It also equates to 1.375 Japanese Hiro, 65.2 Ancient Roman Akt, and a mind-blowing 131,200 Biblical Etzbah, so there's a little geographical context to go with the maffs lesson.

I just picked up on this important thread; [bit pathetic thats its degenerated above into whinging drivel by anon cowards attacking each other].

back to the issue , clearly there needs to be a law change so that in such a case Motorists clearly have to demonstrate BRDoubt a duty of care to cyclists, pedestrians, & m.c.
And not the cops having to prove 'carelessness' BRD

Any lawyer types reading who know how to lobby and initiate this ?

otherwise its Open hunting season, thanks Judge

Assuming
1. that he checked his mirrors before opening his door and did not see the bicycle
2. that roading design around the parking area meant that he wouldnt see the bicycle from a distance.
3. the door was open for long enough for him to get out of the car.

How can this accident be carelessness on his part?

Derryn Hinch wrote:I'm not a lawyer, but it sounds like you are asking for the law to be changed to guilty until proven innocent.

That is, at least in my experience, a dangerous precedent to set. Having survived a major collision with a suicidal truck in Pakistan's NWFP, I, and everyone involved, got thrown in a Military gaol on the basis of guilty until proven innocent. That is a system that favours rich over poor (fortunately I was relatively the former), without the benefit of onus of proof. I was released (obviously), but it was not an enjoyable experience. Essentially, unless you can afford the fight, your innocence is irrelevant.

I still haven't seen anything that shows the car driver (standing outside of his vehicle) or the truck driver (being overtaken on the inside) to be anyway negligent.
It may not be popular, but I would question the awareness of a cyclist wearing earphones, just as I would question the awareness of a driver wearing earphones.

Although, as cyclists, we are usually the ones who come out worst off (if we come out at all), it is not always the motorists' fault.

trancemaster wrote:
otherwise its Open hunting season, thanks Judge

Interesting knee jerk reaction.

Wobbler wrote:onus

Arse you now aware of your onus?

znomit wrote:

Derryn Hinch wrote:I'm not a lawyer, but it sounds like you are asking for the law to be changed to guilty until proven innocent.

I believe this is how it works in some cycle friendly european countries.

It would be interesting to know how that works, I can't imagine it is a simple reversal of the burden of proof.

Anyway, back to the pathetic whinging. Re Mr Derpington on wobbly bits wobbling all over the road, I blame the bike shops. They should sell beginners on the advantages of a bike they can ride in a straight line, not push them upmarket to twitchy bikes that they can't handle and will often never be comfortable on.

For Deanna and her flock of noobs I say they they should be given the same consideration that we give to a family of ducklings following Mum across the road. With experience they will come to realise the appropriateness of single file.

It really worries me that quite a lot of people in this country appear to consider lokking in mirrors as adequate to check for traffic approaching from behind.'

there are these things called

Bl nd Sp ts

where we cant see and turning our heads to look is very much best practice to check for following traffic

It is not just the blind spots and the dirt.
The image in the rear mirror is small, and the wing mirror is smaller again. A cyclist approaching at speed is very easy to miss in the wing mirror, I have done it more than once.

I believenot turning around to look before exiting is policed and ticketed in some countries.
Maybe we could do it here - it might achieve less crash per buck than pure education campaigns.

great uncle bulgaria wrote:It really worries me that quite a lot of people in this country appear to consider lokking in mirrors as adequate to check for traffic approaching from behind.'

there are these things called

Bl nd Sp ts

where we cant see and turning our heads to look is very much best practice to check for following traffic

It's not just cyclists at risk, This avo I was driving in the rh lane on SH 1 just after the poriua on ramp. A woman in a late 90's corolla doing about 80 chopped in front of me (looking to turn off at the police College) I was doing about 105 and she began to indicate asshe crossed the paint. I did see her look and my car is pretty visible bright red, bright sunshine. I got the anchors on just in time. we were about .2 of a second from a big bump.

A large minority of Kiwi drivers are crap.

CrustyMTB wrote: ... A large minority of Kiwi drivers are crap.

That has always been the consensus amongst visitors from the UK and USA.

Hey, if people from the Ukraine, Urdistan and Uzbekistan disagree then we could claim scientific evidence for NZ having good drivers.


"Stuff" would publish it.

Urdistan is a placebo.
UIrdistan is not a place bro'