Should people who cycle on footpaths be prosecuted?

Duke Leonal Felmet

I'm not sure whether it is illegal or not, but it is a fairly dangerous practice and I have nearly been hit by cyclists many times who come flying at me from behind. All would take is for me to take an unexpected (from the cyclists perspective) step to the side as I walk and I would end up battered and bruised (or worse).

It is the height of idiocy, in my opinion, and in the very least there should be fines imposed.

As cycling enthusiasts, what are your thoughts on this?

ThisRegard

Royalty and the gentry are generally not respected by the natives here like they are on the mainland, get rid of the patronage and monocle and dress down and you'll have less clashes with the proles.

Doctor Bob

Duke Leonal Felmet wrote: »

I'm not sure whether it is illegal or not

Best to check! I think illegality is a pre-requisite for prosecution.

Duke Leonal Felmet

Doctor Bob wrote: »

Best to check! I think illegality is a pre-requisite for prosecution.

Ah, but my question is should!

Duke Leonal Felmet

I'm surprised people are voting no. In my opinion, it's just common sense. Safer for both cyclist and pedestrian.

Doctor Bob

Duke Leonal Felmet wrote: »

Ah, but my question is should!

Exactly!

CianRyan

I've had to mount the curb a few times to avoid being crushes myself. I'd never cycle on the path, only hop up momentarily and generally dismount if I do.

People cycling on the path is just mad stuff really but if they're not use to city traffic I can understand as it can be scary stuff at first. Still shouldn't be doing it though.

Sure you're not walking on an off road cycle path, OP? Not being funny, genuine question.

Duke Leonal Felmet

CianRyan wrote: »

I've had to mount the curb a few times to avoid being crushes myself. I'd never cycle on the path, only hop up momentarily and generally dismount if I do.

People cycling on the path is just mad stuff really but if they're not use to city traffic I can understand as it can be scary stuff at first. Still shouldn't be doing it though.

Sure you're not walking on an off road cycle path, OP? Not being funny, genuine question.

No, my route to work is all footpaths. The only place of ambiguity is Dame Lane (Dublin), which anything an everything walks/drives down. I generally find that the 'proper' cyclists don't commit this much (the people who have helmets and good bikes), it's those god damn Dublin Bikes. They are an absolute menace.

pawrick

I think they should be prosecuted but with regards to the context of the situation. In most cases it's simply a hazard on the path especially going fast or on busy paths where the cyclist has to go almost walking pace.

CamperMan

it's not safe for a cyclist on the roads with all the traffic and loony drivers about that have no consideration for cyclists

Thinkingaboutit

There are so many stupid junction designs that a person has to move on to the path for at least a few metres. No, therefore. Also a good many segregated lanes marked on paths have buggies pushed by women who seem to think having a baby exempts them from having good manners, and generally people walking in them. Cycling really close to peds at 30 plus km/h gives some of them a fright:D.

johnam

Yes... people spend enough time on this forum bitching about how drivers do not give us the respect we deserve in terms of space on the road etc, and then turn around and break every rule of the road going, overtaking on the left, breaking lights etc. Cyclists should be treated the same as any other road user, and should be prosecuted for breaking the law... that being said... I do see the point in allowing children cycle on footpaths.

Lumen

Thinkingaboutit wrote: »

There are so many stupid junction designs that a person has to move on to the path for at least a few metres

I often get frustrated by poor junction design when driving, so I just pull up on to the footpath and continue on my way.

kirving

I agree with the point about DublinBikes, I often see them doing crazy stuff! To be fair though, I sometimes cycle, sometimes walk a DB across the new ha'penny bridge at about 5kph because the route around would take me all day on the road.

I do like cycling that little bit fast by some people who walk on the cycle lane instead of the path (Where the two are seperated by only a line). Not dangerously so, but enough to remind them where they should be. :P If it was me on the path, I'd be getting abuse.

p

I prefer a more relaxed attitude to cycling and laws generally. I've seen first hand the difference between Denmark & Germany. Germany tends to be have stricter rules, and you're made follow them with hefty fines. Denmark, tends to veer towards a little more human approach, trying to make people cycle safely rather than religiously follow the rules. Just see the desire paths as an example. (http://www.copenhagenize.com/2009/04/subconscious-democracy-and-desire.html)

Therefore, I think dangerous cycling should be prosecuted, but just cycling on a footpath alone should not. I'd also particularly favour many 'mixed use' paths in places like parks and waterfronts, where people know to cycle a bit more leisurely and bikes, buggies, roller bladers and pedestrians all intermingle in a courteous fashion.

doozerie

Ooh, so far this thread has "flying at", "menace", "helmet", "Dublin bikes", "wimmin with buggies, grrr", "manners", "prosecute", plus some passive aggression to boot. All I need is some mention of "hi-vis", "lights", "dark clothes, grrr", "ninja cyclists" and "burn them!" and my Cycling Aggro Bingo card will be complete.

ThisRegard

There's a new ha'penny bridge ?

Duke Leonal Felmet

CamperMan wrote: »

it's not safe for a cyclist on the roads with all the traffic and loony drivers about that have no consideration for cyclists

So the answer is for cyclists to go on the footpath and have no consideration for pedestrians?

You don't see the hypocrisy there?

paddyandy

€10 on the spot.End of problem.Must be serious about enforcing it and thats where EVERYTHING fails in this Country.

tomasrojo

I can't decide what to vote because the question is too black-and-white.

I thought the comment here was quite good (about the UK, obviously):
http://ukcyclerules.com/2010/11/23/riding-on-footpaths-the-basics/

On 1st August 1999, new legislation came into force to allow a fixed penalty notice to be served on anyone who is guilty of cycling on a footway. However the Home Office issued guidance on how the new legislation should be applied, indicating that they should only be used where a cyclist is riding in a manner that may endanger others. At the time Home Office Minister Paul Boateng issued a letter stating that:

“The introduction of the fixed penalty is not aimed at responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of traffic and who show consideration to other pavement users when doing so. Chief police officers, who are responsible for enforcement, acknowledge that many cyclists, particularly children and young people, are afraid to cycle on the road, sensitivity and careful use of police discretion is required.”

Duke Leonal Felmet

doozerie wrote: »

Ooh, so far this thread has "flying at", "menace", "helmet", "Dublin bikes", "wimmin with buggies, grrr", "manners", "prosecute", plus some passive aggression to boot. All I need is some mention of "hi-vis", "lights", "dark clothes, grrr", "ninja cyclists" and "burn them!" and my Cycling Aggro Bingo card will be complete.

Yeah, its funny how the words 'helmet' and 'bikes' pop up in cycling threads, alright.

Let's face it, those who use DB tend to be people with very little cycling experience... and it shows.

petethedrummer

It depends.

tomasrojo

Duke Leonal Felmet wrote: »

Yeah, its funny how the words 'helmet' and 'bikes' pop up in cycling threads, alright.

Let's face it, those who use DB tend to be people with very little cycling experience... and it shows.

Your equation of helmet-wearing with savvy cycling is arguable though.

doozerie

Duke Leonal Felmet wrote: »

Let's face it, those who use DB tend to be people with very little cycling experience... and it shows.

Interesting theory. It kinda suggests though that couriers should be shining examples of how to ride a bike (and that taxi drivers should be shining examples of how to drive a car), at which point it falls apart as a theory.

Chips Lovell

I dont think prosecution would work. The Gardai should be empowered to administer on the spot kneecappings to people found cycling on the footpad. An Irish solution to an Irish problem.

Duke Leonal Felmet

tomasrojo wrote: »

Duke Leonal Felmet wrote: »

Yeah, its funny how the words 'helmet' and 'bikes' pop up in cycling threads, alright.

Let's face it, those who use DB tend to be people with very little cycling experience... and it shows.

Your equation of helmet-wearing with savvy cycling is arguable though.

Possibly, but the decision to wear one surely points to a safety-concious cyclist, and thus not one who cycles next to pedestrians as if he is in the movie Tron.

RobFowl

petethedrummer wrote: »

It depends.

I was cycling with my 5 year old earlier. he was on the path I on the rad along side him.
Should I shop him now? seems a bit cruel to wake him up after the stories I read, to drag him down to the cop shop..........

tomasrojo

Duke Leonal Felmet wrote: »

Possibly, but the decision to wear one surely points to a safety-concious cyclist, and thus not one who cycles next to pedestrians as if he is in the movie Tron.

Not in my experience. I am cycled at on the footpath by hiviz-wearing helmeted cyclists all the time. Years ago, I might have agreed with you, but helmet-wearing has spread to a point where even scofflaws wear them for peace of mind. They aren't the preserve of cautious people anymore.

In fact, I see much reckless cycling by helmeted cyclists. It may be a logical consequence of telling people that they prevent 85% of head injuries. (Search this forum for the helmet debate in all its tedious glory.)

tomasrojo

RobFowl wrote: »

I was cycling with my 5 year old earlier. he was on the path I on the rad along side him.
Should I shop him now? seems a bit cruel to wake him up after the stories I read, to drag him down to the cop shop..........

According to a response to a comment on that ukcyclerules post, children that young can't actually commit a crime, so he's in the clear. Consider fining him yourself though.

doozerie

Duke Leonal Felmet wrote: »

Possibly, but the decision to wear one surely points to a safety-concious cyclist, and thus not one who cycles next to pedestrians as if he is in the movie Tron.

I don't follow your logic. If I were to wear steel toe-capped boots it would be to protect my toes , it would in no way make it less likely that I would administer a kick up the arse to someone else while I was wearing them. In fact, given the sense of invincibility I'd feel while wearing them I might be even more inclined to dish out some kicks up the arse while wearing them.

RobFowl

tomasrojo wrote: »

According to a response to a comment on that ukcyclerules post, children that young can't actually commit a crime, so he's in the clear. Consider fining him yourself though.

On the way down to hand myself in.
20years to life??

(just been watching Law and Order)