Southland Times this morning (3 Nov), bike 'accident' pic

[EgliHonda]

Page 3, not a lovely firm set of breasts, like you get in the classy pom papers, but a large picture of a Suzuki lying damaged and the poor rider being attended to in the background. Story read something like '42 year old bike rider injured, 76 year old lady shaken but unhurt after collision. It appeared she did not give way at the intersection'...

Tell me this. WHY DOES THIS SILLY OLD BINT NOT HAVE TO PAY HIGHER ACC LEVIES?

Shouldn't she, as the cause of this 'accident' have to bear the brunt of the costs involved, considering the poor joker on the bike did nothing wrong, apart from share road space with a moron? How about she pays $1000 per year rego for say, 5 years as a result of being at fault.
Too simple? or would this not do as it might actually make people think about consequences...

[PirateJafa]

Bad idea.

My mate was found at fault by the police after he t-boned a little old lady - who had decided to pul an impromptu, un-indicated u-turn across his path. He's appealing it, of course. But with these kinds of awe-inspiring deductive powers, I'd rather leave them out of the equation.

[scumdog]

Page 3, not a lovely firm set of breasts, like you get in the classy pom papers, but a large picture of a Suzuki lying damaged and the poor rider being attended to in the background. Story read something like '42 year old bike rider injured, 76 year old lady shaken but unhurt after collision. It appeared she did not give way at the intersection'....

Invers is notorious for people not giving way/stopping when they should, never trust anybody to obey traffic lights or road signs if you are riding riding around that city.

[EgliHonda]

Invers is notorious for people not giving way/stopping when they should, never trust anybody to obey traffic lights or road signs if you are riding riding around that city.
Oh I don't, believe me. :yes:
And don't get me started on the use of (or lack of) indicators in this fair city...
Guess I was ranting a bit, but point was it could have been a cyclist, a child crossing the road or anything really she hit, and 'I didn't see him/her/it' seems to be an adequate excuse...?

[Bren]

I guess thats what you get for livin in the deep souf.....redneck heaven!

[CookMySock]

How about she pays $1000 per year rego for say, 5 years as a result of being at fault. Too simple?Yes. And it won't work because ACC is a no-blame scheme where everyone pays the same. :blink:


...as it might actually make people think about consequences...Yes it would, but that is not the point. The point is, bikers are a pushover, and they are able to pay. So they get targetted.

You are wasting your time trying to talk common sense. You don't win battles with common sense - you win battles with vicious tactics.

Steve

[EgliHonda]

I guess thats what you get for livin in the deep souf.....redneck heaven!

Oh, but the roads, the roads...

[Katman]

But of course we'll assume the motorcyclist was travelling at the speed limit.

:whistle:

[vifferman]

Well, I was, when someone u-turned in front of me without looking or indicating. Why do you always assume the motorcyclist is the one at fault?

[Maha]

Well, I was, when someone u-turned in front of me without looking or indicating. Why do you always assume the motorcyclist is the one at fault?

I dont think he does, he is pointing out that we assume the car is always at fault.

[Katman]

I dont think he does, he is pointing out that we assume the car is always at fault.

Thanks Mark, I knew someone would get it.

[brendonjw]

But of course we'll assume the motorcyclist was travelling at the speed limit.

:whistle:
I know your all about bikers taking responsibility and i agree we do, but i fail to see how this comes up in this scenario. Give way signs are just that, designed to make you slow down/stop judge the speed of any other vehicles and if you can make it across safely then go, this lady obviously failed to do this. Even if we do say the rider was been speeding it could have just as easily been a cop car or ambulance speeding to a accident that she pulled out in front of, as most of the times they dont have their lights or sirens on when travelling down a straight peice of road (well they don't in orkland anyway).

[Katman]

Even if we do say the rider was been speeding.....

If a motorcyclist is speeding and is involved in a collision with a car that pulls out on them then it is a clear case of shared responsibility.

[dipshit]

Give way signs are just that, designed to make you slow down/stop judge the speed of any other vehicles and if you can make it across safely then go

But people do not try to judge the speed of other traffic. They look for a sizeable gap relative to the typical flow of traffic for that bit of road.

