non biking friends making fun

How many other cyclists here getting made fun of because they ride?
I don't use my car all that often, so friends and for that matter family are always making those smart arse little comments , annoys me a bit

Dont look for comfort from me. I hate people that ride. Not all but those barstards that ride 2 a breast. I mean if you wanted a lane why not just drive a car.

riding 2 abreast is legal (even in south Australia http://www.transport.sa.gov.au/personal_transport/bike_direct/fact_sheets.asp#1)

We are also by allowed to take the lane , we are classed as a vehicle

i laugh my ass off when they start bitching about fuel prices
or one thing i like saying is "you're getting a bit of a beer gut there "

Stuff what people might say as long as you enjoy riding who cares

just come up with some good comebacks. just like anything you do in life... theres allways some one thats gona see it differently

They mock. I point to their bellies and bums and say, "nobody built six pack abs and buns of steel sitting behind a powered steering wheel."

criticism is the highest form of compliment - they've actually taken the time to consider you, think about what you do, draw a conclusion and make a comment...quite a lot of effort for something thats rediculous, apparently

bluejay said:

riding 2 abreast is legal (even in south Australia http://www.transport.sa.gov.au/personal_transport/bike_direct/fact_sheets.asp#1)

We are also by allowed to take the lane , we are classed as a vehicle

Click to expand...

Yes but so many cyclists do themselves and the rest of us no favours by being so arrogant about this.Often it is just not safe or practical to ride 2 abreast or take up a lane.
P.S. I am a cyclist.I don`t even own a car.

I agree with Zarkov. There are times when riding two abreast is irresponsible. However, there are times when I will take the whole lane if the road is too narrow and cars tend to push you very close to the edge.

Who cares what other people think. If you love it, keep doing it!

I agree with cyclist being able to take up the whole lane, how ever as bikes are being classified as a vehicle on the road you should pay registration like the rest of the vehicles, no one should get a free ride.

there are good and bad cyclists, just as there are good and bad drivers.. and it's because of the bad drivers, I wouldn't risk cycling around Sydney streets.. Unless I had a death wish..

At least I have 1+ ton of steel and airbags around me to protect me from these bad drivers.. Dunno how effective a helmet is versus that same 1+ ton of steel..

toasted said:

I agree with cyclist being able to take up the whole lane, how ever as bikes are being classified as a vehicle on the road you should pay registration like the rest of the vehicles, no one should get a free ride.

Click to expand...

The registration paid for vehicles is priced on the wear and tear the vehicle creates on the road. Hence motorcycles have a lower registration than cars, and heavy vehicles higher than cars. Because bikes don't damage the roads in any way (nor do they pollute) they should not have to pay any registration. There is also the issue of road worthiness for cars too (another factor which is addressed through the registration system). I'm not saying there aren't unroadworthy bikes out there, but as there are millions more bikes on the road than cars it would be unrealistic and not really worth the money for any benefit gained in registering bikes.

toasted said:

I agree with cyclist being able to take up the whole lane, how ever as bikes are being classified as a vehicle on the road you should pay registration like the rest of the vehicles, no one should get a free ride.

Click to expand...

don't like it ,petition your local MP

Didn't read thread. I don't really care either way, but seems like a lot of bike riders get cut pretty easy, so it's fun to bait them/tease them.

But regarding the roads etc. Logically the law doesn't make sense. If the vehicle can't do the speed limit, then it really shouldn't be on the road. I don't see a difference between a bike, skateboard, roller blades and a scooter.

Do bikes even pay rego or anything like a car? (this is a serious question because I don't know and I'm too lazy/don't care enough to google it)

Just curious because if the owner of a vehicle doesn't contribute to the maintenance and upgrades of the roads then they definitely shouldn't be allowed on there.
Bike lanes on the footpath side of parked cars is the way to go.

Drivers get pissed off at bike riders so easily (and understandably I think) and riders get pissed off at car drivers easily (also understandable). So separate them.

The amount of times you see a bike rider change between obeying the laws like a car and then at red lights deciding to either sneak between cars up to the front or just hop off their bike and walk it across the road ignoring the light is ridiculous.

I think everyone gets a bit edgy when they have to obey the laws but it is flexible for another person.

"Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules."

It`s a pretty pissweak argument for cyclists to pay rego or some kind of road tax.I`d happily pay a nominal fee to ride on the road but who is to say cyclists don`t contribute in other ways.My mate uses a diesel powered generator for his business and a truck to get to and from his jobs but apart from that he cycles everywhere.He uses more fuel than the average person does so he could argue that he has more right than a car driver.
Both sides need to stop being so arrogant about it and accept neither owns the roads and both have a right to it.If cyclists,and drivers for that matter,ignore the rules,throw the book at them.My friends brother in law hit and killed an elderly cyclist and although right from the start the cops,the cyclists family,the witnesses - everybody agreed he was completely innocent of any wrong doing there had to be an investigation and the poor dude hardly slept a wink until it was wound up.Even now he is on the edge of a nervous breakdown because of it.No one would want someone`s death on their hands.
My sister almost hit a cyclist and he went nuts but I was in the car and I can attest that he was in her blind spot the whole way as they both approached the roundabout.Sure he had the right of way but there are times when a cyclist has to be extra dilligent and understand that he/she cannot be seen sometimes.

"If the vehicle can't do the speed limit, then it really shouldn't be on the road"

Sorry mate,poor argument there.The old biddy who ambles down the road at 35k`s an hour-get her off the road too?Motor scooters that struggle to hit 80k`s - get them off the roads as well?

not to mention the massive savings that cyclists give to the health care system of approximately $154 millio,Traffic congestion savings of $63.9 million

Zarkov said:

"If the vehicle can't do the speed limit, then it really shouldn't be on the road"

Sorry mate,poor argument there.The old biddy who ambles down the road at 35k`s an hour-get her off the road too?Motor scooters that struggle to hit 80k`s - get them off the roads as well?

Click to expand...

Just negating what I say doesn't make any of it wrong.

It's not a poor argument. In fact it wasn't even an argument of mine, rather an observation and judgement based on logic which you have coincidentally not addressed.
If you are driving a car too slow, you can get pulled over and fined/punished. Just because there isn't always a police officer around to do so doesn't mean it's allowed.

Same with scooters, but if they can hit 80km/h then they are fine for any roads with the limits they can handle.
I think it's fair to say if it can't do the limit it shouldn't be there. Going too slow is dangerous and can cause problems, not to mention adding to road rage which we're really just starting to see the effects of in the last 5-10 years.

I think bikes cause too many problems and drivers with bad attitudes cause just as many. Both are to blame.

Like I said above, a bike lane on the footpath side of parked cars is a decent approach. Separates the two whilst giving both access to the same roads. With the parked cars between them there is too much space for idiot drivers to swerve towards them and also too much space for bike riders to stick the leg out and kick cars (yes I have seen this several times).

Also you made the comment:

"It`s a pretty pissweak argument for cyclists to pay rego or some kind of road tax."

Can you tell me why? I'm happy to agree if you can point it out for me.

The whole point of taxes, regos, tariffs etc is to support government/public services and facilities.

So if you want to use it, you have to pay for it. Why should bikes be excluded from this?
They don't use fuel - great! They avoid the cost of fuel and the taxes and tariffs connected to that.

I'm not saying what I've written is the be-all and end-all of this topic. They are just quick thoughts I'm typing out to respond to your repudiating and belittling remark about my above post.

apiewithhoboliftingaroma said:

Just negating what I say doesn't make any of it wrong.

It's not a poor argument. In fact it wasn't even an argument of mine, rather an observation and judgement based on logic which you have coincidentally not addressed.
If you are driving a car too slow, you can get pulled over and fined/punished. Just because there isn't always a police officer around to do so doesn't mean it's allowed.

Click to expand...

Fair point.


It`s a pretty pissweak argument for cyclists to pay rego or some kind of road tax.I`d happily pay a nominal fee to ride on the road but who is to say cyclists don`t contribute in other ways.My mate uses a diesel powered generator for his business and a truck to get to and from his jobs but apart from that he cycles everywhere.He uses more fuel than the average person does so he could argue that he has more right than a car driver.

That is just one example.

Another reason is what has already been stated,the price it would accordingly be would not even cover the admin costs making it pointless.

All the environmental and health benefits also save a lot of money so indirectly cyclists are contributing.

As I said,I would quite happily pay a fee if only just to give the car drivers less ammo.

I too would happily pay a fee, but I also agree that the benefits would be negated by the admin costs.

However, the main issue, as I see it, is a lack of tolerance on both sides but I would think mainly on the behalf of some car drivers). I don't know many cyclists who have actively provoked car drivers through their actions - most are just trying to enjoy their sport or get from A to B safely. The car drivers (and I am one, and pay rego, and ride a bike too) tend to see the cyclists as "intruders" on their "turf". However, it isn't like this throughout the world, (or throughout Australia for that matter). Cyclists in Europe are afforded far more respect by other motorists and the attitude to cyclists in Melbourne is MUCH better than Sydney too. I don't think we need further legislation or administration, just a change of culture among ALL road users, to see the road as a shared space which everyone has a right to use so long as they are not breaking the law.