Why do grown men ride on the pavement?

Norman_Castle

Honeydog wrote: »

The chaps on the pavement are not what I call 'real' cyclists. They have cheap Halfords type bikes and are probably cycling to work and back. .Proper cyclists - the ones with decent road bikes and the right gear are always on the road. They may have sold their decent bikes to fund a puppy sanctuary and are cycling to the RSPCA to do voluntary work.

The ones on the trails are probably just boorish oafs in the rest of their lives as well and not just when they are riding trails.

I expect they are quite happy, contented people who are generally polite despite the boorish oafs they encounter.

Norman_Castle

My other half was knocked off her motorbike just after Christmas. Simple case of a young driver not looking or indicating before pulling out. Luckily it was a low speed accident so not too bad. Should I suggest she rides on the pavement in future?

If she had been knocked off a bicycle in the same circumstances and said she would now ride, with caution, on the pavement, where possible. Would you support her decision?

adouglasmhor

spacey2012 wrote: »

Because they are breaking the law ? Just like you are with your dog not on a lead.

What law would that be about dogs on leads - one you have made up perhaps?

adouglasmhor

jblack wrote: »

There are bad cyclists and bad drivers. As a driver I see a lot more bad cyclists though.

I had a cyclist banging on the back of my van last week. We were stuck in traffic on a busy main road and crawling along. I heard him banging and shouting so put the handbrake on and got out. He was upset that I was too close to the kerb which meant he couldn't pass. I pointed out that he should be overtaking not undertaking. He didn't seem to get it:rotfl:.

Anyone using the roads should be following the Highway Code, simple as that. Many cyclists think they above it though.

IMHO all road users should be insured including cyclists. If a cyclist causes damage or an accident to a pedestrian or another road user it would make getting it sorted a lot easier.

That's because you are wrong. 151, https://www.gov.uk/general-rules-all-drivers-riders-103-to-158/general-advice-144-to-158 no charge :rotfl:

adouglasmhor

googler wrote: »

Sounds like the pedestrians round your way are also taking their lives in their hands, with all the cyclists hogging the pavement.

Let's not forget, a pavement can also be called a sideWALK, or a FOOTpath, neither of which terms would seem to admit cyclists to their use.....

In places where they call a pavement a "sidewalk" they call the road surface the pavement.

googler

Rotor wrote: »

Few roads are wide enough to SAFELY pass a single cyclist when a car is coming the other way.

If there's something coming the other way - don't overtake , if there isn't then you have the whole of the other side of the road.

It may cause a problem for those drivers 'hoping for the best' who then can't dart in and skim past the cyclist if another car appears , but they are dangerous and shouldn't be on the road.

Couldn't agree more. If I had a pound for every "I HAVE to get past this cyclist" motorist that I've seen, I'd be much better off than I am at the moment...

jblack_2

adouglasmhor wrote: »

That's because you are wrong. 151, https://www.gov.uk/general-rules-all-drivers-riders-103-to-158/general-advice-144-to-158 no charge :rotfl:

Oh I see, I should have been over the central white lines of the road, in oncoming traffic to allow him to undertake me. My mistake:rotfl:.

I didn't say it was illegal to undertake on a bike. The fact of the matter is if I have to be close to the kerb he should have overtaken me if he was so impatient. My road positioning was correct, there was no cycle lane etc.

No charge

googler

adouglasmhor wrote: »

In places where they call a pavement a "sidewalk" they call the road surface the pavement.

So? The term for the area where the pedestrians are - the sidewalk - still doesn't, by its name, seem to admit wheeled vehicles.

adouglasmhor

jblack wrote: »

Oh I see, I should have been over the central white lines of the road, in oncoming traffic to allow him to undertake me. My mistake:rotfl:.

I didn't say it was illegal to undertake on a bike. The fact of the matter is if I have to be close to the kerb he should have overtaken me if he was so impatient. My road positioning was correct, there was no cycle lane etc.

No charge

Fair enough, I owe you one, I misunderstood you and thought you were saying cyclists were not allowed to undertake in stationery or slow moving traffic.

adouglasmhor

googler wrote: »

So? The term for the area where the pedestrians are - the sidewalk - still doesn't, by its name, seem to admit wheeled vehicles.

Do you walk sideways on it as well? What does pavement convey about who is allowed on it.