Moron Motorists #3

[Retrobyte]

is that a stop sign they ran too?

George Street Parramatta so street view on Google would show it. The sign is "no right turn".

corner of horwood pl and george st. there is a stop sign

I detoured into Horwood Place today to check - no stop sign, just a "left only" arrow sign, and the no right turn sign on the right side.

[g-boaf]

Watch out for the fridge!!! Bang….


https://youtube.com/shorts/QUGgnd_wnW0? ... p2uwJV1DDZ

America but still.

I had a guy blast through the roundabout in front of me yesterday even though I was already in the roundabout . Not pleased. Typical 50yo in crew cab ute. Probably listens to Ben Fordham as well.

[duncanm]

George Street Parramatta so street view on Google would show it. The sign is "no right turn".

corner of horwood pl and george st. there is a stop sign

I detoured into Horwood Place today to check - no stop sign, just a "left only" arrow sign, and the no right turn sign on the right side.

If you look at old google street views, its clear there was a stop sign which has been knocked off the top of the left-turn only.

Regardless, the rule is

"Stopping and giving way at a stop sign or stop line at an intersection without traffic lights
(1) A driver at an intersection with a stop sign or stop line, but without traffic lights, must stop and give way in accordance with this rule."

"stop line means a continuous line that—
(a) is marked across all or part of a road ... "

.. and that intersection has a stop line.

[CmdrBiggles]

corner of horwood pl and george st. there is a stop sign

I detoured into Horwood Place today to check - no stop sign, just a "left only" arrow sign, and the no right turn sign on the right side.

If you look at old google street views, its clear there was a stop sign which has been knocked off the top of the left-turn only.

Regardless, the rule is

"Stopping and giving way at a stop sign or stop line at an intersection without traffic lights
(1) A driver at an intersection with a stop sign or stop line, but without traffic lights, must stop and give way in accordance with this rule."

"stop line means a continuous line that—
(a) is marked across all or part of a road ... "

.. and that intersection has a stop line.

Is there something else missing from those regulations about stopping at a Stop sign..? Or are the regulations different from State to State?

I was fined in 2007 (by a concealed but watchful patrol car) for stopping very briefly at a stop sign line before proceeding. Next thing I see red and blue lights in the mirror.

The problem?
I should have stopped for a minimum of 5 seconds before proceeding.

[P!N20]

I should have stopped for a minimum of 5 seconds before proceeding.

That is not a requirement in the Road Safety Road Rules 2017.

(Although apparently you're meant to indicate for at least five seconds before pulling out of a car park. Didn't know that.)

[CmdrBiggles]

I should have stopped for a minimum of 5 seconds before proceeding.

That is not a requirement in the Road Safety Road Rules 2017.

(Although apparently you're meant to indicate for at least five seconds before pulling out of a car park. Didn't know that.)

Maybe not in 2017 regulations. The seemingly innocuous transgression took place a decade earlier. In June 2007 and was itemised on the infringement notice issued by the Sergeant stationed at Colac at the time.

[duncanm]

Maybe not in 2017 regulations. The seemingly innocuous transgression took place a decade earlier. In June 2007 and was itemised on the infringement notice issued by the Sergeant stationed at Colac at the time.

You were had. The NSW rules referenced the Australian Road Rules from 1999 onwards.

There's no 5s rule in any of these.

[bychosis]

5s rule only applies if you drop food on the floor.

My kids driving instructor said best thing to do is to stop then look. This ensures you are stopped properly.

[trailgumby]

The problem?
I should have stopped for a minimum of 5 seconds before proceeding.

The problem is that is nowhere in the rules. The law only requires that you stop. Is it good judgement to use 5 seconds while stopped to scan? Yes, but failing to do so is not that offence. If anything, you could have been pinged for negligent driving, but that is a different offence to what you were charged with.

[find_bruce]

Yep, straight out of the big book of made up road rules, in the same chapter that says a rider of a bicycle or motorbike has only stopped if they put their foot down

[antigee]

I should have stopped for a minimum of 5 seconds before proceeding.

That is not a requirement in the Road Safety Road Rules 2017.

(Although apparently you're meant to indicate for at least five seconds before pulling out of a car park. Didn't know that.)

not indicating when pulling out from being parked seems pretty common...I had a near miss when turning right on my bike...we both ended up stopped me near the drivers window and I copped some anti cyclist abuse...when I pointed out that he hadn't indicated before moving away from the kerb the answer was "I wasn't changing lanes"

lucky to live on a road with lots of trees on the nature strip and a lot of parked cars, all the incoming roads have stop signs and lines I assume because the visibility is poor my guess would be less than a third of drivers actually stop at the stop lines

[elantra]

………….
not indicating when pulling out from being parked seems pretty common...I had a near miss when turning right on my bike...we both ended up stopped me near the drivers window and I copped some anti cyclist abuse...when I pointed out that he hadn't indicated before moving away from the kerb the answer was "I wasn't changing lanes"

lucky to live on a road with lots of trees on the nature strip and a lot of parked cars, all the incoming roads have stop signs and lines I assume because the visibility is poor my guess would be less than a third of drivers actually stop at the stop lines

Cars that suddenly pull out from the kerb without indicating is so thoughtless at best and dangerous at worst. Yes, it triggers me too.

