Pedestrians

Status
Not open for further replies.
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
the difference between the two is simple - speed hurts. People walking in a park do, in a general kind of way, owe it to others (and to themselves) not to walk in to one another, albeit that the risk is tiny. Cyclists, travelling at a greater speed, should ensure, as best they can, that they don't injure others, or put others in fear of injury. Further cyclists should get it in to their heads that their speed is seen as an affront, or disrespectful to the spirit of certain places, notably parks, which are, after all, places of recreation.

If memory serves the Highway Code tells us to ride on shared paths no faster than twelve miles an hour. Lambeth Council has imposed a five miles an hour speed limit across Clapham Common. I would say that if there were people on a shared path then eight or nine miles an hour would be a sensible maximum, and that one should reduce one's speed still further (as Ben does in his video) when close to pedestrians, especially children, the elderly, or people with headphones on. If you can't work out how to do this, take to the road. And if you can't work out why you should do this, then it' probably because you lack the ability to empathise with others.

Agreed, everyone has a responsibility for their safety. It doesn't matter if they're on the road, in their yard, or in the local park. Each and everyone of us is responsible for their safety.

The primary MUP in my area has a posted speed (presumably mainly for cyclists) of 20MPH. The park(s) that I ride through have one of 10MPH, not that it appears that many obey that. And sadly a lot of them don't have any sort of computer on their bike so they don't know how fast they are going.
 
I disagee. From the perspective of the pedestrian, the cyclist is still a hazard, regardless of competency.

"Competent cyclists do not pose a risk to pedestrians" would be closer, but still not entirely true. Something unplanned still might happen, even if travelling the same speed (or slower) than the pedestrians.

But I see the point your trying to make :smile:

Exactly, the cyclist could have an unexpected blow-out causing them to lose control of their bike, or their chain can break (I've had the master link on my chain break more than once and I do an excellent job of maintaining my bike(s)), a cable can break, or they can hit a pot hole and have their fork or wheel bend on them.
 

tongskie01

Active Member
Not entirely, if a parent allows their child(ren) to run wild in the park with little to no supervision than it is the parent's fault if their child(ren) is/are injured. Yes, children are and should be safe in a park. But there are things within most if not all parks that present a danger to children.

As an example, there is usually some sort of storage shed for supplies for the maintenance of the park. If a parent takes their child(ren) to a park and let's them run wild and they end up getting into the shed and poisoning themselves who is responsible? The parent or the park management?

its the park managements duty that the hazardous substances are kept secured from the public. thats what our health and safety executive guidelines is for.

That is usually how it is when I am riding through the park as well. Put parents here take responsibility for their children and when they see someone on a bike on the sidewalk/MUP they tell their children to be careful of the bike. Because sadly too many cyclists as I have said before will ride at speeds as if they're out on the road. And sadly they do not slow down when they encounter other people in the park/on the sidewalk/MUP.

Even though there are signs posted instructing cyclists to yield to pedestrians.

As I've said I slow down so as not to pose a risk to others in the park and when/if someone who is walking in front of me realizes that I am behind them. They'll move aside and apologize for "slowing" me down. I tell 'em that there's no need to apologize and continue on my way.

the use of a warning device like a cycle bell is highly recommended.
 

tongskie01

Active Member
Exactly, the cyclist could have an unexpected blow-out causing them to lose control of their bike, or their chain can break (I've had the master link on my chain break more than once and I do an excellent job of maintaining my bike(s)), a cable can break, or they can hit a pot hole and have their fork or wheel bend on them.

in this case it is an accident.
 

Angelfishsolo

A Velocipedian
Exactly, the cyclist could have an unexpected blow-out causing them to lose control of their bike, or their chain can break (I've had the master link on my chain break more than once and I do an excellent job of maintaining my bike(s)), a cable can break, or they can hit a pot hole and have their fork or wheel bend on them.
And you could be struck by lightening, have a heart attack. Better stay indoors and seal the doors, hide all medication and sharp objects. Turn off the gas and electric and pray!
 

tongskie01

Active Member
And you could be struck by lightening, have a heart attack. Better stay indoors and seal the doors, hide all medication and sharp objects. Turn off the gas and electric and pray!

maybe we are taking too much caffeine? we seem to be very anxious about something that doesn't happen regularly and argue about it that it will be a matter of time before it happens.
Well the End of the World is coming. Its just a matter of time.
 

tongskie01

Active Member
DC and Jonny Blade seem to have the issues. The rest of us are just wondering what planet they live on.

+1 in a different dimension?
 

Angelfishsolo

A Velocipedian
[QUOTE 1484428"]
I'm not. Public forum where people have their opinions. You may or may not disagree with this but please don't speak for the rest of us.
[/quote]
I am sorry. I should have said "based on the posts most of us are......"
 

tongskie01

Active Member
I am sorry. I should have said "based on the posts most of us are......"
smile.gif
 

mangaman

Guest
DC and Jonny Blade seem to have the issues. The rest of us are just wondering what planet they live on.


Nice summary.

Children enjoy running around parks.

I've never seen a British Park (for DCs benifit) with unlocked sheds of toxic chemicals or dangerous drivers - they tend to be open spaces for people.

The most unnecessary user, for me, would be a cyclist.

I hate shared paths with a passion - because I believe parks etc are actually nicer without bikes. In the UK I've never come across an area where cycling on the road wasn't safer and quicker.

Even if I were teaching my child to cycle without stabilisers, I'd choose an industrial area at a quiet time or a quiet road.

Parks in the UK are full of people on foot throwing balls around / dogs running free / toddlers toddling.

That's how it should be.

To cycle across a busy park I think I wouldn't even try, frankly, I'd get off and push.

More fun anyway.

Of course if it is 6.30 am and you are commuting across a cycle path that will genuinely cut your commuting time - that is different.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom