London SE1 community website

Cyclist/pedestrian collision yesterday - Tower Bridge Road

Join in these discussions today! Log in or register.
Pages:  Previous1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Current: 4 of 7
Tuesday 28 April 2015 4.14pm
Posters on this forum "joke" about running over and killing cyclists. That's the same mentality as hit-and-runners have. Cyclists are worthless, and that's an attitude reflected by the law, so all a driver has to do is say "The sun was in my eyes" and they walk free from court after killing a cyclist doing nothing wrong.

Whoever hit Andrea is a lowlife.

Some riders use the pavement to avoid psycho drivers.

Those two statements are not mutually exclusive.
Tuesday 28 April 2015 5.24pm
spindrift wrote:
Posters on this forum "joke" about running over and killing cyclists. That's the same mentality as hit-and-runners have. Cyclists are worthless, and that's an attitude reflected by the law, so all a driver has to do is say "The sun was in my eyes" and they walk free from court after killing a cyclist doing nothing wrong.
Whoever hit Andrea is a lowlife.

Some riders use the pavement to avoid psycho drivers.

Those two statements are not mutually exclusive.

Some minor flaws in that: as already pointed out, cycling on pavements is illegal (by all means dismount and walk), and also, where should pedestrians go to avoid psycho cyclists?
Tuesday 28 April 2015 5.30pm
Gavin Smith wrote:
Terry, that's insulting to the poor lady who was hit. Cycling on the pavement is illegal for good reason.

Nonsense. Everyone has sympathy with people who get injured.

Cycling on the pavement is far from ideal, as this incident shows. But it is perfectly legal in other places. Many pavements are designated shared use by cheapskate councils who claim they are supporting cycling. The accident rate is very low.

But lots of people see cycling as a problem. Perhaps they forget that everyone riding a bike is someone who is not in a motor vehicle. Everyone gains from more people cycling, even if they are forced to ride on the pavement.
Tuesday 28 April 2015 5.40pm
There's no reasoning with some people, so I am off.
Tuesday 28 April 2015 6.11pm
"Some minor flaws in that: as already pointed out, cycling on pavements is illegal"

See, this is the sort of rank dishonesty that exposes your mustelid nature. There's nothing in my post that says cycling on pavements is legal, there's nothing in my post that even condones pavement cycling. And why do you keep announcing your departure when you never stay away, you silly drama queen?

I note with disgust that you STILL haven't condemned the hit-and-running drivers in London. You haven't even offered to help track them down. You've let yourself and every driver down.
Tuesday 28 April 2015 6.14pm
"Everyone gains from more people cycling, even if they are forced to ride on the pavement."

The first part is definitely true. More cyclists means safer roads for everyone. For example a community that doubles cycling rates sees a decline of a third in RTCs. That's exactly what's happened in London since 2000-cycling rates doubled, accident rates halved.

The second part isn't true. I understand why riders use pavements because there are more uninsured cars in this country than regular cyclist commuters. In other words drivers break the law more than cyclists before you even start counting speeding, drunk driving, drugged driving etc etc.
Tuesday 28 April 2015 7.55pm
Since we're on the subject of (drama) queens
Tuesday 28 April 2015 9.08pm
spindrift wrote:
"Everyone gains from more people cycling, even if they are forced to ride on the pavement."

The second part isn't true.


There are pavements where it is legal to cycle, and accident rates are low. There are countries where pavement riding is the norm. There is little inherent danger because riders are generally very cautious around pedestrians. Now that people are encouraged to drive and park on the pavement, where they injure and kill many pedestrians, why is there so much concern about cycling? Dangerous drivers should be banned from the road. No-one says all drivers should be banned. Deal with dangerous cyclists, don't ban all of them.

Where more people cycle, there are fewer traffic accidents, less poisonous air pollution, less congestion, less noise, less obesity, less ill-health. Everyone gains. But few people are willing to ride in road traffic and the pavement is usually the only option in this backward country.

When there are proper cycle tracks, people should feel free to complain about pavement riding. Until then, they need to get used to it.
Tuesday 28 April 2015 9.21pm
,
Tuesday 28 April 2015 9.57pm
One take on cars (note that it's on the pavement as well).
Pages:  Previous1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Current: 4 of 7

To post a message, please log in or register..
We are part of
Independent Community News Network
Email newsletter

For the latest local news and events direct to your inbox every Monday, you need our weekly email newsletter SE1 Direct.

7,000+ locals read it every week. Can you afford to miss out?

Read the latest issue before signing up

Also on the forum
Views expressed in this discussion forum are those of the contributors and may not reflect the editorial policy of this website. Please read our terms and conditions