Communities to be canvassed over bikes concerns

CRIME COMMISSIONER: Durham's Police and Crime Commissioner Ron Hogg talks to shoppers.

CRIME COMMISSIONER: Durham's Police and Crime Commissioner Ron Hogg talks to shoppers.

First published in News Darlington and Stockton Times: Photograph of the Author by , Regional Chief Reporter

POLICE in Darlington are to ask communities if they want to see a crackdown on adults riding bikes on the pavement.

The move follows a request from a resident to Durham police and crime commissioner Ron Hogg during a meet and greet exercise in the town's Cornmill Centre on Friday.

Mr Hogg said: "The resident said there seemed to be a lot of people riding bikes where they shouldn't in the town.

"We're not talking about kids - were talking about adults who should know better."

Sergeant Mark Ralphs, from Darlington police, said that following the complaint, officers would discuss the issue with local Partners and Communities Together (Pact) groups.

"The man's point was that people were riding on the pavements and not really taking care of pedestrians.

"We will talk with Pact groups to find out the depth of feeling on the issue.

"If it's the general feeling that it is a problem it can be adapted as a Pact priority."

Mr Hogg said this outcome was an example of the benefit of having police and crime commissioners who were answerable to the public.

"We can find out what problems people are having and get something done about them.

"I will now follow this up with the officers to make sure it is being looked into."

Comments (66)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:30am Sun 24 Aug 14

Gamechanger says...

I am totally in favour of people cycling on the pavement because the main roads are so dangerous, although I am totally against cycling skateboarding etc. In the town centre itself. Pedestrians must always have right of way and there should be a speed limit for adults who choose to ride on the pavement. The best way of encouraging reluctant cyclists who by and large cite heavy traffic as the reason for not cycling is to allow then to ride on the pavement. The haphazard piecemeal cycle routes are not fit for purpose. Of course there will be a positive impact as car use may be reduced and people get more exercise. It goes without saying that safety for cyclists pedestrians and drivers is paramount.
I am totally in favour of people cycling on the pavement because the main roads are so dangerous, although I am totally against cycling skateboarding etc. In the town centre itself. Pedestrians must always have right of way and there should be a speed limit for adults who choose to ride on the pavement. The best way of encouraging reluctant cyclists who by and large cite heavy traffic as the reason for not cycling is to allow then to ride on the pavement. The haphazard piecemeal cycle routes are not fit for purpose. Of course there will be a positive impact as car use may be reduced and people get more exercise. It goes without saying that safety for cyclists pedestrians and drivers is paramount. Gamechanger
  • Score: -27

10:09am Sun 24 Aug 14

lfp says...

ON THE ROAD.
ON THE ROAD. lfp
  • Score: 31

10:20am Sun 24 Aug 14

kitten41 says...

Make the roads safer or introduce more cycle paths then! This headline has really annoyed me!
Make the roads safer or introduce more cycle paths then! This headline has really annoyed me! kitten41
  • Score: 15

10:28am Sun 24 Aug 14

kitten41 says...

Oh and does this apply to mobility scooters that mow pedestrians down travelling at speed?!
Oh and does this apply to mobility scooters that mow pedestrians down travelling at speed?! kitten41
  • Score: 37

11:27am Sun 24 Aug 14

stevegg says...

A PR exercise by Mr Hogg like all the others hes done, he will tell anyone what they want to hear to make himself look good. An impossible promise as the police are impossibly overstretched and far to busy to have time for this!
A PR exercise by Mr Hogg like all the others hes done, he will tell anyone what they want to hear to make himself look good. An impossible promise as the police are impossibly overstretched and far to busy to have time for this! stevegg
  • Score: 10

11:45am Sun 24 Aug 14

Catherinet says...

I would prefer them to use the cycle paths rather than the road.
I would prefer them to use the cycle paths rather than the road. Catherinet
  • Score: 21

12:03pm Sun 24 Aug 14

Madadrian says...

It is a criminal offence to ride a bike on the footpath. Over 60 years ago as a child I was ordered by the police to either get off my bike and push it or get onto the dual carriageway if I wanted to ride it. I was 9 years old.

The problem is the police have stopped enforcing the laws. Cyclists used to be prosecuted for riding on the footpath and motorists used to be prosecuted for driving without due care for other road users. They don't even enforce the speed limits past the local police station. The 20mph limit is routinely ignored by the yob element of motorist and obstructive parking has become the norm. At one time the police would prosecute the motorist who parked too close to a junction. Today they park halfway across and get away with it. And even the police park on pavements.

As for the poster who complains about mobility scooters I agree a small minority travel too fast but that could easily be remedied by restricting their top speed to 4mph and not the current permitted 8mph. But that would be something for the towns MP to raise in parliament
It is a criminal offence to ride a bike on the footpath. Over 60 years ago as a child I was ordered by the police to either get off my bike and push it or get onto the dual carriageway if I wanted to ride it. I was 9 years old. The problem is the police have stopped enforcing the laws. Cyclists used to be prosecuted for riding on the footpath and motorists used to be prosecuted for driving without due care for other road users. They don't even enforce the speed limits past the local police station. The 20mph limit is routinely ignored by the yob element of motorist and obstructive parking has become the norm. At one time the police would prosecute the motorist who parked too close to a junction. Today they park halfway across and get away with it. And even the police park on pavements. As for the poster who complains about mobility scooters I agree a small minority travel too fast but that could easily be remedied by restricting their top speed to 4mph and not the current permitted 8mph. But that would be something for the towns MP to raise in parliament Madadrian
  • Score: 45

12:09pm Sun 24 Aug 14

Jonn says...

Mr Hogg, I think you'll find it's chavs brought up with no common sense or consideration for others who ride on pavements like idiots with no concern for pedestrians. Equally, they have not been taught any road sense so are just as inconsiderate on the roads. This is not just exclusive to Darlington, but across the country.
I had to partake in a cycling proficiency test at school in the 80's when I was about 10 and what I learnt I still practice today when cycling on the roads. Every cyclist should undergo this test today.
Mr Hogg, I think you'll find it's chavs brought up with no common sense or consideration for others who ride on pavements like idiots with no concern for pedestrians. Equally, they have not been taught any road sense so are just as inconsiderate on the roads. This is not just exclusive to Darlington, but across the country. I had to partake in a cycling proficiency test at school in the 80's when I was about 10 and what I learnt I still practice today when cycling on the roads. Every cyclist should undergo this test today. Jonn
  • Score: 28

12:36pm Sun 24 Aug 14

Voice-of-reality says...

And why should children be above the law? I know we live in a culture in which the child is increasingly worshipped and can do no wrong - but it is not one law for adults and another for children. It is about time cyclists were also prosecuted for ignoring traffic lights - if they wish to be treated with respect when travelling, they should start to treat the 'laws of the road' with respect.
And why should children be above the law? I know we live in a culture in which the child is increasingly worshipped and can do no wrong - but it is not one law for adults and another for children. It is about time cyclists were also prosecuted for ignoring traffic lights - if they wish to be treated with respect when travelling, they should start to treat the 'laws of the road' with respect. Voice-of-reality
  • Score: 14

4:03pm Sun 24 Aug 14

miketually says...

Where bad/dangerous road design make it safer to ride on the pavement, I'll continue to ride, sensibly and carefully, on the pavement.
Where bad/dangerous road design make it safer to ride on the pavement, I'll continue to ride, sensibly and carefully, on the pavement. miketually
  • Score: -13

4:37pm Sun 24 Aug 14

jps101 says...

Cyclists who collide with pedestrians come off just as badly or even worse as was the case recently with the 73 yr old cyclist who was killed after colliding with a pedestrian who was released from hospital shortly after with minor injuries.
Most cyclists avoid collisions with anything because it hurts when you crash to the ground (ask Mark Cavendish)
As was said above there are a few, who regardless of what laws there are, couldn't care less about anyone else but themselves, and they won't stop being anti-social illegal or not!
Cyclists who collide with pedestrians come off just as badly or even worse as was the case recently with the 73 yr old cyclist who was killed after colliding with a pedestrian who was released from hospital shortly after with minor injuries. Most cyclists avoid collisions with anything because it hurts when you crash to the ground (ask Mark Cavendish) As was said above there are a few, who regardless of what laws there are, couldn't care less about anyone else but themselves, and they won't stop being anti-social illegal or not! jps101
  • Score: -6

11:25pm Sun 24 Aug 14

onerydoory says...

legs pumping like mad this hairy assed twelve stone no brain cycles past me and i think god if i had veered a couple of inches i would have been badly injured . if they were to hit a child coming out of there gate or an old lady it would be curtains and the worst is you cant hear them coming . you dont have to deploy extra police , the morons are riding along the pavements and the police are passing them by in there cars !
legs pumping like mad this hairy assed twelve stone no brain cycles past me and i think god if i had veered a couple of inches i would have been badly injured . if they were to hit a child coming out of there gate or an old lady it would be curtains and the worst is you cant hear them coming . you dont have to deploy extra police , the morons are riding along the pavements and the police are passing them by in there cars ! onerydoory
  • Score: 8

11:30pm Sun 24 Aug 14

onerydoory says...

Gamechanger wrote:
I am totally in favour of people cycling on the pavement because the main roads are so dangerous, although I am totally against cycling skateboarding etc. In the town centre itself. Pedestrians must always have right of way and there should be a speed limit for adults who choose to ride on the pavement. The best way of encouraging reluctant cyclists who by and large cite heavy traffic as the reason for not cycling is to allow then to ride on the pavement. The haphazard piecemeal cycle routes are not fit for purpose. Of course there will be a positive impact as car use may be reduced and people get more exercise. It goes without saying that safety for cyclists pedestrians and drivers is paramount.
challenge , walk up yarm road and back at say 1130 and no looking back because you should not have to and experience the scary thrill of having a huge moron on a bike going past you as fast as he can without you knowing he is coming .
[quote][p][bold]Gamechanger[/bold] wrote: I am totally in favour of people cycling on the pavement because the main roads are so dangerous, although I am totally against cycling skateboarding etc. In the town centre itself. Pedestrians must always have right of way and there should be a speed limit for adults who choose to ride on the pavement. The best way of encouraging reluctant cyclists who by and large cite heavy traffic as the reason for not cycling is to allow then to ride on the pavement. The haphazard piecemeal cycle routes are not fit for purpose. Of course there will be a positive impact as car use may be reduced and people get more exercise. It goes without saying that safety for cyclists pedestrians and drivers is paramount.[/p][/quote]challenge , walk up yarm road and back at say 1130 and no looking back because you should not have to and experience the scary thrill of having a huge moron on a bike going past you as fast as he can without you knowing he is coming . onerydoory
  • Score: 13

11:31pm Sun 24 Aug 14

darloboss says...

miketually wrote:
Where bad/dangerous road design make it safer to ride on the pavement, I'll continue to ride, sensibly and carefully, on the pavement.
in that case i hope you get done
[quote][p][bold]miketually[/bold] wrote: Where bad/dangerous road design make it safer to ride on the pavement, I'll continue to ride, sensibly and carefully, on the pavement.[/p][/quote]in that case i hope you get done darloboss
  • Score: 14

11:32pm Sun 24 Aug 14

onerydoory says...

stevegg wrote:
A PR exercise by Mr Hogg like all the others hes done, he will tell anyone what they want to hear to make himself look good. An impossible promise as the police are impossibly overstretched and far to busy to have time for this!
doing what ?
[quote][p][bold]stevegg[/bold] wrote: A PR exercise by Mr Hogg like all the others hes done, he will tell anyone what they want to hear to make himself look good. An impossible promise as the police are impossibly overstretched and far to busy to have time for this![/p][/quote]doing what ? onerydoory
  • Score: 0

11:33pm Sun 24 Aug 14

darloboss says...

Voice-of-reality wrote:
And why should children be above the law? I know we live in a culture in which the child is increasingly worshipped and can do no wrong - but it is not one law for adults and another for children. It is about time cyclists were also prosecuted for ignoring traffic lights - if they wish to be treated with respect when travelling, they should start to treat the 'laws of the road' with respect.
vor gets my vote again treasure it dosnt happen often
[quote][p][bold]Voice-of-reality[/bold] wrote: And why should children be above the law? I know we live in a culture in which the child is increasingly worshipped and can do no wrong - but it is not one law for adults and another for children. It is about time cyclists were also prosecuted for ignoring traffic lights - if they wish to be treated with respect when travelling, they should start to treat the 'laws of the road' with respect.[/p][/quote]vor gets my vote again treasure it dosnt happen often darloboss
  • Score: -1

7:48am Mon 25 Aug 14

miketually says...

darloboss wrote:
miketually wrote:
Where bad/dangerous road design make it safer to ride on the pavement, I'll continue to ride, sensibly and carefully, on the pavement.
in that case i hope you get done
Why, thank you.
[quote][p][bold]darloboss[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]miketually[/bold] wrote: Where bad/dangerous road design make it safer to ride on the pavement, I'll continue to ride, sensibly and carefully, on the pavement.[/p][/quote]in that case i hope you get done[/p][/quote]Why, thank you. miketually
  • Score: 4

7:50am Mon 25 Aug 14

miketually says...

This consultation seems to be after one comment from one resident. I think I might attend a PACT meeting and suggest a priority. Perhaps people who park their car on the wrong side of the road after dark?
This consultation seems to be after one comment from one resident. I think I might attend a PACT meeting and suggest a priority. Perhaps people who park their car on the wrong side of the road after dark? miketually
  • Score: 2

8:09am Mon 25 Aug 14

darloboss says...

miketually wrote:
This consultation seems to be after one comment from one resident. I think I might attend a PACT meeting and suggest a priority. Perhaps people who park their car on the wrong side of the road after dark?
old law but not illegal if parking lights are on
[quote][p][bold]miketually[/bold] wrote: This consultation seems to be after one comment from one resident. I think I might attend a PACT meeting and suggest a priority. Perhaps people who park their car on the wrong side of the road after dark?[/p][/quote]old law but not illegal if parking lights are on darloboss
  • Score: 4

9:17am Mon 25 Aug 14

Bank of Europe says...

Well If this is what it takes to get Mr Hogg Moving.... A personal request Would he investigate the the inconsiderate people of a certain church not a million miles away from the Police station - Car parking seems to be a free for all Lets see how long this will take you Mr Hogg
Well If this is what it takes to get Mr Hogg Moving.... A personal request Would he investigate the the inconsiderate people of a certain church not a million miles away from the Police station - Car parking seems to be a free for all Lets see how long this will take you Mr Hogg Bank of Europe
  • Score: 7

9:52am Mon 25 Aug 14

jps101 says...

miketually wrote:
darloboss wrote:
miketually wrote:
Where bad/dangerous road design make it safer to ride on the pavement, I'll continue to ride, sensibly and carefully, on the pavement.
in that case i hope you get done
Why, thank you.
The apt words here are "sensibly and carefully" the powers that be seem to think its safe to allow pedestrians and cyclists to share footpaths or there wouldn't be shared use footpaths (they've recently made the one between the White Horse and Newton Aycliffe Shared use which I appreciate - cycling on the road there is very risky)

Unfortunately as I said before there are SOME people who aren't sensible and careful including drivers, but this mentality of generalising everyone as being the same results in comments like "all cyclists are bad and should be hated" stop taring everyone with same brush - Please.
[quote][p][bold]miketually[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]darloboss[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]miketually[/bold] wrote: Where bad/dangerous road design make it safer to ride on the pavement, I'll continue to ride, sensibly and carefully, on the pavement.[/p][/quote]in that case i hope you get done[/p][/quote]Why, thank you.[/p][/quote]The apt words here are "sensibly and carefully" the powers that be seem to think its safe to allow pedestrians and cyclists to share footpaths or there wouldn't be shared use footpaths (they've recently made the one between the White Horse and Newton Aycliffe Shared use which I appreciate - cycling on the road there is very risky) Unfortunately as I said before there are SOME people who aren't sensible and careful including drivers, but this mentality of generalising everyone as being the same results in comments like "all cyclists are bad and should be hated" stop taring everyone with same brush - Please. jps101
  • Score: 5

10:06am Mon 25 Aug 14

miketually says...

darloboss wrote:
miketually wrote:
This consultation seems to be after one comment from one resident. I think I might attend a PACT meeting and suggest a priority. Perhaps people who park their car on the wrong side of the road after dark?
old law but not illegal if parking lights are on
The Highway Code (248) tells me it's still illegal, regardless of parking lights being on or off.

The law used to bar cycles from pavements is older than the motor car, but its implementation was clarified very recently and it is clear that it is not intended to be a blanket ban on all pavement cycling.
[quote][p][bold]darloboss[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]miketually[/bold] wrote: This consultation seems to be after one comment from one resident. I think I might attend a PACT meeting and suggest a priority. Perhaps people who park their car on the wrong side of the road after dark?[/p][/quote]old law but not illegal if parking lights are on[/p][/quote]The Highway Code (248) tells me it's still illegal, regardless of parking lights being on or off. The law used to bar cycles from pavements is older than the motor car, but its implementation was clarified very recently and it is clear that it is not intended to be a blanket ban on all pavement cycling. miketually
  • Score: -2

10:59am Mon 25 Aug 14

Jonn says...

Voice-of-reality wrote:
And why should children be above the law? I know we live in a culture in which the child is increasingly worshipped and can do no wrong - but it is not one law for adults and another for children. It is about time cyclists were also prosecuted for ignoring traffic lights - if they wish to be treated with respect when travelling, they should start to treat the 'laws of the road' with respect.
'Children above the law'?? Adults are responsible for their children, in every walk of life. It's they who should be held to account, unless you want to start fining and jailing children.
[quote][p][bold]Voice-of-reality[/bold] wrote: And why should children be above the law? I know we live in a culture in which the child is increasingly worshipped and can do no wrong - but it is not one law for adults and another for children. It is about time cyclists were also prosecuted for ignoring traffic lights - if they wish to be treated with respect when travelling, they should start to treat the 'laws of the road' with respect.[/p][/quote]'Children above the law'?? Adults are responsible for their children, in every walk of life. It's they who should be held to account, unless you want to start fining and jailing children. Jonn
  • Score: 3

1:15pm Mon 25 Aug 14

LUSTARD says...

darlington is a well known cycling friendly town with many splendid routes linking town and countryside, recently cycling thru york their was no alternative but to dismount and walk due to the absolute sheer volume of happy shoppers and tourists, as currently its a little quieter in darlington i cant see a real problem cycle where the road was before pedestrianisation, however as our council are excellent with a yellow paint pot, why not use a green colour and paint cycle lines through the required areas and those that arent quite with it will have no excuse when they get a ticket,
darlington is a well known cycling friendly town with many splendid routes linking town and countryside, recently cycling thru york their was no alternative but to dismount and walk due to the absolute sheer volume of happy shoppers and tourists, as currently its a little quieter in darlington i cant see a real problem cycle where the road was before pedestrianisation, however as our council are excellent with a yellow paint pot, why not use a green colour and paint cycle lines through the required areas and those that arent quite with it will have no excuse when they get a ticket, LUSTARD
  • Score: 5

2:27pm Mon 25 Aug 14

thetruthyoucanthandlethetruth says...

