Why do grown men ride on the pavement?

sda38

I'm curious about something. When I'm on a pavement of some sort - something pedestrians use, not a road - and I see them coming from the other direction (I'm cycling slowly in these situations) I start to move diagonally to avoid them. There are times when the pedestrian then starts to move away also, BUT the same direction I started moving in. It resolves itself quickly. I dare say they aren't purposely moving towards me as I'm moving away from them, but I was wondering how the brain is working in these situations.

DCodd

ozzage wrote: »

The problem is, that using this system, errors and stupidity can both very easily kill. And do kill.

The roads should be designed for kids, teenagers, the nervous, the elderly, the NORMAL(!) to be able to ride a bike around as a normal form of transport.

You will never train most people to take a primary position on a major road with lorries/buses/taxis/cars. Because no normal person finds that a sane thing to do!! Some of us do it anyway, but we should realise that expecting it effectively rules cycling out for the majority of people.

Go Dutch. They know what's required. And it's not about training.

But it is about training. where many problems lay is in the literature available to all road users.

You say about the primary position, well it is all well and good we cyclists saying that the primary and the secondary positions are the safest and best but it states that nowhere in traffic law or in the highway code. These two documents are what 99% of all other road users are expected to follow. This causes a conflict, whereby most road users are expecting cyclists to follow one set of rules but the cyclist is actually following a different set of rules.

Guesthouse

Short answer to original post - probably for safety? If you're hit by a vehicle it's invariably going to hurt. My qualification for that - I'm a paramedic and I've spent many years dealing with collisions involving cyclist (and other combinations of road users) of varying severity.

Long version - a rant, if you will.

I cycle on roads almost exclusively - especially on my road bike because bumping on and off kerbs/shared cycle lanes is not what it's designed for. I'm no Bradley Wiggins but I can bowl along with city/commuter traffic quite easily, so get over it motorists.....you can listen to your radio and be nicely air conditioned in your traffic jam while I'm sweating/freezing/soaking.

My MTB on the other hand will go on off road/pavement routes where appropriate. But just because it's an MTB doesn't mean I have to go off road everywhere. Your average 4x4 doesn't see many safari adventure on the high street and your SuperSport Nurburgring Turbo doesn't have to be driven like it's always on a race track.

Cycle lanes around here? Perfect for parking your car on and aways end just before massively busy/dangerous roundabouts & junctions. Also a handy place for road debris/broken glass and (my pet hate) dog mess to lurk.

Pedestrians/dog walkers/horse riders get appropriate respect from me and I always give them in return. So you heel your dog or pull your horse over and I slow down. You don't let your pack of Scottie dogs run at me three nights running while shouting ineffectually at them.

Motorists. You let me out of a junction or pull out in front of you after signalling to turn right and you'll get a thumbs up or cheery wave. I've done it for drivers when I've been holding them up and they've been grateful. It's called respect.

That little ringy bell I've got?....It's to notify people I'm nearby. It's useless if you've got your headphones jammed in your ears and your music up full volume or you're talking on your phone/texting/on Facebook because you won't be paying attention.

Do cyclists who blatantly and dangerously break road traffic (and common sense) rule annoy me? Absolutely. Especially the floppy haired BMX tits who cycle round city centre pavement like an adventure park and your local stereotype drink/drug user waking his dog from his bike on city pavements - because they're the ones who give normally well "behaved (for want of a better word) cyclists a bad name when they take a small liberty in the name of their safety.

Big_G_RC

This really winds me up. I saw probably close to 10 cyclists on the pavement around Lincoln on the weekend. Mostly adults with "Beats by Dre" headphones on too!

I saw 4 lads on BMX's also who almost managed to ride into a Child's Buggy

There is no excuse for doing this and also cycling on pavements as an excuse for not having lights on your bike. If you want to cycle at dusk then fit some lights! When a motorist gives the famous "Sorry mate I didn't see you" you partly/mostly have yourself to blame!

I'm kitted out with very good lights and reflective strips on my cycle gear for good reason! I ride with the traffic stopping at lights and obeying traffic laws at all times.

Motorists don't own the road. There is no such thing as road tax anymore. They pay VED which is based on their CO2 output. My bike outputs <100 co2/km so I pay no VED!!!

rustyboy21

Shouldn't be cycling on pavements , end of. Unless there is a dedicated cylce path marked on it.

If you have to adhere to the traffic laws that cars do on the road, then why should you have the right to use a pedestrian right of way.

And get some lights on your bike, while you at it !

Paddles

I cycle almost exclusively on the road. The only exception being if I have my baby in the child seat and for whatever reason I don't feel safe. We both had reflective jackets, there are lights on the bike and on the babys helmet but even so we've had a few close calls, close enough to make me feel happier on the pavement at times.

Last week a van pulled across me (on to the wrong side of the road) to talk to a friend who was walking on the pavement. They didn't look at all and if I hadn't noticed what they were doing they would have clipped me and sent me and the baby over.

My children ride only on the pavement. I think the cycling proficiency is done in year 5 so my oldest has not done it yet and until then I prefer they stay on the pavement.

When I'm a pedestrain I don't mind if cyclists use the pavement, as long as everyone is mindful of everyone else I don't think it has to be a problem.

DCodd

rustyboy21 wrote: »

Shouldn't be cycling on pavements , end of. Unless there is a dedicated cylce path marked on it.

If you have to adhere to the traffic laws that cars do on the road, then why should you have the right to use a pedestrian right of way.

And get some lights on your bike, while you at it !

That's is where the confusion is. Cycling on a pavement is not illegal per se, neither is cycling on a footpath. Cycling on a footway set aside for the use of pedestrians is illegal as long as it runs alongside a road.

Other footpaths, pavements or whatever else you wish to call them are subject to local bye-laws and civil laws only.

Nada666

Why do grown men ride on the pavement?

Perhaps they have misunderstood bye-laws that ban crawling kerbs?

ozzage

DCodd wrote: »

But it is about training. where many problems lay is in the literature available to all road users.

You say about the primary position, well it is all well and good we cyclists saying that the primary and the secondary positions are the safest and best but it states that nowhere in traffic law or in the highway code. These two documents are what 99% of all other road users are expected to follow. This causes a conflict, whereby most road users are expecting cyclists to follow one set of rules but the cyclist is actually following a different set of rules.

There is some truth in that, but it's largely irrelevant because cycling in those road positions is extremely unnatural for most people.

Training is not the answer. Most people will never cycle if they have to take primary in front of a HGV or a bus at a pinch point to be safe. You can train them all you like, they WON'T DO IT. And I don't blame them .

You can forget about all that if you want to increase cycling to be more than a fractional mode of transport. Create proper infrastructure so that using the road isn't a battle for space, because a good chunk of it has already been given to the cyclist.

Marco_Panettone

ozzage wrote: »

There is some truth in that, but it's largely irrelevant because cycling in those road positions is extremely unnatural for most people.

Training is not the answer. Most people will never cycle if they have to take primary in front of a HGV or a bus at a pinch point to be safe. You can train them all you like, they WON'T DO IT. And I don't blame them .

You can forget about all that if you want to increase cycling to be more than a fractional mode of transport. Create proper infrastructure so that using the road isn't a battle for space, because a good chunk of it has already been given to the cyclist.

Why do you assume that 'training' refers to cyclists being trained? If drivers are trained properly to drive safely when near cyclists then they'll stop trying to overtake when it isn't safe to do so. Also, impose higher penalties for those who endanger other road users. After all, there is ALREADY a system in which to train them.