Cycling on the pavement not to be prosecuted
Discussion
hora said:
Willy Nilly said:
If I get run over and my spine crushed, how is wearing a helmet going to help me? I'd rather be dead than paralised.
I cycle alot. Ever hit your head against anything? Long before your cyclist is crushed you'll have memory, coordination issues, brain damage, vision issues etc. Ive fallen off my bikes a fair few times, I've learnt to roll off road most of the time however on the road when you go down its very quick. Tarmac is a very cruel surface. My last fall on tarmac my bike washed out with no explanation, diesel? I hit the side of my head hard. Luckily after a couple of days of feeling stuff I was fine. I would have had a fractured skull.Rethink your view on this please.
I had a load of round bales of hay fall on my head crushing it against a machine. I survived.
I cycle half a mile to work, judging my the driving, any incident is going to be a hard one, what good is a bit of polystyrene on the top of my head going to do.
I have plenty of of well maintained organs that would be of use to people.
Will you miss me?
benjijames28 said:
On the other hand I was taught manners and to consider other people, so you move out of the way of pedestrians and keep your speed low.
Exactly.If all cyclists were considerate then pavement cycling would work as it does in Tokyo which is obviously far more crowded than any UK city.
If cyclists want to go racing then they should do the same as any driver who wants to race and go to a track or velodrome.
For the minority of cyclists who race along on the roads and think they are the next Wiggins, they need to learn consideration for other road users - drivers and pedestrians. Also to respect red lights, traffic signs, etc.
Willy Nilly said:
I feel off my bike A LOT as a kid. I survived.
I had a load of round bales of hay fall on my head crushing it against a machine. I survived.
At last, the definitive evidence scientific research has been missing all these years! They'll be able to abandon all their pointless technological advances in safety engineering they've spent decades of wasted time on ;-)I had a load of round bales of hay fall on my head crushing it against a machine. I survived.
Jagmanv12 said:
If cyclists want to go racing then they should do the same as any driver who wants to race and go to a track or velodrome.
The term "racing" doesn't really cover it. I see lots of posts on fitness forums and social media about people beating their PBs while getting to work etc. If I posted on Facebook that I managed to get to work beating a PB in my car, there'd be a riot.frisbee said:
motco said:
swerni said:
If you go to holland you see very few people wearing helmets.
Ah, but they are people on bicycles, not 'cyclists'!
t in traffic so I take my bike. You sit there all frustrated while your arteries harden, I'll just use the best tool for the job...cb1965 said:
Cyclists seem to be determined to be exempt from common sense as well as any legislation that might apply to them (which is not a lot compared to proper road users).
As for riding on the pavements no point changing the law as they do it anyway already with zero comeback so it's a pointless change!
"Cyclists'"as in all of them? No. "Determined" as in consciously precluding common sense from their decision making process? No.As for riding on the pavements no point changing the law as they do it anyway already with zero comeback so it's a pointless change!
Many cyclists might seem to lack common sense as anyone whom buys a bike and rides it in a public place is classed as a cyclist, no matter how qualified or experienced they are. They don't need to pass a test unlike other road users so by default then they will not be anything like as qualified to use the road or understand the implications of using what is in effect a vehicle at an equivalent level as a legal driver. Your perception of this (no doubt not having been a cyclist much yourself) leads you to believe all cyclists are consciously making poor decisions through no caring, but given the previously mentioned facts does this not suggest your perception is rather out of perspective?
The point is you and other people whom are so happy to label all cyclists as reckless need to realise that the very nature of being a cyclist means that term encompasses a huge range of abilities. The fact that standards of driving vary so widely despite drivers being far more qualified to do so should really highlight just how varied the range cycling standards there are out there. So it's probably better to treat cyclists as your would do with any human being and be open to the idea they may not be as crap a person as the few that ultimately prove themselves to be.
Hoofy said:
Jagmanv12 said:
If cyclists want to go racing then they should do the same as any driver who wants to race and go to a track or velodrome.
