To the man that asked my 6 year old to cycle on the road

[mikeb]

It's like going back in time- the old thread even arrived at the same description of someone as a "nob": http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,339127,339186

And let's not forget this:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1292334/No10-backs-couple-let-small-children-cycle-school-own.html

[titch juicy]

http://www.roadsafetygb.org.uk/news/3319.html

Minister confirms it?s OK for cyclists to ride on pavement

Robert Goodwill, road safety minister, has confirmed that cyclists are permitted to ride on the pavement, as long as they do so considerately, according to an article on the road.cc website.

Road.cc says the confirmation came in an email sent to the cycle campaigner Donnachadh McCarthy, in which the minister said that original guidance issued by the Home Office 15 years ago when Fixed Penalty Notices (FPNs) were introduced was still valid.

Mr Goodwill said: ?Thank you for bringing the issue of cycling on the pavement around dangerous junctions such as Vauxhall Cross to my attention.

?I agree that the police should be using discretion in enforcing this law and would support Paul Boateng?s original guidance."

That guidance from Mr Boateng, issued in 1999, said: ?The introduction of the fixed penalty is not aimed at responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of traffic and who show consideration to other pavement users when doing so.

?Chief police officers, who are responsible for enforcement, acknowledge that many cyclists, particularly children and young people, are afraid to cycle on the road, sensitivity and careful use of police discretion is required.?

In response, Donnachadh McCarthy said: ?Fining vulnerable cyclists for cycling responsibly on the pavement at extremely dangerous junctions is a bedroom tax on two-wheels as there is no safe alternative for them to cycle on.?

[Mugglesworth]

A simple rule that would remove much of the angst surrounding this: Pedestrians always have right of way on a pavement. Any other vehicle using the pavement should give way to pedestrians, even if the vehicles are faster or bigger. This includes cycles, scooters, skateboards, pogo sticks, etc. I really wouldn't care if those vehicles used the pavement if the users showed consideration and did not expect me to to leap out of the way for their convenience.

[intexasatthe moment]

I think I'd add joggers to your list Mugglesworth . And that I have sometimes felt that although the words spoken were "excuse me " the sentiment being expressed was " coming through "

[keano77]

If you don't mind me asking where were you when this happened? Cycling with him on the pavement? walking beside him? Cycling on the road next to him?

Just curious

[James Barber]

Lets not forget some pavements have cycle paths or shared use on them.

Hi Mugglesworth,

That how they operate on all pavements and roads - the stronger party in a collision is assumed guilty unless they prove otherwise and the weaker party in a collisions is assumed innocent. Works treat for neutering safer roads and pavements.

[edhistory]

James Barber Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Lets not forget some pavements have cycle paths or

> shared use on them.

>

Are there any exclusive or shared cycle paths on pavements in any of the four wards that cover East Dulwich?

[Penguin68]

I have recorded this amidst these threads before, but, as a child in the 1950s I was not allowed (by my parents) on public roads until I could demonstrate proficiency riding one handed (left or right) so I could signal turns. This meant that I was, in fact, pretty proficient. I didn't ride on pavements (although the town in which I was brought up does now offer delineated cycle lanes on some of the wider pavements). If children are to be allowed (by custom and practice if not the law) now to use pavements (even local roads are far busier than when I was a child) then they should also be as proficient in bike handling as I was before allowed out in public. It is safer for them and for fellow users of their riding space.

And there should be some very clear age-limit to their use of pavements. Possibly linked to their bike size - adult bikes should mean an adult use of roads, not pavements. Perhaps even intermediate size bikes. Cyclists who jink on to pavements from roads, and then back again, to avoid red lights when turning left, for instance, should be penalised.

[Beulah]

There's a chance for many of you to be even more miserable next week: It's ride your "bike and scooter to school" week.

My 3 year old and 6 year old will be taking part and WILL be using the pavement.

Come and say hi!

[edhistory]

Which local schools are advising their pupils to break the law?

[intexasatthe moment]

That's a lovely cheery post Beulah .

If my mum were still alive I'm sure she'd have appreciated your joy de vivre . Or possibly her poor sight and hearing and limited mobilty might have tempered her appreciation .

Oh and the fact that she was terrified of being knocked over by someone on a scooter or bike .Especially on the shared pedestrian bike way in Rye Lane .

What's wrong with walking to school ?

[JoeLeg]

edhistory Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Which local schools are advising their pupils to

> break the law?

Starting to think KK was wrong about you.

If you've got something to say then why not just say it?

[craigy]

I have no problem with children riding on the pavement but do think they should be taught some manners by their parents.

This morning whilst walking my children to school a child rode up behind us and just rung his bell at us to come past, no sign of a parent anywhere and then we watched him ride up to the next lot of people on the pavement and do the same.

I have a 6 year old and she rides on the pavements as she is not safe for the rode but knows if she comes up behind someone she either waits or speaks to ask if she can come past.

[rendelharris]

intexasatthe moment Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

Especially on the shared pedestrian bike way in

> Rye Lane .

No disrespect to your mum, but there isn't a shared pathway on Rye Lane, that's a cycle path which pedestrians shouldn't be on. That's why (see other thread) something needs to be done to mark it more clearly, pedestrians are getting mad at cyclists thinking they're riding on the pavement when in fact it's a very poorly designed cycle lane.

[Coach Beth]

So, a month ago I was nearly knocked down by a man using a mobility scooter in the road - he merrily ran the red light at East Dulwich Station. And yes, I did look both ways but I made this crazy assumption that he would actually stop at the red light so I started to cross and as I mid way across, he appeared to speed up and I then stopped just in time and he zoomed by!

Then, last week I was outside SMBS looking at the fruit and veg and and a male jogger pelting down the pavement SHOUTED at me 'Get out of my bloody way.' I wasn't in the middle of the pavement - I was looking at fruit and veg under there awing and the shopkeeper was very annoyed on my behalf.

The moral is that there are rude and inconsiderate people in the world of different ages, genders and abilities.

[DuncanW]

Anyone who is making the argument, explicitly or otherwise against a six-year old cycling on the pavement needs to take a good look at themselves in my opinion.

[Mark]

edhistory Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Which local schools are advising their pupils to

> break the law?

None of them

[Sally Eva]

http://www.cyclinguk.org/blog/victoria-hazael/children-cycle-pavement

"Section 72 of the Highways Act 1835 made it a criminal offence to ?lead or drive? a ?carriage of any description? on ?any footpath or causeway by the side of any road made or set apart for the use or accommodation of foot passengers?. In 1888, s85(1) of the Local Government Act declared that ?bicycles, tricycles, velocipedes, and other similar machines are ?carriages? within the meaning of the Highway Acts?. The maximum court fine is ?500 or the police can issue a ?50 fixed penalty notice (FPN). In short, it is illegal to cycle on a pavement alongside a road, unless it has been marked as a cycle track.

However, children under the age of 10 are below the age of criminal responsibility. Therefore, they cannot be prosecuted for a criminal offence. They cannot be issued with a fixed penalty notice either as they cannot be given to anyone under the age of 16.

This means that, whilst police officers can theoretically stop young children (aged under 10) who are cycling on pavements, they have no powers to arrest, fine or even caution them. This is sensible, as young children should not be expected to cycle on the road."

[charlie.gl]

The general argument does not appear to be against children cycling on pavements: but simply against inconsiderate use of shared spaces.

Ultimately, pedestrians have right of way on pavements. Children should be expected to respect that, as should runners, those on mobility scooters, those with buggies etc. I appreciate children make mistakes and are harder to control, but that doesn't mean parents are devoid of responsibility in ensuring their children don't make pedestrians feel uncomfortable.

Personally, I have no problem with considerate cyclists using pavements, but I can see that less mobile (or more fragile) individuals could find this intimidating.

To the OP: That was not very nice of the pedestrian, especially as you say your child was polite to him. However I doubt the chap on the phone will see this, so I'm confused as to why you posted your complaint. Your child was no more 'in the right' than the pedestrian was.

[edhistory]

I had to look up the meaning of velocipede.

It was not defined in S100 of the Local Government Act 1888.

It appears to mean a wheeled vehicle that is capable of transporting a human and is powered by a human but not through a transmission chain.

Scooters, skake boards and roller skates appear to be examples of velocipedes.

Can anyone elucudate?

[keano77]

From the Daily Mail

The velocipede appeared in 1865, and had pedals applied to the front wheels. It was popularly known as the 'Bone Shaker', as the combination of wood and metal tyres and cobblestoned streets made for a very uncomfortable ride

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2339507/The-hobby-horse-style-bike-pedals-saddle--holds-riders-harness.html

[Blah Blah]

I challenge this idea of pedestrians and 'right of way'. Most of us meander in a way that flows with everything around us. How many times have any of us been walking behind a slow moving pedestrian for example, unable to pass by, and feeling irritated by it. It's the irritation that leads to these arguments of right of way. We all think we should be able to get from a-b without having to slow down, or stop, or go around anything! Personally, if I see a 6 year trundling along the pavement on a bicycle, I step out of their way with a smile. Have I really been inconvenienced by doing that? Of course not. People need to just live and let live a little. There are far more important things to worry about.

[rendelharris]

keano77 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> From the Daily Mail

>

> The velocipede appeared in 1865, and had pedals

> applied to the front wheels. It was popularly

> known as the 'Bone Shaker', as the combination of

> wood and metal tyres and cobblestoned streets made

> for a very uncomfortable ride

>

> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-233

> 9507/The-hobby-horse-style-bike-pedals-saddle--hol

> ds-riders-harness.html

Always be careful when looking to the DM for facts! As a bike bore I can tell you the word velocipede (from velo - fast and pede - feet) first arose in France much earlier, just after the end of the Naopoleonic wars. It was a simple "dandy horse" type bike pushed along by the feet, like the "balance bikes" one can buy for toddlers today.

It's only used as a term for bicycles and similar derivatives (unicycles, tricycles etc), not skateboards or roller skates.

Good post above Blah Blah, most of these conflicts won't be conflicts with a little courtesy and common sense on both sides.

[Penguin68]

Personally, if I see a 6 year trundling along the pavement on a bicycle, I step out of their way with a smile.

I'm glad that you are young and fit enough (and not partially sighted or blind) to be able to do this. There are pedestrian users of pavements who are elderly, who are disabled or unsteady on their feet, or are simply no longer so nimble as to make way for wheeled users of pavements. The thoughtful child will stop, or move, to allow people like this to walk unimpeded. But to suggest that the six year olds on bikes should automatically be free to barge through on a pavement, and expect all others to move out of their way, is ridiculous - if that is what you are suggesting.

And should someone with a buggy launch themselves into the road to allow free passage for the toddler cyclist?

[Louisa]

This thread has simply become rather ridiculous.

Considerate youngsters can ride bikes on pavements, nothing to see here folks.

Louisa.