In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...
Quoted message said:
A walking cyclist helpfully told me, today, as I cycled through for the umteenth time that there is a £500 fine for cycling.
Is a valid defence that I am not cycling to the detriment of pedestrians but with consideration?
What is special about Kingston's pedestrianised area that is different to a footpath?
Covered by specific bylaws?
Quoted message said:
Can I plead that my bike is my in-line zimmer frame?
I've tried that - I pointed out that I was cycling at a slow walking pace, that on my bike I take less room than when I'm walking beside it, that my dodgy leg was giving me particular problems that day so it was a disabled aid ... bloody officious plastic plods, the real ones are more discriminating.
A walking cyclist helpfully told me, today, as I cycled through for the umteenth time that there is a £500 fine for cycling. What is special about Kingston's pedestrianised area that is different to a footpath?
Just get off, or cycle round, it's not as if it's far to go between any points that are accessible through the middle by going round the outside.
The annoying thing about Kingston cntre is that there appears to be a cycle route through, but halfway through it disappears (or turns down an un-noticed side street?) Anyway, you find yourself in a peds only area with no legal way to cycle but back. This is annoying and not conducive to respecting the rules.
Colin McKenzie
-- No-one has ever proved that cycle helmets make cycling any safer at the population level, and anyway cycling is about as safe per mile as walking. Make an informed choice - visit www.cyclehelmets.org.
A walking cyclist helpfully told me, today, as I cycled through for the umteenth time that there is a £500 fine for cycling. What is special about Kingston's pedestrianised area that is different to a footpath?
Quoted message said:
Just get off, or cycle round, it's not as if it's far to go between any points that are accessible through the middle by going round the outside.
The annoying thing about Kingston cntre is that there appears to be a cycle route through, but halfway through it disappears (or turns down an un-noticed side street?) Anyway, you find yourself in a peds only area with no legal way to cycle but back. This is annoying and not conducive to respecting the rules.
Colin McKenzie
Really, which bit is that then? The only real ped & cycle bit is to the west of the market square, past Borders & Woolworths.
The stupid bit about Kingston is that the police park a big ruddy van in the middle on the busiest days and securicor vans come and go as they please.
A walking cyclist helpfully told me, today, as I cycled through for the umteenth time that there is a £500 fine for cycling. What is special about Kingston's pedestrianised area that is different to a footpath?
Just get off, or cycle round, it's not as if it's far to go between any points that are accessible through the middle by going round the outside.
The annoying thing about Kingston cntre is that there appears to be a cycle route through, but halfway through it disappears (or turns down an un-noticed side street?)
There's a cycle road along the old london road (past the telephone boxes) which then also takes you across the road, you can then leave the road, and go on a path into castle road, but that is very much away from the central pedestrian area, and the path clearly goes in that direction.
I don't know of any entries at the other end that look at all like cycle paths, so I don't really get the confusion.
A walking cyclist helpfully told me, today, as I cycled through for the umteenth time that there is a £500 fine for cycling.
Quoted message said:
Is a valid defence that I am not cycling to the detriment of pedestrians but with consideration?
No
Quoted message said:
What is special about Kingston's pedestrianised area that is different to a footpath?
Cycling on a pavement is illegal too. Is it a paved area?
Cycling on a pavement as a * part of the highway adjacent to a carriageway set aside for pedestrians* is illegal. That is explicitly not the case in the old clarence street as there is no road there, but local bylaws may apply.
It may also be not legal to cycle on a footpath. That doesn't mean it is illegal.
Can I plead that my bike is my in-line zimmer frame?
No, that's taking the [censored], which I guess is the point you're trying to make. Just 'cos the law seems wrong doesn't make it any less of a law.
--
He may well not be taking the [censored]. I have walked painfully through pedestrian areas when cycling would have been pain free. I can cycle when I can't walk at all. How about those high tech hand cycles for those who can't pedal? Obviously Tanni Grey thingies wheelchair is fine. Hard cases make bad law of course, but bikes can greatly extend mobility for the disabled.
The annoying thing about Kingston cntre is that there appears to be a cycle route through, but halfway through it disappears (or turns down an un-noticed side street?)
Quoted message said:
There's a cycle road along the old london road (past the telephone boxes) which then also takes you across the road, you can then leave the road, and go on a path into castle road, but that is very much away from the central pedestrian area, and the path clearly goes in that direction.
I don't know of any entries at the other end that look at all like cycle paths, so I don't really get the confusion.
I went in somewhere near the station and tried to go straight (for Surbiton), if that helps. It was a few years ago.
Colin McKenzie
-- No-one has ever proved that cycle helmets make cycling any safer at the population level, and anyway cycling is about as safe per mile as walking. Make an informed choice - visit www.cyclehelmets.org.