So does some law enforcement activities.
But not just me, my riding buddy is prone to going off about the traffic cop who busted him for going left at a stop sign at a crawling pace years ago.
It is or used to be a fairly common law-enforcement thing.

In suburban Brisbane there is an intersection near Rosalie Village which used to be notorious for this.
Of course all the locals knew this and rarely got pinged but occasional did and boy oh boy did they feel like s…t when that happened.
The thing is that I lived near that intersection for decades and I know that collisions at that location were almost unheard of and as far as I know no fatalities ever.

This process erodes public confidence in policing and makes us speculate that the police were only there because they could fulfill some sort of quota, quickly and easily.

Maybe that’s not the case but locals were scratching their heads to try and work out why there was such an emphasis on policing that location (when there were so many other locations more worthy of Police patrols)

[zebee]

Yep, straight out of the big book of made up road rules, in the same chapter that says a rider of a bicycle or motorbike has only stopped if they put their foot down

I am so waiting for someone to apply that to the trike! Be fun to take that to court.

As I understand it, the guys done for doing a race stand were done for not in control or reckless or something - so not precisely not putting a foot down.

Zebee

[nathg]

First proper ride since April 1st due to a new born. Have lost a bit of fitness so it was pretty slow.
Nearly got cleaned up on Hospital Rd Concord going through the roundabout outside the hospital. I indicated right on approach, as I entered the round about I saw from the left a blue Corolla and thought “gee they’re going to take some stopping!” She slowed, but continued through and we both came to a stop as I was forced into the curb of the roundabout to my right, scraping my tire (lucky no visual rim damage). I’ve turned my head left with a few expletives, seen the driver, and I’m 99% sure it’s my neighbor! Roughly 10km from home, what are the odds?
Same car, it looked like her, she works at the hospital and we’ve seen her drive the streets in and into the driveway like a lunatic.

I saw no right indicator but she hooked it right and sped off, I’m wondering if she knew it was me and panicked so got out of there?

Now, we get along fine (and live in a strata townhouse complex), so I’m cautious of approaching her and raising an issue considering no damage was done and no contact made (thankfully!). Obviously if she comes to me, that’s good enough as an admission and if she wants to play nasty I’ll threaten to report to cops.

[g-boaf]

Yep, straight out of the big book of made up road rules, in the same chapter that says a rider of a bicycle or motorbike has only stopped if they put their foot down

I am so waiting for someone to apply that to the trike! Be fun to take that to court.

As I understand it, the guys done for doing a race stand were done for not in control or reckless or something - so not precisely not putting a foot down.

Zebee

Wasn’t there a riding furiously back then? Don’t know if it still exists.

[mikesbytes]

Yep, straight out of the big book of made up road rules, in the same chapter that says a rider of a bicycle or motorbike has only stopped if they put their foot down

I am so waiting for someone to apply that to the trike! Be fun to take that to court.

As I understand it, the guys done for doing a race stand were done for not in control or reckless or something - so not precisely not putting a foot down.

Zebee

Wasn’t there a riding furiously back then? Don’t know if it still exists.

I think it still exists in NSW. What the metric is for it I don't know

[Bunged Knee]

I am so waiting for someone to apply that to the trike! Be fun to take that to court.

As I understand it, the guys done for doing a race stand were done for not in control or reckless or something - so not precisely not putting a foot down.

Zebee

Wasn’t there a riding furiously back then? Don’t know if it still exists.

I think it still exists in NSW. What the metric is for it I don't know

Maybe it still exists in NSW but it mentions in 2020 bicycle fines and haven't been updated yet but it incurs $464 fine but never heard of anyone who got this fines yet.



And it's been stated of Road Rules 2014 -REG 245-1 in Austli link below.
https://www5.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/ns ... 20offence.

[mikesbytes]

Wasn’t there a riding furiously back then? Don’t know if it still exists.

I think it still exists in NSW. What the metric is for it I don't know

Maybe it still exists in NSW but it mentions in 2020 bicycle fines and haven't been updated yet but it incurs $464 fine but never heard of anyone who got this fines yet.



And it's been stated of Road Rules 2014 -REG 245-1 in Austli link below.
https://www5.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/ns ... 20offence.

There doesn't seem to be any metric on riding furiously, I doubt that any issued ticket for riding furiously would stick in court.

Dictionary definition

in an extremely energetic or hurried manner; intensely:
"Terry was furiously scribbling away" · "Charlie pedalled furiously for six miles"

[antigee]

For those that don't follow stuff in the UK (pom here) there was a case 6 years were a young cyclist on a fixie killed a pedestrian who stepped in front of him he was charged with "furious driving" and manslaughter...the manslaughter charge was dismissed but he got an 18month jail sentence for the "furious" charge ... back in the news following another recent sad pedestrian death of an elderly female pedestrian and a government commitment to waste time legislating to change the law to introduce new cycling legislation...couple of articles here:
Sentencing:
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyl ... 20sentence.
Interesting review:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... ing-charge

[Mr Purple]

Pretty crazy. As pointed out in that second article 18mph (28.8km/hr) would be considered a very safe speed in the average car despite cars killing 400 pedestrians a year in the UK. So charging a cyclist for doing the same speed with a fraction of the mass seems absolutely ridiculous.

Not having a front brake though? That seems a little stupid.

[elantra]

For those that don't follow stuff in the UK (pom here) there was a case 6 years were a young cyclist on a fixie killed a pedestrian who stepped in front of him he was charged with "furious driving" and manslaughter...the manslaughter charge was dismissed but he got an 18month jail sentence for the "furious" charge ... back in the news following another recent sad pedestrian death of an elderly female pedestrian and a government commitment to waste time legislating to change the law to introduce new cycling legislation...couple of articles here:
Sentencing:
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyl ... 20sentence.
Interesting review:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... ing-charge

Part of the problem of course is that Mr Average Citizen is unfortunately partially desensitised to the issue of pedestrians falling victim to Cars (drivers)

But if Pedestrian dies as a result of collision with Cyclist - that is more unusual so gets more media attention - the classic “Man bites dog story” which gets lots of “clicks”

Related is something else that’s been in the UK media recently :
https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/dang ... er-new-law

As always, things get very complex.
I presume that overpowered e-devices are going to become more prevalent and more intrusive in UK cities as they are here.
And then there is likely to be a lot more casualties resulting from these things being used in pedestrian environments.
Unfortunately, considerate cyclists are going to be caught up in the bad press from this.

Like here in Australia, governments should be getting on top of this emerging issue in an intelligent fashion.
Which doesn’t seem to be happening here in Australia, so perhaps it’s a failing of the Westminister system (that we inherited from the UK)

[g-boaf]

Pretty crazy. As pointed out in that second article 18mph (28.8km/hr) would be considered a very safe speed in the average car despite cars killing 400 pedestrians a year in the UK. So charging a cyclist for doing the same speed with a fraction of the mass seems absolutely ridiculous.

Not having a front brake though? That seems a little stupid.

28km/h isn’t all that fast - but not having a front brake, hmm. If I’m riding outside I think I’d prefer having a full complement of brakes thanks. No telling who or what might dart out unexpectedly.

My road quite regularly has cars exceeding 100km/h, and those entirely innocent motorbike riders treating the green light as a motogp race start for the next 1km before they are hard on the brakes. But we mustn’t say anything about that here.

[zebee]

https://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/view ... h=au/cases has a case of riding furiously but as far as I can tell the actual. offence was "yelling at the police and not being a good boy" as the riding described can hardly be called "furious".

LSC Audus calmly went to restrain the Applicant’s bicycle and then, in turn, the Applicant. LSC Audus explained to the Applicant that he needed to speak to him about the bicycle . As he did this, the Applicant actively attempted to evade LSC Audus by aggressively pedalling backwards and forwards.

It does appear though that not being a good boy is not quite punishable yet..
These charges were ultimately withdrawn and the Applicant was compensated for his legal fees. ... the court awarded costs against the Police in the amount of $11,984.25..

To b fair it wasn't the furious riding that was the reason for that, it was that the stop was illegal in the first place. So I have not been able to find case law that defines furious riding on a bicycle.

[Andy01]

I presume that overpowered e-devices are going to become more prevalent and more intrusive in UK cities as they are here.
And then there is likely to be a lot more casualties resulting from these things being used in pedestrian environments.
Unfortunately, considerate cyclists are going to be caught up in the bad press from this.

My daughter lives in London and told me that it is illegal to ride anything (bicycle, scooter, escooter etc) on the footpath (or pavement as they call them there - unless the path is specifically designed for use by cyclists. They have to ride in the road (if no designated bike path), so presumably the likelihood of a cyclist hitting a pedestrian is lower ?

She also said that, in general, the cyclists and particularly escooter riders are fairly well behaved. She rode a pushbike for a while there, and then bought a small (300cc) motorbike - although she tries not to use it for commuting to work because there has already been one attempted theft.

I might guess that many (most ?) of the bicycle or escooter serious accidents (with peds involved) in Australia have occurred on paths, not on roads.

[mikesbytes]

For those that don't follow stuff in the UK (pom here) there was a case 6 years were a young cyclist on a fixie killed a pedestrian who stepped in front of him he was charged with "furious driving" and manslaughter...the manslaughter charge was dismissed but he got an 18month jail sentence for the "furious" charge ... back in the news following another recent sad pedestrian death of an elderly female pedestrian and a government commitment to waste time legislating to change the law to introduce new cycling legislation...couple of articles here:
Sentencing:
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyl ... 20sentence.
Interesting review:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... ing-charge

It does sound like it really boils down to not having that front brake. The math's doesn't include the reaction time, how long is reaction time and what distance is travelled during that reaction time at 18mph (28.96kph)?