Pavement warriors

PBo

rjsterry wrote:

gtvlusso wrote:

There is a lady that I have seen on my commute a couple of times. She rides an upright tandem, she is on the front, her daughter of about 9 or 10 is on the back and then on a pannier child seat is a 3 year old.

She is my hero - I am so impressed and she rides on the road, not on the pavement!

I always say hello when I pass and marvel at how brilliant she is! Will try and get a pic.

"D'you mind if I take a picture? It's for this web forum... no, wait, not that sort of forum!" I've seen something similar on my commute, and the odd Bakfiets barrow-bike jobbie with two kids in the front. Sadly Mrs RJS has made it abundantly clear that we are not getting one.

Maybe Mrs RJS doesn't fancy doing all the cycling whilst you sit in the front!

PBo

Boy Lard wrote:

There is definitely not enough room between the lamp post and the wall (red arrow) for my mountain bike to fit, but I do have 760 bars on it at the moment. My road bike would fit...

Maybe if you just had 1 bar instead of 760, you'd be able to squeeze through......? how many lights/computers etc. do you have on those things?

cyberknight

msmancunia wrote:

I tackled a bloke about this only yesterday. He was coming towards me on a narrow pavement and expected me to step into the road. I wouldn't mind, but he was a grown man, on a hybrid, helmet, sensible clothes, lights and high viz. He said he "didn't feel comfortable" cycling on the road (only a little B road!).

So I told him that he was perfectly equipped to cycle on the road, he could get free training to do it, and as an aside, told him that there was nothing less sexier to a girl than a grown man who wasn't man enough to ride on the road - we just look at them with a kind of "pity" look. And then I walked off.

Like
My normal ripsote to pavements cyclits is " Doesn`t you mum allow you to ride on the road ?"
Coming home after night shift when theres hardley any traffic about i see numerous people on bikes doing a good impression of a ninja riding on the pavement which makes me laugh on so many levels.

notsoblue

medoramas wrote:

Two adult men with the bells on the bikes? :shock: I thought it's the first device you remove when you're old enough to not use the stabilizers... That explains everything...

msmancunia

cyberknight wrote:

msmancunia wrote:

I tackled a bloke about this only yesterday. He was coming towards me on a narrow pavement and expected me to step into the road. I wouldn't mind, but he was a grown man, on a hybrid, helmet, sensible clothes, lights and high viz. He said he "didn't feel comfortable" cycling on the road (only a little B road!).

So I told him that he was perfectly equipped to cycle on the road, he could get free training to do it, and as an aside, told him that there was nothing less sexier to a girl than a grown man who wasn't man enough to ride on the road - we just look at them with a kind of "pity" look. And then I walked off.

Like
My normal ripsote to pavements cyclits is " Doesn`t you mum allow you to ride on the road ?"
Coming home after night shift when theres hardley any traffic about i see numerous people on bikes doing a good impression of a ninja riding on the pavement which makes me laugh on so many levels.

I like that one too - I hope you don't mind if I borrow it?

It is a bit of a let-down though. There's nothing that screams first-class hunter/gatherer at a girl less than a man riding a bike on a pavement. Apart from a Manchester United top, obviously....

jonginge

Veronese68 wrote:

clarkey cat wrote:

won't somebody just think of the children...?

Hooray!! And Airzounds were mentioned at some point. Now I just need to find a link to a cheap headcam and murder some squirrels. What did happen to JR?

Someone shot him...

notsoblue

noodles71 wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

If we had segregated cycle facilities, this wouldn't be a problem.

But yeah, those guys were d1cks...

There are plenty of places that are not segregated and both pedestrians and cyclists have learnt to happily co-exist. Sure, if these guys had been screaming down the pavement in a manner unsafe to themselves and pedestrians then quite rightly they deserve all the praise they have been getting here. I guess my attitude towards this was formed by growing up in a place where what these guys did was not illegal and not considered anti-social in this example.

It was a flippant comment really. But there are too many cyclists who just don't feel safe sharing a space with cars. I live just off Upper Richmond Road and there are a significant number of adults cycling with kids, the elderly, teenagers and cowards that use the pavement there and avoid the road. Its pretty common and you see it all over the place.

rick_chasey

notsoblue wrote:

noodles71 wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

If we had segregated cycle facilities, this wouldn't be a problem.

But yeah, those guys were d1cks...

There are plenty of places that are not segregated and both pedestrians and cyclists have learnt to happily co-exist. Sure, if these guys had been screaming down the pavement in a manner unsafe to themselves and pedestrians then quite rightly they deserve all the praise they have been getting here. I guess my attitude towards this was formed by growing up in a place where what these guys did was not illegal and not considered anti-social in this example.

It was a flippant comment really. But there are too many cyclists who just don't feel safe sharing a space with cars. I live just off Upper Richmond Road and there are a significant number of adults cycling with kids, the elderly, teenagers and cowards that use the pavement there and avoid the road. Its pretty common and you see it all over the place.

SEGREGATION .

Mwhahahahaaa. :twisted:

anonymousblackfg

Monkeypump wrote:

bails87 wrote:

...it wasn't clear from the OP just how narrow the pavement was...

I know there are plenty of militant crusaders on here, but in this case I'd just live and let live.

Christ alive, man up at some point, sadly I think you've signed up for a life time of getting dicked on by society.

DonDaddyD

People said segregation as in seperate bike lanes. You do realise that those two 40yr old men would then be holding "you" up. When you're used to riding at 20mph being forced to ride a 9mph is painful.

Anyway, there is a strentch between Colliers Wood firestation and Colliers Wood tube station where if it's busy with traffic I've been known to mount the pavement. It's wrong I know. If I'm stuck behind a pedestrian I wait. It's nearly unthinkable to ask them to move out the way, I mean I shouldn't even be there in the first place (a risk I take).

Anyway due to the sound of my Fulcrum's freewheel peds tend to move out the way anyway and glare at me as I ride past. I avoid eye contact, always embarassed, but I can't say I won't do it again someday...

Personally I'm with the OP the blokes were out of order. If they need to build confidence then they need to find some safe quiet roads to learn to ride. Cyclists seem to think that it's a right.

I can also see TWH point about not giving way with the children. But to be honest I probably wouldn't have moved out the way either.

Monkeypump

anonymousblackfg wrote:

Monkeypump wrote:

bails87 wrote:

...it wasn't clear from the OP just how narrow the pavement was...

I know there are plenty of militant crusaders on here, but in this case I'd just live and let live.

Christ alive, man up at some point, sadly I think you've signed up for a life time of getting dicked on by society.

Umm.... right. I think you might have missed the point a little. I used to get worked up about inconsequential stuff like this, but eventually learnt it was pointless so I let it go.

In the situation the OP describes - two polite blokes who have stopped and asked to pass by - I'd just let them go.
They're in the wrong, but it simply doesn't bother me enough to warrant the reaction others on here might have.

Someone flying toward me at high speed, actually posing a threat of harm or being confrontational would certainly get a different reaction, but that's more related to their potential impact on me rather than whether they're breaking the law or not.

And thanks for the advice, but I'm not in immediate danger of getting 'dicked on' by anyone.

t4tomo

Nah you've missed the point, it not "polite" to attempt to force a mother and 2 children against the wall or into the road when said cyclists can easily just pop onto the road to cycle past.

notsoblue

DonDaddyD wrote:

People said segregation as in seperate bike lanes. You do realise that those two 40yr old men would then be holding "you" up. When you're used to riding at 20mph being forced to ride a 9mph is painful.

I'd just use the road.

Monkeypump

t4tomo wrote:

Nah you've missed the point, it not "polite" to attempt to force a mother and 2 children against the wall or into the road when said cyclists can easily just pop onto the road to cycle past.

Who did they force to do anything? They asked to get past, and when told 'no' they stayed behind the wife/kids until able to pass. Everyone got on with their day, no harm was done, and lots of forum warriors had a good old moan about it.

I wouldn't mind living in a world full of people as badly behaved as those guys!

walkingbootweather

t4tomo wrote:

Nah you've missed the point, it not "polite" to attempt to force a mother and 2 children against the wall or into the road when said cyclists can easily just pop onto the road to cycle past.

Sorry T4tomo, but I'm with Monkeypump on this one. Politely asking someone to move, though misguided in my view, does not equate to forcing a mother and children into the road any more than someone politely asking if you have any spare change equates to a mugging.

There are many times I have asked politely for something that I did expect to get, and you might be suprised how often you get a result. Asking politely (and accepting a rebuttal in good heart) is very different from demanding or forcing.

Many of the reactions here have been from the standpoint of an accomplished cyclist. We sometimes forget that not every cyclist is as accomplished or fearless as we might be. Without understanding why these individuals were unwilling to ride on the road I wouldn't jump to conclusions. However if they were behaving in a rude, threatening or dangerous manner then I'd be the first to confront them.

t4tomo

read carefully chaps, I said attempt to force, as if you look at that picture there is no way that you could get by without the mother flattening against the wall or going into the road as any parnet will tell you she you be holding the little one's hand on such a narrow pavement.

they might not have realised that was what they were asking, but that doesn't make them any less of a tool.

walkingbootweather

t4tomo - "would you mind sticking you head up your bottom please?"

What have I just done? Have I forced your head up your bottom? Have I attempted to force your head up your bottom? Have I made a polite request which you can either choose to reject or comply with?

clarkey cat

you are hereby charged with attempted force.

DrLex

medoramas wrote:

Two adult men with the bells on the bikes? :shock: I thought it's the first device you remove when you're old enough to not use the stabilizers... That explains everything...

