Another death, another article. Hopefully things change soon - the current situation is woeful.
I know of at least 4 people that have been doored in melbourne - myself included.
Ive gotten to the point of riding on the road instead of lanes where possible and if I do use a cycle lane I ensure I am on the outside of it as far away from parked cars as possible.
I hope this creates more awareness for drivers and helps bring about tougher penalties for those that cause accidents.
RoadSafe Action Group (a partnership of four inner-city councils) will begin Operation Doorknock in 2012 to encourage drivers to adopt new safety techniques when getting out of parked cars.
New safety techniques?
Maybe the government can spend $100K of public money for some consultants to come up with some brilliant new ideas like “opening your fucking eyes”?
Be careful out there. This world is full of brain dead morons
Three in my family ride daily. All three have been doored. My brother’s GF was doored last week and luckily only came away with a broken finger, a large haematoma on her thigh and a buckled wheel. Melbourne’s bike lanes are very very dangerous.
But I its time to stop thinking about it too simplistically. Yes, drivers and passengers MUST become more aware of cyclists, but at the heart of the problem is road design. The fact that a decent whack of bike lanes (most probably) exist entirely in door zones, and some can even be parked across is simply absurd, nay negligent.
More emphasis should be placed on providing good safe bike routes on Melbourne’s back streets (and good accessible resources for cyclists to navigate them), as well as the development of more wide off-road cycle paths, as well as wider cycle-only lanes on major roads. Also the govt must introduce penalties for drivers driving or parking in bike lanes - like there are in other big cities across the globe.
this is really sad
Does the Transport Accident scheme cover motor vehicle accidents involving cyclists and stationary motor cars or motor vehicles?
A cyclist will not be entitled to compensation pursuant to the provisions of the Transport Accident Act 1986 where that cyclist collides with a stationary motor car or motor vehicle, unless the collision occurred whilst the cyclist was on a journey to or from work (effective from 7 December 2000).
A cyclist will be entitled to compensation pursuant to the provisions of the Transport Accident Act 1986 where that cyclist is injured in a collision with an open or opening car door.
A cyclist involved in a transport accident will be entitled to compensation where there has been no collision with a motor car, motor vehicle, train or tram provided the incident and the injury was caused by a feature of the driving. For example, a cyclist swerves to miss a car that pulls out in front of him or her and in doing so, he or she falls off the bike and is injured.
Baiki, why are you posting this? It is all information that has been previously posted on the forum numerous times and I think that the mention of possible compensation is wholly appropriate/ insensitive in a thread focusing on an newspaper article regarding the death of a cyclist and discussions of prevention of further cyclist deaths. All the money in the world isn’t going to bring back James Cross, huh.
This thread makes me very sad … and angry.
Seriously? There was some reasoned debate in the original thread that I linked to, much of it around the legal standing for this very scenario. Im not sure if you’ve read that thread. Questions were raised about avenues for redress, and the total inaction from authorities. I dont really understand why the thread was closed. I think silence is the worst form of protest.
I was not in any way suggesting that a claim for compensation was going to bring back James Cross.
The Age article mentions the following inititatives which have been implemented or are under consideration:
■Bicycle Network Victoria has asked the police Chief Commissioner to ensure drivers involved in dooring incidents are charged and fined.
■Cycling and government bodies will meet next week to debate the introduction of a new law that would institute a statutory one-metre distance between cars and bikes.
■VicRoads will launch a campaign in early 2012 aimed at encouraging ‘‘understanding and respect between cyclists and drivers to share the road safely and mindfully’’ with a focus on dooring.
■RoadSafe Action Group (a partnership of four inner-city councils) will begin Operation Doorknock in 2012 to encourage drivers to adopt new safety techniques when getting out of parked cars.
■The Amy Gillett Foundation is lobbying state and federal governments to include bike-related safety issues in driver training and licence testing procedures.
There was no mention in the article of existing avenues for redress/compensation/support via the TAC. I dont see how my posting that kind of detail is any different from the above which were prominent in the article.
The information is relevant. Im sorry if you were offended but I’d prefer to see factual information and reference to policy rather than half arsed statements about Melbourne bike lane design being “negligent”
Sticks and stone Baiki. Learn to take some criticism. FYI JAMS linked to that thread already. Perhaps you should brush up on your reading skills before clicking CTRL+C next time.
I didnt realise I was being criticised - perhaps you can elaborate? Im also not seeing anything in the way of a counterpoint in your post other than the fact that i reposted a link.
If you think there is a more appropriate thread to discuss road safety/lobbying/legal & policy issues, I’d happily contribute there. But I dont really see a problem in discussing dooring related issues in a thread about an article about dooring.
I think Balki has every reason to make a post regarding policies and initiatives.
I also think posting these articles on this forum is a waste of time - unless anyone is being proactive about it and gathering support for an initiative, it’s just an emotionally charged discussion for an emotionally charged discussion’s sake.
We’ll have none of that sensible talk here thanks stuen.
Don’t get me wrong I have no problem with reposting links to other threads, fire away. Mindlessly regurgitation of screes of information verbatim, that is somewhat, but not entirely related - presumably just to make the poster feel intelligent and well-informed - that you have just read in another recent thread, and which another member has just posted in the same thread, now that shits me.
Baiki, You criticise my suggestions as half-arsed - why? because they don’t come from the VicRoads website? Or just because I called you out.
And Stuen, yes, you’re absolutely right on both points.
There is no reference whatsoever to the Transport Accident Act on the other thread I linked to, nor the TAC. Not that I can see anyway… happy to be shown otherwise.
Im not exactly sure what it is that you think you called me out on.
Calm down cvnts or I’ll bang your heads together. There are more serious things to be worrying about, no?