Damn Pedestrians

[Thomas]

Hi All,

Finally had my first minor accident today. Was cycling through Hyde Park when I came to a few kids
playing with their rollerblades on the cycle path. Attempted to avoid them whilst they seemed intent
on getting in my way, no doubt to show their "cool". Anyways, got out of their way only to move onto
the new path that has about a 2-inch kerb on it. Embarrassingly, it was this that bought my down and
I now have a delightful pattern of impacts on my right elbow.

It was bound to happen today. This is the first time I've cycled into town (was after a book so went
to Charing Cross Road). Went back via Oxford street. A pedestrian walked out in front of me without
looking. I'm going quite fast so shout at him, shout again, and eventually just about scoot by him,
only getting a touch from his rucksack.

What is it with pedestrians not looking? I'm beginning to get the feeling they're far more dangerous
than the cars on the road...

Thomas.

 

[Frank]

"Thomas" <tom [at] greysheep [dot] co [dot] uk> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>>
> What is it with pedestrians not looking? I'm beginning to get the feeling they're far more
> dangerous than the cars on the road...
>

I'm actually of the opinion a lot of this is you fault.

A lot of the reason they step out in front of you is because they can't hear you, so don't bother
looking. They won't change so you might as well accept this now.

I would recommend:

ride slower near pedestrians, particulary when it is possible they might step out. The west end is
very much a pedestrian area where this happens.

ride further away from the pavement near pedestrians, after all people don't drive their cars in
the gutter.

make more noise.

don't ride fast through parks or other recreational, relaxed areas.

 

[Just Zis Guy]

On Sat, 14 Jun 2003 20:27:12 +0000 (UTC), "Frank" <[email protected]> wrote:

>I'm actually of the opinion a lot of this is you fault.

Harsh but fair. After all, pedestrians are just doing what pedestrians do - they are a complete
rabble. This is not a surprise, just as children failing to look properly is not a surprise, and if
we fail to take account of it we are surely no better than the cagers whose "solution" to the danger
they pose children is to try to teach the children adult levels of road sense.

On the other hand, there is an extent to which peds have been so brainwashed into thinking
car=danger => danger=car that they may also be failing to take account of moving cycles.

A bell, much as I deride them, can be a useful device when mixing it with pavement lemmings. My Air
Zound is certainly a bit much

Guy
===
** WARNING ** This posting may contain traces of irony. http://www.chapmancentral.com Advance
notice: ADSL service in process of transfer to a new ISP. Obviously there will be a week of downtime
between the engineer removing the BT service and the same engineer connecting the same equipment on
the same line in the same exchange and billing it to the new ISP.

 

[Thomas]

"Frank" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
> "Thomas" <tom [at] greysheep [dot] co [dot] uk> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >>
> > What is it with pedestrians not looking? I'm beginning to get the
feeling
> > they're far more dangerous than the cars on the road...
> >
>
> I'm actually of the opinion a lot of this is you fault.

Fair, but within reason. In this instance, the ped on Oxford Street had managed to walk virtually
halfway across without looking. 'T is daft.

> A lot of the reason they step out in front of you is because they can't
hear
> you, so don't bother looking. They won't change so you might as well
accept
> this now.

Meh - I'm young and idealistic

> I would recommend:
>
> ride slower near pedestrians, particulary when it is possible they might step out. The west end is
> very much a pedestrian area where this happens.
>
> ride further away from the pavement near pedestrians, after all people don't drive their cars in
> the gutter.
>
> make more noise.
>
> don't ride fast through parks or other recreational, relaxed areas.

All very sensible advice and I agree with it.

I think I'm a fairly good cyclist, but what's one to do when you're going a fair old pace down a
major road and are then faced with a child (with mother by side) pushing their bike across the road
infront of you? I think that's an isolated case as there were cars all around, but still. Bah.

