3 ms·

I’ve never, ever seen a car run a red light at a pedestrian crossing in London. Both as a pedestrian and driver, I am confident that all cars will stop and keep

I’ve never, ever seen a car run a red light at a pedestrian crossing in London. Both as a pedestrian and driver, I am confident that all cars will stop and keep to the red light. If anything, vehicles show an abundance of caution and assume a flashing yellow is the same as a solid red and yellow, and remain behind the line even when the crossing is clear. I regularly see cyclists ride through pedestrian crossings with pedestrians on them, which as a pedestrian is utterly terrifying - particularly when it happened when I was in a wheelchair, on crutches or with a walking stick (I had serious mobility issues a few years back). I have never seen a cyclist stop for a pedestrian waiting at a zebra crossing in London. I’ve seen it once in Manchester. I regularly see cyclists on pavements, even riding next to kerb-segregated cycle lanes. This is an offence the Highway Code is incredibly clear about. When a cyclist is doing over 20mph on a pavement coming towards me, it’s terrifying, again. When I am watching my speed in a 20 zone, I am rarely overtaken by a frustrated vehicle driver who thinks they know better, but I am often overtaken by cyclists who seem to think speed limits don’t apply to them. In 20 zones with high density of cyclists to pedestrians (Richmond Park, Bushy Park, and so on), this is scary to experience both as a driver and as a pedestrian. Your anecdata is yours, mine is mine, but I will not accept that cyclists are all about safety in London, and motorists are not. The perception of most non-cyclists in London is that cyclists consistently behave in ways dangerous to pedestrians and other traffic, and running red lights are just one of the factors in that. Yes, cars should give you time and space to move off, and I always do, but all the other behaviours I’ve described are common, dangerous, and inexcusable.

soco 4y ago
I can add my experiences in Switzerland: e-bike riders speeding on pedestrian lanes is a daily sighting. I have no idea about collision rates but they cannot go but up.
nxkwkfhik 4y ago
Ahh the old “let’s apply rules designed for cars to bicycles” fallacy Some of what you have said is correct but let’s make this clear: cycling across a pedestrian crossing at walking pace posses vastly less threat to human life than a car doing that would. Fundamental physics, momentum=mv Bicycle plus rider: 100kg Car: 1500kg That’s a 15x For a comparison, Human: 80kg Bicycle + rider: 100kg That’s 1.25x If we assume that risk is proportional to momentum, then that’s an 125% increase of threat from a bicycle vs a human (running at the same speed) and 1500% increase of threat from a car vs a bicycle. So to compare cars to bicycles doesn’t work, they pose a vastly reduced threat to human life va cars and in fact, cars pose more of a threat to cyclists than they do to pedestrians (I.e more cyclist die in car accidents that pedestrians).
- PaulRobinson 4y ago
  Risk is not proportional to momentum. It's proportional to likelihood and impact and is determined entirely by context. Vehicles, cycles and pedestrians need segregated context to protect all of them. The moment a bicycle is on a pavement, it increases the risk to pedestrians to an unacceptable degree, which is why it is illegal in the UK (and many other countries). Your argument basically points out that a car on the pavement would be higher risk, but the fact that the car on the road poses a problem to cyclists on the road (which is your intent), isn't the pedestrian's problem. You're basically saying "for me to be safer, I will make others less safe". Do you realise that how that sounds to pedestrians, given bike riding is a choice in a way being a pedestrian is not? You could just walk too. Your argument is fallacious and is rooted in the idea that cyclists' lives are more important than pedestrians. The truth is all lives are important. Yes, road usage needs to be safer for cyclists, but that doesn't mean you get to raise risks for pedestrians just because. The law is the law.
  - nxkwkfhik 4y ago
    I am not saying that people should ride on pavements, I am saying that you complaining about cyclists not following the same rules as cars when they are on the road is based on fallacious reasoning. To your straw man, as people have pointed, out there are many mixed use pathways where pedestrians and bicycles share the same path. In rural Germany it is incredibly common for cyclists and pedestrians to share a single path. Your argument that bicycles and pedestrians sharing a single path leads to unacceptable risk to pedestrians is simply not true. Some numbers: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/reported-road-casualties-great-britain-road-user-risk/reported-road-casualties-great-britain-road-user-risk-2020-data https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/reported-road-casua... Per passenger mile: ~200 pedestrians killed by cars ~4 pedestrians killed by bicycles Please don’t make assumption about my behaviour. I ride in the road and not on the pavement, but I regularly have a near-death experience. In Germany and across norther Europe, bicycles and pedestrians share a (slightly) segregated space on the pavement and cars are in a completely separate space.
nxkwkfhik 4y ago
> When a cyclist is doing over 20mph on a pavement coming towards me, it’s terrifying, again. Maybe a reckless kid but surely someone cycling at 20mph on a pavement is a rare occurrence. Either way, having someone running at you at 20mph might not be as terrifying, but it poses a similar risk to you life vs a bicycle if they hit you. A car at 20mph on the other hand…
- PaulRobinson 4y ago
  Most cyclists in London are doing over 20mph, even on pavements. They're oh so very important and in a hurry, you see. I once saw a racing bike (rider was in lycra racing gear like he was in the Tour de France, sigh), go through the pedestrian crossings at the junction at Bank at well over 40mph. If people hadn't noticed him and held back he could have hurt dozens of people. And yes, somebody sprinting at you is scary, but you won't have to deal with wheels, chains and a metal frame - just another skeleton dressed in muscle, fat and skin coverings.
  - ljf 4y ago
    I'm not too sure about your ability to gauge others speeds. Most cyclists (or at least the average cyclist) is not doing 20mp+. I cycled daily for nearly 10 years, and while I could sprint fast, 20mph was my standard speed, and I was faster than the majority of the East London to West London cycle traffic (and more traffic tbh) - for a good period had the Strava KoH to prove it. Those that beat me were usually coming out at night to complete set sections of the route so as not to compete with traffic. I'm not as fit as I was, and on the flat 20mph is now my 'good speed' - I can hit 25 when going for it, and even 30 if I can draft in behind a better cyclist or a van. Was the junction at Bank on a steep downhill section for the person to do 40mph? How are you so sure people are riding at 20 on the pavement? I would be terrified to do 20 on a London pavement - such a thin area to cycle on, and risk of doors opening, and traffic etc.
- rascul 4y ago
  > Maybe a reckless kid but surely someone cycling at 20mph on a pavement is a rare occurrence. A decent rider can do 20mph on pavement if it's not uphill. I regularly did 15-20mph on the flats when I rode often.

