Why is there so much animosity towards cyclists in Sheffield?

[jezzyjj]

They obviously were NOT official statements from the government otherwise they would have been backed up with a change in the law. They were merely personal opinions from admittidly senior memebers of gevernment, but not convincing enough to warrent a change in the law

 

 

Governments have a priority of laws they want to change and a very limited ability/time to do so. This is not anywhere near high priority as it's not actually a problem either way. People don't tend to get fined as it's rarely an issue, but if they are idiots on pavements then they can be punished.

 

But constantly and at every opportunity attempts to justify it by the opinions of 2 MPs who did not have the courage of thier covictions to change the law

And cyclone mentioning it was to underline the fact that it is not seen as a problem by those in charge. The vehicles which kill 40 odd people on pavements are however. Why not complain about the actual problem instead, rather than continuing to display your bigotry? Edited June 3, 2015 by jezzyjj

[alchemist]

Well that is exactly what the bikeability scheme does, it teaches people how to ride safely on the road and does so surprise, surprise on the road. With traffic. And guess what, it's perfectly safe.

There is no other way to do it. Also unlike driving you make sure kids are competent on their bike before starting on the road. Driving instruction should have to be be done similarly. You learn how to control a car correctly and only then should learners go out on the road.

 

When I was a lad many moons ago I did my cycling proficency test in the school yard and then was only let out onto the road when I had passed. It is THAT type of scheme I think that is needed. I also agree with you concerning drivers, Im sure that there is enough spare ground around for them to learn basic car control skills before venturing out onto the road

[jezzyjj]

When I was a lad many moons ago I did my cycling proficency test in the school yard and then was only let out onto the road when I had passed. It is THAT type of scheme I think that is needed. I also agree with you concerning drivers, Im sure that there is enough spare ground around for them to learn basic car control skills before venturing out onto the road

Did you not bother to read post re Bikeability and how it works? It's a much better system than the fairly useless cycling proficiency.

[alchemist]

And cyclone mentioning it was to underline the fact that it is not seen as a problem by those in charge. The vehicles which kill 40 odd people on pavements are however. Why not complain about the actual problem instead, rather than continuing to display your bigotry?

 

Bigotry?? Hmm, I will let that pass thank you.

 

I DO object to ANY veheicle using the pavement and putting pedestrians at risk. I object to people parking thier cars on and across the pavement especially when it forces pedestrians out on to the road. I object to walking along the pavement and having some idiot on a cycle riding at me and telling ME that im in the wrong. I object to people using invalid carriages as if they are some kind of jousting charger. However, the subject of this thread is cyclists and unlike some I do not feel the need to divert away from the thread by bringing in irrelevancies. There ARE good and bad cyclists as there are equally good and bad motorists, that is not in doubt. Neither side should be using the other as an excuse to do what is wrong or illegal.

 

I would welcome the opportunity to have the rights and wrongs of riding on pavements to be openly discussed and thrashed out in parliament as it would act as a form of education to both sides. Recent events have shown that cyclists and children do not make a good mix and there is no getting over that and it would be very useful to get down somewhere better guidlines of what IS safe and not merely relying on the personal opinions of indivdual ministers or cyclists of what constitutes safe riding on a pavement

 

---------- Post added 03-06-2015 at 14:09 ----------

 

Did you not bother to read post re Bikeability and how it works? It's a much better system than the fairly useless cycling proficiency.

 

I DID read the post correctly and have taken note of the bikeability scheme but you DID point out in your post that kids did not go onto the road until they are competant

 

Also unlike driving you make sure kids are competent on their bike before starting on the road

 

That is precisley what the cycling proficency test did so how was that useless?

[jezzyjj]

I DID read the post correctly and have taken note of the bikeability scheme but you DID point out in your post that kids did not go onto the road until they are competant

 

Also unlike driving you make sure kids are competent on their bike before starting on the road

 

That is precisley what the cycling proficency test did so how was that useless?

Because it took place on the playground. Would you also think teaching dancing by seating people down and describing how it is done is useful?

Learning to ride on the roads [as opposed to learning to ride a bike] needs to be done on the road and with traffic. Bikeability is about riding safely on the road, not about teaching people how to ride a bike from scratch, although it teaches you cycling skills that are specific to riding on road before going out.

 

---------- Post added 03-06-2015 at 14:49 ----------

 

I DO object to ANY veheicle using the pavement and putting pedestrians at risk. I object to people parking thier cars on and across the pavement especially when it forces pedestrians out on to the road. I object to walking along the pavement and having some idiot on a cycle riding at me and telling ME that im in the wrong. I object to people using invalid carriages as if they are some kind of jousting charger. However, the subject of this thread is cyclists and unlike some I do not feel the need to divert away from the thread by bringing in irrelevancies. There ARE good and bad cyclists as there are equally good and bad motorists, that is not in doubt.

You forget to mention idiot pedestrians who walk out of shops expecting everyone else to jump out of their way or onto the road without looking and so on....

 

Neither side should be using the other as an excuse to do what is wrong or illegal.

Not an excuse, driver's endangering one's life is a perfectly valid reason to ride on a pavement free of pedestrians and again cycling on the pavement is not really an issue. It like worrying about a bee flying around when people are shooting at you. The bee or in this case cyclists are not the thing you should prioritise as the problem.

As for occasional numpty riding a bike stupidly, just be thankful they are not in a car.

 

The problem that even people like yourself who actually admit it's only a percentage of drivers/cyclists causing problems is one of proportionality.

Thousands of deaths a year result from vehicles and very rarely does a bicycle ever result in a death, yet people waste time complaining about a non issue.

[Cyclone]

But constantly and at every opportunity attempts to justify it by the opinions of 2 MPs who did not have the courage of thier covictions to change the law

 

Does justify it. Two Home Secretaries, stop trying to downplay them as random MPs.

The law will get changed eventually, I'm sure. Until then I'll stay on the road or the cycle path.

 

---------- Post added 03-06-2015 at 15:00 ----------

 

And of course you can prove these "facts" by official studies and links to the same cant you?

Yes, but as it's been done to death I simply can't be bothered.

It's like vexatious FOI requests. You pretend to be ignorant of the facts and I have to waste 10 minutes of my life educating you.

 

I imagine that it is perfectly possible for children to learn in a safe situation and gain thier certificae of competancy without going out on the road, or are you suggesting that they learn to ride on the road and the survivors get a certificate of survival?

I imagine that like most children you and I both learnt to ride on a quiet residential street. You're suggesting making that a crime.

 

They obviously were NOT official statements from the government otherwise they would have been backed up with a change in the law. They were merely personal opinions from admittidly senior memebers of gevernment, but not convincing enough to warrent a change in the law

They were not personal opinions. They were official guidance issued to the police.

[jezzyjj]

Does justify it. Two Home Secretaries, stop trying to downplay them as random MPs.

The law will get changed eventually, I'm sure. Until then I'll stay on the road or the cycle path.

I'd rather they didn't and built a proper cycle infrastructure instead. Shared use paths are not the best solution, simply a less worse one. It's a cheap way for politicians to pretend they are doing something.

[Squiggs]

I'd rather they didn't and built a proper cycle infrastructure instead. Shared use paths are not the best solution, simply a less worse one. It's a cheap way for politicians to pretend they are doing something.

 

Not sure they are less worse

 

Ended up via an errand, on the shared path along Sheaf Street - that is NO place for bicycles to be at 8:30am with so many pedestrians. Hopped straight back on the road as soon as clear to do so

 

Problem is; I don't mind tackling Ponds Forge on a bike but you need wits about you for taxis and buses taking the wrong lane to bypass queueing Commercial Street traffic then cutting in across the chevrons at the Exchange Place entrance

 

But that's not something everyone feels confident doing - and shouldn't have to, it is in cycling route terms, "Hostile"

 

So people take the shared path and come into conflict with pedestrians. It's a lose-lose

[mattleonard]

Problem is; I don't mind tackling Ponds Forge on a bike but you need wits about you for taxis and buses taking the wrong lane to bypass queueing Commercial Street traffic then cutting in across the chevrons at the Exchange Place entrance

 

But that's not something everyone feels confident doing - and shouldn't have to, it is in cycling route terms, "Hostile"

 

So people take the shared path and come into conflict with pedestrians. It's a lose-lose

 

You're right. There is a case for improved infrastructure, but the current attitude from many is that bikes don't belong on the road. I wouldn't want improving infrastructure to be seen as a magic bullet when actually what's needed are cultural changes in order for all road users to share the space more amicably. Neither would I want the presence of more cycle lanes etc. to encourage drivers that there is any legitimacy to the idea that cyclists should not use roads (as was seen recently with Cyclone being pestered to use an inconvenient and badly thought-out cycle path which went somewhere that he didn't want to go - hope I've got that right this time ).

 

Yes, infrastructure could be better. But I don't think many locations are dangerous simply because the infrastructure is bad (excepting potholes), but because people use the infrastructure badly.

[PeteM01]

Not sure they are less worse

 

Ended up via an errand, on the shared path along Sheaf Street - that is NO place for bicycles to be at 8:30am with so many pedestrians. Hopped straight back on the road as soon as clear to do so

 

Problem is; I don't mind tackling Ponds Forge on a bike but you need wits about you for taxis and buses taking the wrong lane to bypass queueing Commercial Street traffic then cutting in across the chevrons at the Exchange Place entrance

 

But that's not something everyone feels confident doing - and shouldn't have to, it is in cycling route terms, "Hostile"

 

So people take the shared path and come into conflict with pedestrians. It's a lose-lose

 

You don't have to cycle on the pavement/busy shared path - you can get off your bike and walk with it to get round a dangerous section. Why put pedestrians at risk simply to arrive at your destination a minute or two earlier? That is as bad as the drivers who make bad overtaking manoeuvres around cyclists to make their progress a tiny bit quicker.