In Queensland we’ve got new rules concerning cyclists. We drivers have to give at least 1 metre clearance if the speed limit is 60kmh or less and 1.5m over 60. We can cross double white lines or painted islands if we need to.

This is just bizarre….. and critically dangerous!

It is unbelievable how such laws could be introduced. It indicates to me that laws can be made by people who just don’t have a clue!

I can envisage a situation on the Cook Hwy north of Cairns, which is a road I am very familiar with, where this new rule could be deadly!

Cycling on this road north from Palm Cove to the Port Douglas turnoff should be banned outright, as it is a narrow winding road full of blind curves, trucks and busses, and drivers that treat it as a race track. Rank tailgaters are rife! It is very popular with cyclists.

So, there I am driving up this road, carefully and conservatively. I come across a cyclist just around a blind curve. The road is too narrow to pass with a 1.5 metre space without going well out across the centre line. I’ve got traffic up close behind me and there are oncoming vehicles. I CAN’T go out across the centre line, and I CAN’T quickly slow down to stay behind the cyclist until the road is clear on the other side, for fear of getting the car behind me running into me. But I can drive SAFELY if I pass the cyclist with 0.5 to 1 metre gap.

Then I find out later that this cyclist had a Gro cam mounted on his helmet and recorded me going past considerably closer than 1.5 metres and got my rego number as I drove ahead of him. He went to the cops in Mossman. And lo and behold, I’m BOOKED… when all I was doing was driving in the safest possible manner in the circumstances… and would have a been complete BLOODY IDIOT if I’d driven according to the STUUUUUPID new law!!

http://www.qld.gov.au/transport/news/features/bicycle-rules/index.html?gclid=CIv3oc_9_b0CFVcRvQodAVQAEQ

If you run over them Luddy, they are unlikely to get a picture of you.

All bike riders should be charged rego and ALL FUNDS should fund bikeways. Problem solved because if they are on the road, when a bikeways is available, that's a risk they take. If there is no bikeways on that rout, and they are not commuting to work, then tough because drivers have enough distractions without worrying about them.

They should also be restricted to riding in groups of less than three, otherwise they need to arrange for a permit just like an event, because I am sick to death of these lica clad groups of twenty of more hogging our roads and expecting us who fund the roads to give way to them.

Find a track and use it.

Stop whinging. What you need to do is OBEY THE ROAD RULES. If you had done that you wouldn't have put the cyclist at risk by passing so close.

The roads are for EVERYONE, not just drivers.

If you can't act with maturity and obey the road rules whether or not you agree with them, then hand in your licence. If not, then man up and pay the many fines you'll receive, and stop whinging like a little child.

From your angry, immature post I suspect the roads would be safer with you NOT having a driving licence.

Hello Nhoj. Friendly fellow aren’t you!

Let me guess; you just dropped in to this thread on one of your very occasional visits to OLO for the express purpose of having an offensive whinge, and you are completely not interested in debating the subject. Right?

It is obviously something you know stuff-all about.

You wrote:

<< What you need to do is OBEY THE ROAD RULES. >>

What an incredibly naïve perspective!

So…. do YOU obey the road rules? Do you never do 61kmh in a 60 zone? When you go from a 60 zone into an 80 zone, do you never exceed 60 until you get to the 80 sign? When you go from a 100 zone into an 80 zone, do you make sure you have lowered your speed to 80 by the time you reach the sign? What do you do when you encounter temporary speed limit signs at roadworks? Do you obey them strictly at face value, or do you very loosely observe them as the great majority of drivers do?

Of course you don’t strictly observe the road rules! NO ONE does. So stop being so totally and blatantly hypocritical!

Those that come closest to strictly observing the road rules set themselves apart from normal driving practice. If they are not rolling with the flow and doing the same speed as everyone else, regardless of the speed limit, then they can indeed create an increased risk of mishap. This is the case on the highways everywhere in the country. The ‘correct’ speed would be 90 to 95 where the speed limit is 100, just to make sure that you never inadvertently exceeded 100. But the cruising speed in a 100 zone is ~105, which means you would be going significantly slower. This would incur impatience from many drivers, tailgating, dangerous overtaking and in short; a quite significant increased risk factor.

I hope you can see my point Nhojjie.

You have just proven my point.

Bad drivers with bad attitudes, like you, are a danger to the safety of drivers who obey the road rules.

Pay your fine, adjust your behaviour, and stop whinging.

What fine?

Could it be that you have completely misread my opening post? It was a hypothetical situation.

Come on Nhoj, you can do better than this.

Pay your imaginary fine, adjust your imaginary road behaviour, and stop whinging.

If you get so upset over your imaginary incident, I'd hate to think how badly you'd react to a "real" road situation.

You are clearly a driver who's easily stressed, who can't keep to the road rules and as such are a danger to other drivers and pedestrians. We need immature, bad drivers to be OFF our roads. Please hand in your licence, it may save a life.

Nhoj, your negativity is appalling. Anyone who has concerns about road rules SHOULD bring them forward for discussion.

OLO is a good forum for doing that.

Now, have you got anything meaningful to contribute to this discussion? If not, why are you on this thread? Or on OLO at all?

The problem with you Ludwig is that you are not here to "discuss". It's obvious from your first post you have already made up your mind, and that the purpose of your post is to "TELL" people what your opinion is and present it as if it's the ONLY way to go.

If your driving personality and manner is accurately represented in your first post, then you are a danger to other road users. Making up your own personal road rules on the run whilst driving, and then whinging about other people on the road who interfere with your personal rules, is bad driving.

You'd get a more positive response from people who disagree with you if you didn't present as such a whinger.

Whatever you reckon Nhoj. Hold on to that negativity. It’s a doozie of a personal trait you’ve got there.

Whatever you do, don’t see anything positive.

And uphold that abject hypocrisy. You shouldn’t have any problem with that because you are very good at it.

You’re the one who is not here to discuss or debate the issue at hand.

You’ve firmly made up your mind that my very raising of the issue was a totally negative thing.

Crikey mate, you’re a real champion.

What we need to make our roads safer is people who give a damn. The people you should be criticising are those who NEVER get involved in discussions about road rules and the like and who don’t respect them when they are driving, and don’t respect drivers who do observe the rules…. and lambast those who do give a damn.

Nhoj is right Ludwig.
You sound like a road rage ranter in your opening post!.

I don't think that asking for at least a metre between a frightening little bike and a big ol' car is too much to ask for?
Surely we should all be doing this already ?

Wow, Luddy, it's a minefield out there; you never know when a fast-moving Nhoj is going to come tearing straight at you from out of left field.
T-bone, splat, all over red rover!

(Not that Nhoj would ever be so incautious as to place you, or anyone else, in jeopardy.)

Seriously though, there have been too many cyclists coming to grief from uncaring (or irresponsible, impatient, incapable, flaky, distracted or devil-may-care) motorists, and something needed to be done to draw due attention to their safety needs.
The new road rule is a good start - as is the related advertising campaign.
(I recall a similar advertising campaign aimed at improving the life expectancy of motor-cyclists. Hope it has worked.)

Hypotheticals are one thing Luddy, but in the real world, and particularly in the hustle and bustle of the city and urban environment, a lot more has been, and is still needed to be done to make the roads safer for all users - motorists, cyclists, pedestrians and kids (and even the native fauna).
(Not everyone is as caring and capable a driver as your good self, Luddy; and rules are usually made for the least, rather than for the best.)

I doubt you would have been fined for your 'hypothetical transgression' (in the hypothetical circumstances you described), but 'rules' are not made for the occasional exceptional circumstance, but for the common good.

Nhoj, have you considered going into politics?
Campbell Newman could sure do with a hand there in Queensland to overcome the State's $80 billion debt; and might then be able to do something to widen that northern road Luddy finds such great fault with.
(Or should that be - with which Luddy finds such great fault?)

Nhoj sounds like a perfect 'strike hitter' for wherever there is a problem in need of fixing.
Pragmatism of such a high order is indeed a rare commodity.

@Ludwig, you've got MY sypmathies, mate. If I never see lycra again, it'll be too soon!! They're SO ignorant, that they don't even have mirors fitted to their bikes, as they just don't care who or how many cars they are blocking a lane to. Fair enough when they're actually in a competition, they want to reduce wind drag, but when they are just practicing, they should be fitted with mirrors. This should be COMPULSORY! Besides, extra drag during practice makes them fitter. :)

I travel across the city to and from work, and I have learnt to hate them. I call them "riders in the Tour DeLusion".

If they want to use the road, as you say, pay vehicle registration, otherwise, get the hell outta the way! I've got no gripe when they stick to their bicycle lane, but there are so many roads that don't have those lanes, and they seldom stick to the left hand side of the road. Or, like motorcyclists in heavy traffic, they ride down between lanes! Bad enough motorbikes doing that, but at least you can hear one looming up on you, but bicycles are silent.

Free our roads of these hazards...PLEASE!! It's not as though our roads aren't congested enough, so that you're in a carpark called a "motorway", FFS! And we have to pay a toll on top, to sit in a carpark on the way to and from work! Ain't that bad enough? Spare us!

That’d be right Suze. You have a track record for responding to me in silly fashion and then running away. You won’t get drawn into the discussion or into corroboration of your ill-conceived comments

My opening post was deliberately put in strong terms, so as to increase the chances of engendering a reaction and getting a good discussion rolling.

Pity you couldn’t see that… and concentrate on the subject, which is of very real concern.

There have been a number of recent cycling fatalities in north Queensland; in Cairns and Townsville. The Qld Govt was right to seek a review and to do something about it.

Trouble is; what they have done is absurd! It is not just a feel-good be-seen-to-do-something-while-not-actually-doing-anything-significant exercise, it is much worse than that - it is a downright DANGEROUS law, which can INCREASE hazards and create real conflict situations.

This law is in for a trial two year period. I wonder how many people are going to die because of it, before they see the merit in getting RID of it!

<< Seriously though, there have been too many cyclists coming to grief from uncaring (or irresponsible, impatient, incapable, flaky, distracted or devil-may-care) motorists, and something needed to be done to draw due attention to their safety needs. >>

Too right Salty!

The problem is NOT the gap between cyclists and cars, it is the fact that drivers often don’t see cyclists until the last moment, if at all. From the driver’s position on the right side of the car, looking out the left side, past traffic in front of them, creates a real problem for seeing cyclists… especially if the road is curving to the right or if they’ve got a bus, truck or van in front, or if they are travelling too close to the vehicle in front, which is a very common driving fault.

I bet that in each fatality in my part of the world, the driver of the car that hit the cyclist has said; I didn’t see them!

Well….. how is a 1 or 1.5m mandatory gap going to fix that if some drivers are not going to see cyclists in the first instance??

I drove up the Cook Hwy yesterday on the part south of Palm Cove. There is a cycle strip outside a solid white line all the way along there. Speed limit is 80. Legal gap when passing cyclists is at least 1.5metres.

But even though cyclists are off the road proper, you still have to get right out over the centre line to be able to pass them with this sort of gap!! And that’s just for cars. What about busses and trucks?

Of course, NO vehicles were doing this. Every car was passing cyclists at considerably closer than 1.5m….. and doing so perfectly safely.

"There have been a number of recent cycling fatalities in north Queensland; in Cairns and Townsville. The Qld Govt was right to seek a review and to do something about it."

So we know how many riders have died without this law... so there is at least a baseline for comparison.

"This law is in for a trial two year period."

Therefore you will get the answer to your question, "I wonder how many people are going to die because of it,..."

If you wish to simplify the law and provide for all contingencies suggest changes to the Australian Road Rules Division 3 paras 140 to 145, extending the offences and rules on overtaking to encompass both vehicles and cyclists.

However, as the evidence that such overtaking occurred when it was NOT 'safe to do so' would be after a crash, injury or death I'd suggest ramping up the degree of offences to either attempted murder or murder as a disincentive for drivers to test the minimum bicycle-passing separation distance.

There is such a simple way to solve this problem, and that's to get the cyclists off the roads. Period! Because if you use something (in this case our roads) surely it's not unreasonable to contribute for that use.

Even farm machinery, Excavators, bob cats, even ride on mowers all have to be registered if used on our roads. It's about time cyclists were made to pull their weight.

You achieve this by introducing a registration system for ALL cyclists and the money raised is used to build bikeways. It's the perfect example of a 'user pays system, because you won't ever see a motorist driving on a bike way.

You don't register the bike, you register the rider, just like a fishing license because the days of the free ride on the tax payer must come to an and.

Thus would serve two purposes, one, it would make cycling safer, and two, it would remove the hazards from our roads.

Oh come on Ludwig.
You carry on at me as though I was the one ranting!

It was obvious in your first post that you dislike cyclists annoying you on the road, but when others took you to task about being a tad selfish in wanting to have the roads to yourself, you took the 'no, it's the cyclists I'm worried about' approach'.

We do need more cycle ways on our roads, but I doubt we can ever have them on ALL roads, so we do need laws to protect cyclists on the road.

So Ludwig with drivers speeding, tailgating and you driving too fast for the conditions and it is the cyclist who is at fault?? What the?
If YOU hadnt been breaking the law then you would have had plenty of time to slow down and wait for a clear space to overtake. Just like you would have to if it was a slow truck or a caravan or a pedestrian. It is called driving with due care and attention, a legal requirement, and you deserve to be fined for not exercising it. Not to mention the fool tailgating you. An all to common occurrence and cause of many accidents despite numerous ongoing education campaigns.

To threaten someone or put them in danger with your 2 ton killing machine is reprehensible and people like hasbeen should be forced to be servants to cyclists maimed and crippled by fat idiots in their penis enhancers.

If you cant drive your car while avoiding cyclists, pedestrians and other slower vehicles then your license should be revoked and your vehicle confiscated for all our sakes.

Oh and another point to note for all you vehicular supremacists.
Bicycles were on the roads long before cars.

Suse, good analysis of Ludwig's motives.

Ludwig is all about --- "I'm a driver. I own the roads. Roads are for drivers only. I can make up my own rules, on the run, if I disagree with any road rules. I must NOT be held up or inconvenienced by anyone on the road. I'm right and you're wrong no matter what".

Ludwig, if you don't like the road rules then learn how to effectively lobby government for road rule change. It's a skill. Just whinging about it on a public forum shows you likely don't possess the capabilities to elicit change in an effective manner. You just want to whinge as evidenced by your first post and subsequent replies.

The roads are for EVERYONE, not "just" drivers. That's a legal fact.

Ludwig, by making up your own road rules, on the run whilst driving, you are putting other road users at risk. You have a road "attitude" problem. You won't become a better driver unless you become aware that you need to change your "attitude" whilst driving.

<< Oh come on Ludwig. You carry on at me as though I was the one ranting! >>

Suze, you’ve been on OLO a long time. Surely you realise that different people have different ways of expressing themselves. Surely by now you have realised that it is the message that you need to concentrate on, NOT the particular person’s writing style!

<< It was obvious in your first post that you dislike cyclists annoying you on the road… >>

Not at all. You have entirely invented this interpretation in your head. I have neither said nor implied anything of the sort!

I do not go along with Daffy Duck’s view of cyclists, nor rechtub suggested solution of getting them all off the roads.

We just need better rules, and better education and awareness, for all drivers, and cyclists! In short, we need a thorough risk-minimisation strategy.

.....

<< So Ludwig with drivers speeding, tailgating and you driving too fast for the conditions and it is the cyclist who is at fault?? What the? >>

What the? Indeed Mikk!

Who is saying cyclists are at fault?

<< If YOU hadnt been breaking the law then you would have had plenty of time to slow down and wait for a clear space to overtake >>

So um…. where do you get this assertion that I was breaking the law? Reread the opening post. Then tell me; where did you get this gem?

Stop inventing complete furphies!!

By the way, on the curves on the Cook Hwy, the recommended speed is 70, 60, 50 or 40kmh. So coming around a blind curve, you would be doing considerably less than the legal speed limit of 80. If you find a cyclist right in front of you, you do NOT have time to slow down to ~25, unless you do it very quickly indeed. And if you’ve got traffic behind, you definitely don’t want to do that!

Mikk PLEASE, make sure you know what a person’s position is before you lambast them for it, and make a fool of yourself.

I agree with Ludwig about bikes that are a real nuisance everywere they go to even on those special paths that are made for them they travel about trying to knock over people who walk along the special paths to.

You are a real rude person Nhoj and somebody who knows nothing about nothing my silly friend. Ludwig is completely right about everything he says about you are very rude and quite stupid with many of the remarks you make about him personally.

Pointing out the dangerous unintended consequences of a road rule is not selfish or irresponsible. If you come out of a blind curve with someone tailgating you and encounter a slow moving vehicle, it could be highly dangerous to slam on the brakes, which, according to Ludwig, was his only alternative. In that case, the tailgater then slams into Ludwig's car, which is likely to collect the cyclist as well as it is pushed forward by the tailgater. Where is the suggestion that Ludwig himself was speeding or driving dangerously? Cyclists can be just as selfish and arrogant as drivers.

Pretty much all my driving is in city traffic.

Cyclists are everywhere, and the majority are a complete menace, to themselves and others. A law that defines a 1 metre or 1.5 metre clear zone would be impossible to observe here, simply because the lanes are too narrow to pass with that separation, and the chance of being able to take advantage of a gap in the oncoming traffic is as close to zero as makes no difference.

So the only course of action open to us townies is to stay behind them, cursing quietly. And there's no opportunity to catch up with them and curse loudly at them, because they don't bother to stop at traffic lights, as we motorists are obliged to.

And y'know, this has been going on for many years. There have been some attempts to put in cycle paths in various spots around town, but these tend not to be used. Given the slightest opportunity, the city cyclist (especially those lycra-clad "couriers", who are another breed entirely) will use the footpath, or the wrong side of the road, instead of the nice green cycle tracks that have been provided for their sole use. And heaven help the poor pedestrian, who inadvertently looks the wrong way first (they are mostly two-way) before trying to cross one of these tracks - these folk take a great delight in yelling obscenities in your ear as they go past, their speeding metal only inches from your ribs...

But strangely, I am at peace with all this. Instead of fuming behind the wheel when stuck behind their lurid behinds, I take solace from the fact that the average speed through Sydney is only slightly above walking pace anyway. Overtaking them - only to be overtaken again when they zip through the next red light - will get me to my destination no faster. So I become very relaxed about it all, and simply crank up the music another notch.

And as a bonus, I won't have to clean the blood off the car when I reach my destination.

I agree in general this law requires more thought. I live on the Sunshine Coast Qld. Two cyclists were riding abreast on one of the most popular drives on the Sunshine Coast, between Alexandra Headlands and Mooloolaba. There was a stream of traffic behind me, Easter Weekend. When I held back behind the riders, I got blasted with horns, and if I passed the riders I had to cross the double white lines to maintain separation. There was absolutely nowhere to pull over to let other cars pass me who obviously weren't so particular. The particular incline is south out of Alex and steep so consequently slow for the cyclists.

The traffic was probably backed up to Maroochydore CBD by the time the cyclists (still two abreast) reached the top of the hill.

I respect that the cyclists have rights, but where is the safety here?
The cyclists were not interested in riding single file to allow some distance between themselves and the traffic given the double white lines, and I didn't want to attract a fine by crossing the double white lines to maintain the required separation.

I would appreciate some comment from the Qld Police on this issue.

Ludwig
"If you find a cyclist right in front of you, you do NOT have time to slow down to ~25, unless you do it very quickly indeed. And if you’ve got traffic behind, you definitely don’t want to do that!"

Then you are not driving to the conditions and not driving with due care as required by the law. You deserve to lose your license.

To all the Rambos here who think as car drivers they "own" the roads - try reading the second last paragraph of the post by Pericles. Read it 100 times, maybe then you'll become more mature drivers.

If there's a bad road rule, then GET IT CHANGED. Don't do what Ludwig does, and make up your "own" rules to circumvent the real road rule. Doing that makes you a danger to all road users.

Motor bikes, trucks, cycles, pedestrians, cars, buses and trams ALL have to abide by the road rules.

Thanks Misanthrope for noting the antics of Nhoj.

……….

Divergence, I am pleased you can see my hypothetical and very plausible and dangerous example, and have put it in different words, I think somewhat better explained than what I have done.

<< Pointing out the dangerous unintended consequences of a road rule is not selfish or irresponsible. >>

I find it very odd indeed that three posters so far seem to think that this IS selfish and irresponsible!!

……….

Pericles, yes such a law wouldn’t be feasible in Sydney.

So how does this differ from Brisbane. Newman’s mob is surely familiar with inner city traffic, if not with the open highway or smaller towns. And yet the blatant unfeasibility of such a law in the city environment wasn’t enough to make them knock this stupid idea on the head instead of turning it into law. Xstrordinry!!

……….

<< I agree in general this law requires more thought. >>

Pleased to hear it, Kitten. This is the nub of this thread. New laws are needed as they concern cyclists and drivers and how they interact, but MUCH more thought needs to go into them than for this terrible example.

<< I would appreciate some comment from the Qld Police on this issue. >>

Yes...except that the Qld police are public servants and are beholden to the current government. They will tell us that it is there role to police the law and not to pass judgement on the merits of the law.

………

Mikk, do you drive? Please tell me you don’t. Please!

You seem to have no idea at all about driving conservatively, about minimising risk factors and maximising safety margins, about what you might do when you suddenly encounter a difficult situation, or about what sort of driving is lawful or unlawful, or about real-world driving practices which are often significantly different to the letter of the law. In fact, you seem to be completely at a loss on this subject.

One has got to wonder why you have commented on this thread!

Mikk "To threaten someone or put them in danger with your 2 ton killing machine is reprehensible and people like hasbeen should be forced to be servants to cyclists maimed and crippled by fat idiots in their penis enhancers."

Thanks for that sentence Mikk (and oh so true!) as I just arrived home from a long day at work and needed a laugh : )

Ludwig, you are a lost cause on this subject and I doubt anyone will change your mind.
You need to take a chill pill when you are driving...and slow down!

Of course Ludwig owns the road you fool Nhoj, who do you think paid for them. It certainly was not bike riders. If the twits want somewhere to ride those things, they should pay for it themselves, & go build it, somewhere a long away from decent people driving their cars on the roads they have paid for.

Hasbeen, I wouldn't mind betting that all those nasty bike riders also own cars and pay the same as anyone else to use the roads.
You haven't got a leg to stand on now...

Suse - please, please, please don't confuse him with logic. Show some mercy.

One thing about road safety that has been beautifully brought to light on this thread by Nhoj and co is the terrible attitude that the vast majority of people have about the subject.

On all the road safety threads that I’ve started or been involved with on OLO, this is usually borne out by the very limited response. Only very few people can see fit to comment or be involved in this sort of debate.

Then you’ve got the occasional complete nutter who goes right out of his way to give you a hard time for simply trying to point out the hazards on our roads and suggest ways of improving them.

Unfortunately, this is a good reflection of life out there on our roads – the majority don’t give a hoot about road rules or safety margins and a small but very significant fraction are outright bullies and super-impatient mongrels who give anyone who is driving normally a hard time and especially pack it on for anyone who is laying back a little bit more and daring to drive within the letter of the law!

I can just imagine the sort of driver Nhoj is. I’d hazard a guess that he is one of those total bullies who is always driving right at the limit of what he thinks he can get away with, and who drives with zero respect for other road users or for the law.

And Suse also, but in a very different manner….. pottering along well below the speed limit, with a line of cars behind her, oblivious to any other road users. She has plenty of opportunity to pull over and let the traffic clear, but never does.

So, how close to the truth am I Nhojjie and Susie??

It just makes no sense that you would be good drivers and have the dismal attitudes that you have presented on this thread.

Oh Ludwig, I think we can safely assume who are the more considerate and safer drivers on this forum.
I guess we will never really know though will we : )

Whether you lot like it or not, the safest driver on the road is the one that goes with the fow of the surrounding traffic, even if this means doing a few K's over the limit.

In fact, if you are one of a dozen cars traveling along the 100K zone highway, all doing 105, few cops will pull you over. Speed cameras may get you, but rarely coos as they realize the importance of consistency in traffic.

Onother simple solution to the problem would be to increase the MINIMUM speed one can travel at for any more than say 200m unless held up by other motorists.

If the min SL was increased to 80% of the max, this would make our roads safer and, if you wish to travel slower, like a tractor, then you would require a special rego for such travel and, not be allowed to travel during peak hour/s.

Until push bikes are banned from the roads, deaths may be reduced by these laws, but riders will continue to die regardless of what rules are imposed on motorists.

It's so sad to think any push bike death on our roads could be so easily avoided, if not for the stubbiness of push bike riders.

Rehctub, read this - It's sad to think that any push bike death on our roads could be so easily avoided, if not for the stubbiness (sic) of car drivers.

(1) Poor Ludwig, he just can't tolerate it when a topic doesn't go "his" way. So what does he do? He blames those horrible, evil posters.

(2) Poor Ludwig, he just can't tolerate it when the traffic flow doesn't go "his" way. So what does he do? He blames those horrible, evil cyclists.

Had an occasion today where to be 1.5 mt from the cyclist I had to be in the oncoming traffic lane and still he abused me.
Paid registration and license details displayed is the only way to go and then we can lock up a few of the fancy pant-ed riders who think they own the road.
Paint a line down the middle of their lane and fine them when they ignore it. The revenue would be enormous.

<< Whether you lot like it or not, the safest driver on the road is the one that goes with the fow of the surrounding traffic, even if this means doing a few K's over the limit. >>

YES!! Absolutely right rehctub!

I could give you a whole bunch of examples where general practice and the law are two quite different things, and where you’d be very well advised to observe general practice rather than the letter of the law, at least if there are any vehicles behind you!

One of them is passing cyclists at closer than 1.5 metres in 80 or 100 kmh zones, where you’d have to get out over the centre line if you observed this stupid law.

<< It's so sad to think any push bike death on our roads could be so easily avoided, if not for the stubbiness of push bike riders. >>

Stubbiness! Hahahaaaa.

Yeah, those stubby little bike riders with their stubby little legs on their stubbly little bikes can be a real hazard. Main reason being that they are so low to the ground you can’t even see them out your left window!!

Oh dear. Shame on me for making light of a very serious subject.

Sorry rechtub, I couldn’t help m’self!!

Returning to serious commentary: a large part of the problem lies with cyclists’ lack of awareness of the issues and hazards, as it does for drivers.

Rather than registering cyclists or bicycles, maybe all riders should all be required to do a training and hazard awareness course, and to then carry a certificate of having passed this course with them at all times when riding. This course should start for children as soon as they are old enough to ride on our roads.

And cyclist awareness should absolutely be a fundamental part of driver-training.

<< Had an occasion today where to be 1.5 mt from the cyclist I had to be in the oncoming traffic lane… >>

Thanks Chris for mentioning this.

It is pretty amazing to come across this situation and to think that you have to sometimes (in fact very often) get out across the centre line to legally pass a cyclist, or if you can’t safely do that due to oncoming traffic, or a tight curve ahead that you can’t see far enough around or whatever, then to very quickly slow down from your cruising speed of 80, 90 or 100 to 30 or 20 or 10 kmh to stay behind the cyclist until you can safely pass at >1.5m space… regardless of what’s behind you or the hazard that doing that could create.

The more I think about this law, the more bizarre and utterly absurd it seems to be.

So…. I wonder if dodgy Nhojjie or snoozy Susie have been out driving in the last three days since this thread started with this issue in mind and have done a bit of observing of cyclists, road widths, and the appropriateness or inappropriateness or downright absurdity of the new laws in this regard. Or have they just kept the blinkers up?

Ludwig, here's some good advice ...

(1) Follow the road rules

(2) If you don't like the road rules, lobby the correct authorities to get them changed.

But Ludwig doesn't like 1 or 2, as he prefers 3, 4 and 5 .....

(3) Disobey road rules when he disapproves of the rules.

(4) Never do anything to actually change these rules.

(5) Just relentlessly whinge on a public forum about these rules.

Gotta love that Ludwig modus operandi.

It's your way or the highway isn't it Ludwig?

Like most normal drivers, if I am behind a cyclist, I wait until the other side of the road is clear before I go around them.
So 1.5 metre clearances around bikes are the usual for me.
Obviously, Rehctub prefers not to wait.

I work full time as a community nurse and am on the road all day, 5 days a week.
Nothing you can say would convince me we all shouldn't already be giving cyclists at least a metre's clearance already, whether there are laws or not.

I have more than enough client's to patch up already without adding more work for myself knocking cyclists off their pedals!

Suse wrote, "Like most normal drivers, if I am behind a cyclist, I wait until the other side of the road is clear before I go around them".

Oh Suse, don't say that. You'll just confuse Ludwig with logic. But hopefully it won't affect his erectile function. I'm sure Ludwig's boyfriend would be happy about that. Let's be nice to Ludwig from now on; he's a sensitive soul in need of pampering.

Haaaa haahahaaa.

At least you’re having fun Nhojjie!

Hmmmm.... well I hope you are.

Or perhaps you are just being driven by your pathological negativity. Perhaps you are seething with anger and hatred as you write your absurd posts ??

Whatever the case, they are certainly entertaining. So I thankyou for that. Keep it up! ( :>)

Suse, thanks for that. At last a there is bit of substance in your post….. that actually contributes to this discussion.

<< Like most normal drivers, if I am behind a cyclist, I wait until the other side of the road is clear before I go around them. >>

If you observe this in the real-world, you will see that scant few drivers will hang up behind a cyclist unless they absolutely have to. ‘Normal’ drivers squeeze on through. This is the way it has always been, and I would say that it has resulted in very few mishaps.

As I said earlier; it is NOT the gap between cyclists and cars that is the problem, it is that drivers don’t see cyclists. I would think that 99.9% of car-bicycle accidents result from the driver simply not seeing the cyclist.

The gap that a driver gives to a cyclist once they have seen them is simply NOT the issue! Increasing the gap or making a wide gap mandatory as per this new law won’t help at all, because it simply doesn’t address the main issue.

That is my heartfelt opinion, having been a driver for >35 years, and a cyclist for 40 years up to 5 years ago.

continued

<< Nothing you can say would convince me we all shouldn't already be giving cyclists at least a metre's clearance already, whether there are laws or not. >>

That’s good Suse. Definitely give a cyclist a metre clearance when you safely can. But if you can’t do it without it increasing the risk of mishap, then don’t!!

The trouble with the new law is that 1m is now binding in Queensland in 60kmh zones or less, regardless of any other considerations…… and there often are other things to consider, which could render this sort of gap more dangerous than a half-metre gap.

And the situation is exacerbated in 70kmh zones or higher with the requirement for a 1.5m gap.

I hope you can see what I saying.

Suse I appreciate your views. But really, you shouldn’t have aligned yourself with that silly drongo Nhoj. I think you jumped in far too soon before you knew what sort of a character he/she/it is. Perhaps after his last post you will now see the merit in distancing yourself from him.

No, sorry Ludwig, I still like Nhoj's style, but thanks for toning it down for a decent discussion on this issue.

I don't see why you are surprised that the Queensland Govt brought in this rule ( I don't live in Queensland), as it is well known that the drivers in that state are the worst in Australia ......they had to do something : )

Suse, you like Nhoj’s style !?!?

WOW!! This character is the worst I have ever come across on OLO.

His 100% negativity is just palpable! If he really does care about road rules and road safety then he should be strongly onside with me. To just immediately come out in a powerfully negative and hateful manner is just as bizarre as!

Then there are his copious false assertions…. which amount to defamation. He deliberately makes out my arguments or my position to be something quite different to what he knows they are, just to make it seem as bad as he possibly can. Any fool can do that. He demonstrates kindergarten-level debating skills.

And then there are the forum rules that he is constantly breaking. Rules 1 and 2 in particular: http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/rules.asp

As old CJ Morgan would say; he needs to get help!

<< …but thanks for toning it down for a decent discussion on this issue. >>

So can we now have a decent discussion? What in my last double post do you agree with or not agree with?

<< I don't live in Queensland >>

Suse you don’t have to live in Qld to appreciate what I’m saying, or to observe my concerns when you are out there on the road.

As a nurse I would have thought you’d be very interested in road safety, and in my concerns about the potential hazards that this new Qld cyclist safety margin law creates. Indeed, if you are not interested in this, why are you on this thread? It seems most odd to me that you’ve come out strongly in opposition to my concerns. I don’t understand that at all.

Road rules should be national or nothing! There should NOT be different road rules in different states!

Road rules should most definitely be up to the federal government.

We really don’t need new rules. What we need as part of a national road safety strategy is:

1. For existing rules to be upheld. For the policing regime to match the law. Where the law is out of sync with accepted practices; it either needs to be updated to match the situation that has become acceptable, or the errant practices need to be reined in to match the law. Emphasis should be on the former. We need to regain the rule of law!

2. An education program so that all road users will know all the rules… and will be made patently aware of all the hazards and risk factors, and how to uphold decent safety margins and to always drive with safety at the front of their minds.

3. Empowerment of the public to report offenders, and expect the police to fully follow up on complaints. The public needs to be implored to assist the police with road safety, just as they are implored to dob in a litterer, or suspicious-looking people as part of Neighbourhood Watch, or suspicious activity offshore at boat ramps as part of border security and drug-smuggling regulation. The public has very largely been disempowered when it comes to road safety, which is something I have expressed great concern about on OLO many times over the years.

4. Uniform rules and policing regimes across the country.

We don’t need little piecemeal efforts like this new law in Qld. Even if it was an entirely good move with no negative aspects to it, it is not the right way of addressing this issue. Neither should we be getting a concerted effort to improve cyclist safety on our roads just in Qld. We need a concerted national effort to improve all aspects of road safety across the whole country!

Ludwig, training bike riders is not the answer, as many bike/car accidents are caused by the driver not seeing the bike. Perhaps a flag, similar to this used by mining vehicles would be worth considering, either way, the best way to improve rider safety is to remove them from the road, the second best option is to make them more visible.

....I have more than enough client's to patch up already without adding more work for myself knocking cyclists off their pedals!

So Suze, do you agree that removing them from oir roads would solve that?

Nhoj, I've never come across you on the forum before, but just for the record, I think you're a genuine prize #whti

<< …training bike riders is not the answer… >>

Rehctub, it is certainly not the whole answer, but it is a significant part of it.

<< …as many bike/car accidents are caused by the driver not seeing the bike. >>

Absolutely.

And a fundamental part of cyclist training would be to emphasise this and to point out all the situations in which this is likely to happen and how cyclists can avoid or reduce the chances of it happening.

I get the strong impression that most cyclists automatically think that they are going to be seen in every situation and many of them assert their lawful rights on that basis.

It seems that many cyclists get a false sense of security if they wear bright shirts or give hand signals or have lights at night. Having/doing these things can actually be more dangerous than not having them if it means that a cyclist is going to be less careful than they otherwise would be.

A flag is not going to help much. It is in the same category as a bright shirt or lights at night.

Removing cyclists entirely from our roads is just impractical. It is never going to happen.

We should be doing just the opposite – encouraging people to embrace cycling….. on cycleways and otherwise off-road where possible, but on-road where there are no other options.

But as part of this, we need to emphasise the dangers and strive to implement a comprehensive and holistic hazard-awareness and avoidance strategy….. nationwide.

I am lucky enough to live where there are very few cyclists, they do however drive me mental whenever I do head for the city. I personally do not have an issue with this law except the passing over islands and double lines bit...talk about putting in a grey area! However, there needs to be laws stopping cyclists from lane splitting between cars to get to the front of the pack, so many accidents are caused by them weaving through traffic and been "doored" (how they can blame this on other I will never know they ride into them!) or hitting a parked or turning car. I have also been stuck with mobs of cyclists going though a round about they where pouring into despite my 4X4 was to their right. I like to think myself a patient person, but 20mins at a round about was getting on my nerves. I have nothing against cyclists who obey the road rules themselves, I will even give them room as I am passing and wait for a safe spot to pass. But as I said, its not every day for me, and I do wonder how well my sanity would last if facing it every day.

Bec, you bring up a very good point with regards to roundabouts, as the law clearly states, you must give way to traffic on the roundabout. In other words, first there.

When a line of bikes arrive at a roundabout, they should stop to allow the car to proceed, as the car arrived before most of them entered the roundabout. The first few may have right of way, but that's it. Many accidents ( nose to tail) are caused because law breaking drivers allowing their consciences to dictate how they drive by either allowing someone into traffic or stopping for a bike. Of cause there are exceptions to this, but too many drivers have no regard for who's behind them.

The truth is they (cyclists) are a law to themselves, and until they address the fundamental issues that place them at risk, many will continue to die on our roads.

I do not hide the fact that my opinion is they should not be there as they do not pay to be there.

The worst thing is the proliferation of damn fool bike lanes.

There is an example of the stupidity at a new intersection in Beenleigh, where they pinched part of an historical showground for a new road. They have bike lanes running all over the place, many of them invisible to a driver, as the traffic lights are just over a crest.

Fortunately no bikes ever use the things, or there would be mangled metal all over the place. Then there is the stupidity of turning 6 car parking spaces in Beenleigh into 3 spaces & a bike lane. My barber, one of the business affected lives over her shop, & has seen only 3 bikes on the things in 2 years, but has lost quite a bit of business, with no other parking with in hundreds of meters.

The prime example of the stupidity of town planners however is at the entrance to Yarrabilba, the new satellite city south of Logan. Here we have traffic, turning lanes & bikeways all over the shop. The paint alone must have cost more than all the bikes in Oz are worth.

Fortunately it is too far from anywhere for many fool peddlers to get there, but I expect to see little crosses erected there when they do.

Fortunately around my area, the roads are too narrow for cars traveling in opposite directions to pass by each other, without each putting 2 wheels well out into the dirt. We manage to handle horse riders, joggers, & dog walkers courteously, but the people & parents are too smart to ride or allow riding on our roads.

<< ….regards to roundabouts, as the law clearly states, you must give way to traffic on the roundabout. In other words, first there. >>

Yes rehctub, we are told by various authorities that we must give way to traffic on the roundabout.

However, this is somewhat problematic. We should be required simply to give way to the right.

Problems arise when the first onto the roundabout has come off of a stationary position, with a vehicle to their right, not yet on the roundabout coming through at some speed. This is where the ‘give way to traffic on the roundabout is at conflict with the give way to the right rule.

So, ‘first there’ might have the legal right of way, but they could be undertaking a very dangerous move.

I realised this lawful point of conflict decades ago.

So if we are going to expect cyclists to observe the law, we need to sort out some laws and clarify them, and completely revise others that are long-outdated. And we need to regain the rule of law and make accepted practice the same as the law, which it all-too-often isn’t, not least as it concerns cyclists!

<< The truth is they (cyclists) are a law to themselves… >>

Largely true. The Newman government has noted this and along with the new safety gap laws it has implemented full fines for cyclists, equal to those of drivers, for legal incursions.

Ludwig wrote that we need to "make accepted practice the same as the law".

So, here's how it works .. Ludwig comes across a rule he despises, so he breaks that rule and makes up his "own personal" rule to replace the official, inconvenient rule. His mates agree with him, and some other car drivers also agree that "Ludwig's" rule is a better rule. So Ludwig then proceeds to use his "personal" rule whilst driving his car, because he declares it's accepted practice. He then thinks, "hey that works for me", so I'll continue to break the law, disobey the official rule, and implement "my" rule instead whilst I'm driving.

This is why drivers with the "attitude" that Ludwig displays are a danger to other drivers who obey the "official" rules. They don't know that Ludwig and his mates are using different rules,so this results is two groups of drivers using DIFFERENT rules in a given situation. Result? ACCIDENTS. Do you not understand this Ludwig? Nah, you clearly don't.

As I told you before Ludwig, the solution to your problem is to acquire the skills to have the rules changed. And until the rules are changed to your satisfaction you MUST OBEY THE CURRENT RULES ... otherwise you'll eventually cause accidents and put other peoples' lives in danger.

Ludwig, just for emphasis .. please read my above 3rd paragraph 100 times.

With a bit of .. no a LOT of luck, maybe you'll finally comprehend why driving under your "own" rules is extremely dangerous road behaviour.

Butch, you are dead wrong here:

> Many accidents ( nose to tail) are caused because law breaking drivers allowing their consciences to dictate how they drive by either allowing someone into traffic or stopping for a bike.<

My dear Butch, 'nose to tail' accidents are the fault of the following vehicle not driving to the conditions, NOT the fault of a courteous driver (who is in no way a law-breaker) giving way to allow someone, bike or car/vehicle to enter a line of traffic.
(Ok, it would be a problem if someone screeches to a halt in fast moving traffic - certainly even to let a little old lady cross the road - but that is not the essence of your described scenario, so let's not go confusing 'traffic' with a 'line of traffic'.)

So often I see drivers not giving way to someone (bike or vehicle) wanting to enter a huge line of traffic - either from a side-road, or from a parking space - just to 'maintain' their 'place' in what amounts to a static 'car park'. How discourteous, how insensitive, these are the worst kind of road-hogs, and there is simply no excuse for their selfishness and their 'indifference'.

What's needed is more courtesy, not less.

Luddy,

The 'give-way to the right' rule was abandoned long ago and for good reason; major problems existed with a vehicle on a side road not giving way to a vehicle rapidly approaching the intersection from the left. Some people insisted on taking their 'right of way' irrespective of the circumstances; idiots! Good riddance to this ridiculous rule.

Have you noticed that we also no longer have or use 'silent cops'?
(Boats also still pass 'port to port' don't they?)

Give way only to the right at roundabouts? What, and ignore someone ON the roundabout just because they entered it from the left? Nuts.
As for people racing into roundabouts, they are breaking the law; roundabouts were introduced to induce people to reduce their speed at, and when approaching, intersections - to reduce accidents - as well as to enable a smooth traffic-flow at problematic intersections.

A stream of bikes passing through a roundabout?
Anyone so rushed that they can't wait a few minutes, taking-in the passing parade, really needs to take a 'chill pill', and get a life - they will suffer fewer ulcers.

Finally, bikes would be safer if fitted with a red flag (of suitable dimension) flown on a three or four foot rod attached to the rear of the bike; more visible, even if not quite so manoeuverable.
(The same could also be effectively applied to motorcycles.)

Saltpetre, 2 very good posts from you. We need more good drivers like you.

<< 'nose to tail' accidents are the fault of the following vehicle not driving to the conditions, NOT the fault of a courteous driver… >>

Abolutely right Salty.

Drivers who tailgate (and who follow too closely if not full-on tailgating) are a real hazard for cyclists…. because their vision out to the left side of the road is seriously restricted.

Sitting back a bit and upholding the recommended two-second gap between yourself and the vehicle in front, is of considerable importance to cyclists.

A two second gap is about six car lengths at 60kmh, eight at 80, ten at 100, in good conditions and more at night or in the rain.

Death caused by a vehicle cleaning up a cyclist from behind would presumably account for a large of portion of overall cyclist fatalities. So if all drivers did this, I would think that the number cyclist deaths would be considerably reduced.

I absolutely hate tailgaters. They immediately demonstrate very poor driving skills and a complete lack of regard for safety margins and risk factors. And yet tailgating is not something that the police bother with…. except perhaps on the very rare occasion.

<< The 'give-way to the right' rule was abandoned long ago… >>

Non no, not at all. It is still a fundamental rule.

<< …bikes would be safer if fitted with a red flag >>

Yes, up to a point. But we really do need to be very mindful of the false-sense-of-security factor that having a red flag, or a bright shirt or bright lights or flashing lights at night or reflectors on your bike and shirt, etc can create.

Even with all of that stuff, a cyclist is still not going to be seen by an idiot driver who is tailgating a truck and travelling too close to the edge of the road at the same time.

Good posts Salty. Interesting that that Nhoj character also likes your posts. So maybe he could now conduct himself in a similar manner? Hmmm... fat chance!

It is my understanding that courtiousy is not law and unless it is a merge lane, the car entering traffic has to wait for a gap.

Now of cause there is nothing wrong with courtiousy, but not at the expense of peak hour following traffic.

As for right of way, where I work, Miles QLD, the law of give way to your right still applies on some intersections and locals usually take it, albeit in 50 zones.

As for roundabouts, they should either be preceeded with a shikaine type entry, or the law changed as many speed up to get there first. And the entry speed should be changed to 30 for the last 100 m.

Couldn't think of a better location for a speed camera.

Good idea rehctub – to lower the entry speed to 30kmh at the entry to all roundabouts, or perhaps 40.

We’ve got the most absurd setup with all the big roundabouts on the Cook Highway on the north side of Cairns. They’ve got 60kmh zones on the approach, down from 80 or 100 on the open stretches in between them. But NO ONE lowers their speed to anywhere near 60 by time they enter these zones. And 60 is patently too fast to enter the roundabouts! The 60 signs suggest very strongly that 60 is the right speed to enter the roundabouts. There used to be big 'slow to 40' signs, but there were all taken down!!

It is a completely stupid setup!

And of course it never gets policed!

This strip is very popular with cyclists, which have to negotiate these big double-lane roundabouts. They are extremely difficult and hazardous for cyclists when turning right, if not just at any time.

They are damn difficult for drivers at the best of times. Cyclists complicate it to a whole new level.

They most definitely need a 40kmh speed limit for traffic entering the roundabouts.

<< Couldn't think of a better location for a speed camera. >>

Yes indeed.

Suse, oh Suuuuse…. You out there?

You wrote:

<< …thanks for toning it down for a decent discussion on this issue. >>

Then as soon as we managed to get some decency into the discussion, you’re OFF!

Why? There is plenty to be discussed here!

How about a bit of considered response to my posts of 29 and 30 April?

And for goodness sake; if you want a decent discussion, you need to completely disassociate yourself with that Nhoj delinquent… and to not lower yourself to anywhere near that sort of puerile and directly and deliberately offensive and strongly OLO law-breaking type of carry-on.

Oh come on rehctub & Luddy, roundabouts are about the only place left for a driver to have any fun.

They have taken every corner out of the roads around here. Every time they do a bit of road work, they straighten another corner or two. The only place left to get the tail out, & burn a bit of rubber is on roundabouts. They have even conned most people into driving these soulless front drive horrible hatches, which can't even spin their rear wheels.

What sort of con trick is that. People talk about political conspiracies, but they have nothing on the front drive car conspiracy that's taken one of the last legal pleasures out of life.

I am only half joking too. They built a pretty little traffic calmer in our country road. In a place where everyone owns horses, a small horse truck, or a vehicle towing a horse float can't get round it, & every kid for miles around have a challenge to get through it at 80Kn/H in a 60 zone. Failure means excommunication from the backwards baseball cap fraternity.

Now some idiot is designing artificial high mounds into roundabouts. They actually think that people will slow if they don't have clear vision.

The latest one near Jimboomba will be deadly to cyclists, if they ever get that far out of the city on the stupid things, & the lack of visibility makes it a more attractive to the hoons.

A friend who lives near it reckons the tyre screeching & thumps in the night are quite annoying, but the cops are making too much money catching people doing 83 as they slow into the 80 zone, to be bothered with policing it.

PS. I still reckon we should get $10 off our licence fee for every cyclical we eliminate from the road.

The other bizarr thinking with round a bouts is once the roundabout is built, they go and put up some monument, or plants that obstruct your view, all in the name of beautification. Then, rather than run water to these plants, they bring some water truck in to block off one lane come watering time. Often during peak hour of cause.Just plain dumb!

Interesting you should say that rehctub. A couple of days ago I was quite startled by a car which came out of nowhere, entering a roundabout on my right as I approached it. It came from behind a dense band of vegetation about 1.5 metres high – high enough to almost completely hide a car and dense enough to hide any hint of headlights at night.

Utterly bloody stuuupid!

I’d get on to the local council about that.... if I thought they’d take a tad of notice of me.

Hazza, you old self-confessed hoon, you’re almost as bad as our ‘mate’ Nhojjie!!

Oh…. hold on…. on second thoughts, no I’d rather have your type out there than his/hers/its.

Being a hoon is one thing, but being just totally intolerant of any other road users, who are going evenly slightly slower than what they want to go, regardless of the speed limit or any other factors, and who don’t hold back on showing their contempt, are the type of drivers that need to be eliminated from our roads.

Of course I’m just assuming that h/h/i’s driving is similar to h/h/i’s behaviour on OLO…. which I think is a pretty reasonable assumption!

Ok, so how should we judge a persons driving standards. Should it be judged by the number of infringements (traffic violations only) they have accumulated, or, should we judge it by the numbe of accidents they have had. Il start.

I started driving in 77 and, although I have never lost my license, I must have had at least a dozen or more fines for speeding and one, as a very innocent 17 YO for crossing the tip of a double line in making a U turn. But, touch wood, I have only ever had one slight accident when I was 17, other than hitting the odd roo.

When on a multi lane highway, I either sit in the far left lane, or, I do the same speed as the rest of the traffic.

So, while I may have had my share of speeding tickets, I do consider myself a safe driver.

We have similar driving histories rechtub. I started in 1976. I’ve had one accident, in ~1978, which the esteemed police deemed to be my fault, but which absolutely was not.

I’ve never lost my license and have had very few fines over the years. I went for more than 20 years without incurring a fine or demerit point, and I’ve always been a prolific driver, with a great passion for exploring far and wide.

So I consider myself to be a safe driver, well and truly.

The other thing that I’ve done is to write letters to the editor, express my concerns on OLO, discuss them with RACQ, Dept of Transport and local council people and make complaints to the police about the worst instances of rank driving that I have been subjected to… all of which I feel a good and caring driver should be doing, to the best of their ability.

Unfortunately, all of this has given me a very poor impression of our police, Dept of Transport and local authorities when it comes to road safety. RACQ is the only one that has been worth communicating with.

I am a quick driver. I wouldn't have managed to set a number of Bathurst lap records if I weren't. I also had an aging mother who until recently, in her 90s was a very slow driver.

I want everyone on the road to drive at a speed they are comfortable with, no matter how slow.

I had an accident on the road in 1960, & a couple on the track since then, but I've found that if you value your car you tend not to damage it in accidents. I have always organized my life so I was never running late, so never had to hurry on the road.

We have many slow retirees, & farmers with old utes & trucks out here, giving many slow vehicles on our roads. The only ones who upset me are the drivers who never overtake these slow vehicles, but drive so close behind them they make it very difficult for anyone else to pass.

Luddy you'll be pleased to know I value the paintwork on my old restored sports cars too much to follow closely behind other cars, so it won't be me tailgating you. I may pass you, if you are dawdling, in a noisy burst of power, hidden under that old body & nice paint, but I'm sure you won't mind that.

<< I want everyone on the road to drive at a speed they are comfortable with, no matter how slow. >>

Can’t go along with that.

Slow drivers are a hazard, Haz. Slow drivers that hog the road and don’t pull over to the side to let the great long line of traffic that has built up behind them pass are mongrels, who deserve to be booked for failing to show due courtesy to other road users, if not for dangerous driving.

We’ve all got to travel at a reasonable speed, unless there is a very good reason. A tractor or a cane-harvester or grader or anything of that sort, which has to travel on public roads at some point, and can only go very slowly, comprises a good reason. But they still need to be compelled by law to pull over and let traffic clear whenever they can.

<< I may pass you, if you are dawdling… >>

Well, it depends what you mean by dawdling. There are abundant morons out there on the highways who seem to think that ‘dawdling’ is anything below 108kmh in the 100 zone!

Slow drivers should not be allowed on busy roads, or main highways during peak hour, unless of cause they have a valid reason, being a doctors appointment or the likes, but not a game of lawn bowls.

Frustration is one of the main causes of accidents, and slow non courtious drivers are one of the main Causes of frustration.

I have a slogan for road users, it goes, "if you wish to lead, at least do the speed". In other words, if you can't travel at the speed limit, then get out of the way.

Fortunately, around here at least, most of our slow drivers avoid peak hour. Unfortunately for me, as I also avoid peak hour, one of the advantages of being a retired old fart, so they head out at the same time I do.

Luddy to me anyone doing less than 90 in a hundred zone is dawdling. Fortunately our old drivers were brought up in the days of very slow trucks, & many old slow cars, so are unruffled by overtaking, or being overtaken. Unfortunately many middle aged drivers did not have this experience, & appear to take being overtaken as an extreme insult.

I have been flashed when I have overtaken someone doing 80 in a 100 zone, on a mile long straight stretch with no other traffic visible. No wonder some give in to their road rage tendencies.

I used to have to drive very gently around corners with some of our horses, who were bad travelers in the float. Even so, I could always avoid having more than a couple of cars stuck behind me for long. Unfortunately many slow drivers think it is their civic duty to prevent other drivers driving faster than them.

Well, must go shopping in town, 25 kilometers away. I'll be taking the little Oz Ford Capri, the 2+2 convertible. It is the only car I have with paintwork rough enough to park in supermarket car parks. I may be a while if I meet any of those dawdlers. The poor little thing takes a country mile to get up to passing speed, & there aren't many of those around here, so see you next week.

Hassie,

The ones that get me are those who drive just enough below the speed the conditions and prevailing limit would easily allow to be annoying, and then speed up just enough on the clear stretches to make it too difficult and dangerous to pass, and then, when you do manage to overtake, they proceed to sit right on your tail and at the very first chance race past you at an astonishing rate.
(You can just sense the virtual 'finger' as they race away.)
I then just hang back and give such m**grels a clear birth - you never know what they may do next.

The other poor sods I dislike (but who themselves have no real vindictiveness in their souls) are those who slow down to, or below, the 'advisory speed sign' speed at every curve in the road (irrespective of the conditions), and then floor it on the straight stretches - where one might otherwise have a chance to overtake.
Annoying, but I usually find a chance to overtake by hanging back a bit at a likely curve, and then flooring it going into and coming out of the curve so I can zip past before they know what's happening. (Rear wheel drive.)
A bit dicey, but ok if one has sufficient skill - and of course always mindful that there may be an oncoming vehicle at the other end of the 'whip'.

Ah, the joys of country driving.

I can't agree with Butch though. There will always be slow drivers, and they need to be treated with courtesy (just like all road users), but also with care, for some slow drivers can sometimes make erratic moves without warning. Part of getting old I guess, and perhaps a little absent-minded.
Discretion is the better part of valour, in such circumstances.

Mind you, some young people who think they are 'Jack Brabham' are a bit of a worry - as much for their own sakes, as for others.

<< The ones that get me are those who drive just enough below the speed the conditions and prevailing limit would easily allow to be annoying, and then speed up just enough on the clear stretches to make it too difficult and dangerous to pass… >>

I often feel the same, Salty. That can be very annoying.

However, they are doing precisely what the law, and the principles of commonsense / safety-first / erring-on-the-side-of-caution would have us all do – drive a little bit below the speed limit most of the time, hang it back a bit on the curves and crests, take heed of the advisory signs and perhaps take it right to the limit or a bit over on the straights. All of that really does amount to good driving. I think we just have to exercise patience with that sort of driver.

I do find that a bit difficult sometimes. However, there are much more annoying things on the road for one to get worked up about.

One very common thing that really peeves me out there on the open road is drivers who just have to pass you even when you are sitting right up there on the fringe of the bookable speed – 5 or 8kmh or so over the legal limit. They have to sit too close behind until they can overtake, and then after overtaking they go no faster at all, and often a bit slower than what you were going!!

The worst to me are those who drive 10/15Km/H under the limit in 100 zones, then at 10/15Km/H over the limit in the 60Km/h zones, making getting clear of them very difficult. I avoid the Hume highway in northern NSW because of this driving.

One of the best memories of my father was with one of those fast down the straight people. Dad had been a light horseman, & was a better horseman than mechanic or driver.

He was driving an early post WW11 Woolsey in the mid 60s, one of those big square heavy things of prewar origin, as seen in the Foyle's War TV show. It accelerated very slowly.

We were following a lady through the suburban streets, with many intersection type turns. She was driving a newish auto, & was virtually stopping at every turn, although it was a main connecting road, then blasting off down the straight. This necessitated dad going right through the gears from first, every couple of hundred yards, when he caught her at the next turn.

After about the 6Th near stop he quietly said, to himself I think, "Oh for gods sake lady, why don't you get out & carry the damn thing around the corners". He would never have shouted at another driver, but the frustration of following that lady, in the lumbering great Woolsey was obviously telling.

It was to be another 10 years before I got him into an automatic, something more suited to his driving ability. Still I don't think he ever entirely trusted a car that changed it's own gears, even if it was easier.

Most roundabouts have negative camber which tends to make them a bit unsafe, especially in the wet, but saves on the drainage costs.

The obstructions to vision that adorn most of them are there because of policy, the thought behind it is that drivers may speed up to get to the roundabout first if they have a clear vision of the approaching traffic; I've had a couple of near misses when a car has entered much to fast and has suddenly shot around the vegetation on my right.
Had there been a collision then I'd have been in the wrong for not giving way to a vehicle already in the roundabout, based on distance from point of entry.

As much as I hate roundabouts…. well, the large ones at least... I would rather have them than traffic lights.

But traffic lights are definitely much better for cyclists’ safety and for cyclist / driver relations… even if some cyclists do bore through red lights!

I was listening to a discussion on cyclist safety on ABC radio far north today. The big roundabouts around Cairns are an absolute hazard for cyclists, and a real worry for drivers who want to make sure that they never hit a cyclist.

This fact was acknowledged, and cyclists were advised to not turn right at roundabouts, but to instead go up the road until they can do a U-turn or turn left and then do a U-turn, so that they can then turn left at the roundabout or go straight through…. or avoid the roundabouts altogether.

The point was also very clearly made that the majority of cyclist deaths are caused by being hit from behind, by drivers who just don’t see them.

The new mandatory 1 and 1.5 metres gaps will do NOTHING to address this issue. But addressing tailgating and following too closely would definitely go some way towards it.

I noted today while driving on the Bruce Hwy, that even in a normal line of traffic, while maintaining a reasonable gap between yourself and the vehicle in front, your vision off to the side of the road where cyclists ride is very limited.

THIS is the major issue that needs addressing.

The Newman government has so far completely missed the mark with improvements to cyclist safety.

Ludwig wrote, "while maintaining a reasonable gap between yourself and the vehicle in front, your vision off to the side of the road where cyclists ride is very limited".

