Media demonisation of cyclists, there's more.

Crapaud

dang65 wrote:

beverick wrote:

My second thought was that the woman was one of those cyclists who only cycles on the road to get to the opposite pavement.

Bob

I'm surprised at all the comments from cyclists on here condemning this woman for "riding on the pavement" when we're can't even be sure that she was. I posted a link before to the Google maps view of this section of road:

Google satellite pic of St Paul's Street and High Street junction

I'd rather give the cyclist the benefit of the doubt till she's been proved guilty. It looks to me like that bollarded section is a legitimate and legal cut through for bicycles. Also, the original media story says that the little girl stepped out for a second while a workman was fixing her front door. She may well have stepped off the narrow pavement outside her house and into the path of the cyclist who was unable to avoid her.

But she seems to have been damned by pretty much everyone, including fellow bike riders who must surely have plenty of personal experience of pedestrians suffering from SUMS (Sudden Unexpected Movement Syndrome).

Fixed!

AndyManc

dang65 wrote:

beverick wrote:

Crapaud wrote:

My second thought was that the woman was one of those cyclists who only cycles on the road to get to the opposite pavement.

Bob

I'm surprised at all the comments from cyclists on here condemning this woman for "riding on the pavement" when we're can't even be sure that she was. I posted a link before to the Google maps view of this section of road:

Google satellite pic of St Paul's Street and High Street junction

I'd rather give the cyclist the benefit of the doubt till she's been proved guilty. It looks to me like that bollarded section is a legitimate and legal cut through for bicycles. Also, the original media story says that the little girl stepped out for a second while a workman was fixing her front door. She may well have stepped off the narrow pavement outside her house and into the path of the cyclist who was unable to avoid her.

But she seems to have been damned by pretty much everyone, including fellow bike riders who must surely have plenty of personal experience of pedestrians suffering from SUMS (Sudden Unexpected Movement Syndrome).

Dang , I'm not surprised , I'm sickened by the attitude of some 'cyclists' who's attitude is often more offensive than the pathetic ramblings of a tabloid rag.

Most of us know the horrendous dangers we undertake each and every day and I for one would not berate any biker who used any means necessary to complete their journey in one piece ( inc. using the pavement whilst not putting others at risk ) .

jedster

Most of us know the horrendous dangers we undertake each and every day and I for one would not berate any biker who used any means necessary to complete their journey in one piece ( inc. using the pavement whilst not putting others at risk ) .

Get a grip man. That's a load of old ballcocks.

The squaddies trying to avoid being blown limb from limb in Afghanistan might be exposed to "horrendous dangers" but commuting cyclists certainly aren't.

Yes there are risks but these can be managed by good road sense, positioning, appropriate caution, etc. You NEVER need to ride on the pavement. Even in an extreme situation (the road is blocked) you have an alternative - GET OFF AND PUSH until its safe to rejoin the road.

J

jpembroke

I reckon, just to appease the large, and growing, anti-cyclist movement, that there should be at least one day a year when cyclists drive a car instead. All those thousands and thousands of cyclists taken off the streets and safely tucked away in cars would have three benefits that I can think of off the top of my head:

1) It'd obviously improve road safety by stopping the carnage caused by cyclists on a daily basis
2) It'd take pressure off the NHS having to treat all those dying cyclists with head injuries and treating all those killed and maimed by cyclists every day
3) It'd also improve traffic flow as there wouldn't be thousands of cyclists riding in and out of traffic, jumping red lights, and generally getting in everyone's way

We could call it Cyclists Driving for Safety Day.

or something

Every little helps

dondare

The other day the Daily Mail printed a letter from someone who was cross that Kensington and Chelsea intended to change half a dozen one-way roads in the borough to being two-way for cyclists. The irate letter-writer said, of course, that "cyclists make no contribution to the upkeep of the roads" which is what someone will always say when bikes get mentioned at all. So I wrote in with the facts about "Road Tax" and how roads are really paid for and my letter was not printed. The editor of that particular rag will not allow the facts to get in the way of it's readers prejudices.

meanwhile

Why perceive this as demonization? It's a report that may or may not be accurate. Are people generally narked at idiots riding on the pavement? Yes - I am myself. Are some motorists hypocrites and idiots? Yes. Are people on bicycles NEVER at fault? Is this article a call to anti-cyclist jihad? No to both.