Thought that was the dork disc.

I know the wink means that you're joshing; but as a user of a shared path on part of my commute, I went and bought the PDW "King of Ding" bell to assist in my pedestrian interaction.

(I'm also a pavement-riding scofflaw for the 30 yards between the end of the shared path alongside the dual-carriageway and the entrance to my workplace; dismounting if any pedestrians are on the stretch. Chalk me up as lazy. )

bigmat

Live and let live. People need to chill out all over this forum. Pick your battles, if its inconsequential stuff that has no real impact on anybody then just let it go...

medoramas

DrLex wrote:

medoramas wrote:

Two adult men with the bells on the bikes? :shock: I thought it's the first device you remove when you're old enough to not use the stabilizers... That explains everything...

Thought that was the dork disc.

I know the wink means that you're joshing; but as a user of a shared path on part of my commute, I went and bought the PDW "King of Ding" bell to assist in my pedestrian interaction.

(I'm also a pavement-riding scofflaw for the 30 yards between the end of the shared path alongside the dual-carriageway and the entrance to my workplace; dismounting if any pedestrians are on the stretch. Chalk me up as lazy. )

Man, I've got a horn on my bike... :-P

Initialised

medoramas wrote:

DrLex wrote:

medoramas wrote:

Two adult men with the bells on the bikes? :shock: I thought it's the first device you remove when you're old enough to not use the stabilizers... That explains everything...

Thought that was the dork disc.

I know the wink means that you're joshing; but as a user of a shared path on part of my commute, I went and bought the PDW "King of Ding" bell to assist in my pedestrian interaction.

(I'm also a pavement-riding scofflaw for the 30 yards between the end of the shared path alongside the dual-carriageway and the entrance to my workplace; dismounting if any pedestrians are on the stretch. Chalk me up as lazy. )

Mam, I've got the horn on my bike... :-P

*fixed*

Mr Sworld

DrLex wrote:

I know the wink means that you're joshing; but as a user of a shared path on part of my commute, I went and bought the PDW "King of Ding" bell to assist in my pedestrian interaction.

Ohhh... That's a lovely looking bell.... I just had to buy one for the SS commuter...

DrLex

Mr Sworld wrote:

DrLex wrote:

I know the wink means that you're joshing; but as a user of a shared path on part of my commute, I went and bought the PDW "King of Ding" bell to assist in my pedestrian interaction.

Ohhh... That's a lovely looking bell.... I just had to buy one for the SS commuter...

Hope your bar is small enough; wouldn't fit on Roubaix, but just right on the Pompetamine. One could adapt a spare front light bracket otherwise.

bluefinch

Take the bikes out of the picture. If you were walking briskly along this pavement and came up behind a young family walking more slowly, would you seriously ask them, however politely, to step out into the road so that you could overtake them on the inside? Really?

bails87

bluefinch wrote:

Take the bikes out of the picture. If you were walking briskly along this pavement and came up behind a young family walking more slowly, would you seriously ask them, however politely, to step out into the road so that you could overtake them on the inside? Really?

They didn't ask them to step into the road.

Edit: The cyclists shouldn't have been on the pavement. As a ped, I wouldn't have gone into the road to let them through. The cyclists should have been on the road anyway, but if they're too scared to ride properly on the quiet road then they should have just bumped down into the road to get past the peds then gone back onto the pavement. As it happened, they broke the law, but they didn't hurt anyone, didn't force anyone out of the way and waited patiently until it was safe to pass. They shouldn't have done it, but it really wasn't that bad.

merkin

How would the family have let them past? Stepped into the road or maybe pressed themselves into the wall while hoping the less than competent cyclist can get past without catching he kids face with the bar ends? 2 choices really.

t4tomo

walkingbootweather wrote:

t4tomo - "would you mind sticking you head up your bottom please?"

What have I just done? Have I forced your head up your bottom? Have I attempted to force your head up your bottom? Have I made a polite request which you can either choose to reject or comply with?

Polite? Yerjokinarentyer?

bails87

merkin wrote:

How would the family have let them past? Stepped into the road or maybe pressed themselves into the wall while hoping the less than competent cyclist can get past without catching he kids face with the bar ends? 2 choices really.

They asked for something unreasonable, got told "no", quite rightly. Then they didn't make a fuss about being told "no" and just waited. So the family didn't let them past, didn't get mown down on the road, didn't get embedded into a wall or D locked by lycra louts, everyone was fine, everyone went about their day without any aggro or harm.

tailwindhome

bails87 wrote:

They asked for something unreasonable, got told "no", quite rightly. Then they didn't make a fuss about being told "no" and just waited. So the family didn't let them past, didn't get mown down on the road, didn't get embedded into a wall or D locked by lycra louts, everyone was fine, everyone went about their day without any aggro or harm.

Clearly you didn't read the OP properly.

No wait

You did

Why are we on page 7?