I blame the mother

July 13th, 2010 at 6:19 am by David Farrar

The Herald reports:

A motorist involved in a “cycle rage” incident claims cyclists squirted water through her window and threatened to punch her after refusing to budge off the road.

Mosgiel police are trying to get to the bottom of an incident near Outram on Saturday in which the occupants of a car took a $12,000 road bike off a cyclist and dragged it several hundred metres down the road.

New Zealand cycling representative Logan Edgar, 19, and Otago teammate Shane Melrose, 30, had an row with two female motorists who ended up dragging Edgar’s $12,000 bike into their car and along the road.

However, the motorists, a 17-year-old passenger and her mother who was driving, contacted the Otago Daily Times yesterday with a different story.

The teenager, from Outram, said they came across the two cyclists riding on either side of the centre line.

“We tooted the horn … and called out some verbal abuse that was only out of frustration.” She said the cyclists responded by squirting water bottles in the window.

She said anger and frustration took over. She pulled the bike into the car and they drove off with the bike dragging alongside.

“I wanted to teach them a lesson.”

Even if the allegation over the water squirting is true, the appropriate response is not to grab the cycle and steal it.

Personally I doubt the squirting water allegation, unless they have some proof for it. But again, even if true, that does not excuse what was criminal behaviour.

What shocks me most is not that a 17 year old would act like a selfish moron. But that they would do so with their mother in the car, and the mother does nothing to stop her. Indeed, it sounds like she was encouraging her on.

UPDATE: The ODT has a story that confirms the girl is a liar, as she claimed to be with a friend in her 20s, and in fact it was her mother.

Tags:

152 Responses to “I blame the mother”

  1. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    “said they came across the two cyclists riding on either side of the centre line.”

    That’s what they do all the time down here, they’re notorious for it. Stock trucks and logging trucks are swerving off the road all over the place to avoid them. Whenever cyclists see a vehicle approaching they spread out, one in each lane.

    And many of the cyclists have long necked water bottles, so when cars coming up behind them can’t get past because the cyclists are blocking both lanes the cyclists can face backwards while they ride and reach into the car window with their long water bottles to get a good squirt in.

    And you can’t believe witnesses:

    A woman who lives near the scene of the incident, who declined to be named, said she saw the cyclists riding two abreast on the left-hand side of the road, and heard the car tooting.

    She said the car passed the cyclists and stopped suddenly, forcing one of the cyclists into gravel on the wrong side of the road, and catching the other behind the open passenger door.

    “They weren’t riding up the middle of the road.

    “I didn’t see any punches being thrown, but the girl was definitely going septic at the cyclists.”

    http://www.odt.co.nz/print/115493?page=0%2C1

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Viking2 (11,471 comments) says:

    Now come on David, we’re talking of two childish males attempting to intimate two ladies. Good on them and the pricks who behaved that way should lose their bikes for being such pratts.
    These pratts on bikes are a pain in the bum and its odds on they wouldn’t have done this to a big black hori in a 44 tonner.
    They desrve what they got. good lesson.
    And I’ll bet they vote Labour, the pratts on the bikes.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    So the car females were Act voters, just enforcing freedom on the roads?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. ummmm (61 comments) says:

    Arrogant cyclists got their comeuppance. Good job. Squirting water is an assault. Payback is a bitch.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Viking2 (11,471 comments) says:

    Yep, car owners pay for roads, cyclists don’t.
    In fact those two are probably on some ex offico govt. tit that pays for their play.
    Tell them to buy/build their own road or pay car rego fees like the rest of us including the ACC content on each bike they own.
    Want to share our play space then pay their share.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    Cyclists that also own cars should be able to use the roads, but cyclists who don’t shouldn’t?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. mattyroo (1,028 comments) says:

    Dead right Viking!

    The self righteousness of cyclists does more harm than good to their image. They seem to have some sort of misguided belief that they have more right to be on the road, than vehicles that actually pay to use the roads. You only ever hear these wankers complaining about motorists, you never hear the other side of the story, where some prize-idiot cyclist has done something to cause a vehicular accident.

    I find, that all too often, cyclists will purposely do something, that they know is blatantly dangerous and illegal, forcing a driver to then take evasive action to avoid squashing said idiot. The response from cyclists, when you go out of your way to save them harm from their own fuckwittery, is to usually laugh, or give you a the two-finger salute

    Soon, I’m gonna start bowling them – a couple of mangled deadly treadlies tangled in my bullbars might serve as a warning to some of the other fuckwits out there.

    P.S. Not all cyclists are fuckwits, it just seems that fuckwits are over-represented amongst cyclists.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. mattyroo (1,028 comments) says:

    Take the bus Petey – and pay the full fare of the service that you are using whilst you’re at it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Viking2 (11,471 comments) says:

    No Pete, you miss thepoint. I can’t ride a motor bike on the road without paying my dues nor a tractor nor can I tow a trailer without fees so why should cyclists be treated any differently. At the very least they should be required to register their bikes just so we can lower our ACC fees or even better fit the bastards with a hubometer and charge then road user fees.

    When you are getting a free ride at least be nice to the person paying allowing you to have that privilege.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    Don’t forget the pedestrians – they should have to wear rego plates too to pay for the footpaths.

    Funny how prejudices about certain groups seems to shade opinion on incidents.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Jibbering Gibbon (198 comments) says:

    A $12,000 bicycle? What’s it made of? Titanium and gold?

    Don’t forget the pedestrians – they should have to wear rego plates too to pay for the footpaths.

    Especially women in high heels. Like mini jackhammers, they are.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Viking2 (11,471 comments) says:

    mattyroo; name anywhere in NZ that bus passengers pay the full fare.
    In BOP the ratepayers and owners of EBOP pay 80% of each ride. All so the Tainui can have a bus fleet and certain social objectives can be net and paid for by said ratepayers.
    EBOP used to self fund until Clark can along with her mindless need to satisfy the voters of socialism and now every property has an increasing yearly EBOP rate attached to the already inflated Council rates.

    BIG BUSES. 3 or 4 passengers if they are busy. Outrageous waste of my money.

    By the way the average fare is about a dollar so if it was $4 the service might break even and still be cheaper than running a car.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Viking2 (11,471 comments) says:

    No Pete. Footpaths are provided by local bodies who are generously funded by the property owners around. I will remind you that tenants don’t pay rates either so they get to use local body amenities free as well. Place is full of bludgers.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Viking2 (11,471 comments) says:

    Yes possibly is made with titanium parts. Reason is the the weight compared to steel is way less.
    Titanium springs for instance are about 20% of the weight.
    Costs of course.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. mattyroo (1,028 comments) says:

    You’re preaching to the converted here Viking.

    If I had my way, every bus and train user would pay the full price of their fare. Both Central and Local gummint would be removed from the running of these services, they would go to a fully competitive model.

    When I am on the road, I do not let any bus past me, I will go out of my way to hold them up – if I am funding the ride for the bus’ passengers, why the fuck should they get any priority over me?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Jibbering Gibbon (198 comments) says:

    tenants don’t pay rates

    and pigs fly. The concept of market rates for rental properties makes it perfectly legal to include a portion of the projected cost of maintaining the property in each rent payment. To suggest thousands of landlords are carring the cost of rates for free is just silly.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. mattyroo (1,028 comments) says:

    Interesting point Gibbon.

    About 5 years ago, when I was renting, my landlord put up the rent, one of the reasons he cited was an increase in rates. When I mentioned that rates were not legally allowed to be included in the rent, he replied that they were not included in his rents.

    Ok, I said, so to justify your rental increase, please show me your budget, that excludes rates, which calculates fair market value of the rent at the new cost you have indicated to me.

    He came back with a downward revision in his rent increase.

    It wasn’t the money, it was his justification that got on my goat, as he thought I wouldn’t know that it is not legal to include rates in the rental fee.

    But, we all know that rates are included in calculating rental fees, it’s just not legal.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Murray (8,847 comments) says:

    Both mother and daughter are well known to the police. Which is all you need to know really.

    Scum raising scum.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Lance (2,655 comments) says:

    I drive a car most days,
    A portion of the drivers on the road are arrogant self centred shits unaware of the consequences of killing someone by their fucked up driving until it is too late.