 

[Thomas]

"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sat, 14 Jun 2003 20:27:12 +0000 (UTC), "Frank" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >I'm actually of the opinion a lot of this is you fault.
>
> Harsh but fair. After all, pedestrians are just doing what pedestrians do - they are a complete
> rabble. This is not a surprise, just as children failing to look properly is not a surprise, and
> if we fail to take account of it we are surely no better than the cagers whose "solution" to the
> danger they pose children is to try to teach the children adult levels of road sense.
>
> On the other hand, there is an extent to which peds have been so brainwashed into thinking
> car=danger => danger=car that they may also be failing to take account of moving cycles.
>
> A bell, much as I deride them, can be a useful device when mixing it with pavement lemmings. My
> Air Zound is certainly a bit much

I think a lot of my resentment comes from never having driven - all these strange quirks of using
the road baffle me sometimes

Thomas.

 

[Simon]

> I think a lot of my resentment comes from never having driven - all these strange quirks of using
> the road baffle me sometimes

Any cyclist using the road ought to, at least, learn the highway code.

 

[Thomas]

"Simon" <sbennettatwiderworlddotcodotuk> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> > I think a lot of my resentment comes from never having driven - all these strange quirks of
> > using the road baffle me sometimes
>
> Any cyclist using the road ought to, at least, learn the highway code.

Sadly, though, in the highway code universe, no car ever attempts to turn left on top of you...

Thankfully, I researched defensive cycling before hitting the roads. So far, it's served me well.
Aside from two-inch kerbs.

 

[Frank]

"Thomas" <tom [at] greysheep [dot] co [dot] uk> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Meh - I'm young and idealistic
>

I think it is a mistake to believe a persons views are more valid just because they are old.

Trust me, I have many years of experience to support this statement ;o).

 

[Frank°]

"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sat, 14 Jun 2003 20:27:12 +0000 (UTC), "Frank" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >I'm actually of the opinion a lot of this is you fault.
>
> Harsh but fair. After all, pedestrians are just doing what pedestrians do - they are a complete
> rabble. This is not a surprise, just as children failing to look properly is not a surprise, and
> if we fail to take account of it we are surely no better than the cagers whose "solution" to the
> danger they pose children is to try to teach the children adult levels of road sense.
>
> On the other hand, there is an extent to which peds have been so brainwashed into thinking
> car=danger => danger=car that they may also be failing to take account of moving cycles.
>
> A bell, much as I deride them, can be a useful device when mixing it with pavement lemmings. My
> Air Zound is certainly a bit much
>

It's quite strange how this ties in with your pavement cycling post, which I support, there seems to
be a body of opinion that it is ok to endanger other people safety as long as it is within the law
but utterly unreasonable if it isn't.

I take the view we should use the law as a guide not an absolute master.

 

[Frank]

"Thomas" <tom [at] greysheep [dot] co [dot] uk> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Sadly, though, in the highway code universe, no car ever attempts to turn left on top of you...
>
> Thankfully, I researched defensive cycling before hitting the roads. So
far,
> it's served me well. Aside from two-inch kerbs.
>

A couple of weeks ago I was riding past Biggin Hill Airport, They have a couple of superb Spitfires
mounted by the side of the road. Naturally enough this gained my full attention and I missed the
fact that the entrance road/ bus stop was separated from the road by a 30mm ridge. I did manage to
stay on but only just (

 

[Thomas]

"Frank" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
> "Thomas" <tom [at] greysheep [dot] co [dot] uk> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Sadly, though, in the highway code universe, no car ever attempts to
turn
> > left on top of you...
> >
> > Thankfully, I researched defensive cycling before hitting the roads. So
> far,
> > it's served me well. Aside from two-inch kerbs.
> >
>
> A couple of weeks ago I was riding past Biggin Hill Airport, They have a couple of superb
> Spitfires mounted by the side of the road. Naturally
enough
> this gained my full attention and I missed the fact that the entrance
road/
> bus stop was separated from the road by a 30mm ridge. I did manage to stay on but only just (

Hehe, it's a bugger but it appears to me that it's always the stupid piddling little things that
catch you out. I was just rather embarrassed (hence laughing rather /too/ hard). Pretty young
ladies, how can I appeal when I've just been that much of a prat? Fun.

 

[Danny Colyer]

Thomas wrote:
> Sadly, though, in the highway code universe, no car ever attempts to turn left on top of you...

Rules 158 & 159 would suggest otherwise.

Any motorist using the road ought to, at least, learn the Highway Code

--
Danny Colyer (remove safety to reply) ( http://www.juggler.net/danny ) Recumbent cycle page:
http://www.speedy5.freeserve.co.uk/recumbents/ "He who dares not offend cannot be honest." -
Thomas Paine

 

[Pete Biggs]

Thomas wrote:
> What is it with pedestrians not looking? I'm beginning to get the feeling they're far more
> dangerous than the cars on the road...

They are! You've got to assume every ped anywhere nearby could step into your path at any moment -
including those on the pavement when you are on the road. Give them room: ride further out or away
when going past. The faster you're going, the more leeway is required.

Sorry, but there's no excuse for hitting a pedestrian unless something really extraordinary happens.
Someone just stepping off the kerb or roller skating doesn't count. That's most ordinary!

I have been through Hyde Park when all the rollerbladers are out in force. The paths they use are
very wide and it's easy to give them *loads* of room.

~PB

 

[Thomas]

"Pete Biggs" <pLime{remove_fruit}@biggs.tc> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Thomas wrote:
> > What is it with pedestrians not looking? I'm beginning to get the feeling they're far more
> > dangerous than the cars on the road...
>
> They are! You've got to assume every ped anywhere nearby could step into your path at any moment -
> including those on the pavement when you are on the road. Give them room: ride further out or away
> when going past. The faster you're going, the more leeway is required.
>
> Sorry, but there's no excuse for hitting a pedestrian unless something really extraordinary
> happens. Someone just stepping off the kerb or roller skating doesn't count. That's most ordinary!

I'm more than willing to accept that - I was going too fast down Oxford Street when there were loads
of peds about. Live 'n' learn, I suppose.

> I have been through Hyde Park when all the rollerbladers are out in force. The paths they use are
> very wide and it's easy to give them *loads* of room.

Again, was going too fast. It happened around the bottom-left corner, where you go off the path,
onto a pedestrianised road and then back onto the path. The kids were everywhere, I was able to say
a couple of sorries to them and yet they kept on showing off by going straight in front of me. Moo.
Anyways, it was the tiny, tiny curb that brought me down. As I say, you live 'n' learn.

I think I've said this elsewhere, but I'd really like to think of myself as a safe cyclist. I notice
kids playing football and think accordingly. It's just when you have a matter of seconds to decide
an action with regards to a ped walking out in front of you... well, for the third time, I suppose
it comes down to experience.

Thomas.

 

[Dave]

"Thomas" <tom [at] greysheep [dot] co [dot] uk> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Frank" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> >
> > "Thomas" <tom [at] greysheep [dot] co [dot] uk> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > >>
> > > What is it with pedestrians not looking? I'm beginning to get the
> feeling
> > > they're far more dangerous than the cars on the road...

<snip>

> I think I'm a fairly good cyclist, but what's one to do when you're going
a
> fair old pace down a major road and are then faced with a child (with
mother
> by side) pushing their bike across the road infront of you? I think that's an isolated case as
> there were cars all around, but still. Bah.
>
Aaah!, see, herein lies the problem ;-) .... you're already assuming this is an isolated case. There
will no doubt be some version of Sod's Law that you should be aware of that states exactly the same
thing will happen today and probably tomorrow, if not also the day after and is by no means an
*isolated case*. It won't, but it could and probably will...but won't. Understand ? HTH, Dave.
p.s. when I was a weeny cub scout, there used to be a motto along the lines of...hhmmm..let's see if
I can remember...hhhm...'Be Prepared'. It served me well and I think it might help you here ;-)
Remember, no matter what your state (ped/cyclist/cager), they're all out to get you !

 

[Peter B]

"Thomas" <tom [at] greysheep [dot] co [dot] uk> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Sadly, though, in the highway code universe, no car ever attempts to turn left on top of you...

