ACC calls for “greater awareness of motorcyclists”

[Drum]

So whats the big deal in wearing a fluoro vest or jacket?......

No big deal. As long as it's your own choice. I do have a problem with the Government telling me what to wear.

[Grub]

I do have a problem with the Government telling me what to wear.

So if you ride a black bike in black gear ans as ACC says, a car doesn't see you and puts you in horsepittle, whose fault is it? Who cares? The car driver is having another latte while you're sipping from a straw

If someone is too stupid to look out for themselves then the Nanny State has to step in and do it for them

[Grahameeboy]

Oops, too late.



But I'm interested as to your reasoning?

Incidentally, can Aucklanders keep an eye out for it, see if it makes it in? They don't publish them online.

Never mind.

I sent one but used facts to point out the flaws whereas your letter is taking a cynical approach to what she has said which is fine and I understand this approach, just that she is using facts so we need to reply using facts.

Basically you are just telling her she is a stupid cow and I am giving her facts and she does not know I am telling her she is a silly old cow.....

[Sanx]

I ride a black bike and, when not in my leathers, I wear a full black cordura suit (with reflective piping, which doesn't show up during the day). My helmet's about 50% black from the front, with white and red bits (Shoei Patriot, if you're interested). However, I ride a late model sports bike where I can't turn the headlight off even if I wanted to (which I wouldn't). There is simply no excuse for not seeing me in daylight. The bike's a big black loud object (like Hone Harawira, but better looking) with a bright headlight in the middle. Considering I'm half crouched over the bike anyway, and the bike's got a dark smoke screen on it, there'd be very little of any high-vis vest visible.

I'm against nanny legislation at the best of times. However, I understand why the major Jap manufacturers have made it that headlights on road bikes cannot be turned off. But forcing everyone to wear a high-vis vest would be daft. Though ... thinking about it ... when it came to people trying to describe that bike who'd done a runner: "Yes officer, it was a bike loud bike, and the rider was wearing a flouro vest". Hmmm

[craigs288]

I agree although I see a lot of dumb cylists who seem to be colour blind when it comes to traffic lights.

When I moved to NZ I used to cycle but bought a bike instead because it was just too dodgy.

It is surprising how fast you can travel on a cycle eh...used to cycle to London and was often overtaking traffic..safer than undertaking.

Completely. There are as many 'bad' cyclists out there, as any other group of road users, ignoring the road rules and then complaining bitterly that other people broke the same rules that they did.
Maybe it is just a human thing to blame everyone else, and then much later look in the mirror and accept your own part in the big scheme of things.
However, there is always going to be a certain number of unsuspecting and undeserving victims.

[James Deuce]

So if it became complusory how would it affect your enjoyment of riding your bike?

You can't enjoy it if you can't ride it can you?

Contrary to popular leftist ideology, making something compulsory does not give you a +1 force field of not being run into by blind road users.

[MSTRS:Me]

So if you ride a black bike in black gear ans as ACC says, a car doesn't see you and puts you in horsepittle, whose fault is it? Who cares? The car driver is having another latte while you're sipping from a straw

If someone is too stupid to look out for themselves then the Nanny State has to step in and do it for them

If drivers can't see a headlight (even one on high beam) then a fluoro jacket is not gonna do it either. Wear one through your own choice - that's fine. Forced wearing is not a valid option. Because, with the riot of colour that is today's roads and roadsides, what makes you think that (yet another) bright colour is going to be noticed?
Besides, black is perceived to be more threatening than (pretty) colours...

[Albino]

I'm one of the ones who are obviously "too stupid" to wear fluoro, and like hell I think the government should try to save me from myself.

That logic really isn't that far from saying bikes are dangerous and that we shouldn't be allowed to ride them.

[MSTRS:Me]

Maybe it is just a human thing to blame everyone else,

Probably, and exacerbated by nanny state policies. Want some more? Just vote Hellon Earth...

[craigs288]

Have crashed into the side of a red-light runner.

In a marked 'work' car too.

Have had to hit the brakes hard to stop from running into the rear of a 'people-mover' that pulled out of a side street right on front of me.

Again in a marked 'work' car.


Had some minor scares on the bike but make myself really visible on it and ride like they're all out to get me. and don't ride in cities much except to pass through them.

I figured it happens too often for it not to have happened to some officers.
I was about to type that I would love to see it happening but that might be misconstrued as me wanting to see a police officer injured because of some numbnuts.
What I would like to see is some useless unobservant twat getting an earful ( plus tickets )for their piss poor driving skills. That would cheer me up on the way to work.


Someone else made a reference to metal poles to stop red light runners (I think).
I reckon automated tyre spikes that operate 2 seconds after your light goes red. If you commit to leaving your side of the intersection after the light has turned red then you will face the consequences.
It would sure make it easy for the first police on the scene to catch the bastards.

[James Deuce]

So if you ride a black bike in black gear ans as ACC says, a car doesn't see you and puts you in horsepittle, whose fault is it? Who cares? The car driver is having another latte while you're sipping from a straw

If someone is too stupid to look out for themselves then the Nanny State has to step in and do it for them

Colour has nothing to do with it.

Motion camouflage is the issue, followed by relative personal threat assessment. The "average" "driver" spends 1/10th of a second checking each option at an intersection and is not told to look specifically of motorcycles, nor are they trained that motorcycles essentially act like a dragonfly in regard to their surroundings and require specific techniques for spotting.

Human beings estimate size by triangulating recognisable features, such as headlights, and then calculate relative velocity and trajectory accordingly. Motorcycles are bereft of reference points for triangulation and just like trains approaching level crossings, they appear to remain motionless in regard to the background until almost on top of you, giving rise to the myth that all motorcyclists speed everywhere, all the time.

A poster campaign won't help, nor will fluro vests (particularly those in the red end of the colour spectrum - all males have a degree of red-green colour blindness), lights-on in the daytime, leg protectors, speed limiters, tougher licensing, and cc restrictions.

Driver training with specific educational goals will.

The Nanny state has no obligation to step in, and there is a quiet philosophical argument developing that says that removing risk taking from society is a surer way to destroy it than nuclear weapons.

[Gremlin]

So if you ride a black bike in black gear ans as ACC says, a car doesn't see you and puts you in horsepittle,

Besides, black is perceived to be more threatening than (pretty) colours...

I go with the threatening idea... bike is black, gear is black, same with helmet, smoked visor etc. Also helps that I never look small on the bike.

Never had anyone directly take me on (in car, whatever), but do see plenty of idiots. Barely get angry any more... just sigh, and wish a cop had seen it

[Hitcher]

and there is a quiet philosophical argument developing that says that removing risk taking from society is a surer way to destroy it than nuclear weapons.

I, for one, wish that this philosophical argument would get a whole lot fucking noisier.

[Dave Lobster]

So if you ride a black bike in black gear ans as ACC says, a car doesn't see you and puts you in horsepittle, whose fault is it? Who cares? The car driver is having another latte while you're sipping from a straw

If someone is too stupid to look out for themselves then the Nanny State has to step in and do it for them

No, they don't. It's none of their damn business. They're in place for our BENEFIT, not the other way around.

[MSTRS:Me]

No, they don't. It's none of their damn business. They're in place for our BENEFIT, not the other way around.

Can you think of a way to convince them ??