Filtering

[skitzor]

Well considering riders already do it since it's no illegal. You are therefore saying that by simply legislating it will cause there to 50-70 times more crashes? Please, do justify that one?

that is not what I said.

obviously less people will filter if it's made illegal, and it's likely more people will filter if it's explicitly classified as legal (as cops can just book you for something else).

riding a motorcycle and getting in an accident is something like 50x more likely than driving a car and getting in an accident. if filtering was legal, this would go up (in my example, to 70x).

my point was that some of the votes could simple be "I don't give a ****", because it's typically only the motorcyclist getting injured. if you asked people if they wanted to allow cars to drive more dangerously, you wouldn't get the same results.

[MaddMoose]

Except it's not more dangerous. Riding in a straight line past stationary objects is not exactly difficult.

oh and it's only 5x more likely to be killed on a bike than a car.

[skitzor]

Except it's not more dangerous. Riding in a straight line past stationary objects is not exactly difficult.

so you think there would be exactly the same injury rates regardless of whether everyone filtered or not? that seems a bit delusional to me.

[Uzi]

DO IT!

sitting behind a diesel is retarded.... its not like you can wind the window up and turn the airco on.

[MaddMoose]

so you think there would be exactly the same injury rates regardless of whether everyone filtered or not? that seems a bit delusional to me.

Well considering the majority of riders already do it, it's a small minority that don't. Therefore, no the injury rate will not go up. Besides, falling off your bike at 10km/h, the biggest injury is going to be to your pride and wallet.

[HandsomeSandwich]

So is there a single moral argument as to why they shouldn't be allowed to filter?

[Nekosan]

so you think there would be exactly the same injury rates regardless of whether everyone filtered or not? that seems a bit delusional to me.

Well considering the majority of riders already do it, it's a small minority that don't. Therefore, no the injury rate will not go up. Besides, falling off your bike at 10km/h, the biggest injury is going to be to your pride and wallet.

I don't know about where you live but up here the majority of riders do NOT filter, i can only remember seeing it once in the last few years.

edit: and i'm pretty sure it was a motorcycle cop with his siren on slowing to run the lights.

So is there a single moral argument as to why they shouldn't be allowed to filter?

Moral argument? That has nothing to do with it, every driver I've asked considers it to be dangerous and stupid behavior that doesn't have a real benefit, in fact the only people who seem to think it's a good idea ride motorcycles themselves.

[Datafunk]

riding a motorcycle and getting in an accident is something like 50x more likely than driving a car and getting in an accident.

where'd you get that from?

you sure your not talking about the 38x more likely to have a SERIOUS result when you have an accident.

afaik that 38x thing is a bit suspect as well.

[MaddMoose]

in fact the only people who seem to think it's a good idea ride motorcycles themselves.

i.e. The people in the best position to judge. Funny how you think riding past a stationary object at walking speed is massively dangerous. Just to note, I was doing it today in Adelaide in peak hour traffic, amazingly I was brutally maimed.

Just so you don't have to worry, I'm willing to risk these horrendous injuries, as it's preferable to sitting right behind a bus and having exhaust fumes blown straight into my face.

[MaddMoose]

where'd you get that from?

afaik that 38x thing is a bit suspect as well.

Per kilometre travelled, injury rate is 16x higher on motorcycles. Death rate is about 5 times higher worldwide and 5.7 in Australia.

[Otto-matic]

My main issue with it is that a seemingly large bunch of motorcyclists seem to think it is OK to filter at 50 or 60 KM/h and/or through moving traffic.

As it stands, I am OK with filtering down bike lanes provided the bike lane is unoccupied, traffic is at less than 10 KM/h and the bike's speed is less than 10 KM/h. Seen too many dodgy motorcyclists and regular cyclists cruising down the dotted line between traffic when there isn't really room for them.

[MaddMoose]

My main issue with it is that a seemingly large bunch of motorcyclists seem to think it is OK to filter at 50 or 60 KM/h and/or through moving traffic.

Agreed, filtering through moving traffic is stupid and should not be allowed.

[Nekosan]

My main issue with it is that a seemingly large bunch of motorcyclists seem to think it is OK to filter at 50 or 60 KM/h and/or through moving traffic.

Agreed, filtering through moving traffic is stupid and should not be allowed.

I just don't see the majority of riders as responsible enough to do it safely, what happens when you're halfway down a line of traffic and it starts moving? I would be 100% fine with filtering being legal if they implemented insanely harsh penalties for doing it in moving traffic or for not doing it exactly right, place breaches under the hooning laws and start confiscating bikes for riding through moving traffic or filtering over a certain speed and it would have my support.

[Datafunk]

Per kilometre travelled, injury rate is 16x higher on motorcycles. Death rate is about 5 times higher worldwide and 5.7 in Australia.

getting picky here i know, but is that injury rate = accident rate or?

in fact the only people who seem to think it's a good idea ride motorcycles themselves.

i.e. The people in the best position to judge.

gold.

[MaddMoose]

getting picky here i know, but is that injury rate = accident rate or?

That's serious injury rate.