To expect cyclists not to ride on the pavement and not expect pedestrians to move out of their way!

[ophelia275]

I am so sick of having to swerve the pushchair or move out of the way so that some idiot on a bicycle can avoid the traffic by cycling on the pavement and expect me to stand aside with my kids/pushchair/shopping so that they can ride past. Sometimes (when I am not with my kids) I stand firm and don't move out of their way so they have to get off or be patient and wait until I have walked past.

When I was quite heavily pregnant I was walking along and this guy on a bike came zooming up and shouted "move" and just pushed past me. Nob.

Grrr. Hate them!

BOC, FWIW cyclists don't (on the whole) pay insurance, which they ought to when their stupidity (Pan jumping red lights) causes accidents.

I never give way to them. ESPECIALLY on pavements or when mounted and attempting to use a PEDESTRIAN crossing. They can get fucked.

Maya Are you saying you knocked someone down last night?

You're obviously the lovely considerate road-user that you want cyclists to be then, CT

I think that was a reference to Nancy66's post not that Maya goes running down pedestrian's.

Maya, thank you for that.

I do believe that honesty is the conerstone of any healthy relationship. So I do need to point out that if Noomi Rapace, the Swedish Dragon girl were to ever want a twos-up on my bike, I'd be leaving you at the bus stop!

Good to have things clear.

Ohh okay sorry Maya I was a bit shocked!

Oh excuse dodgy apostrophe use. See even cyclists have standards.

TCL I wouldn't attempt to DRIVE on the pavement.

It's the law not just consideration, something cyclists should look into, while their getting insurance quotes.

"so they have to get off or be patient and wait until I have walked past. "

yy. I totally understand why some cyclists feel intimidated by busy roads and there are occasions where I think it's acceptable for them to ride on the pavements but when they do the above quote applies.

Some of us have insurance

And again, why would we do something that is not a legal requirement? If it was then we would, ditto tax and registration. Well most of us. A bit like drivers.

I said (most) in my OP.
It should be a legal requirement. Like stopping at red lights...oh wait, Pan doesn't do that. Because he/she rides a bike.

Clearly cyclists are not causing congestion. If this was the case how is it that folk moan about them coming up on the inside. How often do you overtake a bike only for it to be sitting in front of you at the next set of lights (waiting for green - natch) because you've been stuck in traffic. I'm confused.

They're called Junctions. And ALL traffic is supposed to respect the signals controlling them. That's not congestion it's traffic management.

I'm not surprised you're confused if that concept alludes you.

Don't be obtuse Sparks you know exactly what I mean. We all end up at the same junction at pretty much the same time so the cyclist hasn't held you up has it?

CoryTwunt - If you think it should be a legal requirement then do what you can to get the law changed. Don't berate cyclists for not doing something they don't have to do.

See even cyclists have standards.

Well clearly they don't. Otherwise cycling shorts would have been banned years ago...

Noomi wants a ride, so we are off to find some red lights to go through.

Kidding.

One bike/car standoff that actually quite amuses me is when there's the green bike section at a traffic light, and I pull up on my bike to the front of it, then the car at the head of the queue revs the engine, creeping further and further forwards until the lights change. What does the driver hope to achieve by this? I usually give them a look and laugh to myself that they are "racing" me on my bike.
FWIW I used to cycle on a bit of pavement to go under a subway crossing, as I was too scared to cross 3 lanes each side of 40mph traffic to turn right across a nasty junction. I did cycle at walking pace, and hopped off to push if people were using the subway.

Don't be obtuse Sparks you know exactly what I mean. We all end up at the same junction at pretty much the same time so the cyclist hasn't held you up has it?

Obtuse is the cyclists bible in my experience. What you refer to is built up urban areas, nowhere else.

I'm yet to see an objection to my idea. Seems reasonable, and like i say everyone wins.

CoryTunt, I'll tell you why you should give way to cyclists. Because (as has been said already, in many different ways) not all cyclists are bastards!

Lurking - no, I'm far too civilised for that (unlike CoryTunt, it would seem ).

Pan - I thought that was a joke name until I clicked on the link!

Pan: no red mist. Just idiocy.

From now on I shall be ignoring the idiots on this thread.

All these threads and those like them in the Daily Mail assume that "cyclists" aren't drivers and pedestrians as well.

Most people are good cyclists and are considerate.

Sorry, that should say "most cyclists are considerate".

I never give way to them. ESPECIALLY on pavements or when mounted and attempting to use a PEDESTRIAN crossing. They can get fucked.

How charming.

I think it's called 'attempt to scare the shit out of you' InMySpareTime. A trait usually displayed by drivers with big engines and small brains.

God I nearly hit a cyclist this morning. I was in a side road approaching a main road. He was on the main road and swung out of a stream of slow traffic onto the pavement and straight across the side road I was in, just as I was coming to a stop at the junction. He was only visible for a second before crossing my path. I had no time at all to react, and was within inches of hitting him.

Nob