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.

NSW- CHANGES to NSW road rules effective july 1

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' at netrider.net.au started by idontlikemondays, Jun 15, 2008.

  1. well, looks like some beurocrat has had another spurt of sheer genius.


    interesting one is that childeren under 8 years old are now longer allowed to pillion unless in a side car.

    tex, your bug bear is right at the bottom of the page, 3 points, $324 fine. good luck in beating it mate, its a crock of shit.
  2. "Bicycle storage areas at intersections"???

    Where are the motorcycle "storage areas"?
  3. yeah, i can see a lot of riders getting knabbed for that one.
  4. So does that mean up until now it's been legal, including the ones in the middle of the road :shock: :?
  5. Wow, sure hope there aren't any kids dying of cancer under 8 years old who'd like a ride on the back of a bike, as part of a good charity event that helps to bond a community together and briefly make people feel like they are a part of something bigger than 'just f*#%ing Sydney'.

    "Sorry kid, it's too dangerous for you. You've got your whole life ahea... oh wait."
  6. :(
    so, my little pillion will be banished from the back seat for 2 weeks until she turns 8 (july 13) better make the most of the "shool dropoffs" while im still on holidays.
  7. yeah i would really love to see the stats that demonstrate childeren under 8 years are at a higher risk of being injured.
  8. The rider of a motorbike must not ride with an """animal ON the fuel tank. """.

    PENALTY: Three demerit points (four in a school zone) and a $324 fine ($405 in a school zone).


    Isn't the Buell fuel tank IN the frame .
  9. Exactly. Why the fvck are cyclists always accomodated for and not bikes. THere is no reason no why we shouldn't be able to filter down the side and stop in these zones. I know I will anyway.
  10. I've written to the NSW Transport Minister and my local member. Please feel free to do the same and use the text below, or create your own rant!

    Dear Minister, I refer to the recent legislative changes to the NSW Road Rules effective 1 July 2008. (http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/rulesregulations/roadrules/2008nswrrulechanges.html) As a motorcyclist i'm not unfamiliar with the lack of attention received by government. What frustrates me with the latest changes is the new rules introduced only penalise motorcyclists, yet there is a host of changes accomodating for bicyclists.

    Could you please explain to me, why you have created storage areas for cyclists but have excluded motorcylists from using them? Motorcyclists have been begging for zones like this to avoid one of the most common accidents - being hit from behind my motor vehicles. Now that zones have finally been introduced, you will fine us for using them and effectively fine us for trying to reduce our likelihood or injury through rear end accidents.

    Could you please provide a reason why two wheeled vehicles with engines are discriminated against those relying on pedal power. Its hardly like we're taking up much more of the road with the comparative widths of both vehicles and we can already fit in existing cycle lanes at traffic light intersections. We are just trying to reduce our chances of injury or worse - death, why prevent us from doing this?
  11. I still don't get the idea of a bicycle box ,how is this safer for a bicycle rider ?

    So your driving along and over take 1 or 2 or 3 pushy riders ,then you get a red light ,...are they allowed to split to the front and gather on this box.??????????????????.

    Lights change and they ride off at 10kph causeing traffic to back up and blocking that lane ,as you try to over take then again . :roll:
    2 minutes later the same 3 split to the front and gather in the box ,...light goes green and your stuck behind them again as they ride off at 10kph , blocking traffic again.

    I don't get how this is safer or better for anyone ,the traffic flow ,the car driver or the pushy riders as the same person has been stuck behind them for 3 sets of lights and is now MAD :mad: and your not moving with the traffic ,your a speed hump.

    Motorcycles split to the front and are gone in a split second and you hardly catch up to them.

    Any pushy riders care to explain how or why this is good????.
  12. Yep.

    Welcome to Melbourne.
  13. I swear i thought this part said don't carry animals inside your fuel tank when i first skimmed it...


    spose i'll have to stuff my kitten in my back pocket instead from now on...
  14. Yeah, i dont understand how putting cyclists now in front of cars rather than beside them will be anything but worse considering the speed and acceleration differences.
  15. It works in other countries but only because they have a separate green light for bicycles which gives them a head start and time to move over to the left before the cars go. Unfortunately it seems like the NSW Government have only copied half the idea.
  16. how do you prove the child is eight or older? whip out their drivers licence for the cop?

    or do you have to carry a birth certificate with you?

    i bet harold scruby was somehow involved in some of these... :evil:
  17. This one was proposed about 18 months ago when they also proposed cracking down on bike noise. The age limit got very little attention.

    I find this regulation really affronting. It basically means that people can't choose to have a bike instead of having a car. It could mean 2 car families instead of 1 car, 1 bike. 1 bike families are not going to be an option for most people.

    Really who picked 8? It's pretty hard to argue that a 3 year old should be allowed on the back of a bike on the road, but 8?
  18. Yeah somewhat ridiculous that a 9 year old with dwarfism would be fine but a 7 year old that's tall for their age isn't. If it's simply an issue with them being able to reach the pegs then wouldn't a height requirement make more sense - or is it only okay to discriminate based on age.
  19. We already had the height requirement in place, didn't we? The law already stated that the pillion must have their feet on the pegs at all times.

    Unless they're concerned that a seven year old kid will be swinging around on the seat like a gyrating monkey, upsetting the bike. (And yet, an 8 year old wouldn't?)

    I agree, it's redundant and/or stupid. :?
  20. I've taken my six year old a couple of times up and down the court. She turns 7 in a couple of weeks and I wouldn't really consider taking her for a proper ride anywhere yet, but I was definitely riding on the back with my dad younger than her, with my pudding bowl helmet and oversized flying goggles :LOL:

    It really depends on the kid in question...I'm sure there are plenty of 6 + 7 year olds that can both reach the pegs and would be fine on the back of a bike and some that just aren't even at 8. Given the amount of nanny behaviour going on with our government recently I'm just surprised they didn't put an age limit on it a while ago, AND make it something like 16 :roll: