If bicycles are banned from commuter trains, why aren't pushchairs?

Skeeter

Skeeter

Skeeter

Caporegime
Joined
8 Mar 2007
Posts
37,146
Location
Surrey
(Assuming that the reason bikes are banned is because of the space they take up and the hassle they create).

Discuss.
 
[TW]Fox;27481089 said:
Because you can hardly ban mothers with young children from public transport without an outrage?
Click to expand...

OK, folding push chairs only then. Like they only allow folding bikes. The kids already traveling for free!
 
TheVoice said:
Why can't cyclists?
Click to expand...

A bike is a means of transport.
A pushchair is just so the mother can forget about the kid and give it greggs pasties to eat.
Kids over a certain age, should be walking.
They already get on the bus for free.
Not to mention most "pushchairs" are the massive pram things that take up most the front of the bus.
 
Lol I'm not suggesting universally banning Pushchairs from society, I'm questioning why taking up space on a train with a bike is not acceptable yet taking up space with an abandoned pushchair/pram/buggy is.
 
Skeeter said:
Lol I'm not suggesting universally banning Pushchairs from society, I'm questioning why taking up space on a train with a bike is not acceptable yet taking up space with an abandoned pushchair/pram/buggy is.
Click to expand...

OanIYk5.jpg
 
Skeeter said:
Lol I'm not suggesting universally banning Pushchairs from society, I'm questioning why taking up space on a train with a bike is not acceptable yet taking up space with an abandoned pushchair/pram/buggy is.
Click to expand...

Because
"THINK OF THE CHILDREN"
Next time you see a kid with a greggs pasty, pitty it.
 
Check your white young adult male privilege, yo!

Also there's usually a child in the push chair. You don't sit on your bike while on the train.
 
Saw title, assumed jsmoke thread.
Weird.

Anyway children small enough to need a pushchair may be too big to be carried for long distances, without being able to walk those distances themselves.
Thread would suggest those against it do not have children of their own.
 
Years ago I broke down on my motorcycle (Honda 250) and they let me put it on the train to get it home. I was jobless at the time and miles away from home so it saved me an absolute fortune, I had to sit on it between the doors of the very last carriage and they also made me buy a ticket for the bike, but I got them to give me a child discount for it because the bike was under 16 years old :D
 
Dj_Jestar said:
Check your white young adult male privilege, yo!

Also there's usually a child in the push chair. You don't sit on your bike while on the train.
Click to expand...

Why would you leave the kid in it and stand when you can turf people out of a couple of priority seats and sit down?
 
My local trains allow bikes when it's not rush hour, mainly as theres just not enough room so the same should apply to prams I think. They can always do thier shopping at 10am rather than 9am.

If bikes were allowed during rush hour it would save me about 20 quid a week not having to drive.
 
[TW]Fox;27481230 said:
Depends on the age of the kid surely :confused:
Click to expand...

Its more to do with the personality and sense of entitlement of the parent, but anyway...

If you wish to travel with a bike during busy commuter hours you are forced to use a fold up bike out of consideration for your fellow passengers. My question is why does this expectation to be considerate not extend to parents with Pushchairs too? Why not require them to have a fold up pushchair too?
 
mattyfez said:
My local trains allow bikes when it's not rush hour, mainly as theres just not enough room so the same should apply to prams I think. They can always do thier shopping at 10am rather than 9am.

If bikes were allowed during rush hour it would save me about 20 quid a week not having to drive.
Click to expand...

This is my point. Surely the case against bikes should also apply to Pushchairs etc?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom