Cyclist jailed for pavement death

[rf065]

There are still some areas where pedestrians and cyclists have to compete for space and some of the pedestrians could do with a lesson on passing safely.

That really sums up most cyclists attitude, incredible!

Russ

 

[Deleted member 6183]

Thdre seems to be a difference between recreational cyclists and the more serious types. Where I live there is a cycle path curving around the bay from my village to town.

Those cycing for fun or with families are happy to use the path and cause no harm to anyone.

The serious cyclists use the road and tend to cycle in groups, the minority cycle in single file but the more aggressive ones cycle 2 abreast - why do they do this?
If you upset them in any way they start shouting and shaking their fists or worse, how do you think my Mrs feels when surrounded at a junction by a gang of aggressive bike boys on a sunny day with the roof down?

 

[grober]

New Legislation Required!

Talking about shared pedestrian/cyclist areas just confuses the issue. The majority of cyclist+pedestrian collisions occur when cyclists are cycling at speed in areas where cyclists are expressly prohibited and pedestrians rightly don't expect to have to be constantly on guard against being mown down by cyclist travelling at 25mph. The fact that this case had to resort to some archaic law to prosecute is a further indication that new legislation is required in this area. This will be a considerable inconvenience to the many considerate and law abiding cyclists but its the irresponsible cyclists who have brought this on the cycling community--- no one else.

 

[mirras]

That really sums up most cyclists attitude, incredible!

Russ

I'm talking about split paths with a solid white line down the middle and nice little pictures of a bicycle on one side and pedestrians on the other... It's not unreasonable to expect to cycle, at a reasonable speed, without folk shouting at you for cycling on the 'pavement' while they are walking.

I slow right down for kids / dogs / old folk, use a bell for others and slow down if they don't see me and thank those who do see me and move so don't lump me in as having a bad attitude toward anyone. I walk these same paths too...

 

[Mr E]

Oi.... I saw a chavved up corsa driving like a utter **** this morning, what is about four wheels that makes a person behave in such a way?

generalisations are pretty useless in my example too.



Biscuit
user of two feet, bus, two unmotorised wheels,three unmotorised wheels, motorbike and car.

I'll remove the generalisation - I only mentioned the guy on the motorbike as I happen to know him (he lives in the same village). Nice guy, wife, 3 kids, etc, etc, but known by all to turn into a loon as soon as he throws his leg over the bike. In all other aspects of life he would appear to be a sensible chap.

Is it perhaps the perceived vulnerability that winds up the "agression" factor? I'd be interested to know.

If it wasn't for the fact that I know the guy I wouldn't have mentioned it as the slightest criticism of bikers does seem to spark off things.

And I also walk, cycle, ride a bike, etc, etc.

 

[Stratman]

Pontoneer wrote:-

I do feel that the reason disobedience of traffic rules is so prevalent amongst so many bike riders is anonymity . Again I would be happy to pay a reasonable 'road tax' as a cyclist which would cover the cost of registration and wear a reflective tabard with a 'registration mark' on the back . Making this compulsory would effectively wipe out the majority of bad cycling overnight since the culprits would be 'caught on camera' in most cities and fined since they could be identified and held accountable . The 'registration number' to be displayed could be as simple as the rider's postcode and house number

I agree that anonomity palys a big part in the wanton disregard of the RTA, but your suggested remedy has a couple of flaws.

1) A clearly visible registration mark hasn't 'effectively wiped out' bad driving, has it?

2) House number and postcode = "This house may be empty" to any passing ratboys.

 

[219]

The serious cyclists use the road and tend to cycle in groups, the minority cycle in single file but the more aggressive ones cycle 2 abreast - why do they do this?

I think they interpret the part of Highway Code Rule 51 : " You should not ride more than two abreast " as " You have an absolute right to cycle two abreast whenever you like , no matter what congestion it causes to other road users behind "

Perhaps they didn't read the next line of Rule 51 : " You should ride in single file on narrow or busy roads "

Sadly , this is only advice and not law .

Rule 53 , however IS LAW " You MUST NOT ride in a dangerous , careless or inconsiderate manner " .

If that is insufficient , Rule 145 could also apply : " Do not hold up a long queue of traffic , especially if you are driving a large or slow moving vehicle ......if neccessary pull in where it is safe and let traffic pass . "

 

[Deleted member 6183]

I think they interpret the part of Highway Code Rule 51 : " You should not ride more than two abreast " as " You have an absolute right to cycle two abreast whenever you like , no matter what congestion it causes to other road users behind "

Perhaps they didn't read the next line of Rule 51 : " You should ride in single file on narrow or busy roads "

Sadly , this is only advice and not law .

Rule 53 , however IS LAW " You MUST NOT ride in a dangerous , careless or inconsiderate manner " .

If that is insufficient , Rule 145 could also apply : " Do not hold up a long queue of traffic , especially if you are driving a large or slow moving vehicle ......if neccessary pull in where it is safe and let traffic pass . "

I'm not convinced that the ones around here have any regard for the highway code, it's the missus who gets excited over them (not in a lycra clad way, I think)

The most annoying cyclist hat I see regularly is one that only uses the cycle path, does not get in the way, jump red lights or do anythng antisocial in the slightest. He rides one of those lying down bikes I think it's called a recumbent or something.

I can't explain why he annoys me so much, it might be his smug smirk or the flag on a long pole to make sure that he's seen but I just want to punch his face in.

This character even wrote a long letter to the local paper complaining that he gets abuse because of his silly bike, I wouldn't go as far as abusing but I can see why the local kids give him a hard time. He seems to stare at everyone he passes just inviting comment.

I've heard of small man syndrome...

 

[219]

I'm talking about split paths with a solid white line down the middle and nice little pictures of a bicycle on one side and pedestrians on the other... It's not unreasonable to expect to cycle, at a reasonable speed, without folk shouting at you for cycling on the 'pavement' while they are walking.

I slow right down for kids / dogs / old folk, use a bell for others and slow down if they don't see me and thank those who do see me and move so don't lump me in as having a bad attitude toward anyone. I walk these same paths too...

Agree on that one .

Just on Saturday , I was out with the family ( 4 of us on bikes , me towing the trail buggy with Harris , aged one ) and we went for a cycle along the esplanade in Aberdeen which is marked out exactly like that with a white line separating cyclists and pedestrians .

The place was fairly busy as it was a glorious sunny day : there were quite a lot of adult cyclists , like us , keeping to the cycle lane , a fair few children of various ages on bikes , some 'toddlers' on trikes/their 1st bikes with stabilisers some in the cycle lane and others in the pedestrian lane with mum/dad keeping an eye on them and no one complaining on either side .

The vast majority of pedestrians kept to the pedestrian part but a few were wandering into the cycle lane these tended to be 1) the elderly , 2 ) parents running after young children - both categories can be easily forgiven and a lot of tolerance extended - however the third category I noticed , who were a nuisance , were dog walkers , often with dogs on long , extending leads stretched right across the cycle lane and who plainly couldn't care a hoot what inconvenience they were causing . Most did move after a single 'ding' on my bell when approaching but a couple did seem annoyed when I had to resort to a loud 'excuse me' when coming up behind them .

I didn't see ANY adult cyclists on the pedestrian track at any time .

 

[219]

Pontoneer wrote:-



I agree that anonomity palys a big part in the wanton disregard of the RTA, but your suggested remedy has a couple of flaws.

1) A clearly visible registration mark hasn't 'effectively wiped out' bad driving, has it?

Well , I'd debate that it more or less has : you don't see a majority of motorised vehicle drivers/riders blatantly barging through red lights , mowing down pedestrians on crossings or tearing down footpaths - precisely because they know they'd be caught .

2) House number and postcode = "This house may be empty" to any passing ratboys.

Fair point - so a different system might work better .

 

[Deleted member 6183]

On a more light hearted note I had a surreal couple of minutes in Southampton this week.

First sign that it was to be a slightly unusual day was passing a residential street called Benny Hill Close, I'm not kidding it was actually called that. Imagine living there and giving your address for some kind of delivery?

Second was a bit of a heart warmer. I noticed a cyclist ahead and he didn't look to steady so I slowed until I could safely pass and leave a wide berth. As I was waiting I could see that something was a bit wrong with the cyclist, it took about 20 seconds to spot exactly what was amiss. He was only pedalling with one leg but the other pedal was not turning.
I assume that he had somehow disabled the surplus pedal and engaged only the right leg one. The left still sort of moved but only a few inches either way.

It didn't really seem to slow him down greatly, he was at least 70 possibly 80 years old and gave me a very cheery wave when I safely passed him.

 

[Smatt]

I think they interpret the part of Highway Code Rule 51 : " You should not ride more than two abreast " as " You have an absolute right to cycle two abreast whenever you like , no matter what congestion it causes to other road users behind "

Perhaps they didn't read the next line of Rule 51 : " You should ride in single file on narrow or busy roads "

Sadly , this is only advice and not law .

Rule 53 , however IS LAW " You MUST NOT ride in a dangerous , careless or inconsiderate manner " .

If that is insufficient , Rule 145 could also apply : " Do not hold up a long queue of traffic , especially if you are driving a large or slow moving vehicle ......if neccessary pull in where it is safe and let traffic pass . "

A person on a cycle has just as much right to be on the road as one in a car; we are likely to see many more people taking to two wheels with economic & eco considerations.

Rule 163
give motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders at least as much room as you would when overtaking a car

Rules 212 & 213
Give cyclists & motorcyclists plenty of room

-ie the message is; give plenty of room!

Who gives that much room?
The majority of cars, in my experience, roar past at 60-80mph within 2-3 foot; often much less. Thats still a relative speed of 35-55mph even if one is doing 25mph. When cars drive by so closely, it is not the most pleasant experience & this is probably why some cyclists don't react so well to particularly bad drivers

If car drivers are giving as much room to a cyclist as they would to a car, then it does not make that much difference whether cyclists are in single file or double on a wide road, although rule 51 still applies.

With regard to rule 145, how many drivers are aware of rule 129/163 re only overtake/straddle solid lines if cycle moving at 10mph or less?? (I thought this used to be 15mph?). In my experience, no cars follow this rule, as I very rarely cycle that slowly, except when hazards/conditions/other road users necessitate. I cycle many single track roads in the Fens and frequently pull over to allow traffic to pass if necessary.

We could talk about rules all day. I think the main point is that ALL road users should be more aware of the law/highway code and be considerate of other road users.
Singling out a group of road users using a specific mode of transport is not helpful and is very small minded, as some of the posters on this thread have illustrated, particularly when their posts descend into derision of that group.

For the original topic of this thread, more relevant factors are the ones common to the majority of road accidents; driver error, speed, flouting the law/highway code & inexperience. The cyclist may have been just as likely to mow the victim down had he been using a different form of transport

 

[verytalldave]

A small point, but one that appears to have been overlooked is that it is illegal for anyone to ride a bike on a pavement with a wheel diameter greater than 20". That goes for both children and adults.
Bikes with wheel diameters of 20" or less can be ridden on the pavement, but they must give priority to pedestrians at all times.
Its also illegal to RIDE a bike over a zebra crossing. The cyclist must dismount and walk the bike across.

 

[Smatt]

A small point, but one that appears to have been overlooked is that it is illegal for anyone to ride a bike on a pavement with a wheel diameter greater than 20". That goes for both children and adults.
Bikes with wheel diameters of 20" or less can be ridden on the pavement, but they must give priority to pedestrians at all times.
Its also illegal to RIDE a bike over a zebra crossing. The cyclist must dismount and walk the bike across.

That's an interesting one VTD & obviously a sub 20" bike could be just as lethal!

 

[LTD]

I used to race bikes at amateur level and trained almost constantly.

The reason that groups of riders tend to go two abreast is simple. Visibility. A short pack of riders the width of a car is much more visible than a chain of single riders. Another thing to factor in is the shocking state of the kerb edges - drains, ruts etc. all are nightmares to cyclists and an outer rider means that experienced cyclists can flick round these problems without actually causing the outer rider to move.

The other reason for riders 'doubling up' is to relieve the workload on a journey. I used to ride at least 100 miles on a Sunday and there is a definite pattern to a group working as a unit to maintain pace. The group actually rotates so that everyone takes a spell at the front. You will notice the inside line drop back a bike length and then the rear rider moves to the outside behind the last rider. The front man on the outside then takes the inside line and the group come back.

My most serious accident, the one that fractured my skull and stopped me racing, was one where the Gas Board dug a road up, the Electricity Board shut down the street-lighting and ***** nicked the metal cover over the trench. 30ish mph into a 3ft deep hole was not a lot of fun.

There are idiots that drive cars and idiots that ride bikes. There are also idiots that think cycle lanes are a panacea of safety. They help but are often full of glass and road debris that makes using them a bad idea. The painted nature of them makes them almost suicidal in the wet or under severe braking.

I still get out on my bikes when I can. I am grateful to have part of the National Cycle Network on my doorstep yet I am still amazed at the number of dog-walkers, joggers and other f**kwits that they have a God-given right to abuse me for using the cycle path they enjoy.

Lunacy exists at all levels - learn to love it !