Cyclists on pavements, do police really care?

I'll cycle on the pavement if I can see far ahead and it's clear, why would you knowingly put yourself at further risk by being on the road if it is not necessary?

If I see people ahead i'll drop off the pavement, check for cars and go on the road. The laws against cycling are pretty stupid anyway, think about it, if you obeyed all these laws, only used roads and cycle paths then how many times would you have to get off your bike and walk with it to get to your destination to remain legal? Can I cycle in a park?, what about a dirt track through the park?

I would say that the geography of the country and how our towns etc are designed means they are not ideally suited to both cars and bikes. After visiting Amsterdam and Denmark and seeing how they do cycle lanes in built up areas it's perfect, a lot less fat asses around too!
 
Is it actually an offense then? I just thought it was twattish behavior (on busy streets, no issue with people doing it when a road is deserted)
 
cheesyboy said:
Try and find a story about a cyclist killing a pedestrian on the pavement. Then try and find a story about a car driver doing the same (killing a pedestrian on the pavement). Which is the most common?

In fact, from 2009 to 2013 there was one incident of pedestrian death cause by cyclist on the pavement. There were 34 per year cause by cars on the pavement in that time:
http://www.ctc.org.uk/sites/default/files/file_public/pedestrians4rrv2.pdf
Click to expand...

Does that take into account the number of cars and the miles they drive being massively more than cyclists?

The problem is that cyclists should not be interacting so closely with pedestrians, but likewise, they should not be out there interacting with heavy traffic. Unless we're planning on building a whole new road network, or ban all traffic from cities as the cyclist's lobby asked for, cyclists will always be seen as a nuisance for traffic and pedestrians, because the roads and the pavements are not designed for cyclists.

Pedestrians have the pavement, cars have the roads, and cyclists have the generally poor cycle paths that can't be levered into places like central London.
 
Cycling around here isn't really a problem except on tow paths. There are multiple signs advising cyclists that pedestrians have priority but the majority don't take any notice.

It does seem like you can't enjoy a stroll along the side of the canal without having to leap into the undergrowth every 2 minutes. That said, I don't have a problem moving to the side when a cyclist slows down and gives a nod or actually says thank you.

It's unfair to brand all cyclists as a menace because not all are. It's my experience that the majority of people are just ignorant and act like they're the only people on the planet, and that's sad.
 
Given the number of other illegal things I've seen people on bikes do, such as running every red light they can, I don't think the police are all that worried about them cycling on the pavement.
 
Try walking thought the "no cycling" Greenwich foot tunnel during the rush hour. You'll never see a bigger bunch of ******* knobheads on two wheels.
 
Liefrich said:
Oh yes those excellent logistically placed and maintained cycle paths that are so prominent in the UK….Do you by chance live in the Netherlands?

The UK really needs a cultural revolution regarding cycling. We would all benefit more if the infrastructure was there for safer cycling. It would also hopefully bring about a change in attitude.
Click to expand...

my point is, even though the cycle path is in brand new condition running parallel to the road the cyclists dont use it, even though the road isn't wide enough for cars and cycles at the same time.

as to your second point , a lot of uk road layouts especially in towns are centuries old, there just isn't the physical space available.
 
As a non-driver, I love it when cyclists ride on my pavement, then give me evils if I (purposefully) get in their way.

Stay where you are supposed to, and don't get ****ed when you jump a red and almost hit someone crossing the road.
 
krooton said:
As a non-driver, I love it when cyclists ride on my pavement, then give me evils if I (purposefully) get in their way.

Stay where you are supposed to, and don't get ****ed when you jump a red and almost hit someone crossing the road.
Click to expand...

As a pedestrian, you are multiple times more likely to die at the hands of a motorist than a cyclist, even when walking on the pavement.

Surely, then, a sensible pedestrian should do all they can to encourage people to cycle rather than drive, should they not?

I don't actually cycle (other than the odd occasion), but simply don't understand the butthurt about cyclists.
 
It wouldn't bother me as long as they are rising slowly and carefully. Having been hit by a cyclist before it hurts, but I was okay, had I been a child or an elderly person I doubt I'd have fared as well.
 
krooton said:
As a non-driver, I love it when cyclists ride on my pavement, then give me evils if I (purposefully) get in their way.

Stay where you are supposed to, and don't get ****ed when you jump a red and almost hit someone crossing the road.
Click to expand...

I've hit many people specially when they see me cycling up the road and they still cross even when there's a green light.

I cycle on pavements but at a slow pace, try to avoid people ,you can always tell when you see a knob walking thats going to cause you problems.

You can't cycle on the road as the driver just don't give a crap, i've seen buses and cars on cycle lanes in London, i seen drivers look you in the face see you coming and still pull out.
 
Last edited:
The-Plethora said:
If I see people ahead i'll drop off the pavement, check for cars and go on the road. The laws against cycling are pretty stupid anyway, think about it, if you obeyed all these laws, only used roads and cycle paths then how many times would you have to get off your bike and walk with it to get to your destination to remain legal? Can I cycle in a park?, what about a dirt track through the park?
Click to expand...

There's no specific law against cycling on a path if it's not next to the road. There may be bylaws etc. that apply (most likely in parks) but often not. Specifically the law relates to footways which have a specific definition of being part of a highway.
 
Last edited:
Steampunk said:
When you find a survey saying most car drivers admit to driving at 20-30 mph down pavements, then come back to me.

I don't see many car drivers blasting thought red lights with traffic going the other way, along pavements, through pedestrian tunnels and pedestrianised areas, across pedestrian crossings, etc, but I regularly see cyclists just not bothered to stick to the basic rules of traffic. The whole point of roads and pavements is to separate the pedestrians and the road traffic. Which one does the cyclist want to be?
Click to expand...

You're complaining about road users flouting the rules of the road, it's directly relevant to your post.

I take it from your non answer that you speed regularly as well...?;)
 
Steampunk said:
Does that take into account the number of cars and the miles they drive being massively more than cyclists?

The problem is that cyclists should not be interacting so closely with pedestrians, but likewise, they should not be out there interacting with heavy traffic. Unless we're planning on building a whole new road network, or ban all traffic from cities as the cyclist's lobby asked for, cyclists will always be seen as a nuisance for traffic and pedestrians, because the roads and the pavements are not designed for cyclists.

Pedestrians have the pavement, cars have the roads, and cyclists have the generally poor cycle paths that can't be levered into places like central London.
Click to expand...

No, cyclists have the road along with horse riders, carts and many other road users. Being forced off the road by many inconsiderate car/lorry drivers doesn't mean they shouldn't be on the roads. As has already been mentioned most roads in the UK weren't designed for large motorized vehicles. Many have been modified to make them more useable but we still have narrow roads that barely fit cars down, especially when people park both side.

Arguing that roads aren't designed for cyclists is neither here nor there, only dual carriageways and motorways were actually designed for motorized traffic. Any argument against cycling on the road using that logic also needs to be an argument against cars in towns and cities as well.
 
I don't cycle, but I do walk everywhere. Most of the time I find it perfectly acceptable when you see someone cycling on the path, until you get them who have zero care for anyone else. I shouldn't have to be forced to move out of the way for a cyclist although, I do so if they are nice about it.

Them who just don't care much about the speed they are doing are the most annoying. I see the point of the police not getting involved but I do wish they would stop those who are clearly a risk to other users.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom