To ask how we stop dangerous cyclists

[Everythingisnumbersnow]

Why do the most dangerous ones wear those stupid little headcams too? YOU'RE the problem, guy.

Licence plates on all road bikes, plus compulsory 3rd party insurance.

Perfectly possible. The French operated this system (OK it was the Vichy French but still doable).

And you are committing an offence.

Highway Code states that cyclists should give way to pedestrians.

So, riding home from work (on a lined cycle path as per the attached sign). Woman with dogs sitting in the cycle lane. She has a go at me for wanting to pass along the cycle lane rather than illegally riding in the footpath. I can't win.

By the way, a little further on I get to a zebra crossing. The car on the near side stops first. Did the Audi SUV on the far side (which arrived after the other, with plenty of notice to stop) give way? Did it fairycakes. Just blew through.

22 hours into the thread and the OP hasn't been back. Maybe they're busy finishing off their submission to the Mailonline...

Absolutely, that's a given, but it's still annoying.

I like the dutch system, where the law generally assumes the car driver is at fault, such a forward thinking nation

At the point the pedestrian notices the bicycle slowly following because there is no room to pass widely, they will have plenty of time to react without panicking and step to the side to let the bicycle pass. The cyclist could also hop off the bike and walk by quickly. I’ve used both options when riding.

I'd say the opposite. When walking on a shared use path and the cyclist doesn't use the bell and I don't notice them until they're very close behind me it makes me jump and panic. Even if they're just sat there waiting patiently and not flying up behind me. My brain sees they're there before I register that they're not pelting along at high speed. I'd much rather hear a bike bell from some distance away and have time to react more calmly.

Sorry for long post. This is actually what the highway code says to cyclists on shared paths,

Cycle Tracks. .... Cycle tracks may run alongside footpaths or pavements and be separated by a feature such as a change of material, a verge, a kerb or a white line. You MUST keep to the side intended for cyclists as the pedestrian side remains a pavement or footpath.
Some cycle tracks shared with pedestrians will not be separated by such a feature. On such shared use routes, you should always take care when passing pedestrians, especially children, older or disabled people, and allow them plenty of room. Always be prepared to slow down and stop if necessary
AND
Sharing space with pedestrians, horse riders and horse drawn vehicles.When riding in places where sharing with pedestrians, horse riders or horse drawn vehicles is permitted, take care when passing pedestrians and horse riders, especially children, older adults or disabled people. Slow down when necessary and let them know you are there; for example, by ringing your bell (it is recommended that a bell is fitted to your bike), or by calling out politely.
Remember that pedestrians may be deaf, blind or partially sighted and that this may not be obvious.
Do not pass pedestrians, horse riders or horse drawn vehicles closely or at high speed, particularly from behind.

AND to PEDESTRIANS on shared paths:
Routes shared with cyclists. Cycle tracks may run alongside footpaths or pavements and be separated from them by a feature such as a change of material, a verge, a kerb or a white line. Such routes may also incorporate short lengths of tactile paving to help visually impaired people stay on the correct side. On the pedestrian side this may comprise a series of flat-topped bars running across the direction of travel (ladder pattern). On the cyclist side the same bars are orientated in the direction of travel (tramline pattern).
Some routes shared with cyclists will not be separated by such a feature allowing cyclists and pedestrians to share the same space. Cyclists should respect your safety (see Rule 62) but you should also take care not to obstruct or endanger them. Always remain aware of your environment and avoid unnecessary distractions.

I can't see anywhere where it says cyclists should give way to pedestrians in this situation (as opposed to at side roads). It says they should be careful when passing (but presumes they will pass), leave room and slow down, and let them know you are there with a bell. And that pedestrians should not obstruct cyclists and should be aware of the environment.

EDIT - AARGH I'm wrong, it's in rule H2. Cyclists should give way to pedestrians on shared use cycle tracks and to horse riders on bridleways. But all the other points still stand.

I find it really odd that an OP is expected to keep replying to people on the thread rather than just read the replies. Given a certain level of hostility, just reading makes even more sense

Sustrans who maintain a lot of shared used paths also say to use a bell

• When riding a bike, ring a bell well in advance if approaching people from behind, but remember, this might not always be enough to alert people that you’re coming.

Also;

All users of shared-use paths have responsibilities for the safety of others they are sharing space with.

So I would say as well as cyclists needing to use a bell to warn others of their presence there is a responsibility for pedestrians to be aware. I do regularly look behind me when walking on a shared use path. I would not use headphones.

Why should a pedestrian move out of the way for a cyclist when cyclists refuse to do the same for cars?

All road users could do with being more considerate, but it needs to start with cyclists because by far, it’s them that causes the most irritation.

The vast majority of cyclists are not dangerous. The vast majority of cyclists you don't even notice them. Of the few cyclists you notice, they will be a mixture of assertive confident cyclists who know they have every right to be in your way if they have right of way in that situation, plus some genuinely dangerous cyclists. The confident assertive cyclists may well sometimes do a manuever that irritate a car driver but is the best decision for someone trying to survive in an exceptionally dangerous hostile environment where those in control of 1500kg of hurtling metal are trying to ignore their existence. The genuinely dangerous ones would also be genuinely dangerous car drivers if you took action to get them off their cycles and into a car which would be even more dangerous so probably best all round for them to stay on their bikes. Anything you do to attack the dangerous ones will actually have far greater effect on all the other perfectly sensible cyclists that you have no reason to notice, causing much more harm than good. A far better use of resources is to invest in reducing car use, slowing down car traffic and creating more space for cycles so that the risky situations that can sometimes only be survived via a risky maneuver may get minimised

Are you joking? So you'll just mow down a blind or deaf person because they didn't see you or hear your annoying bell? Pedestrians have no obligation to look out for you and many actually can't. This thread was inspired by a fanny guy bringbringing his bell at me as I stepped onto the road to cross and driving at me at speed (I had right of way- if I had turned the wrong way or not heard him I'd be dead... And possibly him too but I care less about that).

No, the most dangerous ones are the Deliveroo/JustEat riders on their jailbroken electric bikes, riding ridiculously quickly, no lights, no helmets. Total menace.

Agree - so many delivery cyclists round our way are out at night - no lights, no helmet, no hi-vis.

Debate is supposed to be two-way. No asking of clarifying questions? Just an ill-informed rant plopped and retire to a safe distance to watch the fireworks.

You need to reread my posts and stop impuning me.

I wouldn't behave the way you are implying and have never said I would. I do think wearing earpods so that you can't hear what is going on around you is foolish, it isn't safe for many reasons, it is annoying when pedestrians don't stick to their path and subsequent to that is you often can't get past. Just one reason is that you can't hear approaching cyclists, but neither can you hear people running up to you, or cars when crossing the road or people shouting to warn you of anything. We all need to act responsibly and that goes for every road user including pedestrians.

And not to mention their illegal vehicles.

Are they? The electric bikes? (That’s what they mainly have round here.)

I think that proper electric bikes are limited in speed to X miles per hour, and only work when people are actually pedalling.

The delivery riders are riding jailbroken bikes which do not have a speed cap, and which they do not need to pedal - they are really motorbikes. And because of that the rider needs insurance, a helmet, lights. But there is such a plague of these bikes that the police can't cope.

The only legal e bikes are pedal assist, so you have to pedal or freewheel like a normal bike would. They are limited to 15 mph. The illegal ones are where you can be propelled without pedalling.

E scooters are illegal on public roads/paths unless they are public hire vehicles able to be hired on the street. They are easy to spot as they're covered in logos.

So deaf people shouldn't leave the house then?

Yes there are idiots in all kinds of transportation.