Cycling wrong way up one way street

Clive George

"Francis Burton" <fburton@nyx.net> wrote in message
news:1210942360.166524@irys.nyx.net...
> In article <YbGdnX9NUdb26rDVnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@plusnet>,
> Clive George <clive@xxxx-x.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>>If I'm walking along a road with no pavement, and a lorry comes the other
>>way, it takes a fraction of a second to stop and position myself as far
>>from
>>the road as possible. With a bike, I have a very real stopping
>>distance/time, would need to find a rather larger place to position
>>myself/the bike, and would also need to consider dismounting as I'd be off
>>the road.
>>
>>Your idea may work slightly better in areas where road edges aren't well
>>defined (though it'll still be more dangerous). But that's not the case
>>here - doing what you suggest simply isn't practicalbe.
>
> How does having the lorry coming up behind you compare? Is it
> better not to see it coming or to glance continually behind?

Better to place yourself in a position of high visibility and not try and
hide from them. Lorry drivers do look where they're going.
(lorries are gert noisy things too - no need to see them to know they're
there).

clive

John Wright

Steve Firth wrote:
> Doug <jagmad@riseup.net> wrote:
>
>> Drivers who loose control of their dangerous machines in public
>> places, obviously, and who only receive derisory punishments,
>
> You're claiming that drivers are put in the stocks and exposed to public
> ridicule?

Don't give Duhg ideas...

--
John Wright

I feel like an insane person with the ability to mimic sanity

Rob Morley

On Fri, 16 May 2008 13:41:10 +0100
"Mortimer" <me@privacy.net> wrote:

> The one thing I noticed when I drove in Massachusetts was that people
> invariably walked with their back to traffic on country roads with no
> pavement (sorry, "sidewalk") rather than walking facing oncoming
> traffic as they usually do here in the UK.

When I lived in New England I used to walk on a couple of semi-rural
interstates and I don't think I ever saw anyone else walking. I was on
the right because I was usually hitching.

> I never saw any cyclists
> cycling on the wrong side of the road - maybe that varies from one
> state to another.
>
AFAIK it's a mid-west thing.

Mortimer

"Rob Morley" <nospam@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:20080516141046.54a31acc@bluemoon...
> On Fri, 16 May 2008 13:41:10 +0100
> "Mortimer" <me@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>> The one thing I noticed when I drove in Massachusetts was that people
>> invariably walked with their back to traffic on country roads with no
>> pavement (sorry, "sidewalk") rather than walking facing oncoming
>> traffic as they usually do here in the UK.
>
> When I lived in New England I used to walk on a couple of semi-rural
> interstates and I don't think I ever saw anyone else walking. I was on
> the right because I was usually hitching.

Walking along roads to get from one place to another seems to be regarded as
weird in the US. I used to work with a guy who went over to Boston on
business and he and a few colleagues went out for a walk one lunchtime from
the building where they were working to a nearby park. Before they had gone
very far, a police car came screaming up with its sirens blaring and the men
were frogmarched at gunpoint to the car for the old "hands up, spread your
legs" routine. It seems that a passing motorist had reported the presence of
people walking along the roadside to the police who came to investigate this
weird, suspicious behaviour!!!! "Why are you walking instead of driving?"
was the attitude of the police.

David

"Mortimer" <me@privacy.net> writes:

> "Cynic" <cynic_999@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:69sq249858i3ma72e9e8sbg31tt2p6iq15@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 16 May 2008 09:20:17 +0100, judith <judithsmith@live.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Is it illegal for a cyclist to walk against the traffic in a one way
>>>street?
>>
>> Strictly speaking, it is legal only if they *carry* the bicycle rather
>> than wheeling it.
>
> I'd love to know why the law was made that way, and why pedestrians pushing
> pushchairs/prams are allowed whereas pedestrians pushing bicycles are not
> (if you apply the law strictly).
>
> Even more bizarre are the streets in the centre of Oxford where it is legal
> for a bus to drive along them but illegal (at certain times of day ) to
> cycle along them. If great big vehicles like buses are allowed, why are
> bikes banned? Weird!
>
> Is there any difference between pushing a bike on a pavement and pushing it
> in the road, close to the kerb? Is it strictly speaking illegal to push a
> bike on a pavement or in a pedestrianised street?
>
> Are there any cases of people being prosecuted (or even cautioned) for
> pushing a bike in a place where riding it would be illegal?
>
> What is the legal situation about pushing a bike along a public footpath (as
> opposed to a bridleway) where you are not allowed to ride it?

If you're pushing a bike, you're a 'foot passenger with a bike',
you're not riding it... (Crank v Brooks 1981). The following doesn't
mention pushing it through a red light, but I can't see that the
situation would be different there (there's no offence for a
pedestrian to walk past a red light...)

http://www.bikeforall.net/content/c...and_the_law.php

NB - you've got to have both feet on the ground - scooting is not
allowed...

regards

David

Francis Burton

In article <-72dnQHY5OZaM7DVnZ2dnUVZ8umdnZ2d@pipex.net>,
JNugent <JN@NPPTG.com> wrote:
>>> Pedestrians are nor vehicles/
>>
>> Nobody suggested that they were. It is the reason behind the
>> suggestion that is pertinent. Does that reason apply to cyclists? If
>> not, why not?
>
>Because a cyclist is not a pedestrian whilst cycling.
>
>For the diofferences between walking and cycling, see other posts.

In my opinion, that is a rather pedestrian reply.

Francis

Nick Finnigan

Mortimer wrote:
> "Cynic" <cynic_999@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:69sq249858i3ma72e9e8sbg31tt2p6iq15@4ax.com...
>
>>On Fri, 16 May 2008 09:20:17 +0100, judith <judithsmith@live.co.uk>
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Is it illegal for a cyclist to walk against the traffic in a one way
>>>street?
>>
>>Strictly speaking, it is legal only if they *carry* the bicycle rather
>>than wheeling it.
>
>
> I'd love to know why the law was made that way, and why pedestrians pushing
> pushchairs/prams are allowed whereas pedestrians pushing bicycles are not
> (if you apply the law strictly).

There is no single law, in depends on the traffic regulation.

> Even more bizarre are the streets in the centre of Oxford where it is legal
> for a bus to drive along them but illegal (at certain times of day ) to
> cycle along them. If great big vehicles like buses are allowed, why are
> bikes banned? Weird!

Because Town Planners Like Buses.

> Is there any difference between pushing a bike on a pavement and pushing it
> in the road, close to the kerb? Is it strictly speaking illegal to push a
> bike on a pavement or in a pedestrianised street?

It depends on the traffic order for the pedestrianised street.

> Are there any cases of people being prosecuted (or even cautioned) for
> pushing a bike in a place where riding it would be illegal?

Yes, and there are places where that would be correct.

> What is the legal situation about pushing a bike along a public footpath (as
> opposed to a bridleway) where you are not allowed to ride it?

Only with permission of the owner of the land.

Jeremy Parker

"Dave Larrington" <smert.spamionam@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:694rhvF30mi76U1@mid.individual.net...
> In news:Xb6dnbRwjue30LHVRVnyiAA@pipex.net,
> JNugent <JN@NPPTG.com> tweaked the Babbage-Engine to tell us:
>> Dave Larrington wrote:
>>> In news:-K2dnR8n2arolbbVnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@pipex.net,
>>> JNugent <JN@NPPTG.com> tweaked the Babbage-Engine to tell us:
>>>> Cynic wrote:
>>>
>>>>> In some countries it is a rule of the road that pedestrians and
>>>>> cyclists must travel on the opposite side of the road to
>>>>> motorised
>>>>> traffic so that they will see it coming in time to get out of
>>>>> the
>>>>> way.
>>>>> Which I believe is a sensible rule.
>>>> So I see.
>>>>
>>>> It takes all sorts.
>>>>
>>>> PS: You've intrigued me. Name one of those countries.
>>>
>>> Large swathes of the USA used to have such a rule. Older
>>> USAnians
>>> taught to ride a bicycle thus are sometimes to be found still
>>> doing
>>> so, to the alarm of other road users.

I moved to the USA, to Washington DC, at the end of 1963, and stayed
there for a quarter of a century. I was rather astonished, when I
got there, to be told that bikes were supposed to ride on the wrong
side of the road. Then I found that the local post office had a rack
of various road safety leaflets, including one about bikes. That
said that bikes were supposed, to my relief, to keep right, like
other vehicles. Finding that the entire population seemed to be
misinformed about which side of the road to use left me equally
astonished.

As far as I can tell wrong side riding never was the law in any state
of the Union, but it was certainly widely believed all over the USA,
and in Canada too. To be propagated that widely it surely cannot
have just been a rumour spread by word of mouth. Traffic engineers
never seemed to have believed the superstition, and the US boy and
girl scouts, who have always had a bicycling badge, didn't. John
Forester, of "Effective Cycling" fame, who moved from London to
California just before WW II at about the age of 10, I think, grew up
cycling English style, but on the right, of course.

The idea seems to have somehow arisen in the 1950s

I wouldn't have put it past some towns to have passed local
ordinances contradicting state traffic law, but I imagine an
ordinance which contradicts a real law would have no effect. It
might have resulted in some rather bizarre insurance claims and court
case though, although I have never actually heard of any.

The next thing the USA did, in Davis, California, in 1966, was invent
the bike lane.

Jeremy Parker

tims next home

"Graculus" <ReplaceWithMyMoniker@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:68u3a8F2va26fU1@mid.individual.net...
> "TimB" <stokefolk@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:ee1705fb-4419-4fe8-910e-9ea9f0b3270e@d1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>> What's the law on cycling the wrong way up a one way street? A few
>> days ago, I was walking home, and saw two people on white Police
>> cycles, wearing hi vis jackets with POLICE emblazoned on the back,
>> travelling at a very leisurely pace, the wrong way round a local one
>> way system, on the pavement. It may or may not have said "Community
>> Support Officer" in smaller writing underneath.
>>
>> Unfortunately, I was too far behind the officers to challenge them
>> about their behaviour. I managed to get a few photos on my phone, but
>> they're very poor quality and wouldn't allow for identification. What
>> would be the best route to take to report these officers? As a
>> cyclist, I despise inconsiderate cycling at the best of times, but
>> from people who are a) supposed to be enforcing the law, and b) whose
>> inconsiderate cycling is much more noticable because of their
>> position, it's unacceptable.
>>
>> If this was a normal cyclist, what would be the expected penalty if
>> caught doing this?
>
> Cycling on the pavement is illegal, whether in the direction of the
> traffic on the road or not (unless signed otherwise, e.g. shared
> cycle/pedestrian path).
> If on the roadway itself, then cycling the wrong way down a one-way street
> is just as illegal as if done in a car.

Even getting off your bike and pushing it the wrong way up the street is
illegal.

Not that anyone would enforce such a stupid rule

tim



>

Just zis Guy, you know?

On Tue, 20 May 2008 09:58:18 +0100, "tims next home"
<tims_new_home@yahoo.co.uk> said in
<69fif8F338p67U1@mid.individual.net>:

>Even getting off your bike and pushing it the wrong way up the street is
>illegal.

Sure? Crank v. Brooks would suggest otherwise.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

lardyninja

On May 19, 7:16 pm, "Jeremy Parker" <JeremyPar...@compuserve.com>
wrote:
> The next thing the USA did, in Davis, California, in 1966, was invent
> the bike lane.


This:

http://galwaycycling.org/archive/in...e_abstract.html

seems to suggest that the Germans got there first.

