Bicycles on pavements - why are they not being ridden on a road?

My dream invention for this situation is a giant net that swoops down, picks up the offending cyclist and bike, dumps them somewhere isolated and hilly with no traffic lights.
Problem solved.

And as I said, that was literally my point to start with, that I have no issue with cyclists on the pavement if it's safer for them to be there and they have consideration for pedestrians.

Poor reading comprehension, again.

Where are you reading that it’s an exception

sometimes means occasionally
exception means not usually allowed

I know that and as I said earlier, it's an exception. Note the word "sometimes". Stretching, again.

That guidance from Mr Boateng, issued in 1999 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.

Was the OP referring to normal pavements? No matter how much you try and resist, legislation affords pedestrians, safety, on general pavements.

Yet you did respond with a whole load of nonsense about the poster saying things they had said about your analogy.

Still unable to explain why there is any problem with a cyclist carefully using an empty pavement next to a busy road, especially when the home office themselves say it's fine to do.

But no, came up with some nonsense about minis using hard shoulders instead.

We need better cycling infrastructure here.. I went to the Netherlands and it was a dream. Completely separate bike lanes on every single road, blocked off from the traffic and the pavement and totally safe all round.. if we had that it would be so much easier for everyone.. as it is, I wouldn’t feel safe advising my son to cycle on the road here. The traffic is terrifying.

🥱 you're late to the party with that one.

Are there a lot of shared paths in your town op? Because in my town most paths are shared so cyclists are so used to riding on the pavement they also do it on the paths that aren't shared.
It's not a problem though because everyone is used to cyclists on pavements and cyclists and pedestrians coexist and make room for each other.

So I don't know where you live but in my city there are very many shared pavements that look exactly like the pedestrian pavements they once were but are actually designated as shared. All that indicates this is the occasional blue sign about the size of a small dinner plate mounted on lampposts etc. No markings on the floor/pavements at all. I frequently get yelled at by frustrated pedestrians, but frankly it's the councils failing.....I cycle slowly in these areas and use my bell as I know most pedestrians don't have a clue they're shared.

I asked the cyclist on the pavement behind me to use the road, which he did. In a way I dont blame them, the roads are terrifying but i thought pavements were for pedestrians.

And to the "you're endangering pedestrians" brigade - it's less dangerous for a pedestrian to be hit by a bike, than for a bike to be hit by a car.

Disclaimer - I don't live in the UK so possibly different situation.

I bike to work and to take my kids to school. Whenever possible I go on the bike lanes. But in order to go to my kids' schools taking the road would involve crossing a busy avenue and making a big detour. Also I'm just not risking it when my kids are on the bike. I don't care what the law says, their safety comes first. I appreciate however the inconvenience to pedestrians and I'm very careful to go slowly when on the pavement and give them right of way.

Once I've dropped them off I then usually go on the road because then there's no need to cross since I'm going in the "right" direction, and I can accept risks to myself that I wouldn't accept for my kids.

The rest of the time I only go on the pavement when it's objectively dangerous - people here are not careful drivers. Thankfully this is rarely an issue as almost all of the way to work is a cycle path.

I dont drive and am usually walking to town/home most days. If I see a cyclist on the pavement I usually deliberately pretend I havent seen them, walk in the middle of the pavement etc. I usually tell them "Its illegal to cycle on the pavement" - they (usually the males) argue with me about how Im wrong. They love pointing out how dangerous the roads are for them without any apparent irony about how dangerous the pavements are for pedestrians with them cycling on them.

Get on the road and ride your bike. Or walk with it. Pavements are not for cyclists. Unless they have been re-designated as cycle paths in which case all good.

Whenever somebody responds with a phrase such as utter rubbish, I'm happy to presume there is no point in engaging further. Hence, why I stood by my analogy, illustration or whatever 'rubbish' you want to call it.

No, I'm saying your point is utter rubbish. Obviously.

Or, to put it another way, complete shite.

I note you didn't respond the last time I proved you completely wrong, so meh.

Not sure how you get that a poster is stating it’s legal to drive down the hard shoulder, or a mini is an emergency vehicle - from two words written “utter rubbish” , that an extreme stretch by any margin

it must probably means the poster thought that your post was utter rubbish, could be it was your analogy they thought was utter rubbish

You're saying it's not an offence to drive on the hard shoulder, if you're not an emergency vehicle? When did minis gain that status?

Utter rubbish.

A campaign that started after someone's child died. Uk culture is topsy turvy.

National standards for cycle routes were set out by the government in Local Transport Note 1/20. If a council hasn’t provided a safe network of routes to LTN 1/20 standards, then some people will inevitably ride on the pavement because they are frightened. Unfortunately, if you cycle on the roads, scary moments happen far too frequently - I was cycling earlier on a decent cycle route (no conflict with pedestrians or cars even though the street was busy), then the route ended so I had to ride on the road & within a few minutes had an impatient driver overtaking uncomfortably close.

This conflict happens much less in the Netherlands as they design streets so vehicles, bikes & pedestrians are separated from each other - it’s much easier & safer to cycle there but it’s also much better for driving. Ultimately, it’s a political choice - the Netherlands chose to design streets safe for cycling (in some places due to political leadership (like Groningen) and in others due to road safety activists such as Stop de Kindermoord) whereas the UK has generally chosen to prioritise motor traffic.

Whataboutery.