Reckless Cyclist

[Beregond]

7 minutes ago, Ct3833 said:

万事起头难，we have to start from somewhere, even an implementation cannot fix 100% of the problem, it will reduce the extent of the situation.

yes. the key is the principle must be right. then u set the right law to follow the principle .

then we follow up with enforcement .

step by step.

we haven't even set the right law and system, and ppl talking about enforcement,

its like we judging a baby cannot walk when we dun even give him chance to crawl. 

[inlinesix]

2 minutes ago, Beregond said:

yes. the key is the principle must be right. then u set the right law to follow the principle .

then we follow up with enforcement .

step by step.

we haven't even set the right law and system, and ppl talking about enforcement,

its like we judging a baby cannot walk when we dun even give him chance to crawl. 

The problem is YOU.

You don't understand the principle and law.

[Lethalstrike]

46 minutes ago, Beregond said:

if japan can do it.

so can we. after registration, lets not forget insurance play an important role on our road also

 

 

13 minutes ago, Beregond said:

yes. the key is the principle must be right. then u set the right law to follow the principle .

then we follow up with enforcement .

step by step.

we haven't even set the right law and system, and ppl talking about enforcement,

its like we judging a baby cannot walk when we dun even give him chance to crawl. 

The current Road Traffic Act is already the LAW and SYSTEM to allow authorities to police, catch and fine errand cyclists. What's left and lacking is focused enforcement.

If there isn't a right law and system as you imply, you think TP can stop cyclists riding on expressways or run red lights as we speak now? 

Your Japan's example is good. I'm sure cyclists don't mind registration and insurance if drivers here can behave and be as patient as Japanese drivers around cyclists. And for your knowledge, honking at other road users, including cyclists are prohibited in Japan unless it's an emergency. 

Also, no license needed to ride a bicycle in Japan. How? Are they still a good example? 

 

[Adrianli]

1 hour ago, Beregond said:

if japan can do it.

so can we. after registration, lets not forget insurance play an important role on our road also

 

Oh. I did not know bicycles need registration in Japan. I was cycling in Japan without any registration. Was there for work and took one of the many bicycles in the shipyard and cycled around. However when snowing I preferred to walking. Cycling on icy roads very scary.

[Beregond]

3 minutes ago, Lethalstrike said:

Also, no license needed to ride a bicycle in Japan. How? Are they still a good example? 

we must take what is good from other and learn, and then we further upgrade from what we learn.

learn how to do the registration and insurance for cyclist from the jap.

then we upgrade and go 1 step further and fix on number plate and give license to cyclist .

 

[Beregond]

5 minutes ago, Adrianli said:

Oh. I did not know bicycles need registration in Japan. I was cycling in Japan without any registration. Was there for work and took one of the many bicycles in the shipyard and cycled around. However when snowing I preferred to walking. Cycling on icy roads very scary.

actually u bring up a very good point and example. u cycle without registration in japan that is breaking their law. but u are not warn or caught or even know it till now. why??

because its very hard to spot if a bike is properly register or not base on that small pcs of stricker.

this is where we can do better, we put on a number plate instead. its like a car, 1 look at any car without number plate on the road , u know something extremely wrong.

we need to build that same culture with all road user. 

[Lethalstrike]

6 minutes ago, Beregond said:

we must take what is good from other and learn, and then we further upgrade from what we learn.

learn how to do the registration and insurance for cyclist from the jap.

then we upgrade and go 1 step further and fix on number plate and give license to cyclist .

 

Brother, do you know why registration is needed in Japan boh? It's to prevent theft and easy identification of bicycles, not to identify errand cyclists. And it's only certain prefectures one will need to do this.

Singapore in the old days, got the round red license plate on bicycles. Their purpose is also to prevent theft, as bicycles are valuable tools of the trade and transport during the old days when Singapore is still developing. 

Since we're talking about Japan, let me share with you more. Japan's Road Traffic Act, similar to our existing one and many other countries, is set up with the spirit to protect the most vulnerable group of users. Meaning, those operating license vehicles capable of inflicting more damage will bear more responsibility. So in order of hierarchy, it's pedestrians first, cyclists/PMDs, motorbikes then motor vehicles. Meaning their insurance of cyclists will cover pedestrians injuries. The onus is still on the drivers to be on the lookout and drive responsibly around the rest of the more vulnerable road users. 

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. 

 

 

[Beregond]

Just now, Lethalstrike said:

Brother, do you know why registration is needed in Japan boh? It's to prevent theft and easy identification of bicycles, not to identify errand cyclists. And it's only certain prefectures one will need to do this.

Singapore in the old days, got the round red license plate on bicycles. Their purpose is also to prevent theft, as bicycles are valuable tools of the trade and transport during the old days when Singapore is still developing. 

Since we're talking about Japan, let me share with you more. Japan's Road Traffic Act, similar to our existing one and many other countries, is set up with the spirit to protect the most vulnerable group of users. Meaning, those operating license vehicles capable of inflicting more damage will bear more responsibility. So in order of hierarchy, it's pedestrians first, cyclists/PMDs, motorbikes then motor vehicles. Meaning their insurance of cyclists will cover pedestrians injuries. The onus is still on the drivers to be on the lookout and drive responsibly around the rest of the more vulnerable road users. 

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. 

 

 

yes i know, that why i say we need to go 1 step further.

1 step at a time.

first we get them to do a review.  great now they are doing a review. once the review pass.

then we go on to registration and number plate.

our group of kakis are working very hard to communicate with the authority on this

[Lethalstrike]

7 minutes ago, Beregond said:

yes i know, that why i say we need to go 1 step further.

1 step at a time.

first we get them to do a review.  great now they are doing a review. once the review pass.

then we go on to registration and number plate.

our group of kakis are working very hard to communicate with the authority on this

Your group of kakis are who? SG Road Vigilantes? Kidding la 😂

My gut feel of how this whole review will pan out is another wayang show just to appease the motorists. Probably another advisory for cyclists and some revised code of conduct. The outcome of this review may not be what most drivers are asking for. 

Currently, there isn't a separate license class for PABs. And the original purpose of license plates on PABs is to show that they had been registered and approved by LTA, as they met the EU electrical safety standards. 

[Beregond]

6 minutes ago, Lethalstrike said:

My gut feel of how this whole review will pan out is another wayang show just to appease the motorists. Probably another advisory for cyclists and some revised code of conduct. The outcome of this review may not be what most drivers are asking for. 

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.

Edited April 14, 2021 by Beregond

[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.