Nick wrote:
> JNugent wrote:
>> Nick wrote:
>>> JNugent wrote:
>>>> Cycling on the footway is illegal and anti-social,
>>> Why?
>> Because it's... er... against the law.
>> <eyes cast upward to Heaven>
> Not around my house it isn't
Fair enough. I was talking about the UK, where cycling on the footway
is illegal.
>>> There are a lot of shared use paths.
>> They are not footways within the meaning of what was described. No-one
>> was under the illusion that "shared paths" were what was being
>> described in the OP in this thread. It was ordinary, plain vanilla,
>> pedestrians-for-the-use-of, footways, such as most people have outside
>> their front doors or garden gates.
> They are footpaths out side my house, just got a bit of paint on them,
Not what was being spoken about. The correct term for what some people
call "the pavement" (sometimes a "footpath") is "the footway". I
always use that term in order to avoid ambiguity.
>>> We all have to live together and a little give and take from
>>> responsible people doesn't seem to be a problem.
>>> What is antisocial is dangerous riding or driving.
>> Those too. But they are certainly not the only thing that is
>> anti-social. Cycling along the footway is very anti-social (says I,
>> principally as a pedestrian, but also as a motorised footway-crosser
>> at the entrance to my driveway).
> So I asked why and you hid behind the its against the law answer
That's a perfect answer as to why it is illegal (which was half of
your question).
> then reiterated the fact that you don't like it without saying why.
I don't like it for reasons I went on to explain (and that was the
other half).
>>> While this behaviour is sometimes seen in pavement cyclists it is
>>> very common in cars on the road.
>> Done to death, I'm afraid, here and elsewhere. When I see a car being
>> driven at normal speed along a footway (ie, not for anything other
>> than crossing it or a slow manoeuvre involved in parking), I'll give
>> you a shout. Don't hold your breath (and no, I don't want a debate on
>> it - you know I'm telling the truth).
>>> Particularly the type of self righteous driver who feels they own
>>> the road and likes to intimidate slower more vulnerable road users.
>> I am a pedestrian most of the time. I feel intimidated by illegal
>> cycling in "my" space. I see no reason why I or anyone else should put
>> up with it. It is a deliberate and cynical shifting of risk onto those
>> who don't deserve it. Try seeing it from the pedestrian's POV.
> If I thought you were a considerate motorist who showed courtesy or care
> for the safety of cyclist in "their" space eg the highway I might have
> some respect for your view, but your not are you.
Is that a question?
If so, what basis do you have for prejudging the answer (particularly
for prejudging it so wrongly)?
> I am a motorist, cyclist and a pedestrian I can say without doubt that
> it is very rarely that I have any problem with the cyclists who use the
> pavement and very common that I have problems with dangerous and
> anti-social car drivers on the road.
That's your view.
Others (particularly, I suspect, those who don't have a vested
interest in defending anti-social footway cycling, if you'll forgive
the tautology) have differing views. So too (though sometimes it's
hard to credit it) does the law.
