are cycle lanes a good idea
had enough of cyclists on the pavements , had a very near miss on sunday morning outside my house, un loading my van in the morning , rear doors open unloading my petrol mowers , out of no where mad cyclist on a mission to break the sound barrier just misses the mower and carries on ........then as he was going so fast he caught his jeans in the chain , that didnt bother him , ..... what if he had crashed into my equipment, he would have killed himself , .... what if it had been a young mum with her children getting out of there car ,, ive just had enough of seeing this to often, when was the last time a police officer stopped someone cycling on the pavement ........... are cycle lanes on all roads the answer ?
Comments
I might nip down to Halford's buy a bike, ride along the pavement all the way home and then fall of my bike due to an uneven paving slab ! I could then sue the council. Any solicitors out there do pro bono work. ( Before anyone rips holes in my legal position I'm only jesting !)
but that document was published two years ago, as yet I haven't found the update.
I can understand why people ride on the pavement but find it difficult to understand why these people don't have any common sense at all.
I would not expect any of my grandchildren to ride on the road but by the same token I would not expect them to ride on pavements as if they were in the latest time trial for some competition or other.
This thread just adds to what is being said in other postings relating to living in LBBD. There is a lack of respect, manners, control, discipline ,skill, authority or care............. need I go on? (Don't feel obliged to comment on the last question)
I will continue to bike ride on the pavement untill this problem is dealt with..
I won't hold my breath!
I am unable to count the times when walking my dog at 6am with very little traffic around we have taken evasive action to avoid a bike on the pavement. My dog was always on a lead (no dog now)and a number of cyclists would attempt to ride between me and my dog. I rarely heard them approach from behind and there was never a warning only a swear word or two when I neglected to avoid them quickly enough. Only once did one stop and apologise when he nearly ran into us. My dog became eventually became aggressive when around bikes(possibly caused by my angry reactions at yet again being suddenly passed by a speeding bike with no warning) so I had to try to time our walks between the times of the regular bike commute.
Two thing could have avoided all this. firstly an audible warning devie and the cyclist using it. Weren't they once a legal requirement like lights?
I can sympathise with you in relation to cars parking over cycle lanes but just as its not all cyclist that ride on the pavement its not all motorists parking on all cycle lanes. Surely you don't ride on the footpath when the cycle lanes are clear ?
I'm sure that when you ride on the pavement you don't ride furiously as if you were part of the 21st Century "Pony Express" and therefore totally ignore the presence of pedestrians. I'm sure that you would be concerned for the welfare and safety of any one of your family at the hands of these morons.
Just as we can't blame every motorist for the practice of a few idiots then we can't blame all cyclists from the moronic knuckle-dragging behaviour of the few idiots on bikes !
Unobstructed cycle lanes / paths / tracks may help people (especially those who are nervous) to cycle in the proper places, but reckless/careless/thoughtless people won't take any notice.
The road danger priority for the police should be to deal with the greatest souce of danger, which is of course motor vehicles and their drivers, first.
Making cycle helmets compulsory just makes people stop cycling. This has been shown repeatedly at various places in the world.
NB I have an independent list of cycle rides/events in or within reach of Barking at www.stibasa.org.uk. I would also be grateful for information about other rides in or within reach of Barking so that I can add them.
They think that they are taught to drive when in fact they are only taught to pass a test, that is those that have passed a UK test (separate issue). Often they have no conception of the havoc and danger they cause. " I've never had an accident but I've seen plenty in my rear view mirror" (that's assuming they know what a rear view mirror is) etc....
But don't you, as one who obviously has connections with the cycling fraternity, think that there should be some form of registration for cyclists, ultimately it would be to everyone's benefit. ?
I know what you're geting at with registration of cycles/cyclists, but it would place a monumental bureaucracy around cycling, the cost of which cyclists would be expected (logically) to pay. It would be a huge deterrent to cycling.
And I don't know what it would achieve. Is there going to be a massive increase in people (police?) going around looking for bilkes that have been involved in some kind of incident?
We're eencouraged to volunatrily register our bikes as a deterrent to theft, but unless the police stop someon ona bike for some other reason and check the bike to see if it is stolen, the chances of getting them back are fairly slim.
I think bikes should be manufactured with RFID tags in them, so that they can be identified by an RFID reader, but it will add to nthe cost of the bike, and people want "cheap" bikes. That's why they come without lights, racks, mudguards, locks and so on.
Believe me, these issues are discussed in the cycling community, at some length.
The vast majority of motorists do not park in cycle lanes. Those that do should be fined. The vast majority of cyclists don't break the Road Traffic Act don't those that do should be fined.Police generally are not interested, either due to lack of knowledge in relation to the law, directions from their senior officers or they don't want to get involved in a situation that could take up the whole or majority of their shift.
As you say, just because some motorists/cyclists do wrong things, it doesn;t follow that they all do. To reinforce this point, I was trying to say that if you see a motorist/cyclist getting it right, you don't conclude that they all do. Only negatives tend to get stereotyped.
I take your point about fining, but I am concerned that it could be a sledge hammer to crack a nut. The cost of running systems to catch people could far outweigh the advantages of punishing them.
Usually up to the Heathway from Dagenham East or even as far as the Fiddlers, near Morrisons for those who do not remember the Merry Fiddlers Pub.
Anyway to get to the point, I am fed up with 'Cyclists' wizzing by me on the pavement at break-neck speeds, I am surprised I do not hear of a lot more accidents.
I see at least one person every day cycling on the pavement and have never seen any of them pulled up and cautioned.
I suppose it will take a serious accident for this illegal activity to be enforced.
But then of course you hear people say that they're not going to report an incident to the police because nothing will happen, but of course nothing will happen if they don't report it. A classic self-fulfilling prophecy.
If the incidents are reported, they should be recorded, and then we'll know the number and severity of the incidents. Police priority should be to deal with the most widespread and severe types of incidents in order to prevent the most deaths annd injuries they can with the resources available.
I'm sorry, but a cyclist whizzing past someone, as unpleasant as it may be, is not serious compared to someone being killed or seriously injured.
I hope that one legacy of the olympics is that these young men (I assume that's what they mainly are) can go and ride fast and take risks in an environment in which there aren't unwilling participants, like the MTB course down at Hadleigh, or the Velodrome in the Olympic Park, or the Redbridge Cycling Centre up on Hog Hill. There they can channel their eneergy and hone their skills to their hearts' content, without upsetting anyone else.
They don't have to mount a surveillance operation, it happens in their face everyday but its is not a borough policy to prosecute cyclists and I emphasise PROSECUTE not PERSECUTE.
The extra cost, and don't just mean financially, comes because if the officer cannot satisfy himself that, if necessary, a summons could not be issued, (most PNC/FPN offences are summonable offences) then he has the ability to arrest.. But that power would apply to all not just cyclists.
Arrest would take him out of effective use for most of his shift.
"Whizzing past someone......" So we wait until an elderly lady or gent is knocked down and fractures their hip and never recovers from the shock. Or a child is knocked from their buggie and receives serious injury.
Do you honestly believe that the morons who ride on the pavement are the same group of cyclist who would be interested in using the now excellent facilities on offer. That's like assuming that EVERYONE who fights in the street would be interested in a boxing or a judo club.
Your passion for cycling seems to cloud your vision. Stop trying to defend every action of every cyclist. I have not read of any motorist, in these postings, trying to defend every action of every other motorist.
Accept their are good and bad in every section of society and put up a reasoned argument to follow a particular course of action to deal with the problem.
You obviously have the level of intellect to do this and it would be a valuable contribution to make.
Stereotyping is a negative action by definition of the word and the general concept in which it is used.
I was trying to get across the point that young men tend to be impressionable, full of inchanelled energy and thrill seeking. So, if they somehow get into contact with good influence, then all this youthful exuberance could be directed at someting worthwhile.
So far as young men who have already fallen under bad influnce (or who have not fallen under good influence yet), it is more difficult, because you have to pull them away. I am not saying that punishment has no part in this, but neither am I prepared to write people off and use only punishment to try to make them better people.
I am not assuming anything about everyone. That is exactly what I'm not doing.
Waiting till someone gets injured before we act. I understand what you're saying, prevention is indeed better than cure, but would you take people away from preventing cancer and put them onto preventing something much more minor? What would be the point in preventing the old lady from getting a broken hip / shock by acting against rogue cyclists if two old ladies got hit by a speeding car as a result of the change in resource allocation?
On your first point, what I was getting at was if you want more cycling offences observed by police, you need more police out observing. That is a function of how the police are managed, but also a resource issue.
Then there is the issue of how far the police take the matter when they see it. They coukd stop and caution, issue a PCN/FPN, arrest, prosecute, convict all the way up the scale. Again there's a resource issue. What are the priorities when you can't do everything?
Where have I tried to defend every action of every cyclist? I don't defend anti-social / dangerous action by anyone, be they cyclist, motorist or whatever, but reckless action by the driver of an HGV has vastly worse consequences than reckless action by a cyclist.
As to putting up a reasoned argument, that is exactly what I am doing.
My passion for cycling clouds my vision, does it? If I am invited to particularly condemn anti-social behaviour by cyclists, I decline, because as you yourself say there are good and bad in all sections of society. The fact that I won't single out cyclists as a particular problem (even though I have not seen any non-anecdotal evidence) does not mean that I condone bad behaviour by cyclists, but just in case I should be misinterpreted:
I do not condone anti-social or reckless behaviour by anyone. This includes, but is not limited to, cyclists.
Bad manners, ignorance, disrespect do not come from youthful exuberance.
I don't advocate a change of resources, where do you get that misconceived impression from ?
To take your example to its extremes the police would do nothing whilst walking around just in case they walked around a corner to find a fatal accident, an armed robbery or a murder taking place.
Either you didn't understand my point or I explained badly. Mostly police are expected to provide a high visibility presence, which they can't do completing paperwork in some office remote from the public.
By condemning anti social behaviour by cyclists how are you condemning all cyclists ? Unless of course you are suggesting that they are all bad ? I'm not, I have not and I will not.
Semantics and philology again !
I am not condemning all cyclists and I never said that you did. I am defending myself against your accusation (above) that I am defending every action by every cyclist.
"Bad manners, ignorance, disrespect do not come from youthful exuberance." I couldn't agree more, but they will ensue if the youthful exuberance is not directed towards productive activity in an ennvironment where good manners and respect are taught. Traditionally this was school and the family, but it can be other environments. Whatever works.
I agree with you about the police being tied up with paperwork. I am interested in the work of Prof John Seddon on the subject of systems thinking. There is at least one police force that has got into the same way of thinking, and they have managed to get rid of a lot of this target nonsense, and get out much more into the community they serve and engage with people, including the youngsters, who they are able to influence positively. Thus with the same resource they actually do more of what really counts (and less bean counting). I think we [will] agree on this.
As to taking my example to an extreme, in this case it has made your point clearer to me. I was talking about the strategic priorities of the police - as in what they plan to do, how they allocate their officer time, not the priorities of an officer on the beat dealing with situations as they arise: A police officer out on the street should rightly deal with the issue at hand, without being put off by paperwork.
I don't know what your jibe about semantics is for. We have to have agreed meanings for words otherwise we get nowhere.
As to philology, I had to look that up - http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/philology?s=t, and I'm not sure what you're getting at.
Comments are closed. Why not start a new conversation?