You ain't bin around

Surely you've had the scenario where a car overtakes you and then does a left turn immediately in
front of you? Well, a refinement of this is to actually commence the left turn whilst they are
immediately to the right of you. This has happened to me and all I could do was to turn left with
the car. I was still sufficiently in control (of the bike anyway) to rap on the front passenger
window! (with my knuckles atho' I also did a form of rapping vocally). Needless to say the Little
Old Lady[TM] technically in control of the car hadn't seen me despite following me for several
hundred metres from a set of lights and me turned out in a stunning crimson top in bright
waeather :-(

Pete

 

[Richard Goodman]

"Frank" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
>
> I'm actually of the opinion a lot of this is you fault.
>
> A lot of the reason they step out in front of you is because they can't
hear
> you, so don't bother looking. They won't change so you might as well
accept
> this now.
>
> I would recommend:
>

I agree entirely with your observation that peds will habitually tend to do this and won't change,
and your recommendations. I wouldn't, however, automatically have blamed the OP for his experiences
with peds - although in another posting he did later agree he was going too fast in those particular
places. To generalise, however, I don't think that, in the event eg of a civil damages claim, the
Courts will necessarily and always agree that the cyclist is at fault if s/he hits a pedestrian who
steps out into the road without looking - it would all depend on the circumstances (and what any
witnesses say). There was of course recently a case where a cyclist was convicted (careless
cycling?) for a heavy collision with a woman (in Bath/Bristol?) - apparently going at speed downhill
having seen the peds some distance away but mistakenly thinking they would give way to him (as
indeed they should have) - but everything will turn on the particular facts of the case. Certainly
we all need to be aware of pedestrian behaviour, but pedestrians also have to take some
responsibility for their own behaviour, and its consequences.

Rich

 

[Just Zis Guy]

On Sat, 14 Jun 2003 22:30:49 +0100, "Frank°" <[email protected]> wrote:

>It's quite strange how this ties in with your pavement cycling post, which I support, there seems
>to be a body of opinion that it is ok to endanger other people safety

I was in Polemic mode and therefore not attempting to cover more than a very narrow set of
circumstances: car drivers criticising cyclists for having been scared off the road by their
driving. I do not advocate pavement cycling, not least because it's more dangerous for the cyclist
than for the pedestrians (and of course more dangerous than riding in the road, however hard the car
drivers try to alter that). If we do ride on the pavement we must take account of pedestrians, a key
weakness of shared use farcilities.

My view is that in any situation where one party brings disporportionate danger they are under a
correspondingly greater obligation to take care. The danger bikes pose to peds is somewhat
greater than the danger peds pose to bikes, while the danger cars pose to both is orders of
magnitude greater.

That doesn't remove the obligation to ride in accordance with the Highway Code (in as much as it is
not directly contradicted by Guru Franklin) and of course the law.

In <mumble> years of cycling I have hit precisely one pedestrian, a pavement lemming who stepped
out into the road from behind a stationary goods vehicle without looking. And even then I hold
myself partly to blame as I really should have been able to stop in time. This low tally is
probably influenced by the fact that I rarely use shared-use facilities and almost never ride on
the pavement.

Guy
===
** WARNING ** This posting may contain traces of irony. http://www.chapmancentral.com Advance
notice: ADSL service in process of transfer to a new ISP. Obviously there will be a week of downtime
between the engineer removing the BT service and the same engineer connecting the same equipment on
the same line in the same exchange and billing it to the new ISP.

 

[Just Zis Guy]

On Sat, 14 Jun 2003 22:03:33 +0100, "Simon" <sbennettatwiderworlddotcodotuk> wrote:

> Any cyclist using the road ought to, at least, learn the highway code.

That's a good idea - maybe we can persuade car drivers as well ;-)

Guy
===
** WARNING ** This posting may contain traces of irony. http://www.chapmancentral.com Advance
notice: ADSL service in process of transfer to a new ISP. Obviously there will be a week of downtime
between the engineer removing the BT service and the same engineer connecting the same equipment on
the same line in the same exchange and billing it to the new ISP.

 

[Garry Broad]

> Certainly we all need to be aware of pedestrian behaviour, but pedestrians also have to take some
> responsibility for their own behaviour, and its consequences.

Too true. What ever happened to the green cross code.....and all those naff public information films
of the seventies. Noise or no noise, when a pedestrian steps out into the road he/she is putting
themselves at risk - going where pedestrians shouldn't really be - on the open road, off the
pavement. All it takes is a look - 'right, left and right again'.....takes two seconds.

garry