Target pavement cyclists, say MPs

[purplepolly]

I can't believe I am seeing so many so called law abiding people posting on here that they break the law with impunity citing all sorts of feeble justification, whilst in other threads, they demonise others for their indiscretions.

Even the police have joined the dark side and differentiate between inconsiderate and considerate cyclists. Personally I find it intolerable that because of this they might actually be spending their time dealing with burglars and muggers and people doing 70 in 30 zones.

Law preventing cycling on pavements is not ridiculous, as long as it enforced in the way it was originally intended. If the law is not there a police officer will not have the power to ticket somebody that is cycling recklessly on the pavement, causing harrasment or distress too pedestrians etc.It (the law) should never be enforced for cycling on a pavement per se. .

 

[Crankarm]

Quote:

Committee member and Tory MP David Curry said some were "irresponsible and arrogant road users" and said many people believed they took no notice of red lights and believed traffic cones were "not for them".
"The only time I have been knocked down in my life was by a cyclist going like a bat out of hell outside the House of Commons," he said.
"We seem to regard cyclists as living in some sort of superior moral category when they actually do not have any."

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ho hum......why so scared of cyclists they have to attack them. Is it because it makes them think about there own wasteful use of vehicles I wonder? If they quoted someone who had clear experience of cycling, then I would listen.

It was Dave his boss ................. or Boris .

 

[very-near]

That's right. If people aren't bothered about someone riding considerately on a bit of pavement is ok then they should also condone murder, otherwise they're hypocrites.

The logic of linf.

Will you listen to yourself MrP. You expect everyone around you to obey all the traffic laws whilst you break them brazenly and with impunity.

Since when has exceeding the speed limit on an empty road been classed as Murder ?

The problem with pavement cyclists like yourself is that you don't want to proceed at walking pace, you want to go at cycling pace.
When someone steps off the pavement, they are looking for cars, motorcycles, cyclists, buses, and (usually) exercise a bit of care when changing direction.

When on the pavement, they expect others to be moving at a similar pace and are so naturally (and rightly) off their guard - and then they get bowled over by a sanctimonious knob who is too damned lazy or whatever justification they can come up with to get off and walk.

Get off the pavement before you injure some innocent pedestrians MrP, you are a danger to those around you when you ride on them - or set off 5 minutes earlier and walk these areas.

Oh, never mind, you won't take any notice anyway. It is only someone else's life you are gambling with

 

[very-near]

Far out, I never knew I was gambling with someones life every time I ride on the pavement. (which I don't)

Then you have nothing to worry about - as you were Lee

 

[rh100]

Will you listen to yourself MrP. You expect everyone around you to obey all the traffic laws whilst you break them brazenly and with impunity.

Since when has exceeding the speed limit on an empty road been classed as Murder ?

The problem with pavement cyclists like yourself is that you don't want to proceed at walking pace, you want to go at cycling pace.
When someone steps off the pavement, they are looking for cars, motorcycles, cyclists, buses, and (usually) exercise a bit of care when changing direction.

When on the pavement, they expect others to be moving at a similar pace and are so naturally (and rightly) off their guard - and then they get bowled over by a sanctimonious knob who is too damned lazy or whatever justification they can come up with to get off and walk.

Get off the pavement before you injure some innocent pedestrians MrP, you are a danger to those around you when you ride on them - or set off 5 minutes earlier and walk these areas.

Oh, never mind, you won't take any notice anyway. It is only someone else's life you are gambling with

Again, how do you account for shared use paths then - which the only special thing about them is a painted line (on segregated) or maybe a blue sign only (on non segregated) which is only there as an advisory sign - not a big glaring warning sign to ped's - they don't pay any attention to signage regardless IME. Yes there is a legality issue - but that is overcome with the path in question simply being designated as shared. The ped's will happily wander all over the markings, and a respectfull cyclist will take this into account, if your problem is just with the idiot cyclists then no one is going to stick up for them, they are a danger wherever they may be. Getting off and walking would only be required when the foot traffic is too heavy - quite clearly not all paths are that full.

I would see the meaning of sanctimonious as being holier than though - is that not what you are doing looking down on pavement cyclists?

 

[very-near]

Don't worry rh, he's just having a go because it's me.

Don't flatter yourself. I am happy to slap down any dangerous and flagrant law breaker such as yourself. Smeggers is also testament to that.

The key is don't be a sanctimonious and hypocritical knob where law breaking is concerned and you won't leave yourself wide open for criticism in the way you just have.

Reap what you sow old chap

 

[John the Monkey]

Again, how do you account for shared use paths then - which the only special thing about them is a painted line (on segregated) or maybe a blue sign only (on non segregated) which is only there as an advisory sign - not a big glaring warning sign to ped's - they don't pay any attention to signage regardless IME.

The desire to introduce "facilities" at minimal cost would be my bet. No need to re-route traffic while the line painting is done, or do much more than paint a line. They're pretty rubbish as "facilities" go, in general.