soco 4y ago

I can add my experiences in Switzerland: e-bike riders speeding on pedestrian lanes is a daily sighting. I have no idea about collision rates but they cannot go but up.

nxkwkfhik 4y ago

Ahh the old “let’s apply rules designed for cars to bicycles” fallacy Some of what you have said is correct but let’s make this clear: cycling across a pedestrian crossing at walking pace posses vastly less threat to human life than a car doing that would. Fundamental physics, momentum=mv Bicycle plus rider: 100kg Car: 1500kg That’s a 15x For a comparison, Human: 80kg Bicycle + rider: 100kg That’s 1.25x If we assume that risk is proportional to momentum, then that’s an 125% increase of threat from a bicycle vs a human (running at the same speed) and 1500% increase of threat from a car vs a bicycle. So to compare cars to bicycles doesn’t work, they pose a vastly reduced threat to human life va cars and in fact, cars pose more of a threat to cyclists than they do to pedestrians (I.e more cyclist die in car accidents that pedestrians).

PaulRobinson 4y ago
Risk is not proportional to momentum. It's proportional to likelihood and impact and is determined entirely by context. Vehicles, cycles and pedestrians need segregated context to protect all of them. The moment a bicycle is on a pavement, it increases the risk to pedestrians to an unacceptable degree, which is why it is illegal in the UK (and many other countries). Your argument basically points out that a car on the pavement would be higher risk, but the fact that the car on the road poses a problem to cyclists on the road (which is your intent), isn't the pedestrian's problem. You're basically saying "for me to be safer, I will make others less safe". Do you realise that how that sounds to pedestrians, given bike riding is a choice in a way being a pedestrian is not? You could just walk too. Your argument is fallacious and is rooted in the idea that cyclists' lives are more important than pedestrians. The truth is all lives are important. Yes, road usage needs to be safer for cyclists, but that doesn't mean you get to raise risks for pedestrians just because. The law is the law.
- nxkwkfhik 4y ago
  I am not saying that people should ride on pavements, I am saying that you complaining about cyclists not following the same rules as cars when they are on the road is based on fallacious reasoning. To your straw man, as people have pointed, out there are many mixed use pathways where pedestrians and bicycles share the same path. In rural Germany it is incredibly common for cyclists and pedestrians to share a single path. Your argument that bicycles and pedestrians sharing a single path leads to unacceptable risk to pedestrians is simply not true. Some numbers: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/reported-road-casualties-great-britain-road-user-risk/reported-road-casualties-great-britain-road-user-risk-2020-data https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/reported-road-casua... Per passenger mile: ~200 pedestrians killed by cars ~4 pedestrians killed by bicycles Please don’t make assumption about my behaviour. I ride in the road and not on the pavement, but I regularly have a near-death experience. In Germany and across norther Europe, bicycles and pedestrians share a (slightly) segregated space on the pavement and cars are in a completely separate space.

nxkwkfhik 4y ago

> When a cyclist is doing over 20mph on a pavement coming towards me, it’s terrifying, again. Maybe a reckless kid but surely someone cycling at 20mph on a pavement is a rare occurrence. Either way, having someone running at you at 20mph might not be as terrifying, but it poses a similar risk to you life vs a bicycle if they hit you. A car at 20mph on the other hand…

PaulRobinson 4y ago
Most cyclists in London are doing over 20mph, even on pavements. They're oh so very important and in a hurry, you see. I once saw a racing bike (rider was in lycra racing gear like he was in the Tour de France, sigh), go through the pedestrian crossings at the junction at Bank at well over 40mph. If people hadn't noticed him and held back he could have hurt dozens of people. And yes, somebody sprinting at you is scary, but you won't have to deal with wheels, chains and a metal frame - just another skeleton dressed in muscle, fat and skin coverings.
- ljf 4y ago
  I'm not too sure about your ability to gauge others speeds. Most cyclists (or at least the average cyclist) is not doing 20mp+. I cycled daily for nearly 10 years, and while I could sprint fast, 20mph was my standard speed, and I was faster than the majority of the East London to West London cycle traffic (and more traffic tbh) - for a good period had the Strava KoH to prove it. Those that beat me were usually coming out at night to complete set sections of the route so as not to compete with traffic. I'm not as fit as I was, and on the flat 20mph is now my 'good speed' - I can hit 25 when going for it, and even 30 if I can draft in behind a better cyclist or a van. Was the junction at Bank on a steep downhill section for the person to do 40mph? How are you so sure people are riding at 20 on the pavement? I would be terrified to do 20 on a London pavement - such a thin area to cycle on, and risk of doors opening, and traffic etc.
rascul 4y ago
> Maybe a reckless kid but surely someone cycling at 20mph on a pavement is a rare occurrence. A decent rider can do 20mph on pavement if it's not uphill. I regularly did 15-20mph on the flats when I rode often.