Remove this Banner Ad

Random Random Chat Thread XL

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Well if you can get them off the roads and onto bike lanes then their adherence to road rules would become a moot point. As it stands however they are road users and are subject to the same rules as other road users.

According to the law they can be fined for breaking them, but I don't know how they're supposed to be fined unless a police officer is sitting right there watching them and manages to somehow pull them over.

My post was a reply to the one before it, which is a clear demonstration that some riders are either unfamiliar with the rules or flout them with little consequence. Red light cameras are totally useless for that sort of situation, short of facial recognition software.
 
I think it's purely monitory.

I doubt you could get a reg plate on a bike big enough to be actively visible anyway, especially when they sit so close to each other.

Car users rego supposedly pays for the roads and their upkeep but also a great bulk of the registration is for tac insurance isn't it? Covers injuries caused from road trauma

What happens when a cyclist goes down? Who pays? Does tac get involved?
 
Howard Moon said:
I think it's purely monitory.

I doubt you could get a reg plate on a bike big enough to be actively visible anyway, especially when they sit so close to each other.

Car users rego supposedly pays for the roads and their upkeep but also a great bulk of the registration is for tac insurance isn't it? Covers injuries caused from road trauma

What happens when a cyclist goes down? Who pays? Does tac get involved?
Click to expand...
I think in that scenario the cyclist is probably treated as a pedestrian for the purposes of TAC?
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Howard Moon said:
well we have a problem then!!

I don't see many pedestrians standing between traffic in turning lanes and weaving in and out of cars, or standing 3 wide on country roads while vehicles queue behind
Click to expand...
http://www.tac.vic.gov.au/about-the...nd-all-victorians-to-benefit-from-tac-changes

Actually I probably phrased that in a slightly more inflammatory way than I should have. They’re covered under TAC as per link above. And they don’t pay TAC fees unless they also have a registered car or whatever.
 
I suspect a very large percentage of bike users also pay car rego. And I also suspect that the vast vast majority of TAC payouts are for car/motorbike only accidents.
 
Howard Moon said:
you could nearly assume that serious bike accidents might be more slanted toward death than serious injury I suppose
Click to expand...
Yes and you could also assume the vast vast majority of those are vehicles colliding with cyclists too.
 
Lore said:
According to the law they can be fined for breaking them, but I don't know how they're supposed to be fined unless a police officer is sitting right there watching them and manages to somehow pull them over.
Click to expand...

With the exception of a red light camera or dash cam footage, can the above statement not be made about any car related law breaking as well?
 
My favourite cringiest shit tatts seen today. On a guy, left calf boxing kangaroo with 'Aussie' in cursive script below. Right calf, southern cross with 'Pride' in cursive script below.

On a girl. Left rear upper arm, small cursive script 'Get knocked down seven times'. Right rear upper arm 'Get up eight times' :drunk:
 

Remove this Banner Ad

https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/r...e/news-story/f825476efc0b2c21743c040fdb6c8f02

Didn't know where else to put this but thought I'd throw it in here.

Am I the only one sick of this kind of reporting? "sick revelation" "boasted" etc are all words designed to install a sense of disgust in the reader. However all he's done is say that being locked up and punished rehabilitated him and made him a better person. Isn't that what jail is meant to do? Isn't he claiming that the system has worked?

The crime he committed was disgusting, immoral, cruel, vicious, insert your own words of disgust here, but lets not forget that he was 10 years old. He wasn't an adult, he wasn't fully developed, absolutely he knew what he was doing was wrong but Thompson was 10. Should we not be grateful the system worked as it was designed and move on?

Venables is obviously a different kettle of fish entirely but Thompson hasn't re-offended, should his actions as a 10 year old condemn him for ever?

Note: If I was the Bulger family I'd imagine my reaction would be vastly different but for me the emotional "he will ever change" comments is gutter journalism preying on the families emotion when clearly evidence suggests he has changed.
 
boncer34 said:
https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/r...e/news-story/f825476efc0b2c21743c040fdb6c8f02

Didn't know where else to put this but thought I'd throw it in here.

Am I the only one sick of this kind of reporting? "sick revelation" "boasted" etc are all words designed to install a sense of disgust in the reader. However all he's done is say that being locked up and punished rehabilitated him and made him a better person. Isn't that what jail is meant to do? Isn't he claiming that the system has worked?

The crime he committed was disgusting, immoral, cruel, vicious, insert your own words of disgust here, but lets not forget that he was 10 years old. He wasn't an adult, he wasn't fully developed, absolutely he knew what he was doing was wrong but Thompson was 10. Should we not be grateful the system worked as it was designed and move on?

Venables is obviously a different kettle of fish entirely but Thompson hasn't re-offended, should his actions as a 10 year old condemn him for ever?

Note: If I was the Bulger family I'd imagine my reaction would be vastly different but for me the emotional "he will ever change" comments is gutter journalism preying on the families emotion when clearly evidence suggests he has changed.
Click to expand...

I noticed the same evocative writing in an article about 'trolley man' designed to just drive community opinion they way they want it to go..

my opinion is he was a fool who got in the way and could have made a bad situation even worse... society called him a hero, so be it, I disagree.. then this article comes out... (with evocative language designed to belittle any opposing thought bolded)


'He’s the hero that Australia deserves, but not everybody thinks the homeless legend who faced off with a knife-wielding jihadi was doing the right thing.

Dubbed the Trolley Man for his shopping cart heroics, Michael Rogers, 46, sent social media into meltdown over the weekend after footage emerged of him trying to ram into Hassan Khalif Shire Ali as the terrorist attempted to stab police officers.

The makeshift crime-fighter’s mobile phone was broken during the awe-inspiring incident and a crowd-funding campaign was launched yesterday by the National Homeless Collective to help him “get back on his feet”. Already, it has raked in more than $100,000.

Despite the mainstream consensus that Mr Rogers is now a bona fide Aussie hero, a backlash from a small minority of cynics is growing.

One such cynic is Victorian Police’s commissioner Graham Ashton, who told 3AW today that Mr Rogers’ actions could have had potentially dangerous consequences.

“I don’t like to criticise people in that situation, he’s acting instinctively about what he’s looking at in front of him,” Mr Ashton said.

“But if a trolley had hit a police member and knocked him over and then this offender got on top of him, we could have had a tragic consequence.

“I think he was trying to support the police in his own way, so I haven’t been jumping on him over the weekend.”

On the GoFundMe page for Mr Rogers, cynical commenters have also pointed out that Mr Rogers could have hurt himself or a police officer if he had toppled over.

“I think that this guy was incredibly stupid. Brave maybe … but basically very stupid, and could have caused more harm by getting in the way,” wrote one cynic on the fundraising page.

https://www.news.com.au/technology/...s/news-story/8f0ea5d9a6511c0bf552f6d57758a2da

To me this article is skewed and very persuasive paining a picture that everyone should and does think hes a hero, and anyone who doesn't is a sniveling little cynic in a corner being un australian....

am I wrong?
 
Howard Moon said:
I noticed the same evocative writing in an article about 'trolley man' designed to just drive community opinion they way they want it to go..

my opinion is he was a fool who got in the way and could have made a bad situation even worse... society called him a hero, so be it, I disagree.. then this article comes out... (with evocative language designed to belittle any opposing thought bolded)


'He’s the hero that Australia deserves, but not everybody thinks the homeless legend who faced off with a knife-wielding jihadi was doing the right thing.

Dubbed the Trolley Man for his shopping cart heroics, Michael Rogers, 46, sent social media into meltdown over the weekend after footage emerged of him trying to ram into Hassan Khalif Shire Ali as the terrorist attempted to stab police officers.

The makeshift crime-fighter’s mobile phone was broken during the awe-inspiring incident and a crowd-funding campaign was launched yesterday by the National Homeless Collective to help him “get back on his feet”. Already, it has raked in more than $100,000.

Despite the mainstream consensus that Mr Rogers is now a bona fide Aussie hero, a backlash from a small minority of cynics is growing.

One such cynic is Victorian Police’s commissioner Graham Ashton, who told 3AW today that Mr Rogers’ actions could have had potentially dangerous consequences.

“I don’t like to criticise people in that situation, he’s acting instinctively about what he’s looking at in front of him,” Mr Ashton said.

“But if a trolley had hit a police member and knocked him over and then this offender got on top of him, we could have had a tragic consequence.

“I think he was trying to support the police in his own way, so I haven’t been jumping on him over the weekend.”

On the GoFundMe page for Mr Rogers, cynical commenters have also pointed out that Mr Rogers could have hurt himself or a police officer if he had toppled over.

“I think that this guy was incredibly stupid. Brave maybe … but basically very stupid, and could have caused more harm by getting in the way,” wrote one cynic on the fundraising page.

https://www.news.com.au/technology/...s/news-story/8f0ea5d9a6511c0bf552f6d57758a2da

To me this article is skewed and very persuasive paining a picture that everyone should and does think hes a hero, and anyone who doesn't is a sniveling little cynic in a corner being un australian....

am I wrong?
Click to expand...

No you arent wrong.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Remove this Banner Ad

Random Random Chat Thread XL

Similar threads

DERO
Random WW
Replies
6
Views
447
ghostdog
ghostdog
Sporno 4 Pyros
Sport The Essendon Board’s Paris 2024 Olympics Thread
2 3
Replies
63
Views
3K
Sporno 4 Pyros
Sporno 4 Pyros

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top