A Plea To Cyclists

[SpewLabour]

A plea to cyclists, especially those in Central London, from a frustrated pedestrian

1. Those funny coloured lights that occur at intervals along the road and flash red, amber and green in some fixed sequence are called "Traffic Lights". When the light is red, you are supposed to stop. The clue here is the long queue of cars, taxis and buses etc. that are not moving and wait for the light to turn green (amber in some cases!) before proceeding.

2. The black and white stripes painted width-wise in the middle of the road forms a "Zebra Crossing" on which pedestrians have the right of way. Again - if there's a group of people crossing, you're supposed to stop and NOT engage in some bizarre form of weaving around them to get across.

3. Pavements are NOT for cycling on. They're for people to walk on.

In the last few weeks I've had numerous cyclists come close to mowing me down on pedestrian/zebra crossings, I've been hit by cyclists who insist on cycling on the pavements, I've watched cyclists jump traffic lights and cause accidents. And in each case, when I challenge the cyclist involved, I get either a dumb stare or a two-fingered salute.

It makes it doubly irritating as I've been laid up for 6 months with a twice-ruptured achilles tendon and I can't move out of the way very fast at the moment. The time I was hit forced me very violently onto my bad ankle I was lucky not to suffer further injury.

Just obey the rules of the road !!! :angry:

[AteMoose]

http://vimeo.com/24572222

at least we dont live in new york....

[inflating]

I'm abroad at the moment. The cycling on the pavements in the city I'm in makes any hazards you've got in Holborn or wherever you are seem like a day out in a peaceful village.

Here, it's an hourly occurrence to dodge by a whisker being smashed into on the footpath by a speeding(adult) cyclist who does not want to use the cycle lanes and either hits you as you step off a bus on to the footpath or very nearly slams into you round a corner at high speed. And forget the zebra crossings over the road, tram line and cycle lane - the cyclists very rarely stop and you have to wait (and sometimes wait a while as there are many of them) at the edge of the cycle lane for them all to ride past. Give you way? Hahahahahaha, never once have they.

[ken_ichikawa]

Its because they can get away with it no number plate and nobody bothers to enforce it.... I loathe many cyclists, there is a big hill near me and a few years ago when I commuted into the city cyclists would grab onto the back of my motorbike for a free ride up the hill. I'd stop and tell them to narf off at which they'd laugh and ride away. I was always tempted to ride past and kick a cyclist over.

Cough cough....

Some people recommend accelerating hard and weaving so the cyclist is afraid to let go. THEN taking them on the motorway

[@contradevian]

Like everything in London, cycling is an extreme sport. There are also a fair amount of couriers about who have to shift eight or so packages and hour to earn a living.

[SpewLabour]

Push them off the bike, they will soon get the message.

I'm half tempted to start. I think I'm going to take one of my crutches in next week and start swinging it on the crossings.

I would like to point out that there ARE good cyclists who do follow the rules of the road. I always acknowledge them when I cross at the lights/zebra crossings just to know I recognise that. However, it seems that the majority aren't and are downright dangerous.

[wherebee]

I'm half tempted to start. I think I'm going to take one of my crutches in next week and start swinging it on the crossings.

I would like to point out that there ARE good cyclists who do follow the rules of the road. I always acknowledge them when I cross at the lights/zebra crossings just to know I recognise that. However, it seems that the majority aren't and are downright dangerous.

i cycle, and i drive. the average skill in driving safely is see is way, way, less adequate than the average skill of cycling safely.....

[pathfinder]

I'm half tempted to start. I think I'm going to take one of my crutches in next week and start swinging it on the crossings.

I would like to point out that there ARE good cyclists who do follow the rules of the road. I always acknowledge them when I cross at the lights/zebra crossings just to know I recognise that. However, it seems that the majority aren't and are downright dangerous.

Problem is, if you push them off the bike youll be the one getting the message, like that poor guy killed after he opened his door without checking in the road. Bam cyclist knocked off. Never mind the cyclist kicked the shit out of him, car driver died.