By your logic, you could speed through the centre of town at 200kph and expect everybody to give way to you. That isn't going to happen.



Even if we do say the rider was been speeding it could have just as easily been a cop car or ambulance speeding to a accident that she pulled out in front of, as most of the times they dont have their lights or sirens on when travelling down a straight peice of road (well they don't in orkland anyway).

I would be surprised if they aren't using their lights and/or sirens while travelling at higher speeds on a call out.

[brendonjw]

But people do not try to judge the speed of other traffic. They look for a sizeable gap relative to the typical flow of traffic for that bit of road.

By your logic, you could speed through the centre of town at 200kph and expect everybody to give way to you. That isn't going to happen.

how does that work?? it your going straight and someone is at a giveway sign in a sidestreet you are approaching they have to give way to you, it doesnt matter what speed you are going (unless of course you a crawling along and they can safely get out before you reach it) And looking for a "sizeable gap relative to the typical flow of traffic for that bit of road" in a way is judging the speed of traffic.

And as for the lights/siren at least 7 out of every 10 rescue vehicle i see speeding do not have these on unless coming up to a intersection, the main excpetion to this seem to be fire engines. And having lived down the road from Middlemore hospital for a good 15 years i've seen a lot of cops and ambulances speed past..

[Danae]

But of course we'll assume the motorcyclist was travelling at the speed limit.

:whistle:

So if the biker were travelling at the speed limit or less then the old lady would have magically seen him and magically avoided him? If she didn't see him going whatever speed he was doing, she wouldn't have seen him with 10km/hr difference (up or down).

[Fatjim]

So if the biker were travelling at the speed limit or less then the old lady would have magically seen him and magically avoided him? If she didn't see him going whatever speed he was doing, she wouldn't have seen him with 10km/hr difference (up or down).

If a chick can get it, why or why can't Katman?

[dipshit]

how does that work?? it your going straight and someone is at a giveway sign in a sidestreet you are approaching they have to give way to you, it doesnt matter what speed you are going

So you think you could ride through the centre of town at 200kph and everybody will giveway to you...??




And as for the lights/siren at least 7 out of every 10 rescue vehicle i see speeding do not have these on unless coming up to a intersection,

There you have it. "unless coming up to a intersection" That's the bit that counts. They need to let people know at intersections that they are travelling at higher speeds... so extra distance to giveway with is needed.

[brendonjw]

So you think you could ride through the centre of town at 200kph and everybody will giveway to you...??





There you have it. "unless coming up to a intersection" That's the bit that counts. They need to let people know at intersections that they are travelling at higher speeds... so extra distance to giveway with is needed.
Of course i wouldnt ride through town that fast, thats just plain stupid, but in theory if they are sitting at a giveway sign and you are going straight, then yes they should give way to you, its in black and white (and i think the pictures are even in colour in the road code!! Now of course people dont follow the road code and dont always give way and in those instances we arrive at what happened today, which is someone not following the road code and causing a accident.
As for the intersection bit, a giveway sign on a side street it just a T junction to them, they expect anyone on them to give way like they are suposed to.... so they dont put it on for them, its traffic lights, and round abouts that they put them on for, or for the muppets that never use their rear view mirrors and dont pull to the side of the road

[yachtie10]

So you think you could ride through the centre of town at 200kph and everybody will giveway to you...??

200 kph is a bit of a stretch isn't it?
any if there was evidence that the motorcyclist was speeding it is usually mentioned that excess speed was involved by the media



There you have it. "unless coming up to a intersection" That's the bit that counts. They need to let people know at intersections that they are travelling at higher speeds... so extra distance to giveway with is needed.

Bollocks
they use there sirens when they need to give way

dont know why you and Katman want to view it from the worst perspective

[dipshit]

Of course i wouldnt ride through town that fast, thats just plain stupid

And why is that..??

[Katman]

So if the biker were travelling at the speed limit or less then the old lady would have magically seen him and magically avoided him? If she didn't see him going whatever speed he was doing, she wouldn't have seen him with 10km/hr difference (up or down).


If a chick can get it, why or why can't Katman?

But she doesn't get it, does she?

Have you not seen the ad currently playing on TV saying "If he'd been travelling at 50kph he'd have stopped here, but because he was travelling at 60kph he stopped here (lamp post)"?

[dipshit]

200 kph is a bit of a stretch isn't it?

It's just an example to make a point.




Bollocks
they use there sirens when they need to give way

...??? :blink: So if you are at an intersection and you see an ambulance or fire engine with its lights and sirens going... you think they are signalling that they are giving way and it is okay for you to go..???



dont know why you and Katman want to view it from the worst perspective

Because a lot of motorcyclists simply don't think and fail to see things from other road user's perspective.

[scumdog]

Because a lot of motorcyclists simply don't think and fail to see things from other road user's perspective.

Ain't THAT the truth!:yes:

[Fatjim]

But she doesn't get it, does she?

Have you not seen the ad currently playing on TV saying "If he'd been travelling at 50kph he'd have stopped here, but because he was travelling at 60kph he stopped here (lamp post)"?

If someone pulls out in front of you when your doing 60k and you hit them, would 10k make a difference? yes, some. But if you were doing 50k, they still shouldn't have pulled out in front of you.

Oh, and by the way, why was the guy inthe add sliding all over the road in the first place? Thats the real problem.

[scumdog]

If someone pulls out in front of you when your doing 60k and you hit them, would 10k make a difference? yes, some. But if you were doing 50k, they still shouldn't have pulled out in front of you.

Oh, and by the way, why was the guy sliding all over the road in the first place? Thats the real problem.

True.

But the impact might be less - or non-existent.

[dipshit]

If someone pulls out in front of you when your doing 60k and you hit them, would 10k make a difference? yes, some. But if you were doing 50k, they still shouldn't have pulled out in front of you.

Or what about 75kph? Or 80kph? Or 90kph?

At what point over the normal flow of traffic would you expect other traffic to misjudge your rate of closure? (leaving aside the how long it would take you to stop bit for now)

[Katman]

If someone pulls out in front of you when your doing 60k and you hit them, would 10k make a difference? yes, some. But if you were doing 50k, they still shouldn't have pulled out in front of you.

Oh, and by the way, why was the guy inthe add sliding all over the road in the first place? Thats the real problem.

We could sit here and split hairs all day but the fact is that if you stop with only centimetres to spare at 50kph then you have shit show of stopping in time from 60kph.

It's called logic.

[mdooher]

True.

But the impact might be less - or non-existent.

hmm sideways at 60km/h for what looked like 10m or so....Bullshit....I bet you can't do it...

The idea of these adverts is great...but at least make them plausable

[mdooher]

and on that subject how about a cop standing by the door of the parked car saying " I'm giving you a ticket for carelessly opening a door" THAT was the real cause of this accident.

[brendonjw]

And why is that..??

Do you really need to ask or are you just living upto your forum name.

I cannot see how anyone can argue about this. The Road code is very clear about this, if you are waiting at a giveway sign you must wait until it is safe to continue, it doesnt mention anything about the speed the other traffic is going, its a very simple concept and if some people here cannot understand it then i hope i never meet you on the road.
Guess this just shows how effective or non effective all the TV adverts are, that advert with death and that spinning wheel about making bad decisions at intersection that been on for months obviously isnt sinking in.......

[dipshit]

I cannot see how anyone can argue about this. The Road code is very clear about this, if you are waiting at a giveway sign you must wait until it is safe to continue, it doesnt mention anything about the speed the other traffic is going,

So are you saying you should be able to do 200kph through the centre of town and people will giveway to you? If not, why?

[brendonjw]

So are you saying you should be able to do 200kph through the centre of town and people will giveway to you? If not, why?

I am saying that if someone is sitting at at giveway sign then they have give way, if i was stupidly doing 200kph then yes, they still need to give way (and i wouldnt expect to keep my license for very long either).... Its a very simple concept and one that i didn't think was this hard for people to grasp

[dipshit]

I am saying that if someone is sitting at at giveway sign then they have give way, if i was stupidly doing 200kph then yes, they still need to give way... ...Its a very simple concept and one that i didn't think was this hard for people to grasp


Then you are making the same mistake a lot of motorcyclists do. You are failing to see things from the other road user's prospective.