I think a large part of the problem here is laxity by police forces that are letting idiots routinely ride - often at quite high speeds - on city pavements. Naturally pedestrians feel intimidated and at risk and they resent cyclists as a group.

iainment

dondare wrote:

The other day the Daily Mail printed a letter from someone who was cross that Kensington and Chelsea intended to change half a dozen one-way roads in the borough to being two-way for cyclists. The irate letter-writer said, of course, that "cyclists make no contribution to the upkeep of the roads" which is what someone will always say when bikes get mentioned at all. So I wrote in with the facts about "Road Tax" and how roads are really paid for and my letter was not printed. The editor of that particular rag will not allow the facts to get in the way of it's readers prejudices.

Would you expect anything different from the Mail?

dondare

iainment wrote:

dondare wrote:

The other day the Daily Mail printed a letter from someone who was cross that Kensington and Chelsea intended to change half a dozen one-way roads in the borough to being two-way for cyclists. The irate letter-writer said, of course, that "cyclists make no contribution to the upkeep of the roads" which is what someone will always say when bikes get mentioned at all. So I wrote in with the facts about "Road Tax" and how roads are really paid for and my letter was not printed. The editor of that particular rag will not allow the facts to get in the way of it's readers prejudices.

Would you expect anything different from the Mail?

The letters that I write to papers are a triumph of hope over expectation.

AndyManc

jedster wrote:

Most of us know the horrendous dangers we undertake each and every day and I for one would not berate any biker who used any means necessary to complete their journey in one piece ( inc. using the pavement whilst not putting others at risk ) .

The squaddies trying to avoid being blown limb from limb in Afghanistan might be exposed to "horrendous dangers"

J

WHAT A JOKE ... jingoistic s*** , your good at that.

I suggest you ask the thousands of families whose suffered a death from your non existent dangers , clearly you're not a biker , no biker I know would suggest ' you get off and push ' without understanding and realising the underlining causes why bikers sometimes use the pavement .

You're a total disgrace to the cycling community.

dondare

Cyclists who use the pavement do put pedestrians at risk and also increase the danger to themselves.
They also show cycling and cyclists in a bad light.

AndyManc

Cyclists who use the pavement do so because they often feel in danger ... here's a thought , how about expecting our roads to be safe for bikers .... here's another thought , how about getting the 1 million plus motorists that are on the roads illegally ...OFF THE ROADS.

I don't give a toss if being seen on the pavement shows 'shows cycling in a bad light' , if I've got a 20ton lorry pushing me into the kerb .... I will jump on the pavement and I will continue on the pavement ( whilst not putting anyone on the pavement in danger ) until I feel the road is safe to continue.

Some people need to get their priorities right .... STOP BERATING CYCLISTS .... and start having a go at criminal motorists and a criminal government that has failed ALL cyclist .

dondare

Our roads should be made safer for everyone, including motorists (who make up the bulk of accident victims) and including pedestrians who make up most of the rest. Cyclists get killed at the rate of one or two a week and pedestrians get killed at the rate of one or two a day, and cyclists who ride on the pavement are no safer than pedestrians. Riding on the road really does not mean that you will inevitably end up under the wheels of a lorry.
My dad always cycled to work as well as being a keen cycle tourist. (In all his time on the bike he never wore a helmet, always cycled legally on the road and never got run over, tho he was once knocked off by a dog.) He is still a member of the CTC although he is now too old and frail to cycle; he lives on a quiet back road in Cambridge which is about as safe a road to cycle on as you could wish for. I learned to ride on that road and it's still as traffic-free as it was forty years ago. But now my dad is worried when he steps out of his front gate because nearly everyone cycles on the pavement down that road, at speed and without watching out for pedestrians. They do that because of an inherent belief that "the roads are too dangerous for cyclists" even tho it's patently obvious that they're not. So now the pavements are dangerous for pedestrians.
Cyclists have no more right to use the pavements than motorists have.

spen666

AndyManc wrote:

Cyclists who use the pavement do so because they often feel in danger ... here's a thought , how about expecting our roads to be safe for bikers .... here's another thought , how about getting the 1 million plus motorists that are on the roads illegally ...OFF THE ROADS.

I don't give a toss if being seen on the pavement shows 'shows cycling in a bad light' , if I've got a 20ton lorry pushing me into the kerb .... I will jump on the pavement and I will continue on the pavement ( whilst not putting anyone on the pavement in danger ) until I feel the road is safe to continue.

Some people need to get their priorities right .... STOP BERATING CYCLISTS .... and start having a go at criminal motorists and a criminal government that has failed ALL cyclist .

and ignore the criminal cyclists riding on the pavements believing they put no one in danger

Ever thought that is exactly what those motorisists are thinking - ie they are not putting cyclists in danger with their actions

Both are wrong

You are hypocritical to complain re criminal actions of motorists whilst condoning your criminal actions

AndyManc

" Cyclists have no more right to use the pavements than motorists have "

Cyclist should not be forced into using the pavements because of government incompetence , incompetence in not only routing out the criminal motorist , whether that criminality lies in drink/drugs, unlicensed ( the list goes on ) but also incompetence in providing a infrastructure that protects its citizens from the inept and criminally dangerous.

Cyclist that jump on the tabloid bandwagon of blaming there own instead of addressing the real underlining issues are doing cycling a greater disservice than those that ride on the pavement.

dondare

I honestly think that you're being a bit paranoid, I cycle on some of the busiest roads in London and rarely feel in any danger at all.

iainment

I'm no angel in respect of cycling legally inasmuch as I will RLJ but cycling on the pavement is never ok. If you feel intimidated to the point of giving up the road then you must dismount and push your wheels. Displacing your perceived danger to others is not right morally or legally.
I suspect that you just need to relax a bit whilst cycling and realise that the dangers whilst real are probably not as great as you feel they are.

:twisted:

AndyManc

dondare wrote:

I honestly think that you're being a bit paranoid, I cycle on some of the busiest roads in London and rarely feel in any danger at all.

You're lucky .... I bike 150 miles a week , and theres never a day go by when I don't have to slam on or take avoiding action through being cut up or forced into the gutter .

iainment

AndyManc wrote:

dondare wrote:

I honestly think that you're being a bit paranoid, I cycle on some of the busiest roads in London and rarely feel in any danger at all.

You're lucky .... I bike 150 miles a week , and theres never a day go by when I don't have to slam on or take avoiding action through being cut up or forced into the gutter .

Maybe it'sd the way you ride, I cycle 190 miles pw commute from SE london through Central London to NW london and rarely suffer either being cut up or forced into the gutter.

AndyManc

iainment wrote:

Displacing your perceived danger to others is not right morally

It's not perceived it's actual and it certainly IS morally right to target a system that caters for the motorised vehicle and gives a token gesture towards a green mode of transport ... that’s not a cash cow in taxes for the government , I don't know about anyone else but self preservation is the key to cycling the roads in the UK.

Question yourself why so many feel the need to jump on the pavement, it's not as if it is easier to ride on the pavement .. because its not , what’s this " you must dismount and push your wheels " crap ... you're not living in the real world , you're like a bunch of walking highway code books , when the motorist pays the slightest attention to the highway code ... then I will do the same, until that time … I will do what I feel necessary and so will the majority of sane bikers that want to keep living.

meanwhile

AndyManc wrote:

I suggest you ask the thousands of families whose suffered a death from your non existent dangers , clearly you're not a biker , no biker I know would suggest ' you get off and push ' without understanding and realising the underlining causes why bikers sometimes use the pavement .

You're a total disgrace to the cycling community.

If you're scared to ride on the road, walk. It's that simple. Complain to the local council, hold protests or whatever, too - but you don't get to ride a bicycle on the pavement where you will be a nuisance to most pedestrians and a real danger to some of them (especially old people) just because you're frightened to ride on the road like a grown-up.

And... you're in ***Manchester****. God knows what you'd do if you saw half real traffic like central London's, let alone New York.

dondare

I don't bother much about the Highway Code which consists of a lot of other people's opinions and it seems to me that these people don't get out much.... but I do bother with the law. If you ride without bothering about the law then you never aquire the skills that will allow you to ride safely within it. I have learned how to obey the law and remain safe because that's what I've being practicing for years. It seems to me that if you constantly find yourself squeezed into the gutter or having to perform emergency stops then you're lacking some basic road skills such as anticipation and positioning.

meanwhile

AndyManc wrote:

Question yourself why so many feel the need to jump on the pavement

Because they're cowardly and selfish and stupid. They'd rather frighten old people than eg find a safe route down the streets parallel to Oxford Rd (you're in Manchester, right?) They're also too cheap to take the bus. Riding on the pavement lets them feel safe and be damned to everyone else. Like most selfish people they're self-righteous, like most cowards they're eager to justify themselves, and like most stupid people they don't realize they're doing the worst possible thing by being self-righteous...

meanwhile

dondare wrote:

It seems to me that if you constantly find yourself squeezed into the gutter or having to perform emergency stops then you're lacking some basic road skills such as anticipation and positioning.

Or you're silly enough to take the wrong route over and over. Oxford Rd in Manchester is a real mess - too busy, too narrow, both a major artery road and used for parking.

The idiot council put a bike path along part of it to lure the very stupid into riding along the road instead of one of the parallel ones; the less brave of these no-brainers use the pavement along the bike path-less stretches of the road. That's most of the pavement riding that happens in Mcr.

jedster

WHAT A JOKE ... jingoistic s*** , your good at that.

classy, very classy

I suggest you ask the thousands of families whose suffered a death from your non existent dangers ,

Thousands of families? How many cyclists get killed on the road every year? How many years did it take to get to your "thousands"? I never said the dangers were non-existent. I just thought the use of "horrendous" was way over the top.

clearly you're not a biker , no biker I know would suggest ' you get off and push ' without understanding and realising the underlining causes why bikers sometimes use the pavement .

Well I don't know if I'm a "biker" or not but I commute 100 miles a week by bike. Including through central London traffic. So I think I know a bit about the dangers. I think people ride on the pavement because they lack the skills or confidence to ride properly on the road.

You're a total disgrace to the cycling community.

What, because I advocate good roadcraft rather than cycling on the pavement? Only in some wierd parallel universe of yours.

Cheers,
J

iainment

AndyManc wrote:

iainment wrote:

Displacing your perceived danger to others is not right morally

It's not perceived it's actual and it certainly IS morally right to target a system that caters for the motorised vehicle and gives a token gesture towards a green mode of transport ... that’s not a cash cow in taxes for the government , I don't know about anyone else but self preservation is the key to cycling the roads in the UK.

Question yourself why so many feel the need to jump on the pavement, it's not as if it is easier to ride on the pavement .. because its not , what’s this " you must dismount and push your wheels " crap ... you're not living in the real world , you're like a bunch of walking highway code books , when the motorist pays the slightest attention to the highway code ... then I will do the same, until that time … I will do what I feel necessary and so will the majority of sane bikers that want to keep living.

If you're that angry I suggest you use public transport - either as a cyclist or driver you're too dangerous for those around you.

jedster

AndyManc,

apologies if my last post just poured petrol in the fire.

I've just noticed that no one has suggested this excellent book to you:

http://www.cyclecraft.co.uk/

I found it really helpful. You obviously feel like you are in a lot of danger when you're cycling. The book offers great advice in how to ride to minimise that and generally take control of the risks.

All the best,
J

AndyManc

The latest stats that I've seen published are 150 cyclists killed each year ( 3 each week ) and 15,000 .... yes fifteen thousand injured every year.

Obviously a number of those 15,000 will be left in a vegative state.

These stats will not include the thousands of incidents that would have resulted in minor injuries and the enormous number of near misses , a number that would vastly exceed 15,000 .

I'm not scared to ride on the roads, I'm just a competent risk annalist with a training in health and safety.


Meanwhile ( name of the forum contributor ) , you're contradicting yourself ., quite right in your comment " Oxford Rd in Manchester is a real mess " , and then condemning cyclists that extradite themselves from that mess by jumping onto the pavement ...... or do you think their should be 'bike no-go areas' on our roads ........ , well I've got news for ya ..... THERE SHOULDN'T BE , in city centres .... inc. Oxford road , the majority should be NO CAR ZONES.


For those that are wondering .. yes I do own a car, and I avoid using it like the plague, I am also an active cyclist ( with 40yrs experience riding the roads )rights campaigner locally and nationally and I’ve found not only have we got a serious problem with governmental Muppets , we also got a problem with a self condemning cycling community suffering a serious case of inferiority complex .

always_tyred

Its like everything, a small number spoil it for the rest of us.

Pedestrians object to cyclists on pavements. I do, when I'm a pedestrian.

Motorists object to cyclists going faster than them. If they are breaking a rule, it causes disproportionate uproar.

It is wrong to flagrantly cycle on pavements. However, as someone who has been cycling for 20 odd years, I honestly couldn't advise a new cyclist how to get used to cycling on our roads. For that reason, its hard to be overly critical at beginners diving for the pavement.

dondare

A training in Health and Safety does seem to increase one's perception of risk.

I can't help but suspect that a somewhat less beligerent attitude would do more to keep you out of danger than cycling on and off the pavement. Minding out for others does not mean that you have an inferiority complex.

always_tyred

dondare wrote:

A training in Health and Safety does seem to increase one's perception of risk.

I can't help but suspect that a somewhat less beligerent attitude would do more to keep you out of danger than cycling on and off the pavement. Minding out for others does not mean that you have an inferiority complex.

"Now there was no need..... for that to happen"