Reckless Cyclist

[Mercury1]

Time to go All Vigilante!!

 

 

 

Speaking of irresponsible cyclists, I noticed this late last week (I haven't got my cam set up yet, so can't offer footage). Been going earlier to work, so I see sights that I normally wouldn't see. I saw two "lycra brigade" cyclists along Macritchie Viaduct (after Lornie Road toward Sembawang). They were cycling two abreast, which is fine if you look at the letter of the law. What was decidedly not fine was that one was in the left lane and the other in the middle lane. Essentially, they were taking up two-thirds of the roads to themselves, cycling slowly in the middle of the lane with some weaving around, and chatting away. Cyclists, as per the law, are supposed to be cycling as close to the left of the road as possible.

 

At first I thought: it's early, something like 0600+, what's the harm really? But then I thought: can I, as a motorised vehicle user, cite the same justification if I break the traffic rules? "Sir/your honour, it was really early in the AM, there were no other cars about, and I submit there was no real harm in doing 200" - do you think that would work? Do you think it *should*?

 

If your answer is no, then the same should apply to bicycles.

 

The point is this: there are too damn many bicyclists who think the law doesn't apply to them. And it's not like these chappies are ignorant of the law. The only way to get a group of road users to comply with a law they are wilfully breaking is increased enforcement and accountability. And since it doesn't seem practical to have TPs everywhere to nab these guys (and even then these cyclists may easily be able to escape an ambush if they're garang enough), I submit (yet again) that having visible unique registration is the best way. That way, video footage of errant cyclists can be sent in to the TP for them to act on, and there will be consequences. If news of the consequences starts filtering through the cycling community, things will change.

 

It's not just a matter of the amount of damage a given vehicle can inflict. It's all about accountability. Even if a cyclist is 100% liable for an accident with a car, the car will likely still have to make an own damage claim and suffer long term consequences (not all insurance providers recognise no-fault claims and waive the loading of premiums or even the loss of NCD). And should, god forbid, an injury or death occur to the cyclist involved, the car driver is the one who has to live with the guilt.

 

We are all human beings, even those in cars. We demand protection from certain irresponsible humans on bicycles just like we already have against those in other cars.

 

End rant.

 

[inlinesix]

Time to go All Vigilante!!

 

 

I like your idea.

[AnimalLover]

http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/2-teenagers-on-e-bike-beat-red-light-but-collided-with-car-and-flung-on-bonnet?utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&link_time=1456659096#xtor=CS1-10

 

Look at the photo.

 

It is e-bike bang car le.

 

Since it is red man, should we assume pedestrian to beat red light whenever we make a right turn?

 

 

As I have mentioned, if there is no hospitalization or death, then there will be no case.

If there is there is death, then the driver is in shit or deep shit.

 

the police are also humans and what humans are best at? Secondly, the police have to listen to their politician bosses and their superiors. So at the end of the case, the driver will still have to pay for the death.

 

Imagine if you are the father of those kids, what will you do? Maybe you are worse than them?

[1fast1]

Sorry to go OT in a thread entitled "Reckless Cyclists" but I saw cyclists again today.

 

But today I had no complaints whatsoever. They kept to the left lane, rode in an orderly fashion and had their flashing lights turned on for adequate visibility. Kudos to them.

 

See, I have no issues with cyclists sharing our road space as long as they obey the same rules.

[RadX]

Sorry to go OT in a thread entitled "Reckless Cyclists" but I saw cyclists again today.

 

But today I had no complaints whatsoever. They kept to the left lane, rode in an orderly fashion and had their flashing lights turned on for adequate visibility. Kudos to them.

 

See, I have no issues with cyclists sharing our road space as long as they obey the same rules.

 

 

yah you OT one more time, I BAN ki-moon you...  

 

 

Praise given where it is due.  WEll done bro.  There are responsible cyclists and we should accord them the graciousness accordingly

[Ktglfc]

Sorry to go OT in a thread entitled "Reckless Cyclists" but I saw cyclists again today.