People look for distance and clear road they need to pull out in. If they see a bike way down the road - they will not give it a second thought and pull out. How were they to know it was doing 80 in a 50 zone?

If most traffic usually flows along at 60kph at a particular intersection, people will look for the suitable distance from oncoming traffic. If a bike comes along doing considerably more than that - a car is going to underestimate the distance/gap it needs.

[brendonjw]

Not true, i have only started riding bikes in the past 2 years where as i have been driving cars for the past 13, My car experience and opinions still override my bike opinions and if i was in my car (which i still have) doing the same thing i would still expect them to give way..... as they are legally required to....

[dipshit]

and if i was in my car (which i still have) doing the same thing i would still expect them to give way..... as they are legally required to....

Then you are an accident waiting to happen.

[Kiwi Graham]

Then you are making the same mistake a lot of motorcyclists do. You are failing to see things from the other road user's prospective.

People look for distance and clear road they need to pull out in. If they see a bike way down the road - they will not give it a second thought and pull out. How were they to know it was doing 80 in a 50 zone?

If most traffic usually flows along at 60kph at a particular intersection, people will look for the suitable distance from oncoming traffic. If a bike comes along doing considerably more than that - a car is going to underestimate the distance/gap it needs.

I agree the driver at the intersection looking for gaps to pull into and sees one he will 'give it a go' (Que spinning wheel ad).
But it is ridiculous to suggest he wouldn't be at fault for misjudging approaching traffics speed regardles of it were a bike, car, ambulance, fire truck or police car.

Ride defensively with anticipation is the answer for the biker and education for the car drivers that bikes can be deceptive.

I dont want to break Katmans and Dipshits bubble here but cars have been known to pull out on each other as well as bikes at well below the speed limt not just above it. Just go and sit in Pak&Save's car park for ten mins and watch what goes on.

[98tls]

I guess thats what you get for livin in the deep souf.....redneck heaven! :clap::rofl::rofl::rofl::clap:Says someone from Otaki.

[brendonjw]

Not true, it is people who cant follow simple road code rules that are the cause of most of the accidents and the biggest dangers on our roads, and as i stated previously, if people at give way signs dont give way (and by giving way they obviously need to slow down enough/stop to judge the speed of oncoming traffic so we should never be in this situation to start with) they are going to cause accidents which are their fault... :bash:

[Katman]

and on that subject how about a cop standing by the door of the parked car saying " I'm giving you a ticket for carelessly opening a door" THAT was the real cause of this accident.

Well this just gets interestinger and interestinger.

Why was the bike travelling that close to parked traffic that an opening door would be a problem?

Filtering down the left hand side of moving traffic perhaps?

[98tls]

Any motorcyclist that goes about his business confident in the belief that he will live long and prosper because other road users will always do what the law requires needs to get off and into a cage.Quickly.

[JohnC]

Well, I was, when someone u-turned in front of me without looking or indicating. Why do you always assume the motorcyclist is the one at fault?

Why ??
Surely if he wasn't speeding and he had both eyes open at the time he wouldn't of hit the car.
Personaly I think he probably was speeding,because to asume anything else is to say he was just a crap rider and not riding fully aware,and that's even worse than saying he was speeding,,,so beliving he was speeding is really a compliment.

Hey, a person can only relate to their own expereinces right.
So I'm a very average rider and I've never hit a car in close to 40 years of riding,,so yes, I do tend to belive it's poorly skilled riders and speeding riders that hit cars,,,because good luck doesn't stretch 40 years.

As to someone U turning in front of you,,I bet they did look and I also bet they did see you,,,I also bet they thought they could make it,,,but were wrong.
What ever,,,,you should of known they would do it,,,not knowing is just an admission of fault,,,,come on man,how old are you and how long have you been doing this thing ?,,,,yeah,that long huh,,,and you still fucked up,,,man do a Defensive riding course before you kill yourself.
I'm not really making a personal attack on you even if it does seem that way,your comment just gave me the opertunity is all,,,but belive this, it is how I put it on myself.

