Jump to content

Cyclists Rant


harleyj

Featured Posts

The first two offences refer to a road, which the towpath (mostly) isn't.

 

The third offence (drink/drugs) refers to road or public place. Is the towpath a public place? In order to protect their position, I could see CRT giving evidence for the defence insisting it is not.

 

George ex nb Alton retired

It depends on the definition used in the specific act, but commonly " public place" is defined as "“public place” includes any highway and any other premises or place to which at the material time the public have or are permitted to have access, whether on payment or otherwise."

 

So I'd guess that the towpath is indeed a public place within the meaning of the Act.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The third offence (drink/drugs) refers to road or public place. Is the towpath a public place? In order to protect their position, I could see CRT giving evidence for the defence insisting it is not.

 

I have come across a legal definition of a "public place" in another context which defined it as something like "a place to which the public has access, including a place where access is only available on pyment of a charge". So that would include the towpath as well as private land subject to entry charges e.g. football ground, theme park etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a news report of a fatal accident which took place near me yesterday. The news report doesn't assign blame, but here we have three cyclists riding down a fairly steep hill on a blind bend and one is involved in a collision with a car coming the other way and dies at the scene. And then another cyclist hits a stationary vehicle which has stopped to assist. The cyclist who died might or might not have been at fault, but for the second collision its pretty clear who was not using the road within the limits of his ability to see ahead and stop safely.

 

http://www.itv.com/news/calendar/update/2016-07-18/cyclist-dies-in-hebden-bridge-collision/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Drove across the Gower yesterday as cycle event in progress...dunno about pedestrians but some car drivers got awfully stressed out with wobbly weavers..danger on the narrow winding roads for all..of course Welsh Mist and rain really enhanced their day.

 

I walked the towpath trail along to Victoria Park from Angel in London several weeks ago...horrific experience with the lycra clad speedsters taking ownership of canalside paths..I believe complete no go for those on foot during "rush hour" and lunch times. Cyclists have to get from a to b but should slow down not just shout "cyclist" and expect Jo Public to jump.

 

Little sis cycling from Amsterdam to Vienna along mainly cycle routes..she says continent have got it right.

Would you call your little sis a wobbly weaver, a rather pejorative term? Or Chris Boardman's Mum?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-north-east-wales-36819791

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One could always go for the offence under Section 35 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 and then argue whether seriously frightening someone constitutes bodily harm. rolleyes.gif

Given that CPS routinely downgrade virtually every grade of assault to the lesser charge below it to ensure success in court (not that they achieve even that), I can't see them following that line.

 

I have come across a legal definition of a "public place" in another context which defined it as something like "a place to which the public has access, including a place where access is only available on pyment of a charge". So that would include the towpath as well as private land subject to entry charges e.g. football ground, theme park etc.

So provided the cyclist is drunk or on drugs we have him, otherwise?

 

George ex nb Alton retired

Edited by furnessvale
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given that CPS routinely downgrade virtually every grade of assault to the lesser charge below it to ensure success in court (not that they achieve even that), I can't see them following that line.

 

Difficult to say whether they will or not. A question posed by former Tory Leadership challenger, Andrea Leadsom, to the Attorney General of how many people were prosecuted under that act and section gave a bit of an ambiguous replyhttps://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2010-11-09c.23023.hthat MoJ don't keep any record of how many of the convictions were of cyclists. Since motorists could be convicted under other statutes i wouldn't have thought too many of them were for motor vehicle users, but that is just speculation.

 

ETA can anyone tell me why, when I post a link, this site adds gobbledegook (%C2%A0%C2%A0) to the end of the link thereby preventing it from working??angry.pngangry.png If you delete the gobbledegook the link will work but, after 4 attempts to amend it I've given up trying

Edited by Wanderer Vagabond
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like to keep risk to a reasonable minimum (happy to cruise in bare feet with a nice wine on back of trad of course)

 

I also like to take pleasure in my life. I ride on the roads, and take care when I do...but it invokes a never-ending vigilance on the part of all road users; I suppose that's a definition of being a road user.

 

The towpath is / should be a pleasure, as previously stated, you get to se weird dinosaur throwbacks. You don't need a helmet, or constant shoulder-checks or defensive positioning.

 

It's a shared space, and a public right of way. I often use it to cycle home, sometimes many miles. The alternative would be country A roads where I am a danger to everyone!

 

 

So, let's look at that in more detail.

 

You want to reduce the risk FOR YOU to a reasonable minimum. Do you acknowledge that in moving from the road to the towpath, you reduce your risk, but increase the risk for pedestrians?

 

You may have cast aside the never-ending vigilance, but those on foot now need to apply it. Yes, the towpath should be a pleasure, but being expected to leap out of the way when a cyclist rings his bell (heaven forfend that the cyclist should interrupt his day by slowing down or stopping) reduces the pleasure for pedestrians.

 

You suggest that it is a shared space, but in reality many cyclists seem to have an attitude that pedestrians are allowed to share the towpath, for so long as they don't get in the way of cyclists.

 

Oh, and it is VERY rare that a towpath is a right of way.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Difficult to say whether they will or not. A question posed by former Tory Leadership challenger, Andrea Leadsom, to the Attorney General of how many people were prosecuted under that act and section gave a bit of an ambiguous reply https://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2010-11-09c.23023.h that MoJ don't keep any record of how many of the convictions were of cyclists. Since motorists could be convicted under other statutes i wouldn't have thought too many of them were for motor vehicle users, but that is just speculation.

 

ETA can anyone tell me why, when I post a link, this site adds gobbledegook (%C2%A0%C2%A0) to the end of the link thereby preventing it from working??angry.pngangry.png If you delete the gobbledegook the link will work but, after 4 attempts to amend it I've given up trying

 

I get this sometimes by adding a space before I press return...

 

This is internet-address-speak for spaces and/or other characters. %C2%A0 is the code for a non-breaking space (ie a character that is blank, not a gap between words).

 

http://www.javascripter.net/faq/escape-encodeuri-upper-ascii.htm

 

So, don't hit the space-bar!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a news report of a fatal accident which took place near me yesterday. The news report doesn't assign blame, but here we have three cyclists riding down a fairly steep hill on a blind bend and one is involved in a collision with a car coming the other way and dies at the scene. And then another cyclist hits a stationary vehicle which has stopped to assist. The cyclist who died might or might not have been at fault, but for the second collision its pretty clear who was not using the road within the limits of his ability to see ahead and stop safely.

 

http://www.itv.com/news/calendar/update/2016-07-18/cyclist-dies-in-hebden-bridge-collision/

It depends whether the car or cyclists were on their own side of the road. The subsequent collision was the fault of the vehicle for travelling faster than the sightlines, which in this case was the cyclist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

being expected to leap out of the way when a cyclist rings his bell (heaven forfend that the cyclist should interrupt his day by slowing down or stopping) reduces the pleasure for pedestrians.

 

Bells like car horns are a warning of presence, not the tool of reprimand they're usually employed as. As a cyclist I find a vocal greeting works better than a bell, it reinforces that I'm a fellow human, wish no harm and am not demanding priority, but the other person needs to know I'm there. Nine out of ten pause for me to pass, the odd one sees it as their right to block their way. Engaging them in a demanding subject completely unrelated to the matter in hand ("isn't it terrible what cats do to birds?" "I love your hat, my father had an identical one." "You know the moon shot was staged in Hollywood studio?") tends to scatter the stubborn ones in short order, singing the soprano parts from Aida in falsetto clears the more belligerent types.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course, fatal collisions between cars no longer really make the news, because they're so ordinary.

 

 

 

 

So, let's look at that in more detail.

 

You want to reduce the risk FOR YOU to a reasonable minimum. Do you acknowledge that in moving from the road to the towpath, you reduce your risk, but increase the risk for pedestrians?

 

You may have cast aside the never-ending vigilance, but those on foot now need to apply it. Yes, the towpath should be a pleasure, but being expected to leap out of the way when a cyclist rings his bell (heaven forfend that the cyclist should interrupt his day by slowing down or stopping) reduces the pleasure for pedestrians.

 

You suggest that it is a shared space, but in reality many cyclists seem to have an attitude that pedestrians are allowed to share the towpath, for so long as they don't get in the way of cyclists.

 

Oh, and it is VERY rare that a towpath is a right of way.

 

 

Well.... reducing risk is generally a good strategy, employed by lots of animals. Though I did point out that I'm happy to stand barefoot on the back of the boat and drink wine, so I'm not risk averse - my main point was that pleasure is important. I cycle on the paths for the same reason I/we/you don't walk on the roads... It's nice.

 

You are right, it's a permissive path -- I was mistaken. I suppose I do have the 'right' to be there...but then, that's a semantic whirlpool.

 

I think that the risk of collision between a pedestrian and a normal cyclist on a towpath is probably lower the risk of contracting, say, Malaria while on holiday in Greece. What I'm hearing is the fear of being hit is an issue, combined with the invevitable numpties ruining it for everyone else.

 

It might also be regional? It's certainly not a problem where I am

 

How long do you think this has been an issue? Have you noticed an increase over the years? The UK population has increased by about a fifth since the 70s.... and car ownership has gone through the roof...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bells like car horns are a warning of presence, not the tool of reprimand they're usually employed as. As a cyclist I find a vocal greeting works better than a bell, it reinforces that I'm a fellow human, wish no harm and am not demanding priority, but the other person needs to know I'm there. Nine out of ten pause for me to pass, the odd one sees it as their right to block their way. Engaging them in a demanding subject completely unrelated to the matter in hand ("isn't it terrible what cats do to birds?" "I love your hat, my father had an identical one." "You know the moon shot was staged in Hollywood studio?") tends to scatter the stubborn ones in short order, singing the soprano parts from Aida in falsetto clears the more belligerent types.

"It's a treat for all the passers by out jogging!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a regular cyclist on the Lancaster canal I only tend to ring my bell as a last resort, I've seen people nearly jump in through surprise.

Amble up behind, most people hear you coming, pass them always saying thank you and everybody's happy.

 

I agree, towpaths are not race tracks but a pleasant place to exercise

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be fair the Thames path passes through numerous different land owners' properties whereas the towpaths on the canal system are afaik owned by the authority (majority CRT and it is CRT towpaths under discussion I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I get this sometimes by adding a space before I press return...

 

This is internet-address-speak for spaces and/or other characters. %C2%A0 is the code for a non-breaking space (ie a character that is blank, not a gap between words).

 

http://www.javascripter.net/faq/escape-encodeuri-upper-ascii.htm

 

So, don't hit the space-bar!

After another 7 attempts I have now 'fixed' the link,still not sure how it works though or I'd have been able to 'fix' it at the first attemptrolleyes.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

So, let's look at that in more detail.

 

You want to reduce the risk FOR YOU to a reasonable minimum. Do you acknowledge that in moving from the road to the towpath, you reduce your risk, but increase the risk for pedestrians?

 

You may have cast aside the never-ending vigilance, but those on foot now need to apply it. Yes, the towpath should be a pleasure, but being expected to leap out of the way when a cyclist rings his bell (heaven forfend that the cyclist should interrupt his day by slowing down or stopping) reduces the pleasure for pedestrians.

 

You suggest that it is a shared space, but in reality many cyclists seem to have an attitude that pedestrians are allowed to share the towpath, for so long as they don't get in the way of cyclists.

 

Oh, and it is VERY rare that a towpath is a right of way.

There seem to be some conflicting threads on these boards. On another thread we are told that if a faster boat comes up behind you it is good manners to move aside and let it through (even if it is going fast,creating a wash and damaging the infrastructure). On the other hand we are here being told that if a cyclist comes up behind you on the towpath as a pedestrian you have no responsibility to get out of his/her way. Let us assume that I and my OH are both fat knackers who enjoy waddling down the centre of the towpath whilst ambling at 1mph blocking it for everyone , cyclists, pedestrians, parents pushing buggies, etc.etc. Would this still apply??unsure.png

 

Perhaps a bit of give and take may assist. You feed the stereotype with your assertion that pedestrians are."... expected to leap out of the way when a cyclist rings his bell..." and highlights why I stopped using the bell that I bought for the bike.

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There seem to be some conflicting threads on these boards. On another thread we are told that if a faster boat comes up behind you it is good manners to move aside and let it through (even if it is going fast,creating a wash and damaging the infrastructure). On the other hand we are here being told that if a cyclist comes up behind you on the towpath as a pedestrian you have no responsibility to get out of his/her way. Let us assume that I and my OH are both fat knackers who enjoy waddling down the centre of the towpath whilst ambling at 1mph blocking it for everyone , cyclists, pedestrians, parents pushing buggies, etc.etc. Would this still apply??unsure.png

 

Perhaps a bit of give and take may assist. You feed the stereotype with your assertion that pedestrians are."... expected to leap out of the way when a cyclist rings his bell..." and highlights why I stopped using the bell that I bought for the bike.

 

yes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not comparable.

 

If I'm boating and come up behind you I'll follow you hoping you'll notice me and pull over to let me pass, likewise if you're waddling down the towpath and I walk up behind you I'd do the same.

 

In either circumstance what I wouldn't do is approach at five times your speed, putting the onus upon you to get out of my way.

I wouldn't leave you frightened, startled or even 4 teeth less and needing 12 stitches. My only defence being that it's more dangerous for me on a road.

 

There's too much taking from cyclists I have yet to see what they give to canals apart from towpaths that are dificult to put a pin into.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bells like car horns are a warning of presence, not the tool of reprimand they're usually employed as. As a cyclist I find a vocal greeting works better than a bell, it reinforces that I'm a fellow human, wish no harm and am not demanding priority, but the other person needs to know I'm there. Nine out of ten pause for me to pass, the odd one sees it as their right to block their way. Engaging them in a demanding subject completely unrelated to the matter in hand ("isn't it terrible what cats do to birds?" "I love your hat, my father had an identical one." "You know the moon shot was staged in Hollywood studio?") tends to scatter the stubborn ones in short order, singing the soprano parts from Aida in falsetto clears the more belligerent types.

In the greater scheme of things cycling is a good thing and cyclists mixing with pedestrians is better for society as a whole than cyclists mixing with HGVs. Therefore I am happy to share the towpath with cyclists notwithstanding it brings it's own issues.

 

But never ever stop and bother me with your conspiracy theories. That's unacceptable behaviour.

 

JP

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It depends whether the car or cyclists were on their own side of the road. The subsequent collision was the fault of the vehicle for travelling faster than the sightlines, which in this case was the cyclist.

Indeed. The police will already have heard from the 2 surviving cyclists and the car driver. They now want to find any independent witnesses to help determine who was actually at fault.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.