FPN for carrying child on bike

[xpc316e]

I cannot read fast enough to keep up with this topic. Having looked at the photo which heads the article, it looks as though the child's feet are resting on the fork crown: seats like this usually have a small bar with stirrups on for attaching to the down tube so that the child can secure its feet. It looks like a rather poor bodge if you ask me, and I'd not be happy that my child was even comfortable, let alone safe, with this Heath Robinson affair.

 

[User482]

[QUOTE 1526962"]
Bored now.

This bloke was obviously stopped for a reason.

He was then ticketed for a reason. He had a strop. He pleaded guilty. We're stupid enough to take notice of the inaccurate, biased media. We're stupid enough to override those who know the facts by making up our own despite only having the media words.
[/quote]

Yes, because the police never stop people without good reason.

 

[xpc316e]

And for all those folk who say that the Dutch get away with it etc: my first wife was Danish and as a young child her nanny took her out for a ride while she sat on the rear carrier. Her right foot got trapped between the spokes and the seat stay and was almost severed in the ensuing 'accident'. 'Elf an Safety' gawn mad I tell ya.

 

[twobiker]

Yes, because the police never stop people without good reason.

.

 

[benb]

A school did say a while back that conkers was'nt allowed, and did'nt they cancel a tournament somewhere because of fears over safety ? also if that seat fitted to his crossbar is illegal it means riding on a mudguard was, but it was still great and I would do it now if my dad was still alive and pay the fine myself, just for the pleasure .

That ridiculous incident had precisely nothing to do with H&S legislation. The HSE even sponsored a conkers tournament specifically to draw attention to the fact that it was a local decision, and was not done to comply with legislation. Its baffling to me how the HSE get blamed for every killjoy decision made. If you want to blame someone for our ludicrously risk-averse society, where no-one can take a balanced view of risk or take responsibility for their own actions, blame no-win no-fee ambulance chasing lawyers and the litigation culture.

 

[Arch]

That ridiculous incident had precisely nothing to do with H&S legislation. The HSE even sponsored a conkers tournament specifically to draw attention to the fact that it was a local decision, and was not done to comply with legislation. Its baffling to me how the HSE get blamed for every killjoy decision made. If you want to blame someone for our ludicrously risk-averse society, where no-one can take a balanced view of risk or take responsibility for their own actions, blame no-win no-fee ambulance chasing lawyers and the litigation culture.

Hear hear! Although I can imagine how someone who couldn't be bothered, or felt already overworked, would like to use a convenient excuse. We have kids at work who try and grab a ride hanging off the sides of the electric truck. They'd probably be safe enough at low speed, but if any of their parents saw, or something did go wrong, you can bet we'd get it in the neck. And since we aren't employed to amuse children, it gets very tiresome telling them to get off and go away.


twobiker: Lots of things are fun, but coincidentally, illegal. Being fun doesn't make it sensible. Even if some people can do something sensibly and safely, laws are there to protect us from eijits (and them from themselves).

 

[benb]

Lots of things are fun, but coincidentally, illegal. Being fun doesn't make it sensible.

Like crack.

 

[Arch]

Like crack.

I'll have to take your word for that....

 

[pshore]

Err ... would this be a good time to mention that I have here sitting on my desk a used Hamax Discovery 101 front mounted child seat for sale? Free roll of gaffer tape.

 

[twobiker]

Hear hear! Although I can imagine how someone who couldn't be bothered, or felt already overworked, would like to use a convenient excuse. We have kids at work who try and grab a ride hanging off the sides of the electric truck. They'd probably be safe enough at low speed, but if any of their parents saw, or something did go wrong, you can bet we'd get it in the neck. And since we aren't employed to amuse children, it gets very tiresome telling them to get off and go away.


twobiker: Lots of things are fun, but coincidentally, illegal. Being fun doesn't make it sensible. Even if some people can do something sensibly and safely, laws are there to protect us from eijits (and them from themselves).

