Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
Options
Cyclist ruding on pavement runs down child
The materials in this website are in no way intended to replace the professional medical care, advice, diagnosis or treatment of a doctor, qualified personal trainer, therapist, dietitian or nutritionist Runners's World, Part of the Hearst UK well-being network © Copyright 2017
Comments
I'm sure the parents were angry with themselves, as I would be in their position. It was still nobodies fault other than the cyclist though.
At no point has the child done anything wrong and the parents are perfectly entitled to let their child wander out given that thither was already out there and dad not far behind. That is how you teach the child independence after all.
I'm not suggesting all cyclists are scum of course. This one however is pretty bad.
The guy's a massive bellend and clearly the only person at fault. Even when I'm running along a pavement, if it's a narrow one with just a few feet between parked cars on one side and terraced housing with tiny front gardens on the other, I proceed with caution. I might *tut* occasionally if someone walks out and apparently gets in my way, but then I remind myself that it's a pavement, and people should reasonably expect to be able to walk on it without having to exercise the look-both-ways caution of stepping onto a road. Cycling on such a pavement is stupid. Cycling at speed on such a pavement - even if it was legal - is bellendtastic.
Or even worse if it ran into the road.
Not that this excused the nob on the pavement.
What if it was a blind person walking out of their gate? Or someone elderly?
In mitigation. If the cyclist is barely into his twenties, who's to say he hasn't been riding on pavements since he started school? maybe it's something he's always done.
No one is brought up with a timeline to become a responsible adult. It's something too many discover the hard way when the habits that were ok as a child suddenly become 'non do'.
🙂
I just think that its a good idea to look where you are going - especially if you are elderly - be it onto the pavement that could have a runner coming past or a runaway car, or an angry bull or whatever.
Just like it'd be nice if people getting out of cars would check before they fling wide their doors. Its just basic common sense.
Obviously the little child was too young to realise this and the nob on the bike had no common sense either.
For most of the comments it seems that this all comes down to the same thing, what you believe to be mitigating circumstances.
One contrived situation for you to ponder... Who would be at fault if a 5 year old rides his/her bike out of the front gate and into a 90 year old who the falls over and breaks a hip that leads to almost certain death?
In that scenario I would suggest that you have 2 victims and one set of parents who are to blame.
Do you have a child or are you speaking hypothetically?
there isn't one law for kids and another for adults. You can't cycle on a pavement -in practice though nobody is going to prosecute a kid. Probably not even in this scnario
Oh and nice PB on Sunday. Another benchmark within reach!
Phil, yeah but her poor old bedridden husband now has to go into a make believe nursing home and die of thirst.
Oh thanks. Only 2 sec off last time but a PB is a PB eh.
What are you talking about man.
Kids are kids. We wont always be there holding there hands when its time to walk out the gate.
At least a cyclist ( in this case ) is an adult should of used a little common sense.
Cycling at that speed, at a place where it was likely to cause an accident is stupid and irresponsible.
End off.
Cycling on a pavement near houses wasn't the best idea, cycling at pace was very ill advised.
But turning an unfortunate collision, into a "shout abuse and zoom off" situation is unbelievable.
I hope that little gimp has taken a lot of heat locally over this.
As far as children cycling on the pavement goes, the age of criminal responsibility is 10. So if a child under 10 cycles on the pavement then there's not much the police can do about it.
Yesterday I was shopping in a local town and saw a family with a dog cycling on the pavement, in the middle of the town centre with all the shoppers! Posh bikes and plenty of lycra on display.
All the gear and no idea, as they say. No common sense but plenty of sense of entitlement.
Personally I think it's ok to ride on the pavements if you are not inconveniencing pedestrians (ie if there aren't any around, or if you get off and walk past them and then go on your way again once past them). It's much safer than taking your chance on the roads with the crazy drivers who think you have no right to be there.
Just out of interest, cycling on pavements is permitted in Norway (Google-translated law) so long as it doesn't endanger pedestrians and one passes strictly speaking at walking speed. Because the pavement is generally also kept free of obstacles (to enable snowplughing) this generally works very well. I imagine the law is similar in Sweden and Denmark, Netherlands, etc.
as a driver, I'm certainly happy to see cyclists on the pavements out the way.
but as a runner/walker, you don't want them anywhere near you.
I see all manner of numskull cyclists, no helmets, wearing headphones etc.
Worst one though, is this complete dunderhead who takes his dog for a ride, with the leash attached to the handlebar, while he keeps both hands separate from it.
When I see him and dog zooming round, I do wonder how they haven't caused or been in some kind of nasty. Or how the dog hasn't been hung if the cycle guy had to stop quickly.