Cyclist Problem

[Elfenstar]

my understanding is that they are not even suppose to cycle 2 by 2.

 

ROAD TRAFFIC ACT

(CHAPTER 276, SECTION 140)

ROAD TRAFFIC (BICYCLES) RULES

 

8.

Every bicycle shall be ridden close to the left hand edge of the roadway and in such a manner as not to obstruct vehicles moving at a faster speed.

 

Look at the section on riding abreast which shows the prohibitions in that regard.

[Altivo]

So u personally feels that road protection and safety is not important?

 

Like i mention earlier, i do agree there are black sheeps around and they ride like idiots waiting to add on to the statistics, but i believe they do not represent the whole cycling community.

 

I believe its not about banning cyclists on the road or whatsoever, its about how to co-exists, how to promote more road awareness and safety. I am sure cyclists know the danger or riding on the road, but how to make it better and safer for everyone? The laws might not just be for cyclists, it could be for everyone and anyone!

 

Personally i feel a cycling lane is a far cry, and it wont be implemented, but i am sure more things can be done to ensure the safety of bikers.

 

Like one of the letters stated, if government can create a law to make it illegal for FDW to clean windows, why not spend abit of time for road safety?

 

U talk more sense and here's my view.

 

Education on road safety is very important and I agree. There is a reason why there is a minimum age for drivers and motorcyclists before they can certified as competent. It all boils down to the perceived maturity and skills required to handle a car or motorbike. How about bicycles? It is so easy that even a 3-4 yo can ride a bike but does that make them competent? No really. And because anyone of any age can ride and buy a bicycle, how is one gonna ensure the rider is sufficiently competent? Sure, you can have certification/tests/license but all these will make the whole idea of riding so laborious and inefficient.

 

Back then when they were plying ulu places like LCK, Changi Costal Road, no one was really bothered by them. But imagine seeing a pack of 20-30 bicycles on busy artery roads like Lornie Road, Thomson Road, Orchard Road, CBD causing jams. It is no wonder that motorists find these cyclists a nuisance. Generally, most motorists are still tolerant of these cyclist and would prefer to keep it status quo. But if the cyclists were to go all public and champion for their rights, then very soon, you will start to see even more "me vs them" behaviour. That's why i quoted the example of Section 377A: The more gay (cycling) activists push their agenda, he said, the stronger will be the push back from conservative forces (non-cyclists) in the society.

 

 

[Elfenstar]

So does this mean can cycle 2 abreast? and a 3rd one if he is overtaking?

 

Yup

[Elfenstar]

I should be the one asking you instead.

 

And I'm not racist. I'm just applying the same logic as yours. Since by giving cyclists a dedicated lane would solve the conflict, then I propose that different races/nationalities should have different train compartments too. In fact, we can even further drill down and have some sections which are for the needy/pregant/old folks. Like that, everyone will be happy!

 

Since we're on this, how about we further divide the bike lane into sub-lanes. Then we can have small kids on their training bikes, teenagers on their cheap aleoca MTs, OLs on their Tokyo bikes, yuppies on their Cannondale etc.

 

Wait, I hear lotsa of toddlers are not happy that they can't zoom on their kick scooter on the pavement. How how? I think the best way is to write an open letter to Tuck Yew and LHL to request for a skating lane.

 

How are different races different when it comes to the human body vs the various types of vehicles on the roads? A human is more or less built the same regardless of race, just like bicycles are more or less the same regardless of type, however a car is different from a bicycle.

 

Don't confuse people asking for changes to improve safety measures with people asking for changes just to be able to do something.

[Ttbest]

Read and look. What the cyclists are doing is 100% legal. What the guy that went out did though illegal was at his own peril to look after the safety of his fellow riders.

 

illegal or not is dependent on situation. if the car did not give way and drive nearer to the right kerb, he bangs into the guy who went out, does the argument of legal/illegal make any sense?

 

whether he is looking after the safety or otherwise is another contentious point, I mean, they are not in peril, he is.

 

The spirit of the law states they are not to obstruct traffic, in which they are doing so now.

[Altivo]

Well we'll see how 377A turns out since its going on trial for possibly being unconstitutional

 

Don't we already have bus lanes anyway?

 

 

Hahaha.... on the 377A, let's see how it goes man!

 

As for bus lanes, it makes sense for the govtn cos it's in line with their policy on public transport + if they can run more buses, they make more $ and that benefits Temasek. But on the flipside, you do see how bus lanes during peak hours do cause congestions to other motorists. Now imagine adding a bicycle lane next to the bus lane.

 

If we have the land mass, I'm all for bicycle lane. I've been to Amsterdam and have seen how useful their bike lanes are. But with land scare singapore, the PCNs would be the next best option for the moment.

[Elfenstar]

U talk more sense and here's my view.

 

Education on road safety is very important and I agree. There is a reason why there is a minimum age for drivers and motorcyclists before they can certified as competent. It all boils down to the perceived maturity and skills required to handle a car or motorbike. How about bicycles? It is so easy that even a 3-4 yo can ride a bike but does that make them competent? No really. And because anyone of any age can ride and buy a bicycle, how is one gonna ensure the rider is sufficiently competent? Sure, you can have certification/tests/license but all these will make the whole idea of riding so laborious and inefficient.

 

Back then when they were plying ulu places like LCK, Changi Costal Road, no one was really bothered by them. But imagine seeing a pack of 20-30 bicycles on busy artery roads like Lornie Road, Thomson Road, Orchard Road, CBD causing jams. It is no wonder that motorists find these cyclists a nuisance. Generally, most motorists are still tolerant of these cyclist and would prefer to keep it status quo. But if the cyclists were to go all public and champion for their rights, then very soon, you will start to see even more "me vs them" behaviour. That's why i quoted the example of Section 377A: The more gay (cycling) activists push their agenda, he said, the stronger will be the push back from conservative forces (non-cyclists) in the society.

 

Actually the minimum age to ride a bike on the road is 16. IIRC it's in the regular RTR.

 

Don't get us wrong. Cyclists are not asking for any rights. We're asking to have due regard and consideration given to us while on the road, because we have as much right to be on it as every other road user. The cycling lane is to help with this. If cyclists were going to ask for a right, it would be a right to cycle on the pavement since other than Tampines, that we don't have.

 

[Altivo]

How are different races different when it comes to the human body vs the various types of vehicles on the roads? A human is more or less built the same regardless of race, just like bicycles are more or less the same regardless of type, however a car is different from a bicycle.

 

Don't confuse people asking for changes to improve safety measures with people asking for changes just to be able to do something.

 

I'm all for improving safety. But at the moment, it seems like the cycling enthusiasts are asking for changes to suit them but at the expense of inconvenience to others.

[Nzy]

U talk more sense and here's my view.

 

Education on road safety is very important and I agree. There is a reason why there is a minimum age for drivers and motorcyclists before they can certified as competent. It all boils down to the perceived maturity and skills required to handle a car or motorbike. How about bicycles? It is so easy that even a 3-4 yo can ride a bike but does that make them competent? No really. And because anyone of any age can ride and buy a bicycle, how is one gonna ensure the rider is sufficiently competent? Sure, you can have certification/tests/license but all these will make the whole idea of riding so laborious and inefficient.

 

Back then when they were plying ulu places like LCK, Changi Costal Road, no one was really bothered by them. But imagine seeing a pack of 20-30 bicycles on busy artery roads like Lornie Road, Thomson Road, Orchard Road, CBD causing jams. It is no wonder that motorists find these cyclists a nuisance. Generally, most motorists are still tolerant of these cyclist and would prefer to keep it status quo. But if the cyclists were to go all public and champion for their rights, then very soon, you will start to see even more "me vs them" behaviour. That's why i quoted the example of Section 377A: The more gay (cycling) activists push their agenda, he said, the stronger will be the push back from conservative forces (non-cyclists) in the society.

 

There is a minimum age to cycle on the road. IIRC is 16 years old. Younger than that have to cycle on the PCN.

[Altivo]

Actually the minimum age to ride a bike on the road is 16. IIRC it's in the regular RTR.

 

Don't get us wrong. Cyclists are not asking for any rights. We're asking to have due regard and consideration given to us while on the road, because we have as much right to be on it as every other road user. The cycling lane is to help with this. If cyclists were going to ask for a right, it would be a right to cycle on the pavement since other than Tampines, that we don't have.

 

U old bird lah... now is 18 for both bikes and car

 

Mine time like yours was 16 for bikes and 17 for cars.

 

I believe you're one of the "good sheeps" who believes that cyclists do bear responsibility in ensuring safety not just for yourself but for other road users as well. Keep it up.

 

 

[Elfenstar]

Hahaha.... on the 377A, let's see how it goes man!

 

As for bus lanes, it makes sense for the govtn cos it's in line with their policy on public transport + if they can run more buses, they make more $ and that benefits Temasek. But on the flipside, you do see how bus lanes during peak hours do cause congestions to other motorists. Now imagine adding a bicycle lane next to the bus lane.

 

If we have the land mass, I'm all for bicycle lane. I've been to Amsterdam and have seen how useful their bike lanes are. But with land scare singapore, the PCNs would be the next best option for the moment.

 

Don't need to draw a bicycle lane outside the bus lane since bicycles are legally allowed to be in it They could perhaps draw in it (perhaps with dotted lines for the idiot cyclist who may assume its for their exclusive use during bus lane hours) for non bus lane hours.

 

I mentioned this in the other thread. IMHO bicycle lanes would be most beneficial on main roads in neighbourhoods whose road that don't have bus lanes.

[Dirtbike]

illegal or not is dependent on situation. if the car did not give way and drive nearer to the right kerb, he bangs into the guy who went out, does the argument of legal/illegal make any sense?

 

whether he is looking after the safety or otherwise is another contentious point, I mean, they are not in peril, he is.

 

The spirit of the law states they are not to obstruct traffic, in which they are doing so now.

 

How can moving at a slower speed be consider obstruction?

So you mean if i chose to drive on the 3rd lane at 30km/hr, i cant?

[Elfenstar]

illegal or not is dependent on situation. if the car did not give way and drive nearer to the right kerb, he bangs into the guy who went out, does the argument of legal/illegal make any sense?

 

whether he is looking after the safety or otherwise is another contentious point, I mean, they are not in peril, he is.

 

The spirit of the law states they are not to obstruct traffic, in which they are doing so now.

 

As I said though it was illegal and dangerous, it was a risk he willingly took.

 

As a non-cyclist you may think its contentious. As a cyclist I can tell you it works as it makes drivers overtake further away from the main group.

 

[Altivo]

There is a minimum age to cycle on the road. IIRC is 16 years old. Younger than that have to cycle on the PCN.

 

I'm not sure cos I only cycle at ECP or Bishan Park with wifey and son.

[Elfenstar]

U old bird lah... now is 18 for both bikes and car

 

Mine time like yours was 16 for bikes and 17 for cars.

 

I believe you're one of the "good sheeps" who believes that cyclists do bear responsibility in ensuring safety not just for yourself but for other road users as well. Keep it up.

 

Sorry I meant bicycle not motorcycle when I said bike

[Altivo]

Don't need to draw a bicycle lane outside the bus lane since bicycles are legally allowed to be in it They could perhaps draw in it (perhaps with dotted lines for the idiot cyclist who may assume its for their exclusive use during bus lane hours) for non bus lane hours.

 

I mentioned this in the other thread. IMHO bicycle lanes would be most beneficial on main roads in neighbourhoods whose road that don't have bus lanes.

 

That's possible.

[Nzy]

I should be the one asking you instead.

 

And I'm not racist. I'm just applying the same logic as yours. Since by giving cyclists a dedicated lane would solve the conflict, then I propose that different races/nationalities should have different train compartments too. In fact, we can even further drill down and have some sections which are for the needy/pregant/old folks. Like that, everyone will be happy!

 

Since we're on this, how about we further divide the bike lane into sub-lanes. Then we can have small kids on their training bikes, teenagers on their cheap aleoca MTs, OLs on their Tokyo bikes, yuppies on their Cannondale etc.

 

Wait, I hear lotsa of toddlers are not happy that they can't zoom on their kick scooter on the pavement. How how? I think the best way is to write an open letter to Tuck Yew and LHL to request for a skating lane.

 

I don't think a kick scooter is practical as a mode of transport. A dedicated cycling lane is not to solve the conflict but more of a guide so that drivers do not overtake cyclists too closely. I don't see any danger in letting the different races take the same cabins. They all have the same bodies as us right? Name me a race that have a different body from the rest of the races? I don't think you get into situations where people will push someone of another race out of the cabin just because they are of a different race right? Whereas on the roads, some cars overtake so closely that the cyclist does not even have space at all.

[Dirtbike]

U talk more sense and here's my view.

 

Education on road safety is very important and I agree. There is a reason why there is a minimum age for drivers and motorcyclists before they can certified as competent. It all boils down to the perceived maturity and skills required to handle a car or motorbike. How about bicycles? It is so easy that even a 3-4 yo can ride a bike but does that make them competent? No really. And because anyone of any age can ride and buy a bicycle, how is one gonna ensure the rider is sufficiently competent? Sure, you can have certification/tests/license but all these will make the whole idea of riding so laborious and inefficient.

 

Back then when they were plying ulu places like LCK, Changi Costal Road, no one was really bothered by them. But imagine seeing a pack of 20-30 bicycles on busy artery roads like Lornie Road, Thomson Road, Orchard Road, CBD causing jams. It is no wonder that motorists find these cyclists a nuisance. Generally, most motorists are still tolerant of these cyclist and would prefer to keep it status quo. But if the cyclists were to go all public and champion for their rights, then very soon, you will start to see even more "me vs them" behaviour. That's why i quoted the example of Section 377A: The more gay (cycling) activists push their agenda, he said, the stronger will be the push back from conservative forces (non-cyclists) in the society.

 

Well, i guess some other forummers have already replied you on the minimum age. I am perfectly fine for cyclists to attend courses and theory test or even proficiency riding tests before they are allowed on the roads. And i do believe quite a number of cyclists in this forum also agree with this point.

 

Why are cyclists on those roads a nusiance? Cause they are travelling at a slower speed than the cars/bikes/trucks/buses?

Base on my understanding, we have maximum speed limit, but no minimum speed limit. So if we see them as a vehicle that is suppose to be on the road, will we still see them as a nusiance? Unless its about the, damn, those cyclists are delaying my schedule by 5mins!!! Than where is all the garciousness?

 

I can understand why some cyclists are asking for a cycling lane, its cause alot of motorists arent willing to accept them. Some even try to play punk with them, giving them a horn right behind them, trying to startle them. If everyone is able to co-exist, i am 80% sure we wont be reading all this arguments now.