Page 1 of 1 [ 3 posts ] 

MrGrumpy
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 22 Apr 2014
Age: 75
Gender: Male
Posts: 425
Location: England

18 Jun 2014, 2:45 pm

Here in the UK there is a massive on-going friction between motorists and cyclists.

Motorists have to jump through all sorts of hoops in order to be legal on the road (driving tests, compulsory tax and insurance, annual vehicle checks, roadside police checks etc etc). But absolutely anybody, irrespective of age or skill or mental stability or working brakes, can get on a bike and demand equal road-user rights with motorists. But it is illegal for cyclists to ride on the pavements (sidewalks).

In practice, there is a growing tendency for cyclists in the UK to regard themselves as being under no obligation to adhere to any rules at all - they are not motorists but neither are they pedestrians. So they think nothing of riding on the pavements if it suits them, and they think nothing of impeding the progress of motor vehicles. They regularly jump red lights, and then claim that it is in the interests of (their own) road safety.

But it is not politically correct to restrict the freedom of cyclists to behave as they please - and it is probably true that in major cities (especially London), the public transport system would be unable to cope with the large and increasing number of commuters who find that cycling is their best way to get to work. There is a growing clamour for motorists to be held automatically liable for any collision between their vehicle and a bicycle.

There is a clear need for a dedicated and completely separate network of cycleways, and we hear a lot about the Dutch system. But in London it is hard to see where there is space for such a network - the roads are already full, and so are the pavements. Cyclists are directed to share a lane with taxis and buses, and their only protection is a painted white line on the road.

I live in an extremely law-abiding small town outside London, and its roads are busy. But it's nothing like London.

So why do parents blatantly teach their children to ride on the pavements? Why do I regularly see pensioners riding their bikes on the pavements?

They will probably tell you that it's because the roads are dangerous.

So why is it OK for them to make the pavements dangerous for pedestrians?

I am a cyclist, and I want to teach my grandchildren to use their bikes as something more than toys. It ain't easy...



Amity
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Mar 2014
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,714
Location: Meandering

18 Jun 2014, 3:41 pm

The larger urban areas in Ireland have cycle lanes, they only work if there is enough width, on older roads in cities there usually isn't. But the council went a bit crazy with the white line paint regardless of width:-)
It is frustrating to drive a long empty street in rush hour at a cyclists pace, because you can not over take them. You miss green lights etc It causes all sorts of tension!!
I think its risky cycling in cities, car vs human... No competition. I think I'd drive to a county location and start from there.



MrGrumpy
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 22 Apr 2014
Age: 75
Gender: Male
Posts: 425
Location: England

18 Jun 2014, 4:34 pm

Amity wrote:
the council went a bit crazy with the white line paint regardless of width


They were probably complying with an EU directive.

Cycling in cities is definitely risky, and cyclists will be the first to tell you so. But they keep on doing it!

And I'm not at all sure that cycling on country roads is any better.

Cycling is probably a bit like smoking tobacco - if it was a new invention, it would probably be banned.