Worthing pavement cycling shame page changes tack after cyclists hit back

These signs are popping up everywhere. No-one would defend anyone being an idiot regardless of transport mode (other than the CPS and the courts where a car is involved naturally) but why are councils so good at picking on the least dangerous whilst continually playing dumb to the real issue...which as any sane mind will recognise are impatient over entitled and plain dangerous people in fast moving metal boxes?

It is a form of discrimination and persecution when the greater problem is continually side stepped and I'm repeatedly left wondering why vulnerable road users are unable to collectively mount a legal challenge against the plain obvious whilst repeatedly paying for lack of action with their lives.

When are we going to demand change?

Ironmancole

Baby on board signs are not used as you state. There an unofficial way of saying impatient, inconsiderate an irrisponsible driver about. Whose only view is that they need to get where ever they are going at warp speed. May brake suddenly, be one the phone or looking in the back for the errant child. Mainly noted for parking as close to the school as possible and pulling out randomly. Or seen cutting across as many lanes of the motorway as possible at as shap an angle the car can handle when joining or leave. May also change lanes without warning for no apparent reason.

And why the hell is your child's life worth more than mine?

Tricky one this but ultimately my final take on it is this.

If I terrorise and kill in my car nobody actually gives a toss as I'm effectively the golden child exercising my apparent right to drive as I wish.

A death caused by the car is dumbed down with responsibility absolved from the driver and everyone seems to accept its ok to throw lives away as the car is this amazing thing we all love (despite everyone hating the MOT, congestion, associated waste of time in never ending queues, bad air for their kids, house depreciation if a road is too close, absurd road upkeep costs, incessant noise, widespread and imminently catastrophic obesity across the country, too scared to let their kids walk anywhere because of the traffic and all whilst hanging 'Baby on board' signs in the back window (which lets be honest petrolheads) is nothing short of a desperate plea to all the dick heads racing about to please not crash into me and ruin my life).

I would compare this utter refusal to acknowledge that the car is actually a rope around your neck to a cocaine addict laying in intensive care after being saved from an overdose who insists it's not that bad at all.

Utter denial of all reasonable fact and logic.

In contrast the whole concept of anyone being hurt by a human being on a lightweight bicycle, who is most likely just trying to avoid becoming the next statistic for ministers to laugh at, is chastised as abhorrent and unacceptable.

Kill with car = Whoopsie
Hurt with bike = How dare you

How has society become so tolerant of death and injury from one source but is happy to turn a blind eye and pick on what is comparably a non issue?

Bring on the congestion, obesity and misery. Our government will reap what it sows and will one day hang its head in shame at its absolute failure to do anything productive.

PS remember that in Scotland its s.129(5) of Roads (Sc) Act 1988 (or 84?)

I always cycle on pavements but most of the time they are carriageways.

Let's shove this ambiguous fudge into the bin, it is I suspect a way that many drivers excuse the fact that they break the same law far more frequently and kill and injure pedestrians on a significantly greater scale. in a survey for RNIB 54% of UK drivers admitted to driving on the footway.

Perhaps the sign should show the 'all vehicles banned' roundel and the wording should read "Highways Act 1835 s.72 driving a carriage on this footway will result in issue of a fixed penalty notice fine and may also incur in other penalties"

Case law recognised cycles as carriages in 1876, and it was affirmed by statute in 1888. The Motor Car Act of 1903 defined the motor car as a carriage as distinct from a light road locomotive.

It would be considerably fairer if drivers were prosecuted with the same vigour as cyclists for breaking the same laws.

So the @shameoncyclists Twitter account appears to have been suspended? Wonder why?

Dex.

Almost got knocked down by a woman cycling on the pavement this morning whilst I was putting the recycling out. No lights, empty road in both directions...

Adults on bikes on the pavement in general is an irritation. When I see burly Phil Mitchell types bowling along at 15-20mph on the pavement I wonder why they can't be a little braver and get on the road?

The more cyclists on the road the more motorists will have to slow down for them. Allowing motorists to continue speeding around unhindered and choosing to speed around on the pavements isn't the solution.

All around Japan, cycling on specifically marked pavements has been legal since the 1970's. The laws aren't strongly policed so it is generally accepted that cyclists can legally cycle on any sidewalks.

Slower "everyday" cyclists, such as parents with kids, the elderly going to the supermarket, and businessmen cycling to the station can safely cycle on the sidewalks, while the lycra crowd can mix it up with the traffic on the roads.

The modal share for bicycles in Tokyo is 16%. Maybe sidewalk cycling is worth considering.

I quite enjoyed this story.

Shouldn't be hard to miss the pedestrians in Worthing, they all travel at a snails pace - unless they are in their motorised mobility scooters

Beware.
As a cycling 'collective' we should be careful of voicing any support for allowing cycling on footways; if official policy changes, we may find ourselves one small step away from being confined to cycling (probably with strict speed limits) on footways and banned from the roads proper. This would please the very vocal 'apparent collective' of motorists no end.

Nobody has mentioned the age of the amendment. Introduced in 1888 and applicable to bicycles and tricycles. The law needs to be looked at and brought into the 21st century, me thinks. What about the 4 wheeled electric scooters? How about the kids on skateboards or push scooters? Someone needs to get off their a** and work on a rewrite!

Pavement cycling may be something that needs to be discussed, but does a random person in Worthing changing the name of a Facebook page really count as 'news'...?

I think I'll just stick to riding on the road surface and avoid the sidewalk

I never cycle on the pavement, because it's illegal and i ride really fast, but you would be surprised at the number of motorists who shout at me as they pass telling me to "get out of the way, get on the pavement" or some such nonsense.

Ah My home town!
Have made several comments on this on Facebook & on the Argos's own article
As a town, we have some fabulous cycling lanes, but in other places it's a complete nightmare
I don't cycle on pavements, But I do understand why some folk feel it is safer & do it.
The problem I encounter daily is not the regular cyclists, it's a very small minority, who have no regard for anyone that are causing the probelm, but as usual we're all being tarred with the same brush

WE ARE NOT A COLLECTIVE!

Looking at that sign in the top right, if I glue a load of £10 notes to my front tyre and £20 notes to my rear tyre then I could ride above the pavement because at any given point I'm cycling on £30. And the sign says that's fine. Am I right?