Cyclists handed out penalties for cycling on Kingston pavements

Surrey Comet: Cyclists handed out penalties for cycling on Kingston pavements Cyclists handed out penalties for cycling on Kingston pavements

More than 50 penalties have been slapped on cyclists cycling down Kingston pavements.

Kingston police have issued 54 fixed penalty notices to cyclists who have broken the law by riding down footways that are for pedestrians in the last three months.

The crackdown is part of the Metropolitan Police’s Operation Safeway.

A spokesman from Kingston police said: “We are aware that some cyclists use pavements in particular areas because they believe this to be safer, however, cycling on the pavements can pose a threat to pedestrians and also to cyclists if they are subsequently re-entering a busy road at a point not designated for this.

“Issuing fixed penalty notices for this offence has been part of an overall program to encourage mutual respect and consideration among different road user groups through law enforcement.”

A fixed penalty notice is generally between £30 to £100.

As part of the operation, five cyclists were given fixed penalty notices for ignoring traffic signals, while 43 drivers were also at the receiving end of this.

Comments (18)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

10:46am Tue 25 Feb 14

Bigdai100 says...

So a Met initiative to make the road safer for cyclists tickets more cyclists than motorists. Typical!
Most cyclists ride on the pavement because they are afraid of traffic not because they are inconsiderate of pedestrians.
So a Met initiative to make the road safer for cyclists tickets more cyclists than motorists. Typical! Most cyclists ride on the pavement because they are afraid of traffic not because they are inconsiderate of pedestrians. Bigdai100

10:59am Tue 25 Feb 14

thefire says...

Bigdai100 wrote:
So a Met initiative to make the road safer for cyclists tickets more cyclists than motorists. Typical!
Most cyclists ride on the pavement because they are afraid of traffic not because they are inconsiderate of pedestrians.
Bigdai100,

This article is extremely poor and does nothing but drive hatred towards cyclists rather than look at the real issue. Which is (as you point out) why are these cyclists riding on the pavement in the first place?

More motorists than cyclists were in fact given tickets, but for some reason the Surrey Comet wants to concentrate on the easy target, cyclists.

Here are the actual stats for operation Safeway in Kingston. As provided to me by the Met Police:

164 fixed penalty notices issued
60 FPNs to cyclists
104 to drivers
3 drivers procecuted

Of the 104 to drivers 45 were issued to drivers using mobile phones.


And here are the stats for the whole of London:

Cyclists (4,085 FPNs or reports for summons)

Contravening traffic signals = 1,225
Using a pedal cycle without lights at night = 1,598
Cycling on a footway = 988
Other = 274

Motorists (9,733 FPNs or reports for summons)

Contravening traffic signals = 1,056
Using a phone while driving = 2,424
Failing to wear a seatbelt = 2,437
Driving without due care = 87
Driving in a cycle lane = 42
Other (can include driving without insurance and faults with vehicle) = 3,687
[quote][p][bold]Bigdai100[/bold] wrote: So a Met initiative to make the road safer for cyclists tickets more cyclists than motorists. Typical! Most cyclists ride on the pavement because they are afraid of traffic not because they are inconsiderate of pedestrians.[/p][/quote]Bigdai100, This article is extremely poor and does nothing but drive hatred towards cyclists rather than look at the real issue. Which is (as you point out) why are these cyclists riding on the pavement in the first place? More motorists than cyclists were in fact given tickets, but for some reason the Surrey Comet wants to concentrate on the easy target, cyclists. Here are the actual stats for operation Safeway in Kingston. As provided to me by the Met Police: 164 fixed penalty notices issued 60 FPNs to cyclists 104 to drivers 3 drivers procecuted Of the 104 to drivers 45 were issued to drivers using mobile phones. And here are the stats for the whole of London: Cyclists (4,085 FPNs or reports for summons) Contravening traffic signals = 1,225 Using a pedal cycle without lights at night = 1,598 Cycling on a footway = 988 Other = 274 Motorists (9,733 FPNs or reports for summons) Contravening traffic signals = 1,056 Using a phone while driving = 2,424 Failing to wear a seatbelt = 2,437 Driving without due care = 87 Driving in a cycle lane = 42 Other (can include driving without insurance and faults with vehicle) = 3,687 thefire

12:34pm Tue 25 Feb 14

Ludovic says...

Amazing distortion of the truth indeed.

Just one small but important question: why cyclists ride on pavements?

The answer usually lies in inadequate provision of cycling facilities such as dedicated cycle paths. In other words, because it's safer. (and by the way, cyclists don't kill pedestrians, cars kill both).
Amazing distortion of the truth indeed. Just one small but important question: why cyclists ride on pavements? The answer usually lies in inadequate provision of cycling facilities such as dedicated cycle paths. In other words, because it's safer. (and by the way, cyclists don't kill pedestrians, cars kill both). Ludovic

1:46pm Tue 25 Feb 14

robertbrickwood says...

I find the facts given by thefire interesting. if i interpret the figures correctly the number of penalty notices is proportionately very much higher for cyclists than for motorists because there is significantly more motorists on the road than cyclists. i believe the attitude of cyclists can be summarised by an incident on Saturday. on the road from Esher to the A3 two cyclists rode 2 abreast and thereby deliberately held up the traffic behind them. when the motorist in front of me hooted in an attempt to get them to ride in single file they gave him/her the 2 fingers. i believe all cyclists should be forced to ride on the road on the basis some of these uncouth antisocial thugs may get wipred out and good riddance to them. The foregoing does not apply to law abiding cyclists who stop at traffic lights, do not abuse motorists and ride with lights at night (perhaps a quarter of them?)
I find the facts given by thefire interesting. if i interpret the figures correctly the number of penalty notices is proportionately very much higher for cyclists than for motorists because there is significantly more motorists on the road than cyclists. i believe the attitude of cyclists can be summarised by an incident on Saturday. on the road from Esher to the A3 two cyclists rode 2 abreast and thereby deliberately held up the traffic behind them. when the motorist in front of me hooted in an attempt to get them to ride in single file they gave him/her the 2 fingers. i believe all cyclists should be forced to ride on the road on the basis some of these uncouth antisocial thugs may get wipred out and good riddance to them. The foregoing does not apply to law abiding cyclists who stop at traffic lights, do not abuse motorists and ride with lights at night (perhaps a quarter of them?) robertbrickwood

3:06pm Tue 25 Feb 14

DB says...

robertbrickwood wrote:
I find the facts given by thefire interesting. if i interpret the figures correctly the number of penalty notices is proportionately very much higher for cyclists than for motorists because there is significantly more motorists on the road than cyclists. i believe the attitude of cyclists can be summarised by an incident on Saturday. on the road from Esher to the A3 two cyclists rode 2 abreast and thereby deliberately held up the traffic behind them. when the motorist in front of me hooted in an attempt to get them to ride in single file they gave him/her the 2 fingers. i believe all cyclists should be forced to ride on the road on the basis some of these uncouth antisocial thugs may get wipred out and good riddance to them. The foregoing does not apply to law abiding cyclists who stop at traffic lights, do not abuse motorists and ride with lights at night (perhaps a quarter of them?)
I would have thought it is significantly more than a quarter of cyclists that are law abiding and probably a higher proportion of drivers break the law if you include speeding etc. Motorists often seem to treat speeding as a minor and acceptable offence in the same way cyclists do riding on the pavement.

I am disappointed by the figures quoted in thefire's post, though. It definitely shows the number of offences committed by cyclists to be massive compared to motorists proportionately. How many cars are there on the road in the morning rush hour compared to cyclists? 10 times? 20 times?

I wonder if this is because police are unfairly concentrating on catching cyclists, or if the number of offences genuinely is that much higher.

We all see too much of the unfortunate side of cycling like in your example. I followed a cyclist up Portsmouth Road the other day who shouted at a pedestrian for daring to step on to the zebra crossing by Grove Road, but then thought nothing of zooming through a red light himself not one minute later at Brighton Road.

Some of these halfwits are extremely aggressive, but they probably drive badly as well when they get behind the wheel of a car, so should not be used to judge all cyclists.
[quote][p][bold]robertbrickwood[/bold] wrote: I find the facts given by thefire interesting. if i interpret the figures correctly the number of penalty notices is proportionately very much higher for cyclists than for motorists because there is significantly more motorists on the road than cyclists. i believe the attitude of cyclists can be summarised by an incident on Saturday. on the road from Esher to the A3 two cyclists rode 2 abreast and thereby deliberately held up the traffic behind them. when the motorist in front of me hooted in an attempt to get them to ride in single file they gave him/her the 2 fingers. i believe all cyclists should be forced to ride on the road on the basis some of these uncouth antisocial thugs may get wipred out and good riddance to them. The foregoing does not apply to law abiding cyclists who stop at traffic lights, do not abuse motorists and ride with lights at night (perhaps a quarter of them?)[/p][/quote]I would have thought it is significantly more than a quarter of cyclists that are law abiding and probably a higher proportion of drivers break the law if you include speeding etc. Motorists often seem to treat speeding as a minor and acceptable offence in the same way cyclists do riding on the pavement. I am disappointed by the figures quoted in thefire's post, though. It definitely shows the number of offences committed by cyclists to be massive compared to motorists proportionately. How many cars are there on the road in the morning rush hour compared to cyclists? 10 times? 20 times? I wonder if this is because police are unfairly concentrating on catching cyclists, or if the number of offences genuinely is that much higher. We all see too much of the unfortunate side of cycling like in your example. I followed a cyclist up Portsmouth Road the other day who shouted at a pedestrian for daring to step on to the zebra crossing by Grove Road, but then thought nothing of zooming through a red light himself not one minute later at Brighton Road. Some of these halfwits are extremely aggressive, but they probably drive badly as well when they get behind the wheel of a car, so should not be used to judge all cyclists. DB

4:41pm Tue 25 Feb 14

Mind the gap says...

robertbrickwood wrote:
I find the facts given by thefire interesting. if i interpret the figures correctly the number of penalty notices is proportionately very much higher for cyclists than for motorists because there is significantly more motorists on the road than cyclists. i believe the attitude of cyclists can be summarised by an incident on Saturday. on the road from Esher to the A3 two cyclists rode 2 abreast and thereby deliberately held up the traffic behind them. when the motorist in front of me hooted in an attempt to get them to ride in single file they gave him/her the 2 fingers. i believe all cyclists should be forced to ride on the road on the basis some of these uncouth antisocial thugs may get wipred out and good riddance to them. The foregoing does not apply to law abiding cyclists who stop at traffic lights, do not abuse motorists and ride with lights at night (perhaps a quarter of them?)
The above comment is typical of the anti-cyclist bile that is doing the rounds at the moment. Some dubious story followed by some fictional statistics makes you look silly. You sound like a really pleasant chap.
[quote][p][bold]robertbrickwood[/bold] wrote: I find the facts given by thefire interesting. if i interpret the figures correctly the number of penalty notices is proportionately very much higher for cyclists than for motorists because there is significantly more motorists on the road than cyclists. i believe the attitude of cyclists can be summarised by an incident on Saturday. on the road from Esher to the A3 two cyclists rode 2 abreast and thereby deliberately held up the traffic behind them. when the motorist in front of me hooted in an attempt to get them to ride in single file they gave him/her the 2 fingers. i believe all cyclists should be forced to ride on the road on the basis some of these uncouth antisocial thugs may get wipred out and good riddance to them. The foregoing does not apply to law abiding cyclists who stop at traffic lights, do not abuse motorists and ride with lights at night (perhaps a quarter of them?)[/p][/quote]The above comment is typical of the anti-cyclist bile that is doing the rounds at the moment. Some dubious story followed by some fictional statistics makes you look silly. You sound like a really pleasant chap. Mind the gap

5:00pm Tue 25 Feb 14

robertbrickwood says...

some well thought out points from db which prompt a further observation. I believe the lack of regulation on cyclists could be a factor for their disproportionately high law breaking. no test to pass, no license, no insurance, no mot, no helmet law etc. I suppose the best bit for the lycra clad thugs is they can't be banned. Fear of financial penalties or loss of licence are big controlling factors. I notice also that all of the lycra clad thugs are male. I suggest to much testosterone is to blame and mandatory castration after 3 cycling offences would probably solve the problem at a stroke
some well thought out points from db which prompt a further observation. I believe the lack of regulation on cyclists could be a factor for their disproportionately high law breaking. no test to pass, no license, no insurance, no mot, no helmet law etc. I suppose the best bit for the lycra clad thugs is they can't be banned. Fear of financial penalties or loss of licence are big controlling factors. I notice also that all of the lycra clad thugs are male. I suggest to much testosterone is to blame and mandatory castration after 3 cycling offences would probably solve the problem at a stroke robertbrickwood

1:23pm Wed 26 Feb 14

robertbrickwood says...

Ludovic wrote:
Amazing distortion of the truth indeed. Just one small but important question: why cyclists ride on pavements? The answer usually lies in inadequate provision of cycling facilities such as dedicated cycle paths. In other words, because it's safer. (and by the way, cyclists don't kill pedestrians, cars kill both).
Point 1. Your comments are proved to be wholly inaccurate by recent events. Only yesterday the news reported about a chap who was cycling on the pavement who had a friend following him who killed an innocent member of the public who complained about his friend cycling on the path. Cycling on the path clearly caused the death of an innocent man. I cant remember a case of a motorist killing a cyclist with his bare hands however given the thuggish behaviour of a significant proportion of cyclists i believe it is only a matter of time

Point 2. when cyclists directly contribute to infrastructure costs for providing dedicated cycle ways then perhaps there is a legitimate case to consider squeezing in a cycle lane here and there where feasible. In the meantime either take the risk of getting run over on the road or get the bus but dont cycle on the pavements - it is illegal and all cyclists who do so thoroughly deserve to be fined for this blatant act of antisocial behaviour
[quote][p][bold]Ludovic[/bold] wrote: Amazing distortion of the truth indeed. Just one small but important question: why cyclists ride on pavements? The answer usually lies in inadequate provision of cycling facilities such as dedicated cycle paths. In other words, because it's safer. (and by the way, cyclists don't kill pedestrians, cars kill both).[/p][/quote]Point 1. Your comments are proved to be wholly inaccurate by recent events. Only yesterday the news reported about a chap who was cycling on the pavement who had a friend following him who killed an innocent member of the public who complained about his friend cycling on the path. Cycling on the path clearly caused the death of an innocent man. I cant remember a case of a motorist killing a cyclist with his bare hands however given the thuggish behaviour of a significant proportion of cyclists i believe it is only a matter of time Point 2. when cyclists directly contribute to infrastructure costs for providing dedicated cycle ways then perhaps there is a legitimate case to consider squeezing in a cycle lane here and there where feasible. In the meantime either take the risk of getting run over on the road or get the bus but dont cycle on the pavements - it is illegal and all cyclists who do so thoroughly deserve to be fined for this blatant act of antisocial behaviour robertbrickwood

1:38pm Wed 26 Feb 14

robertbrickwood says...

Mind the gap wrote:
robertbrickwood wrote: I find the facts given by thefire interesting. if i interpret the figures correctly the number of penalty notices is proportionately very much higher for cyclists than for motorists because there is significantly more motorists on the road than cyclists. i believe the attitude of cyclists can be summarised by an incident on Saturday. on the road from Esher to the A3 two cyclists rode 2 abreast and thereby deliberately held up the traffic behind them. when the motorist in front of me hooted in an attempt to get them to ride in single file they gave him/her the 2 fingers. i believe all cyclists should be forced to ride on the road on the basis some of these uncouth antisocial thugs may get wipred out and good riddance to them. The foregoing does not apply to law abiding cyclists who stop at traffic lights, do not abuse motorists and ride with lights at night (perhaps a quarter of them?)
The above comment is typical of the anti-cyclist bile that is doing the rounds at the moment. Some dubious story followed by some fictional statistics makes you look silly. You sound like a really pleasant chap.
The 'anti cyclist bile' as you call it is a perfectly reasonable response from perfectly reasonable motorists and pedestrians who are sick to the teeth of the lycra clad thugs running traffic lights and abusing verbally and physically all around them , cyclists who ride on pavements, cyclist who ride with no lights etc etc. If you believe there is no legigitimate cause for complaint against cyclists you are deluded!
[quote][p][bold]Mind the gap[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]robertbrickwood[/bold] wrote: I find the facts given by thefire interesting. if i interpret the figures correctly the number of penalty notices is proportionately very much higher for cyclists than for motorists because there is significantly more motorists on the road than cyclists. i believe the attitude of cyclists can be summarised by an incident on Saturday. on the road from Esher to the A3 two cyclists rode 2 abreast and thereby deliberately held up the traffic behind them. when the motorist in front of me hooted in an attempt to get them to ride in single file they gave him/her the 2 fingers. i believe all cyclists should be forced to ride on the road on the basis some of these uncouth antisocial thugs may get wipred out and good riddance to them. The foregoing does not apply to law abiding cyclists who stop at traffic lights, do not abuse motorists and ride with lights at night (perhaps a quarter of them?)[/p][/quote]The above comment is typical of the anti-cyclist bile that is doing the rounds at the moment. Some dubious story followed by some fictional statistics makes you look silly. You sound like a really pleasant chap.[/p][/quote]The 'anti cyclist bile' as you call it is a perfectly reasonable response from perfectly reasonable motorists and pedestrians who are sick to the teeth of the lycra clad thugs running traffic lights and abusing verbally and physically all around them , cyclists who ride on pavements, cyclist who ride with no lights etc etc. If you believe there is no legigitimate cause for complaint against cyclists you are deluded! robertbrickwood

