It's Not Road Rage

Did anyone watch this footage last night? Initially I thought road rage.

Fortunately someone got it on go pro, otherwise who knows whether it would have even made it to court.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-07-...d-after-running-wife-car-off-the-road/6651564

He only got 5 years.

I was listening to the victim on ABC this morning, as you can imagine not happy with the sentence.

Apparently she was on occasions tied her to his ute and made to jog behind.

When are they going to start handing out tougher sentences??

MTR

 

Not even ******* close:

http://www.ntnews.com.au/news/north...jack-sultan-page/story-fnk0b1zt-1227459810602

Then this twit who got 9months:

https://www.google.com.au/#q=talia+van-rysewyk


I could go on all day about soft sentencing.


pinkboy

 

Problem is, harsher sentences don't work as a deterrent. So beyond a certain point, its just a waste of public money.

 

I know a bit about sentencing being friends with a Magistrate. Definitely a tough gig.

pinkboy

 

So what is the answer? I have no idea

 

Leads to the next can of worms: Capital Punishment!

pinkboy

 

Or at least old school army discipline - "contact counselling".

 

Generally if I'm alive after being hit I become Judge, Jury and Executioner.

pinkboy

 

Pretty sure it's Judge Judy and Executioner.
Do you see much road rage on the bike?

 

No, its 'Jury'.

Generally not a lot (but every so often I come across someone with a bee in their bonnet).

However I do a lot of riding by myself, and not in the built-up areas. When I do ride with others, its generally only 2-4 blokes, of which we are all very seasoned riders, and we all know the rules inside and out, plus we really are out in the sticks when we are riding 100-200km anyway, or hill repeats well out of the town.

I think the biggest gripe for motorists is the perception of more than 2 abreast of groups, even though groups may well be 2 abreast, its not easy to keep each pair of riders exactly the same width apart and in line because of the movement and balance of each individual rider - thus they look 3-4 people wide. Group riding is not an exact science.

If you really want to delve into a measurement argument lets look at the width and gaps of cyclists and roads: Widest part of a cyclist is 500mm (either outside of the hands on handlebars or up to say 600mm hips for larger riders). Then good riders can ride about 200-300mm apart, but most general intermediate riders have to be about 500mm apart. So we are already up to 1500mm or over half a carriageway with 2 cyclists. *This is what motorists see more times than not!* If you add a thirst rider (the argument of a motorist), you extend the width of the 3 abreast to 2500mm (which is a whole carriageway width). Do people honestly think cyclists are riding 3 abreast with the outside person riding on the centreline? I think not, its just what they want to see in most cases to argue. They are seeing 2 riders abreast, and seeing through or behind the widest pairing the riders in the pairing in front or behind making it appear 3+ wide. Doesn't take much of an angle from behind to see this, and you will never see a perfect gap up the middle of a group from directly behind as explained above.

The greatest anger from motorists is slowing them up. Slowing them up from what? What is so important that 10-60 seconds going 30km/hr then back up to 60-100km/hr? Its not like its a standstill. My favourite catchcry to someone irritated by us slowing them up is "Did I ruin your day by ruining your trip to work/Maccas? Perhaps you think about the time wasted to tell us such."

Anyway, I could go on about group riding longer than about soft sentencing. If you want to ask me about registration of cyclist, best you kiss your kids on the forehead and tell them you will see them at their graduation.


pinkboy

 

Obviously not a Simpsons fan

 

I'm against that as well, can't believe the dinosaur Minister for Roads in NSW thinks it's a good idea.

 

As a driver and not a rider (and don't take this the wrong way) but 2 abreast can be really annoying.

The road rules are that you are supposed to give 1m clearance when you pass around a cyclist which, if they're riding two abreast mean you have to cross completely onto the wrong side of the road - often in hilly areas where you can sees for ages so can't pass for a significant period - and when you're starting from a speed of 30km/hr (or less) it's takes time to regain speed whilst passing.

If they ride in single file, then passing is so much more incredibly easier ... and significantly safe

 

Except the group is now more than twice as long taking the motorist twice as long to pass putting both cyclists and motorists at risk twice as long.

What is so important that you can't slow down for a short while?

pinkboy

 

Or, you could ride at the posted speed limit.

The problem is that most of these selfish bike riders have no intention of single filing any time soon, so the driver has no idea how long they will be stuck behind them.

It is glaringly obvious that it is pretty bloody easy for the riders to just move over into a single file for a few seconds so the car/s can pass. But no......

Just stay in the two-abreast and subliminally say; "**** you, buddy"

Those who live by the two-abreast are quite possibly going to die by the two-abreast at some point, so it's a bit ignorant to think they can simply do it and everything will work out fine.

 

The uphill run at Mt-Coot-tha in Brisbane most days weekend it's packed with all sorts of bike riders as you drive up the gentlemen in blue will have the speed camera scan you anything above the 40klm's they will pull you over going up going down,and they are there in several locations ,was there a few weeks back and I'm in low gear brakes on sitting just below 37 klms on the digital speedometer,then in the rear mirror comes along about 6 push bike people flat out ,look over at the boss and said this will be interesting to see the next corner as they was a maned speed camera and a r.b.t and drug bus go around the corner and they were all pulled over, and by the look on their faces they looked worried,can one be booked for speeding downhill on a bike?..

 

Ah yes, the old 'just do the speed limit' chestnut... We all know all motorists abide by all posted speed limits hey?

However I do agree with the rest of your post. Obvious places where single file is appropriate, that should be done. Personally I don't ride in very many of these situations, but I can see the merit. Unfortunately the situation being a subjective event, a rigid law will be the default, onus on the motorist to stay back until safe to do so.

I mean, what are you rushing to Bayview? A puncture repair?

pinkboy

pinkboy

 

Yes, of course. Prime example - when I was racing a local club race the lane where we used to have the finish was signposted 40km. Sprint speeds upwards of 60km/hr are possible, and a new local cop sent a stern letter to the club advising they will act upon the speed limit of the street.

The new finish line is now on a slight uphill and usually into the breeze in an 80 zone. We can only get to about 56 .


pinkboy

 

Folks are generally not rushing anywhere, but everyone is selfish and wants to live on their terms.

To be slowed down by a group of riders (who can get out of the way), or a bus, or a truck etc - ****** folks off. I get ****** off when I'm on the freeway with the cruise control set, and have to keep adjusting it for various speed changes...selfishness..

Many slow vehicle (trucks/buses/tractors, etc) drivers are aware of this issue, and try to get out of the way when safe to do so to let the faster vehicles behind them pass.

But for some reason bike riders have developed this arrogance.

All I'll say is; that's fine, but they will never win an argument with a one-tonne (or more) vehicle.

I, for one, am not happy to risk my life by being out near the centre of the road and being cleaned up by a distracted driver at the wrong time.