Why Do Cyclists Think That Dinging A Bell Legitimises Riding On The Pavement?

[ToraToraTora]

Just had a run in with an idiot cyclist, riding on the pavement when there is a perfectly good road to his right. Dinging the p0xy little bell for pedestriants to get out of the way! Was there ever a device that has a more opposite effect? All it does for me is tell me there is a retard comming make sure you block him! Why can't cyclists ride on the road? Not too tricky is it?

[douglas9401]

Why? Because they are superior beings to whom any rule, law or custom does not apply.
They are on a mission to reverse global warming, as long as the rest of us are prepared to put up with their loutish behaviour.

[Cloverjo]

I don't know, Tora. It can be difficult riding on a busy road. I think the point of the bell is to let you know a cyclist is behind you, not necessarily to tell you to get out of the way. He might have just gone around you if you'd carried on with the path and speed you were taking.

[joeluke]

Cyclists are retards?

Us cyclists ride on pavements where we can because it's dangerous on the road with all the idiot drivers

Would you have the same attitude if it was a person on a motorised scooter trying to get past you?

[ToraToraTora]

cyclists that ride on the pavement are retards.

if you cannot ride on the road you need training. I cycle only on the road and frankly I find it a good deal safer especially as know how to behave in amongst cars.

[ummmm]

Most streets are empty of pedestrians. If a cyclist belled me I'd move out the way. It's not very hard.

Roads are dangerous....fact.

[jim360]

It can be a bit of a nightmare for cyclists because on the one hand the roads aren't always safe either, and on the other hand there isn't always the respite of a pavement because pedestrians do after all have right of way there. So where do we go?

One time in Cambridge I was trundling slowly along behind some pedestrian, fully aware that he had right of way, and waiting for the road/ pavement to widen up so that I could pass. Anyway he saw me and then proceeded to go from complaining that I was pushing him along (not entirely true, although I accepted that he had right of way) so seemingly holding me responsible for everything that is wrong with modern society. Which strikes me as going a bit far.

And then there is an incident that I remember very clearly, when a bunch of morons spotted me and then danced about in the road in front of me, apparently desperate for me to hit them. What the heck was that about?

In my experiences though the people who are most a danger to cyclists are, in order (a) other cyclists, (b) themselves, (c) pedestrians. Even if we are going to encourage more cycling, and we should, I'd have thought a certain amount of training before letting us loose on the streets is necessary.

[vulcan42]

joeluke sums up the attitude of most cyclists. Because it's dangerous to cycle on the road they will cycle on the pavement thus making it more dangerous for the pedestrians who are entitled to be there. Motorised scooters are just as bad, I've been knocked down by one because the driver was on his mobile phone.

[whiskeryron]

A pedal cycle is a two wheel vehicle & therefore should only be used on the road or designated cycle track. It is already illegal to ride on a pedestrian pavement. Not only would I like to see this law enforced but I would go further & say that as a vehicle riders should be taxed & insured before being allowed to be out.

[joeluke]

Tora.....'cyclists that ride on the pavement are retards.'

Do you have a link to back up this sweeping statement?



No, I didn't think so

[SlackAlice]

Your assuming motorists all know how to deal with cyclists! Risky!

I also ride a bike and have resorted to the pavement on occasion to get away from aggressive roads, although I do allow pedestrians priority especially those with a mobile stuck to their ear.

If the pavements have too many pedestrians then I'll dismount and walk.

[ummmm]

In my younger days I cycled everywhere. There wasn't the same amount of cars on the road.

[joeluke]

75% of my cycle journey to work is on a pavement which is also an official cycle path and so I have every right to cycle on it......

......and expect pedestrians to move aside when I need to get past

How difficult can it be for a pedestrian to change position slightly? Perhaps it's you who needs training in how to do this Tora?

[McMouse]

I ride my bike on bridle paths and other approved footpaths and always ding my bell to warn pedestrians. Most appreciate it but some are totally intolerant of cyclists who dare to share their space.

[jim360]

Oh and then there's all the other incidents of pedestrians just randomly stepping out in front of me causing me to brake sharply -- it's as if "no cars = no danger", the bike just doesn't register. And I was on the road then before you ask.

The problem is that every group seems to despise the other so that there's no respect. I've seen cyclists behave like utter morons and some of them are (my all-time favourite remains a cyclists on the wrong side of the world apparently trying to play chicken with a car... the car won but it could have been so nasty), but then so can pedestrians be, wandering over roads without looking or occupying cycle lanes. Branding one group or the other "retards" just isn't even close to true or fair.

[Obiter]

Irrespective of the rights and wrongs of cycling on the pavement, at least by ringing the bell he gives you warning of his approach, thus avoiding a nasty shock in the rear!

[ToraToraTora]

Joe - "Do you have a link to back up this sweeping statement?" why do I need a link? my opinion. I suggest you take off the steadying wheels and do a cycling proficiency course.

slackalice: "Your assuming motorists all know how to deal with cyclists! Risky!" who said that? I'm suggestting I know how to deal with traffic.

jim: I normally respect your knowledge and opinion but in this case you are wrong, there is no excuse for riding on the pavement.

Classically trained cyclists are taught how to cycle properly on the road,take roundabouts, right turns properly etc.

[Obiter]

When I was a kid there used to be something called the cycling proficiency test. Does it still exist? I never took it for the simple reason that I couldn't afford a bike!

[ToraToraTora]

jim I only brand those cycling on the pavement retards as I would a pedestrian walking down the middle of the road.

The problem is that most cyclists seem to think it is legal to ride on the pavement. Probably because they have now splashed some paint about and designated some pavements as cycle lanes, hence cyclists think all the pavements are fair game, they have also dropped the kerbs for wheel chairs but the cyclists think it's for their benefit. So now we have a generation of cyclists who cannot ride a bike to save their lives dodging around pedestrians dinging their p0xy annying little bells, death's to good them! rant over!

[jim360]

Up to a point I know I'm wrong really but there is no way his response was proportionate. If I'd been cycling at breakneck speed expecting him to get out of the way then he'd have had every right to shout at me. As it was I was essentially stationary waiting for him to move along to where the pavement widened and five yards later became a road.

And the wider point that pedestrians can be equally careless, wandering into actual cycle lanes or in front of bike on roads, also ought to be accepted. Are all pedestrians retards for doing so? The cycle lane is MY right of way and so few people seem to accept that.

The real problem is that pedestrians and cyclists in particular are allowed on the roads and footways with precisely no training and as long as that's the case you will get people on both sides behaving dangerously, to themselves and others. Cyclists aren't necessarily more guilty of this than anyone else but perhaps they are more visible.