moto_psycho Posted April 26, 2007 Report Share Posted April 26, 2007 I tried to make a petition for this, but then it turned out someone else had, and didnt word it very well, still means the same thing though!http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/pavementcycling/#detail Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poopipe Posted April 26, 2007 Report Share Posted April 26, 2007 don't want to start a fight or anything but don't you think it's a bad idea unless there's controls on how fast cyclists can go on the pavement? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al_Fel Posted April 26, 2007 Report Share Posted April 26, 2007 What would you rather be hit with? a man in a car or a man on a bike? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaRtZ Posted April 26, 2007 Report Share Posted April 26, 2007 on a slightly related note, it winds me up on why roadies use the road when (near me) theres a perfectly good cycle path? i mean wtf? they'd rather face more danger and piss off loads of motorists than use the cyclepath - which the government has spent thousands of pounds constructing. So you see building a cyclepath doesn't mean cyclists will use it. I guarantee that roadies will STILL use the road and that really pisses me off. Its like the government building a trials park for us, and we just ignore it and go ride benches and stuffok sorry im done. Cyclepaths are good (pyshcopaths aren't) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simpson Posted April 26, 2007 Report Share Posted April 26, 2007 Cyclepaths are good (pyshcopaths aren't)Right A peice of red tarmac walks into a northern tarmac bar in newcaste, he says in a Essex accent"yo bruv get us a pint of beer on the double"a couple of peices of tarmac on the table next to him hear him and 1 of them saying in a strong northern accent"What the f**k does he think hes doing comin in arround here on my local and ordering people about"the other peice of tarmac looks scared and says to the other peice of tarmac"dont mess with him hes a cyclepath" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guineasmithpig Posted April 26, 2007 Report Share Posted April 26, 2007 (edited) Right A peice of red tarmac walks into a northern tarmac bar in newcaste, he says in a Essex accent"yo bruv get us a pint of beer on the double"a couple of peices of tarmac on the table next to him hear him and 1 of them saying in a strong northern accent"What the f**k does he think hes doing comin in arround here on my local and ordering people about"the other peice of tarmac looks scared and says to the other peice of tarmac"dont mess with him hes a cyclepath" oh dear.... old, and still rubbishon a slightly related note, it winds me up on why roadies use the road when (near me) theres a perfectly good cycle path? i mean wtf? they'd rather face more danger and piss off loads of motorists than use the cyclepath - which the government has spent thousands of pounds constructing. So you see building a cyclepath doesn't mean cyclists will use it. I guarantee that roadies will STILL use the road and that really pisses me off. Its like the government building a trials park for us, and we just ignore it and go ride benches and stuffI prefer to ride on the roads than the cyclepath on the pavement when i commute to uni. the cyclepaths suck because you have to avoid pedestrians (i know they shouldn't be on said cyclepath, but you can't just ride into em to prove a point), people pulling out of driveways, stop to cross roads, its bumpy as hell... I even stay on the road round the massive roundabout and down the dual carriageway (A40, oxford) rather than using the cycle route through the subway. last time i used the subway, i got jumped by a bunch of chavs who tried to nick my brand new xc bike, so never again!I get loads of abuse from motorists whinging about there being a cyclepath 'just there', but to be hoest, i'm a competent enough cyclist to be considerate and safe on the roads, without causing a nuisance to other people. there is nowhere on my route i hold up traffic (though i average 15mph anyways), and the only danger to me is shit drivers, so they can't complain about me being on the road if they don't know how negotiate someone on a bike. just recently i got cut up 3 times in 200 yards by some spac in a taxi trying to find a road and not watching out for other road users (me on my bike), and eventually pulled onto the kerb without indicating, and would have run me into the pavement had i not been a concentrating. so who's really unsafe to use the roads? (oh, and for anyone who cares, i smashed his wing mirror off and gave him the finger. should have seen the shock on his face, as he'd never once saw me, even after he nearly ran me over. knob.)Smithy Edited April 26, 2007 by guineasmithpig Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poopipe Posted April 26, 2007 Report Share Posted April 26, 2007 What would you rather be hit with? a man in a car or a man on a bike?neither - if cyclists aren't on the pavement I don't get hit by them when I'm walking, which is what most people do on pavements.All I'm saying is that the fines are there to put people off the idea of hurtling along the pavement and running pedestrians over - which is obviously a good thing cos being hit by a bike doing 25mph really hurts - it's probably enough to kill a little old lady. I'm in favour of letting all bikes on the pavement with a speed limit of 10 mph - you're not likely to seriously injure anyone if you do hit them at that speed and the 90% of bikes on the road with brakes that don't work properly stand a much better chance of stopping before they do clobber someone at that speed than when they're going full tilt. make sense ? I think so Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hendrix Posted April 26, 2007 Report Share Posted April 26, 2007 When ever pedestrians give me greif over riding on a cycle path - I slam on the brakes, get off - and have a go back. Get in their face - make them scared - and ride off.I've had enough off people giving me sh*t over nothing. The fact they're in the wrong is funny!I do the same to cops ... til tomorrow - when I have to "respect " them :@ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David20 Posted April 26, 2007 Report Share Posted April 26, 2007 When ever pedestrians give me greif over riding on a cycle path - I slam on the brakes, get off - and have a go back. Get in their face - make them scared - and ride off.I've had enough off people giving me sh*t over nothing. The fact they're in the wrong is funny!I do the same to cops ... til tomorrow - when I have to "respect " them :@You'll do that to the wrong person one day, they won't get scared, they'll just break your nose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bionic Balls Posted April 26, 2007 Report Share Posted April 26, 2007 riding me bike in london...and definitely taxis are the worst- u turns, no indication etc...just a bunch of wankers actually...and all this bollocks about cyclists paying road tax and getting insurance? Whadda absolute load of crap..really! The way road tax is nowadays, it'd be completely unrelated to cyclists since it primarily relates to emissions! And insurance? Specific to cycling? that's madness- what about all the children please...think of the children!! Fines for riding on the pavement are good for discouraging people....but it really does depend on the circumstances- surely all of you lot can appreciate that? Busy high streets, city centres etc...that's understandable- but country roads? Suburbs? Or larger, faster main roads where cyclists just can't keep up- making impatient drivers try silly things...but then...you can't have one law for one thing...not for another? In that case- just f**k it. Forget about it.adam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hendrix Posted April 26, 2007 Report Share Posted April 26, 2007 You'll do that to the wrong person one day, they won't get scared, they'll just break your nose.No they won't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poopipe Posted April 26, 2007 Report Share Posted April 26, 2007 No they won't. I'd probably break your nose if you shouted at me - don't take it personally Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe_Elding Posted April 26, 2007 Report Share Posted April 26, 2007 No they won't. im debating breaking your nose just from the posts youve made on here, never mind if you shouted at me or not.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobinJI Posted April 26, 2007 Report Share Posted April 26, 2007 riding me bike in london...and definitely taxis are the worst- u turns, no indication etc...just a bunch of wankers actually...and all this bollocks about cyclists paying road tax and getting insurance? Whadda absolute load of crap..really! The way road tax is nowadays, it'd be completely unrelated to cyclists since it primarily relates to emissions! And insurance? Specific to cycling? that's madness- what about all the children please...think of the children!! Fines for riding on the pavement are good for discouraging people....but it really does depend on the circumstances- surely all of you lot can appreciate that? Busy high streets, city centres etc...that's understandable- but country roads? Suburbs? Or larger, faster main roads where cyclists just can't keep up- making impatient drivers try silly things...but then...you can't have one law for one thing...not for another? In that case- just f**k it. Forget about it.adamI actually do have 3rd party insurance and legal cover for cycling on the roads. It's part of the CTC (cycle touring club) membership, It's the only reason I'm a member haha, because my dad pointed it out (he's a roady) and I thought it would be a good idea. At least now if some f**ktard in a BMW or taxi pulls out in front of me and I right his car off with my face I don't have to pay for his new shiny toy because there weren't any witness'sBut yeah, I think cycling on pavements really isn't a great idea, but the fine should be appealable depending on the circumstances. In the same way you can get off speeding fines in an emergency. Like, if the road was too dangerous and there were few pedestrians and you were doing a sensible speed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomR Posted April 26, 2007 Report Share Posted April 26, 2007 Insurance isn't stupid for cyclists, imagine if you slipped when filtering through traffic and scraped the side of a porsche or a merc? Imagine if that was your porsche or merc. And cyclists can cause accidents too, and can be penilised for breaking road traffic law, so why not be insured or have a system for penilising idiot cyclists?Obviously it's totally un-enforcable in a practical manner, but it's not a stupid idea at all.As for letting cyclists ride on the pavement, that's just a stupid idea. Local authorities have minimum standard widths for footpaths and cycleways - and funnily enough there's a reason for that - people need space. And i bet if you were allowed to ride on the path all you'd do is post threads saying 'sign this petition to stop prams being allowed on the path as theyre in cyclists way'.Don't be a pussy, just ride on the bloody road, it's really not hard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.