Road legal bikes banned from certain roads due to noise
Discussion
Steve Bass said:
At the end of the day, and irrespective of the number of bikes per day, they are underrtaking a legal activity with legal machinery on public roads.
If the issue is the noise caused by illegally noisy pipes, then deal with that as the law provides remedies for this infraction. But to barr legal vehicles from a legal activity on the public road is a dangerous precedent.
Slippery slope gents...
^^^ ThisIf the issue is the noise caused by illegally noisy pipes, then deal with that as the law provides remedies for this infraction. But to barr legal vehicles from a legal activity on the public road is a dangerous precedent.
Slippery slope gents...
Near me they reduced the speed limit AGAIN on what was an NSL to 50 then to 40 following another fatal bike crash
The fact that he was travelling at around twice the (previous) limit seemed to escape them - enforce the existing rules before introducing stricter rules
V8RX7 said:
The fact that he was travelling at around twice the (previous) limit seemed to escape them - enforce the existing rules before introducing stricter rules
this is another bugbear - twunt crashes at 120mph so 'brake' (and others of their ilk) clamor for a reduction of the speed-limit. WTF?? He wasn't obeying the existing one - what makes you think a lower one will be better observed?Steve Bass said:
At the end of the day, and irrespective of the number of bikes per day, they are underrtaking a legal activity with legal machinery on public roads.
If the issue is the noise caused by illegally noisy pipes, then deal with that as the law provides remedies for this infraction. But to barr legal vehicles from a legal activity on the public road is a dangerous precedent.
if I had paid my annual licanse fee, I would expect the right to utilise all and any road in the pursuit of my daily life excepting those closed for repair or smiliar.
To barr my access when the road is neither a toll road or my vehicle is fully legal may actually give rise to a legal challenge. On what legal basis is my right of way being denied to me?
Slippery slope gents...
well, a lot of diesel cars were banned from many German cities just recently...If the issue is the noise caused by illegally noisy pipes, then deal with that as the law provides remedies for this infraction. But to barr legal vehicles from a legal activity on the public road is a dangerous precedent.
if I had paid my annual licanse fee, I would expect the right to utilise all and any road in the pursuit of my daily life excepting those closed for repair or smiliar.
To barr my access when the road is neither a toll road or my vehicle is fully legal may actually give rise to a legal challenge. On what legal basis is my right of way being denied to me?
Slippery slope gents...
I think the big question here is, "will the restrictions to a small number of roads, in a small region, of Austria, be increasingly applied elsewhere".
I mean, are the motorcycle restrictions enforced in this area typically rolled out on a global scale?
Only, I'm struggling to think of any instance, ever, where a law has been made on the basis of "well, all the cool kids in Austria are doing it". For that reason, and many others actually, this really doesn't bother me.
I mean, are the motorcycle restrictions enforced in this area typically rolled out on a global scale?
Only, I'm struggling to think of any instance, ever, where a law has been made on the basis of "well, all the cool kids in Austria are doing it". For that reason, and many others actually, this really doesn't bother me.
Steve Bass said:
Pothole said:
Slippery slope where?
In the context of the UK? Minimal I would think BUT, the fact that a right of way is being denied on the basis of a particular vehicle is being used, which was bought legally and complies with the laws (as they stand) in force sets a dangeous precedent (in the context of European laws and legislation) [/footnote]If it comes to the UK, then i will fight for my right to (party?) keep my Akrapovic.
OP is based in Southern Germany according to their profile. I would assume the law change may have ruined their summer.
black-k1 said:
Pothole said:
Steve Bass said:
To barr my access when the road is neither a toll road or my vehicle is fully legal may actually give rise to a legal challenge. On what legal basis is my right of way being denied to me?
Slippery slope gents...
Slippery slope where? Slippery slope gents...
What do you think the outcome of the pilot is likely to be?
Q. "Did the pilot ban work? Was it quieter?"
A. "Yes"
Q. "Should the ban be made permanent?"
A. "Yes"
Whether the bike is 'compliant with regulations' is irrelevant.
That part of Austria does not want to hear the obnoxious loud motorbikes. The fact that 'some' of those that are louder than the benchmark set is tough luck.
Motorbikes aren't being banned. Loud ones are.
PushedDover said:
black-k1 said:
Pothole said:
Steve Bass said:
To barr my access when the road is neither a toll road or my vehicle is fully legal may actually give rise to a legal challenge. On what legal basis is my right of way being denied to me?
Slippery slope gents...
Slippery slope where? Slippery slope gents...
What do you think the outcome of the pilot is likely to be?
