"John Ray" wrote in message
...
Rich wrote:

BTW, I think you'll find the definition of "road" includes the pavement.

Ah, so that's why so many cyclists seem to think that they are entitled
to ride on the pavement.

As a cyclist (who doesn't use the pavements!) it astounds me that many
police forces now actively ENCOURAGE cyclists to use what we used to term
'the footpath', for their own safety.

OTOH, as a cyclist, why is it that when discrete footpaths and cyclepaths
are provided (even with grass strips between them), with clear signage on
the asphalt and on lamp-posts, half-witted pedestrians (usually with prams
and pushchairs) STILL insist on jay-walking along the cyclepath, then having
the audacity to verbally harangue any cyclists with the temerity to ask if
they can pass?

The bottom line is that, whether pedestrians, cyclists or motorists, there
is bad practise and intolerance between all groups. Ultimately, better
roadcraft, less arrogance and more consideration for other parties would
improve everybodys day!

On Wed, 15 Jun 2005, Jack Taylor wrote:

The bottom line is that, whether pedestrians, cyclists or motorists,
there is bad practise and intolerance between all groups. Ultimately,
better roadcraft, less arrogance and more consideration for other
parties would improve everybodys day!

Well said.

The solution, of course, is to STRING THE *******S UP IT'S THE ONLY
LANGUAGE THEY UNDERSTAND. Innit. What do we want? Gibbets! When do we want
them? Now!

tom

--
.... a tale for which the world is not yet prepared

In message , Jack Taylor
writes
The bottom line is that, whether pedestrians, cyclists or motorists,
there is bad practise and intolerance between all groups. Ultimately,
better roadcraft, less arrogance and more consideration for other
parties would improve everybodys day!
Whilst as a pedestrian and a car driver I accept this, I find that
cyclists are by far and away the worst for breaking the HC and this
includes motor-cyclists of all sizes of machines, from little scooters
up to 1200cc machines.
--
Clive

"Jack Taylor" wrote in message
...

"John Ray" wrote in message
...
Rich wrote:

BTW, I think you'll find the definition of "road" includes the
pavement.

Ah, so that's why so many cyclists seem to think that they are entitled
to ride on the pavement.

As a cyclist (who doesn't use the pavements!) it astounds me that many
police forces now actively ENCOURAGE cyclists to use what we used to term
'the footpath', for their own safety.

Depends on circumstances. Some places, traffic density is so high it's
better to segregate slower traffic from faster traffic.

OTOH, as a cyclist, why is it that when discrete footpaths and cyclepaths
are provided (even with grass strips between them), with clear signage on
the asphalt and on lamp-posts, half-witted pedestrians (usually with prams
and pushchairs) STILL insist on jay-walking along the cyclepath, then
having
the audacity to verbally harangue any cyclists with the temerity to ask if
they can pass?
because some peds are just as ignorant as *some* cyclists?


The bottom line is that, whether pedestrians, cyclists or motorists, there
is bad practise and intolerance between all groups. Ultimately, better
roadcraft, less arrogance and more consideration for other parties would
improve everybodys day!

Agreed wholeheartedly.

It just seems a pity that so many of the more vociferous cyclists are also
"contributing" to this, and other, threads - their sheer number trying to
assign some justification for their arrogance and ignorance...... they twist
words....they are totally unable to see the other POV ...either on the road,
or on the forums.

--
IanH

On Mon, 20 Jun 2005, ian henden wrote:

"Jack Taylor" wrote in message
...

As a cyclist (who doesn't use the pavements!) it astounds me that many
police forces now actively ENCOURAGE cyclists to use what we used to
term 'the footpath', for their own safety.

Depends on circumstances. Some places, traffic density is so high it's
better to segregate slower traffic from faster traffic.

Absolutely, but once you've got them away from the slower-moving traffic,
isn't the pavement the worst place to put the bikes?

tom

--
As Emiliano Zapata supposedly said, "Better to die on your feet than live on your knees." And years after he died, Marlon Brando played him in a movie. So just think, if you unionize, Marlon Brando might play YOU in a movie. Even though he's dead. -- ChrisV82

Tom Anderson wrote to uk.transport.london on Mon, 20 Jun 2005:

On Mon, 20 Jun 2005, ian henden wrote:

"Jack Taylor" wrote in message
...

As a cyclist (who doesn't use the pavements!) it astounds me that
many police forces now actively ENCOURAGE cyclists to use what
we used to term 'the footpath', for their own safety.

Depends on circumstances. Some places, traffic density is so high it's
better to segregate slower traffic from faster traffic.

Absolutely, but once you've got them away from the slower-moving
traffic, isn't the pavement the worst place to put the bikes?

In Germany they seem to manage with far more segregated pedestrian/cycle
lanes - usually wide enough to accommodate both, unless you have an
exceptionally large party of cyclists coming along (school group, or
something). My husband was most envious of the provision there.
--
"Mrs Redboots"
http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/
Website updated 23 May 2005

"Tom Anderson" wrote in message
h.li...
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005, ian henden wrote:

"Jack Taylor" wrote in message
...

As a cyclist (who doesn't use the pavements!) it astounds me that many
police forces now actively ENCOURAGE cyclists to use what we used to
term 'the footpath', for their own safety.

Depends on circumstances. Some places, traffic density is so high it's
better to segregate slower traffic from faster traffic.

Absolutely, but once you've got them away from the slower-moving traffic,
isn't the pavement the worst place to put the bikes?

Depends on circumstances. Where there is high ped traffic, then you would
probably find a seperate cycle facility. Where ped traffic is light or even
almost nonexistant, then shared facility is adequate. Does rely on people
having some common sense, though, peds as well as cyclist.

A blind ped isn't going to recognise markings seperaing the cyclists half
from the peds half, for a start. Cyclist, of course, will recognise this
problem and treat the ped with appropriate respect.

--
IanH

In message , ian henden
writes
A blind ped isn't going to recognise markings seperaing the cyclists
half from the peds half, for a start. Cyclist, of course, will
recognise this problem and treat the ped with appropriate respect.
You hope. I doubt.
--
Clive