John Franklin;

It is unfortunate, I believe, that so much cycle planning assumes that cyclists are some form of ‘rolling pedestrian’. This is not the case. Cyclists travel around 5 times faster than pedestrians, and in towns much closer to the speed of motor traffic. Cyclists cannot turn on the spot, move sideways or stop suddenly – 3 characteristics on which a lot of pedestrian safety depends. In fact, cyclists have very little in common with pedestrians and deserve not to be treated as such.

http://www.cyclecraft.co.uk/digest/cfi_jaf.pdf

The consequences of this approach [creating shared paths] are :
* Facilities that are unsafe at normal cycling speeds yet usually slower and more tiring than roads;
* Facilities which are dependent for their safety on pedestrian characteristics not shared by cyclists:
e.g. being able to turn on the spot to see traffic and to move sideways to dodge conflict.
* Upstands wherever footways meet roads; sign and lampposts in the path of travel.
* A change of level from footway to road and back again at every road crossing. This is
uncomfortable and tiring for cycling and has safety consequences by distracting attention from
traffic. Cycling should take place at road level all the time.

http://www.cyclecraft.co.uk/digest/glos_seminar.pdf

 

[jimboalee]

Update.

My son and I went on a 10 miler yesterday.

He wasn't feeling too well so we abandoned the 20 miler we had planned.

On the road, he was leading and he was riding at 7.5 - 8 mph.

I lost count of the toots and shouts we recieved off Truckers, WVM and 'Sunday motorists'.

The country lanes we were riding didn't have kerbs or pavements. We were stuck with irritable motorists who had to slow down to pass us. It didn't bother me but it un-nerved my son.

As soon as we could, we rode on the sidewalk.

Incidentally, the 'Pavement route' home passed right past Coleshill Police station. This didn't bother me either.

 

[rh100]

The desire to introduce "facilities" at minimal cost would be my bet. No need to re-route traffic while the line painting is done, or do much more than paint a line. They're pretty rubbish as "facilities" go, in general.

John Franklin;
http://www.cyclecraft.co.uk/digest/cfi_jaf.pdf

http://www.cyclecraft.co.uk/digest/glos_seminar.pdf

I agree, the pavement or shared path is not an ideal solution, but is the alternative to the road. A cyclist legally using a shared path does not suddenly turn into a marauding hooligan when the white lines and signs run out.

 

[BentMikey]

Want to see some IMO irresponsible pavement use?

View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muwPfzabQgE


It's not cycling, and it's rather faster than any pavement cyclists I've seen.

 

[brokenbetty]

No-one has answered yet. Linfy, you deferred to someone else saying that she had answered it. She didn't.

She did.

You didn't see the relevance. That doesn't mean it isn't relevant. You made some points I didn't respond to. That doesn't mean I had no response.

I won't continue this conversation. I trust you will not take my lack of a reply as in any way accepting or condoning your point of view.

Liz

 

[Dan B]

Want to see some IMO irresponsible pavement use?

View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muwPfzabQgE

.

+ quiet upper body, in the circs
+ nice high-tempo skating
- armswing is all over the place
- push sideways not backwards
- needs to work on d-shaped recovery
- more kneebend needed

Oh ... wait ... wrong forum

 

[Cab]

Counted eleven pavement cyclists on the way home. None were causing any problems for pedestrians. Thats not including the many, many 'pavement' cyclists on shared use facilities (that didn't have white lines to divide traffic).

I have no doubt that there are pavement cyclists who do cause problems. Just not many of them, in my experience.

 

[very-near]

Sorry, but you'll have to point out where you addressed the question. I've just had a quick look and all I can find is you commenting on pavements where there are white lines separating pedestrians and cyclists.

And that's not what I'm talking about. I'm asking about pavements and pedestrian areas where there are no separation lines but cyclists are invited to mix with pedestrians. Like New St, in the centre of Birmingham (Google Map it if you like).

Update -2 more on the way home. No trouble to anyone. That's 14/14.

I'm not daft enough to suggest that there aren't inconsiderate pavement cyclists. Just that you claim never to have seen a considerate pavement cyclist, and the naughty ones seem to be hiding from me.

We have a cycle route running down the promenade past Cavendish House. There is a sign which says cyclists dismount. Hardly any do, and I've seen/had a few near misses over the years where they have just tanked on through.

When I see one of these signs, I get off and walk (or cut around the back through post office lane). When I see one of these signs, I expect others to do the same.

I don't see the problem with complying with the law when you know there are pedestrians walking in the same space. You have no idea whether they have a visual or hearing impairment at the end of the day. Would you be able to forgive yourself if you knocked someone over because you felt that the laws of the land are not applicable to you ?

 

[very-near]

We've discussed this before. The same route is marked on one of the town's cycling maps as a cycle route. Have you Cheltenham cyclists manage to sort it out yet?

Yes we have clarification on it. The Cyclists Dismount sign has to be complied with as it is a pedestrian area. There are also signs stating the same thing outside M&S


Not a problem at all for a considerate cyclist.

The only problem is the inconsiderate ones which give all us considerate ones a bad rep. This is why they put the signs up. Considerate cyclists will comply with the signs because they are considerate and don't just think of themselves

Now, you were about to explain what's different when there's a shared-use pedestrianised area with no separation markings...

See above, the sign says 'cyclists dismount'. That is enough for me