BBC R2 again 12.30pm - Cyclists on pavements because roads are so dangerous.......

[rh100]

How old are you?! That was years ago.

Actually there was quite a bit of common sense spoken on this occasion.

Bob Roper still didn't really really push home the reasons for some cyclists being on the pavements in the first place although he did say yoofs would cycle on pavements what ever the regulations. He did highlight that collisions between car and cyclists are generally fatal or result in very serious injuries where as those between cyclists and pedestrians, as inevitably there will be some, would on the whole be cuts and bruises. So on this basis the pavements, where suitable and appropriate, would be preferable to cycling on the roads. He also mentioned the large amount of education of various road and pavement users to be more tolerant of each other. Wise words indeed. I thought he was good.

34 going on 54

About 10 years ago wasn't it? I used to like the way he didn't have a clue what song he'd just played and get it totally wrong

 

[ChrisKH]

Or down town Mexico City ..........

Actually, I suspect Mexico City would be ok'ish. Having been there it was just like London. Except warmer and at altitude. But I digress.

 

[Arch]

Actually, I suspect Mexico City would be ok'ish. Having been there it was just like London. Except warmer and at altitude. But I digress.

And they have those ped crossings that tell you how many seconds you still have to get across...

Crankarm is right, what we really need is better driving to encourage road cycling (and I'd say, coupled with decent enforcement of the law on those who still ride irresponsibly on the pavement). But better driving, it might be theoretically cheap to achieve, but it isn't easy, because you're trying to change people, and people are stubborn buggers.

I'm always wary of the argument that collisions between peds and cyclists will tend to be less serious - for one thing, people can still be killed in such collisions, and if you're the one with cuts and bruises or a broken bone, it's not much consolation that the cyclist who hit you might one day have been killed by a car, because it still hurts to get hit, even if you're 'lucky' and only have cuts and bruises - not to mention the lingering fear it can cause. The people who have the most to fear in such collisions are the elderly and the vulnerable, and that's worth remembering I think.

 

[Crankarm]

...............The people who have the most to fear in such collisions are the elderly and the vulnerable, and that's worth remembering I think.

Saw an old bat on one of those mobility scooters in the middle of nowhere in the Fens this evening. She had a reflective hi-viz jacket draped over the back of the seat and what looked like bike lights front and rear. It was a single carriageway road and cars were blasting past her at speeds approaching 80 mph. When she drew level with me, but going in the opposite direction, she shouted out "Some people are so impatient!" Before I could reply I had passed her. They are indeed I thought. But I was more amazed by her boldness to be riding her chariot along a fairly busy narrow road at peak traffic time.The wind was pretty strong so I didn't try shouting a reply. Crazy old bat.

 

[summerdays]

It depends on the pavement too. Riding a bike down a city centre pavement thick with tourists would be a nightmare for all, but a suburban pavement with few people on would be ok (except for the need to cross driveways etc)

I use shared use pavements sometimes - usually the linear type, but in the centre of Bristol there is a shared use area that has lots of pedestrians crossing it from all sorts of directions, milling around. If you cycle slow enough I quite enjoy it. You have to look in all directions and calculate a good potential path through, and most pedestrians accept you there. There are a few that look worried - I guess as a result of bad bike/pedestrian interaction in the past, and a few stupid cyclists who seem to think the people should move aside of the fast moving cyclists. But generally I think it works better than I would expect.

 

[TheCyclingRooster]

Hi to you all out there,the very notion of Cyclists Riding on Footpaths/Pavements (call it what you like) is utter BOLLOCKS.This is a CLASSIC CASE of CONSTRUCTIVE & DEVICIVE DERELICTION OF DUTY.It has always been an offence to cycle on pavements/footpaths but now because it is a QUICKFIX STICKING PLASTER thought process it suddenly becomes LAWFULL/ACCEPTABLE, the truth is, it is a half cocked excuse/notion to cover up/mend a dire situation.What would happen if the loved ones/remaining members of families affected by a cyclists death took the Government to task on the basis of lack of duty of care, on the same basis as is available in Company Law/Liability of the Directors?.Unlike for example Holland this country has only ever seen the bicycle as liability on the road or a source of amusement(Penny Farthing to name but one).Education & re-education of motorised transport users is not the only fix,the penalties need serious re-appraisal.Fines are useless when they have no money(and expensive to pursue),driving bans are laughable.Confiscation/Detention might begin to produce a more responsible attitude.Put the offenders on bikes and electronicaly tag them both for a 24/7 match(enforced use)might make them more aware.Make the law makers ride bikes for a year might be another approach.Safe & Happy Riding to you All.

 

[very-near]

Hi to you all out there,the very notion of Cyclists Riding on Footpaths/Pavements (call it what you like) is utter BOLLOCKS.This is a CLASSIC CASE of CONSTRUCTIVE & DEVICIVE DERELICTION OF DUTY.It has always been an offence to cycle on pavements/footpaths but now because it is a QUICKFIX STICKING PLASTER thought process it suddenly becomes LAWFULL/ACCEPTABLE, the truth is, it is a half cocked excuse/notion to cover up/mend a dire situation.What would happen if the loved ones/remaining members of families affected by a cyclists death took the Government to task on the basis of lack of duty of care, on the same basis as is available in Company Law/Liability of the Directors?.Unlike for example Holland this country has only ever seen the bicycle as liability on the road or a source of amusement(Penny Farthing to name but one).Education & re-education of motorised transport users is not the only fix,the penalties need serious re-appraisal.Fines are useless when they have no money(and expensive to pursue),driving bans are laughable.Confiscation/Detention might begin to produce a more responsible attitude.Put the offenders on bikes and electronicaly tag them both for a 24/7 match(enforced use)might make them more aware.Make the law makers ride bikes for a year might be another approach.Safe & Happy Riding to you All.

You can breath now