cyclist incident

[topgear]

Originally Posted by Ben73

Yes they do, but many of them seam to think the road rules do not apply to cyclists. I had one fly through a stop sign in front of me today. That is a common occurrence with many cyclists, I see it all the time.
I have also noticed that when they do something wrong they never wave and say sorry, they just go crazy and abuse people.

By the way I RIDE A MOUNTAIN BIKE, I have rode on public roads many times unfortunately. When I do ride on roads I do not act like I own the joint, I don't pick and choose which rules I feel like obeying that day and I can say I have never had any close calls.
So if you are or know any cyclists who are always having close calls, maybe they should look at their own riding style before blaming everyone else.

I bet you enjoy your ride without any hassles.

[ratter]

You assume that the cyclist does not have a car at home, so pays no rego etc?
I pay a heap of rego's so does that give me more right to the road than someone who pays just one?
If you had kids would you like to pay for your 5 year old to ride his bike out on the street?

[blackf6]

[QUOTE=topgear]Aren't they really lucky to have that right with out paying registrations like car drivers?


In a way yes we are lucky but most motorists don't know that cyclists have rights and what rules that we follow. And for the record i do pay rego and my vehicle lives in my shed.

[topgear]

You got me wrong. I didn't mean that cyclists should pay rego or getting away from paying rego. I picked wrong words probably. Its good in QLD, correct me if am wrong, we pay rego with CTP and thats it. No need of another third party insurance like in Melbourne on top of rego with ctp.

PS: I know third party insurance is not mandatory but its a must.

[ratter]

I'm getting a little off topic here, but seeing CTP was mentioned here goes.........

Yes I'm a cyclist, I also drive cars and ride motorbikes.
I agree that some cyclist do the wrong thing on the roads and should be accountable for their actions. I see car owners do the same thing and also motorbike riders. We should all be accountable for anything we do wrong or damage we cause.
At the moment between my wife and I, we pay 9 registrations per year and we have 5 push bikes on top of that.
Of those 9 rego's we pay 8 compulsory third party insurance premiums, pretty sure the trailer rego does not have the premium attached to it.

How many of those vehicles can I use at a time? 1, 2 if you include my wife.
Why don't we pay the compulsory Third part insurance on our licence? That way every licenced road user would be covered for the third party damage they may cause to somebody, no matter what car they are driving etc.
I know then unlicensed drivers then would have no cover, but at the moment an unregistered car has no coverage and they still get used.

Making a cyclist have third party may not be a bad idea assuming it is a one off thing as I mentioned it should be in the above case, but then the questions get asked, at what age does someone need coverage etc etc and it still does not give a way for a rogue cyclist to be identified.

[olds]

Originally Posted by ratter

If you had kids would you like to pay for your 5 year old to ride his bike out on the street?

I not let my 5 Y.O. not to ride on the street with vehicles as it is dangerous. I would hope as he matured he would see this for himself alas some never mature.

[ratter]

That's a fair call, but some kids do ride on the street.
Courts do not see much passing traffic and are normally a mecca for kids riding and playing in the street

[ChRiDDa]

no offence has been committed...

1. There was no accident, so there is no need to exchange details
2. No injuries = no need for police attendance
3. No damage to property, where the owner of the property cannot be identified

=no police involvement