Thanks all for those thoughts. I'm pleased to learn that there's a concensus
that the pavement should be a place for walking and one shouldn't need to be
looking over one's shoulder all the time for cyclist appearing from nowhere.

A few years back I signed up with that London cycling campaign but cancelled
the subscription when I heard their director talking on the BBC, trying to
justify the very thing we are talking about here. His argument being that
it was understandable since our roads are too hazardous, which of course
they are, but it doesn't mean we have to intimidate others.

From his hysterical statements, the young man in my example quite obviously
believed he was standing up for a cause, the freedom to engage in healthy
exercise unipeded by the nuisance of pedestrians. To be fair there are many
pavement cyclists who defer to those who might not be aware of their
presence, but there's a growing trend for quite the opposite, a kind of
street fascism which is not that far removed from his expression of
individual freedom and we don't even have the sound of jackboots to alert
us.

Quite often one sees groups of youths patrolling the pavement together
weaving in and out of pedestrians in an agressive manner. It is obviously
meant to intimidate, perhaps claim ownership of an area and maybe distract
attention from ongoing crime. For many there's simply the quite reasonable
fear of street robbery and a quick getaway for the perpetrators.

I can't imagine I'm the only one to notice these things, but it seems to go
completely over the heads of those that we pay to provide safety and free
passage on our streets.

Jeff Mowatt