The law is an Ass

[peerjay56]

I have just seen the video referred to in the thread http://www.pedelecs.co.uk/forum/charging-post/16244-cool-sustrans-video-made-dad.html. In it the parent apologises for using the footpath on the last part of the journey undertaken. This, together with digesting discussions going on in other threads has confirmed my view that the Law is an Ass.

The hazard to cyclists from vehicles is high; death in the event of contact with a motorised vehicle is highly likely. The death is likely to be that of the cyclist, the risk to the driver is minimal, and as such, motorists do not perceive realistically the hazard they represent, and the risk they pose.

The hazard to pedestrians from cyclists is low, the risk of death in the event of contact with a cyclist is possible, but unlikely. Both the cyclist and pedestrian are likely to sustain injury in the event of a collision, therefore both have a mutual interest in avoiding conflict.

The 'separation' currently enshrined in law, is based on a judgment which interpreted the Highways Act of 1835, FFS! In the 1800s, the speed differential between a cyclist and a pedestrian made the risk to a pedestrian in the event of a collision higher than that in the event of a collision between two pedestrians. At the time, such risk would be judged high compared to the risks associated with the cyclist sticking to the roadway. (Besides, everyone was entitled to the opportunity to die as a result of all the diseases and other causes of premature mortality prevalent at the time)

Whilst that hazard, and associated risk is still there, it is now disporportionately lower than the hazard presented by mixing cyclists and motorised vehicles. On that basis, in my view, cyclists should be allowed to ride on footpaths. We should not have to apologise for doing so - we should be courteous, and give way to both pedestrians and horses when doing so, but we have an equal right to arrive safely at our destination as any other individual. I'm now going to hold my breath until the law changes........

 

[flecc]

Common use of all footpaths by both pedestrians and cyclists been suggested many times. and not only by cyclists. As I see it, there are two problems preventing it's adoption:

1) The common high riding speeds of many UK cyclists compared to that of their European counterparts, their speed incompatible with walking pace and likely to cause serious injury in a collision.

2) The widespread public dislike of cycling on the pavement, universally and frequently expressed. I'm sure the speed referred to in (1) above is a major cause of this opposition, since many cyclists do ride at inappropriately high speeds on pavements at present.

In Japan cyclists commonly share footpaths and in many areas have to by law. When doing that they commonly ride at around 8 mph, which is probably about the limit for pedestrian safety, given pedestrian movement unpredictability and the frailty of some. The question is, can we successfully persuade 20 mph UK cyclists to ride at such a slow speed for prolongued periods. I have my doubts.

 

[Mike63]

I'm now going to hold my breath until the law changes........

....Shouldn't do that Phil, while I agree with you totally, I suspect it'll be a cold day in hell

 

[Deleted member 4366]

....Shouldn't do that Phil, while I agree with you totally, I suspect it'll be a cold day in hell

In China, there were loads of people riding their bikes on footpaths. I don't know what the rules are, but nobody seemed bothered by it. You soon learned to look out for them .

 

[mike killay]

Why not allow bikes on pavements except in areas where they need to be banned such as busy shopping areas.
Also, when within 15 yards of a pedestrian, make it compulsory to slow down and not go more than 5 mph until clear.

 

[flecc]

That has been the general proposal of advocates Mike, pavements ok but not in shopping areas.

I already ride on shared use paths the way you've prescribed, slowing to almost walking pace and greeting or giving a single "ting" on a bell in advance, so as not to startle any pedestrian on the approach from behind as I pass.

I seem to be alone in that though, most cyclists around here seem to think 15 mph or more is ok as they zip past pedestrians.

 

[Jimod]

most cyclists around here seem to think 15 mph or more is ok as they zip past pedestrians.

And that's the truth.

 

[D C]

Road legal electric mobility scooters are restricted to 8 mph on the road but can only be legally used on pavements when kept at 4 mph max.
I feel that sensible cycling on empty pavements is fine, not so sure about being in close proximity to pedestrians, particularly the old and/or infirm.
It's hard to cycle slowly enough to mingle safely with pedestrians, bikes have a lot of sharp bits.

 

[peerjay56]

Common use of all footpaths by both pedestrians and cyclists been suggested many times. and not only by cyclists. As I see it, there are two problems preventing it's adoption:

1) The common high riding speeds of many UK cyclists compared to that of their European counterparts, their speed incompatible with walking pace and likely to cause serious injury in a collision.
…
The question is, can we successfully persuade 20 mph UK cyclists to ride at such a slow speed for prolongued periods. I have my doubts.

There isn't much doubt in my mind that casualty rates amongst pedestrians would increase, but there would also be a greater decrease in casualties, and in particular deaths, amongst cyclists. But I did stress that I would ride 'politely' and considerately, and that should be enshrined in any change in the law.
What the heck - it will never happen, despite evidence from many countries in the world that it isn't a problem, or at the very least that it can work. But I can dream, can't I?

 

[neptune]

I think it is all about education. In the UK, a problem with cycles on footpaths is that people don`t expect them. In Boston we have one official shared path, about 250 metres long, clearly marked with a line down the middle. A surprising number of pedestrians insist on walking on the cycle part, even when the footpath part is clear.

 

[SRS]

I think it is all about education. In the UK, a problem with cycles on footpaths is that people don`t expect them. In Boston we have one official shared path, about 250 metres long, clearly marked with a line down the middle. A surprising number of pedestrians insist on walking on the cycle part, even when the footpath part is clear.

Happens all the time around here particularly in the tourist season.
On paper things would appear simple.
In real life pedestrians switch off when they feel safe. I do it myself, wander along the seafront dreaming of
life or whatever takes my fancy.

I'm not suggesting that a shared path is a safe place for day dreaming but thats how it is.

All 3 of my cycles are fitted with a bell. A non aggressive indication of my presence, appreciated by most pedestrians. They should be a legal requirement!

 

[flecc]

What the heck - it will never happen, despite evidence from many countries in the world that it isn't a problem, or at the very least that it can work. But I can dream, can't I?

Absolutely Phil, I'd love it to happen. I suppose one reason for the lack of inclination to do anything is the overall low level of UK cyclists' deaths. With just over 100 annually and a high proportion of those on countryside roads without pavements, the pay-off from the change would be small. It wouldn't have helped with most of those six London deaths for example, they were nearly all in left turn junctions where the cyclist going straight on wouldn't be on a pavement.

 

[flecc]

All 3 of my cycles are fitted with a bell. A non aggressive indication of my presence, appreciated by most pedestrians. They should be a legal requirement!

It is a UK legal requirement for bikes to be sold with a bell, but it doesn't have to be fitted*. Some shops offer one loose to be legal but most don't bother.

*Another example of the law being an ass.

 

[neptune]

All my bikes have bells, but I am sure that not all pedestrians see them as non aggressive. I often cycle [non electric] on the National cycle route One , north of Boston. This is an off road tarmac path, shared with pedestrians. User traffic is low at this time of year. On my most used bike I have a loud "Ding-Dong" bell. If a pedestrian is on the path ahead, my first ring is 100 yards before hand. If there is no response, I ring again at 50 yards, and twenty yards.

If there is no response, [some people are deaf], I slow to a crawl as I pass. I did this one day, and the guy still stepped in front of me. I stopped with a squeal of brakes, but avoided hitting him. His remark was priceless. Remember we were a mile from the nearest house. He said, " I did hear a bell, but I thought it was somebody`s doorbell!" At least we both had a laugh about it.

I had a very similar episode on another occasion. But this time, the guy was very angry and said "you should not be cycling on here anyway!" Bearing in mind this was on a Sustrans shared path. I was so gobsmacked I was lost for words.

 

[peerjay56]

It is a UK legal requirement for bikes to be sold with a bell, but it doesn't have to be fitted*. Some shops offer one loose to be legal but most don't bother.

*Another example of the law being an ass.

Need something like this:
The Hornster - world's loudest bicycle with Airchime KH3A - YouTube

 

[Deleted member 4366]

The only thing that works is an old-fashioned "bring bring" bell. Unfortunately they all have plastic levers now, which break off on the first day. If only you could get the metal ones.

