Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Anti Cycling Legislators in Aus hit a new low.

Options
1…34689…12

Comments

  • Options
    #152
    tomasrojo
    Registered Users Posts: 11,769 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    Actually, most bells do make a nice noise. I might eventually relent and get one.

    I still have yellow reflectors facing behind on my bike, which is also illegal.


  • Options
    #153
    catbear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,092 ✭✭✭catbear


    Was sitting in a cafe in Freemantle in western Australia one day when I saw a lady walking with her bicycle being stopped by cops and fined for not having a bell on it.
    Australia is just messed up, it followed the USA into carmaggedon and now views cyclists as another traffic problem rather than a healthier alternative to motoring.
    They've got some great cycle lanes but I felt more unsafe as both a pedestrian and cyclist than I've done anywhere I've been in Europe and I've driven in sicily!


  • Options
    #154
    Kev W
    Registered Users Posts: 2,536 ✭✭✭Kev W


    catbear wrote: »
    Was sitting in a cafe in Freemantle in western Australia one day when I saw a lady walking with her bicycle being stopped by cops and fined for not having a bell on it.
    Australia is just messed up, it followed the USA into carmaggedon and now views cyclists as another traffic problem rather than a healthier alternative to motoring.
    They've got some great cycle lanes but I felt more unsafe as both a pedestrian and cyclist than I've done anywhere I've been in Europe and I've driven in sicily!

    Why would the fact that she was walking make a difference? She still didn't have a bell on the bike and was in breach of the law.


  • Options
    #155
    tomasrojo
    Registered Users Posts: 11,769 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    Kev W wrote: »
    Why would the fact that she was walking make a difference? She still didn't have a bell on the bike and was in breach of the law.
    Quite right. They should go house to house, looking for bikes in storage without bells. Zero tolerance for this lunacy.


  • Options
    #156
    Darkglasses
    Registered Users Posts: 14,526 ✭✭✭✭Darkglasses


    tomasrojo wrote: »
    Quite right. They should go house to house, looking for bikes in storage without bells. Zero tolerance for this lunacy.

    You're too lenient. Even having the means to construct an improvised bicycle with no bell attached should be an offence.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #157
    catbear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,092 ✭✭✭catbear


    Kev W wrote: »
    Why would the fact that she was walking make a difference? She still didn't have a bell on the bike and was in breach of the law.
    By that logic a wreck remover could be fined for everything faulty on the car they're towing. You should move to Perth, they work on prison rule were you're guilty until proven innocent.


  • Options
    #158
    ThisRegard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 27,833 ✭✭✭✭ThisRegard


    Kev W wrote: »
    Why would the fact that she was walking make a difference? She still didn't have a bell on the bike and was in breach of the law.

    Would you fine a kid for sitting in the drivers seat of a parked car for not having a licence or insurance, as well as the 2 bald tyres?


  • Options
    #159
    Jawgap
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    Kev W wrote: »
    Why would the fact that she was walking make a difference? She still didn't have a bell on the bike and was in breach of the law.

    What if you were on your way to the shop to buy a bell, because while on your cycle you'd worn the last one out and you - conscientiously - stopped cycling immediately for fear of ploughing through a combined toddler / OAP group on a walkabout?

    My wife's Pashley had a lovely drrring drrring bell on it - unfortunately she became infected with the cycling bug and traded the Pashley (and the bell) for rather nice road bike.


  • Options
    #160
    Kev W
    Registered Users Posts: 2,536 ✭✭✭Kev W


    catbear wrote: »
    By that logic a wreck remover could be fined for everything faulty on the car they're towing. You should move to Perth, they work on prison rule were you're guilty until proven innocent.

    Actually they couldn't because they don't own the car. Also you're applying a completely different logic to the one I used, which is police seeing someone breaking the law and then doing their jobs.


  • Options
    #161
    Kev W
    Registered Users Posts: 2,536 ✭✭✭Kev W


    Jawgap wrote: »
    What if you were on your way to the shop to buy a bell, because while on your cycle you'd worn the last one out and you - conscientiously - stopped cycling immediately for fear of ploughing through a combined toddler / OAP group on a walkabout?

    My wife's Pashley had a lovely drrring drrring bell on it - unfortunately she became infected with the cycling bug and traded the Pashley (and the bell) for rather nice road bike.

    How does one suddenly "wear out" a bell?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #162
    Kev W
    Registered Users Posts: 2,536 ✭✭✭Kev W


    ThisRegard wrote: »
    Would you fine a kid for sitting in the drivers seat of a parked car for not having a licence or insurance, as well as the 2 bald tyres?
    No because they clearly don't own the car.

    Are you suggesting that cyclists should bear no more responsibility for their vehicles than an unsupervised child?


  • Options
    #163
    ThisRegard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 27,833 ✭✭✭✭ThisRegard


    Kev W wrote: »
    No

    So why a person pushing a bike? Or are you just here on the wind up? What if a cyclist was pushing the bike to the shop to buy a bell, or if a garda saw someone driving down the motorway with the bike on the rack, with no bell, should they be pulled in and fined?


  • Options
    #164
    Kev W
    Registered Users Posts: 2,536 ✭✭✭Kev W


    tomasrojo wrote: »
    Quite right. They should go house to house, looking for bikes in storage without bells. Zero tolerance for this lunacy.

    Or they should deal with breaches of the law when they find them. Which is all I suggested.


  • Options
    #165
    tomasrojo
    Registered Users Posts: 11,769 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    Kev W wrote: »
    How does one suddenly "wear out" a bell?

    When I worked in Basel, the junkies used to steel the caps off bells to cook up heroin. They used to go missing a lot anyway, and that's what the locals told me was happening.

    People did get fines for not having bells there, but they were pretty trivial fines, and, from what I remember, they weren't imposed all that often. I really doubt you'd have been fined for walking your bike after a junkie rendered your bell unworkable. But Australia is a world of its own.


  • Options
    #166
    Kev W
    Registered Users Posts: 2,536 ✭✭✭Kev W


    ThisRegard wrote: »
    So why a person pushing a bike? Or are you just here on the wind up?

    I've edited the post you're responding to to expand my answer as I tapped "post" before I finished (the mobile site can be tricky that way).


  • Options
    #167
    Kev W
    Registered Users Posts: 2,536 ✭✭✭Kev W


    tomasrojo wrote: »
    When I worked in Basel, the junkies used to steel the caps off bells to cook up heroin. They used to go missing a lot anyway, and that's what the locals told me was happening.

    People did get fines for not having bells there, but they were pretty trivial fines, and, from what I remember, they weren't imposed all that often. I really doubt you'd have been fined for walking your bike after a junkie rendered your bell unworkable. But Australia is a world of its own.

    I don't see how that answers the question it appears to be a response to.


  • Options
    #168
    Zillah
    Registered Users Posts: 17,371 ✭✭✭✭Zillah


    Kev W wrote: »
    Or they should deal with breaches of the law when they find them. Which is all I suggested.

    The bell legislation refers to cyclists, not pedestrians. If you are wheeling a bike you are a pedestrian. You can no more fine her for not having a bell than you can arrest me for washing an uninsured car. Proximity is not use.

    The pettiness an eagerness of some people to see tiny, annoying rules enforced with the strength of a stamping boot is just horrifying. I always hate threads like this where you get a gang of smug autocrats celebrating the triumph of petty rules over the spirit of the law.


  • Options
    #169
    Jawgap
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    Kev W wrote: »
    How does one suddenly "wear out" a bell?

    Well if you had one you'd know :D

    Actually wearing out a bell sounds like something that should in a Flann O'Brien novel!


  • Options
    #170
    Kev W
    Registered Users Posts: 2,536 ✭✭✭Kev W


    Zillah wrote: »
    The bell legislation refers to cyclists, not pedestrians. If you are wheeling a bike you are a pedestrian. You can no more fine her for not having a bell than you can arrest me for washing an uninsured car. Proximity is not use.

    The pettiness an eagerness of some people to see tiny, annoying rules enforced with the strength of a stamping boot is just horrifying. I always hate threads like this where you get a gang of smug autocrats celebrating the triumph of petty rules over the spirit of the law.

    The law states bikes must have bells. The police saw a bike with no bell and responded accordingly. The bike not being in use at that moment is irrelevant.

    If you find proper enforcement of the law "horrifying" I don't know how to help you.

    On the plus side I just found out I'm an autocrat because I like it when police do their jobs. So that's fun.


  • Options
    #171
    buffalo
    Registered Users Posts: 8,081 ✭✭✭buffalo


    Zillah wrote: »
    The bell legislation refers to cyclists, not pedestrians. If you are wheeling a bike you are a pedestrian. You can no more fine her for not having a bell than you can arrest me for washing an uninsured car. Proximity is not use.

    Does a car not have to be declared 'off the road' now, to be uninsured without offence?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #172
    Carawaystick
    Registered Users Posts: 8,779 ✭✭✭Carawaystick


    buffalo wrote: »
    Does a car not have to be declared 'off the road' now, to be uninsured without offence?

    No.
    only for motor tax.

    If you have a car in a private place, it does not need insurance. But you need to tax it to be able to use it in a public place again.
    The adapted for racing out for not having a bell is an easy out. We used to have slow bicycle races in school. and road or mountain bikes can be used for racing as they are...


  • Options
    #173
    check_six
    Registered Users Posts: 2,245 ✭✭✭check_six


    A bike over your shoulder is "luggage" right? Does luggage require a bell?

    The anti-cycling thing in Australia is perverse. Who does it benefit to discourage people from cycling?


  • Options
    #174
    Kev W
    Registered Users Posts: 2,536 ✭✭✭Kev W


    check_six wrote: »
    A bike over your shoulder is "luggage" right? Does luggage require a bell?

    The anti-cycling thing in Australia is perverse. Who does it benefit to discourage people from cycling?

    A bike over your shoulder is still a bike. If it's legally mandatory to have a bell on it the law doesn't change because you can pick it up.


  • Options
    #175
    Eamonnator
    Registered Users Posts: 6,561 ✭✭✭Eamonnator


    How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?


  • Options
    #176
    Kev W
    Registered Users Posts: 2,536 ✭✭✭Kev W


    Eamonnator wrote: »
    How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

    Depends on the tune.


  • Options
    #177
    Carawaystick
    Registered Users Posts: 8,779 ✭✭✭Carawaystick


    Take either a wheel off, or the seat off. A pedal cycle doesn't need pedals in Ireland, but it does need a seat.... :rolleyes:

    Obviously if the bike was adapted for a race whereby people carried the bike on their shoulder, the adapted fro racing exemption applies


  • Options
    #178
    Snickers Man
    Registered Users Posts: 5,301 ✭✭✭Snickers Man


    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tomasrojo View Post
    I always stop at lights and never wear a helmet. Am I 50% virtuous?
    esforum wrote: »
    Why do you not wear a helmet?

    I'll let tomasrojo answer for him or her self but in my case I don't because I don't own a bicycle, preferring instead to avail of the excellent Dublin Bikes scheme. If you live in some smaller place deemed unworthy of such a scheme then forgive me for sounding like Marie Antoinette but the success of this scheme is essentially predicated on its ease of use. If you need to be somewhere on the other side of town in a hurry, it's such a convenience to be able to hop on a bike and scoot across.

    If you had to carry a helmet around with you all today, just in case you needed to avail of the opportunity it would be a sufficient disincentive not to use the bike. I would either walk, or if in a hurry, take a taxi.

    People insisting on helmets seem to think that all bike rides are planned and scheduled in advance. That they are either long excursions into the country or regular commutes, into which routines can be built of which wearing a helmet is one.

    The joy of being able to get around Dublin city centre in the fresh air at minimal cost and reasonable speed is, I am convinced, one of the reasons for hte success of the Dublin Bikes scheme. Why feck it up just for the authoritarian thrill of forcing people to obey a tiresome edict?


  • Options
    #179
    catbear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,092 ✭✭✭catbear


    Kev W wrote: »
    The law states bikes must have bells. The police saw a bike with no bell and responded accordingly. The bike not being in use at that moment is irrelevant.

    If you find proper enforcement of the law "horrifying" I don't know how to help you.

    On the plus side I just found out I'm an autocrat because I like it when police do their jobs. So that's fun.
    If you saw a parked car with a flat tire would you report it for not being road worthy.

    you're just being contrarian now. If this was after hours then no problem but this is real issue so on your bike.


  • Options
    #180
    tomasrojo
    Registered Users Posts: 11,769 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    Speaking of autocracy and Australia, I think the Australians are starting to look unhinged:

    379010.jpg


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #181
    desertcircus
    Registered Users Posts: 2,648 ✭✭✭desertcircus


    Kev W wrote: »
    Why would the fact that she was walking make a difference? She still didn't have a bell on the bike and was in breach of the law.

    There is no way you are stupid enough to genuinely not understand why there's a difference.


Advertisement