You just put your foot in your mouth with that one Ludwig. If you're driving so close to the driver in front that you can't see what's on the left of that vehicle, then you are driving WAY, WAY too close.

Ludwig, for your own safety, and for the safety of others, STOP TAILGATING like that. This is a "basic" mistake that many impatient city drivers develop. They just don't comprehend how close they "really" drive to the vehicle in front.

Ludwig, leave a good distance between you and the vehicle in front. Enough distance that enables you to STOP without hitting the vehicle in front, NO MATTER WHAT happens to that vehicle in front. If you are not driving like that, then you are a danger on the road.

You must sit on your brains, if you have any Nhoj. Do you ever read any of the posts or just mouth off.

If you read, & comprehended of course you would know that Lundy's main hobby horse is tailgating. He continually posts, as he did here, that he wants to see it strongly policed. He is the last person in Oz who would be following too close to the car in front.

Please make sure you understand the posts of others, before posting rubbish like your last effort

So Nhoj, could it be that you actually don’t drive? It seems that way. You just seem to have no idea!

<< If you're driving so close to the driver in front that you can't see what's on the left of that vehicle, then you are driving WAY, WAY too close. >>

Um… WRONG, oh bodgy one!

If you maintain a respectable distance between yourself and the vehicle in front, your vision along the side of the road where cyclists ride is quite impaired. And as for having a truck or bus in front of you…

If you do actually drive then bear this in mind the next time you get out there behind the wheel of your car…. and you will come to realise just how wrong you are!

As Hazza says, I find tailgating to be a major hassle. I hate it with a passion, both when I get subjected to it and when I see it happening around me. And I’ve been saying so on OLO for a long time.

If you are genuine in your advice about tailgating, then you should be totally onside with me. And yet you choose to alienate me completely!

The same goes for my concerns about the negative aspects of the new ‘safety gap’ laws for drivers in regard to cyclists in Queensland. If you have a genuine philosophy of upholding good road safety, then you really should be strongly in agreement with me on this thread.

Ahh, but why uphold boring old agreement when you can find something to express strong disagreement and absolute vitriol over, eh?

That’s very dodgy, Nhojjie. In fact, it is really quite psychotic!

Poor Ludwig and Hasbeen just can't read.

So I'll repeat -- not having *PLENTY* of room between you and the vehicle in front "is a basic mistake that many impatient city drivers develop. They just don't comprehend how close they "really" drive to the vehicle in front". What don't you guys comprehend about that? Poor English tuition at school? Yep, I blame your teachers.

Ludwig "thinks" he's leaving enough room from the car in front. However, from his description of his own driving in the 3rd last paragraph of his first post on page 14, it's BLATANTLY OBVIOUS he's driving WAY too close to the car in front. If he's so close that he can't see what's at the side of the car in front, then he's WAY TOO CLOSE.

This thread shows that Ludwig's a road whinger. I've found that often road whingers themselves do what they whinge about. For example, many drivers who whinge about others drivers being too close behind them, *THEMSELVES* often drive too close to vehicles in front of them. Maybe it's a subconscious "revenge" thing.

The fact is that if you can't clearly see what's to the left of the car in front of you, then YOU ARE DRIVING TOO CLOSE. You need to get out of this bad driving habit Ludwig, as it's dangerous driving and you could easily kill or injure someone.

I bet people just hate having Ludwig in their car -- he'd likely be a terrible backseat driver always whinging and complaining I bet. There's only one thing worse than the Taliban -- obsessive road whingers.

Thankfully the "powers that be" in NSW have decided that the new Qld laws re clearance for cyclists will not be introduced in NSW.

Is Mise, do you have any more information on that – as to why NSW doesn’t want to introduce them?

Can they see the inherent problems with this stupid law?

Or are they just waiting to see how it goes in Qld?

Luddy I'm hurt. I am on side with you, & was defending you with that post.

Hell, in respect for your sensibilities I have even refrained from advising you to get an HSV V8 Commodore, & never be tailgated again. With one of those you simply drop back a gear or two, & leave your tormentor behind in a cloud of tyre smoke.

I was going to tell you I am never tailgated in my sports cars. That was until I had to drive from near Boonah to Beenleigh in the early hours before dawn yesterday. I was driving, as usual, as fast as I thought wise in relation to the speed limits, & was continually caught, tailgated & passed by a procession of tradesman type utes & light trucks.

This has never happened at the later hours I normally travel, so I can only assume these people know the law is not about that early, & drive at a speed more suitable to conditions than the speed limit. A speed I would never dare to use these days, as I need my licence.

My trip took me over Tamborine mountain at & before first light. I was amazed at the number of lycra clad fools, very red in the face even at 5C temperatures, struggling up the thing on those idiot cycles. There must have been a dozen or more in a few groups, with their little red LED lights flashing miserably.

They all looked so stuffed that I doubt any of them had the energy to activate a camera, even if I had been too close according to the new law.

I thought of you.

<< I was driving, as usual, as fast as I thought wise in relation to the speed limits, & was continually caught, tailgated & passed by a procession of tradesman type utes & light trucks. >>

Interesting you should mention that, Haz.

Some of the worst drivers out there are those that rely on doing a lot of driving for their jobs – tradies, truckies and taxi drivers.

You’d think that they would need to be extra careful, as losing their licence via the accrual of demerit points would be very serious indeed. And yet some of them really are the pits of drivers when it comes to speeding, tailgating and general impatience with and lack of respect for those who are sticking to the law or somewhere close to it.

It seems that they know more about the policing regimes than we mere ordinary road-users do…. or they know that the cops won’t pull over ‘working’ drivers, or they will get off if they do get pulled over because the cops just warn ‘working’ drivers and let them go on their way, or they get off if they take it to court, or get to keep their licence if they do accrue too many demerit points, because magistrates sympathise with ‘working’ drivers.

I don’t know what it is, but many truckies and tradies are pretty rank. Taxi drivers used to be very bad but they seem to have improved a lot in recent years.

What’s your feeling about this, Haz?

The thing is, it's no use whinging about "tradies, truckies and taxi drivers", when you, yourself, drive WAY too close to the car in front and refuse to obey the distance restrictions between your car and cyclists.

In other words, when a person is a bad driver, it's pointless whinging about other bad drivers.

I don't see many taxis out here Luddy, & I desperately avoid going into the city, so I can't talk about them.

The tradies & trucks are not normally a problem either. Out here they mostly travel just a little under 100, & don't mind being passed at all.

Actually I find the big interstate ones rather useful. I think they must have cruise these days. When there is no slow traffic getting in their way they usually travel at a couple of kilometers above the speed limit. I attach a mental tow rope to one, & follow 60/70 meters or so behind them. This takes all the effort out of speed control, making for relaxed traveling.

It was only this before dawn, early start traffic that was regularly catching me, & wanting to pass. I'd say they are used to driving quite quickly going in to work.

One cause is the fool increase in double lines all over the place. One stretch I use regularly has had 10 lots of dotted line overtaking places all painted to double lines over a few years. That gives 15 kilometers of country low traffic road, with easy passing spots, where it is illegal to do so.

What ever fool planners indulge in this stupidity probably don't believe this makes lawbreakers of many sensible drivers, when they find a farm truck doing 55 Km/H.

I also make a point of never leaving town around 3.00 PM. The school taxi mothers are without doubt the worst drivers we encounter on our country roads.

Hasbeen,

Around here there are stretches of road that have double lines where passing is safe and dips, blind curves and crests and combinations of crests and curves where there are broken lines inviting head on collisions.

There are dills in the department that says which lines go where.

Tanya Roneberg, killed on the Cook Hwy just north of Cairns, 11/05/13, 12 months ago today. Hit from behind while cycling on a straight flat stretch of highway, early in the morning.

More than a thousand cyclists rode in memory of Tanya today.

..

We need real action to improve cyclist safety on our roads.

The 1 and 1.5 metres mandatory gaps don’t cut it at all.

The vast majority of cyclists get killed by being hit from behind, by drivers who just don’t see them.

One thing that would really help cyclists, and improve road safety in general, would be for the government to instruct our police to deal with tailgaters, and to get this particular element of bad driving behaviour practically eliminated.

This could be done easily. I am completely at a loss to understand why the police don’t deal with it, or why they and politicians and their expert advisors, don’t see the significance in doing this.

Tailgaters or drivers who follow too closely just can’t see from the driver’s position on the right side of the car, out to the left where cyclists ride.

Tailgating is deadly for cyclists!

A driver’s vision across to the left edge of the road where cyclists ride, is compromised even if they are hanging well back from the vehicle in front. But at least if they hang back, and uphold the recommended minimum 2 second gap between vehicles, they will have a reasonable chance of swerving away from the edge of the road if they encounter a cyclist.

I call on the Qld Govt (actually, it should be national campaign) to attack tailgating with a vengeance forthwith!

Luddy,

Perhaps, when in a line of traffic (or even just following one vehicle), there is a natural tendency to keep to the left-hand edge of the road - right where a cyclist may be travelling, or stopped.

So, it would be in the interest of the safety of cyclists (and pedestrians) if all vehicles kept more towards the centre-line whenever their forward vision is obscured.
A 2-second 'gap' is hardly enough to react appropriately.

And a half-second of inattention can ruin a whole lot of lives.

Everyone really needs to exercise more care, be more aware of possibilities, and be more courteous generally, if there is to be any hope of reducing the road toll.

I think it may be an attitude thing, where too many get their 'jollies' when behind the wheel, forgetting that they are in charge of a dangerous 'missile' - which is just as capable of killing them as it is of killing others.

Also, we have to pull over to use or answer a mobile phone, but I feel the same should apply to these inbuilt hands-free devices the manufacturers are so proud of advertising to attract customers.
One law, one attitude, one onus of responsibility.

And, better driver-education would be a very good thing - including the staging of multi-vehicle situations replicating common accident conditions - for better awareness and attitude development - particularly for high school students eager to attain the new-found 'freedom' of a licence.
Trainee pilots have to negotiate a veritable 'maze' of practical and theoretical 'hoops', why not trainee drivers?

A half-second is all it takes. What a pity so many don't realise.

Saltpetre where I live most of the good roads are not wide enough for small trucks or utes to pass by an oncoming ute, without at least one putting wheels off into the dirt. I have lost a rear view mirror to a city lady in a medium 4WD wagon, who could not bring herself to get as close as necessary to the edge of the narrow strip of bitumen. She was utterly horrified by my suggestion that she should have put 2 wheels off into the dirt as I had.

On many however 2 cars have both to put 2 wheels well off into the dirt to get by an oncoming small car, let alone a large one.

Very few of the locals are silly enough to ride bikes on these roads, & none let their kids out on them on bikes. Fortunately we are a bit far from the city to get too many dills in lycra.

However I think it is entirely unreasonable for bike riders to expect to tie up our transportation corridors with their weekend recreation activities.

Say hullo to Queensland,
Pushbike riders should(and will soon be in QLD) registered and insured just the same as cars and trucks.
They should(and soon will) display registration that identifies them for safety and prosecution purposes.
Children under twelve must not ride on public roads.
Bike riders should (and soon will in QLD) wear high visibility jackets.
A green line will be painted down the center or to the left on pushbike lanes and riders will be required to ride on that line thus assisting to maintain the required distance between rider and vehicle,
Failure to follow this rule will result in hefty fines and/or imprisonment with bike confiscation and crushing.
All bikes will undergo a six monthly (at the riders expense) safety check and there will be random compliance checks by police on the roads.
Failure to wear helmets and/or safety clothing will be a serious road transport offense with prison as a sentencing option.

<< …when in a line of traffic (or even just following one vehicle), there is a natural tendency to keep to the left-hand edge of the road - right where a cyclist may be travelling… >>

YES indeed Salty!

<< So, it would be in the interest of the safety of cyclists (and pedestrians) if all vehicles kept more towards the centre-line whenever their forward vision is obscured. >>

Definitely. However I would prefer to travel more to the edge of the road in order to make sure that there is a safe gap between me and vehicles coming the other way.

If we implored people to drive closer to the centre line, we’d have vehicles travelling in both directions close to the centre line and thus passing very close, at twice the speed limit.

Most roads are just not wide enough for even cars, let alone trucks and busses, to travel outside of the cyclist zone without being very close to if on or over the centre line.

So unfortunately I don’t think we can really ask drivers to drive more towards the centre of the road, outside of the cyclist zone.

<< A 2-second 'gap' is hardly enough to react appropriately. >>

Agreed. We really should be requiring a minimum four second gap, I reckon. That would be about 12 car-lengths at 60kmh, 16 at 80 and 20 at 100.

But I can't imagine it would work given that the most drivers, even complete non-tailgaters or follow-too-closers, don’t hang back anywhere near as far as the 2 second gap.

continued

<< Everyone really needs to exercise more care, be more aware of possibilities, and be more courteous generally, if there is to be any hope of reducing the road toll. >>

Absolutely! But that isn’t going to happen without both a comprehensive driver education and awareness program, and a vastly improved policing regime.

As part of the discussion leading up to the new bicycle safety gap laws in Qld, there was talk about cyclists having video cameras attached to their bikes or helmets to record their rides and any accidents or near-misses. This hard evidence would then be taken to the police.

The police seem to be ok with this. So… what we need is a campaign encouraging drivers to install cameras, facing at least front and back, if not on both sides as well, to record tailgaters and anything else untoward.

This would empower the public to assist in the road-safety effort. And I reckon it would only take a small portion drivers to do this to make all the difference in the world regarding bad driving practices.

It would lead to an increased workload for the police initially. But once it is bedded in, very few people are going to drive in a manner that could get them videoed and reported to the cops. And the overall police workload regarding road safety would decrease considerably, below the level that it is now at.

It is such a simple solution to greatly improving driver behaviour and road safety, for cyclists and all road-users.

Luddy,

I'm not in favour of a widespread 'dob in a driver' campaign, though some definitely need straightening-out, and should be 'dobbed'.

We need better roads, better drivers, better public transport, fewer vehicles, and more-visible cyclists who also look to their own safety by being more aware and more cautious about their riding habits.

When I was cycling to and from work in city traffic, I kept in the middle of my lane (making like a car) except when ascending a steep hill - which I mostly tried to avoid like the plague - and in general kept reasonably up with the traffic flow.
I caused no significant problems for others, nor they for me.
And, I wasn't an exceptional rider - but tried to be highly visible.
Maybe I was just lucky?

Perhaps we need more dedicated cycling tracks (circuits), for racing and serious cyclists, so they can avoid those pre-dawn and post-dusk training sojourns which place them at such great risk.

I think you are very lucky Saltpetre.

Lucky you didn't have a meeting with one of those drivers talking on the phone, while eating A MCMUFFIN while reading the morning paper, who had just spilt their coffee in their lap. Oh & while putting on her makeup if it was a lady.

Don't bother buying any lottery tickets, you've used up all your luck.

I'll drive a tank, the bigger the better, if I'm forced to go into the city.

Haz, yes Salty was very lucky not to come unstuck.

Me too. I used to ride like that. I rode for 40 years. I don’t ride at all any more. I must have used up huge gobs of luck… and I can’t have much of the stuff left! ( :>/

<< I'm not in favour of a widespread 'dob in a driver' campaign >>

Why not Salty?

It really does seem like the obvious thing to do to me.

We are urged to ‘dob in a litterer’, we’ve previously been implored to dob in smoky vehicles, we are asked to report suspicious people (whether or not they have been seen doing anything wrong) as part of the Neighbourhood Watch program…. And yet we not at all encouraged to dob in dangerous drivers!!

That does not compute!

Dangerous drivers, or those that drive really poorly and without any respect for the law or other road-users, are surely as significant if not a whole lot more so than the abovementioned categories.

I just don’t understand at all why our politicians and police don’t see fit to launch a major ‘dob in a dangerous driver’ campaign.

As I say; it would initially increase the workload of the police but would then considerably reduce it below what it was before the program.

I can envisage it being very successful indeed in pulling errant drivers into line and considerably improving road safety.

The way in which the police have disempowered the public to assist in the road safety effort is just appalling. The public absolutely needs to be able to make complaints to the police and have the police treat them positively for their efforts and follow right through on those complaints. And they need to be encouraged to do it, just as with littering and Neighbourhood Watch.

Salty, you say:

<< We need… better drivers… >>

Absolutely! This is one way to do it. And I think a very significant way indeed.

Luddy, I guess my reservations are on two bases:

Firstly I'm not keen on drivers diverting their attention from the main game, that is on their driving, in order to get the details of a deviant driver's vehicle number plate - particularly if in doing so they have to speed, overtake other vehicles, and perhaps themselves unwittingly engage in questionable practices in this quest (and maybe then risk getting 'dobbed' themselves, as well as possibly placing others at risk.
(Mind you, if opportunity presents itself to dob in a 'hoon' or idiot driver without any question of hazard, I am fully in favour.)

Secondly, I wouldn't like a situation to develop where drivers generally felt it was their responsibility to dob in every minor deviation - a 'vigilante' mindset - which could of course lead to many spurious complaints, possibly including some simply because a driver was peeved (maybe at being late for work) or in a foul mood, and felt like taking it out on someone else.

Still, dangerous driving needs to be reined-in, and some 'dobbing' would be very much in the public interest.
I also see a place for speed/power-limited vehicles for our younger drivers - in the interest of safety - and maybe one day there will also be a mental-fitness (attitude) evaluation as part of driver assessment to gain a driving licence (as there should already be for gaining a firearms licence).

(Maybe also I'm a little reluctant because I don't always exactly toe the line myself - a few K's over the limit here and there. But, I'm very far from being a hoon - I need and respect my licence far too much for that.)

Salty, the details of number plates and driver description would hopefully be recorded on the video cam.

All a person needs to do is to then go to the police, or phone in a complaint straight away or later on, on 131444 or 134666 in Queensland.

You definitely should NOT pursue the driver in order to get the licence number, if it means speeding or driving dangerously or illegally to do so.

And you should not interact with the offender. Just be cool and get the police to take care of it.

Well…. that's how it should be.

But in my experience, involving quite a few contacts over many years with the police at police stations while trying to make complaint about rank drivers, the police just really don’t want to know and don’t treat you well for your efforts.

On a couple of occasions they have, but on the rest, which numbers about ten I guess, they certainly haven’t. And this has left me feeling very disturbed about the whole police and law and order thing. Very disturbed indeed.

I really don’t want to ever have anything to do with the police ever again.

But I will continue to lobby for a decent policing regime and a much better standard of road safety.

I can’t imagine that a ‘dob in a dangerous driver’ campaign would result in lots of complaints about really minor thing.

Look at Neighbourhood Watch. The scope is very broad indeed. We are encouraged to report people who are suspicious or different, regardless of any lack of wrongdoing. But this hasn’t resulted in large numbers of complaints about trivial things. It is pretty much used only in instances where people are obviously doing the wrong thing or acting in a very strange or suspicious manner.

So I’m sure a DIADD campaign would get ~99% legitimate and serious complaints.

continued

Spurious and vexatious complaints are illegal. So as part of the launch of a DIADD program, the police should tell us that complaints need to be legitimate and accurate, as there are serious penalties for making false or exaggerated complaints, which really would amount to an attempt to pervert the course of justice.

It is interesting to note that the police have provided a hoon hotline (134666) and do actually encourage us to dob in a hoon. And yet when it comes to tailgating and various other bad driving practices, undertaken by ‘normal’ non-hoon drivers on our highways and suburban streets, there is no such facility!

So a DIADD program would just be a natural extension of the hoon hotline program.