FAO Cyclists!

Marisco

But why would you need a bell? It's for pedestrians, as obviously a car driver can't hear it, bikes should not be on pavements, so should not need a bell to make people move. And as for cycle lanes, then pedestrians shouldn't be on them, the clue is in the name - cycle lanes! The only bikes that should be on pavements are small kids on bikes, all the rest should be on roads or cycle lanes, ( if there are any.)

neneromanova

Marisco wrote: »

The only bikes that should be on pavements are small kids on bikes, all the rest should be on roads or cycle lanes, ( if there are any.)

Unless you live in North devon where they have a cycle path on the pavement which they've just halved and put people on the inside and bikes near the road.

Person_one

Marisco wrote: »

But why would you need a bell? It's for pedestrians, as obviously a car driver can't hear it, bikes should not be on pavements, so should not need a bell to make people move. And as for cycle lanes, then pedestrians shouldn't be on them, the clue is in the name - cycle lanes! The only bikes that should be on pavements are small kids on bikes, all the rest should be on roads or cycle lanes, ( if there are any.)

Public footpaths, canal paths, bridle paths, woodland, parks, there are loads of places where walkers, horses, cyclists, dogs, joggers etc have to share the same space.

Marisco

Person_one wrote: »

Public footpaths, canal paths, bridle paths, woodland, parks, there are loads of places where walkers, horses, cyclists, dogs, joggers etc have to share the same space.

But with the obvious exception of canal paths, all the others could have cycle paths running parallel to the pedestrian paths.

Person_one

Marisco wrote: »

But with the obvious exception of canal paths, all the others could have cycle paths running parallel to the pedestrian paths.

Well, they could, but they don't, so...bell!


(Why are canal paths an exception? If you can put a cycle path through woodland you can put one anywhere!)

Marisco

neneromanova wrote: »

Unless you live in North devon where they have a cycle path on the pavement which they've just halved and put people on the inside and bikes near the road.

Yes they've done that in parts, where I live. But the pavements are very wide, so doesn't really present a problem. But where the pavements are not wide enough for this, then they should be on the road.

Marisco

Person_one wrote: »

Well, they could, but they don't, so...bell!


(Why are canal paths an exception? If you can put a cycle path through woodland you can put one anywhere!)

Well canal paths are a certain width, if there is a flat bit next to the path, then it can be done, but you only have the choice of one side, unless your bike is made in the "James Bond" mode i.e changes into a boat!!:D Maybe one of those horn things might be better:D

**curlywurly**

Person_one wrote: »

Not at all, where did you get that idea? I started it to provide a helpful tip for cyclists like the one who nearly plowed into me yesterday, I'm sure they don't actually want to injure people.

I used to cycle myself but decided I liked having my spine and skull intact more, its about sharing space and realising that just because you're faster you don't have more rights than people walking.

There are lots of very polite cyclists out there, this was aimed at the impolite or clueless ones.

And I say WELL DONE for starting this thread. If roadusers read it and learn something, then it's been worthwhile.

I think the problem may be that many cyclists don't drive, and vice versa, and therefore they don't understand each other. This thread may help with that.

BugglyB

Cyclists - GET OFF THE PAVEMENT!!!!

JUST GET OFF IT!

NO EXCUSES!!!!!

I say that as someone who cycles daily

Wickedkitten

Mind as well if you are cycling on a towpath, you are meant to have a cycling permit (unless you are in Scotland or London apparently)