The term "racing" doesn't really cover it. I see lots of posts on fitness forums and social media about people beating their PBs while getting to work etc. If I posted on Facebook that I managed to get to work beating a PB in my car, there'd be a riot.Maybe some of these are talking about strava segments
poing said:
I had this fight with an old git a few years ago. He literally blocked me from passing in a full on Monty Python style and starting have a very loud rant about cycling on paths. Most of it I couldn't make out but he said "police" a lot so I asked him to come to the station with me, it wasn't far away, but that seemed to make matters worse and he took a swing at me. I think I met the street crazy bloke.
And he'd be right and you'd be wrong.http://www.parliament.scot/ResearchBriefingsAndFac...
Pages 9 and 10.
Scottish Parliament said:
Generally, anyone cycling on a footway or footpath in Scotland is committing an offence under
the provisions of Section 129(5) of the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984. It is not an offence to cycle across a footway or footpath to access a cycle track, driveway or other land where cycling is allowed.
The issue is complicated by access rights granted to cyclists under Section 1 of the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003 (“the 2003 Act”). The 2003 Act allows cycling on most land unless access is controlled by or under another enactment. This means that land reform access rights do not normally apply to roads or footways as their use is restricted under various statutes. However, the 2003 Act does allow cycling on any path where access has not been restricted by a Traffic Regulation Order or through other legal means. In practice, this allows cyclists to use most paths in urban parks and rural areas.
Many cyclists thing the 2003 act gives them carte blanche to cycle wherever they want, but if it is a pavement by the side of the road it will be controlled by a TRO which generally means it is illegal to cycle on.the provisions of Section 129(5) of the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984. It is not an offence to cycle across a footway or footpath to access a cycle track, driveway or other land where cycling is allowed.
The issue is complicated by access rights granted to cyclists under Section 1 of the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003 (“the 2003 Act”). The 2003 Act allows cycling on most land unless access is controlled by or under another enactment. This means that land reform access rights do not normally apply to roads or footways as their use is restricted under various statutes. However, the 2003 Act does allow cycling on any path where access has not been restricted by a Traffic Regulation Order or through other legal means. In practice, this allows cyclists to use most paths in urban parks and rural areas.
cb1965 said:
Whenever anyone suggests that cyclists should wear helmets, be in some way licensed, have mandatory insurance, stop acting like self righteous bell ends, take a bit more care of themselves etc. etc. the pro cycling lobbies and their supporters on all sorts of forums and social media rally against the whole concept and rarely, if ever, do I see or read a cyclist in support of a bit of common sense. So that is what I mean by cyclists!!!!! Hope you can grasp that???
Might be time to review your definition of common sense - not sure it should encompass mandatory insurance for cyclists: what with that not existing anywhere on earth it's not exactly common, is it?Trying to integrate other more advanced countries policies in the UK won't work.
The average new age British cyclist, especially the ones you see on YT darting their way around the city, manic, possibly coked up adrenaline monsters are a different breed of human being.
These animals will end up killing pedestrians if let loose on pavements
The Uk is not advanced enough yet to deal with this concept and it shouldn't be enforced.
They may never be advanced enough mentally, too much selflessness and arrogance from so many people whether in a car or bike or whatever.
My vote is leave the pavements for pedestrians.
Helmets, who gives a crap, that's a personal decision. We're all grown-ups, as long as your not injuring someone else.
The average new age British cyclist, especially the ones you see on YT darting their way around the city, manic, possibly coked up adrenaline monsters are a different breed of human being.
These animals will end up killing pedestrians if let loose on pavements
The Uk is not advanced enough yet to deal with this concept and it shouldn't be enforced.
They may never be advanced enough mentally, too much selflessness and arrogance from so many people whether in a car or bike or whatever.
My vote is leave the pavements for pedestrians.
Helmets, who gives a crap, that's a personal decision. We're all grown-ups, as long as your not injuring someone else.
deltashad said:
Trying to integrate other more advanced countries policies in the UK won't work.
The average new age British cyclist, especially the ones you see on YT darting their way around the city, manic, possibly coked up adrenaline monsters are a different breed of human being.
These animals will end up killing pedestrians if let loose on pavements
The Uk is not advanced enough yet to deal with this concept and it shouldn't be enforced.
They may never be advanced enough mentally, too much selflessness and arrogance from so many people whether in a car or bike or whatever.
My vote is leave the pavements for pedestrians.
Helmets, who gives a crap, that's a personal decision. We're all grown-ups, as long as your not injuring someone else.
If that's the opinion of the self appointed intelligentsia I'll take being a non coked up cyclist every day :flicksvees:The average new age British cyclist, especially the ones you see on YT darting their way around the city, manic, possibly coked up adrenaline monsters are a different breed of human being.
These animals will end up killing pedestrians if let loose on pavements
The Uk is not advanced enough yet to deal with this concept and it shouldn't be enforced.
They may never be advanced enough mentally, too much selflessness and arrogance from so many people whether in a car or bike or whatever.
My vote is leave the pavements for pedestrians.
Helmets, who gives a crap, that's a personal decision. We're all grown-ups, as long as your not injuring someone else.
battered said:
Willy Nilly said:
I had a load of round bales of hay fall on my head crushing it against a machine.
Could explain a lot.
When Mr Angry-Dad does a wreckless overtake in his 51 reg Xsara Picasso, bouncing down the road will be akin to falling into Kim Kardasians cleavage, only softer. cb1965 said:
Cyclists seem to be determined to be exempt from common sense as well as any legislation that might apply to them (which is not a lot compared to proper road users).
As for riding on the pavements no point changing the law as they do it anyway already with zero comeback so it's a pointless change!
Not a lot of legislation applies to cyclists? As for riding on the pavements no point changing the law as they do it anyway already with zero comeback so it's a pointless change!
The only legislation that does not apply, as far as I am aware, is the mandatory speed limit. Yup, I can ride as fast as I f
king-well choose.Even so, if I'm belting down a local hill at 39mph in a 30mph zone, I'll still get the "must overtake at all cost" brigade north of 45mph to pass me only to have to hammer the brakes to stop for the back of the queue for the roundabout ahead. Or the tit who's so fixated on overtaking me that he fails to see the traffic calming 'Give Way' outside the local school, and very nearly has a head-on with oncoming (priority) traffic, while I sail past through the bicycle 'by-pass' that means I don't have to bother with the poxy 'Give Way' lines. Yet you assert that it is cyclists who are devoid of common sense.
Today, a red Focus, revving the tits off his s
t-heap, trying to intimidate me before 'dropping a cog' and making loads of noise for very little return just prior to a roundabout to join the A30. He turns left, I nip across the cycle short-cut, and about two minutes later he's passing me again. I'm sick of cock-ends who cannot plan further than the end of their own bonnet. These red light jumping, speeding, illegally parking morons are not prosecuted, despite making the roads a more dangerous place for EVERYONE to be. Yet you want Mrs Gently-Caring to be arrested for cycling along the footway on her way to arrange flowers in the local church?This is a complete non-issue. Or at least it is until the driving fraternity gets it's house in order and stops eating, drinking, shaving, applying make up, and texting/emailing/phoning in their cars. When all that s
t is eradicated, along with the thousands of untaxed, uninsured vehicles driven by unlicensed drivers, then, and only then, do I think the police ought to be turning their attention to a handful of people who ride on pavements only because their fear of idiot motor vehicle drivers has driven them there...
motco said:
Cyclists can be charged with 'riding furiously' I seem to recall.
Cyclists can be charged with many things. Most of which involves a decision to prosecute by the CPS, and the gathering and presenting of evidence by police officers in order to persuade the bench, or a jury, that the offence committed was serious enough to warrant the attention.While drivers are walking free from courts having caused deaths by dangerous driving, I'll happily take the chance on being pulled up on the manner of my riding when no-one but me has been in the slightest bit endangered of inconvenienced.
Oh, and 58.9mph (GPS verified) down Duncton Hill on the A285, since you asked...
Jagmanv12 said:
benjijames28 said:
On the other hand I was taught manners and to consider other people, so you move out of the way of pedestrians and keep your speed low.
Exactly.If all
If
For the minority of
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff