Evading kamikaze jaywalkers
There’s a new menace on London’s streets. It appears to be most prevalent along Kingsland Road, which I cycled along recently on my way north to Stoke Newington Church Street, but I am sure it exists in other areas that are just as ‘vibrant’, as the estate agents would have it.
Adorned with chains of gold, this reckless urban male lurks by the side of the road, swaying languidly in the breeze like a gilded triffid, waiting for the cyclist’s approach.
He casts a sly glance to gauge your distance, and then, with something between a slope and a swagger, he’s off. With his eyes trained firmly on the pavement opposite, his loping gait takes him directly into your path, forcing you to veer dangerously off course.
This is not the absent-minded pedestrian who blunders into the road without checking the traffic first. These jaywalkers are engaging in a militant act. It is the pedestrian equivalent of a dog peeing up a tree: the jaywalker is saying ‘actually I do own the road, and I’m going to let you know it’. No one in the Green Cross Tufty Club was ever so blasé.
The most satisfying response would be to hold my course and plough ahead regardless. But fear of swift and violent retribution stays my handlebars. So far, the furious tinkle of my Miss Marple bell hasn’t been half as effective.
Route rating
Miles 2.8 (Kingsland Rd to Stoke Newington Church St)
Average cycle time 30 mins
Calories burned Around 210
Jaywalker collisions None, regrettably
Feature continues
|
|
The best of London in your inbox
Up to the minute picks of the best things to do in London, delivered to your desktop.
|
|
6 comments
'Why adhere to a law that endangers me?' (re illegal pavement cycling) The same stupid selfish comment could possibly be made about knife-carrying. Get off the pavement, you selfish git - even if people say nothing to you don't take it as tacit acceptance, it's probably because they're frightened. Read letters in the local press and reports of local community and police meetings - it's you and others like you who are making the pavements in London a no-go area for old, disabled and vulnerable people. What a stupid and irresponsible article for Time Out to endorse - I will not be purchasing it again.
I was with a cyclist who was catapulted off her bike in an accident last week. She landed on her head and shoulder. Result: Helmet severely dented, concussion, face had a nasty case of road rash, broken collar bone. Without a helmet I think it could have been much worse.
Re: amazing statistics - the trouble with accident statistics is it is impossible to measure all the accidents that don't happen...
Did the writer really mean;
'Anarchic behaviour under the guise of protest is selfish and self-defeating.'
Or perhaps;
Selfish behaviour under the guise of protest is self-defeating.
Or maybe;
Selfish behaviour under the guise of anarchy is self-defeating.
Clean up on the stereotypes mate.
I ride through that road system most days and, as I've found generally with cycling in London at all times of day and night, if you ride with your wits about you, it isn't a problem. A cycle lane past Central St. Martin's would be safer and there's loads of pavement but in the mean time the author should grow a pair and use the road.
LB 's Southwark and Lewisham provide free Adult Cycle Training for all those who live, work or study in the borough. Available via www.cyclinginstructor.com. Online Booking!
Statistics show that amazingly cyclists who wear helmets have more accidents than cyclists who don't. This is because, the study says, drivers of cars and other vehicles tend to take it "slightly easy" when they see a cyclist wearing a helmet as opposed to when a cyclist is unprotected. A model Catch-22 situation innit?