Pavement perils

SeduLOUs

brat wrote: »

But if I was the parent of that child, I would be feeling guilty about allowing her to become a victim to the cyclist. The parents should have ensured that this accident never happened.

I totally agree.

I have right of way to turn right on a mini roundabout to get into my work, but I've seen so many bad accidents on that roundabout because people forget it's there and just plough over it, so I pause and wait if a car is approaching to make sure they are stopping. A couple of passengers have previously barked at me "just go, you have right of way".

I remind them that it's not much use being able to say the other driver was wrong for ploughing into their side when my car is totalled and we're both potentially in hospital, and suggest they get a lift with someone else in future if they don't like how I drive.

Norman_Castle

brat wrote: »

...no, not the chavvy parents - the child.

Strider590 wrote: »

A stereotypical ditsy blonde, with no awareness and no common sense.

Are these comments justified?. The mothers comments on what happened are rational and factual. The child probably uses that pavement every day and has learnt or been taught where they are allowed to go.

Norman_Castle

Johno100 wrote: »

Cyclist? He wasn't a cyclist, he was a person on a bike (AKA as a POB).

From his picture he looks like not much more than a boy on a bike. http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/05/21/10/28ED852400000578-3090830-image-m-32_1432201906501.jpg. Clearly he has a lot to learn.

It also looks as though he had trouble stopping. Was he using his feet to stop?.

brat

Norman_Castle wrote: »

Are these comments justified?. The mothers comments on what happened are rational and factual. The child probably uses that pavement every day and has learnt or been taught where they are allowed to go.

Possibly a little harsh, to be fair, although my criticism of the parents still stands.
I also question the motive of the speed with which their horror ordeal (which it clearly was) is converted to a media event.

moneyistooshorttomention

It's been "converted into a media event" because there doesn't seem to be any other way to get the message over to cyclists "Keep off OUR pavements". Perhaps the police might take it more seriously now about kicking cyclists off our pavements on the one hand and maybe that derisory little fixed penalty they can levy (ie £50) will be raised to something more realistic (eg at least £1,000).

This little "boy" is now claiming HIS life has been "ruined" ....errrr...hello....that would be by his own behaviour then wouldn't it?

He has the nerve to say people shouldn't be telling him off for what he did:cool::eek:

He's also lying and saying he didn't know it was illegal to ride on pavements. There is a phrase that I've not heard for a while - but it neatly covers it. That being "Pull the other one - its got bells on".

Norman_Castle

It's become a media event as there is video showing it happening and a picture of the cyclist. Without these it wouldn't have had as much attention.

https://www.gov.uk/highway-code-penalties/penalty-table

Dangerous cycling £1,000 fine - Careless cycling £1,000 fine - Cycling on pavement £500 fine

Norman_Castle

There's a loop coming from the handlebars. Is that a brake cable?.

brat

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

It's been "converted into a media event" because there doesn't seem to be any other way to get the message over to cyclists "Keep off OUR pavements"..

Sorry, that wasn't the point I was wanting to make.

I don't think the parents would have had a road safety message on their minds when they took the video to the media.
I wonder what motivated them to go straight to the media?

brat

Norman_Castle wrote: »

There's a loop coming from the handlebars. Is that a brake cable?.

Would it not be his cycle lock?

brat

This story does focus minds on the issue of pavement safety, and pavement usage by cyclists.

Cyclists are not allowed to use footpaths, but they do seem to be doing so more often, especially quiet wide footpaths. Their use of the footpath is, in some circumstances, tolerated by the authorities who recognise that some cyclists feel unsafe in the urban environment due to pressure from motor vehicles.
As the motor vehicle has increased in volume over the last generation, so the pedestrian volume has dropped. There is therefore an increasing temptation for some cyclists (especially the non-assertive cyclists) to opt for the quiet footpath as a safer alternative.

I believe that the use of the footpath probably is a safer alternative for these cyclists, so, if illegal use of footpaths by cyclists saves many more lives than it costs, should more of them be opened up legally to allow careful use by cyclists? Should we maintain the 'light touch' attitude to enforcement that we currently have, or should we ignore the peril to the cyclist and shove them off the safer footpath onto the more dangerous road?