1:40pm Wed 26 Feb 14

robertbrickwood says...

Mind the gap wrote:
robertbrickwood wrote: I find the facts given by thefire interesting. if i interpret the figures correctly the number of penalty notices is proportionately very much higher for cyclists than for motorists because there is significantly more motorists on the road than cyclists. i believe the attitude of cyclists can be summarised by an incident on Saturday. on the road from Esher to the A3 two cyclists rode 2 abreast and thereby deliberately held up the traffic behind them. when the motorist in front of me hooted in an attempt to get them to ride in single file they gave him/her the 2 fingers. i believe all cyclists should be forced to ride on the road on the basis some of these uncouth antisocial thugs may get wipred out and good riddance to them. The foregoing does not apply to law abiding cyclists who stop at traffic lights, do not abuse motorists and ride with lights at night (perhaps a quarter of them?)
The above comment is typical of the anti-cyclist bile that is doing the rounds at the moment. Some dubious story followed by some fictional statistics makes you look silly. You sound like a really pleasant chap.
oh yes and my final word on this matter is i am a really pleasant chap in comparison with the lycra clad cycling thugs and i also smell better!
[quote][p][bold]Mind the gap[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]robertbrickwood[/bold] wrote: I find the facts given by thefire interesting. if i interpret the figures correctly the number of penalty notices is proportionately very much higher for cyclists than for motorists because there is significantly more motorists on the road than cyclists. i believe the attitude of cyclists can be summarised by an incident on Saturday. on the road from Esher to the A3 two cyclists rode 2 abreast and thereby deliberately held up the traffic behind them. when the motorist in front of me hooted in an attempt to get them to ride in single file they gave him/her the 2 fingers. i believe all cyclists should be forced to ride on the road on the basis some of these uncouth antisocial thugs may get wipred out and good riddance to them. The foregoing does not apply to law abiding cyclists who stop at traffic lights, do not abuse motorists and ride with lights at night (perhaps a quarter of them?)[/p][/quote]The above comment is typical of the anti-cyclist bile that is doing the rounds at the moment. Some dubious story followed by some fictional statistics makes you look silly. You sound like a really pleasant chap.[/p][/quote]oh yes and my final word on this matter is i am a really pleasant chap in comparison with the lycra clad cycling thugs and i also smell better! robertbrickwood

1:50pm Wed 26 Feb 14

kingstonpaul says...

My God, all this tribal us vs. them bile. has it occurred to anyone that an awful lot of cyclists are also drivers and vice versa. I do both, and it's apparent to me that both 'tribes' need to change in order to make roads less of a battleground.
Cyclists - stick to the rules of the road; make yourselves visible when it's dark; preferably don't cycle 2/3 abreast.
Motorists - being surrounded by a metal shell does not mean you occupy a higher place in the road using food chain; don't use your mobile phones ehen driving, as it is potentially lethal.
Come on people, let's try to understand each other's needs, and try and accommodate all users
My God, all this tribal us vs. them bile. has it occurred to anyone that an awful lot of cyclists are also drivers and vice versa. I do both, and it's apparent to me that both 'tribes' need to change in order to make roads less of a battleground. Cyclists - stick to the rules of the road; make yourselves visible when it's dark; preferably don't cycle 2/3 abreast. Motorists - being surrounded by a metal shell does not mean you occupy a higher place in the road using food chain; don't use your mobile phones ehen driving, as it is potentially lethal. Come on people, let's try to understand each other's needs, and try and accommodate all users kingstonpaul

2:19pm Wed 26 Feb 14

DB says...

I don’t really understand why this has to be a motorists & pedestrians vs cyclists thing. There are without a doubt quite a number of shockingly bad cyclists but as I said in a previous comment, how many of these people are also inconsiderate motorists or pedestrians when they are not on their bike?

In my opinion we should be encouraging better road use by all types of road user and if that means fining people, then that is what we should do. If we had a hidden police patrol at the zebra crossing on Portsmouth Road, they would make literally thousands a day from motorists who routinely don’t stop for pedestrians to cross, and if there was one at the pelican crossing outside Waterloo station, they’d make a similar amount from the cyclists who coast through the red light without even looking at it and then weave through the pedestrians on the crossing at high speed.

I personally use all three modes of transport, walking more than cycling, cycling more than driving, and am constantly amazed and depressed by the poor road manners of members of all of the three groups, but I expect that like me they are actually members of all of the groups.

One thing that does amaze me about the most extreme cyclists is the level of risk they are prepared to take with THEIR OWN lives. When I am slogging around Richmond Park on my mountain bike, a lot of the faster and fitter cyclists weave around the slower-moving cars at phenomenal speeds. One mistake by them or the car driver and it is going to be the cyclist that dies or is seriously injured. It wouldn’t be worth it to me…

Motorists need to take the greatest level of responsibility because they are driving around in machines that could easily kill or maim with one small mistake, but the other road users need to do their bit as well.
I don’t really understand why this has to be a motorists & pedestrians vs cyclists thing. There are without a doubt quite a number of shockingly bad cyclists but as I said in a previous comment, how many of these people are also inconsiderate motorists or pedestrians when they are not on their bike? In my opinion we should be encouraging better road use by all types of road user and if that means fining people, then that is what we should do. If we had a hidden police patrol at the zebra crossing on Portsmouth Road, they would make literally thousands a day from motorists who routinely don’t stop for pedestrians to cross, and if there was one at the pelican crossing outside Waterloo station, they’d make a similar amount from the cyclists who coast through the red light without even looking at it and then weave through the pedestrians on the crossing at high speed. I personally use all three modes of transport, walking more than cycling, cycling more than driving, and am constantly amazed and depressed by the poor road manners of members of all of the three groups, but I expect that like me they are actually members of all of the groups. One thing that does amaze me about the most extreme cyclists is the level of risk they are prepared to take with THEIR OWN lives. When I am slogging around Richmond Park on my mountain bike, a lot of the faster and fitter cyclists weave around the slower-moving cars at phenomenal speeds. One mistake by them or the car driver and it is going to be the cyclist that dies or is seriously injured. It wouldn’t be worth it to me… Motorists need to take the greatest level of responsibility because they are driving around in machines that could easily kill or maim with one small mistake, but the other road users need to do their bit as well. DB

4:11pm Wed 26 Feb 14

helen59 says...

AND ABOUT TIME TOO. WELL DONE KINGSTON POLICE
AND ABOUT TIME TOO. WELL DONE KINGSTON POLICE helen59

11:21am Thu 27 Feb 14

robertbrickwood says...

Our .MP has summed up the official position succinctly. For the avoidance of doubt cyclists have and will continue to be fined for breaking the law by riding on the plaform. The position is clear and if cyclists feel they are above the law then they deserve everything they get. They do of course have the option of trying to get the law changed to permit cycling on pavements but thdestrian lobby is too strong for them to succeed. Cyclists need to llearnt they are and always will be an insignificant minority ay the bottom of the transport food chain that the majority will not tolrtaye to flout the law. Whongong about being fined only strengthens opinion againsy ethos group of late breakers.
Our .MP has summed up the official position succinctly. For the avoidance of doubt cyclists have and will continue to be fined for breaking the law by riding on the plaform. The position is clear and if cyclists feel they are above the law then they deserve everything they get. They do of course have the option of trying to get the law changed to permit cycling on pavements but thdestrian lobby is too strong for them to succeed. Cyclists need to llearnt they are and always will be an insignificant minority ay the bottom of the transport food chain that the majority will not tolrtaye to flout the law. Whongong about being fined only strengthens opinion againsy ethos group of late breakers. robertbrickwood

1:03pm Thu 27 Feb 14

kingstonpaul says...

Memo to Mr/Ms Mind The Gap

Cool it, everyone is entitled to their opinion. There's an overdose of pomposity on these threads, so I commend a bit of humour. I don't see anything that could vaguely be regarded as 'trolling' aimed at you. If you're offended that easily, suggest you might try growing a slightly thicker skin - or else withdraw gracefully from these discussion boards.
Memo to Mr/Ms Mind The Gap Cool it, everyone is entitled to their opinion. There's an overdose of pomposity on these threads, so I commend a bit of humour. I don't see anything that could vaguely be regarded as 'trolling' aimed at you. If you're offended that easily, suggest you might try growing a slightly thicker skin - or else withdraw gracefully from these discussion boards. kingstonpaul

1:14pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Mind the gap says...

kingstonpaul wrote:
Memo to Mr/Ms Mind The Gap

Cool it, everyone is entitled to their opinion. There's an overdose of pomposity on these threads, so I commend a bit of humour. I don't see anything that could vaguely be regarded as 'trolling' aimed at you. If you're offended that easily, suggest you might try growing a slightly thicker skin - or else withdraw gracefully from these discussion boards.
Its not me who suggested wiping out and castrating cyclists. But if you find that humourous then that says a lot in itself. Lets hope that Robert Brickwood is not involved in a collision with a cyclist.
[quote][p][bold]kingstonpaul[/bold] wrote: Memo to Mr/Ms Mind The Gap Cool it, everyone is entitled to their opinion. There's an overdose of pomposity on these threads, so I commend a bit of humour. I don't see anything that could vaguely be regarded as 'trolling' aimed at you. If you're offended that easily, suggest you might try growing a slightly thicker skin - or else withdraw gracefully from these discussion boards.[/p][/quote]Its not me who suggested wiping out and castrating cyclists. But if you find that humourous then that says a lot in itself. Lets hope that Robert Brickwood is not involved in a collision with a cyclist. Mind the gap

4:02pm Thu 27 Feb 14

David Lindsell says...

We have suspended the comment above purporting to be from MP Edward Davey as it is pretty obviously not him
We have suspended the comment above purporting to be from MP Edward Davey as it is pretty obviously not him David Lindsell

4:55pm Mon 10 Mar 14

Tobermory says...

robertbrickwood wrote:
I find the facts given by thefire interesting. if i interpret the figures correctly the number of penalty notices is proportionately very much higher for cyclists than for motorists because there is significantly more motorists on the road than cyclists. i believe the attitude of cyclists can be summarised by an incident on Saturday. on the road from Esher to the A3 two cyclists rode 2 abreast and thereby deliberately held up the traffic behind them. when the motorist in front of me hooted in an attempt to get them to ride in single file they gave him/her the 2 fingers. i believe all cyclists should be forced to ride on the road on the basis some of these uncouth antisocial thugs may get wipred out and good riddance to them. The foregoing does not apply to law abiding cyclists who stop at traffic lights, do not abuse motorists and ride with lights at night (perhaps a quarter of them?)
So a motorists hoots (contrary to the Highway code) at two cyclists who were cycling perfectly legally along a rode because he was too impatient to overtake correctly and the cyclists are in the wrong!? What a complete tw@t!!
[quote][p][bold]robertbrickwood[/bold] wrote: I find the facts given by thefire interesting. if i interpret the figures correctly the number of penalty notices is proportionately very much higher for cyclists than for motorists because there is significantly more motorists on the road than cyclists. i believe the attitude of cyclists can be summarised by an incident on Saturday. on the road from Esher to the A3 two cyclists rode 2 abreast and thereby deliberately held up the traffic behind them. when the motorist in front of me hooted in an attempt to get them to ride in single file they gave him/her the 2 fingers. i believe all cyclists should be forced to ride on the road on the basis some of these uncouth antisocial thugs may get wipred out and good riddance to them. The foregoing does not apply to law abiding cyclists who stop at traffic lights, do not abuse motorists and ride with lights at night (perhaps a quarter of them?)[/p][/quote]So a motorists hoots (contrary to the Highway code) at two cyclists who were cycling perfectly legally along a rode because he was too impatient to overtake correctly and the cyclists are in the wrong!? What a complete tw@t!! Tobermory

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree