Police target South Australian cyclists

TimC wrote:

If there are 10M cars in Australia, and we spend $10B per year on
roads, then each car does about $1,000 worth of damage to the roads in
a typical year. Then multiply that by another 4 or so for health
related costs from people driving.

Since cars depreciate at about an average of $4,000 per year, then why
not charge them some form of registration at about $4,000 per year to
cover costs, instead of pulling it out of general revenue?

Sounds fair, can I expect a reduction of $4000 in income tax to balance
things out?
Money for roads comes mostly from the Fed Gov't in general tax distribution,
plus some grants for specific roads (eg black spots). Licensing revenue goes
directly to the States. Your balancing rebate comes from the Fed Gov't.

Theo

Brendo Wrote:
On Jan 12, 9:03 am, scotty72 scotty72.331...@no-
mx.forums.cyclingforums.com wrote:
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?

ZebeeBecause I can't see why lazy motorists who are simply cranky
that others

have found a better way want to destroy that better way for everyone
else. Simple envy - and crankiness.

I don't think that motorists who are knobs are that way out of
jealousy, or envy. I just think they're knobs. The fact that you're on
a bike means 1) you're an easy target, and 2) you and them often meet.
Would they be tools if they were walking and you were running? Yes,
Would they be tools if they were in a HSV Commodore and you were
driving the new matchbox car by TATA? Yes. By shouting something anti
bike-ish it makes it a little more legitimate than just being a
******.

BrendoGood points

The average propensity for knobishness mulitplies once s/he gets in
control of a motor vehicle.


--
scotty72

Theo Bekkers Wrote:
scotty72 wrote:
Theo Bekkers Wrote:

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.

I guess theo is going to ask that peds be licenced and
registered as
huge numbers of them break laws when crossing the road.

If law breaking is going to be our main concern (rather than other
benefits), then we'd better ban driving altogether. Most motorists
break at least one law each time they drive.

I don't remember the last time I saw a cyclist indicate?

Each year, thousands die
as a result. Yes, cars are a benefit to the society - but are they
worth the risk Theo?

Can we do without them? Are you happy to have factories in your
suburb?

Or does your hypocracy extent only to bicycles?

If you want to call people hypocritical, you should first learn to
spell the
word. :-)

TheoMany sorries for not double proof reading my quick posts

but, at least when you run out of reason, you can attack my typing.
Gives you somewhere to go.

You ask, can we do without cars. Prob no. But we could try.

No-one needs a car. People base their lifestyle choices around them
but they could do without them. I've reduced my useage (in kms) by about
75%. I'm not yet unable to live.

Factories. How much produce / product / stock is moved by car anyway.
Maybe in WA it's different, but in the east, we have trucks.

I'll ask you, can we do without bicycles? I doubt it.

We are fat enough, unhealthy enough. and polluted enough as a country
already and your grand solution for this is to ban the healthiest,
cleanest from of transport (apart from walking) there is. What was that
you said about Logic 101 at the local TAFE?

Scotty

EDIT

Wanna see a cyclist indicate. Follow me. I do it as the law requires.
That is Turning. We don't have to for stopping as it is dangerous - so I
don't


--
scotty72

John Tserkezis Wrote:
scotty72 wrote:

If our petrol headed freak wants to charge a $200 bike a $200 p/y
fee.
THen how about each motorbike and car be charged it's purchase value
each year. Sounds fair!

It doesn't work like that though.

I know, I was pointing out the stupidity of being asked to pay $200 rego
for a vehicle worth (perhaps) less than that.


--
scotty72

Cars are registered.

Having a plate or sticker etc on the back doesn't prevent law breaking.

As we've pointed out, most motorists break some law every day (about
90% speed through school zones) and many speed through orange/red
lights.

Obviously, you are so anti bike that you want to dream up a way to get
cyclists off the road. BINGO, force them into the licence / rego
bureaucracy. Force them to bolt on a heavy (on road bikes - grams count)
plate.

As you know, many will say stuff that.

You get your NRMA fueled wish of - get the cyclists of MY roads.

Selfish. Communist. You see others onto a good thing and you wanna ban
it.


Theo Bekkers Wrote:
TimC wrote:
Theo Bekkers wrote

So you'd be happy with $10 then, or are you avoiding the question
altogether.

Would $10 get the ignorants off our back? I don't suspect it would.
And as you said, it would be quite expensive to administer. So
since
it doesn't help, and it hinders, it's probably not worth doing,
unless
someone models it and finds otherwise.

