As a disabled woman sick of being terrified on the pavement to feel happy reading about the destruction of e-scooters and e-bikes?

[pinkksugarmouse]

I know some people will want me to be crucified over this. That's mumsnet. I get it. I have Rheumatoid Arthritis. The number of times I have almost been hit by one of these...I have had to walk into busy roads. I've even experienced being sworn out for daring to use the footpath.
Some cyclists and scooter users are a menace and I think they have become emboldened because of the electric vehicles.
They are dangerous, illegal and whenever I see a big piles of these monstrous pieces of s#*t being destroyed I feel relief. Anyone who buys these for children is selfish and stupid. IMHO.

So get your pitchforks out. Time to tell me what an abomination I am....its eniveitable.

There really isn’t an “evil cyclists lobby”.

National standards for cycle routes are in Local Transport Note 1/20, which is clear that in busy urban areas cycles should be treated as vehicles and have their separate space from both pedestrians and from cars. Road safety groups (including cycling ones) don’t tend to support shared space / cycling on pavements as it’s poor design.

There absolutely is. Cycling lobby groups literally argue that pedestrians are safer in "shared spaces".

The All-Party Parliamentary Group on Walking and Cycling has recently looked at e-bikes and made several recommendations to Parliament. These include the sale of illegal e-bikes (which are illegal as they don’t meet battery safety standards and have caused fires - this is a separate issue to whether an e-bike classes as a bicycle or a motorbike). As far as I know, the Government hasn’t acted on these recommendations, but given how strongly the OP feels about this, she could ask her MP about whether the recommendations are likely to be adopted (& if not why not).

One of the really sad points the report makes is that e-bikes can be a mobility aid, but this is being hindered due to the various problems with e-bikes.

If the e-bikes / scooters are hire schemes, then it might be worth the OP contacting her councillors about their misuse as councils can require operators to take action about this and in extreme cases withdraw the contracts.

No they don’t - most argue for safe, segregated cycle routes that meet the standards of LTN1/20. Shoving cyclists and pedestrians together in busy urban areas is poor engineering.

If you are referring to the Walk, Wheel & Cycle Trust (formerly known as Sustrans) saying that the National Cycle Network is good for wheelchairs etc., they are also clear that these are quiet routes like old railway lines not busy urban pavements. They have also delisted large chunks of the NCN because they didn’t meet acceptable standards of engineering.

All? You sure you're not exaggerating. Edinburgh is not in horrible chaos

If it’s the complex and tragic case I am thinking of, there was a lot of debate about whether the pavement was a cycle route and it led to the local Council having to audit their routes and improve signage. The pavement was also next to a busy ring road so it would have been a place where police would have been likely to exercise their discretion re cycling on the pavement because it’s reasonable for a cyclist to feel unsafe on the road.

I think they do Bikeability (equivalent of cycling proficiency), however in my council it’s only for DC who have their own bike. I’ve always thought it a shame that they don’t have a fleet of bikes they can use so all DC can take part.

Disabled and checking in! Link me the videos and I’ll get my tea and biscuits ready!

I think a speed limit of walking pace (5km an hour) for wheeled vehicles on pavements rather than an outright ban - simply because the risk to people on the roads is so much greater than the current risk to people on pavements so moving them onto roads would kill and injure far more people. You might be safer but more people would die and that isn’t acceptable for me.

Yes. If wheeled vehicles are allowed on pavements because they’re safer there than on roads, then they have to accept the trade off of slowness for safety. You want to be with the pedestrians, you go at pedestrian speed.

It’s enforcement that’s always the problem.

I have an ebike. The legal speed limited kind which I ride only legally on the road.

Cities however are full of illegal ones, loads of food delivery people on them flying abput pavements.These things are very obviously self propelled and dont even need pedalled. The police cannot possibly be unaware but they seem to ignore it.

I know how many people die on the roads but my thread isn't about cars or roads. I am aware that there are many excellent cyclists. My ex-husband and daughter are fantastic cyclists and he taught her the skills to be safe and considerate.

Those aren't the ones nearly running me over. You are fortunate that it isn't a problem for you because clearly many people have had near misses or have been injured. Its a serious problem when you are already less mobile. Perhaps you are fully mobile and don't have any disabled or chronically ill family members or friends or perhaps you are oblivious to how things which don't effect you can be very hard for those of us who are less steady on our feet.

It’s the same in Ireland. An elderly woman mown down while she was walking on a footpath who died from her injuries. Two teenagers on a main road on one e scooter. Both hit by a car and died. Love hearing that the Gardai have seized them and taken them off the streets.

The majority of cyclists are entitled e-unts and the last thing they should be given is motorisation

Ride on the road or don't cycle, nobody is born with fucking wheels sewn to their arse

To be accurate, your thread isn’t really about cyclists (ie riders of bicycles or electric bikes that class as bicycles) either.

I suspect the e-bikes you are describing are actually electric motorbikes so technically the riders are motorcyclists rather than cyclists. It should be possible to discuss this issue (which as you say is an important one and one where there are recommendations for Parliament to act) without labelling all cyclists as “entitled” or some of the other worse terms on this thread or blaming them for the behaviour of a separate class of road users.

You are wrong. Cyclists are the problem.

All cyclists? Including DC? Or just the ones who are causing trouble for the OP (who are probably technically motorcyclists)?

If this thread was discussing anti-social driving, I doubt there would be comments labelling other drivers as “entitled” etc. So why on a thread about anti-social (motor)cycling, is it not possible to discuss the actual antisocial behaviour (particularly the recommendations to Parliament) without labelling other cyclists as “the problem” - especially as people who are riding traditional, non-electric bicycle aren’t actually causing the problem that the OP is complaining about.

It's teenage boys who cause the most danger if that's what you mean by "d" c

To be fair to them they can plainly see that adult cyclists endorse this

No - for DC I meant the many, many children who enjoy riding their bicycles. If you think that “cyclists” are the problem does that include them? How are children enjoying riding a bicycle a problem?

As for adult cyclists “endorsing” teens riding electric motorbikes - that really doesn’t happen. I doubt teens pay much attention to older people cycling to work or shopping or club riders out on a weekend ride.

As I’ve said earlier in this post, we really ought to be able to discuss the actual problem (teens engaging in risky behaviour on the roads; illegal e-bikes being a fire risk; Parliament not acting on the recommendations re e-bikes), without blaming people who have nothing to do with electric motorbikes, but who are simply enjoying using a cheap & environmentally-friendly form of transport.

To be fair I did mention cyclists in my original post, perhaps you only read the title. Actually read it and you will see that I wrote that some cyclists are also a problem. What I didn't mention was cars.
That's because moving cars are not usually not problem for me when I am on the pavement. I was writing about my fear of e-bikes and e-scooters and also stated that some cyclists were a problem.
I don't believe cyclists are "the problem" or "all entitled." These are not my words. Some are a menace. Others are considerate eg: my DD and her dad.

Of course cars kill more pedestrians than cyclists or e-bike or e-scooter riders. Irrelevant. My post was about the fear of being a disabled pedestrian walking in an area with increasing pavement traffic. Yes mostly e-bikes and e-scooters and also some very entitled cyclists. Yes they are a greener form of transport but so is walking and I would like to do that without being knocked over.

If you would like to start a thread about the problems with cars go ahead. There are certainly some incredibly selfish drivers and many who think the pavement is a car park but that's not this thread.* *If others want to mention it on here fine but its irrelevant to this topic.

....and Benvenuto no I'm not talking about motorbikes. Motorbikes and e-bikes are very different and I can tell the difference.

Cycle lane intrastructure in the UK is awful generally, given the age of most towns/cities there is little space to put them in, When they are put in you tend to find people walking their dogs on them or parents walking side-by-side pushing buggies/prams as the surfaces are smoother for them than the pavements.

WRT to e-bikes and e-scooters, to be legal the e-bikes should be pedal assist only, as in you pedal for the engine to work and they should stop aiding above a certain speed (15 mph?) but no-one will buy one like that so all of them are very easy to fiddle so that they work without you having to pedal.

Over here a number of e-scooters now have lights on them and indicators etc etc and the legal age limit is 16 and you need have a motor-bike license to ride them (road only).

I have read your post very carefully - and indeed pointed you towards relevant recommendations to Parliament. I have also said I have a lot of sympathy with your points.

However, the language we use when talking about this issue matters and this is a thread where there have been some unpleasant comments about cyclists - because they are just cyclists. It’s your discussion, but you haven’t objected to them, which implies that you agree with them. I suggest you read the description of cyclists posted at 16.09 yesterday and some of the other comments about cyclists on this thread & you might see why I’m upset. You’ve said that your DH & DD cycle so you could consider if it’s a fair way to describe them. This type of language isn’t just used online - I’ve been shouted at just for being on a bike; I can also think of 2 recent cases local to me where cyclists were injured because the driver just didn’t think they should be on the road (one assault, one dangerous driving - neither cyclist was at fault). As I’ve said several times on this thread, we have to be able to discuss road safety without people having a go at cyclists simply for existing.

As for motorbikes, technically there is a good chance that the riders are motorcyclists if their e-bike is too powerful to be classed as an EAPC (electrically assisted pedal cycle). It’s the engine size that matters not the appearance of the bike. The actual rules are:

”If your electric bike does not meet the EAPCrules then it’s classed as a motorcycle or moped.
Your bike is not an EAPC if it:

can be propelled at more than 15.5 miles per hour (mph) by the motor

has a continuous rated power output higher than 250 watts

does not have pedals that can propel it”

(This should be a list of bullet points but I can’t get that to format properly - the source is “Riding an electric bike: the rules” on gov.uk ).

This point is often overlooked in discussions about e-bikes, but it is actually quite important. Firstly, because it means the rider should be wearing a motorcycle helmet, have insurance and a licence. Secondly, it means that the police will not exercise discretion if the rider is on the pavement - if the e-bike is a motorbike it has to be on the road. Thirdly,
it needs vehicle approval (which is why there is an Issue re illegal e-bikes as these are the ones without vehicle approval).

As for why all this is important to your OP - it’s quite simple. You want (understandably) the riders of e-bikes to be punished if they are riding anti socially - if the e-bike is classed an electric motorbike, then the rider is likely to get a more severe punishment.

Not yet. But I was hit by a cyclist on a bicycle (just to clarify) who came round the side of a bus while I was almost across the road on a green light for me, red for her. Luckily I just had a huge bruise on my arm!

This majority of cyclists do use the road. And the majority follow the associated laws and rules of the road. As always, it is the minority who don't that get noticed. I ride legally on the road, and am a confident cyclist. The abuse I still get is phenomenal. People, probably including you, seem to believe that this is acceptable behaviour and that it is possible to cut us up, swear, throw things, assault us etc. I can understand why a less confident cyclist would choose the pavement. Until we address abusive driver behaviour and provide the right infrastructure, we cannot get all cyclists off pavements.

This is a totally separate issue to illegal use of e-scooters and modified e-bikes which round here are predominantly used by the wee scrotes, ASBO kids, drug dealers and petty criminals as they know the police cannot catch them safely.

We have both of these in large numbers in the city where I live and they cause remarkably few issues. Scooters cause a few more problems than bikes but nothing to get worked up about.
I think the UK could do a much better job of embracing them and using them productively.