To cycle ON the pavement?

[Hum2]

Haven't ridden in years and just getting back on it. Do not trust some of the cars on the road to overtake me with enough space. I'm still wobbly on it.

AIBU to ride on the pavement? Even when there is a cycle lane on the road (which was a locked at two points today by parked cars!).

I also use the 'green man' to cross the roads rather than moving to the road and crossing like a vehicle.

There's also the issue of cycling lobby groups pressing for "presumed liability" on the part of drivers; in other words, instead of investigating the evidence on a case by case basis, the driver would automatically be held responsible unless they could prove otherwise

I'd have thought any reasonable person would prefer nobody to be hurt, and as I've said I agree that there are plenty of idiotic drivers as well as cyclists ... but doesn't this say something about the mindset of such groups, especially when they've so quick to argue against registration which would identify cyclists?

I ride on pavements quite a lot. Never been selfish, dangerous or anti-social

Maybe the first two. Or at least you don’t think you have.

Pedestrians may disagree.

On cyclist threads, I’ve always been very defensive of cyclists. I think it’s disgraceful how poorly some road users drive around them and it’s selfish when they do dangerous manoeuvres. I see some cyclists can be equally selfish but I guess that’s people for you. Fuck the disabled and wobbly on their feet and the hearing impaired, eh? It’s not about a “chill pill”, it’s about pedestrians being able to be safe too.

”Disabled doesn’t mean ‘correct’”

WTF does this mean?! Disabled people have a right to be safe on the pavements as much as cyclists have a right to be safe on the road.

Disabled people have a right to be safe on the pavements as much as cyclists have a right to be safe on the road

I can’t imagine how vulnerable disabled people can feel on a day to day basis. I was on crutches for 10 weeks last year and I felt utterly invisible

The worry for me is that when you get a cyclist on a pavement they shouldn’t be on, you’re increasing the likelihood of them being dangerous

That seems a very valid point. Already we've seen OP, faced with the vast majority saying YABU, effectively insisting "well I'm going to do it anyway", insulting a disabled poster and more

Isn't this exactly the sort of attitude which leads to accidents?

Nope JH - none of them. Ever.

Some folks clearly have way to much time in their hands for a Monday PM.

Nope JH - none of them. Ever

Uh huh. Because you stuck around and asked them?

Some folks clearly have way to much time in their hands for a Monday PM

Do you understand irony?

By all means cycle. Good luck to you. Don’t inconvenience pedestrians.

And yes I agree with the high horse stuff.

Posting to say you are disabled does not prevent one from posting a load of high-handed, bikist-hating hyperbole bollocks.

Ni irony JH - referring to your multi-posts. Do you understand evidence-based observations?

@MrPan

I don’t hate “bikists” at all. I’m not a fan of pedestrians being put at risk in places where it isn’t safe for a cyclist to be on the pavement. Is that too difficult for you to comprehend?

yeahwhatevers

yeahwhatevers

There’s a stereotype here you’re doing nothing to negate

This thread has been really useful actually. Would cyclists agree that the following would be reasonable and important for a Town Council to consider allocating budget to:-

Regular maintenance of cycle lanes (pot holes filled, swept, lines painted)
Clear demarcation between the beginning and end of shared pavements

Anything else to consider?

A ban on pavement parking (where practical, I know there are some areas where you can't do it).

Dogs to be on leads on shared use paths.

Priority for cyclists and pedestrians on junctions.

A ban on pavement parking (where practical, I know there are some areas where you can't do it)

Yes definitely support this although that’s being dealt with elsewhere but can’t hurt to add another voice. Mostly though I don’t think that’s a massive problem for cyclists around here as we have pavement (where not shared) then a large bay of parking bays and then a cycle lane.

Dogs to be on leads on shared use paths

Again definitely agree with this

Priority for cyclists and pedestrians on junctions

Could you explain a little what you mean?

yeahwhatevers

YABVU, I never move aside for cyclists (except small children) on the pavement, go on the road where you belong. The vast majority of posters are telling you you're very unreasonable and yet you had clearly decided before you posted that you aren't, so what a pointless thread

It really shouldn't be car drivers vs cyclists. There are dreadful cyclists and drivers (and motorbike riders and pedestrians). The problem is some of the people who think they're safely riding on the pavement won't be, because there are too many people out there with no self awareness.

I shouldn't have to worry that my 3 year old is going to come face to face with a cyclist as we walk round a corner or come out of an alleyway.

The more people that cycle on pavements will mean more people think it's ok.

Shared spaces are fine and I make sure my daughter stays on the pedestrian side (and I know pedestrians ignore the signs making it tough for cyclists).

I said that the OP is being unreasonable and I am a cyclist. So not anti-cyclist.
When 4yo DS cycles, I cycle next to him on the road or run if our route means I can't.
There's no excuse for cycling on a (non-shared) pavement.

It isn't a totally pointless thread, though. Lots of people get to be all pointy fingered and latently aggressive, and I'm sure that makes them feel a lot better.

And I got to type whatevers a couple of times.
We're all winners.

Cycling on the pavement slowly for a bit is not the end of the world. There are worse things to do in life. Wouldn't bother me.

Well quite.

These threads always follow the same pattern - people get all air-rated, throw around a few insults, then I turn up and provide a telling and complete answer to the problem and we all agree I am right.

I’d laugh at you Pan but too much energy in the heat. I’m the complete opposite of anti-cyclist. I was one! I’ve repeatedly said cyclists need to be safe on the road. Surely, if you’re not safe on the road, the answer is to ensure the roads are made safer instead of cycling on the pavement putting another group of people at risk. It’s basic common sense to me.

"I've been hit by cyclists maybe four times in thirty years,"

Somewhat different to:

"I've been hit by bikes more times than I can count."

If you want to make your point, maybe try and do so without the hyperbole.

And the reason why cyclists get defensive about this is because it ends up going hand in hand with calls of testing, license plates, "road tax" etc for people to cycle. That would massively reduce cycling. No doubt some people would be happy with that, which is probably why they suggest it.

If it could be shown that there really was a significant problem that needed sorting out then I'd maybe think differently. But the evidence shows:

• For accidents involving cyclists they are the least likely group of road users to have a 'contributory factor' (i.e. some blame) apportioned to them.
• Pedestrians are far more at risk from motor vehicles than cyclists.

This is not saying that cyclists are perfect. Of course they're not. And yes they can do harm. It pisses me off when they go through crossings etc. Mainly because they could potentially hurt someone, and also because people will judge me (incorrectly) based on the behaviour of these idiots. If there are accident blackspots then I would be on to the police to get more patrols - a few fines (and they do fine cyclists for going through red lights or on pavements) would probably help. I'm all for sensible and proportionate actions to combat dangerous cycling. But I will challenge over the top reactions that attributes more harm to cyclists than they cause.