 

[newebiker56]

YOU are the ass man.
You want to hear yourself.
I absolutely and totally must disagree with everything you are saying.
A 6.2ft, 15 stone friend of mine was leaving my terraced houses with his 3 year old little girl.
The neighbours high hedge obscurded the view to the right.
My friend holding his little girl stepped out from my gate onto the FOOTpath (as was his right to do so) and "BOOM!" they were both hit by a 22 year old adult man on a mountain bike. My friend disslocated his shoulder and his little girl broke her arm. All because of some selfish, idiot cyclist who had NO RIGHT to be there on the FOOTpath (the clue is in the first part of the name by the way) in the first place. If it had been his little girl who had walked out first, (as she was intitled to do), she might have been killed, as would a very old or infirm disabled person.
You FOOTpath pavement cyclists make me sick!
I am 56 years old and have had bikes since i was 3. I was cycling to school by the age of 11 along the main "A" ROAD out of town. I must have cycled at least 10s of 1000s of miles by now on the roads and cycle ways.
What is it you don't understand about the FOOTpath (oh there's that clue again) being for pedestrians, you know, people on FOOT walking on their legs, some of whom are very old, infirm and slow, or deaf, or blind, or disabled, and can't ride a bike or the very young children with no road skills, like you should have you big baby.
Man, grow a pair of balls and start messin it up with the car drivers big boy they're the enemy, not the poor pedestrians after all they cant go on the road, you know, that space reserved for WHEELED vehicles, but you can, but of course you will need balls, even small 11 year old schoolboy ones would
do.
I must say since the 90's this has been a serious problem and cyclist should not think they have the right to use pavements meant for old ladies and little girls to feel safe on.
I would also like to add that i have lived in Holland, Germany and Spain I have also visited the USA several times and i have found that modern UK cyclists are the most aggressive and intimidating.
You know who you are.
But, who do you think you are?
Regards to everybod

 

[flecc]

Steady on newbiker, not one person in this thread has said they ride on footpaths, I don't for example, so why do we make you sick?

I do ride on this sort of path, and so do many of us, do you think that's wrong?

 

[peerjay56]

YOU are the ass man.
You want to hear yourself.
I absolutely and totally must disagree with everything you are saying.
A 6.2ft, 15 stone friend of mine was leaving my terraced houses with his 3 year old little girl.
The neighbours high hedge obscurded the view to the right.
My friend holding his little girl stepped out from my gate onto the FOOTpath (as was his right to do so) and "BOOM!" they were both hit by a 22 year old adult man on a mountain bike. My friend disslocated his shoulder and his little girl broke her arm. All because of some selfish, idiot cyclist who had NO RIGHT to be there on the FOOTpath (the clue is in the first part of the name by the way) in the first place. If it had been his little girl who had walked out first, (as she was intitled to do), she might have been killed, as would a very old or infirm disabled person.
You FOOTpath pavement cyclists make me sick!
I am 56 years old and have had bikes since i was 3. I was cycling to school by the age of 11 along the main "A" ROAD out of town. I must have cycled at least 10s of 1000s of miles by now on the roads and cycle ways.
What is it you don't understand about the FOOTpath (oh there's that clue again) being for pedestrians, you know, people on FOOT walking on their legs, some of whom are very old, infirm and slow, or deaf, or blind, or disabled, and can't ride a bike or the very young children with no road skills, like you should have you big baby.
Man, grow a pair of balls and start messin it up with the car drivers big boy they're the enemy, not the poor pedestrians after all they cant go on the road, you know, that space reserved for WHEELED vehicles, but you can, but of course you will need balls, even small 11 year old schoolboy ones would
do.
I must say since the 90's this has been a serious problem and cyclist should not think they have the right to use pavements meant for old ladies and little girls to feel safe on.
I would also like to add that i have lived in Holland, Germany and Spain I have also visited the USA several times and i have found that modern UK cyclists are the most aggressive and intimidating.
You know who you are.
But, who do you think you are?
Regards to everybod

Well, thanks for your contribution.
Not very subtle for trolling though.

 

[Clockwise]

The only thing that works is an old-fashioned "bring bring" bell. Unfortunately they all have plastic levers now, which break off on the first day. If only you could get the metal ones.

One of these? The picture isn't very clear but searching for adie brand bells gives promising images/items.

Adie Chrome Bell | Evans Cycles