 

But today I had no complaints whatsoever. They kept to the left lane, rode in an orderly fashion and had their flashing lights turned on for adequate visibility. Kudos to them.

 

See, I have no issues with cyclists sharing our road space as long as they obey the same rules.

 

Kudos... responsible road users, that's the way we should be aiming for...

 

But there should also be carrot and stick when necessary ... especially on the use of motorized bicycles ...

Somehow the trend of abusing this kind of vehicle is seeing a rising trend ....

 

Ok, leave it to the authorities... while we drivers will just keep our eyes open and try to stay away from these cyclists ... 

[BenTong]

It's human nature to be tribal. Always they against them mental model. i am a driver, a cyclist, a pedestrian.. Have seen enough of cars, e bikes ; motorbikes, bicycle and human beings Cheong red lights. Cars and motorbikes are licensed. Maybe it's time to license e bikes. Whether that will help, well let's hope so.

[Weez911]

Sorry to go OT in a thread entitled "Reckless Cyclists" but I saw cyclists again today.

 

But today I had no complaints whatsoever. They kept to the left lane, rode in an orderly fashion and had their flashing lights turned on for adequate visibility. Kudos to them.

 

See, I have no issues with cyclists sharing our road space as long as they obey the same rules.

I like this approach too. However, we can't reward these angelic cyclists without any registration details. Just too bad...

[Fcw75]

Just com down hard on those shops selling illegal ebikes or modifying them.

 

Mandatory jail term and fine.

[Watwheels]

Just because old system scrap does not means it cannot be implemented again, with new technology, i am sure can be done.

As simple as having a RFID chip or just a bicyle number plate , the cost cannot be more expensive than borrowing books from library.

If buying a pre-paid SIM card needs to also register, I don't see why bicycle cannot?

 

Accident cannot be avoided, but it certainly can be reduced.

Once a person knows he can be tracked / recognised he/she will be more careful.

 

Yes, i can afford to have have the necessary insurance to cover myself, but that will be only monetary compensation to my love ones if any unfortunate event happen to me; i am sure they would rather have me with them then just to receive the compensation money; and i believe it will be the same for the rest of us here also.

 

Unfortunately you replied the wrong person. Try writing all these to LTA or even your MP, their reply matters more. Good luck.

 

I still think if they want to do it they would have done it long ago. Even if you turn your words to lyrics and sing to them I think it will still fall on deaf ears.

[Othello]

Just com down hard on those shops selling illegal ebikes or modifying them.

 

Mandatory jail term and fine.

 

unfortunately sg law doesn't work this way. Same like vehicles, not illegal to sell or modify. only illegal when using. 

 

Cos I can buy and play on my 2 acre land mah .... not that I have the land 

[1fast1]

Just com down hard on those shops selling illegal ebikes or modifying them.

 

Mandatory jail term and fine.

 

Haha, wait long long ah. They don't even do it to shops that illegally modify exhausts and engines.

[Othello]

No, if the driver drove fast enough and killed these any of the kids, he is in trouble eventhough he has this cam evidence. The police will charge him for speeding and reckless driving. The society still thinks if a life is killed, someone must be liable for it. Although there is cam evidence, there will be still arguments and the driver will be charged with a lower sentence. But if there is no cam evidence, then this driver is in a big mess and he will be sentenced maximum penalty to resolve the dead.

 

Up to today, the police in most of the world will ask you why you cannot stop in time.

They will point out that you are driving too fast and reckless. That is also the fastest and straightforward way to close the case. This is the same too when you bang another vehicle's rear side in front of your vehicle. Although this vehicle suddenly stop, you are still wrong in the end. That driver can claim your insurance easily and your insurance company will not even want to waste time fighting this 100% loose case.

 

not entirely true, although rare. I remember a tragic case whereby the a korean mother and her 2 kids were knocked down and killed but the court eventually cleared the driver of all charges

Edited March 2, 2016 by Othello

[inlinesix]

Unfortunately you replied the wrong person. Try writing all these to LTA or even your MP, their reply matters more. Good luck.

