Police target South Australian cyclists

Zebee Johnstone wrote:
TimC wrote:

Watch an average busy intersection with traffic lights, as they turn
amber. Count how many cars go through the amber and red light when
it was safe for them to stop.

On my motorcycle commute yesterday, at 6 sets of lights, none.

My commute includes 9 sets of lights. I haven't seen a car run a red this
week. Two bikes. As a percentage that's pretty bad.

Theo

PeteSig wrote:
"Zebee Johnstone" wrote:

Why is it overkill? If the technology to register bicycles was
available at a price that could be covered by say $200/yr per cyclist
what are the reasons not to do it?

Because we would see a drop in cycling by.. ooh.. say 50-70% at that
'road safety fee'. And an overall reduction in road safety with more
cars on the roads and fewer cyclists about (oops, sorry people on
bikes)

So it's worth ignoring the law-breakers because of the health advantages?

I rode a bike when they were licenced. I didn't know anyone who didn't ride
because of the licence fee. Next question.

Theo

If people feel so strongly about the issue then either take that crap or
get off the pot. Draft a detailed submission with full costing &
pricing, submit it or make representations to the relevant authorities
or make a parliamentary submission to get the scheme included in either
fed/state government budgetary allocations. Otherwise it's just another
round of internerd waffle with no connection to reality.

Research with cited references:
http://www.cyclingpromotion.com.au/c.../view/213/147/

Game on.


--
cfsmtb

"Theo Bekkers" wrote:
PeteSig wrote:
"Zebee Johnstone" wrote:

Why is it overkill? If the technology to register bicycles was
available at a price that could be covered by say $200/yr per cyclist
what are the reasons not to do it?

Because we would see a drop in cycling by.. ooh.. say 50-70% at that
'road safety fee'. And an overall reduction in road safety with more
cars on the roads and fewer cyclists about (oops, sorry people on
bikes)

So it's worth ignoring the law-breakers because of the health advantages?

Don't go putting words in my mouth Theo. I never stated that at all.

FWIW I think we must continue to pursue the law-breakers. But it's not worth
doing it to the extent that it adds costs that deter lawful people from
pursuing a healthy, sustainable form of transport and leisure.

Just like the foolishness of the.... (helmet law)

--
Cheers
Peter

~~~ ~ _@
~~ ~ _- \,
~~ (*)/ (*)

Theo Bekkers wrote:
Zebee Johnstone wrote:
TimC wrote:

Watch an average busy intersection with traffic lights, as they turn
amber. Count how many cars go through the amber and red light when
it was safe for them to stop.

On my motorcycle commute yesterday, at 6 sets of lights, none.

My commute includes 9 sets of lights. I haven't seen a car run a red this
week. Two bikes. As a percentage that's pretty bad.

Theo



yep and based on that there is no longer any need for red light cameras
because obviously the only red light runners are cyclists.

DaveB

Zebee Johnstone wrote:

What else you can do isn't the point, can you do this? And why not?
Why is it overkill? If the technology to register bicycles was
available at a price that could be covered by say $200/yr per cyclist
what are the reasons not to do it?

$200/yr is the reason not to do it.

For those who ride a LOT, $200 may be easily absorbable into the budget,
because you're spending a lot more than that on a bike anyway.

But "they" only form a small proportion of riders.

The vast majority have cheap bikes, commonly around the $200 mark for the
entire bike, so a yearly licence is a joke.

The bike is cheap enough to give away, or stow in the garage never to be
touched again.

So, those people still have to get where they're going, only option left is
to drive. You're left with now disused bike paths, now only covered by the
occasional walker and their dog, further funding will be scrapped, and spent
on roads that are now carrying the new ex-riders. Except the measly amount
that WAS being spent on bike paths doesn't cover the additional workload on
the roads for the single-car-per-person that are using it now.

End result is the city is more stuffed than they were before all this started.
--
Linux Registered User # 302622
http://counter.li.org

On 2008-01-10, Zebee Johnstone (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
What else you can do isn't the point, can you do this? And why not?
Why is it overkill? If the technology to register bicycles was
available at a price that could be covered by say $200/yr per cyclist
what are the reasons not to do it?

About $190 of that would be a good reason not to do it.

--
TimC
Error: Furry Pointer Exception

In aus.bicycle on Fri, 11 Jan 2008 22:34:13 +1100
TimC wrote:
On 2008-01-10, Zebee Johnstone (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
What else you can do isn't the point, can you do this? And why not?
Why is it overkill? If the technology to register bicycles was
available at a price that could be covered by say $200/yr per cyclist
what are the reasons not to do it?

About $190 of that would be a good reason not to do it.

Bicycles are only worth riding if it's free or close too?

Zebee

On 2008-01-11, Zebee Johnstone (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
In aus.bicycle on Fri, 11 Jan 2008 22:34:13 +1100
TimC wrote:
On 2008-01-10, Zebee Johnstone (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
What else you can do isn't the point, can you do this? And why not?
Why is it overkill? If the technology to register bicycles was
available at a price that could be covered by say $200/yr per cyclist
what are the reasons not to do it?

About $190 of that would be a good reason not to do it.

Bicycles are only worth riding if it's free or close too?

The majority of people riding because it's cheap to go a short
distance, and can fit in the gap between after dinner and sunset - no.
I can't say it would be to them.

--
TimC
"This strongly suggests to me that perl is way out of hand,
or that I need another drink, or both." -- Alan J Rosenthal

Zebee Johnstone wrote:

Bicycles are only worth riding if it's free or close too?

Paying to use a bicycle is a bit like paying to be a non-smoker.

John