Cycling on the pavement

[LadyNorwood]

snowy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> What about a child under the legal age of

> responsibility - how do you propose prosecuting

> them.

>

> It seems that pedestrians and cyclists, who are

> also conveniently pedestrians should wheely

> raleigh together, spoke out and not saddle for

> anything less than a reprioritisation of road and

> pavement use.

>

> Im sorry that you Felt you have experienced abuse

> and intimidation. Alas the police will do nothing

> with your photographic evidence. They have

> different priorities and dont give a 1/8th or a

> 3/32th about minor infringements, let alone

> evidence of using a vehicle as a weapon.

>

> Im also sorry I have failed to squeeze neither

> nipple, flange or bottom bracket into this post,

> but I am quite tyred.

Cycling on the pavement is dealt with by a FPN which cannot be issued to anyone under the age of 16... I don't FEEL that I've 'experienced abuse and intimidation', I HAVE experienced it.... I do like your bicycle-related puns though... Perhaps we should have pavements reclassified as 'sidewalks'... And to LadyDelilah, I'm not a troll, either in real life or virtually - if cyclists are traffic (as you point out) then they should be accountable, just like any other road user...

[bawdy-nan]

I tried to go through Hyde park (on my bike) last week and encountered Boris' tedious triathlon blocking the way through. I asked one of the marshals if there was an alternative safe cycle route. She suggested I travel on the 5 lane Park Lane or cycle on the "no cycling" paths. So I did. Slowly.

[mynamehere]

Children hit by drivers, old people hit by drivers, cyclists killed by drivers none of this runs for more than a few posts. What some group of you latch on to and shake like a rag doll in a bull terrier's mouth is an idiot adult on a bicycle on the pavement.

[edhistory]

Is a "pavement casualty" included in the "road casualty" statistics?

John K

[henryb]

edhistory Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Is a "pavement casualty" included in the "road

> casualty" statistics?

>

> John K

Yes they are. Also included are pederestians who are killed by car drivers on the pavement which is about 20 a year.

Here is a recent one in London - father killed in front of his son.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/father-killed-and-nineyearold-son-hurt-when-car-mounts-pavement-yards-from-upminster-school-8713187.html

[henryb]

LadyNorwood Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I've had enough - cycling on the pavement is

> illegal, whether the cyclist is being

> 'considerate', is 'too frightened to ride on a

> public road' and all the other blah blah blah

> hand-wringing excuses..... It's illegal and

> that's that.... I will no longer (ON A DAILY

> BASIS) be complacent and be intimidated by, sworn

> at, spat at, threatened with violence by pavement

> cyclists - I will take your photograph and give it

> to the police, I HAVE HAD ENOUGH....

That is appalling if you are being sworn at, spat at, threatened with violence on daily bases. Those things are all illegal in their own right. Have you contacted the police? I would definitely get photographic evidence of this intimidation. Where is it happening?

[Jeremy]

henryb Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Here is a recent one in London - father killed in front of his son.

Are you using this tragic accident to deflect critcism of cyclists behaving dangerously?

[henryb]

No, trying to put it in context of other road safety problems.

[Voyageur]

This is a somewhat pointless thread TBH - those that routinely cycle on pavements won't admit, or even realise, that what they are doing puts pedestrians at risk and will carry on regardless as they feel safer on pavements.

As for reporting people that collide with you and/or call you a c---- if you object to their pelting along pavements towards you it is pretty difficult as they don't stop to give you their details funnily enough.

Personally I am ok with kiddies on trikes cycling on pavements as long as an adult is supervising and making sure they don't ride into people or cause them to have to leap out of the way. I don't mind a cyclist using the pavement on occasion to cycle along at a sedate pace as long as there are no pedestrians on the pavement.

The ignorant a****oles who pelt along the pavements and through red lights forcing people to jump out of their way and who scream abuse at anyone who objects to their behaviour (and unfortunately there are many, especially in the city) should be strung up by their ankles and have their beloved speed machines crushed and recycled (pun intended).

[Chick Pea]

Voyageur Wrote:

-------------------------

>

> The ignorant a****oles who pelt along the

> pavements and through red lights forcing people to

> jump out of their way and who scream abuse at

> anyone who objects to their behaviour (and

> unfortunately there are many, especially in the

> city) should be strung up by their ankles and have

> their beloved speed machines crushed and recycled

> (pun intended).

I would advocate the crushing of their Lycra clad nuts, the blame is with the owner not the bike. However as part of a punishment strategy the cycle thugs should be made to ride trikes and swap Lycra for hooded onesies with fun ears and bunny tails for a period of time decided by their victims.

Edited to add: cycling on pavements - just say NO.

[Voyageur]

Chick Pea Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Voyageur Wrote:

> -------------------------

> >

> > The ignorant a****oles who pelt along the

> > pavements and through red lights forcing people

> to

> > jump out of their way and who scream abuse at

> > anyone who objects to their behaviour (and

> > unfortunately there are many, especially in the

> > city) should be strung up by their ankles and

> have

> > their beloved speed machines crushed and

> recycled

> > (pun intended).

>

> I would advocate the crushing of their Lycra clad

> nuts, the blame is with the owner not the bike.

> However as part of a punishment strategy the cycle

> thugs should be made to ride trikes and swap Lycra

> for hooded onesies with fun ears and bunny tails

> for a period of time decided by their victims.

>

> Edited to add: cycling on pavements - just say NO.

I like your thinking Chickpea!

[jonsuissy]

dds29 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

Thanks finally for recognising the increase in cyclists riding on the pavement

Can we see these stats - I've not seen or heard of these before

[Chick Pea]

Stats schmats - so what? Cycling on pavements is an offence and pedestrians should not stand, or rather make way, for it.

[jonsuissy]

LadyNorwood Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I've had enough - cycling on the pavement is

> illegal, whether the cyclist is being

> 'considerate', is 'too frightened to ride on a

> public road' and all the other blah blah blah

> hand-wringing excuses..... It's illegal and

> that's that.... I will no longer (ON A DAILY

> BASIS) be complacent and be intimidated by, sworn

> at, spat at, threatened with violence by pavement

> cyclists - I will take your photograph and give it

> to the police, I HAVE HAD ENOUGH....

This is truly dreadful and I'm not surprised you've had enough.

Report it to the Police, that sort of behaviour is unacceptable and I can understand why you hate cyclists with such a passion.

I won't bore you with some of my stories about pedestrians as that wouldn't help you in this dreadful moment of your life, but I do know how inconsiderate some people can be.

Please do let us all know where this is happening so that I can stop my wife and daughter going there, it does sound extremely dangerous.

I am surprised that no one else has highlighted this epidemic.

Take care

[jonsuissy]

Chick Pea Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Stats schmats - so what? Cycling on pavements is

> an offence and pedestrians should not stand, or

> rather make way, for it.

Oh those made up stats then?

[Voyageur]

jonsuissy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> LadyNorwood Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > I've had enough - cycling on the pavement is

> > illegal, whether the cyclist is being

> > 'considerate', is 'too frightened to ride on a

> > public road' and all the other blah blah blah

> > hand-wringing excuses..... It's illegal and

> > that's that.... I will no longer (ON A DAILY

> > BASIS) be complacent and be intimidated by,

> sworn

> > at, spat at, threatened with violence by

> pavement

> > cyclists - I will take your photograph and give

> it

> > to the police, I HAVE HAD ENOUGH....

>

>

> This is truly dreadful and I'm not surprised

> you've had enough.

> Report it to the Police, that sort of behaviour is

> unacceptable and I can understand why you hate

> cyclists with such a passion.

> I won't bore you with some of my stories about

> pedestrians as that wouldn't help you in this

> dreadful moment of your life, but I do know how

> inconsiderate some people can be.

> Please do let us all know where this is happening

> so that I can stop my wife and daughter going

> there, it does sound extremely dangerous.

> I am surprised that no one else has highlighted

> this epidemic.

> Take care

It's not uncommon sadly, especially in the city. A minority of aggressive twats that unfortunately have quite an impact. I was sworn at and called a c*** only last weekend by a lycra-lout as he sped past me on the pavement near Crystal Palace station. Funnily enough it does always seem to be men - clearly with anger management problems the little darlings....

