And you felt perfectly safe? Would you feel equally safe, with a trailer?
Sometimes, where appropriate, yes, along with many many other cyclists.
No, because otherwise I wouldn't accept it was breaking the law.
Tell me, apart from a 2" wide white line, what *is* the difference (in RW / practical terms) between a pedestrian pavement and a dual use pavement?
Are you one of those cyclists who assault people when they are walking on park footpaths, don't warn said pedestrians of their approach and then clash arms as you cycle past at high speed?
I thought it was only fair to return the stupid questions. ;-)
So you are a sheep and simply do as others do. Try thinking for yourself sometime - if you have the capability to do so. Laws are there for a purpose and not to be broken because 'many many' others do.
And who do you think I was suggesting considered it 'appropriate'? Answer. Me!
The fact that 'as it happens', others *also* deem it to be appropriate ... and the Police *never* stop them doing it, would suggest to any right brainer that doing so was considered reasonable.
See above.
In many such cases, 'Rules are meant to be broken' and that's why few (pedestrians and Police included) care.
Anyway, keep safe on those A roads eh ... the ones with miles and miles of completely f'ing empty (of pedestrians) pavements ...
The thing is, I think I should feel sorry for them, they are trying to fight with one arm tied behind their back. ;-(
Imagine how weird the real analogue world must seem to someone who only works in black and white?
But of course, the truth is, because their world is only ever in black and white so why they appear to be happy with their lot. ;-)
You don't miss what you have never had etc. ;-(
So, round here there are loads of dual use pavements that appear to come and go and so pedestrians and cyclist have learned to co-exist in such places, even when some of it might not be dual use.
In many cases it's not even clear which bits are what, both because the markings have worn away and people joining mid entry / exit not aware that there is supposed to be some segregation.
I believe they are actually extending this 'mixed use' idea in many cities, with pedestrians, cycles, motorcycles and cars all sharing the exact same space with little in the way of markings even and it works because people have to be more observant (from all sides).
The *massive* difference between that an A road is the closing speed of cars, lorries and busses and cyclists, often making it very dangerous when two such vehicles are side by side and then find themselves up the back of a cycle.
So, rather than cycling many many miles beside a completely empty pavement, many cyclists (and especially those who are old or young and generally not wearing Lycra) seek refuge out of the way of the fast traffic, much to the joy of both groups. [1]
Cheers, T i m
[1] We encountered one of those cycling things the other day where there were a fair few cyclists wearing numbers and marshals at various points and they were all fairly spread out along both sides of a stretch of dual carriageway. It was actually causing all sort of issues as cars overtook cyclist, sped up and then whilst being overtaken by other cars, came up behind another cyclist (much faster than you would come up behind most powered vehicles), then you had (saw) the dilemma of people either going for the overtake of the cycle and baulking someone overtaking them or coming to a rapid slow and then being stuck there for ages as everything was overtaking you at a rate of knots.
So if someone robs you of your possessions but causes you no harm and the robber and their family benefits from the proceeds of the crime that's fine is it?
Quite, as I always do in fact, that's one of the burdens on a right brainer. ;-(
And especially when it seems that a 'blind eye' is being turned etc. It's all part of that bigger puzzle that would typically whoosh a left brainer.
Why not indeed. And even in the unlikely event that you were stopped, any *reasonable* person talking to Police Officer using their discretion is more than likely to be pointed towards the road for the rest of your journey.
Given they rarely bat an eye to kids wheelying though the 'No Cycling' / pedestrianised are in most town centres, I can't see them being too bothered with a family / couple cycling cautiously along an otherwise desolate footpath at the side of a busy B/A road or dual carriageway.
I bet there would be a lot more paperwork for them with scraping you up off the road than ignoring you using the pavement. ;-)
Yes, my brain can, as can my funny bone. Guess which one is triggered most when dealing with you on this subject?
See, there are *many* instances where 'most people' (that wouldn't include you of course) would break the law because it was the best / right thing to do, *under those circumstances*.
Unfortunately, you don't have that mental / moral / ethical / practical / social flexibility so you are obliged to stick to the rules *all* of the time.
You would make a good traffic warden, then you could ticket a Paramedic saving someone's life but parked out of the way but on the single yellows, inside the one hour daily restriction ... ;-(
We have either forgotten that we are talking at Rod, it's a(/nother) troll or it's a full blown left brainer. ;-(
How it is unable (... unwilling because it's not it's goal) to differentiate between those two scenarios?
His scenario would only apply if because the Police didn't stop us, their family were going to go hungry (when we all know they wouldn't be likely to stop us) if it was *obvious* the cyclists were doing a 'sensible thing' (albeit technically 'against the law') and when seen in light of the bigger picture (cycling on an empty footpath V possibly catching a mugger or drug dealer).
But how can you come to such a conclusion when you can't automatically see all these things? ;-(
*If* I were a thief who took your possessions but caused no harm and I then sold them for the benefit of me and my family and the chances of my detection and hence penalty would be slim; are you saying that is alright?
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.