To expect cyclists to actually cycle on the road or cycle path??

[NikkiBFG]

Am sick to death of them whizzing past me at dangerous speeds on the pavement! I'm profoundly deaf and don't hear them on the pavement so if I moved thinking there was nothing behind me, could cause a nasty collision as so many of them are going way too fast!

They don't seem to obey traffic lights either!!

because, from what i see around here, car drivers obey the general rules of the road far more than cyclists.

which is not to say that all car drivers obey all laws, but they don't often just go through red lights, that were red when they drove up to them, knowing that they are red. they do, more and more, cut changing lights, and that annoys me aswell.

Because a lot of cyclists seem to have no care for the rules of the road, for other peoples safety or their own.

Live and let live is quite a good motto but cyclists seem to be of the opinion that they are more important than any other road/pavement users.

DS2 almost got hit on the crossing on the way to school by a cyclist going through a red light. I sware if I had had a brolly would have jammed it in the wheel of his bike.

I do sometimes ride on the pavement if the road is too busy but only if the pavement is clear. I'm very considerate and only cycle slowly, would never whizz past someone and often get off and push my bike rather than intimidate pedestrians. I know it's wrong but I'd rather be fined than dead.

I think the OP was fairly clear that it was inconsiderate cyclists, and I agree about it being better on the pavements at times.
It then widened to cyclists in general.

If the provision of cycle paths was better, people didn't park in them, they didn't disappear when the space runs out - ie just when they are needed, they had priority continuing on the road over cars turning, etc etc etc then I think more people would use them.

But even in the parks of cambridge where there are good cycle paths, and special sections at lights to allow cars to turn left separately to the cyclist (cars go first, then cars turning stop, and cyclists going straight ahead can go) the cyclists (in the main) ignore the section, cut into the middle of the cars to go ahead in the car lane.

So I guess I just get fed up that when adequate provision IS made, it is still abused.

Cyclists put their own lives in danger by behaving recklessly - drivers put everyone on the road in danger, so I too find it weird how angry people get about the former.

Cyclists on the pavement are highly unlikely to cause any serious injury to pedestrians, the most badly behaved IME are usually under 12 and so entitled to be there!

I cycle myself (always on the road) and I often don't use the special provisions for cyclists at junctions because the numpties who came up with them seem to have designed them with the convenience of motorists in mind and little regard for the cyclists safety.

In other countries the pavement is widened and divided into cycle and pedestrian lanes. Here we have cycle/bus lanes, so I cycle to work breathing diesel fumes and weaving around buses.

we have motor bikes that go on our paths right near my garden at all hours of the day and night, am seriously thinking about laying a branch accross the path, noisy twunts!

i agree that its dangerous for cycles to be on paths, but when they are courteous and slow right down or get off when they are pedestrians, i don't mind, its the teenage lads that go 50 miles an hour round corners with no concern for others thst p*ss me off

Yes, cycle lanes etc often appear to have been designed by people who've maybe heard of bicycles, but are a bit unclear about what they're for.

I often end up ignoring cycle lanes, as there's generally a white van parked across the end of it, or pedestrians crossing the lane without looking out at all.

I should probably say, in all my years of biking in London, I've only come off the bike twice - once from a pedestrian running out without looking, and once from a car turning right, through me, without signalling.

I got mown down by a fckwit cyclist in a railway* station a few years back. I still have the scars. I was too shocked to do anything but lie on the ground with Dd2 screaming her head off in fright but an old lady tore a strip off the cyclist, which in retrospect was rather funny. Anyway, I'm really nervous when I see a cyclist now and want to give them a good shove to get them away from me.

Come to not so sunny Cambridge where you will narrowly miss running down students at night time who cycle the wrong way down streets in dark clothing with no lights (often in a group if they are language students). Cyclists were banned from the town centre - just one or two streets - for a while but managed to get this ban lifted so that you take your life in your hands now crossing from M&S to Boots across an otherwise pedestrianised street.

tbh, the roads are such a nightmare in my town and cycle paths are non-existent that i do ride on the pavements.

I am not inconsiderate though and I avoid busy pavements or would dismount if there were pedestrians around. My argument is, the roads are now way too dangerous for cyclists. For example, last night at rush hour the traffic was almost stationary but there was not enough room for me to ride down the inside of the jam. So pavement it is...

Ohhh, honestly there is one thing that really annoys me and that is when the council spend loads of money on a lovely new cycle path on a dangerous A road and the serious cyclists are too sniffy to use it. At rush out, traffic gets backed up behind them when this lovely, cycle path is clear. It really, really annoys me.

Thanks for letting me get that off my chest.

what annoys me is that in our town they have provided something pathetic like 2 cycle paths - purely on the grounds that the pavement happened to be wide enough to accomodate one. The paths run for around 50 yards in a random spot, then stop. And then, nada! The council then pat themselves on the back for having ticked another box, while in reality providing feck all of any use to anyone.

Well, I can see why you wouldn't use that one and how annoying that would be. But would someone explain why cyclists don't use really decent cycle paths?

There is a reason. A friend who is a cycle bore was explaining it to me. I nodded off so I can't tell you what it is, but it is a very good reason- apparently.

Hmmm, I've used cycle paths, and generally don't like them. If they're just a line on the road, the cars ignore them, or park on them. If there's a nice little kerb thing between the cycle path and the road, cars still park on them, and also don't see you, so feel even happier turning left through you. Pedestrians also try to walk through you (particularly if it is a two-way cycle path, on one side of the road, so bikes are coming from the 'wrong' direction).

I guess I don't actively mind the little drawn on ones, but they don't do anything, and they're forever appearing and disappearing, so I really don't see the point.

Oh, and I really hate shared cycle/pedestrian paths, with a lovely line down the middle. Because, yeah, pedestrians are trained to care about lines on the path. So they completely ignore the line, and you get to spend your time dodging pedestrians. Who, let's face it, don't exactly indicate when they're about to swerve randomly or gesticulate or whatever. And pedestrians of course can be 3 years old, or drunk, or blind. I don't really want to share my space with those people.

I do use the local towpaths a bit, more so now there are lots of signs up getting cyclists to ring their bell before going under bridges, as this seems to have reduced the chaos there a bit. We do have some nice provisions locally for cyclists, but they have a wide range of gates on them to keep motorbikes off, some of which mean I have to take apart my bike to get through.

But mostly, I am happiest on the road.

I can see all of that nqc, I really can. But this one is about 4 miles long, has a separate kerb, is on an A road where cars don't park, people don't walk and was built at huge expense and disruption. I drive along this particular road quite a lot and it annoys me when I get stuck in backed up traffic and see an empty cycle path.

"Cyclists on the pavement are highly unlikely to cause any serious injury to pedestrians"
I wish this was true - two years ago I was walking along the pavement with my dad under a railway bridge where the pavement narrows. I sudddenly heard a violent ringing of a bike bell & turned to see a cyclist bearing down on us at speed. Not surprisingly my 95 year old dad couldn't leap out of the way & I stepped in front of him. The bike hit me incredibly hard & I had massive bruises - but if it had hit my dad, it probably would have broken his leg, which at his age could easily have led to his death. All the woman on the bike said was "I rang my bell".....

Cyclists do sometimes kill pedestrians. It doesn't happen often, but it does happen.

I don't know what the deal is with the A road, it sounds like a nice cycle route, but I obviously haven't seen it.

Presumably, if the traffic is backed up, it's mostly down to the cars, though, not the bikes?

No, its down to the bikes (and I am really not anti-bikes by the way, I even have one for around town . Cars are normally backed up because you can't overtake the cyclists and it is a fairly busy A road. It puzzles me everytime I pass one

On my route to work I have to take a right turn on a road with a turning lane, I always use signals and change lanes when safe to do so but still regularly have people blasting me with their horns and waving their fists. Why?

Do they think that without a motor I should not need to turn right? Or maybe they would rather I pressed the button at the little used pedestrian crossing instead now that would hold them up...

The only bad thing I admit to is occasionally holding up traffic because

1. there is a line of cars in the cycle lane
2. bitter experience has taught me to cycle a car door's length away from anything parked
3. When I cycle that far out into the road cars have to overtake me, instead of whizzing by at 60mph with inches to spare

Oh, I had a motorcycle courier shout something at me, I didn't hear it, but it included the word 'woman' which is never a good sign, is it. I had just changed lanes or something. I cycle in central London, sometimes I am going to be in other road user's way. That's the reality of using a road, surely?

We have a large network of off-road cycle paths constructed recently at huge expense. They are always empty, with the cyclists choosing to use the (narrowed) road next to the empty cycle path instead. The traffic is bad enough as it is but following a cyclist up a narrow bridge where the road isn't even wide enough to allow two lorries to pass each other causes a two lane jam for miles.

I was once at the front of a set of red lights in a large MPV indicating to turn left. A middle aged man on a bike came up my inside, and proceeded to go straight on when the lights changed. I missed him by inches (he was in my blind spot). Had I hit him I would have got the blame for it, yet he had no business doing that- I was indicating FFS. Now if I'm in a similar situation I move as close to the kerb as I can so a cyclist can't get up alongside me while I'm stopped.

Cyclists demand respect yet don't give it IMO.