Road raging pillocks in Perth

Since 2001, over 90,000 cyclist's have joined Cycling Forums to discuss topics from general cycling to equipment, training, racing and travel or vacation destinations (especially in europe during the tour de france). We also feature an great deals in our online store, 100's of articles, classifieds and product reviews.

No doubt we'll be hearing a lot more about this around here, but
police are currently interviewing a 19 year old who alledgedly mowed
down a group of cyclists in Perth's northern suburbs this morning,
fortunately causing only light injuries.

http://www.thewest.com.au/default.aspx?MenuID=145&ContentID=59164

There is the usual commentary section where people are making the
usual nasty remarks about packs of lycra louts who break the law by
riding two abreast causing delays to busy and important people in
cars.

Travis

"Travis" <travismorien@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:32867486-f720-495b-8ffa-1ad77ef0ea03@i12g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> No doubt we'll be hearing a lot more about this around here, but
> police are currently interviewing a 19 year old who alledgedly mowed
> down a group of cyclists in Perth's northern suburbs this morning,
> fortunately causing only light injuries.
>
> http://www.thewest.com.au/default.aspx?MenuID=145&ContentID=59164
>
> There is the usual commentary section where people are making the
> usual nasty remarks about packs of lycra louts who break the law by
> riding two abreast causing delays to busy and important people in
> cars.
>
> Travis

Shesh. The cagers have been slowing me down on my morning commute along
Blackburn Road in Melbourne the last few days. On the rare days I drive, it
takes me 10 mins to get between Highbury Road and High Street Roads. On the
bicycle I'm crossing Wellington road after 10 mins. So much for us lycra
wearers slowing the gas guzzlers down!

Travis wrote:
> No doubt we'll be hearing a lot more about this around here, but
> police are currently interviewing a 19 year old who alledgedly mowed
> down a group of cyclists in Perth's northern suburbs this morning,
> fortunately causing only light injuries.

Yesterdays news said one broke an ankle.

> http://www.thewest.com.au/default.aspx?MenuID=145&ContentID=59164
>
> There is the usual commentary section where people are making the
> usual nasty remarks about packs of lycra louts who break the law by
> riding two abreast causing delays to busy and important people in
> cars.

I must be looking at a different link then. I can't see anything in the link
you provided that is in any way disparaging to cyclists.

Theo

On Feb 19, 10:49 pm, Travis <travismor...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> No doubt we'll be hearing a lot more about this around here, but
> police are currently interviewing a 19 year old who alledgedly mowed
> down a group of cyclists in Perth's northern suburbs this morning,
> fortunately causing only light injuries.
>
> http://www.thewest.com.au/default.aspx?MenuID=145&ContentID=59164
>
> There is the usual commentary section where people are making the
> usual nasty remarks about packs of lycra louts who break the law by
> riding two abreast causing delays to busy and important people in
> cars.
>
> Travis

Hope the prick goes to gaol. The comments in the blog would be
singing a different tune if it were pedestrians he had deliberately
struck. "Cyclists" is a nice label to dehumanize us, it's not so bad
if you hit a cyclist, it's not like you've hurt a person.

On Feb 20, 8:45 am, "Theo Bekkers" <tbekk...@bekkers.com.au> wrote:
> Travis wrote:
> > There is the usual commentary section where people are making the
> > usual nasty remarks about packs of lycra louts who break the law by
> > riding two abreast causing delays to busy and important people in
> > cars.
>
> I must be looking at a different link then. I can't see anything in the link
> you provided that is in any way disparaging to cyclists.
>
> Theo

"Have your say: Are cyclists safe on the roads?"
http://blogs.thewest.com.au/news/news-blog-are-cyclists-safe/

lemmiwinks.au@gmail.com wrote:
> On Feb 20, 8:45 am, "Theo Bekkers" <tbekk...@bekkers.com.au> wrote:
>> Travis wrote:
>>> There is the usual commentary section where people are making the
>>> usual nasty remarks about packs of lycra louts who break the law by
>>> riding two abreast causing delays to busy and important people in
>>> cars.
>>
>> I must be looking at a different link then. I can't see anything in
>> the link you provided that is in any way disparaging to cyclists.

> "Have your say: Are cyclists safe on the roads?"
> http://blogs.thewest.com.au/news/news-blog-are-cyclists-safe/

Note:- Must learn how to navigate.

I read all the entries on the first page, most of the complaining ones
appear to be from cyclists. Only two are from drivers complaining. One about
being given the finger by riders four abreast. Another about packs of pro
packs of a dozen or more riders. The only other complaint about
"tour-de-France wannabee cyclists in tight lycra" being a pain on shared
paths. The complainee is a cyclist.

Sorry, but I don't agree with Travis comment.

Theo

On Feb 20, 12:37 pm, "Theo Bekkers" <tbekk...@bekkers.com.au> wrote:
> lemmiwinks...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Feb 20, 8:45 am, "Theo Bekkers" <tbekk...@bekkers.com.au> wrote:
> >> Travis wrote:
> >>> There is the usual commentary section where people are making the
> >>> usual nasty remarks about packs of lycra louts who break the law by
> >>> riding two abreast causing delays to busy and important people in
> >>> cars.
>
> >> I must be looking at a different link then. I can't see anything in
> >> the link you provided that is in any way disparaging to cyclists.
> > "Have your say: Are cyclists safe on the roads?"
> >http://blogs.thewest.com.au/news/news-blog-are-cyclists-safe/
>
> Note:- Must learn how to navigate.
>
> I read all the entries on the first page, most of the complaining ones
> appear to be from cyclists. Only two are from drivers complaining. One about
> being given the finger by riders four abreast. Another about packs of pro
> packs of a dozen or more riders. The only other complaint about
> "tour-de-France wannabee cyclists in tight lycra" being a pain on shared
> paths. The complainee is a cyclist.
>
> Sorry, but I don't agree with Travis comment.
>
> Theo

Note: 'first' page is the last page of comments (they're in reverse
chronilogical order).

I suggest you scroll through a few other pages.. you might change your
opinion.

duncan

Duncan wrote:
> Theo Bekkers wrote:

>> Note:- Must learn how to navigate.
>>
>> I read all the entries on the first page, most of the complaining
>> ones appear to be from cyclists. Only two are from drivers
>> complaining. One about being given the finger by riders four
>> abreast. Another about packs of pro packs of a dozen or more riders.
>> The only other complaint about "tour-de-France wannabee cyclists in
>> tight lycra" being a pain on shared paths. The complainee is a
>> cyclist.

> Note: 'first' page is the last page of comments (they're in reverse
> chronilogical order).
>
> I suggest you scroll through a few other pages.. you might change your
> opinion.

Note:- Must learn how to navigate around this stuff.

Why on earth do they put the whole thing backwards. Reading from the bottom
of the page just isn't natural for me.

OK, I've read the whole lot now, and apart from a couple of obvious trolls,
a fairly balanced point of view I think. There are as many, if not more,
cyclists complaining about lycra packs, than motorists complaining about
cyclists.

Cheers
Theo

On Feb 20, 11:17 am, Duncan <duncanmc...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
> Note: 'first' page is the last page of comments (they're in reverse
> chronilogical order).
>
> I suggest you scroll through a few other pages.. you might change your
> opinion.

This came up at work yesterday and I was pleasantly surprised by the
fact that everyone seemed to be of the opinion that cyclists have
every right to be on the road, and if you get delayed by them for a
wee while just chill out and live with it. These were the opinions of
non-cyclists. Normally I have to bite my tongue when such subjects
come up as I do tend to start to rant a bit.

Graeme

On Feb 20, 10:37 am, "Theo Bekkers" <tbekk...@bekkers.com.au> wrote:

> Sorry, but I don't agree with Travis comment.
>
> Theo

There appears to be another Travis posting comments. I only posted
one, last night, which last I saw was still awaiting moderation. My
comment was just an answer to the repetitive claim that cyclists are
constantly breaking the law by riding two abreast, with a link to the
WA Govt "cycling and the law" page where as I pointed out it says that
riders are allowed to ride two abreast, or three if overtaking.

That said, I can't say I've been too outraged by anything the other
Travis has said, but maybe I missed whatever comment you were
objecting to.

Travis

On Feb 20, 3:10 pm, Graeme Dods <GraemeD...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 20, 11:17 am, Duncan <duncanmc...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>
> > Note: 'first' page is the last page of comments (they're in reverse
> > chronilogical order).
>
> > I suggest you scroll through a few other pages.. you might change your
> > opinion.
>
> This came up at work yesterday and I was pleasantly surprised by the
> fact that everyone seemed to be of the opinion that cyclists have
> every right to be on the road, and if you get delayed by them for a
> wee while just chill out and live with it.

How well does their opinion when they're standing around chatting at
work reflect their behaviour when "anonymous" out there in their cars
and stuck in traffic and they perceive themselves to be held up by
some other-species cyclist?

Does it then become "you have every right to be on the road, so long
as it isn't the road I'm using or you're not holding me up at all"

> These were the opinions of
> non-cyclists. Normally I have to bite my tongue when such subjects
> come up as I do tend to start to rant a bit.

> Graeme
Adrian

On Feb 20, 5:02 pm, "Adrian.Tritsch...@gmail.com"
<Adrian.Tritsch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 20, 3:10 pm, Graeme Dods <GraemeD...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Feb 20, 11:17 am, Duncan <duncanmc...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>
> > > Note: 'first' page is the last page of comments (they're in reverse
> > > chronilogical order).
>
> > > I suggest you scroll through a few other pages.. you might change your
> > > opinion.
>
> > This came up at work yesterday and I was pleasantly surprised by the
> > fact that everyone seemed to be of the opinion that cyclists have
> > every right to be on the road, and if you get delayed by them for a
> > wee while just chill out and live with it.
>
> How well does their opinion when they're standing around chatting at
> work reflect their behaviour when "anonymous" out there in their cars
> and stuck in traffic and they perceive themselves to be held up by
> some other-species cyclist?
>
> Does it then become "you have every right to be on the road, so long
> as it isn't the road I'm using or you're not holding me up at all"
>
> > These were the opinions of
> > non-cyclists. Normally I have to bite my tongue when such subjects
> > come up as I do tend to start to rant a bit.
> > Graeme
>
> Adrian

The key point here is that one of the cyclists got the registration
number
of the car. Very important to train yourself to note the number first,
<then>
start yelling.

Theo

In article <47bba808$1@news.bekkers.com.au>, "Theo Bekkers"
<tbekkers@bekkers.com.au> wrote:

>Note:- Must learn how to navigate around this stuff.
>
>Why on earth do they put the whole thing backwards. Reading from the bottom
>of the page just isn't natural for me.

I don't bother. Anyone who can't get the most basic fundamentals of
presentation isn't worth reading.

Its like going back to scrolls after using books for centuries. Not to mention
how bloody long the pages take to load on some blogs (heck, I just mentioned
it)

See Ya
(when bandwidth gets better ;-)

Chris Eastwood
Photographer, Programmer
Motorcyclist and dingbat

please remove undies for reply

On Feb 20, 5:44 pm, pellicleund...@hotmail.com (obakesan) wrote:
> Theo
>
> In article <47bba80...@news.bekkers.com.au>, "Theo Bekkers"
>
> <tbekk...@bekkers.com.au> wrote:
> >Note:- Must learn how to navigate around this stuff.
>
> >Why on earth do they put the whole thing backwards. Reading from the bottom
> >of the page just isn't natural for me.
>
> I don't bother. Anyone who can't get the most basic fundamentals of
> presentation isn't worth reading.

I rarely bother, I don't think I've ever read any comments section of
a news web site which came across as anything other than full of
bigoted/misinformed/plain ignorant/deliberately inflammatory/
irrelevant crap (choose some or all of the preceeding). Sod the
presentation, the content isn't worth wrapping up to try to make it
look nice.

Graeme

On Feb 20, 3:02 pm, "Adrian.Tritsch...@gmail.com"
<Adrian.Tritsch...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Does it then become "you have every right to be on the road, so long
> as it isn't the road I'm using or you're not holding me up at all"

Possibly, I've never been driven by any of them, but they all seemed
pretty genuine. That said, there were those who didn't express an
opinion who may have felt otherwise. As most know I'm a cyclist (the
sight of me arriving at work as a red sweaty wreck having cycled 35km
in 36 degree heat tends to stick in ones mind) they may have felt
silence was the best option :-)

Graeme

Travis wrote:
> Theo Bekkers wrote:
>
>> Sorry, but I don't agree with Travis comment.
>>
>> Theo
>
> There appears to be another Travis posting comments. I only posted
> one, last night, which last I saw was still awaiting moderation. My
> comment was just an answer to the repetitive claim that cyclists are
> constantly breaking the law by riding two abreast, with a link to the
> WA Govt "cycling and the law" page where as I pointed out it says that
> riders are allowed to ride two abreast, or three if overtaking.
>
> That said, I can't say I've been too outraged by anything the other
> Travis has said, but maybe I missed whatever comment you were
> objecting to.