So you're only objecting to the cost then? Supposing the fee of $10
was
revenue neutral and even provided employment for a few more out of
work
cyclists as a bonus, cyclists would no longer be seen as able to flout
the
laws, could say they are ccontributing to the costs. The ignorants
would
lose both their argument. Surely there would then be positives in such
a
proposal? I personally would have no objection to it. As I said, when
I was
a teenager, my bike had a licence plate.

Theo


--
scotty72

Depends

A large % of motorists regularly break the law.

So maybe that makes them arseholes.

Scotty

Theo Bekkers Wrote:
aeek wrote:

which is why I was careful to word it as "Not all drivers but this
driver and mates", not even assuming He. Arseholes who think its fun
to endanger others on the roads should not be on the road!

Of course. I'm sure we are all agreed on that. The tone on the ng
seems to
be "All car drivers are arseholes". As a part-time driver I object to
that.
In fact only a small percentage of people are indeed arseholes, they
just
give the rest of humanity a bad name.

Theo


--
scotty72

Theo Bekkers Wrote:
TimC wrote:

If there are 10M cars in Australia, and we spend $10B per year on
roads, then each car does about $1,000 worth of damage to the roads
in
a typical year. Then multiply that by another 4 or so for health
related costs from people driving.

Since cars depreciate at about an average of $4,000 per year, then
why
not charge them some form of registration at about $4,000 per year
to
cover costs, instead of pulling it out of general revenue?

Sounds fair, can I expect a reduction of $4000 in income tax to
balance
things out?
Money for roads comes mostly from the Fed Gov't in general tax
distribution,
plus some grants for specific roads (eg black spots). Licensing
revenue goes
directly to the States. Your balancing rebate comes from the Fed
Gov't.

TheoYes, we agree. So, those 2 car families will get stung hard/

Also, as cars cause all sort of environmental, health etc disasters,
lets triple the fuel tax to pay for all that. That is very fair. The
more you drive, the more petrol you need to buy = the more tax you will
pay to clean up your mess.

SCotty


--
scotty72

scotty72 wrote:
Theo Bekkers Wrote:

I don't remember the last time I saw a cyclist indicate?

If you want to call people hypocritical, you should first learn to
spell the word. :-)

Many sorries for not double proof reading my quick posts

but, at least when you run out of reason, you can attack my typing.
Gives you somewhere to go.

I am conatantly amused by the varied spelling of hyppocrite. Your's wasn't
too bad.

You ask, can we do without cars. Prob no. But we could try.

No-one needs a car. People base their lifestyle choices around them
but they could do without them. I've reduced my useage (in kms) by
about 75%. I'm not yet unable to live.

Factories. How much produce / product / stock is moved by car anyway.
Maybe in WA it's different, but in the east, we have trucks.

I was suggesting that people will need to live close by where they live.
Hence a factory in your suburb.

I'll ask you, can we do without bicycles? I doubt it.

We managed pretty well until about 1880. We got cars at about the same time.

We are fat enough, unhealthy enough. and polluted enough as a country
already and your grand solution for this is to ban the healthiest,
cleanest from of transport (apart from walking) there is. What was
that you said about Logic 101 at the local TAFE?

You idiot. I am a cyclist. I cycle daily. I have never advocated banning
bicycles. I just don't consider they should be exempt from the rules of the
road.

Wanna see a cyclist indicate. Follow me. I do it as the law requires.
That is Turning. We don't have to for stopping as it is dangerous -
so I don't

You don't have to indicate to stop? I didn't know that. I thought you only
didn't need to indicate to turn left.

So if a policeman should stop you, you and your bike will be compliant with
the law? Two orange reflectors on each wheel and each pedal. Red reflector
on the back, white reflector on the front, and an efficient bell? Great! and
good for you. I think mine is missing a couple of those items.

Theo

Theo Bekkers wrote:

I am conatantly amused by the varied spelling of hyppocrite. Your's
wasn't too bad.

Oops "constantly" :-)

I was suggesting that people will need to live close by where they
live. Hence a factory in your suburb.

That's a bit worse. "will need to live close by where they work".

Theo

scotty72 wrote:

I know, I was pointing out the stupidity of being asked to pay $200
rego for a vehicle worth (perhaps) less than that.

You think there are cars on the road worth less than their annual licence
and compulsory insurance fees?

Do you think these vehicles should be exempt from these fees?

When I'm driving a car, I'm fairly confident that the other vehicles on the
road have third party insurance. On a cycle path, I'm fairly confident that
none have.

Theo