Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Saw a cyclist on the pavement today...

145 replies

CarcerDun · 13/12/2014 18:24

...being reprimanded by a policeman. Most probably because its illegal.

AIBU to have smiled at the policeman as he walked past me afterwards?

OP posts:
JeanneDeMontbaston · 14/12/2014 00:03

Could you send your policeman over here, OP?

It's the same logic people used to have about drink driving (and some still do about running red lights): 'oh, I know I am safe, I just go slow/check there's no one around. What, you mean I'm human and fallible and have just injured someone?! Well, imagine that. Who knew?'

Hmm

It also makes life more dangerous for cylists who abide by the law. Where I live, many cyclists use the pavement as a matter of course, and weave onto and off the road - meaning anyone else cycling properly in the road has to break sharp at an unexpected bike suddenly swerving into their path.

WhyYouGottaBeSoRude · 14/12/2014 00:11

Is there a lot of confusion about the law on cycling?

I dont cycle so i dont know but one morning sitting in traffic i was shocked to see one cyclist stopping at the red light and then another cycling up between cars and straight through the red light. Definitely not a case of it having just turned red or anything, he clearly just thought he could go through. Then i also see cyclists going from road to pavement and then back again supposedly to avoid traffic.

There doesnt seem to be a clear rule that i can see.

cardamomginger · 14/12/2014 00:13

There is a perfectly clear rule - cyclists are not permitted to ride through red lights. All vehicles on the road, including bicycles, must obey the highway code. (Which is why I said there should be a test.)

hmc · 14/12/2014 00:35

S113 - are you sure about the veracity of that story? Surely there would be some reasonable charge that could have levelled at the cyclist...

hmc · 14/12/2014 00:47

Just googled and found it. Horrifying

LifeHuh · 14/12/2014 00:52

Adults cycling on the pavement- bah.
It shouldn't be happening, though I have some sympathy where roads are really dangerous. However I regularly see young blokes on the pavements round here- the roads are no way too dangerous to cycle on,I cycle on them quite happily!
And every adult cycling on the pavement, IMO, is helping to create and reinforce the idea that cyclists shouldn't really be on the road, that it is too dangerous, which does a disservice to those who want to cycle.

MrsItsNoworNotatAll · 14/12/2014 07:40

oh cyclists can't do right for Fucking wrong on mumsnet

Jeez isn't THAT the truth!! Part of my journey to work involves me cycling on the path. I really would rather not as it goes, I'd prefer to be on the road but as it's the choice between that or getting mown down or pushed into the kerb by ignorant motorists who don't see me and probably don't want me on the road anyway, then I'll cycle on the path. Believe me, when you've had as many close calls as I have you would do the same. It's bloody frightening.

Yes, there are some inconsiderate cyclists but I am not one of them. And any sensible cyclist wouldn't even try and ride on pavements where there are loads of pedestrians, it's far easier and quicker to get off and walk.

As another poster has said. Cycling isn't a life style choice. I have to do it in order to get to work and back. I don't drive and bus fares would take a hefty chunk out of my wage. I consider myself sensible. I don't ride through red lights or swerve in and out between cars and I don't peddle at speed when I'm on the path either. Plus I wear a high vis jacket and the bike is lit up like a fucking Christmas Tree when it needs to be!

I should stay off cycling bashing threads like this. They are pathetic. I'd love to know where you'd actually like us to cycle as it's blatantly obvious we aren't tolerated on the roads or pavements. Or should we just not cycle at all. Would that make you happy?

Mehitabel6 · 14/12/2014 07:52

I have never one had a child dart out in me and I am going so slowly that I am sure it wouldn't be a problem if they did. I obviously don't do it on pavements with pedestrians, but if you can see several hundred yards of clear pavement it makes sense to get off the road. I find the main hazard is 3/4 yr olds who can't steer well, can't see hazards and can't stop but surely you don't think they should be on the road?! Maybe they shouldn't cycle at all!
I shall continue to use common sense.

MrsItsNoworNotatAll · 14/12/2014 08:00

Me too Mehitabel6

Not difficult is it.

Mehitabel6 · 14/12/2014 08:06

Not difficult at all, you ride with due care and attention. Children darting on to the road when you are driving are just as big a hazard and yet no one says you shouldn't drive. I have had children dart onto the road when I have been driving, I have never once had one dart in front of my bike on the pavement.

sandgrown · 14/12/2014 08:14

My DS was nearly knocked over outside nursery ( on the pavement) by a speeding cyclist. At the speed cyclist was going DS, who was holding my hand, could have been killed.

Mehitabel6 · 14/12/2014 08:16

I am never speeding and I wouldn't be cycling on the pavement outside a nursery. I am just advocating common sense!

MrsItsNoworNotatAll · 14/12/2014 08:19

You could safely bet your last pound that if a proper cycling infrastructure was created the cyclist haters would bleat and complain that it shouldn't happen as there are better things to spend money on.

Mehitabel6 · 14/12/2014 08:21

If we had a proper cycling infrastructure there would not be a problem and I would be out on my bike most days.

MrsItsNoworNotatAll · 14/12/2014 08:21

Then that cyclist is an idiot. Not all of us are believe or not.

MrsItsNoworNotatAll · 14/12/2014 08:22

Same here I would love it. It would be a damn sight safer for us.

Doobigetta · 14/12/2014 08:25

It's really quite breathtakingly arrogant and selfish to continue to insist on your right to break the law when you've been presented witb several examples of exactly why that law exists. But of course, you're different from those other law-breaking cyclists, aren't you? Until you hit someone, and hurt them, and then you aren't different at all and no-one is surprised except apparently you. And you know what, if you don't hurt them because you swerved or they managed to get out of your way and they just get scared and shocked and intimidated, that's not ok. In answer to your question, yes, if you can't cycle legally, and with a reasonable perception of the impact you're having on pedestrians, I would much prefer that you didn't do it at all.

cardamomginger · 14/12/2014 08:28

To the cyclists here: what are your views on my earlier post stating that there should be a test (theory and practical) and cyclists should have minimum 3rd party insurance?

MrsItsNoworNotatAll · 14/12/2014 08:38

You obviously don't cycle do you? Doob

On my route to work I rarely pass anyone. If, IF, I do see someone I slow down. And I almost stop as I'm not even cycling that fast in the first place! I don't want to injure anyone or myself.

I'd say it's unlikely I'd hit anyone. I should know, what with using that route five days a week.

And stop cycling just because you would prefer me not too?

On your bike!!!Xmas Grin

Possiblestudentteacher · 14/12/2014 08:51

This is why I don't cycle. After being hit by car whilst cycling responsibly on the road (I was cycling responsibly, I was on a round a bout and it was my right of way) I'm too scared to use cycle paths which are a tiny slip of paint at the edge of a road. I prefer the split pavement cycle+foot paths, but they are quite rare where I live. I used to love cycling, but it's just too scary.

babybat · 14/12/2014 08:51

cardamomginger - I've had cycle training, and any cyclist who's also a driver should know the Highway Code. I have third party insurance as part of my membership of a cycling organisation. Lots of cyclists will be covered under their home insurance policies. Having to pass your test and have insurance doesn't stop huge numbers of people driving badly, and there are thousands of people driving without insurance. The thing that will make a noticeable difference to road safety is a better network of cycle paths, not more restrictions.

specialmagiclady · 14/12/2014 08:52

I think it's not a bad idea to have a cycling test but hard to police. What would be easier would be a copy of the Highway Code (possibly cycle bits only) sold with every bike. Oh and lights fitted as standard. It beggars belief that it's legal to sell a bike without lights.

LottieMumofWilfJenkins · 14/12/2014 08:52

As the mother of a deaf child cycling on pavements is a particular bugbear with me. A few years ago Wilf stepped out of a shop and was nearly knocked over by a child on a bicycle on the pavement. I can't begin to imagine how difficult it must be for a deaf person to suddenly have someone whizz past them unexpectedly on the pavement!! Sad

MrsItsNoworNotatAll · 14/12/2014 08:57

I very much doubt taking a test and having insurance would stop folk hating cyclists.

specialmagiclady · 14/12/2014 08:59

Very excitingly, yesterday in the frost and ice I was cut up by a car that overtook me then immediately turned left into the petrol station cutting right across my path.

Well I was (genuinely) thrilled because normally when drives act like total cunts I can't catch up with them. But the lady on the petrol forecourt was a sitting duck.

Tapped on the window; window opened; all the carefully prepared and reasoned arguments I (and very other cyclist) recite in my head came spewing out. No swearing, no hysteria just telling her how vulnerable I am, that I don't dent, that she scared me and it would not hurt her to drive behind me for 40 yards.

So satisfying.

Swipe left for the next trending thread