Cyclists on the pavement

1finny said:
‘Cyclists have this attitude that they are above the law’

They don’t really.
Some people probably have an attitude they are above the law.
Some of those people drive cars, bikes, motor bikes and some don’t drive anything.
Click to expand...
That doesn't correspond with the defending of riding through red lights, nor the stories of cyclists on pavements as mentioned in the OP.

I used to cycle commute to work through the centre of London. For a couple of months I decided to do an experiment and see every time I saw a road user breaking the law. I', ashamed to say that in 95% of cases, it was a cyclist breaking the law.
 
SmallTown said:
That doesn't correspond with the defending of riding through red lights, nor the stories of cyclists on pavements as mentioned in the OP.

I used to cycle commute to work through the centre of London. For a couple of months I decided to do an experiment and see every time I saw a road user breaking the law. I', ashamed to say that in 95% of cases, it was a cyclist breaking the law.
Click to expand...
In London, when cycling, you have to break the law sometimes to save yourself! As I'm sure you well know. :)

Imagine they had designated cycle paths though.:rolleyes:

They're 6 years behind on crossrail, and how much over budget?
 
People not following the rules and having respect for others?
Well I never, you can knock me down with a feather.
Seriously though, it's not the mode of transport at fault so don't try and take the actions of an individual as a broad representation of others.
I'm a safe and respectful driver despite all the loons who teararse around like they are Max Verstappen or Mad Max depending on if the are speeding or bullying other road users.
I'm a safe and respectful cyclist who uses the roads and mixed use paths too.
Part of the problem on shared use paths is that some pedestrians and some cyclists simply don't know or don't care how to share the space safely.
These rants will revisit the forum regularly until we as a nation start to change our attitudes towards each other.
 
atypical_boro said:
In London, when cycling, you have to break the law sometimes to save yourself! As I'm sure you well know. :)

Imagine they had designated cycle paths though.:rolleyes:

They're 6 years behind on crossrail, and how much over budget?
Click to expand...
You genuinely don't I've bene fine cycling in London. Always stop at lights, always give way when I should give way, almost always use cycle paths where available (sometimes they are in a poor state of repair and it's either legally use the road, or use the cycle path and fix the ensuing puncture)
 
SmallTown said:
I do think you need to check if it's mixed use. Some pedestrians really do get confused with these. However I agree there is zero excuse for any cyclist going down a pavement. It's just not on.
Click to expand...
And as for dog walkers - my last 2 incidents were down to them on shared paths.
 
SmallTown said:
That doesn't correspond with the defending of riding through red lights, nor the stories of cyclists on pavements as mentioned in the OP.

I used to cycle commute to work through the centre of London. For a couple of months I decided to do an experiment and see every time I saw a road user breaking the law. I', ashamed to say that in 95% of cases, it was a cyclist breaking the law.
Click to expand...

I think you probably saw what you wanted to see ;)
 
The_Lizards_Jumpers said:
No the law hasn't changed, and as a passionate cyclist for more than 30 years it ignorant, divisive and dangerous - no excuses and we can't have a go at ignorant and dangerous motorists if we're pushing down danger towards pedestrians through cycling on pavements.

We need proper, fit for purpose, cycling infrastructure like in The Netherlands and Denmark, but I won't hold my breath.
Click to expand...
100%agree about improving cycling infrastructure. Problem is how many times do you see cyclists using the road when there is a cycle path available.
 
1finny said:
And London cab drivers are famous for ensuring they give cyclists the legal distance when they overtake them.............
Click to expand...
I thought they had introduced a minimum distance (there was a campaign for 1.5m distance), but, having just checked the online Highway Code, it still says give the same room to cyclists, motorcyclists and horses as you would a car. No distance is mentioned.
 
bear66 said:
I thought they had introduced a minimum distance (there was a campaign for 1.5m distance), but, having just checked the online Highway Code, it still says give the same room to cyclists, motorcyclists and horses as you would a car. No distance is mentioned.
Click to expand...

Thought they changed the law last year - 1.5m or face a fine?
 
Markmywords said:
100%agree about improving cycling infrastructure. Problem is how many times do you see cyclists using the road when there is a cycle path available.
Click to expand...

Pretty rare, and only ever when the cycle path is unhabitable and not maintained such as to be dangerous, or full of dog walkers.

Why on earth would anyone *want* to cycle next to cars?? It’s only ever when there is no other choice.
 
1finny said:
I think you probably saw what you wanted to see ;)
Click to expand...
You think incorrectly. As a cyclist myself it was the last thing I wanted to see. You can try it yourself if you're every in town. It should be added that the majority of these were, of course, not stopping at red lights and I didn't count undertaking.
 
The_Lizards_Jumpers said:
I'm assuming it must have been difficult for him to carry his speed gun, to ensure all the drivers were obeying the speed limits.
Click to expand...
Speed gun, satellite tracking, or sitting in the car, good luck finding anyone speeding in central London during rush hour!

It's easy enough to question my evidence, as it's entirely anecdotal. I'm utterly confident however if any of you try the same experiment, you'll get similar results. It may be uncomfortable for you to read but put it this way: it's only cyclists on this very thread who have admitted to breaking the law and argued they are allowed to.
 
SmallTown said:
That’s disappointing. There’s no reason to jumó red lights. It’s the law. Stop in front of them so you can start safely, yes. There is no wonder cyclists have such a bad rep when they try and justify breaking the law.
Click to expand...

It's a blanket law isn't always in everyone's best interests. It is safer for a bike to go first before traffic, that's why they have those cycle-only 'safe' areas at the front of the traffic queue at the lights.

Also you can turn at a red light in many countries. But not here. Why? Because it's a blanket law that doesn't work as well as it could.
 
1finny said:
Thought they changed the law last year - 1.5m or face a fine?
Click to expand...
I've seen reports about that and even saying the 1.5m is in the highway code, but I've checked two on-line versions of the Highway code and no distance is specified.
 
SmallTown said:
Speed gun, satellite tracking, or sitting in the car, good luck finding anyone speeding in central London during rush hour!

It's easy enough to question my evidence, as it's entirely anecdotal. I'm utterly confident however if any of you try the same experiment, you'll get similar results. It may be uncomfortable for you to read but put it this way: it's only cyclists on this very thread who have admitted to breaking the law and argued they are allowed to.
Click to expand...

Its not uncomfortable to read at all.
But I’m not prepared to believe that car drivers in London respected the 1.5m distance.
I’ve rarely seen a driver do that in London
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top