Traffic lights favour cars, disadvantages walkers and bike riders

[Scintilla]

Thanks. Your second cite links to a 2006 incident not the 2017 incident.

Ooops! Got caught out on that one as the Feral-Hun free-view-gate caught me out and I could not see it fully

But a quick search confirms what you've said. As best as I can tell there was one other fatal Ped/cyclist event in Vic (North Mel) in 2013. Vs many hundreds killed by drivers each year.

Not entirely sure but I will wager that this was also a case of pedestrian error. This web-page - http://www.victoriawalks.org.au/news/1604 - from Victoria Walks lists a series of alleged pedestrians killed by bicycle riders, but several are incidents that were later deemed to have been NOT the fault of the bicycle rider. Mr McKenzie, and the lady who died following the Parkville collision were both not the rider's fault. Following links to the Vicroads data from that Age article - https://www.theage.com.au/opinion/licen ... vr4pc.html - finds a whole listing of collisions in 2013 yet no apparent pedestrian fatality from any cyclist. I call BS on that one!

[fat and old]

I’m thinking that’s how the cyclist got off killing a ped on Beach Rd last year?

References? I've missed that fatality.

It happened in April 2017. The family quickly launched into 'bike-hate-mode':

"Mr MacKenzie’s son Alastair told the Herald Sun while it was too early to know what caused the accident he hoped it would result in bikes becoming registered to make riders more accountable."

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/law-o ... 474f5618e4

Note: the rider stopped, he was held accountable, he co-operated with police.

But when police investigated they found there was footage that showed the cyclist was riding with a green light. We can only presume that Norman McKenzie stepped out too soon, or was somehow distracted.

Thats the one. I'm thinking I read something about the ped still crossing when the lights changed; he didn't have enough time.

[Scintilla]

AFAIK, the rider was proceeding with a green light. Do not know exactly what the score was with the pedestrian, but as it was a pedestrian crossing, not an intersection, I would have presumed the light timings would have allowed for slower walking speeds.

[BobtheBuilder]

AFAIK, the rider was proceeding with a green light.

Either way the pedestrian still has right of way and the cyclist had a duty to look around. If a car killed a cyclist, even when the cyclist was technically "wrong", most cyclists wouldn't let the MV driver off that easily.

[human909]

If a car killed a cyclist, even when the cyclist was technically "wrong", most cyclists wouldn't let the MV driver off that easily.

How do you figure that?

I can think of countless circumstances where a MV driver could be blameless. In fact I remember reading at least one where a cyclist over cooked on a corner into oncoming traffic.


The details haven't been released to my knowledge. But if the cyclist was coming up the inside of stopped traffic at 25kph and the light turns green then he could quite easily have no knowledge of the pedestrian still crossing. Its not about the pedestrian being 'technically' wrong as you put it, it is about whether the cyclist was behaving appropriately and safely.

[BobtheBuilder]

it is about whether the cyclist was behaving appropriately and safely.

If someone died, then ipso facto the cyclist wasn't.

There is still a duty to take due care, which riding 25km/h on the inside lane, with blind spots ahead (caused by MVs), through a just turned green light isn't.

Given previous comments, there's a greater chance of being killed by a collision with another pedestrian than a bicycle, but that doesn't mean cyclists should blindly adopt a "we can do no wrong" attitude. That makes us no different from self-righteous MV drivers.

[Scintilla]

Either way the pedestrian still has right of way and the cyclist had a duty to look around. If a car killed a cyclist, even when the cyclist was technically "wrong", most cyclists wouldn't let the MV driver off that easily.

Granted. Yet it all depends upon the exact circumstances of what occurred. Did the rider have any chance to take evasive action? Was the pedestrian already on the crossing, or had he just stepped out?

There is still a duty to take due care, which riding 25km/h on the inside lane, with blind spots ahead (caused by MVs), through a just turned green light isn't.

We do not know that. You are presuming much. Police established the circumstances using CCTV and dash-cam I believe and decided the cyclist was not at fault, that he acted lawfully and did not breach his duty towards the pedestrian.

I trust they had the facts, and shall leave it at that.

[fat and old]

Was the pedestrian already on the crossing, or had he just stepped out?

I had always believed that he was completing a crossing and the lights beat him.

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/law-o ... 474f5618e4

He had almost completed crossing from the beach to the city side.

Yet, reported by same paper, day before

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/law-o ... f5b9219f1e

Police said the man was hit on the south side of the road, closest to the beach.

Such is the issue with making assumptions based on "reporting"

I do agree with BTB's basic premise; however personal experience has demonstrated that life is not as black and white as that.