for telling a young girl off for cycling on the pavement??

[lottiejenkins]

I went shopping in our local market town this morning with my ds Wilf (profoundly deaf). We stopped at the florists where my cousin works and as we were leaving Wilf went out of the front door ahead of me. He then suddenly stepped back and i saw that girl (aged about ten) had nearly knocked him over as she cycled past on the pavement!! I called after her and said that Wilf was deaf and that is one of the many reasons why she shouldnt be cycling on the pavement. I didnt see any parent with her. Surely if shes that nervous of traffic she shouldnt be out on her own???

I don't have a problem with children riding on empty pavements but they should not be riding outside shops

There have been occasional unfortunate accidents caused by cyclists riding badly on pavements.

Anyone got the figures for how many cyclists killed and on the road for comparison?

I'm only partially deaf but it does make me a lot more careful when I am out and about. Even so, I have been caught out by a pedestrian when I should have been perfectly safe. I've had a near miss with a bike too, but this was a full grown man cycling the wrong way down a one way street and insisting that the one way rule only applies to the direction of cars, not cycles.

At busy times everyone should be more careful when the step out of shop doorways. Pedestrians can be just as dangerous while walking as bikes or dogs or mobility scooters etc. I can't remember how many times people have stepped out of a shop in front of me and we've nearly collided.

While I was very heavily pregnant with my son I was standing looking at a shop display, inside the shop which was used as a cut-through from the shopping centre to the street outside and a man approached from my 'deaf side' and knocked me down.

He was walking, I was standing still, but he was in a hurry and not looking where he was going, I was focused on the things I was looking at and didn't hear him coming.

I was on the floor, crying, with an injured arm, a massive pregnancy bump and wearing a bright red coat. He should have seen me before he hit me but he didn't. He didn't stop to help me either, he just shouted "I'll miss my bus" and carried on.

I know the crying was an overreaction but I'd already lost two babies and I'd fallen forwards, twisted sideways and (luckily) my arm took the impact but I did bang my bump on a shelf as I fell. I was convinced he had harmed my baby for the sake of not missing a bus and so yes, I cried. I was scared and in pain.

Nobody came to help me, not even the shop assistants from the till nearby.

So I know from bitter experience that pedestrians can be just as dangerous and you are not even safe when you are standing in plain sight.

I've also been bumped by an old man on a mobility scooter while I was standing in a cash point queue. He sounded his horn, which was a tiny little "peep-peep" noise. I heard it but it didn't register with me that it was from someone behind me wanting to get passed me. I thought it was a noise from the ATM. He could have spoken and if he had said "excuse me" it would have registered with me and I would have moved. You expect people to say "excuse me" on the pavement, not sound a little peepy horn at you without speaking. So I didn't realise what it was, hadn't even heard the scooter come up behind me, and I didn't move. He chose to hit me with his scooter rather than speak to me and when I asked him what he was playing at he said "Didn't you hear the horn you deaf cow?" and drove off, leaving me muttering "half-deaf cow" and rubbing my sore leg.

Perhaps you don't need to hold your sons hand all the time OP but he does need to be more careful than most, because although you should be able to rely on others to watch where they are going or take care of those around them, you can't. Not if you can hear perfectly and not if you have a hearing impairment of any sort.

And the good thing is, it sounds like your son knows this and reacted exactly right. He saw the danger and reacted properly, stepping back out of harms way with no injury to himself or the little girl.

Someone has posted the view that the law takes on young cyclists and as this girl only looked to be about ten it doesn't appear she was breaking the law even if you are right and in every other way she was too young and too fast to be out alone and on the pavements.

But if you are still concerned about the safety of pedestrians from cyclists on that stretch of pavement you can report the incident and your worries on here and your local council will be informed.

I'm glad your son is okay.

I don't think you can expect a 10 year old to cycle on the road. Absolutely not. However, you can expect a 10 year old to be careful. No child, no matter how old, should ride fast where there are lots of pedestrians, i.e. on a shopping street. In fact, in those areas, she should get off the bike and push.

Our local police apart from giving out leaflets with the advice given above

"1. Children under 10 cannot break the law and therefore no action can be taken against under 10s.

1. The method of enforcement will be the fixed penalty notice. Fixed penalty notices are not issued to those under 16. Therefore it is highly unlikely that action will be taken against those under 16.

1. The police have discretion for the issuing of fixed penalty notices. DoT guidelines tell them to weigh up the dangers of cycling on that particular stretch of road against the dangers of their cycling on the pavement (eg speed, density of pedestrians) and to only issue a notice if their being on the pavement is a greater danger than them being on the road."

also state quite clearly that their advice to parents is that childrne should NOT be riding on teh road until they have done thier cycling proficiency (or whatever its called these days).

So DS (5) will be firmly staying on the pavement thanks

However I do teach him to be considerate of other road/pavement users and expect him to slow down and have his wits about him where there are mre people around.

Pity some parents don't teach their kids to get off and push when there are are other people around in crowded areas, i.e. toddlers and old people.

Everyone needs to look where they are going. In this case, just two children, and they sometimes forget. Nobody was injured. Both of them should be more careful.

takethisonehere, you have had some horrible experiences! What rude and thoughtless people .

smilesy I am so sorry about what happened to your mother

blimey, takethis, the bloke on the mobility scooter was an arrogant knob. Just because he'd peeped his horn, even if you had heard it that didn't mean he should assume you'd get out of the way.

If I'm cycling on a dual use path I usually ping my bell rather than calling out to people - but I know the onus is on me to slow down/avoid. (and of course, say thanks when people do move aside and get their dogs sat/reined in - actually up where I live in Lancashire people are nearly all very good and considerate all ways round IME)

Where obeying the law puts a kid in obvious jeopardy, I'll disobey the law. Like putting an occasionally wobbly kid on a busy road with cars whizzing by at 40 MPH. No way. What's the alternative? Just tell all city kids that bike riding is just not an option for them? Doesn't that seem silly considering the huge need to reduce the number of cars on the road and reduce childhood obesity?

Kids aren't morons, they can understand that the law exists to prioritize pedestrians and to prevent high-speed cycling. They understand discretion. It's not as though they would consider this permission to break the law.

The blame here lies with city planners & their inability to get people out of their cars and into public transport so that they can carve out bike paths that are safe & insulated from the flow of traffic.

Very well put, Saski. Perfect common sense.

Actually I have no problem with people riding bikes on pavements as long as they are careful of other people.

I think it's a lot safer for them to ride on the pavement than for them to ride in the road. Someone being knocked over by a bike is a lot less likely to end up dead than someone on a bike being knocked over by a truck.

Hmmm. It's all a bit tricky really. If I was walking on a pavement and a cyclist nearly/knocked me over, I would be very pissed off and thinking that they should be on the road. But if my children were out on bikes I would prefer them to be safer on the pavement. And whilst I'm driving, I hate passing cyclists on the road, they never look safe, and I find myself wishing they could all cycle on the pavement. but of course as the OP shows, there are very good reasons why they shouldn't.

Cyclists should be on the road, not on pavements. End of. DD has been cycling on the road with me from aged six.

Wear cycling helmets, high visibility clothing and take cycling proficiency classes if you're not confident. But don't put other people at risk by cycling on pavements.

Ah yes, the old childhood obesity gambit. Played surprisingly late in this thread. And The City Planners, they're right bastards, aren't they? They invented lard and sponge and poverty.

Top - and I mean top - peer-reviewed studies suggest (and these I admit are only early indications) that children still burn off fat when they're sensible and polite enough to get off a bike and push it, when they have realised that they are on a busy pavement. Ther are also less likely to ride into other people and hurt smaller children and old people.

I cycle on the pavement sometimes as long as you are extremely careful about pedestrians and aware of dorways, either stopping and letting people pass, or dismounting and walking I think it's ok.

Sharing the road with one ton+ metal objects passing a few inches from you is a bit of a death wish imo.

Exactly, MrGin. Consideration, especially dismounting and walking, is they key to sharing pavement space in really busy areas.

Consider others. Should be tattooed on everyone birth.

So, whose fault is it that there are not more suitable places for kids to ride bikes if not city planners? Just curious.

It is illegal to cycle on the pavement. Full stop.

And that's not even to mention selfish, dangerous and entitled

The idea that pedestrians should have to look both ways before they step out onto a pavement is breath taking. Cycles should not be there. Pedestrians should not have to look.

If a child isn't capable / old enough to cycle on the road they should either stay at home, walk, or walk the bike through the busy areas

"If a child isn't capable / old enough to cycle on the road they should either stay at home, walk, or walk the bike through the busy areas"

Erm, you're contradicting yourself. So as long as they walk the bike through the busy area it's OK then? You sound confused and angry.

Personally I think learning to look as a pedestrian is good practice for when uou're on a shared footpath/cycle path. A fact that seems to escape people 9 times out of 10.

I've been shouted at before for having the cheek to bike on the cycle side of a shared use path!

I have just started cycling to the shops with my 5 yr old DD - she on the pavement and me on the road - but as we near the shops (small parade of local shops) we both get off and push - can get v busy with pedestrians.

Yesterday when we did this we were passed by a 'special police constable' ON THE PAVEMENT!!

No. I said that if a child isn't old enough / capable of cycling on busy roads (which I can undertand - the traffic is terrifying!) then they have 3 options

1. Don't go out at all
2. walk to where they want to go instead of cycling
3. Cycle the quiet bits and walk their bike through the busy bits

And no, thanks for your concern, I'm not angry at all thanks. Had a good day and just sat down with a nice glass of wine. HTH