wall.

There are a whole lot of rules around driving a motor vehicle because of the potential to harm, maim, kill. 2 tonnes of metal at 60km/h does a lot more damage than 100kg of pushbike at 20km/h. Straight up physics. How many cyclists kill another road user each year? How many fatalities do motor vehicles cause?

Drunk cyclist crashes in front of car.  Car slams on brakes, three more cars tail end the first car.  Yep, drunk cyclists can do just as much damage.

Drunk cyclist crashes in front of car.  Car swerves to avoid running over drunk cyclist and smashes head on into oncoming vehicles. Several innocent road users dead.  Yep, drunk cyclist just as dangerous.

KB

[duggie]

Yes, there are jerks out there that shout and rant and rave, but... and this is the big one, cyclists are entitled to ride on the road, and take an entire lane in doing so. Just because there is someone slower in front of you doesn't give you additional rights to tell them to get out of the way.

When you ride, you must:
• keep as close to the left as practicable on a road that is not a multi-lane road
•on a multi-lane road, you can take up any position within the lane
• ride to the left of any oncoming vehicle
• not overtake another vehicle on the left if that vehicle is turning left and indicating they will turn left
• not overtake another vehicle on the left if it is not safe to do so
• not ride with more than 2 riders side by side unless you are overtaking
• ride within 1.5m of the other rider if you are travelling side by side with someone.

A cyclist may ride on the hard shoulder to the left of an edge line.

[Bird]

[stabicraft]

My primary gripes with cyclists are;
1) When I drive in slow traffic and finally manage to get past thet damn bike holding up the lane of traffic, they ride up the middle and I have to start all over again.

2) When said cyclist drags his/her or other (sometimes its hard to tell) handlebars down the side of my car taking off paint, they just ride off into the distance and never pay for the damage.

3) When I'm stationary and some idiot cyclist rams me because he/she or other misjudges the bikes width, they start screaming at me for being there. I was stationary idiot.

4) Finally, it seems that cyclists like the best of both worlds. If they feel that they dont want to wait for lights or at stop signs, they simply jump off the bike and run out across the pedestrian crossing, leaving little or any time to react. Point this out to the aggro bastards at your own peril, they go off like a bomb at a ISIS meeting.

Bike riders really have brought this on themselves.
If they were more compromising, more aware and more sympathetic to other drivers, this draconian legislation would not be necessary.
As a long time motorcycle rider, If I had gone on like these cyclists, I would have been dead many times, but rider training and being aware and coutious to other road users has served me well.

I may have posted this little gem before, but basically its all down to the Lycra.
When one wants to get a bull all worked up for a rodeo, they put rubber bands around the genitals to make it angry.
They lycra serves the same purpose, thus we have a real reason for all the aggro and anger that Lycra clad loonies exhibit daily.

[scblack]

My primary gripes with cyclists are;
1) When I drive in slow traffic and finally manage to get past thet damn bike holding up the lane of traffic, they ride up the middle and I have to start all over again.

Haha, I have to have a good belly laugh at that one. You're having a gripe - because the cyclist is FASTER in traffic than you are, and you feel you have to re-overtake him?

Do you feel a desperate need to get to the next red light faster than he can?

[scblack]

Drunk cyclist crashes in front of car.  Car slams on brakes, three more cars tail end the first car.  Yep, drunk cyclists can do just as much damage.

Drunk cyclist crashes in front of car.  Car swerves to avoid running over drunk cyclist and smashes head on into oncoming vehicles. Several innocent road users dead.  Yep, drunk cyclist just as dangerous.

KB

Car drivers must maintain a safe distance from the vehicle in front of them. Thus, if a car has to use emergency brakes, or swerve to avoid the cyclist they were breaking the law and were driving far too closely to be driving safely.

So in your little example - the drivers are all at fault - by road law.

Great example mate!

[doc evil]

For all you lycra terrorists out there, every time you take your bum off the seat you are breaking the law.....











......well in WA and QLD, dunno about other states.......

so don't claim you are all law abiding road users because you are not!!!!!!!!!

I won't start on the law of walking your bike across an intersection when you blatently use the footpath to avoid traffic  lights or obeying speed limits on bike paths (there have been several pedestrian deaths from irresponsible cyclists in WA alone) or the law that you MUST have a warning bell...............

[doc evil]

Car drivers must maintain a safe distance from the vehicle in front of them. Thus, if a car has to use emergency brakes, or swerve to avoid the cyclist they were breaking the law and were driving far too closely to be driving safely.

So in your little example - the drivers are all at fault - by road law.

Great example mate!

Carp......
what if DUI lycra terrorist trips up over his locked in foot clips and falls infront of said driver, who is at the 1.5m gap and traveling within the law, thus causes a vehicle accident and then scarpers. What recourse is the for the CAUSE of the accident. No rego to report etc.

[macca]

Car drivers must maintain a safe distance from the vehicle in front of them. Thus, if a car has to use emergency brakes, or swerve to avoid the cyclist they were breaking the law and were driving far too closely to be driving safely.

So in your little example - the drivers are all at fault - by road law.

Great example mate!

Not if the rider that caused the accident is drunk he shouldn't have been on the road and he is at fault.

[tk421]

If I just duck down to the shops in my car I need ID, so why should it be different for NON paying road users??

Roads are paid from taxes, not rego. Most bike riders are tax payers. Most bike riders also own a car. Therefore most bike riders are already paying road users.

The majority of Rego pays for the admin costs, the rest goes into general revenue so can be used to fund anything.