While being overtaken by all sorts of vehicles in silly places on my recent bike tour, I began to wonder about what was happening.  The thing that struck me is that the motorist doesn't know how to flex his/her ankle to take pressure off the accelerator or brake to slow down until it's safe to pass.  With that in mind, I wonder whether the message needs to be modified a bit to get the brains (if available) to become receptive to slowing down until it's safe to pass.  There seems to be no consideration to slowing down for any reason anywhere!

Perhaps something like this might work -

"Slow down until it's safe to give a cyclist a metre when passing"

I know it's long winded.  Perhaps someone could come up with something along those lines that's short and sweet!

Views: 2007

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

AMM is bite sized message that has a reasonable chance of being absorbed by drivers.

I say let's support getting it passed as law in all states as a start.

three words works best

"three words works best"

Yep, which is why you know some of its creators other works..

"Stop the Boats"

"Axe the tax"

:)

No Cuts to, Joint Strike Fighters, Ditch the Witch.....

Young and naive

Hmmm, three words .......

"Open Your Eyes"

"Look In Front"

"Put Phone Down"

"Stop F#$%&g Texting"

reduce speed limits

:-)

Could motorists possibly be expected to absorb, process and understand two messages, totalling eight words?

Probably not since it would mean giving consideration to other road users, a totally foreign concept for many in this day and age.

However, I would suggest:

"Slow down for cyclists"

and

"Give cyclists a metre"

Accompanied by appropriate graphics.

How about:

Slow down for People

Give people a metre

I agree with others it is a start, and it generates discussion which hopefully helps the cause.

JM

Or maybe "pass carefully, they might be using a camera".

Unfortunately it seems to take constant repetition of messages over decades before drivers get such basics as buckling up, not drinking, etc, and a percentage still don't get it. I wonder if the current cycling safety campaign is registering at all, haven't seem any billboards or tV messages.
"A metre matters" only to cyclists, and even then only to the few that know of the AGF. Most motorists will reply with "Amy What" when you attempt to explain it and understandably so. The AGF has by and large only ever really preached to the converted.
Then of the number of cyclists that do know of the AGF and the slogan, a further growing number of them believe that a metre is never enough. You mention touring on higher speed roads, where 1 metre will still suck the unprepared rider under the back of a B Double with ease.
I petitioned for 1.5m across the board in Qld last year and the government met us half way. Why? More than a metre is necessary to save a life, even they saw that.
Now, despite the sound reasoning of the Split Rule now on trial here in Qld, the AGF still insist on tagging wverything in relation to the trial with #ametrematters.

1) It's misleading and sends mixed messages.
2) It plays down the importance of the additional half metre at speeds over 60kph.
3) It's marketing hype that I believe is in place in Qld to convince southerners that the AGF had a greater role to play here.

If a metre mattered we wouldn't have the Split Rule. In other words, we wouldn't have whay CYCLISTS asked for here. SCA listens to cyclists, not sponsors, and not the board. The AGF would do well to remember that given that "a metre matters" has lowered our road toll by how much in 9 years?

RSS

© 2019   Created by DamianM.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service