Courier Mail are currently running a poll on their website: "do you think cyclists are a hazard on the road?"
Vote here.
Do you think cyclists are a hazard on the road?
Courier Mail are currently running a poll on their website: "do you think cyclists are a hazard on the road?"
Vote here.
This should be interesting...............
I voted yes, cyclist's are a hazard on the road. If a driver does not consider a cyclist (or any other part of the road) a hazard then he / she is far more inclined to run into the cyclist and prove they are oblivious to their surroundings.
I use the road frequently on my cycle commute each day and I feel like a little worm on a big hook..................
Even though "yes" makes sense as you explain it, it's certain that saying "yes" is doing nothing but fuelling the fire for their calls to remove these so-called hazards from the roads. The authors are not going to think about your response that deeply unfortunately.
It's a footpath!
The cyclists are OK.
It's conflict with cars & trucks that creates a hazard
(66% of 4800 votes say NO so far)
The survey proves nothing except that the Courier will have a few thousand votes to an ambigous question. As Dozer points out - there is more than one way to interpret either of the answers.Originally Posted by Dozer
I actually think you got it a little wrong there, Dozer.
The roads are hazardous for cyclists, I think that is what you are attempting to say. The cyclist is facing the hazard of vehicles that will easily kill the cyclist.
The cyclist themselves are not hazards. They may slow occasional vehicles down, but no-one is facing damage from the cyclist. A hazard is something that will damage you, a cyclist is not materially going to damage any car.
Does that make sense?
A man must believe in something.
I believe I'll have another beer!
"Ordinary people need to lead and not sit there and think that governments are going to spoon feed them." Ian Kiernan
Hitting a cyclist and killing them will change me im pretty sure. I know that may not be exactly what you meant but cyclists are a hazard just like cars are hazards.I actually think you got it a little wrong there, Dozer.
The roads are hazardous for cyclists, I think that is what you are attempting to say. The cyclist is facing the hazard of vehicles that will easily kill the cyclist.
The cyclist themselves are not hazards. They may slow occasional vehicles down, but no-one is facing damage from the cyclist. A hazard is something that will damage you, a cyclist is not materially going to damage any car.
Does that make sense?
The thing that most annoys me about cyclists on the road is that most know it is dangerous for them with drivers not seeing them etc but it sometimes seems as though they don't care about road rules. i have seen many cyclists on the princess highway at heathcote go through red lights and ride between cars (either stopped or moving)etc . If you are gonna ride on the road then you just obey all road rules as if you are driving a car.
Im all for cycling on the road but cyclists can be a hazard to themselves and everyone around them. especially when riding by their rules.
Sorry for the rant
They dont pay rego!...blah blah blah
Motorists are a hazard on the road...
Hahahaha! Drivers? Obeying all road rules? He heeeeeeeeeeee...
Not a dig at you, just a fuckton of drivers.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