 

I still think if they want to do it they would have done it long ago. Even if you turn your words to lyrics and sing to them I think it will still fall on deaf ears.

 

Someone wrote "when there is will, there is way" on ST Forum.  Are you sure these feedback is heard or just noise?

 

unfortunately sg law doesn't work this way. Same like vehicles, not illegal to sell or modify. only illegal when using. 

 

Cos I can buy and play on my 2 acre land mah .... not that I have the land 

 

The revised RTA has this clause.

http://www.onemotoring.com.sg/publish/onemotoring/en/lta_information_guidelines/buy_a_new_vehicle/motorised_bicycles.html

[AnimalLover]

not entirely true, although rare. I remember a tragic case whereby the a korean mother and her 2 kids were knocked down and killed but the court eventually cleared the driver of all charges

 

I have tried to find your this tragic case for hours but cannot find anywhere on google and yahoo.

Please find it and post here so we all can see.

[Loki]

Someone wrote "when there is will, there is way" on ST Forum.  Are you sure these feedback is heard or just noise?

 

 

 

Actually, where there is a will, there is a won't 

[Othello]

I have tried to find your this tragic case for hours but cannot find anywhere on google and yahoo.

Please find it and post here so we all can see.

 

"A British motorist who knocked down and killed a Korean woman and her two children outside The Anchorage condominium in Alexandra Road last year was on 30 Jan 2001 acquitted of negligently causing their deaths. District Judge Audrey LIM ruled that the prosecution had failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Julia Elizabeth Tubbs, a lawyer, had been negligent and failed to keep a proper lookout and had thus caused the three deaths. Since the accident, the Land Transport Authority ahd spent about S$17,000 to improve the street lighting in front of The Anchorage condominium. Two street lamps had been relocated and one more installed. In this case, the judge said the deaths of the three persons could not be described as anything less than tragic. (Straits Times 31 Jan 2001)"

 

 

http://www.singaporelaw.sg/sglaw/laws-of-singapore/case-law/free-law/high-court-judgments/17142-public-prosecutor-v-tubbs-julia-elizabeth-2001-sghc-212

[AnimalLover]

"A British motorist who knocked down and killed a Korean woman and her two children outside The Anchorage condominium in Alexandra Road last year was on 30 Jan 2001 acquitted of negligently causing their deaths. District Judge Audrey LIM ruled that the prosecution had failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Julia Elizabeth Tubbs, a lawyer, had been negligent and failed to keep a proper lookout and had thus caused the three deaths. Since the accident, the Land Transport Authority ahd spent about S$17,000 to improve the street lighting in front of The Anchorage condominium. Two street lamps had been relocated and one more installed. In this case, the judge said the deaths of the three persons could not be described as anything less than tragic. (Straits Times 31 Jan 2001)"

 

 

http://www.singaporelaw.sg/sglaw/laws-of-singapore/case-law/free-law/high-court-judgments/17142-public-prosecutor-v-tubbs-julia-elizabeth-2001-sghc-212

 

Hahaha, these are accidents involving foreigners and not locals. So which local cares?

As you can it is a Saab with british who is rich and powerful battles against poors.

You try to perform the same act and see who win. I will bet on the deceased.

If you read properly, this is an appeal and it means that the lawyer is found in the wrong. The appeal was also dismissed.

So this lawyer still have to pay for her mistake.This above also meant that the lawyer is charged found guilty.

 

District Judge Audrey LIM ruled that the prosecution had failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Julia Elizabeth Tubbs, a lawyer, had been negligent and failed to keep a proper lookout and had thus caused the three deaths.

 

A British motorist who knocked down and killed a Korean woman and her two children outside The Anchorage condominium in Alexandra Road last year was on 30 Jan 2001 acquitted of negligently causing their deaths.

 

This above also meant that the lawyer is charged found guilty.

 

Edited March 2, 2016 by AnimalLover