[ccc]

i cycle, and i drive. the average skill in driving safely is see is way, way, less adequate than the average skill of cycling safely.....

Agreed. And on a similar note there are idiot drivers and idiot cyclists. I hate them both. However as we have discussed on this site many a time - an idiot driver is a far more dangerous beast than an idiot cyclist. Not saying that makes an idiot cyclist any better. Just saying they are far less likely to kill you than their opposite in a vehicle.

To the OP - I would agree with all you say - as a cyclist and a driver these things annoy me too. However the 3rd one is not quite so clear cut. There is nothing wrong with cycling on a pavement if you do it at a similar speed to people walking. It is no different at all. I do this sometimes when the other option is to go round a mega busy junction. I go along the pavement at a very slow pace. Nobody minds. For those flying along pavements like they are on the road ? I totally agree with you.

A few pointers from a cyclists point of view:

(1) Dogs on cycle paths. Keep them on leashes if they cannot control themselves. I do not cycle into your dog so please do the same in return and stop your dog running into me on my bike. If I hit it it is your problem and not mine. Maybe they should think of this as their dog runs back and forward and almost gets ended by bikes every day...

(2) People on cycle paths, woman in particular, who insist on taking up the entire path when there is no need. The worst are those with kids. They think the World revovles around their kid. It does not. Your child means nothing to anyone else. Us cyclists should not have to go around a perfectly good path just so your kid can have a nice view of the middle of the path. They do not care. They are 2 months old. They couldn't give a shit either way.

(3) The bell on a bike. When it is rung it simply means 'Bike coming through - if there is space for me no worries keep going and if not please make a wee space - thanks'.

It does not mean 'Flail around like a ******ing lunatic and jump left and right across the path like you are doing some Scottish country dance'.

Thee days I actually ring my bell maybe only 50% of the time. I find it is the safest thing - which sounds quite strange. However if you see how often ringing your bell actually makes people do stupid things - you would understand.

[Scunnered]

(1) Dogs on cycle paths. Keep them on leashes if they cannot control themselves.

Highway Code, Rule 56:

Dogs. Do not let a dog out on the road on its own. Keep it on a short lead when walking on the pavement, road or path shared with cyclists or horse riders.

(... and yes, it also tells you to stop at pedestrian crossings and not to cycle on the pavement. Quite right too.)

[@contradevian]

I'm not a big fan of London cyclists. Last time I went to London without my bike was nearly mown down on the Thames Path, by the commuter run. I really couldn't understand why if they wanted to do speed, they didn't use the roads.

As far as the red light thing, I tend to move out ahead of the traffic as much as possible. Some junctions have a box, but of course motorists ignore it. This is to avoid being killed by the left turners.

Cycle paths are ok for poddling along, but not suited for high speed riding. Only the roads are, and pedestrians will not look unless they hear a car coming. Forget the bell, most of the idiots have ipods in their ears now.

[Gigantic Purple Slug]

Where I live the police have a crackdown every few months stopping people who don't have lights/cycling on the pavements etc and fining them.

The problem with cycling is that the authorities want to encourage it so they don't have these crackdowns. But IMO a cyclist at 30 mph is as dangerous as a car at 20 mph, but the police do nothing about it.

If they had a crackdown once every few months people would soon get the message, and the filth would make some extra readies.

If you think the cyclists are dangerous, I recommend that you report them to the local police, ask them for a copy of the report and ask them what they are doing about it. The police are supposed to be there to protect you and enforce the highway code, not turn a blind eye to things just because they are green. After all, you don't get away with murder because you strangle someone rather than dousing their body in petrol and setting light to them.

I wonder whether any cyclists involved in accidents with pedestrians have been sued ?

[Number79]

.

[Riedquat]

I'll confess to going through a red light, and being on the pavement, with a bike, for turning left, but by dismounting, walking around the corner with my bike, then getting back on it.

[Number79]

Its because they can get away with it no number plate and nobody bothers to enforce it.... I loathe many cyclists, there is a big hill near me and a few years ago when I commuted into the city cyclists would grab onto the back of my motorbike for a free ride up the hill. I'd stop and tell them to narf off at which they'd laugh and ride away. I was always tempted to ride past and kick a cyclist over.

Cough cough....

Some people recommend accelerating hard and weaving so the cyclist is afraid to let go. THEN taking them on the motorway

we used to do that with caravans in the lake district but I would never contemplate grabbing a bike.

Motorway sounds fun

[ccc]

I actually had a cyclist ride into my dog in Norwich and came off worse as he went over the handle bars, then he tried to stick it to me that my dog had caused the accident and wanted me to replace his broken front light until I reseated the batteries and pointed out he has to give way to pedestrian of which my dog counted as one. He wanted £50 for his light as well!

Trying it on imo becuase my dog gets out of the way of bikes as I ride with him running beside sometimes.

Where/how did this take place ? And if the dog ran out in front of the bike then it is your fault and not the cyclists.

Highway Code, Rule 56:

(... and yes, it also tells you to stop at pedestrian crossings and not to cycle on the pavement. Quite right too.)

Ah - interesting. So can I arrest these losers on the cycle paths then ?

But IMO a cyclist at 30 mph is as dangerous as a car at 20 mph

I think that is one for mythbusters..

[ccc]

Going through some posts which are designed to stop vehicles going down, me in front dog behind, I go through dog tries to go through and the cyclist coming towards me decides to change path and go through the posts my dog was going through when he could have stuck to his own path and go through his own posts!

I should have lumped the bloke personally becuase there was no reason why he had to change his path to go through the posts I had just been through. Even to this day I dont know why he changed his path theres no logic behind it, maybe he had a bad day at work or something I dont know.

Besides its a path which cyclists are allowed down but signs are up stating cyclists have to give way to pedestrians, its not a pavement by a road or anything so debatable whether it comes under highway code rules in this instance, just like tow paths in some respects.

I should add I was on my bike at the time as well and we dont hang around, we'll do about 20mph so its not like he was ambling along going to each side of the path sniffing it like a dog walking would do. The fact is some people for whatever reason dont treat animals with respect.

Seems very strange. As you say you were going at a fair pace at the time. Maybe there was something else happened you didn't see ? Anyway as you say perhaps they just got a bit confused or had a bad day.

As for the bit in bold above ? The worst culprits for this are the owners of animals. Letting them run wild when there are bikes flying past them every minute or two ? I class that as bona fide animal abuse. And if you go along any cycle track you will see that perhaps 70%+ of dog owners do exactly this.

[Lagarde's Drift]

I should also add to this thread that there are "shared pathways" nowadays on PAVEMENTS where cyclists and pedestrians are supposed to share a pavement which tends not to have any definitive lanes, just a signpost every now and then to remind you of that fact.

This is in some parts of Bristol / South Glos and I have used the same in Cambridgeshire so wouldn't be surprised if it is quite common.

So, in some scenarios it is perfectly acceptable to ride on the pavement.

[ccc]

The path in question is busy at rush hour ie before 9 and from 4 afterwards but its not a widely used path, 30 people an hour might walk or cycle on it at rush hour and its wide enough to drive ford transits down hence the posts to stop joy riders going down it. This is one end of the path in question runs horizontally http://maps.google.c...007682&t=h&z=18 the other end finishes 20 or 30miles away up on the north norfolk coast.

Thing is with me, my dog is running with me and most of the time overtaking othe cyclists, I couldnt put him on a lead for two reasons I wouldnt be able to cycle safely and the sticking out arm I have that attaches the seat post which I can hook my dog up to a lead like this http://www.caninecon...d-Set--bikelead makes me wider and harder for me to get around other cycles and pedestrians and I cant pass through the posts in question which defeats the object of the exercise.

If its a dedicate cycle path then should anyone else be on it? If its shared with no markings and not on the road but cutting through fields should a dog be on a lead then as its not technically a pavement? Debatable whether its animal abuse or not.

These are the sort of posts which teh cyclist decided he wanted to cut through onto the side I was on and the end of the path. http://maps.google.c...,358.26,,1,3.73

Well unless I am mistaken - when zooming - that post prior to the entrance posts has a blue sign with a red square on it. These are used for dedicated UK wide cycle paths. Of course other people are free to walk on them or take their dog. However as shown by the highway code, and common sense, they should be sensible about this.

As you are a cyclist yourself - surely you already appreciate how dangerous it is to be going along fine and dandy one second and then suddenly a dog leaps out at you ?

It is also very dangerous for the dog too. Would you be happy for it to run around on a road in the hope that cars saw it and braked before running it over ? What exactly is the difference between this and a cycle lane ? Nothing as far as I can see.

[ccc]

Yes when I have used that path I have been on my bike and its not like my dog cant be seen, he's running with me, sometimes in front or behind, he doesnt jump out of hedges out of nowhere though.

Plus we are going faster than most bikes so are overtaking them anyway but my dog sticks to me he doesnt go, but theres places like road I dont trust him on and theres no roads running alongside this path, we go under them, I wouldnt dream of cycling with him on a road but that doesnt explain why the cyclist that ran into him decided to change course and ride into my dog. As I said I should have lumped him but then I would have got banged up or charged at least. Not worth the hassle when one of my relatives has pee'd the authorities off and holds the title of highest risk prisoner in the UK.

So you trust him to not run out and move direction quickly in front of a bike - but not to do the same for a car. I think you are trying to convince yourself of something here.

[Habeas Domus]

The problem here is that a lot of cycle lanes make riding more dangerous, they are often more about getting cycles out of the way so the cars can go faster.

Also painting a few white lines is a cheap way to tick a few boxes on the green agenda.

[spord]

The problem here is that a lot of cycle lanes make riding more dangerous, they are often more about getting cycles out of the way so the cars can go faster.

Also painting a few white lines is a cheap way to tick a few boxes on the green agenda.

I found cycling in Holland surprisingly difficult. Motorcycles (or at least scooters) are allowed to use cycle lanes, which is a very bad idea to start with... but I found that because a lot of the cycle lanes are block paved and uneven, my average speed on them was down to 12mph or so when on the nice smooth road right next to the lane I could do 18-20mph. Very frustrating.

[ccc]

The problem here is that a lot of cycle lanes make riding more dangerous, they are often more about getting cycles out of the way so the cars can go faster.

Also painting a few white lines is a cheap way to tick a few boxes on the green agenda.

Indeed. I am talking about dedicated cycle paths here though. They are very useful. Except for women in pairs and people with dogs. They are still pretty useful but without those 2 - travelling would be quicker around much of Edinburgh than by car - easily. As long as you are a relatively fast cyclist. My bike to work takes me just over 16 minutes. Timed it in my car and after getting lucky with traffic took me just under 16 minutes.

No, its just the risk assesment is worse when there are cars around and its increased more on a road instead of a path.

You have to bear in mind a dog has a human mentality of a young kid, what would you do if you have a child of a similar age?

We actually afford our kids more freedoms in this instance when really its probably not wise when you consider the statistics of child road accidents.

He is very well trained but there are some circumstances I wont afford him freedom like on a road. Likewise if I felt the path was too busy I wouldnt cycle with him and probably wouldnt even walk down there with him on a lead becuase it would simply be too busy to derive any pleasure from the activity as I dont really fancy being part of a moving obstacle course.

Stick it on a leish too ?! It is not exactly uncommon. Child reigns I think they are called.

[libspero]

Problem is, if you push them off the bike youll be the one getting the message, like that poor guy killed after he opened his door without checking in the road. Bam cyclist knocked off. Never mind the cyclist kicked the shit out of him, car driver died.

You've got to do it properly..

[RentingForever]

About New York.... but even so. Sometimes, keeping to the cycle lanes just isn't safe.