I don't normally write things like this (or haven't in a while), simply because I would much prefer to stick with focusing on my adventures and enjoyment. But I have such a bee under my bonnet at the moment. So OK, it's time to have a rant...
Recently Channel 7 released a video, that was originally uploaded onto social media, about a group of cyclists riding two abreast down what appeared to be a narrow country road. It talks of a "frustrated driver" driving down the country road, and whilst Yahoo 7 reports facts, their intro via their Facebook post leaves the mind boggling, "Some have claimed the bikes 'should be riding single file and not taking up the entire road', while others have praised the cyclists for giving the horseriders room ahead." It leaves an open question for people to comment, and thus enables the haters
Reading through the typical comments was completely and utterly mind numbing to say the least. The tidal wave of stupid runs so deep on this it is hard to believe that the, at the level of mentality displayed, these are actual people who drive on our roads.
I posted this comment on my personal Facebook page finishing my comment with, "We live in a country where we are so hyper about gun control. Given that cars kill more people in this country than anything else maybe we should focus on car control. By whereas you must be licenced, your weapon be registered and you handle it responsibly...see the irony...".
I did get a couple of responses from truckie friends and knowing that I am passionate about cycling, of course there was some healthy banter. But it is in this banter that one discovers ones perception of the law, rather than the knowledge of it. Not so much with these guys as taking the piss is common among friends.
When Mandatory Distance Laws (MDL's) where implemented into a trial in Queensland it was a good twelve months before I began cycling. So I was not at all pro-cycling and rather the contrary. I didn't hate cyclist, I just wasn't right into it like I am now. I think that these years were some of the few that I didn't own a bike.
I jumped on the bandwagon as a professional driver and declared my right to the road, stating all the usual "what if's". My first reaction as a truck driver was, "What if I am driving my loaded truck down a country road, doing the speed limit and come around a corner to see a bicycle in front of me and there is a car coming the other way? Who do I take out?" Seems a fair enough question doesn't it? This is one that I get very often in debates about cyclists on the road, and one I got from a friend last night.
MDL's did me a big favour as a professional driver. They caused me to question, and look at my own behaviour from behind the wheel. I began asking myself what is my responsibility in this. After all I live in a rural area, cyclists are minimal in comparison to tractors, harvesters and all manner of farm machinery, Not too mention stray cattle, kangaroos, emus and our friends on horse back, that still today have more right to on the road than cyclists and vehicles put together.
So just because a road is posted at 100 km/h should I be driving it complaining about possible obstructions, or should I be focusing on driving to the conditions and being prepared for possible obstructions? I'm sorry but if you are approaching a corner that you can't see around at the State Limit, being that you can't see around it, maybe you are driving too fast.
It is my responsibility, as a driver to be prepared for what may be coming. That doesn't mean driving around almost at next to zero just in case. But we here in Bundaberg have some narrow roads, a single strip of bitumen down the middle with dirt on either side. Those that are outside the city limits are posted at 100 km/h. But does this mean you have to drive it?
In the video by Yahoo 7, it is obvious that the cyclists were riding two abreast. But in most states it is not only legal , but highly recommended by authorities to do so when riding in a bunch. It's not so we can have a chat on a social ride, there are specific safety aspects to this method. Visibility and giving a motorist a more effective means of overtaking are parts of this strategy. I find the whole, "Grrr cyclist riding two abreast" argument to be quite fascicle and ironic. Ten cyclists riding two abreast would only take up the same cubic space on the road as a large Four wheel-drive. The cyclists riding two abreast of course protruding far less than half into the lane. At the same time it is perfectly acceptable for a single occupier of a large four wheel- drive to take up the whole lane. This is why traffic is so bad in metropolitan areas, thousands of singularly occupied vehicle all combating for their share of space. But put a cyclist among them, it is like a young fawn for the wolves, the traffic jam is of course the cyclist's fault.
In the video linked, the riders warn other riders behind that there is a safety concern up ahead, being the horse and rider. They signal to one another from behind using the usual pointing. The move to the right to give the horse and rider more room. Horses can be easily spooked and one must pay respect to these guys when they're out and about. It is respect and courtesy, and a particular reason why I stopped cycling with one group. Most cyclists indicate their intention, some, not all run red lights, and no, we try to avoid at all costs swerving unreservedly in front of two tonnes of precious metal.