[JohnC]

how does that work?? it your going straight and someone is at a giveway sign in a sidestreet you are approaching they have to give way to you, it doesnt matter what speed you are going (unless of course you a crawling along and they can safely get out before you reach it) And looking for a "sizeable gap relative to the typical flow of traffic for that bit of road" in a way is judging the speed of traffic.

And as for the lights/siren at least 7 out of every 10 rescue vehicle i see speeding do not have these on unless coming up to a intersection, the main excpetion to this seem to be fire engines. And having lived down the road from Middlemore hospital for a good 15 years i've seen a lot of cops and ambulances speed past..

I drive in Auckland 5-6 days a week,all day.
Every cop/ambulance/fireo I see does have it's lights ect going,,,so I think your making that one up as you go,,,and yeah I lived on Shirly rd for several years to.
And the speed your going is the most direct reason people pull out in front of you and fuck it up no matter how you try to twist it,,,,,people in cars judge their distances and reactions by what they are used to and what they get away with everyday,,a bike comes along at 10-20kms over,the car driver reacts the same way they usualy do and end up with a biker on the bonnet.
I get that same situation a dozen times a day,I recognise it and It doesn't bother me because I do recognise it,and I'm always ready for it.
The very few times I've got it wrong doesn't matter to me,,,if they want a 20 tonne truck on their bonnet instead of a biker,I'm cool with that,I got over giving a shit about what other people bring on themselves years ago.
Anyway,That's just the way it is and in rush hour traffic if you give way to everything,your not going anywhere and that is the reality of it.
The longer you use "but others should do" or "have to give way" as a reason for anything,the closer your going to be to being the biker on the bonnet,and if you don't know that,,,you are going to find out the hard way,,,I mean come on,you live in auckland,,what the fuck are you,,10 years old ?

BTW,I don't belive for a second your dumb enough to live in AK,be a rider,still be alive and not already know this,,so knock off the bullshit.

[Katman]

BTW,I don't belive for a second your dumb enough to live in AK,be a rider,still be alive and not already know this,,so knock off the bullshit.

:psst:Ummmm, he lists an S14 Silvia (whatever the fuck one of those is - but I do know it ain't a bike) as one of the bikes he owns. Don't give him too much credit.

[brendonjw]

I drive in Auckland 5-6 days a week,all day.
Every cop/ambulance/fireo I see does have it's lights ect going,,,so I think your making that one up as you go,,,and yeah I lived on Shirly rd for several years to.
And the speed your going is the most direct reason people pull out in front of you and fuck it up no matter how you try to twist it,,,,,people in cars judge their distances and reactions by what they are used to and what they get away with everyday,,a bike comes along at 10-20kms over,the car driver reacts the same way they usualy do and end up with a biker on the bonnet.
I get that same situation a dozen times a day,I recognise it and It doesn't bother me because I do recognise it,and I'm always ready for it.
The very few times I've got it wrong doesn't matter to me,,,if they want a 20 tonne truck on their bonnet instead of a biker,I'm cool with that,I got over giving a shit about what other people bring on themselves years ago.
Anyway,That's just the way it is and in rush hour traffic if you give way to everything,your not going anywhere and that is the reality of it.
The longer you use "but others should do" or "have to give way" as a reason for anything,the closer your going to be to being the biker on the bonnet,and if you don't know that,,,you are going to find out the hard way,,,I mean come on,you live in auckland,,what the fuck are you,,10 years old ?

BTW,I don't belive for a second your dumb enough to live in AK,be a rider,still be alive and not already know this,,so knock off the bullshit.

Well im not sure how long ago you lived on Shirley Rd but i moved out of there this year so have had some pretty recent experience watching them go up and down there as well as swaffield/coronation and untillthey either get to the shirley/coronation round about or hit the lights getting onto Gt south Rd i will stick to the 7 out of 10 figure from personal experience and observation.

I also have the fun of having to go into the city 5-6 days a week for work and of course im not stupid enough to beleive that everyone follows the road code but what im saying is they SHOULD and if the lady had given way as she was suposed to then we wouldnt be having this conversation in the first place.

http://www.ltsa.govt.nz/roadcode/about-signs/main-types.html

And as to Katman - I never heard of a Katanasaurus Rex bike either, damn looks like google cant find it either.... guess their goes your credit as well.......... :whocares:

[EgliHonda]

Man these threads get hijacked easily, suddenly we're debating the consequences of doing 200km/hr through town...?

OK I have no agenda, I just thought it strange that with the recent focus on bikes costing the country so much money, here was an instance of someone in a car not giving way at an intersection and some poor bloke copping it. The picture in the article focused on the bike lying broken in the foreground, with ambos/police attending the rider at the back. To me, the root cause of the 'accident' was an elderly lady not giving way (at a give way sign) and I thought more emphasis should be put on that, than the motorcycle.

Yes, I know there is an inherent risk in riding, but is it unreasonable to expect to have right of way at a controlled intersection? Or, as some consider, should you really approach EVERY intersection at a speed where you can stop in case someone barrels through and collects you?

Personally I try to make eye contact with drivers, and if the motion of the car/driver seems to indicate they aren't looking/slowing I WILL button off and put a finger on the brake lever and/or scan for oncoming traffic in case I have to swerve to avoid a prang. In saying that, I do at times assume other road users are going to do what they should, and try and enjoy myself. The stress would probably kill me otherwise...

It turns out incidentally that the bloke on the bike concerned works for the same company as me, and it is very unlikely he was speeding at the time, I understand he has typical collarbone, wrist, rib injuries. No idea how the old dear in the car is faring, or if she will be charged...

On that note:

http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php?p=1129493192#post1129493192

[Katman]

Or, as some consider, should you really approach EVERY intersection at a speed where you can stop in case someone barrels through and collects you?



I accept that there comes a point of no return when going through an intersection but personally, I am totally aware of any other traffic at any intersection that I go through and am prepared (up till that point of no return) to stop if someone fails to give way.

Their are far too many road users (car drivers and motorcyclists alike) who seem to place a blind faith in their 'right of way'.

[vifferman]

I do get it, Dr Katman. There is a (natural?) tendency for KBers to always assume in a vehicular altercation that the biker is not the party at fault. But perhaps that also comes from the natural self-preservation instinct that cause yuman beanz to not admit blame for ShitThatHappens.

However (but!), it's easy to assume from the timbre of your posts that you are anti-biker, as you tend to jump in boots'n'all and attack even quite innocuous statements people make.

If a motorcyclist is speeding and is involved in a collision with a car that pulls out on them then it is a clear case of shared responsibility.
If you take the view you are the one with primary repsonsibility for your own safety on the road, then this is the case even if you are not speeding.
In my case, I wasn't speeding, but to be perfectly Frank (or Earnest, or George..), my lack of legal responsibility did not mean I thought myself totally absolved of any responsibility. This has been the case in ALL incidents I've been a party to, as the primary responsibility for my safety lies with ME.
In this particular instance, I did not do all I could to guarantee my safety, in that I made some assumptions. As I came up to the car, my first thought was (as his car windows were obscured by dew etc.) that he may not have seen me approaching, and I should tootle him melodiously to alert him to my presence. At that moment, his car pulled into the curb (and the kerb too) and I assumed it was in response to noticing me approaching at a faster speed than he was traveling (I was doing maybe 35-40km/h, he was doing maybe 10 or 15). Instead, he was preparing to "crack a U-ie".
He came to an apparent stop at the roadside, I pulled out and started to pass him. He turned right, and - being less manoueverable - I was unable to swerve and brake enough to avoid the collision, although I tried very hard.

[Dave_G]

[QUOTE=EgliHonda;1129495410]Man these threads get hijacked easily, suddenly we're debating the consequences of doing 200km/hr through town...?

but is it unreasonable to expect to have right of way at a controlled intersection?

Nope its not unreasonable to expect to have the right of way in those circumstances. The thing is little old ladies (and others including a lot of riders) make mistakes, like this one, and thats going to keep happening no matter what. Avoidable or not, what is unreasonable is that you and I and every other rider will be expected to pay for it in the long run, not the little old ladies and all the other drivers out there that do similar things. Which is what I think started all this...

[McJim]

So all we really need is legislation to keep the mistake makers off the road. But that doesn't happen here coz operating a vehicle in god(sforsaken)zone is a right that no one is prepared to take off the inept or terminally stupid.

She'll get a slap on the wrist and take out a few children before someone decides to take serious action.

I've come to the conclusion that in general terms New Zealand road users simply don't give a fuck.

O'course I know nothing having lived in Glasgow for 28 years, Tuscany for 1, London for 5, Auckland for 3 and Invercargill for nearly 3. I wouldn't have witnessed any driving in that time to allow me to compare driving skills and attitudes would I?

As you were - sorry New Zealand is, as always, the perfect place to reverse over...sorry...I mean 'raise' your children.

[vifferman]

As to someone U turning in front of you,,I bet they did look and I also bet they did see you,,,I also bet they thought they could make it,,,but were wrong.
What ever,,,,you should of known they would do it,,,not knowing is just an admission of fault,,,,come on man,how old are you and how long have you been doing this thing ?,,,,yeah,that long huh,,,and you still fucked up,,,man do a Defensive riding course before you kill yourself.
I'm not really making a personal attack on you even if it does seem that way,your comment just gave me the opertunity is all,,,but belive this, it is how I put it on myself.
There you go, jumping to conclusions and making assumptions.
The driver did NOT look, or if he did, then it was a significant time before he made the u-turn.
Why should I have known the driver would do a u-turn? He did NOT indicate his intention. It was actually in a place that was not very safe to do a u-turn: just past a right-angle bend (that I'd just come around), and right next to a T-intersection. It was a STUPID place to do a u-turn, but like many D'Aucklanders, he did it anyway, for reasons of expediency, disregarding any risk there might have been. Plus he was a lazy shit and didn't bother clearing his windows before he started the car so he could actually see out of them.

Yes, your comments do seem like a personal attack on me; you know almost nothing about me, about the incident, yet jump to conclusions and make bold statements based soley on your experiences and your opinion.

As a matter of fact, I have done a defensive driving course. I have been driving/riding for nearly 36 years, and apart from a very stupid accident when I was 17 when I t-boned a car that didn't give way, I had an accident-free record until I came to D'Auckland. The drivers here have an entirely unprecedented level of stupidity, and drive to their own set of informal 'rules' that have more to do with expediency and selfishness than any regard whatsoever for road safety or other motorists. It's been a 10-year period of constant learning and adjusting to the risks, and after the aforementioned u-turn incident, I spent a very long time considering whether it was worth riding a bike here.

C'mon, Man! Never assume anything! In part, my fault was that I made an assumption, which you would know you have to do to ride in D'Auckland. You have to be SO alert, and constantly evaluating and sifting all the visual and other information you have before making a split-second decision. In my case, I correctly evaluated the data (the guy probably hadn't seen me), but then failed to make absolutely sure by giving him a warning toot (something I always do now), and then made an erroneous assumption based on his actions: he pulled over, just after I came up behind him, so he must have seen me.

It is entirely possible for ANYONE, even you or Katman, to have a crash when faced with a retard who ignores the road rules and the safety of other road users. But as I've stated before, if something happens (near miss, crash, whatever) I always evaluate what my part was in it, and what could have been done to avoid it. If I'm not continually learning and improving, what's the point?

[scumdog]

Or, as some consider, should you really approach EVERY intersection at a speed where you can stop in case someone barrels through and collects you?

I certainly do, even if I have a green light or the other guy has a stop/giveway sign against him.

[Katman]

It is entirely possible for ANYONE, even you or Katman, to have a crash.........

You questioning my super powers?

[davebullet]

I cannot see how anyone can argue about this. The Road code is very clear about this, if you are waiting at a giveway sign you must wait until it is safe to continue, it doesnt mention anything about the speed the other traffic is going, its a very simple concept and if some people here cannot understand it then i hope i never meet you on the road.

Traffic must wait, but to use your extreme example - a bike traveling at 200kph will move 30 - 50 metres in the time it takes to blink an eye!

You add to the fact that people are looking alternate ways at a T intersection and there is a fair bit of "blind spot" going on. Your fast bike can travel from out of range / site to T bone position in no time.

Who is right and who is wrong does not matter. Principles and rights don't save skin or bone when riding a motorcycle... being weary of old / slow reaction drivers does.

[_Shrek_]

O'course I know nothing having lived in Glasgow for 28 years, Tuscany for 1, London for 5, Auckland for 3 and Invercargill for nearly 3.

so thats why you duck & dive when riding in a straight line :dodge: the missile's & in Invers the cadges :laugh:

[mowgli]

Traffic must wait, but to use your extreme example - a bike traveling at 200kph will move 30 - 50 metres in the time it takes to blink an eye!

You add to the fact that people are looking alternate ways at a T intersection and there is a fair bit of "blind spot" going on. Your fast bike can travel from out of range / site to T bone position in no time.

Who is right and who is wrong does not matter. Principles and rights don't save skin or bone when riding a motorcycle... being weary of old / slow reaction drivers does.
All true. I know of a case where the driver giving way was cleared of all responsibility when the skid marks of the vehicle going straight revealed that it had been going significantly higher than the limit. Court determined that it was reasonable for the driver giving way to enter the intersection given how far away the other vehicle was at the time. There was a dip and a bend in play as well but basically the excessive speed trumped the give way.

[Okey Dokey]

Don't worry, EgliHonda, on kiwibiker threads often take on a life of their own. Like this one. It is one of my favourite bits of kb!

[mowgli]

Man these threads get hijacked easily, suddenly we're debating the consequences of doing 200km/hr through town...?
This wouldn't be KB otherwise :yes:

Or, as some consider, should you really approach EVERY intersection at a speed where you can stop in case someone barrels through and collects you?
I button off approaching then as I near the point of being committed I accelerate through.

[dipshit]

but basically the excessive speed trumped the give way.

And think of all those motorcyclists getting around thinking other traffic should give way to them irrespective of the speeds they are doing. :weird:

Road craft skills of your typical NZ motorcyclist are shockingly poor.

[riffer]

I accept that there comes a point of no return when going through an intersection but personally, I am totally aware of any other traffic at any intersection that I go through and am prepared (up till that point of no return) to stop if someone fails to give way.

Their are far too many road users (car drivers and motorcyclists alike) who seem to place a blind faith in their 'right of way'.

Here's a hypothetical situation for you - well actually it did happen to me, but in a cage.

Pull up to an intersection, I have right of way. Observe other traffic - one who should give way is slowing so I go through. They decide, for whatever reason to accelerate again right across my path so I'm on the anchors.

And some dumb fuck shunts me in the rear because they assumed that I wouldn't stop as I had the right of way.

Yes, if you were speeding and assuming people would give way to you you'd have to assume a modicum of responsibility for being hit by someone in their 70s as their depth and speed perception ain't great.

But sometimes the universe just want to fuck you over.

[EgliHonda]

Don't worry, EgliHonda, on kiwibiker threads often take on a life of their own. Like this one. It is one of my favourite bits of kb!

Hey, Im new to this. :innocent:

I have just realised you can do more on a computer than look up bike parts and ladies rude bits...

[MarkH]

Or what about 75kph? Or 80kph? Or 90kph?

At what point over the normal flow of traffic would you expect other traffic to misjudge your rate of closure?

*50%


Any motorcyclist that goes about his business confident in the belief that he will live long and prosper because other road users will always do what the law requires needs to get off and into a cage.Quickly.

Probably a Volvo, just to be safe.


Pull up to an intersection, I have right of way. Observe other traffic - one who should give way is slowing so I go through. They decide, for whatever reason to accelerate again right across my path so I'm on the anchors.

And some dumb fuck shunts me in the rear because they assumed that I wouldn't stop as I had the right of way.

So you got fucked up by someone failing to give was AND someone being unable to stop when you stopped. Lucky you weren't on a bike at the time!



* 50% being the very scientific figure I pulled outa my arse! But clearly you can travel at 51kph and still expect people at give way or stop signs to give way to you, within a normal margin your speed shouldn't give them an excuse to fail to give way. It is not unreasonable for them to allow for someone to be travelling at 60kph in a 50 zone - anyone that can't do that WILL cause and accident and is not safe on the roads.