Bicycles on pavements - why are they not being ridden on a road?

[FinallyMovingHouse]

I've only moved to near the centre of a town in the last 6 months and hence hadn't really noticed this where I used to live, which was more rural.

Can someone tell me why it seems now to be acceptable for people; all ages from schoolkids to 60 odd, to ride their bikes on the pavements and never seem to go on a road? I was trying to explain to my youngest DD (20) how my DH and I would have been shouted at by police and pedestrians if we'd tried that 30 years ago and definitely when we were teenagers (we're mid 50s).

Many have been very polite, waiting for me to notice them and then saying thank you when I've moved for them, but I've also had bells rung at me endlessly from a distance away until right behind me or the handlebars tapped to move me out of the way on a narrow pavement. So far I've stopped myself from retaliating but I do feel an overwhelming urge to shout "get off the effing pavement" more and more.

I do appreciate that yes, the roads are dangerous etc, etc but they're making the pavements dangerous, especially when you can't see them or they're going too fast. It's also illegal.

AIBU or am I just getting old and crabby?!

Relevance to cycling on pavements is...?

On shared paths I’ll always stay on the correct side if there is one, or move out of the way for bikes.

If cyclists are going to ride on pavements that aren’t officially shared paths, then they shouldn’t expect pedestrians to move for them. Go at the same pace as the pedestrians or go on the road.

Says the person who proclaims cyclists have no justification for believing they might be safer on the pavement.

Might be safer but still won't be riding legally.

I’ve had a few near misses from bikes almost hitting me when I step out of my gate onto the pavement. The gateposts are quite high and visibility is limited. The pavement is narrow and is next to a well-used road- but there’s a 20 mile speed limit so cyclists ought to be able to use the road.
If you don’t feel safe on a main road then please consider an alternative route. Or get off and walk your bike along pavements where there are pedestrians and limited space. It’s not fair to push the risk onto pedestrians who are always the most vulnerable road/ pavement users.

India has a large population, and I did say “mostly”.

Unquestionably safer; no one is saying it’s legal.

They might feel safer but it doesn’t mean they should do it.
I would feel safer in the Tube in a women-only carriage, it doesn’t give me the right to ask all the men to leave.

Not unquestionably safer for pedestrians, hence the relevant legislation.

I've recently returned to cycling on a lovely e-bike. One of the most direct routes to some nearby countryside (and a brilliant cycle path) is along a winding major road which cars belt along really quite fast. There's a narrow footpath on one side of it, and I cycle on it as it's far safer than the road. So far I've not seen a single pedestrian using it and if I did I would of course get off. I don't see that as 'entitled', more like 'sensible'.

Perfect summary:
If you don’t feel safe on a main road then please consider an alternative route. Or get off and walk your bike along pavements where there are pedestrians and limited space. It’s not fair to push the risk onto pedestrians who are always the most vulnerable road/ pavement users

Unquestionably safer for cyclists, which is why some do it, which is what OP originally asked.

No one is saying they should do it. OP asked why some do it.

Yes!

OP asked why some cyclists feel it's acceptable. Feeling safer on pavements is not an acceptable reason.

If you can't ride on the road you shouldn't be on a bike full stop.
I live in a city and cyclists are a pain in the butt.
Especially the ones who ride without lights after dark. And there's loads of those.

But it is the reason, which is what OP asked.

I think some of these shared paths are either so badly signposted or badly thought out with not enough space for cyclists to pass that it's made some cyclists think why not just go on the pavement in general.

I've really got tennis elbow now, but quite simply have run out of food to feed.

My teen rides his bike everywhere. I tell him to only ride on the pavement and never in the road. Simply because I’d rather him take out a pedestrian than a car take him out. I don’t care if it’s selfish. I care more about my child’s safety than any strangers.

Fair enough.

So if I put out my arms to push a cyclist rather than having him run into me that'll be fine, because I'm making sure he doesn't take out me or mine.

I am a cyclist and used to ride everywhere on my bike. Over the last 10 years, my family have been going to Holland on holiday. Once there, we park the car and cycle everywhere.

A few years ago after one such holiday, we returned to the UK and the following weekend went out on our bikes. The difference was horrifying between Holland and the UK. No respect for cyclists whatsoever, no safe space for cycling - road or pavements, we are damned whatever we do. Holland has dedicated cyclepaths everywhere and in Holland, everyone was a cyclist before they became a driver so there is respect for cyclists.

As a result, I no longer cycle in the UK. I feel so sad about this as one of our favourite things was a family bike ride at the weekend.

That reminds me of the woman a few years ago who was disabled, and I think blind. She was arrested for doing just that after being scared by a cyclist close by. The cyclist sadly got hit by a car as a result!

In the words of Julia from Motherland that post was "unbelievable". I hope the reason for encouraging teenagers to ride on pavements isn't passed on to the kids. Damn those pesky pedestrians getting in their way.

Yeah, I would rather that than he be hit by a car. In fact a child did do that to him. Still alive to tell the tale and continue riding on the pavements, obviously, he would be.