Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

Bloody Stupid Qld Cyclist Laws

Discussion in 'Your Near Misses - A Place to Vent' started by Python, Mar 24, 2016.

  1. Riding out to Samford the other week - fortunately going slow in the twisties 60kph in an 80kph zone. Rounded a bend and here is a BMW sedan coming straight at me on my side of the road. As I was going slow I had time to head west and avoid him. Why was he there - overtaking 2 cyclists so had to leave 2.5 metres between himself and the first cyclist. Crossed double lines to do it which is now permitted - never mind the fact that this makes the manoeuvre extremely dangerous for other road users.
    Are the Qld govt frigging kidding - double lines no overtaking period. What makes it worse is the bloody cyclists don't even contribute to the cost of the roads via registration fees. Had I have been doing the posted speed limit I would now be a hood ornament on a BMW.

    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  2. can they really cross double solid lines??
  3. #3 Python, Mar 24, 2016
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 24, 2016

    And I believe they are looking to introducing similar laws into the Southern States.
  4. Same stupid rule applies here in NSW also as of 1 Apr.
  5. Perfect feedback... will go into the submission I'm preparing over the course of this weekend.
    • Like Like x 3
  6. I have already posted this as a warning to NSW riders as there a few roads near Sydney which could put you in a similar situation as what OP experienced.

    Just an extra situation we need to be aware of when riding. If you see a cyclist in the distance and a car nearby then there is a chance they might cross into your lane.

    Another tip is to be more vigilant on early morning rides when there are more cyclist about.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  7. Easy solution is to allow overtaking of cyclists only when clear vision ahead, not just before or in a bloody corner.
    • Agree Agree x 3
  8. #8 robsalvv, Mar 24, 2016
    Last edited: Mar 24, 2016
    Define clear vision ahead? On a straight, an oncoming rider can look quite far away as their distance and closing speed is hard for non riders to assess and that's if the driver has even noticed the rider (given their tunnel visioned focus to get around the rolling road block). That oncoming motorcyclist is at risk and the onus is on them to avoid the collision, as in the OP although that was in a bend. The OP example however highlights just how frustrated drivers can become. Overtaking heading into a bend is obviously dangerous and the driver would no doubt admit that in everyday conversation... now hold them up for minutes crawling along behind a bicycle and patience and good decisions go out the window.

    It's a known fact that the more stressed and pressured we feel, the less high order thinking processes we use. If a human has a base programming that leans towards the aggressive, this will come out when the high order functions switch off.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. The (new) law is you can only overtake over lines when safe. There is no automatic entitlement to do it anytime. This is a concession to cars who could never legally overtake a cyclist in the same lane before (they still did though) unless the cyclist was indicating and turning right and the car was passing to the left (same as for any other vehicle).

    The BMW broke the law. Simple. It wasn't safe to overtake as they couldn't see. Cars stupidly overtake into oncoming traffic all the time, passing cyclists or not. Got ran off the road recently by a car overtaking a garbage truck on their side so they just came at me instead of waiting a few seconds.

    But as said above, new laws or not (cars almost always overtook a pushie whenever they wanted before the laws - it's just kind of more legal now) a car is always at risk of overtaking something in their way at any time, so it's best to be aware.

    I wish more cars were fitted with brake pedals, but until then...
    • Agree Agree x 3
  10. You are quite correct but is of little consolation to me if I'm dead hence the law needs to remain - no overtaking on double lines period.
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  11. Easy solution is to go back to what the laws used to be. Simple and basic.

    Double lines = no crossing period. Single lines = overtake when safe, but no u-turns, etc permitted. Double lines where it's obviously too dangerous. Crests, certain corners, etc. Single lines where conditions may change, or allow in some situations, and not in others.

    They fixed what wasn't broken, and now years later as a result they have to fix the bits they've broken by creating even more problems that will in the end also require fixing...
    • Like Like x 1
  12. I doubt they will rescind the rules as the lycra brigade would have a meltdown and pollies hate those kind of tears.
    So all we can do as riders is be aware and manage our air space by keeping enough change from our $1 safety float to change our line if needed to avoid incoming missiles.
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  13. Transport Operations (Road Use Management - Road Rules) Regulation 2009 - Section 139A

    (3) A driver may drive on a dividing strip that is at the same level as the road, or on or over a single continuous line, or 2 parallel continuous lines, along a side of or surrounding a painted island to pass the rider of a bicycle that is travelling in the same direction as the driver if—

    (a) the driver has a clear view of any approaching traffic; and (b) the driving is necessary to comply with section 144A(1) for the passing of the rider; and (c) the driver can do so safely.

    So, yes they can sometimes cross double lines, but they should not be massive cockheads about it.

    And in case you're wondering what 144A says:
    144A Keeping a safe lateral distance when passing bicycle rider
    (1) The driver of a motor vehicle passing the rider of a bicycle that is travelling in the same direction as the driver must pass the bicycle at a sufficient distance from the bicycle.

    Maximum penalty - 40 penalty units.

    Note - Section 129 generally requires the rider of a bicycle on a road, other than a multi-lane road, to ride as near as practicable to the far left side of the road.

    (2) A sufficient distance from the bicycle is—

    (a) if the applicable speed limit is not more than 60km/h—a lateral distance from the bicycle of at least 1m; or(b) if the applicable speed limit is more than 60km/h—a lateral distance from the bicycle of at least 1.5m.
    (3) For subsection (2), the lateral distance is the distance between the following points—
    (a) the furthermost point to the left on the driver's vehicle or any projection from the vehicle (whether or not attached to the vehicle);(b) the furthermost point to the right on the bicycle, any bicycle trailer towed by the bicycle, the rider or any passenger in or on the trailer.
    IMO, crossing double-lines in an 80 zone when you can't see what's coming is a prime example of being a massive, massive cockhead. Which, I suppose, goes hand-in-hand with "BMW" and "Samford".
  14. It's possible that the same people who these laws were made for might also have a problem with them given time. After all - motorcyclists and drivers won't be the only people having to deal with vehicles on the right side of the road on a blind corner - cyclists will as well. If a few of those to get hit then there might be a chance that things will be reconsidered. Sad though that it may take until then to have it reviewed...
  15. #16 robsalvv, Mar 24, 2016
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 8, 2016
    The Amy Gillet foundation have had 100% success in getting an almost identical set of rules through the Victorian parliament.

    The Victorian road rules around solid single and solid double line markings were changed to bring them in line with the model rules and the rest of Australia. I've argued in several submissions that the model rules have it wrong.
    • Agree Agree x 3
  16. Of course we can all see the problem, but hating cyclists, because they don't contribute financially and they are on the road does not solve anything. Cyclist have been around and will be around more than ever ( I am a cyclist, motorbike rider and cager and used to drive overdimensional heavy vehicles) and we all have to live with that. Otherwise: motorbike riders hate cyclists, cagers hate cyclists and motorbike riders, truck drivers hate cagers, motorbike riders and cyclists. Everyone we share the road with can become a problem; they all piss us off from time to time. I have driven for a few decades now accident free by trying to make allowance for all of them.
    • Agree Agree x 3
  17. 'almost' identical?? ... wonders will never cease =D What were the differences?
  18. I think some of the responsibility should be placed back on the cyclists. It is ridiculous to allow riders to ride two abreast on skinny roads with double lines and sharp blind corners. Take the Mt Glorious rd in Brisbane as an example. It is only a matter of time until a cyclist is cleaned up by someone rounding a blind corner, or someone is cleaned up by a car overtaking. But you know.......you have your rights Mr cyclist, and we want to make sure you're happy.

    How about a rule stating cyclists shall ride single file where there are double lines?
    • Agree Agree x 10
    • Disagree Disagree x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  19. What annoys me is that this is now reason for cyclists to not move over. Ugh.
    I get it it, I move over, you move over too. It's courtesy. I don't care that you don't want to damage your $5k bike by riding it over a twig, but sheesh, let me help you.
    My drive to work every morning takes me over a very twisty and steep section of road with no shoulder for a majority of it and many blind corners. Every week there will be a pair of cyclists going down at 6:30 right when I'm there and they take up the entire lane. That in itself does not bother me. It's the fact that they do 45 in an 80 zone and I have to watch my arse because I could get rear ended. And I cannot overtake because there is no visibility to do so.
    If a car was doing that you could get them booked, but not on a pushbike. They can ride centre of the lane and suffer no consequences to holding up traffic.
    • Like Like x 3
    • Dislike Dislike x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1