Reckless Cyclist

[inlinesix]

3 minutes ago, Beregond said:

yup. frankly speaking i got this feeling also. ( at least its a start)

but my pov is having number plate on all road user including  cyclist is for the better of our traffic condition

i dun need keep repeat the same stuff why,  i am sure alot of bro agree with me. 

that's why we are pushing for it.

u may not feel so, u dun like it for personal or whatever reason, fair enough with me.

Sadly, you can't get his previous point

"Fix license plates means licensing is first required. By doing so, it further legitimises cyclists rights to use the road. So, drivers cannot complain they don't belong on the roads, riding slow on the left lane, didn't pay road tax anymore."

[Lethalstrike]

26 minutes ago, Beregond said:

yup. frankly speaking i got this feeling also. ( at least its a start)

but my pov is having number plate on all road user including  cyclist is for the better of our traffic condition

i dun need keep repeat the same stuff why,  i am sure alot of bro agree with me. 

that's why we are pushing for it.

u may not feel so, u dun like it for personal or whatever reason, fair enough with me.

Sure, I can agree to disagree. This is a civilised forum. 

Your "WE" is who? I'm also a car owner and driver, and I can already see the whole exercise will be pointless. I can easily rebut the arguments, on logical grounds, not for whatever personal reasons. 

If we think deeper, we know its pointless for the authorities to push through with number plates for ALL cyclists. Because unlike PABs, a normal pedal powered bicycle has a spectrum of users which are way too broad. Also, most importantly, if we want license plates on, they had to licensed FIRST. Try asking all these users of bicycles to take a separate license for bicycles (Class 2C?), and then the considerable effort to administer and enforce afterwards. It's a different case for PABs as they are an electrical hazard. The LTA's justification to put on identification plates on them is to show and identify that they met the electrical safety standards. They can't justify on the same grounds for a human powered bicycle. 

Next is age. You need to decide what will be a fair age to ask for a cyclist to take the mandatory license. 16, which is the same as PAB? So everyone else below aged 16 can't ride a bicycle which is a joke. 

OK, so next you will say it's only cyclists who go on the roads need to be licensed, insured and registered. Those who need to go on the roads for a short while due to ongoing construction at pavement/PCNs are now breaking the law? Or we just need to say only those cyclists who ride on the roads for sustained periods at any one time will need license? Who the heck will know?!

 

 

Edited April 14, 2021 by Lethalstrike

[Beregond]

5 minutes ago, Lethalstrike said:

Sure, I can agree to disagree. This is a civilised forum. 

Your "WE" is who? I'm also a car owner and driver, and I can already see the whole exercise will be pointless. I can easily rebut the arguments, on logical grounds, not for whatever personal reasons. 

If we think deeper, we know its pointless for the authorities to push through with number plates for ALL cyclists. Because unlike PABs, a normal pedal powered bicycle has a spectrum of users which are way too broad. Also, most importantly, if we want license plates on, they had to licensed FIRST. Try asking all these users of bicycles to take a separate license for bicycles (Class 2C?), and then the considerable effort to administer and enforce afterwards. It's a different case for PABs as they are an electrical hazard. The LTA's justification to put on identification plates on them is to show and identify that they met the electrical safety standards. They can't justify on the same grounds for a human powered bicycle. 

Next is age. You need to decide what will be a fair age to ask for a cyclist to take the mandatory license. 16, which is the same as PAB? So everyone else below aged 16 can't ride a bicycle which is a joke. 

OK, so next you will say it's only cyclists who go on the roads need to be licensed, insured and registered. Those who need to went on the roads for a short while due to ongoing construction at pavement/PCNs are now breaking the law? Or we just need to say only those cyclists who ride on the roads for sustained periods at any one time will need license? Who the heck will know?!

 

 

we have alot of laws atm, but we still see crime and errant vehicle and driver, but does that  mean we take away those laws?? or its stupid to have those laws??? i dun think so .

i not going to argue  with u  all the minor details. discuss enough already ,

but we will keep pushing for what we believe is right.

 

 

[Lethalstrike]

27 minutes ago, inlinesix said:

Sadly, you can't get his previous point

"Fix license plates means licensing is first required. By doing so, it further legitimises cyclists rights to use the road. So, drivers cannot complain they don't belong on the roads, riding slow on the left lane, didn't pay road tax anymore."

On one hand, its easy to rationalise that license plates will serve as easy identification, thus will be the best deterrence against improper road behaviour. 

On the other hand, the justification and effort for mandatory licensing for ALL cyclists are somewhat conveniently left out of the consideration, every time such discussions come out.

Can I say this is biasness solely from a driver's point of view? I'm inclined to think so. 

First world's problems, lol. 

[Lethalstrike]

3 minutes ago, Beregond said:

we have alot of laws atm, but we still see crime and errant vehicle and driver, but does that  mean we take away those laws?? or its stupid to have those laws??? i dun think so .

i not going to argue  with u  all the minor details. discuss enough already ,

but we will keep pushing for what we believe is right.

 

Brother, please kindly rebut me in logical manner if you want to justify your position on this. Please don't come up with a broad statement to brush me off lea. 

