ASRA - Australian Skateboard Racing Association

I just thought id add that there are hundreds of bikes on roads every day and they are not getting fined. Maybe im wrong but they are recreational vehicles too are they not?

Maybe its just because old people have a grudge against ALL people on skateboards.

Tags: bikes, road., rules.

Views: 19

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

They are indeed your right. It is still possible to lose demerit points on a pushbike for things like not wearing a helmet. The biggest difference is that bikes have a secured breaking system where as our boards dont. Maybe you should get a skate break.
Dani said:
They are indeed your right. It is still possible to lose demerit points on a pushbike for things like not wearing a helmet. The biggest difference is that bikes have a secured breaking system where as our boards dont. Maybe you should get a skate break.
Ohhh ok thats fair enough then, Still a shit rule. As we do have some kinds of breaking haha. but definatly not as good as a bike
There is no "recreational vehicle" category in the road rules. There are "vehicles" and there are "wheeled recreational devices".

The road rule state that bikes ARE vehicles and have all the same rights and responsibilities as cars (with some minor exceptions).

The road rule state that skateboards are NOT vehicles. They are "wheeled recreational devices". As such the majority of the road rules do not apply to them. The only roads you can legally skate on have no lane marking and must have a 50km/h speed limit or less.

On a philosophical level, the road rules prioritise transport at the expense of recreation. I'd like to see roads become a legitimate site for recreation of all types, instead of just conduits from here to there. Reclaim the Streets!
So if we were of to denied that we skated at kilkivan are the police allowed to search your car for a skateboard?
Bugs said:
There is no "recreational vehicle" category in the road rules. There are "vehicles" and there are "wheeled recreational devices".

The road rule state that bikes ARE vehicles and have all the same rights and responsibilities as cars (with some minor exceptions).

The road rule state that skateboards are NOT vehicles. They are "wheeled recreational devices". As such the majority of the road rules do not apply to them. The only roads you can legally skate on have no lane marking and must have a 50km/h speed limit or less.

There is a solution to this. Get a Gravity Bike, find a stonking hill on the national highway and bomb it, and bomb it, and bomb it. There should be nothing the authorities can do about it so long as you follow the road rules and don't speed, so find a 110kph section of highway and go for gold.

Cheers

A-Drain
Adrian Alderson said:
There is a solution to this. Get a Gravity Bike, find a stonking hill on the national highway and bomb it, and bomb it, and bomb it. There should be nothing the authorities can do about it so long as you follow the road rules and don't speed, so find a 110kph section of highway and go for gold.

Good call as far as legality goes, but I'd question why you need a gravity bike. I'm not convinced they go faster than a regular road bike, and I'm fairly sure they'd be slower than a low-rider recumbent. And both of those have this neat feature where you can pedal up the hill.
Did the judge in Matt's case go so far as to make a ruling on whether he was riding a vehicle or not when they fined him( I Know part of it was because he crossed the lines) . I can;t seem to find out exactly what the magistrate said in the previous forums.
Wasn't it just because he crossed double white lines that's breaking the road rules even if he is classified a vehicle?
When matt finally got fined the he was quoted in the courier mail as being surprised that a skateboard was considered a vehicle, and when the charges came up in the first sitting the magistrate gave the plice more time to work out if he could be charged as operating a vehicle. I will try and look up some more on his case - but I would be surprised if it is the precedent that we may be heplfull to us when we rise lined roads.
okk yeah what the a vehicle this is the meaning i found for vehicle "a conveyance moving on wheels, runners, tracks, or the like, as a cart, sled, automobile, or tractor." so it could be yeah.
Yer Pete we go on holidays friday so from friday on any day we are up for a skate no probs, we wouldn't mined doing the local hill the Peachester range hill, because Kilkivan looked way faster but i haven't been on Peachester range yet. Or if you know some good spots we could hit them and we could check out some other hills around there or something.
AFAIK (and IANAL), there was no judge in Matt's case - only a magistrate. Magistrates are not required to have any legal training, and in some cases have never been lawyers. There is no written "judgement" in a magistrate's court - basically no record of what went on at all, other than "guilty" or "not guilty".

The "decision" in Matt's case has roughly zero weight as a precedent. It would need to be appealed to the District Court (where there is a judge) for it to start to have some weight in the legal system. I suspect that Matt would win on appeal - skateboards are not vehicles.

But again, I don't know all the details of the particular case and am basing my opinions on what's been in the newspapers, which are always 100% accurate :)
Bugs said:
And both of those have this neat feature where you can pedal up the hill.

Bugs,

that sounds way too much like exercise to me. That is what the support vehicle is for (;-)> The idea of a G Bike is that the cops will be troubled by it's definition and it'd be good training for Newtons '09 and another discipline to enter, the more runs down that mountain the better!!!!!!!!!!

Cheers

A-Drain

Reply to Discussion

RSS

Search

© 2024   Created by Bugs.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service