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.

VIC Petition against Hi-Vis for new riders

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' started by TRA, Aug 23, 2012.

  1. Problem I have with this petition is that AFAIK Terry Mulder has not called for mandatory hi-vis.

    I have a nasty feeling that this is a blow up from a single article that appeared in a wangaratta paper & online where one cop voiced his ill-informed opinion about what the likely outcomes of the RSC inquiry will be.

    Tread with caution IMO
    • Like Like x 1
  2. I dont know much about vic politics sorry, so not sure what the deal is. In fact, I am not sure why the MRAQ sent it out, its not really relevant to Queensland riders. However, just thought I would post it up in case it was worthwhile.
  3. I'd rather you did and I completely agree with what you've done :)

    Just putting in my 2 cents worth - since politics down here is pretty fornicated up as it is!
  4. I concur.
  5. Maybe they need to send the petition to the person who called for hi vis or his superior
  6. If making a man with a red flag walk in front of motorcycles in Victoria becomes mandatory other states might follow too.

    But as stated there is no evidence for the Government supporting this.

    In any event petitions are not worth the paper they are written and that applies even more to on-line petitions.
  7. You know, if you actually wanted to decrease the incidence of cars hitting motorcyclists then you would make drivers take mandatory driving courses every five years or so.

    Drill that checking your blind spot, only merging when you have sufficient time to do this, etc. This would need to be a condition of keeping your licence. Even hi-viz yellow is invisible when you aren't looking at it...
  8. I like where you're going, and I share the idea... it's unfortunately impractical.

    I think there's 4M license holders in Victoria. That equates to about 3000 retests every working day. Imagine the logistics of that! And the retesting!
  9. At the risk of being a complete tool-

    "If it saves one life it will be worth it"

    Agree it is never going to happen but something along those lines could.

    Cheers Jeremy
  10. Maybe not practical, but I would feel safer if this was the case.

    In some ways (now I'm really not sure if this is true) I think P-plater cars might actually be better at checking their blind spots. I feel safer overtaking these cars... probably because having this "roadcraft" drilled into them throughout the Ls to Ps process was beneficial. (although we all know that P-platers are worse, general accidents wise)

    The times I've had drivers violently merge towards me have all been mothers picking their kids up from school, tradespeople at the end of the day and taxis... they are all "experienced" drivers who are getting complacent. They all probably consider themselves good drivers.

    I think everybody considers them self a good driver! Seriously, everybody I ever hear that has mentioned driving has said "yeah, I'm a good driver". Then you hop in the car with them and they drive too fast and are unobservant. I say be critical of yourself.. a few years after having a licence, I noticed I was picking up some shit habits.
  11. The biggst issue with this sort of "pre-emptive" petition is that it gives legitimacy to those calling for hi-viz. If the clowns are ignored in the early stages then it will die a natural death since the TAC and VicRoads have explicitly stated that they are not looking to mandate anything.

    By continuously giving it publicity, these petitions just keep the issue in the public's (and the agencies) minds and they start thinking that there must be something in it Better to shut up and concentrate on the real current issues such as filtering, bad ADRs and general harassment.

    There's enough real issues wihtout inventing them.
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Damned if you do damned if you don't though tony, look how other things were brought in because of inaction.
  13. which other things?
  14. If you're gonna make a habit of querying my every post you had better stop it now before the ignore function hits you square in the ghoulies. I said it in another thread you are a waste of time and space and I am not in the habit of engaging in circular arguments which is what this will turn into.
  15. I'm genuinely interested in the answer too.

    I can only think of the levy but I recall plenty of meetings, lobbying and a protest ride or two to boot, which doesn't sound like inaction to me.

    Of course the rebuttal (especially from up North) will be that there was a cabal of spastics at the wheel so it was all ineffective action. There might be some truth in that, but the subtext in statements like that is that effective media campaigns and savvy people will always win results. That is bullshit.

    [FONT=&quot]The smoking lobby had an unlimited budget, media experts, a carefully crafted and fully funded media strategy AND they had a voting block of 42% of the Australian public - that being their customer base.

    They spent a bucket load attracting their customers to their message and coaching their customers on how to voice their opinions to their local pollies and media, papers, talk back... and what happened??? Surely it was a glorious success given that they paid for the best media savviness and best media people??? Nope. Plain packaging and other restrictions came in.

    So when the strength of your argument is weak, the best media skills, the best lobbying in the world, is absolutely NO guarantee of success.

    Sure, I agree that not having any savvy is detrimental, but it's not the be all and end all that it has been made out to be.

    One of the suggestions I've read is that you have to put motorcycles in front of the media by a steady diet of regular press releases, every 3 days was one suggestion I saw, so that the public can be educated about motorcycling's causes and benefits. Let's follow that through to some logical conclusions.

    1. Why would a steady stream of non controversial press releases get any press? So that means each one has to have a controversy or be in the public interest to get picked up. Can you generate either angle in 121 mostly single issue press releases per year?

    2. With a steady stream of press releases from a minority, who is going to listen after the first dozen?

    3. If a press release got picked up by some of the mass media, what's the likelihood it would get prominent media position in mainstream media unless it had a huge public interest / impact?

    4. If it got picked up but didn't get prominent main stream positioning, HOW is it likely to shape public opinion?

    And there are others.

    A significant proportion of motorcycling's battles is going to be done by the strength of the argument directly with policy makers and implementers. That's reality.

    Embarrassing politicians into submission is a significant uphill road to hoe for a minority group poorly understood by the community and powers that be.

    Media handling has to be a tactic as part of a strategy. It's not a silver bullet... but anyway I digressed.

    What else have motorcyclists been shafted with due to "inaction"?

  16. levy, wire rope barriers, the whole push to restrict motorcycling by the TAC and the Police encroachment of more and more enforcement just to name a few.
    I'm sure you will come up with more if you think about it.
  17. IIRC, one of the first places to have WRB's down the middle of a road was NSW.

    For reasons I don't fathom, especially since the life cycle cost of WRB's is higher than armco, WRB's have become the engineering standard road barrier system for road authorities. Just what strategy would you expect to employ to reverse that decision? The bureacracy simply doesn't buy that it's a danger to riders. I'm interested to hear what the perceived failings of the previous efforts were so we can learn from past mistakes.

    What influence do you think ANY group in the community could wield over police operational matters? :-k

    Why haven't riders exercised their right to complain to their local members of parliament when they've felt harassed by the police? They have every right to.

    Apparent self evident throw away statements made in public aren't going to cut it any more. What other things has past advocacy failed to stop?

    There's a strong perception from the North, that Victoria has FNP and Hi Viz legislation and they are two key reasons to no support advocacy because any cabal of spastics that let that in don't deserve support.

  18. If I remember correctly, riders got royally screwed on WRB.

    Government in power loved them. Then BAM only a few months out from the election, some new kid becomes leader of the opposition and the bikies get his solemn pledge that he'd ditch WRB state wide. An awesome result of lobbying and getting the polly on side and listening.

    Course then when he did win, Bracksy won with such a landslide that he could afford to break half the promises he ever made and he'd still be in power for a decade.

    So, if I have those facts correct, then that wasn't a result of rider inaction, but rather being the victims of political expediency. Bloody Bracksy.
    • Like Like x 1
  19. There is a strong perception not only up north but everywhere that the previous cabal of spastics allowed the current conditions to happen due to their ineptitude, egos and infighting, there are still some elements sticking out their ugly heads and talking to the media. You know who they are.
    They will not shut up and it seems their ego's won't allow them to.
    As soon as they shut up for good and let you guys do YOUR job properly then the stigma will always be there.
    they must be gagged for good.