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: 5 of 7
Tuesday 28 April 2015 10.17pm
Terry99 wrote:
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.

Mmmm, yes I agree with most of that. It's just..

as much as I get fed up with this silly Collective Responsibility thing pavement cyclists exasperate me because they can make it harder for me on my bike ride to work. If I catch up with a rider on the pavement I haven't got a Danny what they're about to do, will they suddenly veer off onto the road? I understand why they use the pavement, I just wish they wouldn't.
Wednesday 29 April 2015 7.36am
Bringing up children, grandchildren, taking neighbours children to school I always impressed on them the dangers of road traffic, that they would be safe on the pavement and to cross at pelican crossings etc.

Now mums have to tell them to watch for cyclists? The damage that idiot caused to poor Andrea could have caused fatal injuries to a child.
Wednesday 29 April 2015 7.52am
My heartfelt best wishes to the lady injured - how awful or her. I hope the chap that hurt her is found and prosecuted.

Unless you're six years old and your bike is pink with tassels on the handlebars, you don't cycle on the pavement. End of.
Wednesday 29 April 2015 8.21am
Jan the old one wrote:
Bringing up children, grandchildren, taking neighbours children to school I always impressed on them the dangers of road traffic, that they would be safe on the pavement and to cross at pelican crossings etc.
Now mums have to tell them to watch for cyclists? The damage that idiot caused to poor Andrea could have caused fatal injuries to a child.

Is cycling on the pavement a new phenomena? I don't think it is any more common now than 10, 20 years ago etc.
Wednesday 29 April 2015 9.01am
Terry99 wrote:
... 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.

Sorry, as an occasional cyclist I can't accept that, Terry99.

'Few people are willing to ride in road traffic...' is nonsense - most cyclists ride in road traffic all the time.

'This backward country' has, I believe, a law against cycling on the pavement. In the absence of a 'proper cycle track' the 'proper' cycle track is the road. A bike is a road vehicle, there is NO excuse for cycling on the pavement unless it's a designated 'shared' space.

If you feel that sharing the road with motor vehicles is always too dangerous DON'T CYCLE!! (I tend only to cycle on Sundays on quiet roads, myself.)

If you judge it's too dangerous in a particular locality or in particular circumstances - bad road layout, pot-holes, a smidsy driving a dumper truck - GET OFF AND WALK.

Misbehaviour by other road users is no excuse - and that includes pedestrians (have you ever seen a pedestrian wait patiently on the pavement for the little green man to light up? - no, unless there's actually moving traffic bearing down on them they'll walk straight across - with children and/or baby-buggies).

Actually, if you don't like stopping at red lights, get off and wheel your bike across - then you can claim to be yet another misbehaving pedestrian, rather than a cyclist breaking the law.
Wednesday 29 April 2015 9.27am
John C wrote:
Terry99 wrote:
... 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.

Sorry, as an occasional cyclist I can't accept that, Terry99.

'Few people are willing to ride in road traffic...' is nonsense - most cyclists ride in road traffic all the time.

'This backward country' has, I believe, a law against cycling on the pavement. In the absence of a 'proper cycle track' the 'proper' cycle track is the road. A bike is a road vehicle, there is NO excuse for cycling on the pavement unless it's a designated 'shared' space.

If you feel that sharing the road with motor vehicles is always too dangerous DON'T CYCLE!! (I tend only to cycle on Sundays on quiet roads, myself.)

If you judge it's too dangerous in a particular locality or in particular circumstances - bad road layout, pot-holes, a smidsy driving a dumper truck - GET OFF AND WALK.

Misbehaviour by other road users is no excuse - and that includes pedestrians (have you ever seen a pedestrian wait patiently on the pavement for the little green man to light up? - no, unless there's actually moving traffic bearing down on them they'll walk straight across - with children and/or baby-buggies).

Actually, if you don't like stopping at red lights, get off and wheel your bike across - then you can claim to be yet another misbehaving pedestrian, rather than a cyclist breaking the law.

Hi John
first, most of what you say is right legally and historically for the UK. But by defending the status quo in the UK regarding cycling you're on the wrong side.

"Most cyclists use the road" - yes, but so few people cycle on the streets (is it 2-3% of traffic) and that IS because it is bloody dangerous due to excessive numbers of cars dominating the road. Saying "then don't cycle" is a sort of victim blaming.

Yes, cyclists should obey the laws and do x y z, but doing so will place them in danger due to our poor road system designed for cars and lorries. Are you seriously going to say to your granny and kids - cycle but just ride on the road with traffic and and take your chances? They won't do it if they have any sense, its a nasty experience and chances are they may have a nasty accident.

Can I suggest you should consider support for a change to Dutch style safe cycle tracks on the roads that everyone on this comments board could use safely to cycle to work/play. It works in the Netherlands and London is in the dark ages in comparison. Lets not pretend all is rosy! :-)

Anyway, I am laughing at this thread. It is a recurring pantomime on SE1. Cyclist and motorist hate, entrenched attitudes, but above all Ed Wood gets his usual good spanking on the issue :-)
Wednesday 29 April 2015 9.48am
johnnytee wrote:
Anyway, I am laughing at this thread. It is a recurring pantomime on SE1. Cyclist and motorist hate, entrenched attitudes, but above all Ed Wood gets his usual good spanking on the issue :-)

LOL. Well, if spanking's your thing.

PS - and I happen to like Ed Wood. Hilarious movie with Johnny Depp as well.
Wednesday 29 April 2015 9.49am
John C:
Quote:
Sorry, as an occasional cyclist I can't accept that, Terry99.
'Few people are willing to ride in road traffic...' is nonsense - most cyclists ride in road traffic all the time.

'This backward country' has, I believe, a law against cycling on the pavement. In the absence of a 'proper cycle track' the 'proper' cycle track is the road. A bike is a road vehicle, there is NO excuse for cycling on the pavement unless it's a designated 'shared' space.

Of course most of the people you see riding a bike are on the road. But most people who might want to cycle don't do so. They are afraid to. So modern cycling rates are very low and we all pay the price for that.

And where do you think small children should cycle? You wouldn't allow them on the pavement, it's illegal, that's an example of how backward this country is in these matters.

And Jan the old one, no the pavements aren't really safe for children now. Not because of bikes, it's drivers who hurt them.
Wednesday 29 April 2015 10.04am
Small children trundling along on their bikes on the pavements don't cause as much damage as the whizzo's in lycra! My kids rode on the pavement..with us guiding them...
Wednesday 29 April 2015 10.10am
Jan the old one wrote:
Small children trundling along on their bikes on the pavements don't cause as much damage as the whizzo's in lycra! My kids rode on the pavement..with us guiding them...

Children can't wait to get on the road. The whizzo's in lycra are not setting a great example though.
Pages:  Previous1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Current: 5 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