Pensioners packed into a meeting to call for police officers to do more to stop cycling on pavements.Wow, I didn’t think the police rode bikes any more, never mind on the pavement!
Oh. Wait. It’s not the police themselves. They are just not doing anything about it:
Jim Stagg, 79, said: "They cycle on the pavement to get around quicker, avoid traffic lights, signs and everything else. The police do nothing. I have drawn their attention to this in Broadmead. The police walking the streets see these things and don't do anything about it."It’s a common complaint.
Alan Pratley, of Ashton Vale, told police officers at the meeting: "You should be upholding the law and the law is that cyclists should not be cycling on the pavement, but the police are turning a blind eye when they see it."
Afterwards, the 64-year-old said: "One of the worst places for me is the Centre because it is shared space and cyclists are allowed on the pavements. There should be proper marked out lanes for them so everyone knows where they stand."A bit pointless marking out lanes for them if there’s no sanction when they fail to stick to them, though?
Naturally, this goes down like a cold cup of sick with the cyclist lobby:
But John Usher of cycling charity Sustrans defended cyclists.
"There are irresponsible cyclists in the same way there are irresponsible motorists and irresponsible pedestrians," he said. He pointed out that in all but one case, pedestrians killed on Bristol's roads were the result of incidents involving motor vehicles rather than cyclists. He admitted there was not data available for injuries suffered by pedestrians as a result of irresponsible cyclists.
"We should be working towards getting the council to put more investment into making cycling safer," Mr Usher said to the meeting.For whom? For the cyclists, or for the pensioners perturbed by the whoosh of air as another lycra-clad kamikaze sails past them at 30mph?
Chris Pratley, 62, said: "We have complained about cyclists riding on the pavements in Bedminster.
"I don't think they should be spending any more money on helping cyclists when there are cuts."
Another woman said: "What we want is for irresponsible cyclists to get off their bikes and walk on the pavement."No doubt, but it’s unlikely to happen.
Chairwoman of Bristol Older People's Forum, Judith Brown, said: "If it is illegal to ride on pavements, I'm old-fashioned and don't think they should be doing it.
"I think if you have to register a car it is fair to register a bike."I can foresee a campaign looming, and though the cyclists may squeal (and the libertarians join them in solidarity) it’ll be purely their own fault, won’t it?
The police response? Oh, yes:
PC Roger Ibrahim told the meeting that cycling on pavements was considered at the discretion of officers but that if people had particular concerns they should raise them at their neighbourhood policing forums.People do have concerns, they are raising them here, with you – why don’t you write them down in your little book and take them to your colleagues yourself? If it's good enough for court, surely it's good enough for your chums?
Members of Bristol Older People's Forum gathered at the Malcolm X Centre in St Paul's...
How apt. The Blessed Malcolm's concern for the welfare of elderly white people is well known.
A well placed walking stick between the wheel spokes might have the desired effect.
A lycra clad kamikazi is hardly likely to be cycling on a pavement, the gaps make a mess of the Mavic Krysiums, as for the damage to the tyres. I have to raise the point that at times I am a lycra clad kamikazi, however pavements are not for cyclists and riding a road bike 25mm wheels will get shredded in no time.
Why not get the police to stop said cyclist, probably some urchin on a cheap mountain bike and either, caution, fine or arrest as the case maybe. There are existing powers to do this, simple problem solved.
"PC Roger Ibrahim told the meeting that [...] if people had particular concerns they should raise them at their neighbourhood policing forums."
The usual police response, then:
MOP: "This is a real problem"
Plod: "Well, you should tell us about it, then".
MOP: "Err, I just did?"
Plod: "If no-one tells us about these things, we can hardly be expected to do anything about them, can we?"
MOP: "Sod this..."
All I will say is that years ago in another life our local community told us they wanted something done about lights on pedal cycles and riding bicycles on the pavement. Cyclists were duly summonsed and the local Magistrates told us 'to stop wasting their time with such trivia' and announced that they would dismiss any such cases forthwith without bothering to hear any evidence. I could guarantee that if people were prosecuted today for such an offence (asuming the CPS would run such a case) the media would frotter themselves into a frenzy over police wasting time on trivia. I understand that the City of London Police have regular purges on nuisance cyclists.
PS My local bench was well known in legal circles for 'odd' decisions. I think the decision making was on the basis of tossing a coin or studying the tea leaves.
'Another woman said: "What we want is for irresponsible cyclists to get off their bikes and walk on the pavement."'
So... What she wants is the irresponisble to behave responsibly.
Now if I ruled the World and every day was the first day of spring etc..
XX There should be proper marked out lanes for them so everyone knows where they stand." XX
How touchingly niave. We HAVE cycle lanes on virtually every main street in Berlin, well Germany actualy. The safest place to walk is IN the bloody cycle lane. Because it is the only place where these moronic two wheeled bastards are NOT.
XX A bit pointless marking out lanes for them if there’s no sanction when they fail to stick to them, though? XX
Quite. WHEN there is a "crack down" here, the maximum fine is €5. I mean, you can not get a liter of beer in a pub for that piffeling amount.
Without "process costs" the bloody tickets cost more to print than that!
What IS good, however, IF they have a driving licence, they get points on it for cycling offences.
My preferd method is Claymores. A beutiful little thing used by the British army, among others, that fill the bastard full of extremely fast flying ball bearings.
Trouble is my boss thimks it could possibla be seen as an "over re-action."
Cyclists on pavements have problems getting past old people in motorised buggies pootling along at 0 mph. So do pedestrians.
Anon at 13.38, Magistrates' complaining about their valuable time being taken up with trivia such as errant cyclists is one of the reasons Fixed Penalty Notices (tickets) were introduced. However, for this to work, the officers require a name and address of the offender. Of course, you had the stroppy "I know the law" and demand to know if they have to give their personal details or accept a ticket. With a resigned air I would explain to such riders that if they didn't give their name and address, or accept a ticket, they would be reported for the offence which, for a summons to be issued, required a name and address. It was then explained that if they refused to give their name and address then I had powers under PACE to arrest them as the service of a summons was impracticable and a final request for a name and confirmable address was requested. To the refrains of "You can't do that. I pay your wages" or some such, I advised them that they were under arrest for whatever the offence was and cautioned. Some became violent and had to be handcuffed and were quite upset at seeing their precious wheels and rubber placed into the back of a Police van to be taken to the nick with them. Somewhat drastic you may feel, but my last nick had several serious injuries to pedestrians, especially elderly who couldn't get out of the way of the cyclists in the pedestrianised areas in time. A strong publicity campaign with details of the number of tickets, summons or arrests seemed to focus the minds of several cyclists somewhat. Unfortunately, the problem continues and with Tom Winsor and iDave's plans on decimating the Police forces of this country, before complaining about lack of action over such matters, the public need to decide which other pro-active or re-active task they will be happy to have cancelled. Unlike the views of many (some write on this blog), there are only so many Police officers and you can't just open a box, take some out and put them back when you don't need them.
One town not all that far away from me had an alternative idea of relaying the pedstrian areas and putting small ridges between the paving stones. It didn't affect walkers, but cyclists and skate-boarders complained about the rumbling effect and lack of smooth progress.
If anyone can come up with a 100% fool-proof system that would please everyone, then no doubt every Council in the country is waiting to hear from you. Good luck.
Just a quick note to support Anon (16:54). In case anyone thinks this isn't a serious issue, my grandmother-in-law died as a direct result of complications arising from a broken hip inflicted by a cyclist riding on the pavement.
No kidding. Old lady. On pavement. Cyclist. On pavement. Cyclist hits old lady. Old lady injured, later dies.
Prior to then, she had been fit as a fiddle.
Penseivat @ 16.54. No one will ever be happy with what the police do, there is no longer a consensus and society has become fragmented, one persons oppression is another persons appropriate policing of a problem. I cycle and drive and there are plenty of complete idiots on both sides of the fence but there does seem to be an epidemic of twattery affecting all sections of the UK at the moment.
"Wow, I didn’t think the police rode bikes any more, never mind on the pavement!"
Oh yes they do and oh yes they do, and they pay precious heed, as in "none whatsoever" to any "No Cycling" signs = and that get ever so ever so snitty (that is a contracted portmanteau term) if anyone dares point out to them that they aren't exactly setting an example nor indeed "upholding the law" as they have sworn on oath to so do. One rule for them, and they cracking down hard on everyone else sometimes via on the spot made up rules ...
What Penseivat said. Where I was we had a particular problem with the night club turn out urinating in the street. It was a byelaw offence with a £50 fine. Many were prosecuted,some refused details and were arrested under PACE, but ultimately, it did not deter others from doing exactly the same thing the next weekend.
As Julia knows all too well I am one of those evil cyclists.
As I am not an utter cretin I ride responsibly and am very much in favour of those who don't having the book thrown at them. If someone kills another with a bike, a car or a shotgun I see no difference, the victim is just as dead.
As to the police doing nothing about people riding on the pavement, can see their point TBH. The old law against riding dangerously, irresponsibily, etc was fine IMO as it allowed the police to use their discretion. If the cyclist is old/very young/otherwise infirm they are far safer for all on the pavement rather than in the road causing havoc.
The police would then have time to deal with the ferals who happen to be on bikes rather than ignoring them and stopping the octogenarian going 3.5 mph accross the square...
Slightly off topic - the areas I dread more than any other are where cyclists and pedestrians share the space. In spite of operating in extreme paranoia mode near any such types I have had to take desperate evasive maneuvers several times recently. It really is hard to plan for guys jumping sideways into the cycle lane or running in a circle to give two recent examples. Hence 99% of the time you will see me in the road...
Nearly half a century ago my dad frequently said, when I pointed out some minor inconsistantcy on his part, that " there is one rule for you and one rule for me and one rule for the Surrey Constabulary.". Nothing changes.
When we were faced with that problem, we had an agreement with the local paper that the names (and pictures if available) of the urinating offenders were published. At first it worked, then people started looking forward to their pics in the paper and printed them off as battle honours. Just think, they are the future politicians. My heart sinks!
I submit myself to the disapproval of this blog and such castigation as is attached to the admission of Sunday cycling.
We have our share of narrow, old roads in Huddersfield; some of which are very badly potholed and bounded by high, stone kerbs. I choose to cycle on the pavement at these locations; a decision I can justify on the grounds of safety. Were I to be confronted by an officious PC Pense type, I would furnish my personal details and take his ticket with a broad smile.
Pompous plod is best brought down to earth in court....local press coverage being a bonus.
Dr (of what?)Melvin T GREY
Broxted Lunatic Asylum
Good evening, Jaded.
I compliment your efforts with a very tricky name and address. Not exactly correct but you did very well indeed. The doctorate, dear? I found it difficult to sleep one night so I did a Ph.D in UK policing to pass the time.
Oh, look - it's raining Chief Constables.
Donut Stu of Cumbria is the latest to be relieved of his duties whilst over the border, there are rumours of a Norman retreat.
I'm a cyclist, as well as a pedestrian and also a motorist, from time to time. I mainly get about by two wheeels nowadays, at least whilst I am still hale and hearty enough.
I suppose I am one of the 'odd' bikers who obey the rules of the road; I don't go through red lights and I don't ride on the footpath or through pedestrian areas. I sometimes get 'sideways' looks from people because I push my bike through the town centre pedestrian area, not that I am a paragon of virtue. It makes my urine boil to see 'adult' cyclists riding on the pavement and when I, as a pedestrian have been confronted by a wheeled idiot have wished I had a walking stick that could 'accidentally' slip through the spokes as they zip by.
Whilst I colourfully curse the inconsiderate, and sometimes downright dangerous motorist when cycling, the same applies to cyclists when I am walking on the footpath. I think it comes down to common courtesy – motorists looking out for the more vulnerable cyclist and the cyclist not endangering walkers. Unfortunately, common courtesy and common sense were abandoned a couple of decades ago.
Indeed. I wonder how many more of these there are?
"There are existing powers to do this, simple problem solved."
Yes. But they can't get anyone to USE them...
"MOP: "Sod this...""
And the HQ police top brass stare at their opinion poll figures and wonder why so many of the public aren't 'on side'...
"So... What she wants is the irresponisble to behave responsibly. "
In a nutshell, yes!
"What IS good, however, IF they have a driving licence, they get points on it for cycling offences."
Ooh! That could be a good idea.
"Cyclists on pavements have problems getting past old people in motorised buggies pootling along at 0 mph."
The ones in use in Southend have a lot more zip than that - some of them could outpace a cyclist, easy!
"Somewhat drastic you may feel..."
No, not at all. More power to you.
"Prior to then, she had been fit as a fiddle."
And the cyclist experienced no consequences, I suppose..? :/
"...but there does seem to be an epidemic of twattery affecting all sections of the UK at the moment."
Amen! And far too many so-called adults suffering from arrested development.
"..but ultimately, it did not deter others from doing exactly the same thing the next weekend."
At one of the boot sales I frequent, despite the ginormous field, some people insist on parking outside, on yellow lines, obstructing the view.
Ticket inspectors come. Have a field day.
Next week? Same again.
"The old law against riding dangerously, irresponsibily, etc was fine IMO as it allowed the police to use their discretion."
For far too many professions, discretion is a dirty word. Everything must conform to a template, no deviation allowed.
" I think it comes down to common courtesy ..."
Sadly, far too many people now see that as a weakness to be exploited, not an example to live up to.
Post a Comment