Re: 9000 bike riders fined for breaking road rules

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.

<snip>

per. http://www.police.qld.gov.au/services/reportsPublications/statisticalReview/0607/default.htm

in 06/07, Qld traffic offences total:
- 43,000 (excluding speed and red/light cameras)
- 208,000 speed camera offences (seems to be steady at 1 in 60-70
vehicles)
- 38,000 red light camera offences

still, that means approx 3% of offences were recorded against
cyclists, which seems pretty high.

duncan

In aus.bicycle on Sun, 30 Mar 2008 19:58:09 -0700 (PDT)
Duncan <duncanmcrae@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>
> still, that means approx 3% of offences were recorded against
> cyclists, which seems pretty high.

If they can catch that many, then why do they need licences?

I agree it's likely helmet laws, although maybe light laws as well?
I'd want to see a breakdown of the actual offences...

Zebee

On Mar 31, 1:33 pm, Zebee Johnstone <zeb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> In aus.bicycle on Sun, 30 Mar 2008 19:58:09 -0700 (PDT)
>
> Duncan <duncanmc...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>
> > still, that means approx 3% of offences were recorded against
> > cyclists, which seems pretty high.
>
> If they can catch that many, then why do they need licences?
>
> I agree it's likely helmet laws, although maybe light laws as well?
> I'd want to see a breakdown of the actual offences...

Indeed.

It's also not clear if this 9000 is "recorded offences" or "unique
offenders".

It is more than likely that the bloke who gets pulled up for no helmet
or running a red, also gets done for
1/ no reflectors
2/ no bell

I know I'd get done for 1/ if anyone bothered to look, and up until
recently, 2/.

On Mar 31, 2:02 pm, Duncan <duncanmc...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
> On Mar 31, 1:33 pm, Zebee Johnstone <zeb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > In aus.bicycle on Sun, 30 Mar 2008 19:58:09 -0700 (PDT)
>
> > Duncan <duncanmc...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>
> > > still, that means approx 3% of offences were recorded against
> > > cyclists, which seems pretty high.
>
> > If they can catch that many, then why do they need licences?
>
> > I agree it's likely helmet laws, although maybe light laws as well?
> > I'd want to see a breakdown of the actual offences...
>
> Indeed.
>
> It's also not clear if this 9000 is "recorded offences" or "unique
> offenders".
>
> It is more than likely that the bloke who gets pulled up for no helmet
> or running a red, also gets done for
> 1/ no reflectors
> 2/ no bell
>
> I know I'd get done for 1/ if anyone bothered to look, and up until
> recently, 2/.

Sent just now:
roadsafety@transport.qld.gov.au

Dear Queensland Transport

As a cyclist and motorist, I was interested to read the article,
reproduced below from The Courier Mail, stating that 9000 bike riders
were fined in the past year for breaking road rules.

This article has caused extensive discussion amongst cycling groups. I
and a number of my colleagues would like to know a statistical
breakdown of these numbers. Would you be so kind as to provide me with
further details, that I can share with others. We would like to know:

- where in Queensland the offences occurred
- what were the offences
- what penalties were issued
- whether these infringements were issued in routine policing or
whether they were in specific campaigns
- and any other details you think might inform the debate.

Of course, details on every offence cannot be provided and categorical
information will be satisfactory.

Thankyou in advance for the information.

Yours sincerely

Donga

Duncan wrote:
> On Mar 31, 1:33 pm, Zebee Johnstone <zeb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>In aus.bicycle on Sun, 30 Mar 2008 19:58:09 -0700 (PDT)
>>
>>Duncan <duncanmc...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>still, that means approx 3% of offences were recorded against
>>>cyclists, which seems pretty high.
>>
>>If they can catch that many, then why do they need licences?
>>
>>I agree it's likely helmet laws, although maybe light laws as well?
>>I'd want to see a breakdown of the actual offences...
>
>
> Indeed.
>
> It's also not clear if this 9000 is "recorded offences" or "unique
> offenders".
>
> It is more than likely that the bloke who gets pulled up for no helmet
> or running a red, also gets done for
> 1/ no reflectors
> 2/ no bell
>
> I know I'd get done for 1/ if anyone bothered to look, and up until
> recently, 2/.
>
>

They ping them for, no lights, at night - frequently.

Duncan wrote:
> <snip>
>
> per. http://www.police.qld.gov.au/services/reportsPublications/statisticalReview/0607/default.htm
>
> in 06/07, Qld traffic offences total:
> - 43,000 (excluding speed and red/light cameras)
> - 208,000 speed camera offences (seems to be steady at 1 in 60-70
> vehicles)
> - 38,000 red light camera offences
>
> still, that means approx 3% of offences were recorded against
> cyclists, which seems pretty high.
>

It does seem a bit high, but then again I'd be tempted to use those
figures to support the case against registration of bicycles. After all,
lack of registration hasn't hindered the process of apprehending and
fining cyclists, has it? :)

It's also not clear if this 9000 is "recorded offences" or "unique
offenders".

It is more than likely that the bloke who gets pulled up for no helmet
or running a red, also gets done for
1/ no reflectors
2/ no bell

I know I'd get done for 1/ if anyone bothered to look, and up until
recently, 2/.

This article was reported in the Courier Mail during Easter:

QLD police nab 7785 speeding motorists (March 22, 2008)
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/articles/2008/03/22/1205602709259.html

Quote: "Speeding and drink-driving remain the biggest risk on Queensland roads this Easter, police say. In the 48 hours to midnight, police have caught 7785 motorists for speeding and 269 for drink-driving."

Taking the last sentence into context, do the math on 9000 bicycles riders in 12 months vs. 8054 motorists in 48 hours. The Easter period maybe (sadly) a spike in regards to these offenses committed by drivers. Like many, I await with interest what correspondence Donga may receive from Queensland Transport.

Peter Cremasco wrote:
> Duncan wrote:
>> <snip>
>>
>> per.
>> http://www.police.qld.gov.au/services/reportsPublications/statisticalReview/0607/default.htm
>>
>> in 06/07, Qld traffic offences total:
>> - 43,000 (excluding speed and red/light cameras)
>> - 208,000 speed camera offences (seems to be steady at 1 in 60-70
>> vehicles)
>> - 38,000 red light camera offences
>>
>> still, that means approx 3% of offences were recorded against
>> cyclists, which seems pretty high.
>>
>
> It does seem a bit high, but then again I'd be tempted to use those
> figures to support the case against registration of bicycles. After
> all, lack of registration hasn't hindered the process of apprehending
> and fining cyclists, has it? :)

Are you suggesting that a very high percentage of offending cyclists were
apprehended?

Theo

Theo Bekkers wrote:
> Peter Cremasco wrote:
>> Duncan wrote:
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>> per.
>>> http://www.police.qld.gov.au/services/reportsPublications/statisticalReview/0607/default.htm
>>>
>>> in 06/07, Qld traffic offences total:
>>> - 43,000 (excluding speed and red/light cameras)
>>> - 208,000 speed camera offences (seems to be steady at 1 in 60-70
>>> vehicles)
>>> - 38,000 red light camera offences
>>>
>>> still, that means approx 3% of offences were recorded against
>>> cyclists, which seems pretty high.
>>>
>> It does seem a bit high, but then again I'd be tempted to use those
>> figures to support the case against registration of bicycles. After
>> all, lack of registration hasn't hindered the process of apprehending
>> and fining cyclists, has it? :)
>
> Are you suggesting that a very high percentage of offending cyclists were
> apprehended?

Hell, no. I'm suggesting that a LOT of cyclists were apprehended. A
LOT!!! The general public is only interested in LOTS, not descriptive
statistics.

Peter Cremasco wrote:
> Theo Bekkers wrote:
>> Peter Cremasco wrote:

>>> It does seem a bit high, but then again I'd be tempted to use those
>>> figures to support the case against registration of bicycles. After
>>> all, lack of registration hasn't hindered the process of
>>> apprehending and fining cyclists, has it? :)
>>
>> Are you suggesting that a very high percentage of offending cyclists
>> were apprehended?
>
> Hell, no. I'm suggesting that a LOT of cyclists were apprehended. A
> LOT!!! The general public is only interested in LOTS, not descriptive
> statistics.

Qualatative statistics? :-)

We went off daylight savings last weekend and because they needed to change
the times on all the multinova cameras, they were all taken off the roads
all weekend. The govt reckons they did not book 3500 motorists for speeding
last weekend, 'losing' $500,000 in revenue. One of the cons of daylight
saving?

Theo

On 2008-04-02, Theo Bekkers (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
> Peter Cremasco wrote:
>> Hell, no. I'm suggesting that a LOT of cyclists were apprehended. A
>> LOT!!! The general public is only interested in LOTS, not descriptive
>> statistics.
>
> Qualatative statistics? :-)
>
> We went off daylight savings last weekend and because they needed to change
> the times on all the multinova cameras, they were all taken off the roads
> all weekend. The govt reckons they did not book 3500 motorists for speeding
> last weekend, 'losing' $500,000 in revenue. One of the cons of daylight
> saving?

Having been grappling with the fallout of a fellow sysadmin who didn't
do his job properly despite claiming it was all under control when I
queried him last week (been doing unix for 15 years, been at the
observatory for 35 years, but still doesn't understand the full
implications of getting timezones and UT wrong in an astronomical
facility?), I can say how easy it is to get right, even after someone
else has screwed up the timekeeping.

If they pay me half of that $500,000, I can fix it for them this
afternoon, "saving" them 250,000!

--
TimC
I don't know, but every time I look at a modern Intel schematic I think of a
steam engine running REALLY fast. -- gcash in ASR on 68K vs 8086

On Mar 31, 2:52 pm, peter...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Mar 31, 2:02 pm, Duncan <duncanmc...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mar 31, 1:33 pm, Zebee Johnstone <zeb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > In aus.bicycle on Sun, 30 Mar 2008 19:58:09 -0700 (PDT)
>
> > > Duncan <duncanmc...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>
> > > > still, that means approx 3% of offences were recorded against
> > > > cyclists, which seems pretty high.
>
> > > If they can catch that many, then why do they need licences?
>
> > > I agree it's likely helmet laws, although maybe light laws as well?
> > > I'd want to see a breakdown of the actual offences...
>
> > Indeed.
>
> > It's also not clear if this 9000 is "recorded offences" or "unique
> > offenders".
>
> > It is more than likely that the bloke who gets pulled up for no helmet
> > or running a red, also gets done for
> > 1/ no reflectors
> > 2/ no bell
>
> > I know I'd get done for 1/ if anyone bothered to look, and up until
> > recently, 2/.
>
> Sent just now:
> roadsaf...@transport.qld.gov.au
>
> Dear Queensland Transport
>
> As a cyclist and motorist, I was interested to read the article,
> reproduced below from The Courier Mail, stating that 9000 bike riders
> were fined in the past year for breaking road rules.
>
> This article has caused extensive discussion amongst cycling groups. I
> and a number of my colleagues would like to know a statistical
> breakdown of these numbers. Would you be so kind as to provide me with
> further details, that I can share with others. We would like to know:
>
> - where in Queensland the offences occurred
> - what were the offences
> - what penalties were issued
> - whether these infringements were issued in routine policing or
> whether they were in specific campaigns
> - and any other details you think might inform the debate.
>
> Of course, details on every offence cannot be provided and categorical
> information will be satisfactory.
>
> Thankyou in advance for the information.
>
> Yours sincerely
>
> Donga

Response, with tables of localities and offences, provided on the
Bikeqld wiki:
http://www.bikeqld.org.au/wiki/Image:10069_-_Bicycle_Infringements_2007.pdf
Makes for some quite interesting reading. I'll post some comments
tomorrow.

Donga

In aus.bicycle on Tue, 8 Apr 2008 05:46:14 -0700 (PDT)
Donga <idomybestworkonabike@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Response, with tables of localities and offences, provided on the
> Bikeqld wiki:
> http://www.bikeqld.org.au/wiki/Image:10069_-_Bicycle_Infringements_2007.pdf
> Makes for some quite interesting reading. I'll post some comments
> tomorrow.
>

Offence_desc Total
BICYCLE RIDER FAIL TO WEAR HELMET 8,500
RIDE BICYCLE/POWER WHEEL REC DEVICE W/O REQ LIGHTS OPERATING & VISIBLE 252


Like people thought - helmets the main one, and lights a way way
distant second.

44 fail to stop at stop sign, compared to 40 carrying more than the
bike was designed for.

Actual naughty traffic things are in mostly single digits.

Zebee

Zebee Johnstone wrote:
> In aus.bicycle on Tue, 8 Apr 2008 05:46:14 -0700 (PDT)
> Donga <idomybestworkonabike@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> Response, with tables of localities and offences, provided on the
>> Bikeqld wiki:
>> http://www.bikeqld.org.au/wiki/Image:10069_-_Bicycle_Infringements_2007.pdf
>> Makes for some quite interesting reading. I'll post some comments
>> tomorrow.
>>
>
> Offence_desc Total
> BICYCLE RIDER FAIL TO WEAR HELMET 8,500
> RIDE BICYCLE/POWER WHEEL REC DEVICE W/O REQ LIGHTS OPERATING & VISIBLE 252
>
>
> Like people thought - helmets the main one, and lights a way way
> distant second.
>
> 44 fail to stop at stop sign, compared to 40 carrying more than the
> bike was designed for.
>
> Actual naughty traffic things are in mostly single digits.
>
> Zebee

and that's not the worst of it! 9500 offences and none of them are for
speeding. Qld riders hang yourt heads in shame!

On Apr 9, 11:48 am, Patrick Keogh <patr...@keogh.net.au> wrote:
> and that's not the worst of it! 9500 offences and none of them are for
> speeding. Qld riders hang yourt heads in shame!

There are 6 recorded for overtaking a tram at > 10km/h.. does that
count?

What I find puzzling is that there are 110 for "carrying passenger
with no helmet", but only 40 for "carrying more persons than bicycle
designed for".

In aus.bicycle on Tue, 8 Apr 2008 18:59:28 -0700 (PDT)
Duncan <duncanmcrae@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>
> What I find puzzling is that there are 110 for "carrying passenger
> with no helmet", but only 40 for "carrying more persons than bicycle
> designed for".

lots and lots of wind-in-the-hair tandem riders?

(or the same one who is a slow learner....)

Zebee

On Apr 8, 10:46 pm, Donga <idomybestworkonab...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 31, 2:52 pm, peter...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mar 31, 2:02 pm, Duncan <duncanmc...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 31, 1:33 pm, Zebee Johnstone <zeb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > In aus.bicycle on Sun, 30 Mar 2008 19:58:09 -0700 (PDT)
>
> > > > Duncan <duncanmc...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > still, that means approx 3% of offences were recorded against
> > > > > cyclists, which seems pretty high.
>
> > > > If they can catch that many, then why do they need licences?
>
> > > > I agree it's likely helmet laws, although maybe light laws as well?
> > > > I'd want to see a breakdown of the actual offences...
>
> > > Indeed.
>
> > > It's also not clear if this 9000 is "recorded offences" or "unique
> > > offenders".
>
> > > It is more than likely that the bloke who gets pulled up for no helmet
> > > or running a red, also gets done for
> > > 1/ no reflectors
> > > 2/ no bell
>
> > > I know I'd get done for 1/ if anyone bothered to look, and up until
> > > recently, 2/.
>
> > Sent just now:
> > roadsaf...@transport.qld.gov.au
>
> > Dear Queensland Transport
>
> > As a cyclist and motorist, I was interested to read the article,
> > reproduced below from The Courier Mail, stating that 9000 bike riders
> > were fined in the past year for breaking road rules.
>
> > This article has caused extensive discussion amongst cycling groups. I
> > and a number of my colleagues would like to know a statistical
> > breakdown of these numbers. Would you be so kind as to provide me with
> > further details, that I can share with others. We would like to know:
>
> > - where in Queensland the offences occurred
> > - what were the offences
> > - what penalties were issued
> > - whether these infringements were issued in routine policing or
> > whether they were in specific campaigns
> > - and any other details you think might inform the debate.
>
> > Of course, details on every offence cannot be provided and categorical
> > information will be satisfactory.
>
> > Thankyou in advance for the information.
>
> > Yours sincerely
>
> > Donga
>
> Response, with tables of localities and offences, provided on the
> Bikeqld wiki:http://www.bikeqld.org.au/wiki/Image:10069_-_Bicycle_Infringements_20...
> Makes for some quite interesting reading. I'll post some comments
> tomorrow.
>
> Donga

Some observations:
- 9,598 offences, total fine $55,625, average fine= $5.80! There must
be a lot of missing data.
UPDATED: after I pointed this out, the statistician found some extra
money. Now it is $716,005 for an average of $74.60 per offence.
- Cairns is the worst location (1,200+) - hardly surprising if you see
the number of Japanese students riding around with evidently complete
disregard for the rules and safety
- Not much action in Brisbane (about 1,150 in all districts)
- Redcliffe police must hate cyclists (600+)
- Huge majority are lack of helmet (8,500) (the average fine would buy
two of the cheaper helmets)
- No lights 250 (wouldn't be hard to crank this up by camping outside
unis and TAFEs after dusk)
- Running a red light 200, but several variant offences on the theme
- 5 drinking alcohol while riding (put it in a bidon, you goof)
- 129 using mobile phone while riding!

Zebee Johnstone wrote:
> In aus.bicycle on Tue, 8 Apr 2008 18:59:28 -0700 (PDT)
> Duncan <duncanmcrae@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>> What I find puzzling is that there are 110 for "carrying passenger
>> with no helmet", but only 40 for "carrying more persons than bicycle
>> designed for".
>
> lots and lots of wind-in-the-hair tandem riders?
>
> (or the same one who is a slow learner....)
>
> Zebee

People carrying toddlers in toddler seats on bikes where the kid isn't
wearing a helmet?


G-S

Donga wrote:

> - 129 using mobile phone while riding!

Which begs the obvious question as to how many qld Mv drivers were
pinged for this offence that year.

Zebee Johnstone <zebeej@gmail.com> writes:

> In aus.bicycle on Tue, 8 Apr 2008 18:59:28 -0700 (PDT)
> Duncan <duncanmcrae@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>>
>> What I find puzzling is that there are 110 for "carrying passenger
>> with no helmet", but only 40 for "carrying more persons than bicycle
>> designed for".
>
> lots and lots of wind-in-the-hair tandem riders?

With tandems the one on the back will assure you there are no
"passengers" -- so there couldn't possibly be an offence that there was
a passenger with no helmet.

> (or the same one who is a slow learner....)

More likely that the policeman was happy to find one offence and didn't
want to charge them with too many at once otherwise he might be thought
to be picking on someone.

> Zebee
Adrain