glasgowcyclist
Charming but somewhat feckless
- Location
- Scotland
Aye, on a pavement: a place where pedestrians have freedom of movement and ought not to be worrying about ceding priority to nobbers on any number of wheels.
GC
Blackpool pavement cyclist decision today
- Thread starter Accy cyclist
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Aye, on a pavement: a place where pedestrians have freedom of movement and ought not to be worrying about ceding priority to nobbers on any number of wheels.
GC
Stephenite
Membå
- Location
- OslO
I meant to write a little more but I had a 4 month old child (aka. little sweetie pie) plonked on my knee.
I think it's relevant because cycling on the pavement is not, in itself, dangerous. And many countries allow it. The police in the UK often turn a blind eye and, can recommend it, in certain cases. In this case the cyclist was going way too fast. He should have been anticipating a child, an animal, or anything at all to come out the gate spaces and cycled at walking pace or below. The man/cyclist is an utter nob for what he did, and his subsequent attitude.
gavgav
Legendary Member
On a pavement where he shouldn't have been!
Stephenite
Membå
- Location
- OslO
@Bianchi boy has written a lot of nonsense here.
snorri
Legendary Member
- Location
- East coast, up a bit.
I would hope his lawyer would be lodging an appeal, the fine seems completely out of proportion when compared with fines following road traffic offences resulting in death and serious injury.
Last edited:
Gatters
Senior Member
- Location
- Right Here
Yes this is what I was trying to say but I just didn't make a good job of saying it, at the time I hadn't seen the video but I saw it on the evening news it was shocking to see that
snorri
Legendary Member
- Location
- East coast, up a bit.
..but this was no ordinary pedestrian, this was a three year old child in a public place with little awareness of danger and with lax parental supervision.
jefmcg
Guru
I can't tell if you are serious. You can't be, can you? The mother is 10 feet away and between the child and the road, and the father is obviously only a couple of feet behind her. Do you really think parents have to be hovering millimetres from a child at all times?
snorri
Legendary Member
- Location
- East coast, up a bit.
It doesn't matter how many feet away from the child the parents were. The point is their brains were out of gear or they would have seen the approaching cyclist and taken action to protect their child.
I'm not defending the cyclist, far from it, but don't believe this is quite the black and white case many on here seem to claim, and would consider the fine imposed to be draconian when compared with many road traffic collisions.
Bianchi boy
Über Member
- Location
- North wales
finally, someone who can look outside the box, and NO i am not condoning the cyclists actions
jefmcg
Guru
I really think a parent who's attitude is to be constantly scanning the horizons for potential dangers in familiar places that should be safe is a parent who is over protective and stunting the growth of the kid. And in the end, scary as the video is, no real harm came to the kid. Parents should be able to look away for a second without blame. And some (tiny) risks to children is needed for them to grow up and become independent.
Agree though, it is out of proportion. I had to spend quite a few minutes on Google to find a driver who had been fined more than this for killing a pedestrian.
Interesting he denied he was travelling anywhere near 20mph. I reckon it's about 10 metres across the field of view. He takes something like a second to cross it. That's pretty close to 20mph, especially assuming he started breaking when the collision occurred.
Moon bunny
Judging your grammar
- Location
- Basking in my own brilliance.
The point is they were crossing a footway, that part of the highway which is set aside for pedestrians and which should be safe for people on foot of any age to use. No ifs, no buts.
What if they had seen the approaching cyclist?t There was hardly time to give his handlebars a good shove to divert him into the wall.
Now was the fine "draconian" ? I do not think so, considering drivers have been imprisoned for offences of dangerous driving in which no or only minor injuries occurred. Perhaps there is a good case for bringing the level of motoring offence penalties up to match this incident.
Bianchi boy
Über Member
- Location
- North wales
No mobility scooters then?
potsy
Rambler
- Location
- My Armchair
Not doing 20mph.
Moon bunny
Judging your grammar
- Location
- Basking in my own brilliance.
Seeing as mobility scooters are used by people with a disability as a substitute for walking some of them-the class 2 or 3 which are limited to 4 mph-are permitted.