The Travis that initiated this thread and said
"There is the usual commentary section where people are making the
usual nasty remarks about packs of lycra louts who break the law by
riding two abreast causing delays to busy and important people in
cars.

Travis"

If that wasn't you and I have offended you, it was an unintended Travisty.

Theo
Moderation? You have moderation?

AndrewJ wrote:

> The key point here is that one of the cyclists got the registration
> number
> of the car. Very important to train yourself to note the number first,
> <then> start yelling.

Before the police did anything about it, the young lad presented himself at
his local police station with his dad to report the incident and his part in
it.

You've got to give him (and/or his dad) marks for that.

Theo

Adrian.Tritschler@gmail.com wrote:

> How well does their opinion when they're standing around chatting at
> work reflect their behaviour when "anonymous" out there in their cars
> and stuck in traffic and they perceive themselves to be held up by
> some other-species cyclist?
>
> Does it then become "you have every right to be on the road, so long
> as it isn't the road I'm using or you're not holding me up at all"

Feed the anger, you'll be over to the dark side soon.

Theo

Graeme Dods wrote:
> On Feb 20, 3:02 pm, "Adrian.Tritsch...@gmail.com"
> <Adrian.Tritsch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Does it then become "you have every right to be on the road, so long
>> as it isn't the road I'm using or you're not holding me up at all"
>
> Possibly, I've never been driven by any of them, but they all seemed
> pretty genuine. That said, there were those who didn't express an
> opinion who may have felt otherwise. As most know I'm a cyclist (the
> sight of me arriving at work as a red sweaty wreck having cycled 35km
> in 36 degree heat tends to stick in ones mind) they may have felt
> silence was the best option :-)

We now have two cyclists in the building but no shower. I'm trying to figure
out how and where to put one in. Meanwhile we paid for gym memberships to
our nearest good gym (Bayswater Waves) for all our staff who were
interested. Too far to go for a shower though as it's about 4 klicks away.

Theo

On Feb 21, 7:30 am, "Theo Bekkers" <tbekk...@bekkers.com.au> wrote:

> The Travis that initiated this thread and said
> "There is the usual commentary section where people are making the
> usual nasty remarks about packs of lycra louts who break the law by
> riding two abreast causing delays to busy and important people in
> cars.
>
> Travis"
>
> If that wasn't you and I have offended you, it was an unintended Travisty.
>
> Theo
> Moderation? You have moderation?

Actually I think I misread your comment.

Were you saying, when you said you disagreed with me, that you
disagreed with the comments I'd made at the newspaper's site (which
was my original assumption, though not what I currently think you
meant) or that you disagreed with my comment in aus.bicycles that the
comments were full of people complaining about rampaging hordes of
cyclists travelling two abreast, which I think is what you actually
meant.

The other post from Travis in this newsgroup was me, and I stand by
that remark (albeit tongue in cheek, the rampaging hordes bit is for
comic effect) but at the newspaper site there is someone else posting
as Travis, and all or most of the Travis posts at that site are from
someone else.

If you read through the early comments you'll find quite a lot of
people expressing outrage that these cyclists, as well as many other
bunches of cyclists they had come across, were traveling two abreast,
many of them obviously under the mistaken impression that this is
actually illegal. They were demanding to know why the police don't do
something to crack down on this common act of anti-motorist terrorism.

That wasn't really an "opinion" I was expressing, the posts I
commented on are there and you can see them when you read the
followups. Hence my confusion, I thought when you were referring to
an opinion of mine that you were disagreeing with you meant something
written by the person at the newspaper site calling himself "Travis",
though admittedly I haven't seen anything written by that guy which I
vehemently disagree with, it seems he's a cyclist too.

Travis