Pavement cyclists

On Sat, 12 Jun 2004 19:15:46 +0900,

James Annan said:

Andy Leighton said:

What is the best approach to try and reduce pavement
cycling?

Why does it matter? Of all the problems to get worked up
about, pavement cyclists should rank very low on the list.

Because it is anti-social and is symptomatic of the same
mindset that condones speeding, red-light jumping, fly-
tipping and a lot of other yobbish "I'm alright Jack"
behaviour.

Also with bike week upon us - I feel that cycling should be
promoted properly to new and returning cyclists. Maybe you
don't care but that doesn't mean other people shouldn't.

Also caring about this issue doesn't mean I can't care about
other issues too.

--
Andy Leighton => [email hidden] "The Lord is my
shepherd, but we still lost the sheep dog trials"
- Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us_

"Andy Leighton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

With bike-week almost upon us, I feel it is important to
stress to returning and new riders how to ride their
bikes properly, and to show the road isn't as dangerous
as they think. Basically get them off the pavements and
onto the roads.

And hopefully the more bikes on the road the more motorists
will come to expect them.

I can undersatnd peoples lack of confidence though. SWMBO
used to cycle a bit but for various reasons let it lapse,
she now says that it would make more sense to cycle to her
part-time job rather than drive but feels the route is not
very safe. I ride that route quite often and don't agree but
once the perception sets in it becomes a barrier.
--
Regards, Pete

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Why does it matter? Of all the problems to get worked
up about, pavement cyclists should rank very low on
the list.

Because it is anti-social and is symptomatic of the same
mindset that condones speeding, red-light jumping, fly-
tipping and a lot of other yobbish "I'm alright Jack"
behaviour.

"The introduction of the fixed penalty is not aimed at
responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the
pavement out of fear of traffic and who show consideration
to other pavement users when doing so. Chief police
officers, who are responsible for enforcement, acknowledge
that many cyclists, particularly children and young people,
are afraid to cycle on the road, sensitivity and careful use
of police discretion is required."

It's perfectly ok to cycle on the pavement as long as great
care is taken to show consideration to other pavement users.
Unfortunately the [censored] that voted the legislation through
as usual couldn't be arsed with doing a decent job, so they
just did their usual tactic of banning everything, then
letting everyone else mystically discover the true purpose
of the law.

[The quote above was nicked from a previous urc post[1]
which was itself nicked from a letter by the Home Office
Minister of the time to the Chief Constables.]

[1]From: Howard Subject: Latest piece of anti-cyclist
legislation Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling Date: 2003-11-22
04:03:49 PST

Andy Leighton said:

James Annan said:

Andy Leighton said:

What is the best approach to try and reduce pavement
cycling?

Why does it matter? Of all the problems to get worked up
about, pavement cyclists should rank very low on the list.

Because it is anti-social and is symptomatic of the same
mindset that condones speeding, red-light jumping, fly-
tipping and a lot of other yobbish "I'm alright Jack"
behaviour.

Really?

I submit that it is neither anti-social nor symptomatic of
any particularly yobbish mindset. The many pavement cyclists
that I see every day in Japan seem invariably polite and
sensible. They make a choice that is (IMO) somewhat
irrational, but no more so than lots of other small
irrationalities that I see every day.

Of course, there are more antisocial yobs in the UK than in
Japan. I happen to think that pavement cycling is one of the
more innocuous manifestations of their rebellion against
society. The real problems start when they get their driving
licences, but I'm sure we all knew that already.

James

On 12 Jun 2004 12:12:27 GMT,

Mark Thompson said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Why does it matter? Of all the problems to get worked
up about, pavement cyclists should rank very low on
the list.

Because it is anti-social and is symptomatic of the same
mindset that condones speeding, red-light jumping, fly-
tipping and a lot of other yobbish "I'm alright Jack"
behaviour.

"The introduction of the fixed penalty is not aimed at
responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the
pavement out of fear of traffic and who show consideration
to other pavement users when doing so. Chief police
officers, who are responsible for enforcement, acknowledge
that many cyclists, particularly children and young
people, are afraid to cycle on the road, sensitivity and
careful use of police discretion is required."

I have no problem with young children using the pavement but
I feel that the attitude displayed by the letter quoted
above is rather regrettable. The police have discretion
anyway and it was always unlikely that primary school aged
children were ever going to be fined.

--
Andy Leighton => [email hidden] "The Lord is my
shepherd, but we still lost the sheep dog trials"
- Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us_

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

"The introduction of the fixed penalty is not aimed at
responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use
the pavement out of fear of traffic and who show
consideration to other pavement users when doing so.
Chief police officers, who are responsible for
enforcement, acknowledge that many cyclists, particularly
children and young people, are afraid to cycle on the
road, sensitivity and careful use of police discretion is
required."

I have no problem with young children using the pavement
but I feel that the attitude displayed by the letter
quoted above is rather regrettable. The police have
discretion anyway and it was always unlikely that primary
school aged children were ever going to be fined.

The letter also applies to adults too. IMHO it makes it
pretty clear that the law was aimed at those cycling
irresponsibly or without consideration for other pavement
users. Actually, on a second reading, it's the *fines* that
were aimed at them.

"Howard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

What is the best approach to try and reduce pavement
cycling?

Easy,

<anti motorist and pedestrian rant snipped>

And not a single word of blame against whiter than white
pavement cyclist. How nice.

Mark McN said:

Ha! [promptly steals for own use...]

Me too!

--
Dave...

Get a bicycle. You will not regret it. If you live. -
Mark Twain

On 12 Jun 2004 10:40:21 GMT, Andy Leighton <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

On Sat, 12 Jun 2004 19:15:46 +0900, James Annan
<[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Why does it matter? Of all the problems to get worked
up about, pavement cyclists should rank very low on
the list.

Because it is anti-social and is symptomatic of the same
mindset that condones speeding, red-light jumping, fly-
tipping and a lot of other yobbish "I'm alright Jack"
behaviour.

I think that many pavement cyclists now think it is the
correct, safe and responsible way to ride. They're
encouraged in this view by all these horrific shared
use paths.

--
Dave...

Get a bicycle. You will not regret it. If you live. -
Mark Twain

James Annan said:

Why does it matter? Of all the problems to get worked up
about, pavement cyclists should rank very low on the list.

To my mind, the real danger is that, if enough people do it,
it will become the norm, and if it becomes the norm,
legislation will be introduced to allow pavement cycling and
disallow road cycling as a 'road safety' measure which will
further undermine the usefulness of cycling as a means of
transport. We all know how inefficient pavement cycling is
(especially in its polite, and conscientious form) when
compared to using the roads.

Just zis Guy said:

ISTR about 60-70 people killed per year by motor vehicles
on the footway, same again on ped crossings.

This sounds low to me. There've been two in Ealing in the
last 6 months. But anecdotes do not statistics make.

Colin McKenzie

--
The great advantage of not trusting statistics is that it
leaves you free to believe the damned lies instead!

"Andy Leighton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I was walking to the train station at 0730 this morning
(to go and see the cricket) and was passing over town
bridge in Peterborough. As I got half way across I noticed
a couple of women walking to my left and a cycle coming up
from behind. So I matched pace with the

. What is the

Quoted message said:

best approach to try and reduce pavement cycling?

Another good way is to ask if they have the £20 fine handy.

Quoted message said:

--
Andy Leighton => [email hidden] "The Lord is my
shepherd, but we still lost the sheep dog trials"
- Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us_

Andy Leighton said:

Personally I would think that it would be a good thing for
local councils to fund adult (and child) bike education -
which as well as helping with petty law-breaking such as
this might also give more people the confidence to get out
on their bike.

