But some people do if they deem the road unsafe, mainly kids, and everybody sensibly turns a blind eye.
A bit off topic, but, IMO you can’t pick and choose what laws you want to comply with. The answer for a cyclist who doesn’t feel the road is safe to ride on is to get off, and walk with the bike on the footpath legally. A few more minutes getting to their destination shouldn’t be a concern and they need to have more patience. Risking injury to people walking on the footpath due to a cyclists haste and impatience to get somewhere isn’t reasonable or fair. You can’t for instance always determine what physical or mental challenges a footpath user might have, you can’t anticipate what they might do, or how to pass them safely on a bike.But some people do if they deem the road unsafe, mainly kids, and everybody sensibly turns a blind eye.
It is worrying; as we see from this thread there are a lot of confused and bad tempered drivers, not to mention the thought of having Deema behind you, photographing your bottom, in between frantically flipping through the Highway Code trying to work out how to overtake you! Thank god his wife is driving!
already comfirmed that certain people on here don't think the rules apply to everyone and that cyclists can do anything they want with no regard for other road users, whether legal or not apparently.A bit off topic, but, IMO you can’t pick and choose what laws you want to comply with. The answer for a cyclist who doesn’t feel the road is safe to ride on is to get off, and walk with the cycle on the footpath legally. A few more minutes getting to their destination shouldn’t be a concern and they need to have more patience. Risking people walking in the footpath due to a cyclists haste and impatience to get somewhere isn’t reasonable or fair.
And yet there are many paths with signs that show that it is a shared path by pedestrians and cyclists.A bit off topic, but, IMO you can’t pick and choose what laws you want to comply with. The answer for a cyclist who doesn’t feel the road is safe to ride on is to get off, and walk with the bike on the footpath legally. A few more minutes getting to their destination shouldn’t be a concern and they need to have more patience. Risking injury to people walking on the footpath due to a cyclists haste and impatience to get somewhere isn’t reasonable or fair. You can’t for instance always determine what physical or mental challenges a footpath user might have, you can’t anticipate what they might do, or how to pass them safely on a bike.
Inevitable…. You are, despite all your protestations, only here to troll. Either that or you simply do not have the capacity to be trusted to navigate 1.5 tons of potential weapon along a road.
Congratulations you are person
I am confused but more confused at the bad tempered drivers you’re referring to. I’ve not seen any evidence of it. You also mentioned rage a few posts back. I’ve not seen any of that either.But some people do if they deem the road unsafe, mainly kids, and everybody sensibly turns a blind eye.
It is worrying; as we see from this thread there are a lot of confused and bad tempered drivers, not to mention the thought of having Deema behind you, photographing your bottom, in between frantically flipping through the Highway Code trying to work out how to overtake you! Thank god his wife is driving!
Getting a bit repetitive this, but I didn't say that.already comfirmed that certain people on here don't think the rules apply to everyone and that cyclists can do anything they want with no regard for other road users, whether legal or not apparently.
Also to ride centre lane if necessary, to prevent overtaking, if there is not enough room, as discussed above several times.Seems people don't want to acknowledge the guidance for cyclists including 'Allow faster moving vehicles to overtake where safe to do so (Rule 72)' but are happy to quote all of the rules for cars.
This thread is now going around in circles.Everyone has a duty of care when on or near the roads. the problem occurs when you have inconsiderate drivers and inconsiderate cyclists and I don't think you will ever get rid of either sadly.
"Whilst it is quite rare for pedestrians to be killed or seriously injured as a result of a cyclist dangerous driving – according to a parliamentary report published in 2020, there were only five reported pedestrian deaths involving a bicycle in 2019 as opposed to the 48 cyclists and 305 pedestrians killed by cars"" and that cyclists can do anything they want with no regard for other road users, whether legal or not apparently. "
There are thousands upon thousands upon thousands of vids on you tube showing bad to dangerous driving, and yet only a handful of vids showing cyclists breaking the laws of the road, mainly nipping through red lights, usually when there is nothing coming the other way.
So yes I agree that some, a small minority of cyclists break the laws, but this percentage in comparison to other road users, mainly in cars is so small its pretty much meaningless.
And of course those killed by cyclist is also proportionally small, maybe one or two per year, in comparison to 5 each and every day by motorists, and thats killed, the injury rate from minor to very serious is considerably higher.
And yet some choose to overlook these statistics and rant and rave about a few cyclists nipping through a red light, or as you say 'cycling on the pavement' which I have also explained might be illegal on paper, but the police AND government have chosen to overlook these minor infractions if the rider is doing so in a considerate manner.
Five people, five human beings with families and their lives snuffed out by motorists each and every day, not to mention those left with life changing injuries.
And some of you here have the AUDACITY to rant and rave about cyclists.
Were cyclists killing and maiming multiple people every day, cycling would be completely banned.
Accidents are caused by motorists due to a range of factors, and impatience is one of the main ones.
Not all laws are enforced equally and not all laws/regulations are known widely. The fact that some people avoid being arrested for murdering someone does grant the right to murder in law. However there are times when murder is considered acceptable such as in self defence and the same applies to cycling on a pavement. You are not permitted to cycle on a footpath but can with the appropriate mitigation. The fact that the police address only a fraction of minor crimes also contributes to the lack of prosecution for pavement cycling, though it does happen.- Im not trolling you Paul - Im just confirming what the law says about this.
Oh yes we can, and i do REGULARLY. in fact its the safest place given drivers kill five people every single day.
But yes indeedy, cyclists can legally cycle on the pavement area.
I have cycled numerous times past beat policemen both on foot and passing in their cars. At no time have I been stopped and challenged that I was breaking the law.
Why do you think that is ?.
If the law is broken or infringed upon, it is the legal duty for the police to challenge that person, and they do.
Many people claim to know the laws. When clearly they do not.
A could of weeks ago, i rode to the supermarket, and on that journey it involved crossing at a toucan crossing. I waited, along with another cyclist, and a couple of pedestrians.
Crossing light came on and we all dutifully crossed.
As I got to the other side, the leading car that had stopped and was close to the kerb rolled down his window to challenge me for crossing there, telling me in a loud and confident manner that I was not allowed to cross on this type of crossing.
I politely told him not only was I allowed to do it, but there was a bicycle symbol, next to the pedestrian symbol showing that bikes can use it.
But he vigorously shook his head and insisted I was in the wrong. I told him plainly that I allowed to use it, and this was confirmed int he highway code. He disagreed strongly, shaking his head telling me that the highway code said no such thing.
I KNOW the highway code concerning cycling, and do swot up on these things. its in section 25 under crossings if you are interested.
Now clearly he was uninformed, and was making a complete fool of himself claiming he knew the code, when the point is he didn't. I only wish i had a copy to hand. Maybe I should start carrying photocopies so i could patiently wait and watch his face drop as rapidly as his overblown ego.
But from experience, even showing proof to these people, they wouldn't believe it or more likely would ignore the facts, and believe wholeheartedly that it is their opinion on their interpretation of the rules than matter more than the rules themselves.
Now back to the cycling on the pavement thing.
If a cyclist believes strongly that his/her life is in danger on a road, they can legally cycle on the pavement, but must do so in a safe manner. So a little over walking speed, maybe 7 or 8mph, taking care and consideration of those around you.
Obviously someone riding quickly is not allowed. but with due care and attention there is no problem.
And thats really what it is all about - Due care and attention of other users.
Now when I have to cycle on the road, and most are 2 lane, with one lane taken up by parked cars, i must ride in the primary position, close to the white dividing line. The law and code tell me to do this because that is the safest position for me to ride in.
But I know at my some 15/16 mph that im going to get a build up of traffic behind me, so when i think it safe, or feel that the build up had gotten quite long, I will pull right in and bump up onto the pavement and allow that traffic to clear.
Im not doing that for the benefit of the drivers, who might need to get to their destination 15 seconds quicker, but I do so because in my 3 decades of being a road user I have witnessed countless, i repeat countless times impatient drivers have taken on dangerous maneuvers, which could put me at risk in order to gain those extra precious seconds off their journey.
did you think everyone was going to come to an agreement?This thread is now going around in circles.
Now your just being silly. Imagine comparing murder to someone cycling slowly along a pavement.The fact that some people avoid being arrested for murdering someone does grant the right to murder in law
You think so?Now your just being silly. Imagine comparing murder to someone cycling slowly along a pavement.
There wouldn't be any deaths thenWould that have been acceptable if the drivers had been driving slowly?
You make my point for me…There wouldn't be any deaths then
Obviously you haven't seen some of the "Dilbert's" around London for one Like other day had some Rear end wipe come flying through us on an "illegally" electrically powered cycle nie on 30mph well over 20 weaving in and out felt the draft as went past me and if i'd moved a ft would have had in my back.Now your just being silly. Imagine comparing murder to someone cycling slowly along a pavement.
Enter your email address to join: