Sport & Fitness

Cyclists on pavements, or any sort of shared surface with pedestrians is simply too dangerous for blind and partially sighted people and should never be allowed. Its almost as dangerous for people with hearing impairments and learning difficulties as well. Disabled people should not be excluded from the streets and getting to whatever film. show, stand up gig or service they want because of cyclists on footpaths. Whatever rules there are, or signs put up, there are always going to be some ignorant or uncaring people that ignore them, and that makes it simply too dangerous to allow

Is this all the Idiot has to talk about, and get paid for it. There are more pressing issues in London.
I think I will be using the GUIDE free in the Guardian or other. from now on rather than buy this kind of Tat

yes i too have had many flashes of inspirations as i walked along the london footpath's and many interesting conversations with the people i brush past on the way- NOT!!! get a life mate

As a London cyclist I have to avoid pedestrians walking on the road / marked cycle path about 6 times a day (24 mile round trip). Sometimes it's genuine mistake, couldn't see me (e.g. walking between buses), but most of the time is plain negligence and not even taking the care to look before stepping out.
Vehicles that drive in the cycle lane (when it's not full of parked cars) are also a common occurrence. And why do Taxi's and bus's need to speed past only seconds later to cut in front and pull over or slow up?
So please if we make a mistake (yes we're not always faultless) consider how many times we may have already taken accident avoiding action on our journey.

I am very much with Derek, not at all with Michael. His article might be brilliantly written, ironic and well, more or less sharp. What I see behind it is the grim mask of conservativeness (which he tries to hide behind his remarks about Boris and David). I never understood why there are so little cyclists in London. You could blame it on the streets, the traffic, the size of the city... well, I am not sure, but think it also has to do with a certain mind set that seems to be very hard to change.

Huh. Has this article been past an editor yet?

The only way for cyclists,pedestrians and motorists to co-exist peacefully together is if ALL road users respect the Highway Code and follow the law of the land-I am a cyclist a motorist and a pedestrian and know of all the bad habits.I gasp in horror at the dangerous liberties each takes with the other-Traffic Laws are made largely to allow citizens to co-exist peacefully and give everyone a chance to avoid the carnage on today's overcrowded roads

Everyone has a grievance with each other - whether cyclist, pedestrian or driver - mostly perfectly well-founded. I'm not a cyclist because I'm terrified of the way people drive on London's roads, so I understand their arguments very well.
However I think the anti-cyclist article above misses one crucial unforgivable thing that [some] cyclists do - jump red lights, particularly on pedestrian crossings. I have very nearly been hit by cyclists going through red lights on a crossing, when I'm legitimately crossing on a green man signal, so many times, and each time it's clear that the cyclist doing the jumping doesn't give a toss about the traffic laws.
Perhaps if we all kept to the rules of the road a bit more - drivers and pedestrians too - we'd all be a lot safer and happier.

Ken livingstones new cycle lanes, great idea! but first why not standardise the use of bus lanes so they are for cycles as well as most even minded people would assume they are/should be anyway.
further to the environmental factors, i recently learned that buses dont have to pass an MOT that monitors their emissions, WHY when they produce the most disgusting spurious fumes it seems an outrageous oversight and a less than accidental one

agreed.... what an old and tired argument! shame on timeout for printing these words. and as for the photography. it sucks. totally sad issue and: completely PEDESTRIAN
(says it all)

Looks to me like someone is short of things to write about and has decided to ride the rise in cycling. albeit badly!
I cycle, walk, bus, drive, trian etc etc. i have been driven at by selfish drivers, pushed into train doors by anxious commuters, abused on the bus by impatient drivers and had cyclists blind side me.
There is no easy ride but put it in perspective. cyclists aren't looking to hurt themselves, they are more alert to their surroundings than the car safe 4x4 drivers and the pedstrians dropping off pavements strapped to their latest eletrical device.
If those who cycle on the pavement raise the awareness of cyclists the few more accidents might happen.
A few more smiles and we can see the middle ground... that is except for bendy busses! get them out of zone 1&2

What a boring argument - and all centred on the few cyclists who do ride on the pavement. He first attacks cyclists for being healthy in a city meant for thinking (he's not from London then, I guess) and then tries to also claim the high ground for health with the spurious argument that walking is cheaper and easier - ergo healthier. I cycle to get from A to B, not to work out. I slow down for pedestrians on the tow path. I chat to little old ladies with dogs, I get off and walk through pedestrian areas (even through Hampstead Heath, which really needs a north south cycle-way through it.). I think this antagonism is being blown up by the papers because they'd rather have a fight than look at the problem - how small-minded!

I'm a cyclist, a walker, a driver and a motorbike rider. Walkers get upset by bikes coming up close to them, and never think that it is exactly the same thing they do to us (as cyclists) when they have finished their 200 foot walk and are back in their cars. That said most of us, in whatever guise, behave well - there are some nutters in every category. As a cyclist I want to see more separate cycling lanes, and a sub-network of ways through London that use parks, canals and unused roads. And I want a law like the French have, whereby if a motorist hits a cyclist he is automatically in the wrong. And I think Michael Hodges needs to deal with his inner demons and calm down a little.

Two well-written and entertaining articles... But... It's pretty simple really, isn't it? The roads should be repaired, particularly in the gutters where they're always the worst, cycle lanes should be put in wherever possible, and drivers should stop trying to glue their smelly vehicles to the curb and driving into the cycle boxes in front of traffic lights.
HA! As if any of that's likely to happen soon! Maybe we should start an online petition for the next Mayor - how about that, Time Out?
Of pavements and stupidity: cyclists should avoid going on the pavements unless there's really no other choice - and then go slowly and carefully because of course pedestrians should have priority on the pavements. As for pedestrians crossing without looking, I'd say they deserve to get hit but we've all done it! And cyclists tend to come off worst in collisions with pedestrians anyway...
If only everyone could just be a little more respectful of each other what a wonderful world it would be (bleeuurrghh!).

I don't understand this rant. Cyclists ride on the road, on cycle paths and shared use paths.
how does that affect the pedestrian exactly?
if you mean people cycling on pavements, then you really need to be directing your ire towards those people.
most criminal activity is carried out by motorists or those on foot, I suggest you have a pop at these evil pedestrians and drivers.
now you see how stupid you are, two people to write such drivel? blimey, shouldn't you be doing homework or a paper round? leave the writing to the journalists.