If it's just a normal pavement:
[Laws HA 1835 sect 72 & R(S)A 1984, sect 129]
You MUST NOT cycle on a pavement.
Cyclists
- Thread starter AndyOcUK
- Start date
If it's just a normal pavement:
[Laws HA 1835 sect 72 & R(S)A 1984, sect 129]
You MUST NOT cycle on a pavement.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Feb 2003
- Posts
- 29,640
- Location
- Chelmsford
I've come in pretty late into this thread but just wanted to add my own personal comments. As a cyclist, motorcyclist and motorist what each one has in common is the lack of respect for other road users, including cyclists and motorists but for very different reasons.
When cycling, I tend to ride very defensively. I guess that's just my motorbike survival techniques on the road. I always adhere to road safety and respect it's laws at all times. There are a few exceptions however. 1. If I'm holding up traffic and there is a bus behind me and the path is clear then i will (rightly or wrongly) take the path to allow traffic to pass. 2. As I live in the depths of the country, there's one piece of road which is NSL when it shouldn't be. Blind bends and corners makes my visibility very difficult and there have been a number of fatal accidents in the past. Again, I'll use the pavement but only when it's clear which it is majority of the times. Other times, I stop at red lights, give clear signals and manoeuvre as I should.
I have seen just as many cars jump light, mount pavement and even park on crossings as they drop people off at the station. It always amazes me the number of decent cars on the road but they appear not have basic instruments, such as indicators.. It's all down to road user consideration, which there is a lack of. People are in too much of a rush to get here and there with all considerations void.
When cycling, I tend to ride very defensively. I guess that's just my motorbike survival techniques on the road. I always adhere to road safety and respect it's laws at all times. There are a few exceptions however. 1. If I'm holding up traffic and there is a bus behind me and the path is clear then i will (rightly or wrongly) take the path to allow traffic to pass. 2. As I live in the depths of the country, there's one piece of road which is NSL when it shouldn't be. Blind bends and corners makes my visibility very difficult and there have been a number of fatal accidents in the past. Again, I'll use the pavement but only when it's clear which it is majority of the times. Other times, I stop at red lights, give clear signals and manoeuvre as I should.
I have seen just as many cars jump light, mount pavement and even park on crossings as they drop people off at the station. It always amazes me the number of decent cars on the road but they appear not have basic instruments, such as indicators.. It's all down to road user consideration, which there is a lack of. People are in too much of a rush to get here and there with all considerations void.
Adding to the ruthless discussion.
I don't cycle in the city as I just find it too dangerous in Edinburgh but however if I'm at my dad's I cycle on designated roads but if I have to I get off the bike and walk along with it at my side till I get to another safe place to cycle.
Yes it may be quicker just flinging about but I'd rather have piece of mind to be honest.
But in the city I walk along with the bike until I get to cycle paths through wooded areas etc. Water of Leith Pathway is just one huge cycle path with main roads at certain bits.
Don't risk it, be safe and take your time.
I don't cycle in the city as I just find it too dangerous in Edinburgh but however if I'm at my dad's I cycle on designated roads but if I have to I get off the bike and walk along with it at my side till I get to another safe place to cycle.
Yes it may be quicker just flinging about but I'd rather have piece of mind to be honest.
But in the city I walk along with the bike until I get to cycle paths through wooded areas etc. Water of Leith Pathway is just one huge cycle path with main roads at certain bits.
Don't risk it, be safe and take your time.
Last edited:
Just ignore the obvious trolling comment.
I didn't say licence - I said some type of number plate so the rider can be id'd just like any motorist should be able to if they make off from an "accident" without stopping.
As it happens, he was also wearing very distictive cycling gear that they could have easily followed on CCTV had they pulled thier finger out.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 13 May 2003
- Posts
- 34,564
- Location
- Warwickshire
None of my points are on topic? Fine, continue burying your head in the sand and ignoring the fact that you actually posted this:
"People on foot are NOT road users"
I can only conclude that you have no answer, and have just chalked it down to being wrong yet again in this thread.
Granted road runners are less likely to damage cars than cyclists, but where does it end? What about skateboarders or those kids scooter things? What about old people on mobility scooters? I bet you won't answer that but I'll put it out there anyway. If you're going to start shafting cyclists for all sorts of silly duties and insurances, then you need to see the entire picture.
I'm glad that you see the need to get off your bike, occasionally, but plenty of times I've been walking down the pavement and I've had a cyclist come up behind me ringing his bell and shouting for me to get out of the way as they are going at a totally inappropriate (and unsafe) speed down the pavement. That's not acceptable, and that's the issue that I have.
On a clear pavement, then yes I don't mind you cycling down it but you should be going at an appropriate speed as you don't know if someone is going to step out of a doorway or something like that.
The majority of the problem pavement cyclists I come across are at commuting times, they don't have consideration for pedestrians and they should be walking their bikes. If that means you have to walk it for a mile because of a busy pavement then tough. Leave earlier.
The comparison you drew with a mobility scooter is totally wrong, for a start someone in a mobility scooter isn't capable of going at the speeds that cyclists often go on the pavement. They can be very annoying, I'm sure we've all dealt with Betty blocking the pavement or something and not having a clue about their surroundings but that's fair enough. It's a totally different situation to that of a cyclist ignoring the law.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 13 May 2003
- Posts
- 34,564
- Location
- Warwickshire
Not the same speeds, no, but the extra mass of the scooter means they can still do lost of damage to cars etc. Of course we should also start taxing stones and tree branches and anything else that could potentially damage a car.
You still face the same problem of where to stop licensing, and license plates don't stop all hit and runs. Also I am not paying 3 grand for a bike to be super light and aerodynamic then sticking a giant license plate on it.
I see you're not familiar with newtons laws of momentum.
p = mv
The weight of a mobility scooter is much greater than a bike therefore a mobility scooter travelling at 4mph can be equivalent to a bike travelling at over 15mph.
Besides you are wrongly assuming that cyclists travel at fast speeds on the pavement.
I agree it won't stop all - it doesnt with cars, but it's a start. Doesn't have to be a "giant licence plate" could even be a fluorescent bib with the riders licence number on the front and back (think cycle racing type of thing).
Cars cost a bit more than 3 grand and they have to display them - and i'm sure the owners of supercars really enjoy having the aesthetics complemented by the numberplate being screwed on the front too
What are you on about? If a mobility scooter is doing damage to cars then that's a whole different matter. Cars aren't meant to be on pavements you know? I haven't mentioned taxing anything in this thread.
I see your point, however never once have I ever seen someone in a mobility scooter acting in an inappropriate and dangerous manner on the pavements. They certainly have never come flying up behind me causing me to take evasive action. I can't say the same about cyclists.
I'm assuming nothing, I'm stating what I have seen. On MANY occasions I have seen cyclists travelling far to fast on the pavement with a disregard to the safety of other people on it. You can't demand to ride on the pavement because the road is dangerous and then act in a dangerous manner on the pavement. If you need to be on the pavement, you should be at a sensible speed or walking with your bike.
Two pieces of black tarmac are standing chatting at the bar, when in walks a piece of green tarmac.
The piece of green tarmac demands a pint of bitter from the landlord in a menacing manner, downs it in one, slams his money on the bar and walks out.
The landlord turns to the two pieces of black tarmac and says: "Well I'm glad he didn't cause any trouble - I've heard he's a bit of a cyclepath".
The piece of green tarmac demands a pint of bitter from the landlord in a menacing manner, downs it in one, slams his money on the bar and walks out.
The landlord turns to the two pieces of black tarmac and says: "Well I'm glad he didn't cause any trouble - I've heard he's a bit of a cyclepath".
You missed the bad joke thread.
![[DOD]Asprilla](/styles/overclockers/avatars/8.png){kind=avatar}
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 14,034
- Location
- Surrey, by the river
I see loads of threads about cyclists leaving the scene of an accident but I don't actually know anyone who has had it happen to them. Weird, isn't it.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 13 May 2003
- Posts
- 34,564
- Location
- Warwickshire
My point was that the speed they're travelling at isn't the only factor. Clearly mass x velocity isn't a concept you're familiar with. Geesh you really have to spell things out to some people
.
- Joined
- 3 May 2004
- Posts
- 17,719
- Location
- Kapitalist Republik of Surrey
Lol, and they wonder why cyclists ride so defensively
I had a girl deliberately try and force me into a parked car with her front wing this morning. Should have seen her face when I won the battle of nerves. Couldn't quite make out what it was she was saying in there but I could tell it was lots of swearing
Really honestly don't know why people bother in traffic. What was she going to achieve by forcing me into a situation?
Cyclists ride like **** and people in cars drive like ****. There will not be a single person in this thread who drives and does so by the letter of the law.
You hit someone in a car and they will probably have lasting injuries or be killed. Hit them with a bike and there is very little chance of killing them.
They are not the same thing and the road system has been designed for polluting cars for all the lazy ***** that can't be bothered to walk or cycle. Most journeys people make in their cars could be done faster and easier on a bike but we are too lazy. There would be more dedicated cycle paths if more people cycled so why do you all start cycling those few miles to work instead of driving.
You hit someone in a car and they will probably have lasting injuries or be killed. Hit them with a bike and there is very little chance of killing them.
They are not the same thing and the road system has been designed for polluting cars for all the lazy ***** that can't be bothered to walk or cycle. Most journeys people make in their cars could be done faster and easier on a bike but we are too lazy. There would be more dedicated cycle paths if more people cycled so why do you all start cycling those few miles to work instead of driving.