Views: 588

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

When that a******e Duncan Gay hiked the fines the mendacious bastard justified them by saying they were only being introduced for the safety of cyclists. There have been 17 times the number of bell fines as there have been close pass fines, QED (using the illogic of the NSW government and Duncan Gay's bullshit rationale in particular) close passes must pose substantially less risk than not having a bell - 1/17th the risk.

I was wondering that since Bell laws predate headphones, does the current bell law legally require the person  to hear the bell ? I use my bell but I don't expect the people to hear it ...and an AirZound would be too scary.

Does the bell law require you to use the bell at all?

As I have said to the odd pedestrian, usually wandering randomly on a shared or even not-shared path (i.e. that rarest of things, an exclusive bikeway), who has told me that "You are legally required to have a bell, you know": "Yes, I have a bell [dings bell] but would you prefer I ring the bell and run into you, or use my brakes and avoid hitting you?"

No requirement to use, only to have. Just like a horn on a car.

And I'm with you Neil. I prefer to have full control dealing with pedestrians than try and ding the bell.

I ask Bicycle NSW, what is being done to introduce close passing operations by the Nsw Police as has and is being done in the U.K.? How many NSW cyclists will be killed, maimed or terrorised before careless and in some cases, malicious drivers are brought before the courts? What campaign addresses this urgent issue? Why is NSW dragging behind the UK in this vital matter?
What was their response?

RSS

Community Ads

© 2017   Created by DamianM.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service