Cyclists are the scourge of the roads & paths. They want it all ends up and flout the law repeatedly. They are a real pain in the neck.
Cyclists are the scourge of the roads & paths. They want it all ends up and flout the law repeatedly. They are a real pain in the neck. thetruthyoucanthandlethetruth
  • Score: 4

2:45pm Mon 25 Aug 14

darloboss says...

and dont get me on about the ideot who cycles on paths with a very bright cree led light on his hat dazzleing everyone what a berk
and dont get me on about the ideot who cycles on paths with a very bright cree led light on his hat dazzleing everyone what a berk darloboss
  • Score: 5

3:52pm Mon 25 Aug 14

Voice-of-reality says...

I have no problem with fining and jailing chidlren. The killers of Jamie Bulger were children - glad to see, Jonn, that you believe that the parents of the killers should have been punished not those who killed. I would reduce the age of criminal responsibility to 7. A child is quite capable of knowing right from wrong and the consequences of their actions - ask any teenage father.
I have no problem with fining and jailing chidlren. The killers of Jamie Bulger were children - glad to see, Jonn, that you believe that the parents of the killers should have been punished not those who killed. I would reduce the age of criminal responsibility to 7. A child is quite capable of knowing right from wrong and the consequences of their actions - ask any teenage father. Voice-of-reality
  • Score: -9

3:57pm Mon 25 Aug 14

miketually says...

thetruthyoucanthandl
ethetruth
wrote:
Cyclists are the scourge of the roads & paths. They want it all ends up and flout the law repeatedly. They are a real pain in the neck.
Bless :)
[quote][p][bold]thetruthyoucanthandl ethetruth[/bold] wrote: Cyclists are the scourge of the roads & paths. They want it all ends up and flout the law repeatedly. They are a real pain in the neck.[/p][/quote]Bless :) miketually
  • Score: 2

5:01pm Mon 25 Aug 14

Homshaw1 says...

There have been a number of cyclists killed in Darlington in the past year. I have come close to being wiped out by cars on numerous occasions. There is no reason why cyclists can't ride on the pavement if they show consideration to pedestrians.
A blanket ban wouldn't work because there are areas such as the Town Centre and Haughton Rd where pedestrianss and cyclists are expected to mix. So I reckon Mr Hogg should be targeting people who ride without consideration for pedestrians - I have been hit by a 0moron coming around a corner at high speed and without any consideration for pedestrians. Mr Hogg should also be talking to DBC because for the amount of money spent the cycle paths are a disgrace and need improving.
As for somene suggesting a nine year old should ride on the road. Lost for words.


A
There have been a number of cyclists killed in Darlington in the past year. I have come close to being wiped out by cars on numerous occasions. There is no reason why cyclists can't ride on the pavement if they show consideration to pedestrians. A blanket ban wouldn't work because there are areas such as the Town Centre and Haughton Rd where pedestrianss and cyclists are expected to mix. So I reckon Mr Hogg should be targeting people who ride without consideration for pedestrians - I have been hit by a 0moron coming around a corner at high speed and without any consideration for pedestrians. Mr Hogg should also be talking to DBC because for the amount of money spent the cycle paths are a disgrace and need improving. As for somene suggesting a nine year old should ride on the road. Lost for words. A Homshaw1
  • Score: 6

5:07pm Mon 25 Aug 14

onerydoory says...

miketually wrote:
darloboss wrote:
miketually wrote:
Where bad/dangerous road design make it safer to ride on the pavement, I'll continue to ride, sensibly and carefully, on the pavement.
in that case i hope you get done
Why, thank you.
think nothing of it
[quote][p][bold]miketually[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]darloboss[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]miketually[/bold] wrote: Where bad/dangerous road design make it safer to ride on the pavement, I'll continue to ride, sensibly and carefully, on the pavement.[/p][/quote]in that case i hope you get done[/p][/quote]Why, thank you.[/p][/quote]think nothing of it onerydoory
  • Score: 0

5:10pm Mon 25 Aug 14

onerydoory says...

jps101 wrote:
miketually wrote:
darloboss wrote:
miketually wrote:
Where bad/dangerous road design make it safer to ride on the pavement, I'll continue to ride, sensibly and carefully, on the pavement.
in that case i hope you get done
Why, thank you.
The apt words here are "sensibly and carefully" the powers that be seem to think its safe to allow pedestrians and cyclists to share footpaths or there wouldn't be shared use footpaths (they've recently made the one between the White Horse and Newton Aycliffe Shared use which I appreciate - cycling on the road there is very risky)

Unfortunately as I said before there are SOME people who aren't sensible and careful including drivers, but this mentality of generalising everyone as being the same results in comments like "all cyclists are bad and should be hated" stop taring everyone with same brush - Please.
all adult cyclists who ride on footpaths are wrong and should be disliked
[quote][p][bold]jps101[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]miketually[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]darloboss[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]miketually[/bold] wrote: Where bad/dangerous road design make it safer to ride on the pavement, I'll continue to ride, sensibly and carefully, on the pavement.[/p][/quote]in that case i hope you get done[/p][/quote]Why, thank you.[/p][/quote]The apt words here are "sensibly and carefully" the powers that be seem to think its safe to allow pedestrians and cyclists to share footpaths or there wouldn't be shared use footpaths (they've recently made the one between the White Horse and Newton Aycliffe Shared use which I appreciate - cycling on the road there is very risky) Unfortunately as I said before there are SOME people who aren't sensible and careful including drivers, but this mentality of generalising everyone as being the same results in comments like "all cyclists are bad and should be hated" stop taring everyone with same brush - Please.[/p][/quote]all adult cyclists who ride on footpaths are wrong and should be disliked onerydoory
  • Score: 4

5:12pm Mon 25 Aug 14

onerydoory says...

miketually wrote:
darloboss wrote:
miketually wrote:
This consultation seems to be after one comment from one resident. I think I might attend a PACT meeting and suggest a priority. Perhaps people who park their car on the wrong side of the road after dark?
old law but not illegal if parking lights are on
The Highway Code (248) tells me it's still illegal, regardless of parking lights being on or off.

The law used to bar cycles from pavements is older than the motor car, but its implementation was clarified very recently and it is clear that it is not intended to be a blanket ban on all pavement cycling.
where ? where does it say it is not a blanket ban ? quote me where it says this in recent legislation .
[quote][p][bold]miketually[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]darloboss[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]miketually[/bold] wrote: This consultation seems to be after one comment from one resident. I think I might attend a PACT meeting and suggest a priority. Perhaps people who park their car on the wrong side of the road after dark?[/p][/quote]old law but not illegal if parking lights are on[/p][/quote]The Highway Code (248) tells me it's still illegal, regardless of parking lights being on or off. The law used to bar cycles from pavements is older than the motor car, but its implementation was clarified very recently and it is clear that it is not intended to be a blanket ban on all pavement cycling.[/p][/quote]where ? where does it say it is not a blanket ban ? quote me where it says this in recent legislation . onerydoory
  • Score: 1

5:18pm Mon 25 Aug 14

onerydoory says...

Homshaw1 wrote:
There have been a number of cyclists killed in Darlington in the past year. I have come close to being wiped out by cars on numerous occasions. There is no reason why cyclists can't ride on the pavement if they show consideration to pedestrians.
A blanket ban wouldn't work because there are areas such as the Town Centre and Haughton Rd where pedestrianss and cyclists are expected to mix. So I reckon Mr Hogg should be targeting people who ride without consideration for pedestrians - I have been hit by a 0moron coming around a corner at high speed and without any consideration for pedestrians. Mr Hogg should also be talking to DBC because for the amount of money spent the cycle paths are a disgrace and need improving.
As for somene suggesting a nine year old should ride on the road. Lost for words.


A
god i would love to live in your world , the fact that they are on the pavement tells me they are incapable of consideration .
[quote][p][bold]Homshaw1[/bold] wrote: There have been a number of cyclists killed in Darlington in the past year. I have come close to being wiped out by cars on numerous occasions. There is no reason why cyclists can't ride on the pavement if they show consideration to pedestrians. A blanket ban wouldn't work because there are areas such as the Town Centre and Haughton Rd where pedestrianss and cyclists are expected to mix. So I reckon Mr Hogg should be targeting people who ride without consideration for pedestrians - I have been hit by a 0moron coming around a corner at high speed and without any consideration for pedestrians. Mr Hogg should also be talking to DBC because for the amount of money spent the cycle paths are a disgrace and need improving. As for somene suggesting a nine year old should ride on the road. Lost for words. A[/p][/quote]god i would love to live in your world , the fact that they are on the pavement tells me they are incapable of consideration . onerydoory
  • Score: 5

5:49pm Mon 25 Aug 14

miketually says...

onerydoory wrote:
miketually wrote:
darloboss wrote:
miketually wrote:
This consultation seems to be after one comment from one resident. I think I might attend a PACT meeting and suggest a priority. Perhaps people who park their car on the wrong side of the road after dark?
old law but not illegal if parking lights are on
The Highway Code (248) tells me it's still illegal, regardless of parking lights being on or off.

The law used to bar cycles from pavements is older than the motor car, but its implementation was clarified very recently and it is clear that it is not intended to be a blanket ban on all pavement cycling.
where ? where does it say it is not a blanket ban ? quote me where it says this in recent legislation .
The law isn't just legislation, but also case law and guidance.

On 1st August 1999, new legislation came into force to allow a fixed penalty notice to be served on anyone who is guilty of cycling on a footway. However the Home Office issued guidance on how the new legislation should be applied, indicating that they should only be used where a cyclist is riding in a manner that may endanger others. The then Home Office Minister Paul Boateng issued a letter stating that:

“The introduction of the fixed penalty is not aimed at responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of traffic and who show consideration to other pavement users when doing so. Chief police officers, who are responsible for enforcement, acknowledge that many cyclists, particularly children and young people, are afraid to cycle on the road, sensitivity and careful use of police discretion is required.”

Almost identical advice has since been issued by the Home Office with regards the use of fixed penalty notices by ‘Community Support Officers’ and wardens.

“CSOs and accredited persons will be accountable in the same way as police officers. They will be under the direction and control of the chief officer, supervised on a daily basis by the local community beat officer and will be subject to the same police complaints system. The Government have included provision in the Anti Social Behaviour Bill to enable CSOs and accredited persons to stop those cycling irresponsibly on the pavement in order to issue a fixed penalty notice.

I should stress that the issue is about inconsiderate cycling on the pavements. The new provisions are not aimed at responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of the traffic, and who show consideration to other road users when doing so. Chief officers recognise that the fixed penalty needs to be used with a considerable degree of discretion and it cannot be issued to anyone under the age of 16. (Letter to Mr H. Peel from John Crozier of The Home Office, reference T5080/4, 23 February 2004)
[quote][p][bold]onerydoory[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]miketually[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]darloboss[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]miketually[/bold] wrote: This consultation seems to be after one comment from one resident. I think I might attend a PACT meeting and suggest a priority. Perhaps people who park their car on the wrong side of the road after dark?[/p][/quote]old law but not illegal if parking lights are on[/p][/quote]The Highway Code (248) tells me it's still illegal, regardless of parking lights being on or off. The law used to bar cycles from pavements is older than the motor car, but its implementation was clarified very recently and it is clear that it is not intended to be a blanket ban on all pavement cycling.[/p][/quote]where ? where does it say it is not a blanket ban ? quote me where it says this in recent legislation .[/p][/quote]The law isn't just legislation, but also case law and guidance. On 1st August 1999, new legislation came into force to allow a fixed penalty notice to be served on anyone who is guilty of cycling on a footway. However the Home Office issued guidance on how the new legislation should be applied, indicating that they should only be used where a cyclist is riding in a manner that may endanger others. The then Home Office Minister Paul Boateng issued a letter stating that: “The introduction of the fixed penalty is not aimed at responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of traffic and who show consideration to other pavement users when doing so. Chief police officers, who are responsible for enforcement, acknowledge that many cyclists, particularly children and young people, are afraid to cycle on the road, sensitivity and careful use of police discretion is required.” Almost identical advice has since been issued by the Home Office with regards the use of fixed penalty notices by ‘Community Support Officers’ and wardens. “CSOs and accredited persons will be accountable in the same way as police officers. They will be under the direction and control of the chief officer, supervised on a daily basis by the local community beat officer and will be subject to the same police complaints system. The Government have included provision in the Anti Social Behaviour Bill to enable CSOs and accredited persons to stop those cycling irresponsibly on the pavement in order to issue a fixed penalty notice. I should stress that the issue is about inconsiderate cycling on the pavements. The new provisions are not aimed at responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of the traffic, and who show consideration to other road users when doing so. Chief officers recognise that the fixed penalty needs to be used with a considerable degree of discretion and it cannot be issued to anyone under the age of 16. (Letter to Mr H. Peel from John Crozier of The Home Office, reference T5080/4, 23 February 2004) miketually
  • Score: -1

6:09pm Mon 25 Aug 14

hobbles says...

it wouldn't be so bad if all cyclists had a bell fitted to there bikes, and use it but how many have. and yes I am against them using the pavements as a lot don't take in consideration of the elderly or infirm also mothers with kids and pushchairs
it wouldn't be so bad if all cyclists had a bell fitted to there bikes, and use it but how many have. and yes I am against them using the pavements as a lot don't take in consideration of the elderly or infirm also mothers with kids and pushchairs hobbles
  • Score: 3

6:22pm Mon 25 Aug 14

Jonn says...

Voice-of-reality wrote:
I have no problem with fining and jailing chidlren. The killers of Jamie Bulger were children - glad to see, Jonn, that you believe that the parents of the killers should have been punished not those who killed. I would reduce the age of criminal responsibility to 7. A child is quite capable of knowing right from wrong and the consequences of their actions - ask any teenage father.
Now you are just being rather weird. Comparing the Bulger killers with cyclists misdemeanours. What an odd statement to make.
[quote][p][bold]Voice-of-reality[/bold] wrote: I have no problem with fining and jailing chidlren. The killers of Jamie Bulger were children - glad to see, Jonn, that you believe that the parents of the killers should have been punished not those who killed. I would reduce the age of criminal responsibility to 7. A child is quite capable of knowing right from wrong and the consequences of their actions - ask any teenage father.[/p][/quote]Now you are just being rather weird. Comparing the Bulger killers with cyclists misdemeanours. What an odd statement to make. Jonn
  • Score: 6

6:27pm Mon 25 Aug 14

Voice-of-reality says...

No Jonn, you stated, that
'Adults are responsible for their children, in every walk of life. It's they who should be held to account' - by making that comment you were clearly stating that in the event of a child doing wrong it is the parent who should be held responsible. I have taken your comment, applied it to a real life eent, and shown your comment to be ludicrous. Children should be held to account for their actions not their parents. If children can be held accountable for murders they commit, they can be held accountable for all crimes they commit. However, you believe, as per your comment that it is the parent who should be held responsible. Not my fault that you once again failed to think through the wider repercussions of your thoughts.
No Jonn, you stated, that 'Adults are responsible for their children, in every walk of life. It's they who should be held to account' - by making that comment you were clearly stating that in the event of a child doing wrong it is the parent who should be held responsible. I have taken your comment, applied it to a real life eent, and shown your comment to be ludicrous. Children should be held to account for their actions not their parents. If children can be held accountable for murders they commit, they can be held accountable for all crimes they commit. However, you believe, as per your comment that it is the parent who should be held responsible. Not my fault that you once again failed to think through the wider repercussions of your thoughts. Voice-of-reality
  • Score: -1

7:09pm Mon 25 Aug 14

miketually says...

Voice-of-reality wrote:
No Jonn, you stated, that
'Adults are responsible for their children, in every walk of life. It's they who should be held to account' - by making that comment you were clearly stating that in the event of a child doing wrong it is the parent who should be held responsible. I have taken your comment, applied it to a real life eent, and shown your comment to be ludicrous. Children should be held to account for their actions not their parents. If children can be held accountable for murders they commit, they can be held accountable for all crimes they commit. However, you believe, as per your comment that it is the parent who should be held responsible. Not my fault that you once again failed to think through the wider repercussions of your thoughts.
Is a ridiculous comparison, but it doesn't even hold up: I'm pretty sure that Bulger's killers were 11, which means they were over the age of criminal responsibility.
[quote][p][bold]Voice-of-reality[/bold] wrote: No Jonn, you stated, that 'Adults are responsible for their children, in every walk of life. It's they who should be held to account' - by making that comment you were clearly stating that in the event of a child doing wrong it is the parent who should be held responsible. I have taken your comment, applied it to a real life eent, and shown your comment to be ludicrous. Children should be held to account for their actions not their parents. If children can be held accountable for murders they commit, they can be held accountable for all crimes they commit. However, you believe, as per your comment that it is the parent who should be held responsible. Not my fault that you once again failed to think through the wider repercussions of your thoughts.[/p][/quote]Is a ridiculous comparison, but it doesn't even hold up: I'm pretty sure that Bulger's killers were 11, which means they were over the age of criminal responsibility. miketually
  • Score: 3

7:24pm Mon 25 Aug 14

oliviaden6 says...

With all comments taken into consideration i can only say the following the foot way/footpath is for PEDESTRIANS not Bicycles.
With all comments taken into consideration i can only say the following the foot way/footpath is for PEDESTRIANS not Bicycles. oliviaden6
  • Score: 5

8:11pm Mon 25 Aug 14

onerydoory says...

miketually wrote:
onerydoory wrote:
miketually wrote:
darloboss wrote:
miketually wrote:
This consultation seems to be after one comment from one resident. I think I might attend a PACT meeting and suggest a priority. Perhaps people who park their car on the wrong side of the road after dark?
old law but not illegal if parking lights are on
The Highway Code (248) tells me it's still illegal, regardless of parking lights being on or off.

The law used to bar cycles from pavements is older than the motor car, but its implementation was clarified very recently and it is clear that it is not intended to be a blanket ban on all pavement cycling.
where ? where does it say it is not a blanket ban ? quote me where it says this in recent legislation .
The law isn't just legislation, but also case law and guidance.

On 1st August 1999, new legislation came into force to allow a fixed penalty notice to be served on anyone who is guilty of cycling on a footway. However the Home Office issued guidance on how the new legislation should be applied, indicating that they should only be used where a cyclist is riding in a manner that may endanger others. The then Home Office Minister Paul Boateng issued a letter stating that:

“The introduction of the fixed penalty is not aimed at responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of traffic and who show consideration to other pavement users when doing so. Chief police officers, who are responsible for enforcement, acknowledge that many cyclists, particularly children and young people, are afraid to cycle on the road, sensitivity and careful use of police discretion is required.”

Almost identical advice has since been issued by the Home Office with regards the use of fixed penalty notices by ‘Community Support Officers’ and wardens.

“CSOs and accredited persons will be accountable in the same way as police officers. They will be under the direction and control of the chief officer, supervised on a daily basis by the local community beat officer and will be subject to the same police complaints system. The Government have included provision in the Anti Social Behaviour Bill to enable CSOs and accredited persons to stop those cycling irresponsibly on the pavement in order to issue a fixed penalty notice.

I should stress that the issue is about inconsiderate cycling on the pavements. The new provisions are not aimed at responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of the traffic, and who show consideration to other road users when doing so. Chief officers recognise that the fixed penalty needs to be used with a considerable degree of discretion and it cannot be issued to anyone under the age of 16. (Letter to Mr H. Peel from John Crozier of The Home Office, reference T5080/4, 23 February 2004)
how many fixed penalty notices have been issued ? eh , none . quoting the labour government of 97/2010 shows what a shilly shallying lot they were . if you are over 16 you will not ride on the pavement .

frightened of traffic for god sake give me a break .
[quote][p][bold]miketually[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]onerydoory[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]miketually[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]darloboss[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]miketually[/bold] wrote: This consultation seems to be after one comment from one resident. I think I might attend a PACT meeting and suggest a priority. Perhaps people who park their car on the wrong side of the road after dark?[/p][/quote]old law but not illegal if parking lights are on[/p][/quote]The Highway Code (248) tells me it's still illegal, regardless of parking lights being on or off. The law used to bar cycles from pavements is older than the motor car, but its implementation was clarified very recently and it is clear that it is not intended to be a blanket ban on all pavement cycling.[/p][/quote]where ? where does it say it is not a blanket ban ? quote me where it says this in recent legislation .[/p][/quote]The law isn't just legislation, but also case law and guidance. On 1st August 1999, new legislation came into force to allow a fixed penalty notice to be served on anyone who is guilty of cycling on a footway. However the Home Office issued guidance on how the new legislation should be applied, indicating that they should only be used where a cyclist is riding in a manner that may endanger others. The then Home Office Minister Paul Boateng issued a letter stating that: “The introduction of the fixed penalty is not aimed at responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of traffic and who show consideration to other pavement users when doing so. Chief police officers, who are responsible for enforcement, acknowledge that many cyclists, particularly children and young people, are afraid to cycle on the road, sensitivity and careful use of police discretion is required.” Almost identical advice has since been issued by the Home Office with regards the use of fixed penalty notices by ‘Community Support Officers’ and wardens. “CSOs and accredited persons will be accountable in the same way as police officers. They will be under the direction and control of the chief officer, supervised on a daily basis by the local community beat officer and will be subject to the same police complaints system. The Government have included provision in the Anti Social Behaviour Bill to enable CSOs and accredited persons to stop those cycling irresponsibly on the pavement in order to issue a fixed penalty notice. I should stress that the issue is about inconsiderate cycling on the pavements. The new provisions are not aimed at responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of the traffic, and who show consideration to other road users when doing so. Chief officers recognise that the fixed penalty needs to be used with a considerable degree of discretion and it cannot be issued to anyone under the age of 16. (Letter to Mr H. Peel from John Crozier of The Home Office, reference T5080/4, 23 February 2004)[/p][/quote]how many fixed penalty notices have been issued ? eh , none . quoting the labour government of 97/2010 shows what a shilly shallying lot they were . if you are over 16 you will not ride on the pavement . frightened of traffic for god sake give me a break . onerydoory
  • Score: 4

8:30pm Mon 25 Aug 14

MSG says...

Just make sure you sue a cyclist if they clip you on the pavement. this will force them onto their roads !
Just make sure you sue a cyclist if they clip you on the pavement. this will force them onto their roads ! MSG
  • Score: 3

10:11pm Mon 25 Aug 14

Homshaw1 says...

onerydoory wrote:
Homshaw1 wrote:
There have been a number of cyclists killed in Darlington in the past year. I have come close to being wiped out by cars on numerous occasions. There is no reason why cyclists can't ride on the pavement if they show consideration to pedestrians.
A blanket ban wouldn't work because there are areas such as the Town Centre and Haughton Rd where pedestrianss and cyclists are expected to mix. So I reckon Mr Hogg should be targeting people who ride without consideration for pedestrians - I have been hit by a 0moron coming around a corner at high speed and without any consideration for pedestrians. Mr Hogg should also be talking to DBC because for the amount of money spent the cycle paths are a disgrace and need improving.
As for somene suggesting a nine year old should ride on the road. Lost for words.


A
god i would love to live in your world , the fact that they are on the pavement tells me they are incapable of consideration .
It must be sad to be so miserable that you are happy to see adults and children killed and injured when there is no need for it to happen.

My bike is as controllable as a person walking. If it is busy I dismount. I have never come close to hitting anyone.

If you ride up Haughton Rd pedestrians block the cycle lane, What am I supposed to do? Use the path or shout at them to move? Are the police going to arrest them for jaywalking? You are allowed to ride your bike in the town centre which is the busiest part of town. Are cyclists being inconsideration even through they are riding where they are allowed?

I cycle, drive, walk and use the bus. There are dangerous drivers, idiotic cyclists and inconsiderate pedestrians. These are the ones the police need to deal with not someone riding slowly and safely doing no harm to anyone.

Before Mr Hogg starts demonising cyclists he needs to dress in plain clothes and ride around Darlington for a day. He will find 1)If he goes on the road he is taking his life in his hands and 2)if you ride properly you can ride on the pavement and not inconvenience anyone
[quote][p][bold]onerydoory[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Homshaw1[/bold] wrote: There have been a number of cyclists killed in Darlington in the past year. I have come close to being wiped out by cars on numerous occasions. There is no reason why cyclists can't ride on the pavement if they show consideration to pedestrians. A blanket ban wouldn't work because there are areas such as the Town Centre and Haughton Rd where pedestrianss and cyclists are expected to mix. So I reckon Mr Hogg should be targeting people who ride without consideration for pedestrians - I have been hit by a 0moron coming around a corner at high speed and without any consideration for pedestrians. Mr Hogg should also be talking to DBC because for the amount of money spent the cycle paths are a disgrace and need improving. As for somene suggesting a nine year old should ride on the road. Lost for words. A[/p][/quote]god i would love to live in your world , the fact that they are on the pavement tells me they are incapable of consideration .[/p][/quote]It must be sad to be so miserable that you are happy to see adults and children killed and injured when there is no need for it to happen. My bike is as controllable as a person walking. If it is busy I dismount. I have never come close to hitting anyone. If you ride up Haughton Rd pedestrians block the cycle lane, What am I supposed to do? Use the path or shout at them to move? Are the police going to arrest them for jaywalking? You are allowed to ride your bike in the town centre which is the busiest part of town. Are cyclists being inconsideration even through they are riding where they are allowed? I cycle, drive, walk and use the bus. There are dangerous drivers, idiotic cyclists and inconsiderate pedestrians. These are the ones the police need to deal with not someone riding slowly and safely doing no harm to anyone. Before Mr Hogg starts demonising cyclists he needs to dress in plain clothes and ride around Darlington for a day. He will find 1)If he goes on the road he is taking his life in his hands and 2)if you ride properly you can ride on the pavement and not inconvenience anyone Homshaw1
  • Score: 1

10:31pm Mon 25 Aug 14

Homshaw1 says...

So from what I'm reading above Mr Hogg is planning on following a policy contrary to Home Office guidelines which are just plain common sense.
So from what I'm reading above Mr Hogg is planning on following a policy contrary to Home Office guidelines which are just plain common sense. Homshaw1
  • Score: 1

6:44am Tue 26 Aug 14

darloboss says...

MSG wrote:
Just make sure you sue a cyclist if they clip you on the pavement. this will force them onto their roads !
this is also my advice and as bicycles are vehicles i would also force them into having at least third party insurance and for their bikes to have an annual inspection to ensure they are maintained
[quote][p][bold]MSG[/bold] wrote: Just make sure you sue a cyclist if they clip you on the pavement. this will force them onto their roads ![/p][/quote]this is also my advice and as bicycles are vehicles i would also force them into having at least third party insurance and for their bikes to have an annual inspection to ensure they are maintained darloboss
  • Score: 0

7:27am Tue 26 Aug 14

Homshaw1 says...

darloboss wrote:
MSG wrote:
Just make sure you sue a cyclist if they clip you on the pavement. this will force them onto their roads !
this is also my advice and as bicycles are vehicles i would also force them into having at least third party insurance and for their bikes to have an annual inspection to ensure they are maintained
Having read the above I would think there is little chance of Mr Hogg going against Home Office guidelines as he would be unsure of a successful prosecution.
Complusary bike MOTs and insurance are even less likely.
Police should prosecute inconsiderate cyclists for "careless riding of a pedal cycle" but from what I've seen with people damaging property and dangerous motorists it won't happen.
[quote][p][bold]darloboss[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MSG[/bold] wrote: Just make sure you sue a cyclist if they clip you on the pavement. this will force them onto their roads ![/p][/quote]this is also my advice and as bicycles are vehicles i would also force them into having at least third party insurance and for their bikes to have an annual inspection to ensure they are maintained[/p][/quote]Having read the above I would think there is little chance of Mr Hogg going against Home Office guidelines as he would be unsure of a successful prosecution. Complusary bike MOTs and insurance are even less likely. Police should prosecute inconsiderate cyclists for "careless riding of a pedal cycle" but from what I've seen with people damaging property and dangerous motorists it won't happen. Homshaw1
  • Score: 3

10:26am Tue 26 Aug 14

LUSTARD says...

hobbles wrote:
it wouldn't be so bad if all cyclists had a bell fitted to there bikes, and use it but how many have. and yes I am against them using the pavements as a lot don't take in consideration of the elderly or infirm also mothers with kids and pushchairs
funny thing bells on bikes, rarity, naturally mine has one, and the look on peoples faces when you use it it is one of complete surprise, sometimes anger, funny world
[quote][p][bold]hobbles[/bold] wrote: it wouldn't be so bad if all cyclists had a bell fitted to there bikes, and use it but how many have. and yes I am against them using the pavements as a lot don't take in consideration of the elderly or infirm also mothers with kids and pushchairs[/p][/quote]funny thing bells on bikes, rarity, naturally mine has one, and the look on peoples faces when you use it it is one of complete surprise, sometimes anger, funny world LUSTARD
  • Score: 3

10:37am Tue 26 Aug 14

LUSTARD says...

Homshaw1 wrote:
onerydoory wrote:
Homshaw1 wrote:
There have been a number of cyclists killed in Darlington in the past year. I have come close to being wiped out by cars on numerous occasions. There is no reason why cyclists can't ride on the pavement if they show consideration to pedestrians.
A blanket ban wouldn't work because there are areas such as the Town Centre and Haughton Rd where pedestrianss and cyclists are expected to mix. So I reckon Mr Hogg should be targeting people who ride without consideration for pedestrians - I have been hit by a 0moron coming around a corner at high speed and without any consideration for pedestrians. Mr Hogg should also be talking to DBC because for the amount of money spent the cycle paths are a disgrace and need improving.
As for somene suggesting a nine year old should ride on the road. Lost for words.


A
god i would love to live in your world , the fact that they are on the pavement tells me they are incapable of consideration .
It must be sad to be so miserable that you are happy to see adults and children killed and injured when there is no need for it to happen.

My bike is as controllable as a person walking. If it is busy I dismount. I have never come close to hitting anyone.

If you ride up Haughton Rd pedestrians block the cycle lane, What am I supposed to do? Use the path or shout at them to move? Are the police going to arrest them for jaywalking? You are allowed to ride your bike in the town centre which is the busiest part of town. Are cyclists being inconsideration even through they are riding where they are allowed?

I cycle, drive, walk and use the bus. There are dangerous drivers, idiotic cyclists and inconsiderate pedestrians. These are the ones the police need to deal with not someone riding slowly and safely doing no harm to anyone.

Before Mr Hogg starts demonising cyclists he needs to dress in plain clothes and ride around Darlington for a day. He will find 1)If he goes on the road he is taking his life in his hands and 2)if you ride properly you can ride on the pavement and not inconvenience anyone
very well put
[quote][p][bold]Homshaw1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]onerydoory[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Homshaw1[/bold] wrote: There have been a number of cyclists killed in Darlington in the past year. I have come close to being wiped out by cars on numerous occasions. There is no reason why cyclists can't ride on the pavement if they show consideration to pedestrians. A blanket ban wouldn't work because there are areas such as the Town Centre and Haughton Rd where pedestrianss and cyclists are expected to mix. So I reckon Mr Hogg should be targeting people who ride without consideration for pedestrians - I have been hit by a 0moron coming around a corner at high speed and without any consideration for pedestrians. Mr Hogg should also be talking to DBC because for the amount of money spent the cycle paths are a disgrace and need improving. As for somene suggesting a nine year old should ride on the road. Lost for words. A[/p][/quote]god i would love to live in your world , the fact that they are on the pavement tells me they are incapable of consideration .[/p][/quote]It must be sad to be so miserable that you are happy to see adults and children killed and injured when there is no need for it to happen. My bike is as controllable as a person walking. If it is busy I dismount. I have never come close to hitting anyone. If you ride up Haughton Rd pedestrians block the cycle lane, What am I supposed to do? Use the path or shout at them to move? Are the police going to arrest them for jaywalking? You are allowed to ride your bike in the town centre which is the busiest part of town. Are cyclists being inconsideration even through they are riding where they are allowed? I cycle, drive, walk and use the bus. There are dangerous drivers, idiotic cyclists and inconsiderate pedestrians. These are the ones the police need to deal with not someone riding slowly and safely doing no harm to anyone. Before Mr Hogg starts demonising cyclists he needs to dress in plain clothes and ride around Darlington for a day. He will find 1)If he goes on the road he is taking his life in his hands and 2)if you ride properly you can ride on the pavement and not inconvenience anyone[/p][/quote]very well put LUSTARD
  • Score: 0

1:27pm Tue 26 Aug 14

darloboss says...

funny how many cyclists on here comment on soft sentencing past out by magistrates and judges and yet they by cycling on footpaths think that they can break the law and get away with it. Mr Hogg no more soft options catch them and bring them to court for propper sentencing . only this morning a disabled persons car was parked correctly displaying his / her blue badge outside of taylors butchers on skinnergate when two morons on their bikes decided they wanted a pie so parked their bikes on the pavement ajacent the car totally blocking the path forcing people to walk out into the road what kn*bheads
funny how many cyclists on here comment on soft sentencing past out by magistrates and judges and yet they by cycling on footpaths think that they can break the law and get away with it. Mr Hogg no more soft options catch them and bring them to court for propper sentencing . only this morning a disabled persons car was parked correctly displaying his / her blue badge outside of taylors butchers on skinnergate when two morons on their bikes decided they wanted a pie so parked their bikes on the pavement ajacent the car totally blocking the path forcing people to walk out into the road what kn*bheads darloboss
  • Score: 2

2:53pm Tue 26 Aug 14

miketually says...

darloboss wrote:
funny how many cyclists on here comment on soft sentencing past out by magistrates and judges and yet they by cycling on footpaths think that they can break the law and get away with it. Mr Hogg no more soft options catch them and bring them to court for propper sentencing . only this morning a disabled persons car was parked correctly displaying his / her blue badge outside of taylors butchers on skinnergate when two morons on their bikes decided they wanted a pie so parked their bikes on the pavement ajacent the car totally blocking the path forcing people to walk out into the road what kn*bheads
You hardly ever see cars parked blocking the pavement, so this must just be a problem specific to cyclists. Oh no, wait a minute...
[quote][p][bold]darloboss[/bold] wrote: funny how many cyclists on here comment on soft sentencing past out by magistrates and judges and yet they by cycling on footpaths think that they can break the law and get away with it. Mr Hogg no more soft options catch them and bring them to court for propper sentencing . only this morning a disabled persons car was parked correctly displaying his / her blue badge outside of taylors butchers on skinnergate when two morons on their bikes decided they wanted a pie so parked their bikes on the pavement ajacent the car totally blocking the path forcing people to walk out into the road what kn*bheads[/p][/quote]You hardly ever see cars parked blocking the pavement, so this must just be a problem specific to cyclists. Oh no, wait a minute... miketually
  • Score: -4

3:15pm Tue 26 Aug 14

Homshaw1 says...

Car and bikes parked on the pavement causing an obstruction should be dealt with. No problem. I have even been in Taylors when someone bought a bike into the shop. Totally unacceptable.

Cyclist can ride amongst pedestrians on High Row but there is a presumption they do so with due consideration. So if you can ride on the busiest street in Darlington why is it not possible to ride where it is dangerous on the road again with due care and consideration.

The rules outlined by the Home Office are eminently sensible.. They clarify the government's position on the riding of bikes on the pavement. I am all in favour of them.

If we are talking inconsistency. Surely advocating giving drugs to addicts and not prosecuting shoplifters but prosecuting someone who rides with care and consideration, albeit on a pavement, in an attempt to prevent death and injury is an ultimate inconsistency.
Car and bikes parked on the pavement causing an obstruction should be dealt with. No problem. I have even been in Taylors when someone bought a bike into the shop. Totally unacceptable. Cyclist can ride amongst pedestrians on High Row but there is a presumption they do so with due consideration. So if you can ride on the busiest street in Darlington why is it not possible to ride where it is dangerous on the road again with due care and consideration. The rules outlined by the Home Office are eminently sensible.. They clarify the government's position on the riding of bikes on the pavement. I am all in favour of them. If we are talking inconsistency. Surely advocating giving drugs to addicts and not prosecuting shoplifters but prosecuting someone who rides with care and consideration, albeit on a pavement, in an attempt to prevent death and injury is an ultimate inconsistency. Homshaw1
  • Score: 0

3:29pm Tue 26 Aug 14

Homshaw1 says...

To be fair the total extent of my riding on the footpath is to freewheel down the subway with my right foot on the left pedal and I brake and hop off and walk if I see anyone coming.

I think children should be allowed to ride bikes but really don't want to see anyone hurt. If I had a child I'd rather pay a fine than have them killed.

I think DBC come out of this too lightly. The cycle paths are OK in some places but you get cycle lanes blocked by cars and daft markings that disappear as soon as they appear and can't be seen in the dark. For the money spent they 're not good enough
To be fair the total extent of my riding on the footpath is to freewheel down the subway with my right foot on the left pedal and I brake and hop off and walk if I see anyone coming. I think children should be allowed to ride bikes but really don't want to see anyone hurt. If I had a child I'd rather pay a fine than have them killed. I think DBC come out of this too lightly. The cycle paths are OK in some places but you get cycle lanes blocked by cars and daft markings that disappear as soon as they appear and can't be seen in the dark. For the money spent they 're not good enough Homshaw1
  • Score: 3

5:58pm Tue 26 Aug 14

Madadrian says...

Homshaw1 wrote:
To be fair the total extent of my riding on the footpath is to freewheel down the subway with my right foot on the left pedal and I brake and hop off and walk if I see anyone coming.

I think children should be allowed to ride bikes but really don't want to see anyone hurt. If I had a child I'd rather pay a fine than have them killed.

I think DBC come out of this too lightly. The cycle paths are OK in some places but you get cycle lanes blocked by cars and daft markings that disappear as soon as they appear and can't be seen in the dark. For the money spent they 're not good enough
Have you ever thought of just getting off your bike and pushing it instead of yobbishly riding it down the subway path?
[quote][p][bold]Homshaw1[/bold] wrote: To be fair the total extent of my riding on the footpath is to freewheel down the subway with my right foot on the left pedal and I brake and hop off and walk if I see anyone coming. I think children should be allowed to ride bikes but really don't want to see anyone hurt. If I had a child I'd rather pay a fine than have them killed. I think DBC come out of this too lightly. The cycle paths are OK in some places but you get cycle lanes blocked by cars and daft markings that disappear as soon as they appear and can't be seen in the dark. For the money spent they 're not good enough[/p][/quote]Have you ever thought of just getting off your bike and pushing it instead of yobbishly riding it down the subway path? Madadrian
  • Score: 1

9:17pm Tue 26 Aug 14

Homshaw1 says...

The bicycle is been ridden with every consideration for other people. I have never inconvenienced anyone. I would not be prosecuted if Home office guidelines were followed. A few yards away I could ride my bike amongst pedestrians perfectly legally. Only a miserable self-righteous person could describe my behaviour as yobbish I would use the roundabout but time after time some moron overtakes me on the outside as I leave the roundabout and move to the inside lane of the dual carriway.. Never any police to be seen.
They seem to be after easy targets. If I get fined the case will be defended and Mr Hogg will have a fight on his hands. I read you early post about been told to ride your bike on the road 60 years ago but there were few cars on the road and we are talking a different situation.
The bicycle is been ridden with every consideration for other people. I have never inconvenienced anyone. I would not be prosecuted if Home office guidelines were followed. A few yards away I could ride my bike amongst pedestrians perfectly legally. Only a miserable self-righteous person could describe my behaviour as yobbish I would use the roundabout but time after time some moron overtakes me on the outside as I leave the roundabout and move to the inside lane of the dual carriway.. Never any police to be seen. They seem to be after easy targets. If I get fined the case will be defended and Mr Hogg will have a fight on his hands. I read you early post about been told to ride your bike on the road 60 years ago but there were few cars on the road and we are talking a different situation. Homshaw1
  • Score: -4

8:13am Wed 27 Aug 14

Madadrian says...

Homshaw1 wrote:
The bicycle is been ridden with every consideration for other people. I have never inconvenienced anyone. I would not be prosecuted if Home office guidelines were followed. A few yards away I could ride my bike amongst pedestrians perfectly legally. Only a miserable self-righteous person could describe my behaviour as yobbish I would use the roundabout but time after time some moron overtakes me on the outside as I leave the roundabout and move to the inside lane of the dual carriway.. Never any police to be seen.
They seem to be after easy targets. If I get fined the case will be defended and Mr Hogg will have a fight on his hands. I read you early post about been told to ride your bike on the road 60 years ago but there were few cars on the road and we are talking a different situation.
If you are too scared to use the road you should get off and push your bike on the footpath. Riding it in any manner is a criminal offence. It is easy to see the criominal element in Darlington defending their actions. They wil be mugging babies next.
[quote][p][bold]Homshaw1[/bold] wrote: The bicycle is been ridden with every consideration for other people. I have never inconvenienced anyone. I would not be prosecuted if Home office guidelines were followed. A few yards away I could ride my bike amongst pedestrians perfectly legally. Only a miserable self-righteous person could describe my behaviour as yobbish I would use the roundabout but time after time some moron overtakes me on the outside as I leave the roundabout and move to the inside lane of the dual carriway.. Never any police to be seen. They seem to be after easy targets. If I get fined the case will be defended and Mr Hogg will have a fight on his hands. I read you early post about been told to ride your bike on the road 60 years ago but there were few cars on the road and we are talking a different situation.[/p][/quote]If you are too scared to use the road you should get off and push your bike on the footpath. Riding it in any manner is a criminal offence. It is easy to see the criominal element in Darlington defending their actions. They wil be mugging babies next. Madadrian
  • Score: 3

9:20am Wed 27 Aug 14

miketually says...

Madadrian wrote:
Homshaw1 wrote:
The bicycle is been ridden with every consideration for other people. I have never inconvenienced anyone. I would not be prosecuted if Home office guidelines were followed. A few yards away I could ride my bike amongst pedestrians perfectly legally. Only a miserable self-righteous person could describe my behaviour as yobbish I would use the roundabout but time after time some moron overtakes me on the outside as I leave the roundabout and move to the inside lane of the dual carriway.. Never any police to be seen.
They seem to be after easy targets. If I get fined the case will be defended and Mr Hogg will have a fight on his hands. I read you early post about been told to ride your bike on the road 60 years ago but there were few cars on the road and we are talking a different situation.
If you are too scared to use the road you should get off and push your bike on the footpath. Riding it in any manner is a criminal offence. It is easy to see the criominal element in Darlington defending their actions. They wil be mugging babies next.
Except, as noted above, riding sensibly on the pavement isn't considered a criminal matter by those making the law.

The pavement I regularly ride on is the one on the bridge over the railway line, on Haughton Road. I only ride on the pavement when heading away from the town centre, as there is no safe means of crossing the road when the bike path abruptly ends.

I've ridden here 200+ times a year for about the last ten years with zero incidents with pedestrians. I've tried both walking and riding, and it is far easier and safer for me to ride, as the pavement is very narrow and I'm wider when standing by my bike than when sitting on it.

Heading into town, I use the road to cross the bridge and it is one of the points where I experience the most dangerous overtakes.
[quote][p][bold]Madadrian[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Homshaw1[/bold] wrote: The bicycle is been ridden with every consideration for other people. I have never inconvenienced anyone. I would not be prosecuted if Home office guidelines were followed. A few yards away I could ride my bike amongst pedestrians perfectly legally. Only a miserable self-righteous person could describe my behaviour as yobbish I would use the roundabout but time after time some moron overtakes me on the outside as I leave the roundabout and move to the inside lane of the dual carriway.. Never any police to be seen. They seem to be after easy targets. If I get fined the case will be defended and Mr Hogg will have a fight on his hands. I read you early post about been told to ride your bike on the road 60 years ago but there were few cars on the road and we are talking a different situation.[/p][/quote]If you are too scared to use the road you should get off and push your bike on the footpath. Riding it in any manner is a criminal offence. It is easy to see the criominal element in Darlington defending their actions. They wil be mugging babies next.[/p][/quote]Except, as noted above, riding sensibly on the pavement isn't considered a criminal matter by those making the law. The pavement I regularly ride on is the one on the bridge over the railway line, on Haughton Road. I only ride on the pavement when heading away from the town centre, as there is no safe means of crossing the road when the bike path abruptly ends. I've ridden here 200+ times a year for about the last ten years with zero incidents with pedestrians. I've tried both walking and riding, and it is far easier and safer for me to ride, as the pavement is very narrow and I'm wider when standing by my bike than when sitting on it. Heading into town, I use the road to cross the bridge and it is one of the points where I experience the most dangerous overtakes. miketually
  • Score: -1

2:04pm Wed 27 Aug 14

jps101 says...

I walked along Yarm Rd today (Wed) of the 2 Cyclists I saw both were on the footpath.
1 a Man was travelling on the south side away from the town no other pedestrians and he was barely going faster than walking speed.
2 was a youth 13-14 I guess flew past me from behind and disappeared around a corner, he didn't particularly make me jump or make contact at all, but I could see how some would be shocked and offended by it.

Going by some of the commentators on here because of the second incident all cyclists are bad and are to hated, even though we all know youths are a law to themselves and like it or not, theres no law that stops anyone including them owning and riding a bike in any fashion they please.

so again stop saying cyclists in your complaints when you mean SOME cyclists!
I walked along Yarm Rd today (Wed) of the 2 Cyclists I saw both were on the footpath. 1 a Man was travelling on the south side away from the town no other pedestrians and he was barely going faster than walking speed. 2 was a youth 13-14 I guess flew past me from behind and disappeared around a corner, he didn't particularly make me jump or make contact at all, but I could see how some would be shocked and offended by it. Going by some of the commentators on here because of the second incident all cyclists are bad and are to hated, even though we all know youths are a law to themselves and like it or not, theres no law that stops anyone including them owning and riding a bike in any fashion they please. so again stop saying cyclists in your complaints when you mean SOME cyclists! jps101
  • Score: 1

7:45pm Wed 27 Aug 14

Mikedriz says...

Its funny that people are saying that if cyclists are cionsiderate they should be allowed on the pavements. Surekly its their lack of consideration that allows themselves to ride on the pavement in the first place. I have lost count of the number of times I have been walking up Neasham Road and have been told to get out of the way by adults on bikes sometimes 3 abreast. II hope that if there ever is a serious accident the police will have the bottle to prosecute the rider. Ron Hogg has stated that he needs to consult, does he go around with a blindfold on?
Its funny that people are saying that if cyclists are cionsiderate they should be allowed on the pavements. Surekly its their lack of consideration that allows themselves to ride on the pavement in the first place. I have lost count of the number of times I have been walking up Neasham Road and have been told to get out of the way by adults on bikes sometimes 3 abreast. II hope that if there ever is a serious accident the police will have the bottle to prosecute the rider. Ron Hogg has stated that he needs to consult, does he go around with a blindfold on? Mikedriz
  • Score: 0

7:58pm Wed 27 Aug 14

spragger says...

You could not make it up .
Approaching 3000 people killed a year by vehicles & the Labour PCC will focus on cycles
Is he for real!
You could not make it up . Approaching 3000 people killed a year by vehicles & the Labour PCC will focus on cycles Is he for real! spragger
  • Score: 2

9:49am Fri 29 Aug 14

johnny_p says...

Absolutely spragger- I will be interested to see The Echo reporting when "Pedestrian Killed by Pavement Riding Cyclist", but I suspect we'll have to wait an awfully long time.

Can anyone explain to me what Ron Hogg actually does all day apart from hanging around town centres chatting to shoppers about things which bother him?

I'd like to invite him to get his own bike out of the shed and join me for a morning ride around the town to see if he changes his mind. Could The Echo arrange this? I'm sure he would change his mind.
Absolutely spragger- I will be interested to see The Echo reporting when "Pedestrian Killed by Pavement Riding Cyclist", but I suspect we'll have to wait an awfully long time. Can anyone explain to me what Ron Hogg actually does all day apart from hanging around town centres chatting to shoppers about things which bother him? I'd like to invite him to get his own bike out of the shed and join me for a morning ride around the town to see if he changes his mind. Could The Echo arrange this? I'm sure he would change his mind. johnny_p
  • Score: 1

11:19am Fri 29 Aug 14

kitten41 says...

I am a cyclist who at times cycles on the pavement, carefully, giving consideration to pedestrians. Unlike the elderly man who flew round the corner of the dolphin centre as i was walking last night, nearly wiping me out! No he wasn't a chav! In the same way that it isn't always 'chavs' who show no consideration, cyclists shouldn't all be tarred with the same brush either!
I am a cyclist who at times cycles on the pavement, carefully, giving consideration to pedestrians. Unlike the elderly man who flew round the corner of the dolphin centre as i was walking last night, nearly wiping me out! No he wasn't a chav! In the same way that it isn't always 'chavs' who show no consideration, cyclists shouldn't all be tarred with the same brush either! kitten41
  • Score: 0

12:27pm Fri 29 Aug 14

David Lacey says...

http://www.dailymail
.co.uk/news/article-
2534697/Cyclist-jail
ed-knocking-girl-nin
e-went-red-light-ped
estrian-crossing-lea
ving-head-injuries.h
tml
.
http://www.mirror.co
.uk/news/uk-news/lew
is-gill-killed-andre
w-young-3181527
.
Cyclists injured 21 pedestrians per billion km travelled in 2012 compared with 24 pedestrians injured by drivers.

Read more: http://www.theweek.c
o.uk/uk-news/57065/c
yclists-almost-likel
y-injure-pedestrians
-cars#ixzz3BmOG4hJq
http://www.dailymail .co.uk/news/article- 2534697/Cyclist-jail ed-knocking-girl-nin e-went-red-light-ped estrian-crossing-lea ving-head-injuries.h tml . http://www.mirror.co .uk/news/uk-news/lew is-gill-killed-andre w-young-3181527 . Cyclists injured 21 pedestrians per billion km travelled in 2012 compared with 24 pedestrians injured by drivers. Read more: http://www.theweek.c o.uk/uk-news/57065/c yclists-almost-likel y-injure-pedestrians -cars#ixzz3BmOG4hJq David Lacey
  • Score: 0

1:21pm Fri 29 Aug 14

miketually says...

Two quotes from the last article linked above:

"Only about 20 pedestrians are "seriously injured" each year by riders taking to the pavement. Most collisions occur "when pedestrians step out into the road without seeing or hearing a cyclist", The Times says."

"One pedestrian was killed by a cyclist and 78 were seriously injured in 2012. At the same time, 253 pedestrians were killed by drivers in urban areas and 4,426 were seriously injured."

And, from the Times article on which that article is based: "Just 2 per cent of pedestrian injuries on pavements involve cyclists, the other 98 per cent involve motor vehicles."

(And if we're going to count the Mirror link, we surely have to include all deaths where drivers get out of their car and punch somebody?)
Two quotes from the last article linked above: "Only about 20 pedestrians are "seriously injured" each year by riders taking to the pavement. Most collisions occur "when pedestrians step out into the road without seeing or hearing a cyclist", The Times says." "One pedestrian was killed by a cyclist and 78 were seriously injured in 2012. At the same time, 253 pedestrians were killed by drivers in urban areas and 4,426 were seriously injured." And, from the Times article on which that article is based: "Just 2 per cent of pedestrian injuries on pavements involve cyclists, the other 98 per cent involve motor vehicles." (And if we're going to count the Mirror link, we surely have to include all deaths where drivers get out of their car and punch somebody?) miketually
  • Score: 0

1:36pm Fri 29 Aug 14

miketually says...

I wonder if the stats for 'per billion kilometres' risks exclude motorway miles, where it is pretty difficult to injure a pedestrian? 20% of miles driven are on motorways which would mean cyclists injured 21 pedestrians per billion km travelled in 2012 compared with 30 pedestrians injured by drivers.

So, drivers on non-motorway roads are 50% more likely to seriously injure a pedestrian than a cyclist is.
I wonder if the stats for 'per billion kilometres' risks exclude motorway miles, where it is pretty difficult to injure a pedestrian? 20% of miles driven are on motorways which would mean cyclists injured 21 pedestrians per billion km travelled in 2012 compared with 30 pedestrians injured by drivers. So, drivers on non-motorway roads are 50% more likely to seriously injure a pedestrian than a cyclist is. miketually
  • Score: 2

1:29am Sat 30 Aug 14

JJTOP2 says...

Real news story this one. The Northern Echo strikes again.
Real news story this one. The Northern Echo strikes again. JJTOP2
  • Score: 1

6:15am Sat 30 Aug 14

johnny_p says...

JJTOP2- The Echo hates cyclists. It has been running the "menace" of cyclists on pavements story for an awfully long time now. It also has an adoration of (Labour) PCC Ron Hogg and is quick to report everything he does regardless of how trivial or pointless it is.
JJTOP2- The Echo hates cyclists. It has been running the "menace" of cyclists on pavements story for an awfully long time now. It also has an adoration of (Labour) PCC Ron Hogg and is quick to report everything he does regardless of how trivial or pointless it is. johnny_p
  • Score: 1

7:41am Sat 30 Aug 14

darloboss says...

news for you johnny_p its not just the echo
news for you johnny_p its not just the echo darloboss
  • Score: -2

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

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