As the car came into view undertaking on the left, spinning in the dirt you can see the riders begin to move back over to their original trajectory. By all means it appeared they were preparing to give the driver room to overtake take if he/she had only given them another ten seconds. TEN SECONDS, is it worth a person's life. On top of all this cyclists riding two abreast are still far narrower than a motor vehicle
Some of the arguments that come up are all the time, "Cyclists swerve all over the place and weave through traffic". Yes, of course they do, they can. It is legal in some states of Australia for cyclists and motorcyclists to filter and split lanes. Plus cyclist may move to the left or the right to avoid obstacles such as potholes, debris, car doors and even cars themselves.
Now let's compare that to the average motorist that zips from lane to lane, usually without indicating and using their mobile phones and/or being distracted that drift from their lane, just to name a couple. Even driving down a road paying full attention it is impossible for a motor vehicle to drive perfectly straight. Your car/vehicle will wander from side to side as the camber of the road fights with the wheel alignment of your car. You naturally move your steering wheel from left to right to combat this ongoing battle, even if you are not aware of it.
The whole rego thing always comes up...do I need to go there again? Rego doesn't pay for roads, Federal and State, along with Local rates do. In fact Qld Transport's operational budget is $1.9 mill. Revenue raised from rego is $1.6 mill. So tax payers fund the rest. Comparing a bike to a car is like comparing a water pistol to a machine gun.
Identification plates are another issue for the entitled motorist. Really, how many cars are damaged in car parks by anonymous parties, usually in another vehicle? How many hit and runs are there in small incidences on our roads, where as there will be a small dingle and one party takes of? How many cyclists have been hit and left for dead on the side of the road? All these vehicles presumably had plates, didn't they? What about the 210,000 vehicle caught in Qld during 2016 that were unregistered, 10% of which had never been registered? Identification does not make one accountable to the law, a sense of responsibility does.
There are also too many to list, the running of red lights, not stopping at stop signs etc etc etc (because cars never do this). I could be here for days and days, I don't even think the internet is that big...lol
I'm not so much angry at the haters, they are only doing what they know to do. Jeez, they even hate on each other, with the "typical" motorist being nothing short of a childish hypocrite droning on about how cyclist flaunt the law, all the while breaking it themselves. I am not so much angry at the media coverage of this story, although I do believe their intro was a little suspicious to attract click bait.
I am most angry at peoples' lack of knowledge of responsibility and their knowledge of laws. Just because you got your licence handed to you thirty years ago doesn't mean you stop learning. It is the drivers responsibility to keep up with current law changes, not blame shift because they disagree with them. The law is the law, not what you think it is, or should be. I'm angry that a vehicle is a potential weapon and needs to be handled responsibly and with due care. A motor vehicle is not an office, not a make up room, not a disco, it is a means of transport that has the potential to kill. It is an item that causes 100% of deaths on our roads, and contributes as one of the highest causes to death and serious injury in our country.
I am also angry at a wasted opportunity. This was the perfect scenario Yahoo 7 could've used to portray why cyclists do what they do. It could of been used as an explanation, not left as a kind of open question, "What do you think?" thingy. It is times like this the media could really step up to help squash the hatred, and explain the whys and how comes. It is also the perfect opportunity to help change culture and mentality. In Japan there is very little to no cycling infrastructure, bicycles are seen as another form of transport on the road and treated as such. But I suppose we have seen how drivers in this country treat each other, so maybe that is not a good example...lol.
Since my thirty-five (plus) year stint as a truck driver is over I have become so anti car, and for good reasons. In all that time I have never had an issue with a cyclist, but the amount of close calls I have had from cars, caravans and other truck drivers out there, well it has left an everlasting sour taste in my mouth. I feel safer on my bike, more so than I ever do in a car.
I know there is a much more likelihood of being involved in a motor vehicle incident, yes incident, because an accident is not what they are. An accident implies there is no one at fault and we know this is not the case.
Anyway guys, as always ride safe...cheers.
No comments:
Post a Comment