Q. "Did the pilot ban work? Was it quieter?"
A. "Yes"
Q. "Should the ban be made permanent?"
A. "Yes"
Whether the bike is 'compliant with regulations' is irrelevant.
That part of Austria does not want to hear the obnoxious loud motorbikes. The fact that 'some' of those that are louder than the benchmark set is tough luck.
Motorbikes aren't being banned. Loud ones are.
legal ones are.
loud and obnoxious are subjective values without basis. An imposed 'benchmark" has no basis in law. it's another subjective assessemnt and unduly disadvantages those who have complied with the law in all respects.
Whether they like it or not, those vehicles are legal to own and operate in all areas where legal right of way is entitled.
Ripe for a legal challenge even by a manufacturer.
BobSaunders said:
The worrying thing is that this pilot was started on a 44% minority view.
How so ? you said : BobSaunders said:
It should be noted however, that 44% of respondents didnt like the noise - the pilot ban was introduced on a minority rule. Which is worrying.
https://www.tirol.gv.at/verkehr/verkehrsrecht/moto...
https://www.tirol.gv.at/verkehr/verkehrsrecht/moto...
That does not mean that 56% Did Like the noise? https://www.tirol.gv.at/verkehr/verkehrsrecht/moto...
https://www.tirol.gv.at/verkehr/verkehrsrecht/moto...
If the polling came back with 44% didn't like the noise, the other 56% believe it is wonderful - would the ban have started?
Is it feasible (likely) it was something akin to : 44% didn't like the noise, 15% thought the noise was fab, 41% didn't have an opinion.
In that instance what should the outcome be ?
After all the study reported :
"The study results show a clear picture. The extent of the nuisance response to motorcycle noise is very clear. Even at low noise levels, those outside the company feel that they are 'badly bothered by motorcycle noise' compared to two-lane motor vehicles. In addition to acoustic parameters such as pass-by and peak levels as well as the noise characteristics, subjective levels of perception of motorcycles themselves also play a major role. While the average noise pollution from two-lane traffic on Sundays is very similar to that on working days, motorcycle traffic noise increases on Saturdays and Sundays during the day, which is decisive for the annoyance reaction. In addition to a variety of other questions, the meaningfulness of various possible measures was also asked. among other things, this shows that even among those surveyed who drive motorcycles themselves, there is a very high level of agreement and a great need for specific steps to reduce motorcycle noise. These range from more traffic controls for motorcycles, higher penalties for loud two-wheelers, to driving bans on certain routes."
Perhaps context (facts) would be useful. https://www.tirol.gv.at/fileadmin/themen/sicherhei...
Steve Bass said:
Incorrect.
legal ones are.
loud and obnoxious are subjective values without basis. An imposed 'benchmark" has no basis in law. it's another subjective assessemnt and unduly disadvantages those who have complied with the law in all respects.
Whether they like it or not, those vehicles are legal to own and operate in all areas where legal right of way is entitled.
Ripe for a legal challenge even by a manufacturer.
Have fun. I am sure you are totally right and will win the legal challengelegal ones are.
loud and obnoxious are subjective values without basis. An imposed 'benchmark" has no basis in law. it's another subjective assessemnt and unduly disadvantages those who have complied with the law in all respects.
Whether they like it or not, those vehicles are legal to own and operate in all areas where legal right of way is entitled.
Ripe for a legal challenge even by a manufacturer.
PushedDover said:
BobSaunders said:
The worrying thing is that this pilot was started on a 44% minority view.
How so ? you said : BobSaunders said:
It should be noted however, that 44% of respondents didnt like the noise - the pilot ban was introduced on a minority rule. Which is worrying.
https://www.tirol.gv.at/verkehr/verkehrsrecht/moto...
https://www.tirol.gv.at/verkehr/verkehrsrecht/moto...
That does not mean that 56% Did Like the noise? https://www.tirol.gv.at/verkehr/verkehrsrecht/moto...
https://www.tirol.gv.at/verkehr/verkehrsrecht/moto...
If the polling came back with 44% didn't like the noise, the other 56% believe it is wonderful - would the ban have started?
Is it feasible (likely) it was something akin to : 44% didn't like the noise, 15% thought the noise was fab, 41% didn't have an opinion.
In that instance what should the outcome be ?
After all the study reported :
"The study results show a clear picture. The extent of the nuisance response to motorcycle noise is very clear. Even at low noise levels, those outside the company feel that they are 'badly bothered by motorcycle noise' compared to two-lane motor vehicles. In addition to acoustic parameters such as pass-by and peak levels as well as the noise characteristics, subjective levels of perception of motorcycles themselves also play a major role. While the average noise pollution from two-lane traffic on Sundays is very similar to that on working days, motorcycle traffic noise increases on Saturdays and Sundays during the day, which is decisive for the annoyance reaction. In addition to a variety of other questions, the meaningfulness of various possible measures was also asked. among other things, this shows that even among those surveyed who drive motorcycles themselves, there is a very high level of agreement and a great need for specific steps to reduce motorcycle noise. These range from more traffic controls for motorcycles, higher penalties for loud two-wheelers, to driving bans on certain routes."
Perhaps context (facts) would be useful. https://www.tirol.gv.at/fileadmin/themen/sicherhei...
PushedDover said:
Steve Bass said:
Incorrect.
legal ones are.
loud and obnoxious are subjective values without basis. An imposed 'benchmark" has no basis in law. it's another subjective assessemnt and unduly disadvantages those who have complied with the law in all respects.
Whether they like it or not, those vehicles are legal to own and operate in all areas where legal right of way is entitled.
Ripe for a legal challenge even by a manufacturer.
Have fun. I am sure you are totally right and will win the legal challengelegal ones are.
loud and obnoxious are subjective values without basis. An imposed 'benchmark" has no basis in law. it's another subjective assessemnt and unduly disadvantages those who have complied with the law in all respects.
Whether they like it or not, those vehicles are legal to own and operate in all areas where legal right of way is entitled.
Ripe for a legal challenge even by a manufacturer.
Don't be an obtuse knob.
The basic facts are that whilst the noise nuisance is appreciated, the local government will have numerous other avenues to manage the nuisance such as noise barriers, traffic calming measures through to outright an ban on any type of vehicle on a prescribed road for whatever reason. Say no bikes between X hours on Y days of the week. Totally legal and acceptable as it is neither discriminatory nor arbitary.
What isn't acceptable is an application of prohibitation based on arbitrary or speculative values or opinions. If is vehicle is legally compliant at the time it is sold the owner is free to operate it where ROW is provided. To select certain makes or models is discriminatory when all makes and models are legally compliant. There's no grey here.
But If reasoned dicussion and cogent debate is beyond your abilities perhaps think before you press the submit button.
black-k1 said:
Pothole said:
Steve Bass said:
To barr my access when the road is neither a toll road or my vehicle is fully legal may actually give rise to a legal challenge. On what legal basis is my right of way being denied to me?
Slippery slope gents...
Slippery slope where? Slippery slope gents...
What do you think the outcome of the pilot is likely to be?
Q. "Did the pilot ban work? Was it quieter?"
A. "Yes"
Q. "Should the ban be made permanent?"
A. "Yes"
Prof Prolapse said:
I think the big question here is, "will the restrictions to a small number of roads, in a small region, of Austria, be increasingly applied elsewhere".
I mean, are the motorcycle restrictions enforced in this area typically rolled out on a global scale?
Only, I'm struggling to think of any instance, ever, where a law has been made on the basis of "well, all the cool kids in Austria are doing it". For that reason, and many others actually, this really doesn't bother me.
That was where I was hoping people would get to on their own.I mean, are the motorcycle restrictions enforced in this area typically rolled out on a global scale?
Only, I'm struggling to think of any instance, ever, where a law has been made on the basis of "well, all the cool kids in Austria are doing it". For that reason, and many others actually, this really doesn't bother me.
Prof Prolapse said:
Only, I'm struggling to think of any instance, ever, where a law has been made on the basis of "well, all the cool kids in Austria are doing it". For that reason, and many others actually, this really doesn't bother me.
I can think of a few laws which were created due to the activities of a certain Austrian. Depends which side of the third reich you sit on if you think he was cool. So there might be merit in this after all. Pothole said:
Prof Prolapse said:
I think the big question here is, "will the restrictions to a small number of roads, in a small region, of Austria, be increasingly applied elsewhere".
I mean, are the motorcycle restrictions enforced in this area typically rolled out on a global scale?
Only, I'm struggling to think of any instance, ever, where a law has been made on the basis of "well, all the cool kids in Austria are doing it". For that reason, and many others actually, this really doesn't bother me.
That was where I was hoping people would get to on their own.I mean, are the motorcycle restrictions enforced in this area typically rolled out on a global scale?
Only, I'm struggling to think of any instance, ever, where a law has been made on the basis of "well, all the cool kids in Austria are doing it". For that reason, and many others actually, this really doesn't bother me.
Also very odd to come from a country where they have a fairly large motorbike industry. Whatever.
Gassing Station | Biker Banter | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff