Kamikaze Cyclists!

Norman_Castle

A very good example of what you mean is that we now have a rule which states that if a cyclist is in fear of other road users, then he or she should simply bump up on to the pavement and transfer their fear onto the unsuspecting, and even more vulnerable, pedestrians.

Willfully misinterpreted due to your anti cycling bias. The Home Office guidance states cyclists should not be penalised if riding on the pavement safely. Nothing else.

You're not trying to find answers to anything. You're just tediously moaning about cyclists.

Marco_Panettone

modsandmockers wrote: »

I have no problem at all with cyclists who choose to exercise their legal right to use the public highway.

modsandmockers wrote: »

You are tying yourself in knots. I do have a problem with cyclists using the road when there's a cycle path available. And, yes, I think it should be illegal.

And you talk about people tying themselves in knots....

Cycrow

When im a pedestrian, i've not had a single issue with cyclists in the last year (in fact i cant remember the last time i did).
But last month i was hit 3 times by motor vehicles, all while i was on the pavement

PenguinJim

modsandmockers wrote: »

You make a good point - it is cyclists who insist upon being given all sorts of special dispensations - motorists and pedestrians are mostly pretty well satisfied with the rules which have existed for centuries, but they are increasingly having to learn all the new rules which cyclists are gradually managing to impose upon the majority of road users, most of whom can see no pleasure or advantage in cycling to work.
...
That would not be a change of rules, it would be a confirmation of the rules which have existed for centuries.

100% agree. I was pushed to read the Magna Carta for the first time last week, and the "Motoring" subsection makes for some very interesting reading that cyclists would do well to note.

modsandmockers

Cycrow wrote: »

When im a pedestrian, i've not had a single issue with cyclists in the last year (in fact i cant remember the last time i did).
But last month i was hit 3 times by motor vehicles, all while i was on the pavement

PenguinJim wrote: »

100% agree. I was pushed to read the Magna Carta for the first time last week, and the "Motoring" subsection makes for some very interesting reading that cyclists would do well to note.

Cycrow - I think we need a few more details before we can take your statement seriously. Maybe you should start your own thread about Kamikaze Pedestrians.

Penguin - cars and bikes were both invented in the 1800s, and initially their access to the public highway was completely unrestricted, along with horses, farmers’ carts, pedestrians, flocks of sheep, travelling circuses and dancing bears. The only permitted interruption to the freedom of passage on the public highway was the railway level crossing, and for some reason, that anomaly still exists, despite the regular fatalities which occur on unmanned crossings on rural branch lines whose very occasional trains mostly consist of one or two slow-moving coaches carrying no more than a handful of passengers.

Your joke about the Magna Carta is very funny, and would go down well at a Cyclists Comedy Club, but, like so many other posts on this thread, it makes absolutely no contribution to any kind of discussion about how to lower the level of conflict between militant cyclists and other road users.

The potential dangers of the motor car were recognised at an early stage, hence the introduction of the 4mph speed limit, and the requirement for the red flag man to walk in front of the car (I wonder how many red flag men were run over by the brake failure of the car behind them!).

Almost every group of road user which I listed above has found a better way. In busy areas, pedestrians have been provided with pavements and sidewalks precisely so that they do not have to compete for space with animals and wheeled vehicles, and also so that they do not have to walk in the mud and ruts which horses and wheeled vehicles used to create. Except in extremely remote rural areas, it is rare for a farmer to drive his animals along the public highway, and it is less and less common to see a farm tractor and trailer driving along the tarmac in any part of the country (especially anywhere near a major city).

Motor vehicles have now taken over the highway completely, and the highway itself is designed and regulated entirely in favour of the motor vehicle. This is not about to change, however many symbolic white lines and bicycle shapes are painted onto the roads and pavements by local authorities and their equally symbolic Cycling Officers. Motorists have no option but to conform to all the regulations which are designed to ensure a safe passage for all, but the militant cyclist fraternity has somehow managed to create a situation (probably with the help of the European Union) whereby the various highway authorities are not allowed to state the obvious fact that bicycles are just another problem which uses up time and money in the pointless attempt to meet yet another set of meaningless targets. That is not to say that cycling is a bad thing - if you prefer to cycle, then please go ahead. But please also try to understand that most people simply don’t understand or care about your irrational desire to continue with practices which were completely normal in the century before last, but which have long been superseded by vastly superior forms of transport.

Until a few years ago, I was unaware of the politics of cycling - during the 1980s/1990s, we had many family adventures on our bikes - we did a day-trip from Dover to Calais, and biked through a swarm of hornet-like insects on our way back from an extremely enjoyable lunch. We took our bikes several times to Mid-Wales and Pembrokeshire, and also to the coasts of Essex and Suffolk, as well as the Isle of Wight. We also spent some time biking around Orkney. I regularly cycled to work over a period of many years, varying according to distance, weather conditions and scheduled start times.

As a car-driver, I never had any kind of problems with any kind of cyclist, and as a truck-driver, I never had any problem with blind-spots because I worked out how to set my mirrors correctly.

The thing that has !!!!ed me off in recent months, is that when I reported to the council’s cycling officer a fairly major problem with cyclists riding on the pavement in one particular location, he fobbed me off with a quote from a government policy document which said that cyclists are now allowed to ride on the pavement if they feel nervous about riding on the road. When I asked him to come and look at the situation, he said there was no point because he has no power to prevent cyclists from riding on the pavement.

I suspect that it is only a very small minority of cyclists who are aware that they will probably face no legal challenge if they decide to ride on the pavement instead of the road. If that fact should ever become widely known, then I shudder to think how the police will deal with the confrontations which will ensue.

ps - I am now sufficiently agitated about the issue of cyclists being officially allowed to ride on the pavement despite the fact that it is against the law, that I am going to write to my MP to ask for his comments. It will be weeks or months before I receive a reply, because he will forward my query to an appropriate government minister, and will then send me the reply which he eventually receives. If I can be bothered, I will post the reply onto this thread for all to read.

esuhl

modsandmockers wrote: »

As a car-driver, I never had any kind of problems with any kind of cyclist...

Ha ha -- oh, stop it! :rotfl:

Look at all the problems that cyclists don't cause!

Cycrow

modsandmockers wrote: »

Cycrow - I think we need a few more details before we can take your statement seriously. Maybe you should start your own thread about Kamikaze Pedestrians.

so its wrong for Pedestrians to walk down pavements is it ?

last weekend i was walking down the pavement to the shops when a car mounted the pavement to avoid a traffic light.

another time was a van driver who drove up onto a narrow pavement to park up while i was walking down it

BillyMansell

Cycrow wrote: »

so its wrong for Pedestrians to walk down pavements is it ?

last weekend i was walking down the pavement to the shops when a car mounted the pavement to avoid a traffic light.

another time was a van driver who drove up onto a narrow pavement to park up while i was walking down it

People only have to look at the KSI figures for people killed or seriously injured on footpaths to see who the real danger on footpaths is, and it ain't cyclists.

Norman_Castle

The thing that has !!!!ed me off in recent months, is that when I reported to the council’s cycling officer a fairly major problem with cyclists riding on the pavement in one particular location, he fobbed me off with a quote from a government policy document which said that cyclists are now allowed to ride on the pavement if they feel nervous about riding on the road. When I asked him to come and look at the situation, he said there was no point because he has no power to prevent cyclists from riding on the pavement.

As previously advised, the police police the highways. Not the council or your MP. Try walking to your local police station, carefully, there may be militant cyclists on the pavement, and explain the problem to them. Remember to advise them about the history of road transport and cyclists place in it.

ps - I am now sufficiently agitated about the issue of cyclists being officially allowed to ride on the pavement despite the fact that it is against the law, that I am going to write to my MP to ask for his comments. It will be weeks or months before I receive a reply, because he will forward my query to an appropriate government minister, and will then send me the reply which he eventually receives. If I can be bothered, I will post the reply onto this thread for all to read.

Looking forward to reading the reply.

Marco_Panettone

modsandmockers wrote: »

The thing that has !!!!ed me off in recent months, is that when I reported to the council’s cycling officer a fairly major problem with cyclists riding on the pavement in one particular location, he fobbed me off with a quote from a government policy document which said that cyclists are now allowed to ride on the pavement if they feel nervous about riding on the road. When I asked him to come and look at the situation, he said there was no point because he has no power to prevent cyclists from riding on the pavement.

I suspect that it is only a very small minority of cyclists who are aware that they will probably face no legal challenge if they decide to ride on the pavement instead of the road. If that fact should ever become widely known, then I shudder to think how the police will deal with the confrontations which will ensue.

ps - I am now sufficiently agitated about the issue of cyclists being officially allowed to ride on the pavement despite the fact that it is against the law, that I am going to write to my MP to ask for his comments. It will be weeks or months before I receive a reply, because he will forward my query to an appropriate government minister, and will then send me the reply which he eventually receives. If I can be bothered, I will post the reply onto this thread for all to read.

So, you're annoyed at a change of policy, and are moaning about it. Good for you. I wish you well in your campaign to force the Home Office to change their stance about cycling. They'll disagree with you and nothing will change, but that's democracy...