I don't need some killjoy clown telling me what is safe and what is'nt, you have a situation where some poor women and her disabled daughter are driven to suicide by yobos and nothings done and then you have a guy ,albeit a foolish one, done for giving his kid a bike ride, why because one is easy to catch and deal with and the other would cost more in policing with less chance of a prosecution, nobody bothered to tell those yobos it was dangerous to throw rocks at someones house, in both situations a child could have died ,.........................Oh hang on, one did.

 

[Arch]

I never said anything was fair. Life isn't, I had that drummed into me at the age of 5.

Just because one case is cocked up royally, doesn't mean anyone else ought to be able to do what they like.

The guy in the story can't choose and buy a proper seat, or fit a cycle helmet properly. Perhaps he's just in more need of telling stuff than you are.

 

[twobiker]

I never said anything was fair. Life isn't, I had that drummed into me at the age of 5.

Just because one case is cocked up royally, doesn't mean anyone else ought to be able to do what they like.

The guy in the story can't choose and buy a proper seat, or fit a cycle helmet properly. Perhaps he's just in more need of telling stuff than you are.

Rant over, moved on

 

[Red Light]

Do you have kids red light? Have you cycled with them on your bike?

Yes and yes and they are grown up now and cycle everywhere.

A seat on the top tube, on its own is not safe and would not pass any safety standard test, if you bothered to read my post you would have noted that I said my childs seat had a back rest, safety belt and a foot rest which is nothing like the gaffa taped creation sported in the article.

Children have been riding on the top tube with nothing more than a seat and foot pegs (if that) for decades and its a very common way of riding in Europe. It seems to be only the UK that get apoplectic about it.

As for the other items, EN14344 was updated in 2010 so what applies now may not have applied when the seat was bought. Up until very recently (and maybe again) the highly popular [url="http://ourmaninside.com/2011/08/20/a-child-seat-for-a-brompton-folding-bike-review/"]ITchair[/url] was available for the Brompton. It was simply a saddle and foot pegs with no back-rest, no belts etc. In fact the whole idea is that the child comes off the bike with the adult and protected by the cocoon of their arms and body rather than careering on strapped to the bike after the adult has come off so I would not use a seat belt with it even if one was provided.

Also remember just because something is written in the paper doesn't make it so ie, I bought it at Halfords so it must be legal... Having looked on the Halfords Website I can see nothing resembling a seat that secures onto the top tube. He may however have purchased a childs bike seat and then gaffa taped it onto his bike.... Well done you for jumping in with two feet.

I agree that papers are not always right but given the journalist would have had to go and find out what the standards were and had spoken to the CTC, Halfords and others, its unlikely that they hadn't actually looked into it before writing the story. Re: Halfords, the standards have changed since the seat was allegedly bought so what they sell now may well be different.

 

[Red Light]

I cannot read fast enough to keep up with this topic. Having looked at the photo which heads the article, it looks as though the child's feet are resting on the fork crown: seats like this usually have a small bar with stirrups on for attaching to the down tube so that the child can secure its feet. It looks like a rather poor bodge if you ask me, and I'd not be happy that my child was even comfortable, let alone safe, with this Heath Robinson affair.

You can see the footrests on the downtube right at the bottom of the photo and half cropped off. I suspect the feet on the forks are for photographic purposes as it makes a more compact picture than if the feet were on the pegs.

 

[Red Light]

I cannot read fast enough to keep up with this topic. Having looked at the photo which heads the article, it looks as though the child's feet are resting on the fork crown: seats like this usually have a small bar with stirrups on for attaching to the down tube so that the child can secure its feet. It looks like a rather poor bodge if you ask me, and I'd not be happy that my child was even comfortable, let alone safe, with this Heath Robinson affair.

You can see the footrests on the downtube right at the bottom of the photo and half cropped off. I suspect the feet on the forks are for photographic purposes as it makes a more compact picture than if the feet were on the pegs.