http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/cycl...-20140316-34usd.html

And another one. All from the last couple of days. And the victim blaming is in full-swing....

good job he had something on his bonce,otherwise he could well have ended up being measured for his wooden overcoat.

mista h

OK, I'll bite - but you won't like it !!

The first one (door banging) shows the cyclist has no awareness of potential threats, or was simply out to prove some stupid point. Proper training would help sort out the first possibility and a phsyclogical examination might reveal mental illness as the cause of the second possibility.

The second clip (cyclist attacked from behind). I anticipate the motorist will be prosecuted for attempted murder, or at least should be.

The third clip (six cyclists in pile-up) .... well, there is no evidence yet as to what happended. However, the following text, cut from the news item suggests to me that cyclists are out to prove some sort of point, even if it kills them...........!! 

The six cyclists belonged to the Eastern Suburbs Cycling Club, which has been lobbying the state government for bike lanes along the busy motorway for years.

‘‘This was an accident waiting to happen,’’ club director Frank Conceicao told Fairfax Media.

‘‘We’ve been telling the government for ages that this stretch of road needs bike lanes, but we’ve continually been ignored. It’ll take someone being killed before they do anything about it.’’

The group was taking its usual Sunday morning ride from Dolls Point to Centennial Park.

I will repeat that specific sentence....It’ll take someone being killed before they do anything about it.’’

Looks to me as if the cycle group failed on this occasion to achieve their aim - they all survived !!

Why not wait until the necessary bike lanes are provided ?

That first cyclist was a muppet.  Taxi stops in front of her with someone in the back it's fairly obvious what could happen next and she flies up the inside of it.  I'd be sending her the bill for the damaged door.

I actually agree with you to some extent that she could have been more cautious.

The bit that burns me up is more the response of the people getting out of the cab. Not an ounce of concern, even though they have injured someone through an illegal action.

Not sure that "flying up the inside" really captures the fact that she was doing something perfectly legal. In the jurisdiction here (Victoria, Australia) you are not allowed to open the door of your vehicle into the path of an oncoming vehicle. Nor are you allowed to open your door other than when parked. Cyclists are also legally allowed to undertake motor traffic, except when it is indicating a left turn.

Imagine now that you were driving up the inside lane, and someone getting out of a taxi to your right opened a door into your path, would you apologise to them, pay for damages and move on? Do you always slow when passing stopped taxis in case someone decides to get out in the middle of traffic? Do you slow when passing parked taxis, in case someone gets out? No, of course not. The risk awareness responsibility lies with the "muppet" opening the door. They are legally required to ensure it is safe to do so. It is the only way it works. Christ.

So I guess it's OK to run them down, just to prove the point that the road is dangerous and they shouldn't be there, eh?

Her stupid point was to try to cycle somewhere in a perfectly legal manner, I guess. What's your evidence that she may have mental illness? The guys getting out the car seemed to me to be sociopaths. But a lot of Australians view cyclists as pond scum, so I guess they're not alone.

We have no evidence (yet) that the cyclists were deliberately attacked by  a person or persons  unkown. But we do have evidence that the cyclists knew they were deliberately putting themselves into a position of danger. 

....the video camera she was wearing. Bit like those stupid prats that deliberately walk onto a (UK) Zebra Crossing without looking to see if its safe !! Yes, they have a right to use the crossing and they do have priority over vehicles, but.............they need their heads examining !!

You're always "deliberately putting yourself into a position of danger" when you decide to take out your bike in an unfriendly environment. Does that mean you should stay at home? You're responsible even when you did not cause the accident?

Life is full of danger. People need to take care, even when the "law" is on their side, if they want to survive. Its normally called "commn sense". These days the term "threat and error management" is creeping in.

It seems to me that cyclists in particular, are organising themselves to agressively demand (not merely assert) their perceived rights, even if this means they get hurt or even killed. They demand access to the highhway system, but refuse to even consider any form of access charge. They demand that motorists be charged with murder or manslaughter when one of them is killed, regardless of the circumstances. They demand that motorists are incarcerated for life if a cyclist is injured, again regardless of the circumstances. The list is endless............

I am not against cyclists per-se. I even happen to enjoy cycling myself - see my thread a few months back. but yes, I am a triffle concerned by this unceassing string of self-interested demands by cyclists who blame motorists for all their woes.

I see it as my duty (as  the only reasonable person here) to maintain a sense of proportionate balance in this matter on the forum.

I think initially the guy did show some concern but the cyclist went straight for the "I'm gonna sue you/send you the bill" with such glee in her voice and to be honest, on first watch I wondered if she did it on purpose or it was some kind of set up/TV spoof.  She seemed rather pleased with the fact she hit the guys door or maybe it was her trying to get one over the guy.

Despite the fact filtering is legal in most countries everyone has the duty to filter safely and she was doing about 15 mph when the door opened.  She was not filtering in a safe and sensible manner.

It was a lack of awareness on her part that a taxi stopping with someone in the back is likely to have a door opening.

If that was me on the bike I'd have slowed to walking pace as I drew level with the car and no accident would have occurred.

My take:

Second clip - the Audi driver should be charged.   He was a total jack@ss.  Vehicular assault would be a proper charge.

First clip: she was a fool.

Third clip: Not enough info to know what happened.

Cyclists should have access to the roads, but then they should be subjected to all applicable laws, including minimum speed limits as well as having to remain in a lane.   "Dooring" should only be a charge when there is a legitimate lane or even a designated bike lane, neither of which were the case for the woman.  If I am getting out of a car on the street side, of course I am going to look for any vehicle, including a bike.  Expecting the same when exiting a car on the curb side that is essentially parked at a curb is just bulls**t.  She was stupid, and as F. Gump said, "Stupid is as stupid does."

You're watching a different video.

But why should cyclists be treated differently to motorists who break the road rules pretty much all the time? Motorists NEVER stop at stop signs (unless to avoid a collision), speed constantly (unless impeded by other traffic or a curve/corner), drive fasater than appropriate for conditions, drive whilst distracted, fail to indicate etc. This just standard benhaviour for the vast majority of motorists. Motorists don't view any of this as dangerous as long as it is them doing it (Hey we're all above-average drivers, aren't we?). But you view the young lady's actions as dangerous, don't you?

The consequences of motorists' safety breaches are that they kill and maim their family members, their friends, each other and themselves to the tune of millions of people worldwide each year (over 30,000 killed in North America alone), as well as cause countless billions of dollars of property damage.

The consequences of cyclist' breaches is that they annoy you.

http://www.dnainfo.com/new-yor...-on-q-train-mta-says

Maybe she was trying to avoid a cyclist....

Motorists "never stop at stop signs"?  Seriously, if you want to debate the topic at least stop resorting to such nonsense.

The young ladies actions were a danger, to herself, and if she's not prepared or able to look out for herself then why should anyone else?

You also fire away with some stats but then measure that against the time motorists spend in the car and the mileage they do.  You might find they're quite a bit safer than you're imagining.

The overwhelming majority will cover more than 200,000 miles in their lifetime without causing a serious accident.

We can all post clips...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ZBKzkz6dFE

Absolutely seriously.

I cycle through about 20 4-way stop signs on my commute. I have done so for 5 years. In that time I have observed thousands and thousands of motorists fail to come to a complete stop. I see at least 10 or 20 every single day. The only time they stop is if they physically have to to avoid a collision. There have been perhaps 4 or 5 exceptions in 5 years and a couple of those were because a cop was sitting by the intersection. Sure they slow down, and generally proceed safely...but fully stop? Never unless they have to.

I actually don't see it as an issue (although a woman rolled through the stop sign without stopping and turned across my path just last night), but it irks me when people trot out the scofflaw-cyclist nonsense as a justification for the occasional murder of a cyclist or two. Compared to absolute carnage caused by motorists, cyclists' behaviour is completely trivial.

And die early of heart disease or diabetes....

I would hardly rate drivers in this area as models for good driving, but most do stop at stop signs that I see.

I always stop at stop signs, and always use my blinkers...even for lane changes.  I also try to be courteous to both bicycles and motorcycles.

And at about 12,000 miles a year (which is low, if you've ever leased a car you know it is) and 40+ years of driving, the average driver will chalk up over a half million miles in a lifetime.

Not sure what you are trying to achieve with the heart disease & diabetes comment.  I have an idea, but I hope it's not that gauche.

Mark, Winky lives in Vancouver. 4-way Stop signs in Vancouver are purely ornamental.

In Kelowna, Vernon, Banff and Canmore, and at all points between on the Trans-Canada and the BC Ferry Routes, EVERYBODY respects the 4-Way Stop signs at junctions. They pull up and STOP, even when the other three roads are clear. When the incomming roads are busy, we note who gets to the line first (no rush !!) and we politely WAIT our turn.

No rush. No stress. We get to our hiking areas relaxed and refreshed.

Once in the National Parks we only have to worry about the bears, cougars, moose and rattlesnakes. Once out of the National Parks its only the hunters.

Moral ?? don't commute fron West Vancouver to Robson 5 days a week. If you have no choice, then DRIVE and take a lunchtime hike around Stanley Park.

Simply that for me, at least, cycling keeps me healthy. If I drove to work each day I'd be less fit, more stressed and 20kg heavier. Risk of disease would be much higher. This may also be true for others.

Kate Cairns is the founder of See Me Save Me campaign.

According to her, HGVs are involved in more than 50% of cyclists deaths (in the UK) yet only account for 4% of our traffic. The majority of these HGVs involved in cyclists' deaths are construction vehicles. Nearly all the HGV drivers involved said the didn't see the cyclist.

Although she is campaigning for new laws to make HGVs safer, she has started to win the voluntary support of construction contractors to implement vehicle design improvements based on the latest technology, HGV driver training plus industry based audit and enforcement of the voluntary rules.

One or two major contractors have signed up to implement these voluntary standards by April this year. Hopefully others will follow quickly.

This, together with the CrossRail initiative that I highlighted a few weeks back, seem to be steps in the right direction. IMHO

7 May, 2013 | By Orlando Crowcroft