Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Back to news
news
Crime & Legal
Canberra brings in law targeting people who throw objects at cyclistsJustice (Lonpicman, Wikimedia Commons)

Canberra brings in law targeting people who throw objects at cyclists

Up to two years' jail for anyone found guilty of new offence in ACT...
by Simon_MacMichael
Tue, Jun 14, 2016 10:18
12

Cyclists in Canberra are to be protected by a new law that will make it illegal to throw objects at them, or at other vehicles.

The law, which has been approved by the government of the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) also makes it illegal to place objects in the way of road users, reports The Canberra Times.

People convicted of the new offence could be imprisoned for up to two years.

ACT road safety minister Shane Rattenbury said: "These new laws will help protect the territory's road users from irresponsible and dangerous actions, such as throwing rocks at cars or cyclists.

"Throwing objects at cyclists is unfortunately a relatively common practice, and many regular cyclists will have a story of being hit or nearly hit by an object thrown from a car.

“These days, with the popularity of helmet cams, a quick internet search will bring up videos of cyclists being subjected to dangerous behaviour."

He said that the new law as well as existing legislation such as minimum passing distance would help protect people on bikes.

"Initiatives like these aim to improve accessibility and connectivity, improve safety and raise awareness of cyclists on our roads," he explained.

"This is all extremely unsafe, criminal behaviour, and it is appropriate that our laws recognise it. People need to be able to travel around our city safely."

Compared to some Australian states such as New South Wales, which recently introduced massive increases in fines for offences such as riding a bike without a helmet, ACT seems more accepting of those who choose to get around on bikes, with the minister saying earlier this year that it could relax its compulsory helmet law.

> Australia’s capital could relax compulsory helmet law

Lisa Keeling, president of Cycling ACT, told the newspaper that while cycling she had experienced objects being thrown at her such as a McDonald’s milkshake and eggs.

"It is only a small minority who throw things at cyclists, but they need to have consequences and take it seriously that someone could get hurt,” she said.

“A lot of our members talk about their stories of how dangerous it is and how unsafe they feel," she added.

> Australian study blames hostile media coverage for increased harassment of cyclists

Canberra
ACT
Simon MacMichael

Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.

Add new comment

12 comments

Avatar
kie7077 | 8 years ago
0 likes

Only 2 years? And what if the object causes some permanent harm to the cyclist? They get off lightly?

Avatar
PaulBox | 8 years ago
1 like

I like that, but wouldn't it be nice if the 'helpers' could just do positive stuff and not have to try to make the bad stuff done by the wankers better.

Avatar
antigee | 8 years ago
0 likes

"I'm surprised they need a new law to cover this. Can't they already prosecute it as an assault?"

not sure on the detail of Au' law but a lot is very similar to the UK (I live in Victoria) used to live in Sheffield and around 5 years ago I reported an incident in which a group of youths had thrown half a house brick at me as I cycled past - I only reported it so that it was a recorded incident in case it was regular at the location. Police took it seriously and followed up with local community police as I had first name of one them - his mate was stupid enough to shout it out as I chased them (stupid thing to do but I was angry) anyway as I gave a statement to the police they specifically queried when I said the half brick hit my rucsac - there reason being that it didn't actually hit me so they couldn't call it assault despite the intention

Avatar
Paul M | 8 years ago
0 likes

Well, if "objects" include great dollops of horseshit, they'll have to prosecute the entire legislature of New South Wales. Probably the other states too.

Avatar
pakennedy | 8 years ago
1 like

I was worried because I throw a lot of money at my bikes, but then I realised that when it comes to bikes, money is no object!

Avatar
lushmiester | 8 years ago
0 likes

Mario Cipolli (and a few others) are probably not happy about that

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4XxCZagAjk

Avatar
tritecommentbot | 8 years ago
3 likes

Specific new offenses can be good for publicity, and can build their own case law to dodge existing loopholes.

 

Really I'd like to see throwing things out the car to be strict liability. I was on a ride a few weeks back around the pentland's and some clown threw a McD's out on to the road as I was coming the other way. Wasn't at me, but if it was windy it could have blown over enough to hassle me. Maybe not so dangerous, but I mean seriously, could you even be more of a stereotype. McDs, AND littering. Sad as F. Wish I had a cam on the bike to catch stuff like that. Though doubt the police would bother. Youtube has tons of driver offense videos, no way the police can follow up on them all.

Avatar
PaulBox | 8 years ago
5 likes

So sad that something like this is required, humans can be such wankers.

Avatar
Jimnm replied to PaulBox | 8 years ago
2 likes

PaulBox wrote:

So sad that something like this is required, humans can be such wankers.

well said Paul

Avatar
zanf replied to PaulBox | 8 years ago
2 likes

PaulBox wrote:

So sad that something like this is required, humans can be such wankers.

In light of what happened in Orlando at the weekend, I was made aware of this quote:

Mr Rogers wrote:

"When I was a boy and I would see scary things in the news, my mother would say to me, "Look for the helpers. You will always find people who are helping." To this day, especially in times of "disaster," I remember my mother's words and I am always comforted by realizing that there are still so many helpers – so many caring people in this world."

And then theres this one about 9/11:

Jon Stewart wrote:

“The reason I don’t worry about society is, nineteen people knocked down two buildings and killed thousands. Hundreds of people ran into those buildings to save them. I’ll take those odds every f*cking day.”

Despite some people being wankers.... they are vastly outnumbered by people who arent, who care and who will stand up against them.

Avatar
hawkinspeter | 8 years ago
6 likes

I'm surprised they need a new law to cover this. Can't they already prosecute it as an assault?

Avatar
ron611087 replied to hawkinspeter | 8 years ago
2 likes

hawkinspeter wrote:

I'm surprised they need a new law to cover this. Can't they already prosecute it as an assault?

I would have thought they could. A specific law can be good because they reduce the juries options to a technical decision. It could also be counter productive because the maximum penalty is defined whareas the maximum injury to the cyclist is limited only by death. This is a mismatch.

The penalty for dooring for example is so low that prosecutors are reluctant to use it for serious cases, and juries are reluctant to return a guilty verdict for the more serious alternate charges. The result, no justice for the victim.

Latest Comments