[jonsuissy]

Voyageur Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> The ignorant a****oles who leap out from the

> pavements and through green lights forcing cyclists to

> swerve out of their way and who scream abuse at

> anyone who objects to their behaviour (and

> unfortunately there are many, especially in the

> city) should be strung up by their ankles.

Fixed your post for you my friend

[Voyageur]

jonsuissy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Voyageur Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> >

> > The ignorant a****oles who leap out from the

> > pavements and through green lights forcing

> cyclists to

> > swerve out of their way and who scream abuse at

> > anyone who objects to their behaviour (and

> > unfortunately there are many, especially in the

> > city) should be strung up by their ankles.

>

>

> Fixed your post for you my friend

On the contrary my friend, you merely added yourself to the list of ignorant lycra-louts :)

[Chick Pea]

jonsuissy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Chick Pea Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Stats schmats - so what? Cycling on pavements

> is

> > an offence and pedestrians should not stand, or

> > rather make way, for it.

>

>

> Oh those made up stats then?

And those damn lies! Cycling on pavements is an offence regardkess of the stats, there does seem to be an awful lot more of it and the ones I have witnessed have all been male.

Last week I saw a middle aged male in non Lycra cycle on the pavement at the side of a cycle lane - anarchy or total tosspottery?

[jonsuissy]

Voyageur Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> jonsuissy Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Voyageur Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > >

> > > The ignorant a****oles who leap out from the

> > > pavements and through green lights forcing

> > cyclists to

> > > swerve out of their way and who scream abuse

> at

> > > anyone who objects to their behaviour (and

> > > unfortunately there are many, especially in

> the

> > > city) should be strung up by their ankles.

> >

> >

> > Fixed your post for you my friend

>

> On the contrary my friend, you merely added

> yourself to the list of ignorant lycra-louts :)

Sorry my friend, you might need to explain that one.

[Chick Pea]

Jonsuissy I am loving the profile of the wayward pedestrian, this is thread is comedy central.

I can see Cycle Weekly or some such quality mag doing in depth reportage on the menace that is the pavement walker *cue scary music provided by Dr King and the Old Timers*

[jonsuissy]

Chick Pea Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Jonsuissy I am loving the profile of the wayward

> pedestrian, this is thread is comedy central.

>

> I can see Cycle Weekly or some such quality mag

> doing in depth reportage on the menace that is the

> pavement walker *cue scary music provided by Dr

> King and the Old Timers*

Not funny when a pedestrian walks in front of you without looking. Not funny for either party.

[Chick Pea]

jonsuissy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

Not funny when a pedestrian walks in front of you

> without looking. Not funny for either party.

Isn't that why bikes have bells? You see one of those darn pavement walkers hovering close to the kerb, probably mid text or simply navel gazing and you know they don't pay any attention to the highway ode. Do you a) continue cycling towards them risking shredding your fave Lycra shorts in a full on collision or b) do you ring your bell to alert the walker to your imminent arrival, avoid the collision and save your shorts?

[jonsuissy]

Chick Pea Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> jonsuissy Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> Not funny when a pedestrian walks in front of you

> > without looking. Not funny for either party.

>

> Isn't that why bikes have bells? You see one of

> those darn pavement walkers hovering close to the

> kerb, probably mid text or simply navel gazing and

> you know they don't pay any attention to the

> highway ode. Do you a) continue cycling towards

> them risking shredding your fave Lycra shorts in a

> full on collision or b) do you ring your bell to

> alert the walker to your imminent arrival, avoid

> the collision and save your shorts?

Not ridden a bike in the city have we my friend?

[Righty]

In response to Chickpea:-

a) Normally one would apply the brakes - of course, if a pedestrian is mere feet in front of you then this will not help either party. Obviously it is also not particularly easy to move out of the way when this happens on a busy road which cyclists have to share with cars/buses. This happens with alarming regularity in Rye Lane

b) Ringing the bell doesn't usually work in my experience. People either freeze or ignore it. Many also have headphones in etc.

I would also add that people just don't seem to 'get' that bicycles have stopping distances too (which particularly suffer in the wet).

I say all of the above as a pedestrian, cyclist and motorist.