Even if you want to bring in the whole idea of law, you also need to consider what is fair across the audience that you want this new law to be applicable to. 

Answer me first on my 3 concerns as I've written above, then I can evaluate and judge for myself on what you believe is right. Isn't the outcome of such discussions better in your communication to the authorities on this matter? 

[inlinesix]

3 minutes ago, Lethalstrike said:

Brother, please kindly rebut me in logical manner if you want to justify your position on this. Please don't come up with a broad statement to brush me off lea. 

Even if you want to bring in the whole idea of law, you also need to consider what is fair across the audience that you want this new law to be applicable to. 

Answer me first on my 3 concerns as I've written above, then I can evaluate and judge for myself on what you believe is right. Isn't the outcome of such discussions better in your communication to the authorities on this matter? 

He can't rebut you logically.  Been there!

[Lethalstrike]

26 minutes ago, inlinesix said:

He can't rebut you logically.  Been there!

Just a sentence that he is not going to discuss and argue the minor details with me, and off he goes. 

The formulation of any new law DOES takes into account the MINOR details for fair execution and legislation, else lawyers need to study so hard for what. 

[inlinesix]

7 minutes ago, Lethalstrike said:

Just a sentence that he is not going to discuss and argue the minor details with me, and off he goes. 

The formulation of any new law DOES takes into account the MINOR details for fair execution and legislation, else lawyers need to study so hard for what. 

That’s why lawyer is paid so much $$$.

Any major change to legislation will have the same repercussions as PMD legislation.

[Lethalstrike]

6 minutes ago, inlinesix said:

That’s why lawyer is paid so much $$$.

Any major change to legislation will have the same repercussions as PMD legislation.

I agree, thus my gut feel that the outcome is going to be another wayang exercise to appease complains and to show a certain old Mdm that they got do work. 

If they had the political guts and will to legislate that ALL bicycles will need licensing and number plates, they would have already done so and made it a cash cow a long time ago. It's so easy to pass the costs to businesses and end users, while they just collect licensing and registration fees. 

For the Grabfood delivery guys, many sold off their PMDs and switched to bicycles because of the last PMD legislation fiasco. Now, they're advocating to slap licensing, registration and maybe insurance on this group. Really kanna screwed once again. Just do Grabfood on foot is best lah, until they want to license pedestrians also. 

 

 

[Fcw75]

I mentioned before, if they can find a way to tax the amount of air we breathe in, they would. 

Maybe in the future who knows? Put a microchip in us.

[inlinesix]

10 minutes ago, Lethalstrike said:

I agree, thus my gut feel that the outcome is going to be another wayang exercise to appease complains and to show a certain old Mdm that they got do work. 

If they had the political guts and will to legislate that ALL bicycles will need licensing and number plates, they would have already done so and made it a cash cow a long time ago. It's so easy to pass the costs to businesses and end users, while they just collect licensing and registration fees. 

For the Grabfood delivery guys, many sold off their PMDs and switched to bicycles because of the last PMD legislation fiasco. Now, they're advocating to slap licensing, registration and maybe insurance on this group. Really kanna screwed once again. Just do Grabfood on foot is best lah, until they want to license pedestrians also. 

This post a day after the announcement

Any change will make all these infra white elephants.

[Ct3833]

13 hours ago, inlinesix said:

1st of all, how do you know TP lack determination?

CCTV + AI is an end to end process. 

Once an infraction is determined, a fine is automatically sent to the person.

TP lacks determination because i dont see them on the road at all. If any , once in a lucky while i see them on the road, they are just doing their leisure sightseeing.

[Soya]

18 minutes ago, Ct3833 said:

TP lacks determination because i dont see them on the road at all. If any , once in a lucky while i see them on the road, they are just doing their leisure sightseeing.

I tink it's the famous fishball stick syndrome 

TP probably tink it's LTA's job to catch leotards

LTA probably think it's cisco's job

Cisco probably scared of leotards n think it's TP's job

End up u hv some clever MP who think the real issue lies w MOE not teaching students on how to ride a bike safely (??)...

In the meantime, some of these white trash continue to cause nuisance n locals monkey see, monkey do

And all we have left is to kpkb on car forum.....

End of story

 

[Fcw75]

35 minutes ago, Ct3833 said:

TP lacks determination because i dont see them on the road at all. If any , once in a lucky while i see them on the road, they are just doing their leisure sightseeing.

They are here filing reports. 😁

 

[Beregond]

1 video say everything

https://youtu.be/_MNT7VyV-BE

 

Edited April 15, 2021 by Beregond

[Soya]

Saw the 'aftermath' of some form of collision between a amdk leotard n a BMW along Holland Rd this morning 

The car won......

 

[inlinesix]

22 minutes ago, Soya said:

Saw the 'aftermath' of some form of collision between a amdk leotard n a BMW along Holland Rd this morning 

The car won......

What time? Which part of Holland Rd?
 

[Jellandross]

No need think so complicatedly lah... create a Leotard Cycling Act to license and regulate the leotard retards enough already. Wear leotards cycle must have license don't want to register license don't wear leotards cycle.