LN

Brimstone

Jeremy Parker wrote:
> "Dave Larrington" <smert.spamionam@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:694rhvF30mi76U1@mid.individual.net...
>> In news:Xb6dnbRwjue30LHVRVnyiAA@pipex.net,
>> JNugent <JN@NPPTG.com> tweaked the Babbage-Engine to tell us:
>>> Dave Larrington wrote:
>>>> In news:-K2dnR8n2arolbbVnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@pipex.net,
>>>> JNugent <JN@NPPTG.com> tweaked the Babbage-Engine to tell us:
>>>>> Cynic wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> In some countries it is a rule of the road that pedestrians and
>>>>>> cyclists must travel on the opposite side of the road to
>>>>>> motorised
>>>>>> traffic so that they will see it coming in time to get out of
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> way.
>>>>>> Which I believe is a sensible rule.
>>>>> So I see.
>>>>>
>>>>> It takes all sorts.
>>>>>
>>>>> PS: You've intrigued me. Name one of those countries.
>>>>
>>>> Large swathes of the USA used to have such a rule. Older
>>>> USAnians
>>>> taught to ride a bicycle thus are sometimes to be found still
>>>> doing
>>>> so, to the alarm of other road users.
>
> I moved to the USA, to Washington DC, at the end of 1963, and stayed
> there for a quarter of a century. I was rather astonished, when I
> got there, to be told that bikes were supposed to ride on the wrong
> side of the road. Then I found that the local post office had a rack
> of various road safety leaflets, including one about bikes. That
> said that bikes were supposed, to my relief, to keep right, like
> other vehicles. Finding that the entire population seemed to be
> misinformed about which side of the road to use left me equally
> astonished.
>
> As far as I can tell wrong side riding never was the law in any state
> of the Union, but it was certainly widely believed all over the USA,
> and in Canada too. To be propagated that widely it surely cannot
> have just been a rumour spread by word of mouth. Traffic engineers
> never seemed to have believed the superstition, and the US boy and
> girl scouts, who have always had a bicycling badge, didn't. John
> Forester, of "Effective Cycling" fame, who moved from London to
> California just before WW II at about the age of 10, I think, grew up
> cycling English style, but on the right, of course.
>
> The idea seems to have somehow arisen in the 1950s
>
> I wouldn't have put it past some towns to have passed local
> ordinances contradicting state traffic law, but I imagine an
> ordinance which contradicts a real law would have no effect. It
> might have resulted in some rather bizarre insurance claims and court
> case though, although I have never actually heard of any.
>
> The next thing the USA did, in Davis, California, in 1966, was invent
> the bike lane.
>
Errr, not quite.

The Great West Road (A40) has/had cycle lanes from Chiswick roundabout to
its junction with the A30. It was built in the early 1920s.

The layout is, building line, footpath, cycle lane, 3 lane motor traffic, +
3 lane motor traffic, cycle lane, footpath, building line.

http://www.brentford.inuk.com/hgwest.htm

Jeremy Parker

>> The next thing the USA did, in Davis, California, in 1966, was
>> invent
>> the bike lane.
>>
> Errr, not quite.
>
> The Great West Road (A40) has/had cycle lanes from Chiswick
> roundabout to its junction with the A30. It was built in the early
> 1920s.

No it didn't, It had cycle tracks, the bike facility with such a bad
reputation, that it dare not speak it's name

Jeremy Parker

Jeremy Parker

"lardyninja" <lardyninja@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:43897be5-9dda-46ae-9ad2-8faa03a9bbac@d77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> On May 19, 7:16 pm, "Jeremy Parker" <JeremyPar...@compuserve.com>
> wrote:
>> The next thing the USA did, in Davis, California, in 1966, was
>> invent
>> the bike lane.
>
>
> This:
>
> http://galwaycycling.org/archive/in...e_abstract.html
>
> seems to suggest that the Germans got there first.

Well, in Bremen, before cars, but when the car people got
enthusiastic about getting cyclists off the road, in about 1930, they
went for tracks, not lanes

Other places used cycle tracks before Davis as well; Wisconsin in
1941, Belgium just after WWII, the Hague, to lessen the hazards of
Dutch cycle tracks at intersections, but it's Davis which originated
the world wide infection.

Cycle tracks, of course, have such a bad reputation that people have
started resorting to euphemisms to avoid referring to them, such as
"protected (hah!) lanes". Every traffic engineer seems to know that
tracks are bad, even if they don't know enough about traffic
engineering to know why.

Jeremy Parker