Pavement etiquette

[Lozz360]

Generally, cyclists give way to pedestrians (on a shared cycle path). I can't believe it is any different in Ireland. The main point is, it is against the law to cycle on a pavement. The local authority must see this as a particular problem in this stretch of road as they have gone to the trouble of installing "no cycling" signs. We tend not to have signs prohibiting us from doing something that is against the law. (ie. "murdering is forbidden here"). If she considered the road was too dangerous, her correct action would be for her and her son to dismount and push the bikes.

 

[Drago]

"Selfish narcissistic b...tard", even if untrue, is not exactly a torrent of foul abuse, unless you've led a very sheltered life.

Calling someone a bar steward is swearing at them. some people find it more offensive than others might, but it is nevertheless swearing. End of. Finito. Period. Even the law says it is.

When someone is gobbing off at you in the street there is no sliding scale of insults - they are either swearing, or they ain't. This woman was swearing, and that being the case I'd have no issue communicating with her in the same manner had I been present.

Conversely, were she to be polite I would be equally polite back. "Good day to you sir!" would have been met with "And top of the morning to you too, Missus", as I bowed my head and clutched my cloth cap to my chest.

 

[Rusty Nails]

Calling someone a bar steward is swearing at them. some people find it more offensive than others might, but it is nevertheless swearing. End of. Finito. Period. Even the law says it is.

When someone is gobbing off at you in the street there is no sliding scale of insults - they are either swearing, or they ain't. This woman was, and that being the case I'd have no issue communicating with her in the same manner.

Conversely, were she to be polite I would be equally polite back.

There is a sliding scale of swearing and insults, defined in law or not, as I am sure you are aware from your time in the Army and Police.

It was not about swearing at her, but the example set to the kid.

But if it makes you feel better......

 

[MontyVeda]

I'd have just shook my head and told her she was fecking knob head and advised the child to take no notice of anything their dickhead mother ever says, and added that they would probably be better off in foster care... before going on my way and spending the day thinking up some far more cutting retorts

 

[classic33]

Of course your link goes on to further explain this, just to confuse things.

• Fortunately, when FPNs were introduced for pavement cycling in 1999, Home Office Minister Paul Boateng issued guidancesaying that: "The introduction of the fixed penalty is not aimed at responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of traffic and who show consideration to other pavement users when doing so. Chief Police Officers who are responsible for enforcement, acknowledge that many cyclists, particularly children and young people, are afraid to cycle on the road, sensitivity and careful use of police discretion is required".
• The Home Office guidance was re-affirmed in 2014 by the then Cycling Minister Robert Goodwill, who agreed that the police should use discretion in enforcing the law and recommended that the matter be taken up with the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO).ACPO welcomed the renewed guidance, circulated it to all forces, and issued a statement referring to "discretion in taking a reasonable and proportionate approach, with safety being a guiding principle".
• To summarise, cycling on the pavement is still an offence, but there is clear guidance that the police are supposed to exercise discretion.
• And finally on pavements, remember that on segregated cycle tracks the pedestrian side remains a footway, so if you cycle into the pedestrian side to pass a pedestrian in the cycle lane you technically commit a pavement cycling offence. There's an anomaly because cyclists have to ride on their side, but pedestrians are only advised to use theirs.

Non of which applies in Ireland.

 

[classic33]

The 1835 Traffic Act may still exist in Ireland unless the Irish government have repealed it since becoming a republic in 1922

Republic in 1916
Irish Free State in 1922
Republic in 1949


https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/travel_and_recreation/cycling/cycling_offences.html

 

[Lozz360]

Republic in 1916
Irish Free State in 1922
Republic in 1949
https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/travel_and_recreation/cycling/cycling_offences.html

How about...
Home Rule introduced in 1912
Irish Free State in 1922
Republic in 1949

 

[classic33]

How about...
Home Rule introduced in 1912
Irish Free State in 1922
Republic in 1949

Simply pointing out it wasn't made a republic in 1922.

And that the act mentioned is no longer in use.

 

[Brandane]

You can only reason with people up to a point. Once they have crossed that line between being a reasonable human being and a nut-job, you either walk away or, if you feel confident of winning a physical fight - wind 'em up.
I fail to see why it might be @tyred 's place to set an example to the boy, when his own mother seems not to bother with such niceties. She fully deserved a rollocking to try and correct her poor legal knowledge, and if that included some sweary words, then so be it.

 

[classic33]

You can only reason with people up to a point. Once they have crossed that line between being a reasonable human being and a nut-job, you either walk away or, if you feel confident of winning a physical fight - wind 'em up.
I fail to see why it might be @tyred 's place to set an example to the boy, when his own mother seems not to bother with such niceties. She fully deserved a rollocking to try and correct her poor legal knowledge, and if that included some sweary words, then so be it.

Never said it was up to tyred to set an example for the child. However, the child might now be asking their mother why didn't he use words like she did. I'll not hold my breath on it.

But the child now has an example to compare their mother to. Someone who did nothing wrong, but received a lot of verbal abuse for doing that.

 

[Brandane]

Never said it was up to tyred to set an example for the child. However, the child might now be asking their mother why didn't he use words like she did. I'll not hold my breath on it.

But the child now has an example to compare their mother to. Someone who did nothing wrong, but received a lot of verbal abuse for doing that.

I was thinking more about reply #33, not yours .

 

[tyred]

A problem I have is that I have always been hopeless with confrontation. I either just take it without saying anything or else lose my temper.

The problem in this case and why I felt so shell-shocked by it is that I didn't see it coming as I didn't feel I had done any wrong. Even with the best will in the world, everyone does silly things or makes mistakes from time to time and you usually know if someone has a genuine reason to be annoyed with you or not and you can apologise as appropriate but to suddenly and unexpectedly be harangued in the street when I really felt I was being considerate left me stunned.

 

[classic33]

A problem I have is that I have always been hopeless with confrontation. I either just take it without saying anything or else lose my temper.

The problem in this case and why I felt so shell-shocked by it is that I didn't see it coming as I didn't feel I had done any wrong. Even with the best will in the world, everyone does silly things or makes mistakes from time to time and you usually know if someone has a genuine reason to be annoyed with you or not and you can apologise as appropriate but to suddenly and unexpectedly be harangued in the street when I really felt I was being considerate left me stunned.

Look at it this way, you didn't loose your temper. Putting you in a better light than the parent.