    The potential devastation of the energy of speed x weight of a car vs the vulnerable cyclist (and pedestrian) is horrendous. There is a responsibility that is inherent with such potential even if provoked, like owning a gun. “Its OK to shoot him if he calls you names?

    Indeed because of this sort of TOTAL fucked attitude its too dangerous for kids to ride to school in most cities.
    So is this an ACT paradise?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Viking2 (11,471 comments) says:

    Ah no. Section 39 / 1 of the RTA specifically excludes rates so by definition no money collected from rents is in liew of rates.

    http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1986/0120/latest/DLM95084.html#DLM95084

    Outgoings

    (1) Subject to subsection (2) of this section, all outgoings (including rates, insurance premiums, and water charges) from time to time payable in respect of the premises shall, as between the landlord and the tenant, be payable by the landlord.

    Therefore any money collected from rent is applied to the landlords rent of their asset and not to payment of the rates nor insurance. That’s what the Act says. If you have surpus then you may sppend it how you will.

    The point still remains that tenants do not contribute in many rental situations to the local body services that are provided for their use. i.e. approximately 35% of people in the community are not contributing and indeed a much smaller number of property owners are.

    All that’s required to put that right is a small change to the RTA allowing landlords to account for the costs of running their property.
    Heatley has refused to make that change in case it frightens the voters. Problem for that attitude is that the people who are most likely to rent are Labour voters and when voting in local bodies are the ones who vote to spend someone else’s money. They are the ones who vote for Brown and the likes who are very happy to spend others cash.
    If for no other reason that in itself is why the Act should be changed.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. mjwilknz (605 comments) says:

    “We tooted the horn … and called out some verbal abuse that was only out of frustration.”

    This incident was destined to end badly whatever anyone did. I find it remarkable that drivers take such offence when a cyclist riding within the law just happens to inconvenience them slightly. Of course, that’s gonna happen when two groups of users are trying to share the same piece of real estate. The least drivers can do is relax and show some respect! Surely, we’re all human here!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Viking2 (11,471 comments) says:

    Matytyroo. why did he need to justify an increase to you?
    If you didn’t like the new rent go somewhere else. That’s the deal.
    You don’t ask any other business why they are charging more and have them justify it or roll over and play dead.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Viking2 (11,471 comments) says:

    That’s right non paying road hoggers impeding the ways. Great.
    No manners at all. despicable little give me give me’s of the current generation.

    Oh and not to mention the Road Code of course . A thousand years since I rad one but i doubt that it allows cyclists to ride down the middle of the road but rather says they should keep left at all times.

    Correct me if I’m wrong.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. mjwilknz (605 comments) says:

    @Lance, biking to school has only become unpopular the last 15 years or so. A convincing explanation of why parents have become more concerned about safety on the road is the introduction of compulsory helmet laws. This law has likely had the unintended consequence of decreasing the number of cyclists on our roads, which, in turn, decreases the number of cyclist/motorist interactions. That means cyclists and motorists are more distrusting of each other, as evidenced by people’s comments on here.

    What we’re left with is a well-intended law making our roads less safe. Another fantastic government intervention, eh?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    The potential devastation of the energy of speed x weight of a car vs the vulnerable cyclist (and pedestrian) is horrendous. There is a responsibility that is inherent with such potential even if provoked, like owning a gun. “Its OK to shoot him if he calls you names?

    Yes, and the responsibility lies with cyclists not to ride an unsuitable vehicle on infrastructure, designed and built for motorvehicles.

    Cyclists need to pay for their own infrastructure in the same way pedestrians pay for footpaths. In that situation any pedestrian on the road is at fault and any vehicle on the footpath is at fault.

    It is an absurd nonsense for bikes to share the road with cars, osh would not allow anything like this in the workplace. A safe environment needs to be built and paid for by the users.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    I find it remarkable that drivers take such offence when a cyclist riding within the law just happens to inconvenience them slightly.

    I take offense at cyclists who don’t know the road code. Riding two abreast with a car behind you is not allowed and it is bloody dangerous.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. mjwilknz (605 comments) says:

    @Viking2, when you come up behind cyclists it’s no surprise they’re taking up too much of the road. Of course, they can’t see that little sticker you’ve got on your car that says that YOU own the road!

    Show some respect! The great majority of (adult) cyclists are car owners, too, that just happen to be out enjoying a bit of sun. I’m sure none would have a wish to impede you, they’re just out riding. I’m sure you’ll find it much less stressful if you just RELAX and take a few more seconds to carefully pass them. There’s no need to become all stressed out about it. You won’t be doing your heart any favours!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. kaya (1,360 comments) says:

    Unfortunately for the cycling community there is a hardcore group of (usually) lycra wearing, 40/50 somethings who for some reason believe the road is THEIR personal domain and how fucking dare any other vehicle come within 5 metres of them or even show slight annoyance at their poor road behavior.
    Nobody knows what actually happened here except the people involved. I would guess there was some provocation form both sides.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. davidp (3,581 comments) says:

    I was visiting the Gold Coast a few years ago when some woman sailed through a red light in her car and plowed in to a pack of cyclists, hospitalising several. You’d think the public would be on the side of the cyclists, but this is the Gold Coast so the media was full of people banging on about cyclists not paying road tax and therefore not having any right to cycle. Then there were cyclists being run off the road and one reported having a gun waved at him out of a car window.

    So… Gold Coast bogans, women “well known to police”, and Viking2. Birds of a feather.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    The great majority of (adult) cyclists are car owners, too

    So what.

    I’m sure you’ll find it much less stressful if you just RELAX and take a few more seconds to carefully pass them.

    Cyclists will find it much less stressful when they pay for infrastructure designed for them and seperated from dangerous situations.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. mjwilknz (605 comments) says:

    @Sonny Blount, your own ignorance does nothing for your comments. Have another read of the road code. It says cyclists ARE allowed to ride two abreast. The only proviso is they don’t hold up the traffic. Riding two abreast in the middle of town is definitely not advisable, but two abreast on country roads? You just look selfish in the extreme if you’re a driver taking offence at that.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. mattyroo (1,028 comments) says:

    He justified the increase first, without my prompting, by putting it to me in writing, which is where he cited that rate increases were a contributor. This was his first mistake.

    I could have gone somewhere else, left him in the lurch, but I had been a good tenant, and was fully aware of the prevalent market forces at that time – which I believed justified him raising the rents. However, he was not within his legal rights to include rates in his increase. As I said before, I was not averse to the increase, I was averse to him treating me like a dumbfuck.

    As in any business, life is the same, the way to get ahead is by controlling costs, I was therefore obliged to myself to question the inclusion of rates in his increase. Simply because it was against the law.

    The rates in rental costs is always going to be a tricky one Viking, I have conflicting opinions on it myself, but I am fully aware that landlords will always include rates in their rental calculations.

    If you don’t like the current rules around property investment, can I suggest you get out of the market, instead of whinging about it, as you quite often do.

    Disclosure: Not an investment property owner and never likely to be, as their are far better uses of my capital than a lousy 7% return (which is on the high side for most rentals) on a high maintenance investment, such as a rental property.

    Apologies for dragging the thread off topic.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. mjwilknz (605 comments) says:

    @Kaya, I agree, both cyclists and motorists bear some blame for the present distrust of each other. That’s all the more reason for both motorists and cyclists to RELAX a little when dealing with each other.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    Cyclists also tend to congregate on popular routes over the weekend, such as Oriental Parade in Wellington. The ‘few seconds’ cars are supposed to take out for them can be repeated dozens of times over a few kms. None of these cyclists have suggested that they would approve of me bringing a few dozen of my mates to their workplace on Monday to each take a few moments out of their day.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. davidp (3,581 comments) says:

    Sonny Blount>Riding two abreast with a car behind you is not allowed and it is bloody dangerous.

    It IS allowed and is only dangerous if you try and pass while not accounting for oncoming traffic.

    Do you complain about pedestrians not funding pedestrian crossings, about how children insist on using pedestrian crossings despite holding you up, and how dangerous it is when you drive through the middle of a group of crossing children?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    Sounds like some car driving selfish pricks here.

    I’m a motorist, I’m not a cyclist, but I respect their rights. Sure I sometimes come behind a couple of cyclists and think bugger, they’re in my way, but it’s their way just as much. And it won’t kill me if I stay calm and a bit patient.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. mjwilknz (605 comments) says:

    @Sonny Blount, uh huh? Cyclists shouldn’t be allowed to congregate in “popular” areas, but cars should? You’re having a laugh, mate?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    13th, 2010 at 8:33 am

    @Sonny Blount, your own ignorance does nothing for your comments. Have another read of the road code. It says cyclists ARE allowed to ride two abreast. The only proviso is they don’t hold up the traffic.

    Ha ha. Another ignorant cyclist who only reads the parts of the road code they find agreeable. All vehicles travelling less than the speed limit must immediately pull over when a vehicle approaches behind them. Riding two abreast is not pulling over, this happens all the time in the central city and ignorant cyclists like yourself will stop to argue that they are allowed to ride two abreast even if a car is behind them. This pisses meof because I will not overtake cyclists riding two abreast or go within several metres of them so I end up tailing them at cyling speed until there is a suitable overtaking area (Oriental Parade is again bad for this).

    Riding two abreast on a country road is just plain dumb. I have cycled plenty myself, and I always cycle single file in the country (and the city which I only do if the city is safe for it) and if I want to have a yak to my riding buddies I go to a cafe like anybody else would.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Lance (2,655 comments) says:

    @wjwilknz

    That’s bullshit on stilts, too many drivers in cities are fucking dangerous arseholes.
    You are saying helmets are the reason parents don’t let their kids cycles to school!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    You’re reality cheque just bounced.

    It would amount to parental abuse to send a kid to school on a bike in Auckland. Walk maybe but not bike.

    Then again 20 years in the slammer for knocking a kid off a bike might be a bit more of a deterrent than the wet bus ticket that currently faces such offenders.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Murray (8,847 comments) says:

    Its fucking amazing the sense of entitlement and outright ownership that some people get from having paid to register their cars.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. mjwilknz (605 comments) says:

    @Lance, no, sorry, I’m not saying the helmet laws are the reason parents don’t let their kids bike to school, anymore. The evidence says parents don’t let their kids bike to school anymore because they think it’s unsafe. I AM suggesting that the reason they think it’s unsafe is that motorists are no longer used to being around bikes and that that’s because of the helmet laws.

    My reality cheque just bounced, huh? Give me a break, man. How about you just take a mo to understand better what I’m trying to say. I acknowledge I’m not always the best at explaining it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    Do you complain about pedestrians not funding pedestrian crossings, about how children insist on using pedestrian crossings despite holding you up, and how dangerous it is when you drive through the middle of a group of crossing children?

    Yes I do. Firstly you are talking about clearly delineated seperate infratructures so we are in a far better situation than with cyclists. Zebra crossings work as a cheap fix in some areas and likewise I would not expect a cyling infrastructure to have zero effect on vehicle traffic. Obviously zebra crossings are not used on major arterial routes, under or overpasses are built. Footpaths also need to have a impact barrier between them and the road wherever possible, we could start with the schools.

    Secondly as mentioned before footpaths are paid for through rates. I am not particularly fussy about who or how infrastructure is paid for, but the current situation of shared roads for bikes and cars is backwards and dangerous. Bicylces as vehicles using the road should be warranted for safety like any other vehicle, including brake and lighting tests. I don’t understand the point of impact safety being an issue for cars but not other vehicles on the road.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. davidp (3,581 comments) says:

    Lance>You are saying helmets are the reason parents don’t let their kids cycles to school

    I don’t know. But it is fairly well documented that cycle helmets make cycling more dangerous. Countries where cycling is commonplace are always safer than countries where cycling is rare. Safety in numbers, basically. The number of people cycling in NZ fell off dramatically (22% apparently) after helmet laws were enacted (as it did in every Australian state), leaving it more dangerous for those left.

    You certainly don’t hear anyone in the Netherlands banging on about how cyclists get in their way. Few people wear helmets and cycling is very safe.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. Inventory2 (10,342 comments) says:

    Trevor Mallard would have dealt with it differently ….

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    Its fucking amazing the sense of entitlement and outright ownership that some people get from having paid to register their cars.

    No, it’s called some realistic sense of safety. I have flown over a couple of cars riding bikes, it is absurd that we let this situation continue. The next person who dies because of vehicle to bycycle impact will be a preventable death that is only allowed to continue because of unrealistic and unworkable expectations.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    @Sonny Blount, uh huh? Cyclists shouldn’t be allowed to congregate in “popular” areas, but cars should? You’re having a laugh, mate?

    wtf?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. cabbage (455 comments) says:

    A portion of the drivers on the road are arrogant self centred shits unaware of the consequences of killing someone by their fucked up driving until it is too late.

    The potential devastation of the energy of speed x weight of a car vs the vulnerable cyclist (and pedestrian) is horrendous. There is a responsibility that is inherent with such potential even if provoked, like owning a gun. “Its OK to shoot him if he calls you names?

    Very well said Lance. As a Motorist, a Motorcyclist and a cyclist, I am constantly flabbergasted at the selfish, self centered behaviour of the majority of cage drivers on our roads. It seems to me (no matter what vehicle i happen to be using at the time) that the majority of road users in NZ simply have no fucking clue.

    There is a serious inability to adhere to the most basic of road rules – Indicating (and giving 3 seconds warning when the indicators actually are used), Keeping Left, appropriately giving way, merging corectly… The list just goes on. It boils down to one simple fact – Most road users in this country are so caught up in their own little bubble of self importance, that they fail to comprehend that there are other people in or on the other vehicles around them.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    Sounds like some car driving selfish pricks here.

    I’m a motorist, I’m not a cyclist, but I respect their rights. Sure I sometimes come behind a couple of cyclists and think bugger, they’re in my way, but it’s their way just as much. And it won’t kill me if I stay calm and a bit patient.

    I am extremely wary of cyclists and keep my distance from them on the road. It is when you do this Pete that there are significant disruptions to infrastructure. If you are willing to pass cyclists in tight situation then yes, its not much bother. But if you actually stay back and slow down until it is safe then they muck up the roads. It does actually matter whether average traffic speeds are 50kmh or 20kmh.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. davidp (3,581 comments) says:

    Sonny Blount>Obviously zebra crossings are not used on major arterial routes

    But there are dozens around Oriental Bay. The ‘few seconds’ cars are supposed to take out for them can be repeated dozens of times over a few kms (Statement copyright S Blount), holding up your Sunday drive by a minute or more. Best that you just keep going, tooting your horn so that the pedestrians can get out of your way. Then if any of them shout or flip you a finger you can lecture them about how you pay for the road but they don’t, and how they better not complain because you’re surrounded by tonnes of metal and they’re not so they better watch it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. mjwilknz (605 comments) says:

    @Sonny Blount, my apologies, I should not have called you ignorant. I retract that comment. However, I still believe you incorrect on this one. If you please, have a look at the second bullet on page 20 of the road code in the link below.

    I have little idea why you are expecting to drive at the speed limit around Oriental Bay, anyway. The place has parked cars for Africa! A group of cyclists riding at 30kmh isn’t really going to hold you up. You’ll get past them soon enough (after Point Jerningham).

    In regard to riding two abreast in the country, you’re joking, right? You’d ride for hours on end with your mate on your shoulder not chatting to him because you believe cyclists aren’t allowed to ride two abreast, in spite of good evidence they are. You’re not really a cyclist, are you?

    http://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/cyclists-road-code/docs/cyclist-code-2009-high.pdf

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    Very well said Lance. As a Motorist, a Motorcyclist and a cyclist, I am constantly flabbergasted at the selfish, self centered behaviour of the majority of cage drivers on our roads. It seems to me (no matter what vehicle i happen to be using at the time) that the majority of road users in NZ simply have no fucking clue.

    There is a serious inability to adehere to the most basic of road rules – Indicating (and giving 3 seconds warning when the indicators actually are used), Keeping Left, appropriately giving way, merging corectly… The list just goes on. It boils down to one simple fact – Most road users in this country are so caught up in their own little bubble of self importance, that they fail to comprehend that there are other people in or on the other vehicles around them.

    This is what cyclists need to wake up to. We let the majority if the poulation drive cars within reason. This contains many people who have sub 100 IQs and are nearly illiterate, they may be able to manage safely on a road with cars, but adding cycles to the mix is pushing it. We should be making licensing far more rigourous but even then, we should base our decision making on the safest way to proceed based on actual observations of what skill level the population has rather than wishful thinking of what we would like to see.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. mjwilknz (605 comments) says:

    davidp, don’t tempt him. ;-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    But there are dozens around Oriental Bay. The ‘few seconds’ cars are supposed to take out for them can be repeated dozens of times over a few kms (Statement copyright S Blount), holding up your Sunday drive by a minute or more. Best that you just keep going, tooting your horn so that the pedestrians can get out of your way.

    You obviously haven’t lived at one end of Oriental Parade like I have. And I work on Sundays and much of my work I am running errands in my car. It’s much longer than the 1km strecth by Freyberg pool.

    Best that you just keep going, tooting your horn so that the pedestrians can get out of your way. Then if any of them shout or flip you a finger you can lecture them about how you pay for the road but they don’t, and how they better not complain because you’re surrounded by tonnes of metal and they’re not so they better watch it.

    Go fuck yourself ignoramus.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. mjwilknz (605 comments) says:

    @Sonny Blount, you seem upset that cyclists aren’t treated exactly like drivers by the authorities. Do you think the potential for a driver vs. a cyclist to maim or kill people has anything to do with this?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    In regard to riding two abreast in the country, you’re joking, right? You’d ride for hours on end with your mate on your shoulder not chatting to him because you believe cyclists aren’t allowed to ride two abreast, in spite of good evidence they are. You’re not really a cyclist, are you?

    So you’re calling me a liar?

    I didn’t say I didn’t do it because of the rules.

    1. Like I said, on a 2 week cycling trip we found more than enough time to chat at rest stops and when we weren’t cyling.

    2. It is easier to slipstream and keep a constant pace.

    3. Theres no point constantly changing your formation when a car or truck comes up behind you or the road changes.

    I won’t ride a bike in Wellington as it’s not suitable but I also used to commute a good 10km before and after nightfall in Canterbury.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    @Sonny Blount, you seem upset that cyclists aren’t treated exactly like drivers by the authorities. Do you think the potential for a driver vs. a cyclist to maim or kill people has anything to do with this?

    Again, wtf?

    There is great potential for harm in cyclist v rollerblader or cyclist v skateboarder also. This is why they are not allowed on the road with cars.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. Rufus (667 comments) says:

    Davidp 8:54 You certainly don’t hear anyone in the Netherlands banging on about how cyclists get in their way. Few people wear helmets and cycling is very safe.

    Of course, apart from the towns and villages, where traffic is very slow anyway, the majority of Dutch cyclists cycle on dedicated bike paths. No cars to worry about.

    Tough one.

    I’m a car owner, so pay for my use of the road. I’m also a keen cyclist, though not of the lycra-wearing kind.

    There’s a lot of arrogant idiots in both camps.

    When I’m cycling, I often get very annoyed and angry with bad drivers, especially in town. It happens regularly that I’ve been cut off, or had car doors opened just in front of me. So far I’ve been lucky, but can see how easily a cyclist can get hit/squashed etc.

    When I’m driving, I often encounter a mob of spandex-clad weekend warriors, clogging up the roads. Not much fun to get stuck behind, especially out in the country and they refuse to go single file and allow cars the chance to pass.

    I try to ride/drive the way Id’ want others too if the roles were reversed. Work sometimes, but I guess there will always be crappy cyclists/drivers out there to annoy others.

    Rufus

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. cabbage (455 comments) says:

    @Sonny – But Cycles are vehicles too, and to be frank we are not adding bicycles into the mix. However it would be more correct to say that we have added cars into the mix – That is, Bikes have been around for longer than cars. Especially as personal transport.

    we should base our decision making on the safest way to proceed based on actual observations of what skill level the population has rather than wishful thinking of what we would like to see.

    I Agree. Immediate cognitive testing of the entire licensed population would be a good start.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    Always ride as near as you can to the left side of the road. If you are holding back traffic you must move as far as possible to the left side of the road to allow traffic to pass, as soon as you can. However, you do need to cycle in a sensible position on the road to keep safe.

    Moving as far left as possible does not include riding two abreast.

    Riding two abreast is fine so long as there is not traffic immediatley behind you travelling less than the speed limit. This is the situation where cyclists get it wrong.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. mattyroo (1,028 comments) says:

    It boils down to one simple fact – Most road users in this country are so caught up in their own little bubble of self importance, that they fail to comprehend that there are other people in or on the other vehicles around them.

    Good point Cabbage. It is like a self-fulfilling prophecy, they won’t treat us with respect, because we don’t treat them with respect, and because neither party respects the other, no respect is ever going to be earned or reciprocated.

    Attitudes of both parties are the nub of the issue. I’m representative of the issue, I hate the fuckers, they hate me.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. davidp (3,581 comments) says:

    Sonny Blount>Go fuck yourself ignoramus.

    You apparently have no idea that your own words are painting you as a jerk who thinks he owns the road and everyone else should get out of your way. Where else have we seen such a lack of self awareness recently?

    You’re Andy Haden and I claim my $5!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    @Sonny – But Cycles are vehicles too, and to be frank we are not adding bicycles into the mix. However it would be more correct to say that we have added cars into the mix – That is, Bikes have been around for longer than cars. Especially as personal transport.

    To the roads you numpty. Designed and paid for by motorvehicles for the last 100 years.

    We now require them to provide another purpose. Our design parameters for roading need to change and the funding for this needs to be shared equitably by those who use it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    We haven’t become a selfish society have we? Better get the givmint to fix it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    You apparently have no idea that your own words are painting you as a jerk who thinks he owns the road and everyone else should get out of your way. Where else have we seen such a lack of self awareness recently?

    Ok davidp, let the carnage continue and no need to think of any solutions or think of others. Maybe I’ll bump into you at the next memorial for someone killed whilst cycling.

    BTW, you are the one who ventured to ad hominem.

    Deaths per billion passenger-kilometres
    Air 0.05
    Bus 0.4
    Van 1.2
    Water 2.6
    Car 3.1
    Bicycle 44.6
    Foot 54.2
    Motorcycle 108.9

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    Sonny, are you suggesting we all travel to the moon because that must have the safest passenger-kilometre record?

    And it’s a bugger I don’t have an airport outside my home and work.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. cabbage (455 comments) says:

    We now require them to provide another purpose. Our design parameters for roading need to change and the funding for this needs to be shared equitably by those who use it.

    Oh I agree wholeheartedly. However, I’d moot that many cyclists already pay their fair share. For example, I pay rego for Three cars and one Motorcycle. Only two of those vehicles are being used at any given moment. the other two are sitting idle, and being unfairly levied.

    A sensible solution would be to levy the user rather than the vehicle, with the rates defined by which vehicles one is licensed to use on the roads, with perhaps children having dispensation in the licensing process for bicycles. Obviously this has its flaws but would i think, be a good basis for debate and investigation.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. PaulD (97 comments) says:

    davidp @ 9.00am “Sonny Blount>Obviously zebra crossings are not used on major arterial routes

    But there are dozens around Oriental Bay. ” Toning down the hyperbole, there are six (6) pedestrian crossings in the whole length of Oriental Parade.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. mjwilknz (605 comments) says:

    @Sonny Blount:

    “There is great potential for harm in cyclist v rollerblader or cyclist v skateboarder also. This is why they are not allowed on the road with cars.”

    Yep, I agree. That’s why cyclists are not allowed to ride on footpaths.

    In regard to calling you a liar, no, I didn’t mean to suggest that you’d never ridden, more than you didn’t ride regularly in groups. Your comments suggest you don’t.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    However, I’d moot that many cyclists already pay their fair share. For example, I pay rego for Three cars and one Motorcycle

    This argument is tiresome as as somebody who is paying for multiple cars you should know it is not true.

    I rode a bike throughout my university years and did not own a car, as did many others.

    A sensible solution would be to levy the user rather than the vehicle, with the rates defined by which vehicles one is licensed to use on the roads

    This could work. I still believe that bikes should get safety checks (warrants), they could be policed at check points and whilst parked in the city the same as cars. Toll lanes for bikes also isn’t out of the question.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    But there are dozens around Oriental Bay. ” Toning down the hyperbole, there are six (6) pedestrian crossings in the whole length of Oriental Parade.

    And?

    There are none on Wellington Motorway.

    Zebra crossings on Oriental Parade do not justify cyclists riding two abreast and holding up traffic along the length.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    In regard to calling you a liar, no, I didn’t mean to suggest that you’d never ridden, more than you didn’t ride regularly in groups. Your comments suggest you don’t.

    No I don’t and haven’t.

    Outside of controlled races, is there a reason they can’t ride single file?

    And what are they talking about and why can’t they do that at a cafe?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. RRM (9,924 comments) says:

    Cyclists vs women drivers, obviously pretty bolshey ones at that. What a f*cking nightmare that will be for the cops to sort out.

    The upside is that, no matter who loses this fight, society will be the winner.

    If you’re doing less than [speed limit - 10km/h] then GTFO of the way and don’t hold other people up. It’s not their road and it’s not your road either, try to show some common courtesy.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    No cyclists on motorways either.

    Is creating a selfish stuff-everyone-else society part of the socialist plot?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. cabbage (455 comments) says:

    Outside of controlled races, is there a reason they can’t ride single file?

    I second this.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. MT_Tinman (3,187 comments) says:

    As soon as cycle scum pay their own way (via a registration vest) I’ll offer them some respect.

    Meantime I’m still laughing my cock off at the thought of two fit young cyclist being dealt to by a 17YO sheila.

    Move aside Ms Vili, we have another contender for NZ’s greatest woman. ;-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  76. mjwilknz (605 comments) says:

    @Sonny Blount, would you be willing to try riding in a group sometime? Would you want to see what all the fuss is about; why cyclists do what they do?

    There is no reason cyclists can’t ride single file – the Road Code says they have to, sometimes. The reason they prefer to ride two abreast is that it’s more interesting chatting to people than remaining silent. If you ruled that there be no riding two abreast, then you’d get much much less people riding. Be a great way to kill the sport, really.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  77. RRM (9,924 comments) says:

    I ride a bike and I drive a car.

    On my bike I can’t do anywhere near the full speed limit, therefore I stay near the side of the road where I feel safer and where I don’t clash with fast-moving traffic.

    In my car, I don’t get right up cyclist’s arses, I don’t cut them off or pass them in narrow places where there isn’t room, and I don’t blow my horn and hurl abuse at them for having the impertinence to use public roads.

    All of this is just Do Unto Others As You Would Have Others Do Unto You.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  78. Komata (1,191 comments) says:

    In reading all that has been written so far it appears that the ‘lycra-wearing, light-bike riding’ cyclists are saints and the owners of all other vehicles arre ogres.

    If only it was so.

    The average ‘lycra-wearer’ is probably very law-abiding, but, as with all sectors of society, it is inevitably a small group that ruins things for others.

    This small group has been known to exhibit the following characteristics:

    1. Suddenly pulling out in front of a car (without looking first) when it is two meters away (and accelerating to pass) then (the cyclist) getting all abusive when it is almost impaled.

    2. Travelling in rapidly expanding and contracting packs on all sides of any road – and again, being annoyed when frustrated motorists dare to toot (out of courtesy) at them to warn they are coming past.

    3. Stopping in packs just around and beyond blind corners, while simultaneously spread all over the left-hand side of the road; and again becoming upset when they get ‘near-missed’ by vehicles. Evidently never considering that they have contributed to their own misfortune.

    4. Having the belief that it is their right to go anywhere across any road when they want to and that the road code is only for idiots – never for cyclists

    5. Holding the view that while riding single-file is permissable it is terribly anti-social, and that any number tyhat is more than one is ideal for conversations and discussions, irrespective of where they might be and how many others are being onconvenienced by their actions; while if the number just happens to expand to take up the entire Left-hand side of the road, then so much the better – cyclists have ‘rights’ too are ‘entitled’ to do so., etc, etc, etc . . .

    There are lots of other examples

    Casual observation over the years would seem to indicate that the owners of these lycra suits and light-bikes hold the sincere belief that they can do whatever they want to on the road, without fear of consequence and that they are also perfectly entitled to become extremely upset, (to the point of violence), when other road-users, frustrated by their antics, and blocked-off ‘because its fun’ from going around them, become annoyed at their stupidiity, and selfishness. As an example, for those who want to see this in action, I would suggest the Hutt Road on a Saturday morning, or a drive up past Silverstream, early on a Sunday (but be very careful going around the corners!!!)

    It may be a mid-life crisis thing but, sadly, many of the owners of these shiney toys are actually totally selfish and self-centred, caring for no-one else and totally obsessed with their toys and hobby.

    And the funny thing is that when they cause accidents (as they certainly do), there is never a Copper in sight and it is always the motorists fault, never, ever, ever, the cyclists. (If only that were true)

    Odd that.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  79. RRM (9,924 comments) says:

    mjwilknz –
    I remember when I lived in Auckland a few years ago, every morning Tamaki Drive heading out of town would be blocked by a black ML63AMG SUV doing about 25km/h with its hazard lights on, acting as a safety car for a gaggle of about 50 cyclists who were taking up the whole road. Tamaki Drive is one of NZ’s few roads that is paralleled by a full cycle path along its entire length, but that wasn’t good enough for the cyclists, they wanted to use the road not the cycle path. The WHOLE road. Never mind that people like me needed to get to work, their leisure time was more important.

    C units like these are the reason for attitudes like MT_Tinman ” blah blah blah CYCLE SCUM blah blah blah…” It’s not a very fair or attractive attitude, but it doesn’t come from nowhere.

    Cyclists are people too, but some cyclists are selfish pricks, just as some non-cyclists are. People need to grow up on both sides of this debate.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  80. RightNow (6,994 comments) says:

    What the road code (for cyclists) actually says:
    http://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/roadcode/cyclist-code/about-cycling/rules.html

    Always ride as near as you can to the left side of the road. If you are holding back traffic you must move as far as possible to the left side of the road to allow traffic to pass, as soon as you can. However, you do need to cycle in a sensible position on the road to keep safe.

    Two cyclists can ride next to each other but should take into account the keep left rule and not hold back traffic. Three or more people cycling next to each other is illegal, except in the case of a road race that has been given traffic management approval from a road controlling authority.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  81. RightNow (6,994 comments) says:

    While we’re on the subject of road rules, I’d like to take this opportunity to remind everybody that in the situation of you wanting to turn right and another car on your right also making a right turn, you must give way to the other car as it is crossing from your right. Many is the time I’ve had to stop suddenly because of idiots who don’t understand this rule.
    There is a handy guide to remember who should give way: the car that would be hit on the driver’s side should give way.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  82. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    No cyclists on motorways either.

    Is creating a selfish stuff-everyone-else society part of the socialist plot?

    Pete, why do you continue to disappoint with this deliberately lazy trolling.

    Cycling is becoming popular enough and the demand is such that we need to start on motorways for cyclists.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  83. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    There is no reason cyclists can’t ride single file – the Road Code says they have to, sometimes. The reason they prefer to ride two abreast is that it’s more interesting chatting to people than remaining silent. If you ruled that there be no riding two abreast, then you’d get much much less people riding. Be a great way to kill the sport, really.

    And talking on cellphones makes driving much less interesting.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  84. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    I don’t think it’s lazy to point things out like I did – although it might be a bit subtle and sarcastic for some, especially those who think that right wing freedom means that they should be able to do anything they please and everyone else should keep out of their way.

    Cycling is becoming popular enough and the demand is such that we need to start on motorways for cyclists.

    National cycleways?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  85. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    What you think is subtle and sarcastic the rest of us think is tiresome and thick.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  86. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    And not being able to talk on cellphones makes driving much less interesting.

    fixed

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  87. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    Sonny, those who like digging at others shouldn’t complain when others call a spade a spade.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  88. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    Sonny, are you suggesting we all travel to the moon because that must have the safest passenger-kilometre record?

    And it’s a bugger I don’t have an airport outside my home and work.

    Notice how you got no response to this Pete. Thats because its a stupid comment.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  89. mjwilknz (605 comments) says:

    RRM, I definitely agree that both cyclists and drivers share some blame. Although I haven’t noticed anyone mention it on here, one unfortunate habit of cyclists is running red lights at busy intersections. Sure, lights at many smaller intersections commonly don’t detect bikes and so red lights will get run, but no such argument applies to busy intersections where cars are waiting to get round.

    RE: your SUV holding up traffic on Tamaki Drive, it’s nigh on impossible for any sort of “gaggle” of cyclists to use cycle lanes. These lanes have truck loads of pedestrians and kids on bikes – no place for a group of lycra-ed cyclists. The road rules are the road rules, though, and if your SUV wasn’t keeping left and/or the cyclists were riding more than two abreast, you have a legitimate complaint. If they weren’t, I don’t believe you have much recourse except to get up and leave for work earlier. Them’s the breaks!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  90. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    Notice there’s now one stupid response.

    Point is Sonny, air travel might be one of the safest ways to travel per kilometre but we can’t travel everywhere by air.

    Note also many cyclist deaths are caused by cars anyway, those figures don’t factor that in.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  91. mjwilknz (605 comments) says:

    @Sonny Blount, the powers that be decided that talking on a cellphone while driving was dangerous enough to make illegal. They have yet to make the same decision re: riding two abreast. I guess you’ll just have to deal with it until they do.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  92. mjwilknz (605 comments) says:

    @Pete, really? You’re backing national cycleways? I reckon “weekend warriors” would take some convincing to use them. You may convince me otherwise, but my initial expectation is that they’ll become full of pedestrians and kids on bikes, just like all the other cycle lanes. There doesn’t seem much avoiding of cyclists and drivers becoming more tolerant of each other.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  93. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    Point is Sonny, air travel might be one of the safest ways to travel per kilometre but we can’t travel everywhere by air.

    Don’t think anybody didn’t realise this. I’m waiting but no epiphany seems to be arising from reading this.

    Note also many cyclist deaths are caused by cars anyway, those figures don’t factor that in.

    Where did I say that those figures had anything to do with the cause of death. I can’t believe how underperforming your brain is.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  94. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    @Sonny Blount, the powers that be decided that talking on a cellphone while driving was dangerous enough to make illegal. They have yet to make the same decision re: riding two abreast. I guess you’ll just have to deal with it until they do.

    No I don’t have to deal with it because it is currently illegal to ride two abreast with traffic follwing at less than the speed limit.

    And as a reminder for the comparative dangers of the activities of driving and riding:

    Deaths per billion passenger-kilometres

    Car 3.1
    Bicycle 44.6

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  95. dog_eat_dog (781 comments) says:

    Cyclists have to be single file when you pass parked vehicles.
    It is an offence to obstruct the flow of traffic.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  96. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    Cyclists and motorists are never going to coexist safely on the same piece of roadway. And this is not because of the nature of the individuals, it is becuase of the disparate nature of the activities.

    Car:
    1500kg
    50kmh
    large, well lit, visible
    Safety certified and able to withstand substantial impacts

    Bycyle:
    10kg
    25kmh
    barely visible
    offers no protection, no 3rd party safety tests.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  97. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    Ok Sonny, maybe you were being to subtle with your table of deaths – what point were you making? What is the biggest danger to cyclists?

    Car on car causes a few problems too – should cars travel on separate roads?

    mjwilknz, I was asking Sonny if he was in favour of National’s cycleways.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  98. mjwilknz (605 comments) says:

    Sonny, sorry to come back to you on this, but are you willing to ride in a group at some stage to see what it’s like?

    On your data on the comparative dangers, no one is more aware of the danger of bike riding than the bike riders, themselves. What’s your point?

    ,

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  99. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    Using a bycyle on a road used by cars is inappropriate and unsafe. This is supported by the data I showed.

    The fault is inconsequential, it happens.

    We have tolerated this situation and the related casualties up until now. But at some point a dedicated infrastructure needs to be built for cycling, this will be very expensive and cyclists need to pay.

    Sonny, sorry to come back to you on this, but are you willing to ride in a group at some stage to see what it’s like?

    Why would I want to? What purpose would I have where I need to do this?

    I have never needed to drive in convoy and don’t see a need to.

    I would commute to work on a bike in a city where I feel safe (Parts of Chch & small towns like Palmy, not Wellington)

    I would go on a bike tour or day trip with mates again. I could not forsee any reason to ride in other than single file.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  100. krazykiwi (9,186 comments) says:

    Good to see the cyclist-haters out here in force. Of course there are some idiot cyclist, just as there are unskilled, idiotic drivers.

    Having ridden in France and Italy I can say with absolute certainty that drivers there are much more courteous and careful than here in NZ.. by a long shot. They share the same roads – often more narrow and winding.

    The “I pay for this road, so get out of my way or I’ll squash you like a bug” attitude is truly pathetic. I must remember this the next time I fill up boat or the lawnmower.. that I’m subsidizing those bastard motorists.

    Time for the hard-core haters to realise that you share a resource (roading) with an number of users (petrol/diesel vehicles, foot, pedal, electric vehicles etc etc) and that feeling aggrieved at having your journey delayed a few seconds in order to ensure the safety of another road user is part of being a civilized grown-up. If the French can do this so can we.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  101. krazykiwi (9,186 comments) says:

    Oh.. and most cyclists are also drivers, while few drivers are cyclists.

    If there is any ‘balance’ to be offered in this discussion it comes from cyclists.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  102. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    Oh.. and most cyclists are also drivers, while few drivers are cyclists.

    If there is any ‘balance’ to be offered in this discussion it comes from cyclists.

    So you think most cyclists have no experience of cycling. This would make them less aware of the issues and risks of cyclists, this is the reality of the drivers on the road and is what must be considered in any solution.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  103. mjwilknz (605 comments) says:

    Sonny, your reply to Krazykiwi shows just why you best try cycling in a group. You may find your views on cycling in groups more acceptable to people if you’ve actually experienced group cycling before you make them. Otherwise your arguments look like they lack careful consideration – the let-them-eat-cake sort of thing!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  104. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    Krazykiwi, who paid you to say that? (at 12:09 pm) It was money well spent.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  105. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    The “I pay for this road, so get out of my way or I’ll squash you like a bug” attitude is truly pathetic.

    That is not the attitude of most people that are dissatisfied with bycycles on roads today.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  106. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    Sonny, your reply to Krazykiwi shows just why you best try cycling in a group.

    Why? If it is not safe I’m not interested.

    I don’t expect to have an absolute right to do dangerous things, this s why drinking and texting while driving are banned.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  107. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    So you think most cyclists have no experience of cycling.

    This is supposed to say most drivers have no experience of cycling.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  108. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    Sonny, your reply to Krazykiwi shows just why you best try cycling in a group.

    I run a lot also and don’t particularly desire to do it in groups. I do not see why cyclists see it as particularly neccessary.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  109. mjwilknz (605 comments) says:

    Sonny Blount, walking down the road is dangerous! If you don’t want to cycle because it’s not safe, you might as well stay at home all day wrapped up in cotton wool. Aren’t you at least a little curious why cyclists (especially the kind, caring, risk-adverse ones) do what they do?

    Finally, if the attitude of many drivers isn’t “I pay for this road, so get out of my way or I’ll squash you like a bug”, what is it?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  110. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    Having ridden in France and Italy I can say with absolute certainty that drivers there are much more courteous and careful than here in NZ.

    2 countries renowned for their efficiency.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  111. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    Sonny Blount, walking down the road is dangerous! If you don’t want to cycle because it’s not safe, you might as well stay at home all day wrapped up in cotton wool. Aren’t you at least a little curious why cyclists (especially the kind, caring, risk-adverse ones) do what they do?

    I’ve done plenty of it.

    And the footpaths need some work too. There should be a proper crash barrier between the vehicles and the pedestrians, especially outside of schools.

    If this was done traffic would also flow a lot better.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  112. mjwilknz (605 comments) says:

    Sonny, if you do something that’s dangerous and hold views on it (such as the view there should be more guardrails), why aren’t you willing to bunch ride?

    On the guardrails, who do you think should pay for it?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  113. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    Finally, if the attitude of many drivers isn’t “I pay for this road, so get out of my way or I’ll squash you like a bug”, what is it?

    That the current situation is ridiculous. No driver wants to be involved with an accident that involves the death of a cyclist.

    What do you expect our infrastructure to look like in 50 years time? The same as today?

    Whatever it is we are aiming towards we have to start now, I don’t think we have shown much vision or ambition over the last 50 years.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  114. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    Sonny, if you do something that’s dangerous and hold views on it (such as the view there should be more guardrails), why aren’t you willing to bunch ride?

    Why would I want to? What is the benefit for me in doing so?

    On the guardrails, who do you think should pay for it?

    Whoever pays for the footpaths.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  115. dog_eat_dog (781 comments) says:

    As a motorist, I can tell you I find it most annoying that cyclists are not registered or cannot be indentified. I commute along Tamaki Drive and if you’re held up by a group of cyclists riding five wide, there’s not a damn thing you can do about it. They are accountable to no one. If everyone obeyed the traffic management laws, then it’d be fine with me, but I do think it’s unfair that the cycle lobby can say what they want about motorists while getting away with doing whatever they please.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  116. mjwilknz (605 comments) says:

    No driver wants to be involved with an accident that involves the death of a cyclist.

    I imagine they don’t at all (I certainly don’t when I’m driving!). However, that doesn’t preclude them from honking and waving their figure as soon as a cyclist looks remotely like impeding their trip, does it?

    What do you expect our infrastructure to look like in 50 years time? The same as today? Whatever it is we are aiming towards we have to start now, I don’t think we have shown much vision or ambition over the last 50 years.

    Yeah right! I’m sure that no one has a clue what infrastructure looks like in 50 years time. Starting now would be a seriously unwise thing when we don’t know what cars will look like in 50 years time, much less whether they’ll even remain earth-bound. Good luck to you if you want to plan so far out, but please do it with someone else’s money.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  117. KevinH (1,227 comments) says:

    So I guess it’s unsafe to go bike riding in Otago just in case you piss the locals off.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  118. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    Yeah right! I’m sure that no one has a clue what infrastructure looks like in 50 years time. Starting now would be a seriously unwise thing when we don’t know what cars will look like in 50 years time, much less whether they’ll even remain earth-bound. Good luck to you if you want to plan so far out, but please do it with someone else’s money.

    This kind of thinking is why our major roads still operate at the same speed that they did in 1969.

    Its not that big a deal to cut a few extra metres and seal it when putting in new roads or upgrading/maintaining current ones.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  119. MT_Tinman (3,187 comments) says:

    # KevinH (25) Says:
    July 13th, 2010 at 2:13 pm

    So I guess it’s unsafe to go bike riding in Otago just in case you piss the locals off.

    More it’s unsafe to go bike riding in Otago if you’re weak as cats piss and can’t handle a pissed off 17 YO sheila.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  120. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    However, that doesn’t preclude them from honking and waving their figure as soon as a cyclist looks remotely like impeding their trip, does it?

    You also get that kind of thing while driving if you don’t indicate, pull out in front of someone, run a light etc etc

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  121. mjwilknz (605 comments) says:

    Sonny, I suggest with some confidence that the reason the speed limit hasn’t risen since then is that when roads (and cars) get made safer, drivers start taking more risks! Take a look at the book below if you want to look at why I said that.

    Just a few extra metres to roads, huh? You’re not an engineer, are you? Given how long roads are, a few extra metres costs a huge amount. The extra cost is particuarly an issue around Wgtn (especially at your favourite place of Oriental Bay), where there’s just no more room to put “a few extra metres”.

    http://books.google.co.nz/books?id=_5KJG2rD8rEC&dq=traffic&hl=en&ei=4tE7TOjDH4qCsQOq18DbCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAA

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  122. mjwilknz (605 comments) says:

    Sonny, do you get the honking and finger waving if you’re driving a bit slower than the rest of the traffic? Or do people just shrug their shoulders and respectfully look for a safe place to pass?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  123. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    There’s no room to put the extra metres because it wasn’t included in the planning. Start including it in the planning, upgrade those places where possible and when affordable.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  124. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    Sonny, do you get the honking and finger waving if you’re driving a bit slower than the rest of the traffic? Or do people just shrug their shoulders and respectfully look for a safe place to pass?

    Of course, and far more chance a motorist will get honked for going as slow as a bicycle than the chance a cyclist will.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  125. mjwilknz (605 comments) says:

    On the honking and finger waving, unlike you, I don’t get any while I’m driving. I get plenty while I’m cycling.

    … far more frequently than cyclists do.

    How would you know? You’re the one refusing my encouragement to bunch ride so you can understand better, remember.

    There’s no more room because people forgot to plan? Oh sorry, planners are meant to predict all things perfectly, are they? How’d the 1855 earthquake happen then? Planning’s for people in knee high socks and walk shorts, people who can’t handle a bit of spontaneity; they’re otherwise known as the fun police. You’re not one of those types, are you? Maybe that’s why you dislike cyclists – they look too much like they’re having fun.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  126. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    There’s no more room because people forgot to plan? Oh sorry, planners are meant to predict all things perfectly, are they? How’d the 1855 earthquake happen then? Planning’s for people in knee high socks and walk shorts, people who can’t handle a bit of spontaneity; they’re otherwise known as the fun police. You’re not one of those types, are you? Maybe that’s why you dislike cyclists – they look too much like they’re having fun.

    God your a dickhead.

    Ok, fuck the cyclists. Lets keep making narrow roads with no allowances made for them.

    We have known about the issue of cyclists for the last few decades, at any time we can alter the way we design our roads for them, why don’t we get serious now?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  127. mjwilknz (605 comments) says:

    What’s up, Sonny? Can’t handle a bit of fun being poked in your direction? Oh well, have a good day, eh?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  128. Rick Rowling (813 comments) says:

    Oh wow, anyone who gets that worked up about cyclists needs to take a good long look at themselves in the mirror.

    Outstanding anger issues anyone?

    /not a road cyclist
    //safely passes cyclists every day driving around the bays
    //not wanting to be pedantic, but most roads (except state highways) are paid for by rates, not rego’s or fuel taxes.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  129. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    What’s up, Sonny? Can’t handle a bit of fun being poked in your direction? Oh well, have a good day, eh?

    Dumb hypocrite.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  130. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    //not wanting to be pedantic, but most roads (except state highways) are paid for by rates, not rego’s or fuel taxes.

    That may be so but where does the money for vehicle registration, fuel taxes, and ticketing for infringements go?

    ACC is a factor in the recent rego price rises, how is ACC collected for cycling?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  131. MT_Tinman (3,187 comments) says:

    # Sonny Blount (847) Says:
    July 13th, 2010 at 4:42 pm

    //not wanting to be pedantic, but most roads (except state highways) are paid for by rates, not rego’s or fuel taxes.

    That may be so but where does the money for vehicle registration, fuel taxes, and ticketing for infringements go?

    ACC is a factor in the recent rego price rises, how is ACC collected for cycling?

    Now you’re getting it.

    Cyclists are, according to stats I read recently, the greatest users of road-user-injury related ACC in NZ and, notably, the only road user group not to pay for that ACC coverage.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  132. Viking2 (11,471 comments) says:

    MT_Tinman (855) Says:
    July 13th, 2010 at 6:04 pm
    Cyclists are, according to stats I read recently, the greatest users of road-user-injury related ACC in NZ and, notably, the only road user group not to pay for that ACC coverage

    # Viking2 (2,141) Says:
    July 13th, 2010 at 7:05 am

    Yep, car owners pay for roads, cyclists don’t.
    In fact those two are probably on some ex offico govt. tit that pays for their play.
    Tell them to buy/build their own road or pay car rego fees like the rest of us including the ACC content on each bike they own.
    Want to share our play space then pay their share.

    So when are all you cyclists going to start paying?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  133. mjwilknz (605 comments) says:

    @MT_Tinman and Sonny, how much does ACC charge sky-divers and bungee jumpers? Besides, (road) cyclists are not normally the ones who cause the accidents they’re involved in. Wanting to charge them is like wanting to charge pedestrians extra because they might get run over when they go out walking.

    It’s very difficult to put an argument about ACC charging together. Best of luck with it if you want to have a crack, though.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  134. mjwilknz (605 comments) says:

    @Viking2, cyclists’ share of road charges? Well, if you put it on a total kg share of usage basis, at a guess it’s likely to be about 0.00000000001% of total costs. Gonna be some fairly big charges, there.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  135. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    Besides, (road) cyclists are not normally the ones who cause the accidents they’re involved in. Wanting to charge them is like wanting to charge pedestrians extra because they might get run over when they go out walking.

    Using an inapproriate vehicle in an inappropriate setting is the cause. The same as if a pedestrian walks on the road, they are the cause. ACC is no fault.

    This is the same reason Motorcycle charges have gone up, regardless of the fault of the accident, if you ride a motorcycle you are more likely to be injured in a crash and choosing a different vehicle could prevent this.

    @Viking2, cyclists’ share of road charges? Well, if you put it on a total kg share of usage basis, at a guess it’s likely to be about 0.00000000001% of total costs. Gonna be some fairly big charges, there.

    If cycleways are built into roads they have a cost. Wear and tear is not the only cost on the roading system, the affect on congestion and therefore extra roading required is a factor.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  136. krazykiwi (9,186 comments) says:

    Why? If it is not safe I’m not interested.

    Hey Sonny, if we got you onto a bike I should think cycling would instantly become a whole lot safer :)

    I agree with you about need to improve roading infrastructure. This is happening now, and will probably continue to happen for the forseeable future. The dutch started years ago and they’re still working on it. So it’s slow. What can be achieved instantly, one driver at a time, is an understanding that our roads are a shared resource.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  137. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    Hey Sonny, if we got you onto a bike I should think cycling would instantly become a whole lot safer :)

    It seems many people jump to conclusions about people that have a bee in their bonnet about bikes.

    I give bikes a very wide berth and do not overtake unless it is properly safe. Therefore they inconvenience me more than many other people.

    I have spent plenty of time riding bikes on the road in different towns, I am shit scared of alot of situations on a bike and have flown over a car or two.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  138. mjwilknz (605 comments) says:

    Granted, Sonny. I concede your point on motorcycle charges. However, I think you’re fairly unlikely to convince a government that a bike is an inappropriate vehicle, particularly given cycling will generally have beneficial effects on the nation’s health (with things such as heart disease).

    On roading costs, currently, our roads are not funded in the way you suggest. If congestion charging becomes used (say through greater use of tolled roading), maybe you’d have a point – given the limited influence of bikes on congestion, not a great point, but a point nevertheless. Until such time, though, you don’t.

    You and others on here just can’t seem to face up to the fact that, as krazy suggests, roads are a resource that you need to share with other users. Let’s try cutting this another way, shall we? If a loved one or one of your good mates started riding, would you behave in a respectful manner to them if you saw them out cycling? If you think you would, why do you appear to regard cyclists with such little respect?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  139. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    If you think you would, why do you appear to regard cyclists with such little respect?

    If you are refering to how I drive around them. From where do you infer that I treat them with little respect?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  140. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    You and others on here just can’t seem to face up to the fact that, as krazy suggests, roads are a resource that you need to share with other users.

    Do I have to share it with drunks, unwarrantable cars, and unlicensed cars. No because there are rules in place for safety, just nobody has the will to tackle the safety issues of bicycles in the way that OSH would treat a workplace with such patently unsafe practises.

    You just need to face up to the fact that cyclists need to be inspected and ticketed in the same way other vehicles are, and funds need to be levied to provide safe infrastructure for the use of bikes.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  141. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    However, I think you’re fairly unlikely to convince a government that a bike is an inappropriate vehicle, particularly given cycling will generally have beneficial effects on the nation’s health (with things such as heart disease).

    Should motorists also subsidise Les Mills then?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  142. mjwilknz (605 comments) says:

    Sweet as, Sonny, all I’ve seen of you are your comments on here. They are from where I infer you have little respect for cyclists. Please don’t bother asking me which comments. I’ll have trouble deciding which ones to pick. :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  143. mjwilknz (605 comments) says:

    Should motorists also subsidise Les Mills then?

    No, definitely not. Given the way roads are charged is done, in this country, it’s a tough argument to say that cars are subsidising bikes (at least in any substantial way). Of course, you’re welcome to argue that roads should be charged differently, but that’s not the argument you appear to be trying to make. My guess is that that’s because it’s not against cyclists enough.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  144. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    Well you have a logic disconnect then mjwilknz.

    I have said a couple of times that I give cyclists a wide berth on the rode. I am one of the most cautious people around bikes I know and that includes my many friends who are cycling buffs.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  145. mjwilknz (605 comments) says:

    I have a logic disconnect? I never said you disrespected cyclists while you were driving; I just said that you disrespected cyclists.

    If many of your friends are cyclists, what would they think of your insistence that cyclists be forced to pay for their road use and not ride two abreast? Furthermore, aren’t you even the slightest bit tempted to join them for a bunch ride at some stage, just to see what it’s like?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  146. scrubone (3,099 comments) says:

    If I’m doing something dangerous on a bicycle, that’s my life.

    If I do something dangerous in a car around a bicycle, that’s their life.

    I don’t care how badly some cyclists are, or how much they inconvenience you, doing something that might kill them is totally unacceptable. If they want to kill themselves, that’s their business.

    Ultimately, it’s a heck of a lot more inconvenient to go to court for killing someone than waiting for a safe passing opportunity.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  147. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    They’re like you. ‘I drive a car as well’ blah blah bullshit, but most of them do exist in an ignorant leftist bubble.

    But I do notice that alot of cyclists don’t like seeing other cyclists riding two abreast.

    Furthermore, aren’t you even the slightest bit tempted to join them for a bunch ride at some stage, just to see what it’s like?

    No, 90% of the time I have been riding other than commuting it is with usually 1 maybe 2 others. That is plenty. Organizing more people for a trip would just be more hassle, if I want to socialize with people we maybe share a meal. If I want to exercise or see some sights, I can do it alone or with one or two others. I (used to) tramp alot also, more people along means more compromises.

    If I was going for a ride somewhere and there was a bunch going I would deliberately avoid them.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  148. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    I don’t care how badly some cyclists are, or how much they inconvenience you, doing something that might kill them is totally unacceptable. If they want to kill themselves, that’s their business.

    But do you care enough to actually fix the danger?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  149. krazykiwi (9,186 comments) says:

    I have spent plenty of time riding bikes on the road in different towns, I am shit scared of alot of situations on a bike and have flown over a car or two.

    Ok so you are speaking from experience. That’s good. I’ve been mauled by a car or two.. and attended the funeral of a young chap who was the victim of a drivers callphone urge.

    You just need to face up to the fact that cyclists need to be inspected and ticketed in the same way other vehicles are, and funds need to be levied to provide safe infrastructure for the use of bikes.

    I absolutely support ticketing and fines for poor cyclist behavior. I’m as apocalyptic as the next driver when I see cyclists act in a way that put their and my lives at risk. Not so sure about the funds levied bit though. Why should we have the government opportunity to tax another group beyond reasonableness? How will kids cycling to school to registered and taxed? How about mountain bikes off-road.. and if them, why not runners, rugby players, skydivers, kayakers etc etc.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  150. ben (2,380 comments) says:

    The ODT has a story that confirms the girl is a liar, as she claimed to be with a friend in her 20s, and in fact it was her mother.

    This is Otago. Does one story really rule out the other? :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  151. moaningmoa (68 comments) says:

    As Cabbage as said, the majority of car drivers (note – not all) in fair NZ are are manifest threat to other road users.

    The drive around in thier little cage expecting every other vehicle around them to be respectful of them, but yet show no respect to other road users.

    Ask your average cyclist, motorcyclist, truck, bus, etc driver about car drivers, and you will get a monologue of frustration and fear. That’s not to say that these don’t groups don’t have their own share of idiots, but it seems to be a much lower percentage than those within cars.

    As a motorcyclist, I’d much rather have a 40 tonne truck following me, than ANY car….

    That said, I think the cyclist community does need to do a lot more to police it’s own, the number of redline runners, road hogs, are causing the rest of the rule abiding riders, much grief from the general public (as seen above).

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  152. mjwilknz (605 comments) says:

    Sonny, if you mean to imply that I live in a leftist bubble, I’ll thank you. Normally, I identify with values that put me on the right wing. No one’s ever suggested I’m a left-winger before.

    You seem feed up with cyclists and it appears there’s naught I can do to dissuade you from that; your negative views of cycling seem inconsolable. Given cyclists will be on our roads at least until a major change in our political climate, I fear you’ll forever find yourself getting upset while out driving. If that’s the way you want to live your life, then so be it! I wish you the best of luck with somehow avoiding having any of your negativity and disrespect result in an accident with some poor cyclist. Good luck out there!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote