Media demonisation of cyclists, there's more.

Andy Monty

Bikerbaboon wrote:

so here i use the underpass as i dont feel safe to ride on that roundabout. once im passed it im back on to the road. Do i hammer it through the under pass no. do i stop when i see an on comeing pedestrian yes. is it breaking the letter of the law more than likely.

IIRC No unless there are other signs in force showing its a no cycling area however if the underpass reemerges parallel to the road once the path draws parallel you will be committing an offense ..

There is No cycling permitted on a pedestrian foot way which runs parallel with the road if the footway doesn't run parallel to the to the highway it had a change of status..

gangsteruk

can i just say regarding the law and cycling on the pavement - many times i have rode on a pavement when i deemed it safer to do so (not proud of it, but i do have a family to support, and i dont want to die early) and frequently police cars/vans/motorcyclists pass me - and they neve never stop to tell me to stop....

do u think that though technically it's against the law, perhaps even the police realise that we dont live in some eutopia where everything is as it should be....

we live in the real world.

i cycle on roads whenever possible, but shock horror sometimes i do it on a pavement.

\\please dont try to use the thread to show your supposed intelligence re smart alec comments, big words, and upper class twoddle.

thank you.

biondino

Everyone here who cycles on the pavements drops their speed to only a few mph, right?

iainment

gangsteruk wrote:

can i just say regarding the law and cycling on the pavement - many times i have rode on a pavement when i deemed it safer to do so (not proud of it, but i do have a family to support, and i dont want to die early) and frequently police cars/vans/motorcyclists pass me - and they neve never stop to tell me to stop....

do u think that though technically it's against the law, perhaps even the police realise that we dont live in some eutopia where everything is as it should be....

we live in the real world.

i cycle on roads whenever possible, but shock horror sometimes i do it on a pavement.

\\please dont try to use the thread to show your supposed intelligence re smart alec comments, big words, and upper class twoddle.

thank you.

oi you, don't ride on paths ok - they're for walkers not cyclists. If you're too scared to ride on the road you walk on the path

Plain enough for you?

.

saveswalking

iainment wrote:

gangsteruk wrote:

can i just say regarding the law and cycling on the pavement - many times i have rode on a pavement when i deemed it safer to do so (not proud of it, but i do have a family to support, and i dont want to die early) and frequently police cars/vans/motorcyclists pass me - and they neve never stop to tell me to stop....

do u think that though technically it's against the law, perhaps even the police realise that we dont live in some eutopia where everything is as it should be....

we live in the real world.

i cycle on roads whenever possible, but shock horror sometimes i do it on a pavement.

\\please dont try to use the thread to show your supposed intelligence re smart alec comments, big words, and upper class twoddle.

thank you.

oi you, don't ride on paths ok - they're for walkers not cyclists. If you're too scared to ride on the road you walk on the path

Plain enough for you?


.

I dont know what all the fuss is about ... cyclists dont cycle on pavements :roll: - just kids , young families with their broods on Sunday morning and ... er tramps .

You cant make any sort of decent progress and I for one would feel embarassed cycling anywhere 'sharing' a path with pedestrians.

sw

iainment

saveswalking wrote:

iainment wrote:

gangsteruk wrote:

can i just say regarding the law and cycling on the pavement - many times i have rode on a pavement when i deemed it safer to do so (not proud of it, but i do have a family to support, and i dont want to die early) and frequently police cars/vans/motorcyclists pass me - and they neve never stop to tell me to stop....

do u think that though technically it's against the law, perhaps even the police realise that we dont live in some eutopia where everything is as it should be....

we live in the real world.

i cycle on roads whenever possible, but shock horror sometimes i do it on a pavement.

\\please dont try to use the thread to show your supposed intelligence re smart alec comments, big words, and upper class twoddle.

thank you.

oi you, don't ride on paths ok - they're for walkers not cyclists. If you're too scared to ride on the road you walk on the path

Plain enough for you?


.

I dont know what all the fuss is about ... cyclists dont cycle on pavements :roll: - just kids , young families with their broods on Sunday morning and ... er tramps .

You cant make any sort of decent progress and I for one would feel embarassed cycling anywhere 'sharing' a path with pedestrians.

sw

Don't get me started - a person riding a bike is a cyclist wherever they cycle.

biondino

A person riding a bike on a pavement is a (stupid, selfish and irresponsible) cyclist (in almost every circumstance). Will that do?

iainment

biondino wrote:

A person riding a bike on a pavement is a (stupid, selfish and irresponsible) cyclist (in almost every circumstance). Will that do?

Yes that's absolutely correct.

Clever Pun

Always Tyred wrote:

I think the thread has picked up on the trend in the media of picking on indiscretions by cyclists as though they are equal in magnitude to, no actually far worse than, indiscretions by motorists. Examples are bending the red light and pavement rules, causing disproportionate indignation. In some cases, as we know, it makes motorists feel justified in using their vehicles as weapons, enacting some form of retribution, be that passing closely, driving into people, shouting, spitting, throwing objects from cars.

It seems that this has percolated through the cycling community also, to the extent that there seems to be zero tolerance to people carefully using the pavement to avoid daunting junctions designed without any consideration of cyclists.

I personally don't think its a black and white issue.

RACIST! BAN HIM!!!!!!!

dondare

biondino wrote:

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.

Hang on, the Highway Code IS the law, isn't it? Glad motorists don't by and large agree with you.

Perhaps meanwhile can give us his view on the efficacy of wearing a helmet while ploughing through crowded pavements?

This thread is turning into Grand Theft Auto.[/i]

The Highway Code is not in itself the law, although some legal requirements get a mention. These are distinguished by the word "must" as well (IIRC) as being set out in red.
But it's mostly opinions, and unfortunately some of those opinions are based on misconceptions about cyclist's safety. That was why there was all that fuss a while back, and now the instructions for cyclists now are so garbled. The Driving Standards Authority just couldn't understand why cyclists didn't want to be told "to use cycle lanes when ever possible because they are safer", and they weren't prepared to leave out this bit of misinformation altogether. But we don't have to use them, nonetheless, nor do we have to dress like the cyclist who gets a tick in their silly Children's First Reader style booklet.

dondare

Far too many cyclists (to use the term in it's widest sense) believe that they can only cycle on the pavement because The Roads Are Too Dangerous. No matter what, they will ride on the pavement and they are a danger to pedestrians and also in greater danger themselves than they would be if they used the road correctly. Cyclists who habitually use the pavement get killed crossing roads, just like lots of pedestrians do.

AndyManc

boybiker wrote:

Reading some of the posts on here it sounds as if some people have been riding for 40 years and hated every minute of it, I would suggest that if you have been riding for 40 years and are constantly getting yourself killed by motorists then you might need to re-assess your riding style.
Round me the motorists are quite considerate I pedal along quite happily and nobody has tried to kill me so I don't feel the need to ride on the pavement.

You need to re-asses your style of patronising condescending b/s before you put fingers to keyboard, the attitude of motorists ( and society in general ) has changed markedly in the last 15yrs, not to mention a massive increase in the numbers of vehicles on the roads to the point of gridlock.

There's been a reduction of 1000 traffic police in the past decade when there should have been an increase of 2000.

If anyone believes that a 20 ton vehicle overtaking you inches from your right elbow is safe practice and should be tolerated then you are showing a total disregard for your own safety and for that of all cyclists.

I'm amazed at how much crap bikers will accept , it's one reason why this government and all local council pay lip service to cycle amenities, and that will never change till all bikers become actively involved in forcing change.

AndyManc

biondino wrote:

Everyone here who cycles on the pavements drops their speed to only a few mph, right?

Yes .... my first comment was I use the pavement without putting others at risk.

If the pavement is clear I ride at a decent speed .. , if its busy , walking pace and near the kerb, till I consider the situation on the road to be safe.

BUT , facilities should be in place , and present laws enforced so cycling should not be the risk activity it is now.

AndyManc

rhext wrote:

I think I'm losing the track of this thread a bit. It was about demonisation of cyclists by the media in the wake of a tragic incident.

It seems to me as if we don't need the media to demonise us, we're more than capable of demonising each other.

100% , cyclists are their own worst enemy , failing to see where the real problems lie and condoning tabloid media b/s.

There was even a thread ( elsewhere ) about the 4 bikers killed in north wales by a motorists driving a defective vehicle ( bald tyres ) and using excessive speed , where someone blamed the bikers for going out in cold weather , that B/S coming from another cyclist, it sickens me.

AndyManc

I'll just point out that there will be punters on forums like this that hate cyclists and have never ridden a bike in their life.

They will be here under false pretences .... try and see through their propaganda.

spen666

AndyManc wrote:

biondino wrote:

Everyone here who cycles on the pavements drops their speed to only a few mph, right?

Yes .... my first comment was I use the pavement without putting others at risk.

....

most motorists would say the same re cyclists ie they drive on the road without putting cyclists at risk

Cyclists would often disagree - as do pedestrians re criminal behaviour carried out by you and your ilk

AndyManc

spen666 wrote:

AndyManc wrote:

biondino wrote:

Everyone here who cycles on the pavements drops their speed to only a few mph, right?

Yes .... my first comment was I use the pavement without putting others at risk.

....

most motorists would say the same re cyclists ie they drive on the road without putting cyclists at risk

Cyclists would often disagree - as do pedestrians re criminal behaviour carried out by you and your ilk

ADDRESS THE REAL ISSUES , you and your ilk are one of the reasons why the tabloids have so much fun demonising bikers, not a car driver spreading propaganda are ya.

If you are incapable of understanding cause and behaviour please don't bother me with your inane ramblings, thank you for your co-operation in this matter .

spen666

AndyManc wrote:

biondino wrote:

Everyone here who cycles on the pavements drops their speed to only a few mph, right?

Yes .... my first comment was I use the pavement without putting others at risk.

If the pavement is clear I ride at a decent speed .. , if its busy , walking pace and near the kerb, till I consider the situation on the road to be safe.

BUT , facilities should be in place , and present laws enforced so cycling should not be the risk activity it is now.

They are- they are called roads. There are quite a few of them around if you look carefully, you may find some in your area

Risk? Cycling has less deaths per km traveleed than walking/ driving etc

spen666

AndyManc wrote:

spen666 wrote:

AndyManc wrote:

biondino wrote:

Everyone here who cycles on the pavements drops their speed to only a few mph, right?

Yes .... my first comment was I use the pavement without putting others at risk.

....

most motorists would say the same re cyclists ie they drive on the road without putting cyclists at risk

Cyclists would often disagree - as do pedestrians re criminal behaviour carried out by you and your ilk

ADDRESS THE REAL ISSUES , you and your ilk are one of the reasons why the tabloids have so much fun demonising bikers, not a car driver spreading propaganda are ya.

If you are incapable of understanding cause and behaviour please don't bother me with your inane ramblings, thank you for your co-operation in this matter .

Oh dear- try re reading your post

The media are not having a go at me for riding lawfully, stopping at traffic lights, riding on the road etc. The media have a go at those who choose to break the law - ie you and your ilk

Stop trying to justify criminal activity. It completely removes attention from the valid points you make about safety issues. Breaking the law and causing others to fear for their safety gives the media the ammunition to berate cyclists in general and gives the perfect ammunition to divert attention from the safety issues you wish to highlight

Try looking at cause and behaviour.

spen666

AndyManc wrote:

...not a car driver spreading propaganda are ya.
... .

No, I am a law abiding cyclist who is sick of criminals be smirching the name of cyclists by trying to justify their own criminal activities
You complain about motorists criminal behaviour but seem to think you are justified in being a criminal

AndyManc

spen666 wrote:

AndyManc wrote:

spen666 wrote:

AndyManc wrote:

biondino wrote:

Everyone here who cycles on the pavements drops their speed to only a few mph, right?

Yes .... my first comment was I use the pavement without putting others at risk.

....

most motorists would say the same re cyclists ie they drive on the road without putting cyclists at risk

Cyclists would often disagree - as do pedestrians re criminal behaviour carried out by you and your ilk

ADDRESS THE REAL ISSUES , you and your ilk are one of the reasons why the tabloids have so much fun demonising bikers, not a car driver spreading propaganda are ya.

If you are incapable of understanding cause and behaviour please don't bother me with your inane ramblings, thank you for your co-operation in this matter .

Oh dear- try re reading your post

The media are not having a go at me for riding lawfully, stopping at traffic lights, riding on the road etc. The media have a go at those who choose to break the law - ie you and your ilk

Stop trying to justify criminal activity. It completely removes attention from the valid points you make about safety issues. Breaking the law and causing others to fear for their safety gives the media the ammunition to berate cyclists in general and gives the perfect ammunition to divert attention from the safety issues you wish to highlight

Try looking at cause and behaviour.

Read again .... you are reinforcing media b/s .... I don't consider it breaking the law when the laws to protect cyclist are not being enforced.

I also don't consider it breaking the law when I act to protect my safety whilst not placing others at risk , berate this government for it's failings ... not other cyclist for reacting to those failings.

spen666

AndyManc wrote:

...
Read again .... you are reinforcing media b/s .... I don't consider it breaking the law when the laws to protect cyclist are not being enforced.

I also don't consider it breaking the law when I act to protect my safety whilst not placing others at risk , berate this government for it's failings ... not other cyclist for reacting to those failings.

Whether you consider it criminal or not- the fact is it is criminal.

The law is not what YOU feel it is.


The motorists you complain about do not consider their actions to be breaking the law, so they are ok to carry on are they?

You cannot have it both ways. You cannot complain about their criminality whilst justifying your own

This not putting others at risk is nonsense- you don't perceive you are putting others at risk - this is different from what they perceive.

similarily with motorists - they don't perceive they are putting others at risk, but you as a cyclist perceive they are putting you at risk


You cannot justify your criminal activity whilst complaining about the criminality of others.

It is hypocritical and the sort of behaviour and attitude the media use to attack cyclists with

AndyManc

spen666 wrote:

AndyManc wrote:

...
Read again .... you are reinforcing media b/s .... I don't consider it breaking the law when the laws to protect cyclist are not being enforced.

I also don't consider it breaking the law when I act to protect my safety whilst not placing others at risk , berate this government for it's failings ... not other cyclist for reacting to those failings.

Whether you consider it criminal or not- the fact is it is criminal.

The law is not what YOU feel it is.


The motorists you complain about do not consider their actions to be breaking the law, so they are ok to carry on are they?

You cannot have it both ways. You cannot complain about their criminality whilst justifying your own

My ( as you call it) criminality ' does not endanger life ' , a 40ton lorry knocking my arm as it overtakes me ... puts my life at risk, as does much of the law breaking committed by motorists .. from using a mobile phone to drink driving to speeding , my actions are taken out of self preservation , motorist illegal actions are done out of self interest and incompetence.

There is an obvious difference

Bikerbaboon

well looks like we have a right stand off going on.
from what i have read we have to main groupes of thinking on this issue.

1) people riding bikes need to be on the road no matter the danger of the road conditions.

2) people that in dangerous situations on the road will make use of a safer route to continue the trip.

i realy dont think that people that blitz about on the pavements at a hell for leather pace are posting on this topic
i also dont think that people ranting and raveing at people in the other groupe will ever change there opinion.

please every one take time count to ten and try to keep the flameing down.

spen666

AndyManc wrote:

..., my actions are taken out of self preservation , motorist illegal actions are done out of self interest ....

There is an obvious difference.

Your self "preservation" is not in your self interest is it not?


Your self "preservation" is an unselfish gesture for the good of mankind with no thought to your own self interest?

AndyManc

Self preservation is a necessity ... not a self interest.

spen666

AndyManc wrote:

Self preservation is a necessity ... not a self interest.

Self preservation is not a self interest


right and next on fantasy island.......

jedster

Andy,

You say it is essential that you ride on the pavement to protect yourself. It is difficult to believe this because:

a) plenty of us who cycle commute on urban roads don't find it essential
b) you have not explained why it is impossible to get off and push

Putting a to one side for a moment, it seems to me that you will find it difficult to argue that you cannot get off and push. The issue has to be that you won't get off and push because in your opinion your convenience is more important than the law. It's a point of view, but not one that allows you to take the high ground when criticising poor driving.

Cheers,

J

saveswalking

spen666 wrote:

AndyManc wrote:

spen666 wrote:

AndyManc wrote:

biondino wrote:

Everyone here who cycles on the pavements drops their speed to only a few mph, right?

Yes .... my first comment was I use the pavement without putting others at risk.

....

most motorists would say the same re cyclists ie they drive on the road without putting cyclists at risk

Cyclists would often disagree - as do pedestrians re criminal behaviour carried out by you and your ilk

ADDRESS THE REAL ISSUES , you and your ilk are one of the reasons why the tabloids have so much fun demonising bikers, not a car driver spreading propaganda are ya.

If you are incapable of understanding cause and behaviour please don't bother me with your inane ramblings, thank you for your co-operation in this matter .

Oh dear- try re reading your post

The media are not having a go at me for riding lawfully, stopping at traffic lights, riding on the road etc. The media have a go at those who choose to break the law - ie you and your ilk

Stop trying to justify criminal activity. It completely removes attention from the valid points you make about safety issues. Breaking the law and causing others to fear for their safety gives the media the ammunition to berate cyclists in general and gives the perfect ammunition to divert attention from the safety issues you wish to highlight

Try looking at cause and behaviour.

Anything else we could do to appease the media ? We are after all 'guests' on the road are we not ?
RLJ/Pavement 'cycling/no helmets' = RED HERRING
Those who 'hate' cyclists will do so even if every single cyclist stopped at home and never set foot on the road ever again.

"you and your ilk ffs :roll:

sw

spen666

saveswalking wrote:

[....

Anything else we could do to appease the media ? We are after all 'guests' on the road are we not ?
RLJ/Pavement 'cycling/no helmets' = RED HERRING
Those who 'hate' cyclists will do so even if every single cyclist stopped at home and never set foot on the road ever again.

"you and your ilk ffs :roll:

sw

Who apart from you mentioned appeasing the media?

Why give your opponent ammunition to attack you with?

The "you and your ilk" refers specifically to AndyManc & his criminal ilk who want to break the law whilst lambasting others for breaking the law.