If you had read my posts you would know that I am not criticising anyone for walking bicycles on pavements (or anywhere else) but for riding them. Which is NOT legal.
You would also know that I did exclude children of primary school age from my comments because, as you say, it is not safe for them to be on the road. They are still an immense potential danger to pedestrians, especially babies, other children, the old and infirm, but we will have to live with that. I am talking about cretinous, pompous, self-important adults riding bicycles on pavements, crossings and pedestrianised zones which do not have designated cycle paths on them. Have I now made my point sufficiently clear?
Yesterday evening my daughter's pushchair was nearly hit by a man on a bike. He was coming round a corner. On a pavement. As a human being, he was unable to see round corners. Why should my daughter and me be put at risk because he's scared of going on the road with the big boys?
Perhaps - and I'm going to be radical here - if being able to cycle is that important to you, then yes, you should move to Canada, or Holland, or some other cyclist's utopia. Or alternatively you could stop bleating because you are not permitted to break the established law of the land which has been put in place for the greater good. It's what the rest of us do every single day of our lives. You probably do it yourself when you're not on a bike. Why not apply it as a uniform policy and keep things simple? Or is that too "ridiculous"?
The cyclists who whinge about this remind me of nothing so much as American citizens who want to exercise their right to keep guns in their houses as guaranteed by some archaic law, in the face of common sense, changing realities, ordinary civility and humanity, and simple, overwhelming practicality.
The main difference is that they do actually have a legal right to do so, however silly that may be. British cyclists don't. Get over it.