Pedestrians

[benb]

It has to be both IMO. You can't just let kids run all over the place when they may be at risk. I agree cyclists must be extra vigilant but you can't lay it all with the cyclist. They wouldn't let their children run all over the main roads ................ or would they?

It's not a main road, it's a path. Pedestrians have absolute priority, and that's it.

 

[JonnyBlade]

It's not a main road, it's a path. Pedestrians have absolute priority, and that's it.

So parents have no responsibility for their children? Very realistic I have to say. When there is a collision will we all fall on fluffy cushions?

 

[benb]

So parents have no responsibility for their children? Very realistic I have to say. When there is a collision will we all fall on fluffy cushions?

If you cycle properly and carefully there won't be a collision.

 

[JonnyBlade]

Young children don't have a lot of sense of awareness so have to be looked after by parents. How are we supposed to know if a child is going to run out in front of us. Perhaps we should slow down at the sight of every pedestrian so they can wander about willynilly as they please? Ironically when the child is old enough to wander alone they won't have to be aware of the hazards because we will do it for them!

 

[JonnyBlade]

[QUOTE 1484182"]
Of course they do. Cyclists are still obliged to give way at all times while riding through parks.
[/quote]

I'm not disputing we give way or not, that's a given. I'm disputing a lack of parental control and parents letting child run all over the place. How can we second guess their actions and what if it is too close for us to avoid or stop? The hazard is to cyclists as well as pedestrians

 

[JonnyBlade]

If you cycle properly and carefully there won't be a collision.

You are a wind up I think. It's unpredictable when children run out no matter how safely we are cycling. What a silly comment to make and one I'd take as an insult. 'Cycling properly'

 

[JonnyBlade]

[QUOTE 1484186"]
It's a park.


Do you have a different view of toddlers on the same path on bikes? They're just as unpredictable, but given your suggested priorities of use have just as much right to ride their as you do.
[/quote]

And if they are being monitored correctly by parents they will be in one lane or another and easily identifiable and so avoidable

I'd love to stay and chew the fat with the fluffy brigade but I'm of out to do a bit of 'safe' cycling

 

[benb]

You are a wind up I think. It's unpredictable when children run out no matter how safely we are cycling. What a silly comment to make and one I'd take as an insult. 'Cycling properly'

If you cycle at an appropriate speed, and give enough room (going onto the grass if necessary) there is no way for a collision to occur.
No, I'm not on a wind-up.

 

[ClichéGuevara]

And if they are being monitored correctly by parents they will be in one lane or another and easily identifiable and so avoidable

I'd love to stay and chew the fat with the fluffy brigade but I'm of out to do a bit of 'safe' cycling

and if they're not?

 

[Angelfishsolo]

Young children don't have a lot of sense of awareness so have to be looked after by parents. How are we supposed to know if a child is going to run out in front of us. Perhaps we should slow down at the sight of every pedestrian so they can wander about willynilly as they please? Ironically when the child is old enough to wander alone they won't have to be aware of the hazards because we will do it for them!

If a child is kept on reigns them will also fail to learn hazard awareness so your point in moot. As for slowing down when you see a pedestrian - yes this what you do on a shared path!

 

[Angelfishsolo]

If you cycle at an appropriate speed, and give enough room (going onto the grass if necessary) there is no way for a collision to occur.
No, I'm not on a wind-up.

Beb I think Johnny is on a wind up mission here!

 

[markharry66]

Its the same as driving at 30 in a school zone match to speed to the environment you are choosing to cycle in if you dont like find an alternative route

 

[mcr]

I've never liked all these shared-use paths, whether with marked separation or not - they just transfer the car-driver/cyclist antagonism to one of cyclist/pedestrian. They'll only work if they're legally made proper cycle paths on which pedestrians may walk 'permissively' - ie at their own risk. After all, with the network of public footpaths and pavements in this country, pedestrians are the best served of all users (and I write as a keen walker as well as cyclist). If you've ever accidentally walked on marked cycle lanes in Germany without looking you'll know it - if they can work there...

 

[JonnyBlade]

If you cycle at an appropriate speed, and give enough room (going onto the grass if necessary) there is no way for a collision to occur.
No, I'm not on a wind-up.

Oh if only the old crystal ball worked

Are you sure you are not on the wind up?

 

[JonnyBlade]

If a child is kept on reigns them will also fail to learn hazard awareness so your point in moot. As for slowing down when you see a pedestrian - yes this what you do on a shared path!

'reigns' is not intended as a literal thing so it is a valid point. You learn hazard awareness from parents because children seldom see the obvious dangers. Whether that is from a word of warning or tug back makes no odds. The control principle stands IMO