Some do, though not all training offered stresses the right
points. But the budget is usually strictly limited, so
children are prioritised. And few adult males are willing to
admit they need cycle training.

Colin McKenzie

--
The great advantage of not trusting statistics is that it
leaves you free to believe the damned lies instead!

Quoted message said:

The police have discretion anyway and it was always
unlikely that primary school aged children were ever going
to be fined.

VERY unlikely, even the fixed penalty notices cannot be
given to under 16 years olds... The advice was intended to
direct police forces on how they should deal with those who
were subject to the fixed penalty notices. I.e. adults...

On 12 Jun 2004 10:07:04 GMT, Andy Leighton <[email hidden]>

wrote in message : said:

In point of fact this particular road is quite safe during
the day (at night you do get some mad speeders).

How can you possibly say that? Everybody knows that urban
speed limits are only appropriate during the day, and after
dark it is Perfectly Safe to drive as fast as you like...

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
chapmancentral.co.ukchapmancentral.co.ukOpen ↗

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

On Sat, 12 Jun 2004 15:43:25 GMT, Dave Kahn <[email hidden]>

wrote in message : said:

I think that many pavement cyclists now think it is the
correct, safe and responsible way to ride. They're
encouraged in this view by all these horrific shared
use paths.

And by those who rely on building the perception of cycling
as dangerous to justify their insistence on everybody
wearing special protective equipment.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
chapmancentral.co.ukchapmancentral.co.ukOpen ↗

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

Colin McKenzie said:

Andy Leighton said:

Personally I would think that it would be a good thing
for local councils to fund adult (and child) bike
education - which as well as helping with petty law-
breaking such as this might also give more people the
confidence to get out on their bike.

Some do, though not all training offered stresses the
right points. But the budget is usually strictly limited,
so children are prioritised. And few adult males are
willing to admit they need cycle training.

I've just spent the day running a cycle training stand at
the Winchester Bike Fair and was thoroughly encouraged by
the number of adults who were asking about training, both
for themselves and for children. Training for families also
seems to be much sought after. Several adult males were
interested, but they were always as part of a family group
or couple.

Also, on a related point, (asks forgiveness if it annoys
anyone) but in the five hours I was there and from the
several hundred people spoken to, the word h*lm*t was not
uttered once. It makes me wonder whether it really is
such a Big Thing amongst the general public as many like
to make out.

John

Simonb' wrote James Annan said:

Quoted message said:

Why does it matter? Of all the problems to get worked
up about, pavement cyclists should rank very low on
the list.

To my mind, the real danger is that, if enough people do
it, it will

become

Quoted message said:

the norm, and if it becomes the norm, legislation will be
introduced to allow pavement cycling and disallow road
cycling as a 'road safety'

measure

Quoted message said:

which will further undermine the usefulness of cycling as
a means of transport. We all know how inefficient pavement
cycling is (especially in its polite, and conscientious
form) when compared to using the roads.

And as more and more ride on the pavement it will become
more difficult and less safe for those who obey the law (as
it stands now). Motorists will have less regard for the
safety of those of us who insist on riding properly. They
will feel justified in endangering us since we show
disregard for our own safety by riding on the road. When we
are not expected to use our rights of way on the road we are
more likely to be hit by drivers who are expecting us to get
out of the way. Mike Sales

Howard said:

Quoted message said:

The police have discretion anyway and it was always
unlikely that primary school aged children were ever
going to be fined.

VERY unlikely, even the fixed penalty notices cannot be
given to under 16 years olds... The advice was intended to
direct police forces on how they should deal with those
who were subject to the fixed penalty notices. I.e.
adults...

But the quoted letter specifically mentioned children and
young people.

--
Andy Leighton => [email hidden] "The Lord is my
shepherd, but we still lost the sheep dog trials"
- Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us_

Pete whelan said:

I normally say something along the lines of "don't your
parents let you ride on the road yet", especially if they
look well over 20

I'll almost certainly remember to say that five
minutes too late!

James