Today I was a ped

[rosscbrown]

I cycle on the pavement :-) For about 75 meters. Naughty I know, but it saves me turning right onto a very busy road for 75 meters before turning right again across 5 lanes of traffic to arrive at my front door. That said I cycle slowly with respect to anyone I meet and if I see more than one pedestrian on the stretch of pavement I jump off the bike. Would never think of taking the pavement for my entire journey - far too many risks.

 

[Canardly]

All goes to show how daft it is not to fit a simple bell to hbs.

 

[Cush]

A bell is some times not heard my whistle or voice is always heard but it is always followed by a polite quip, even when the ped is still getting back into his /hers/ their skins

 

[Maz]

Cycling on pavements is fine if it's done safely and with consideration. No need to be anal and uptight about it being illegal, against the law, bla bla bla. There's more important things in life to worry about.

 

[Maz]

As an aside has anyone seen the Jehova's Witnesses riding around all suited in pairs and always on the pavement - God's obviously not being their shield if they feel the need to hop on the pavement all the time!

Don't tell them off for pavement riding...they'll go on and on and on about how "they are on the right path to Salvation and you should change your ways".

 

[hackbike 666]

[QUOTE 1164958"]
+1 I don't see what the OP is so uptight about, and that is why there are the guidelines from the ACPO. He rung his bell and asked to make some room - what's wrong with that?
[/quote]


It works in Japan.TIA

 

[661-Pete]

[QUOTE 1164958"]
+1 I don't see what the OP is so uptight about, and that is why there are the guidelines from the ACPO. He rung his bell and asked to make some room - what's wrong with that?
[/quote]Choice of words is everything here. According to the OP the cyclist said "make some room mate". Maybe that sounded just a teeny bit rude and patronising? How many steps, from that, to "get outta my f***ing way!", huh?

I was on a shared-use path (central dividing line) this morning, perfectly legal and all that (it's a short cut, not alongside a road). Group of peds strung out across the whole width. I slowed to their pace and then said "excuse me" in a perfectly neutral voice (I don't have a bell). Nothing more than that. They made way. If they hadn't, I'd have stayed behind them to the end of the short path, it's no big deal. And no ill-feeling.

 

[Jezston]

In Japan you are expected to ride on the pavement.

I don't mind people riding on the pavement either, if done with consideration. A grown man charging about at 10mph+ isn't being considerate, someone trying to get past someone carrying heavy shopping by being rude isn't being considerate either.

 

[515mm]

It does all depend on the circumstance. A kiddie on the pavement? Can't see the harm really. Bunch of teenage BMXers larking about? Bit more dangerous that, but it's just kids being thoughtless, it ain't deliberate.

Don't get me started on the evil-looking chavs running weed around the town on their full-bounce MTBs.........

 

[brokenbetty]

If it's not a problem why do so many pedestrians feel so strongly about it? Why do cyclists know better than pedestrians what is a problem for pedestrians?

 

[Jezston]

[QUOTE 1164963"]
No and a lot.
[/quote]

You are wrong.

(constructive isn't it?)

 

[vikingcyclist]

If it's not a problem why do so many pedestrians feel so strongly about it? Why do cyclists know better than pedestrians what is a problem for pedestrians?

Possibly because they also tend to be pedestrians, and therefore have a balanced view of the situation whereas a pedestrian will only have their own.

 

[dondare]

Cycling on pavements is fine if it's done safely and with consideration. No need to be anal and uptight about it being illegal, against the law, bla bla bla. There's more important things in life to worry about.

Until you get caught.

 

[brokenbetty]

Possibly because they also tend to be pedestrians, and therefore have a balanced view of the situation whereas a pedestrian will only have their own.

So they balance the distress caused to the pedestrian with the convenience provided to the cyclist? Well in that case I can't see what the peds are bothered about

(We know it causes distress because that's what peds keep telling us. I still dont see why cyclists decide we know what they feel better than they do)

 

[Origamist]

So they balance the distress caused to the pedestrian with the convenience provided to the cyclist? Well in that case I can't see what the peds are bothered about

(We know it causes distress because that's what peds keep telling us. I still dont see why cyclists decide we know what they feel better than they do)

Indeed - if you suffer from mobility issues or have problems with your sight, cyclists riding on the pavement can and do cause distress, particularly to more vulnerable members of society.