Sunday, December 9, 2012

Cycling futile opposition to law enforcement


Is reckless cycling less of a problem for the community than littering?
http://www.optuszoo.com.au/news/state/herald-sun/blitz-on-litter-louts-to-clean-up-state/897376

Is reckless cycling unworthy of law enforcement and education?
http://www.muggaccinos.com/Liability/BrakeCalcs/MyStuff/RegulateBunchRiding.htm


This counterproductive, hypocritical stance 

opposing law enforcement 

is the “raw prawn”

which brings resentment upon cyclists, 

and torpedoes any chance of cooperation on the roads, 

or Sharing the Road.


“Sharing the Road means obeying the Road Rules, 

being predictable and respecting the rights of others who use the road.”  
Code of Conduct for Training Cyclists

“You can’t expect not to be subject to the law
if you want to be treated equally”

Klaus Mueller, President, CycleSport Victoria

(Road law-breakers risk going to jail)
Mordialloc Chelsea Leader May 18th 2009
http://mordialloc-chelsea-leader.whereilive.com.au/news/story/road-law-breakers-risk-going-to-jail/

“It’s only fair that all vehicle users are treated equally”


Gary Brennan, Bicycle Victoria


(Road law-breakers risk going to jail)
Mordialloc Chelsea Leader May 18th 2009


http://mordialloc-chelsea-leader.whereilive.com.au/news/story/road-law-breakers-risk-going-to-jail/

Cycling

Law Enforcement

Victoria Police advise that Road Safety Education does not work without enforcement.

Even the www.litter.vic.gov.au website states in relation to Littering:  “Enforcement and education play a primary role in improving these behaviours.”

Is reckless cycling less of a problem for the community than littering?
http://www.optuszoo.com.au/news/state/herald-sun/blitz-on-litter-louts-to-clean-up-state/897376

Is reckless cycling unworthy of law enforcement and education?

The current Victorian cycling community has called for increased penalties, enforced more often on pedestrians and every other road user group.

EPA litter report line

Including advocating using the EPA litter report line to “dob in” motorists’ traffic infringements by (false) reporting the number plate. 

Which is rather ironic given that the bike lobby vested interests oppose law enforcement of cyclists’ traffic infringements and oppose law enforcement capability/ compulsory identification of cyclists and their bicycle vehicle.

Why would they?

Compulsory identification of cyclists is a cycling safety measure

"Our review of cycling deaths shows that cyclists who break the law are much more likely to be killed or seriously injured". Bicycle Victoria (2002)
Because apparently Society ought not discourage illegal, illegitimate, reckless cycling!

The implication being that the cycling community believe being seriously injured or killed by a rogue 

cyclist is an acceptable risk for the rest of the community, so nothing should be done about rogue cycling.


And why should it be an acceptable risk for pedestrians?


Because you don’t want to discourage illegal, illegitimate, reckless cycling do you?

Is reckless cycling less of a problem for the community than littering?

Is reckless cycling unworthy of law enforcement and education?

The fact is rogue cycling is a much greater and unacceptable risk for cyclists

"Our review of cycling deaths shows that cyclists who break the law are much more likely to be killed or seriously injured". Bicycle Victoria (2002)

Victoria Police advise in relation to traffic infringements that education does not work without enforcement.

Yet the Cycling community advocate education alone.

That rogue cyclists will somehow self-regulate.

Not only has this never worked, but to re-iterate, the cycling community believes education and enforcement

are appropriate to littering, and every other road user group but not illegitimate road usage by cyclists!

This counterproductive stance is the “raw prawn” which brings resentment upon cyclists, and torpedoes any chance of cooperation on the roads, or Sharing the Road.

Pete Dowe

Road Safety Advocate

No comments:

Post a Comment