Bike bells..

[Kanda]

I'm interested that the latest safety TV advert featuries a load of kids pratting about with their mobiles and then one of them seeming to walk straight into the path of a car.

At long last - a message that recognises that the vast majority of pedestrian accidents are caused by - PEDESTRIANS.

That advert is pretty much what it's like cycling through London yet it's cyclists that are the bad ones... are they bollocks. If pedestrians are gonna throw the Highway Code at Cyclists I suggest they read it and act accordingly themselves.

 

[pogofish]

In my experience most people are completely oblivious to the sound of a puny little ting ting ting.

Get a bell with a better ring then. Even I've managed to find a couple.

 

[Termite Man]

I read that article this morning and to be honest my ride to work is fairly pedestrian free since it's quite early but in a week there have been more instances of pedestrians walking in front of me and almost getting hit , the worst case I was ringing my bell because I could see the bloke was about to walk in front of me and he ignored me . I believe cyclists should be aware of other people and not ignore lights and pedestrian crossings , which is something I do , but the responisbility for being safe on the road should ultimatly be down to making sure you are safe and this goes for pedestrians - before you walk into the road , look . Make sure it's safe to cross even if there is a pedestrian crossing or "green man" and you'll be afe . It's doesn't take much effort but if you want cyclists to look out for you then you should look out for cyclists !

 

[gentlegreen]

16K MIDI

 

[pogofish]

But don't let any of that get in the way of your idiotic prejudice against cyclists will you

The idiocy is your assumption that anyone mildly critical is automatically prejudiced. Simply, I lost paitence longsince with the sort of "individualist" who thinks the rules for everyone else don't aply to them. No matter how good & considerate you might be, you are your own worst enemy & give the people who want to enact these restrictions full justification.

 

[Termite Man]

Get a bell with a better ring then. Even I've managed to find a couple.

Why should I have to spend my time looking for a better bell if the pedestrians will just ignore it anyway . I ride safely I look for potential danger and alter my riding style accordingly but if I'm constantly ringing my bell it means my hands aren't positioned properly to stop suddenly if I need to . So your advocating I make myself and probably other people less safe just so I can ring a bell ?

 

[Kanda]

The idiocy is your assumption that anyone mildly critical is automatically prejudiced. Simply, I lost paitence longsince with the sort of "individualist" who thinks the rules for everyone else don't aply to them.

But you sir are the one that misinterpreted the rules. It is not a legal requirement to have a bell, as stated throughout this post. If it was, they wouldn't be looking to close the loophole.

 

[Termite Man]

Simply, I lost paitence longsince with the sort of "individualist" who thinks the rules for everyone else don't aply to them. No matter how good & considerate you might be, you are your own worst enemy & give the people who want to enact these restrictions full justification.

Have you read the rules which are being proposed ? They want cyclists to warn pedestrians by ringing their bell . That would mean I'd be ringing my bell constantly at some times which will mean I can't stop suddenly if I need to . If this law is going to be imposed it needs to be sensible which I don't believe it is .

 

[lighterthief]

Have you read the rules which are being proposed ? They want cyclists to warn pedestrians by ringing their bell . That would mean I'd be ringing my bell constantly at some times which will mean I can't stop suddenly if I need to . If this law is going to be imposed it needs to be sensible which I don't believe it is .

No 'rules' are being imposed, as far as I can tell - merely an intent to consult on the issue. No need to froth at the mouth just yet.

 

[Kanda]

Have you read the rules which are being proposed ? They want cyclists to warn pedestrians by ringing their bell . That would mean I'd be ringing my bell constantly at some times which will mean I can't stop suddenly if I need to . If this law is going to be imposed it needs to be sensible which I don't believe it is .

Hence my comment in the OP saying about Jaywalking. If that were an offense in this country, accidents would decrease dramatically. Maybe even Jaywalking on Red Routes/where bus lanes are or some such law. Far more effective than the ridiculous constant bell ringing which in the end would just melt in with other background noise in a city.

 

[Termite Man]

No 'rules' are being imposed, as far as I can tell - merely an intent to consult on the issue. No need to froth at the mouth just yet.

Thats good becuase it's a stupid idea . And to be honest now is the time to froth at the mouth because if their are sufficient complaints about this it won't even get to the "we could make this law" stage !

 

[pogofish]

Why should I have to spend my time looking for a better bell if the pedestrians will just ignore it anyway .
So your advocating I make myself and probably other people less safe just so I can ring a bell ?

Have a bell, use your own common sense about when it is better to shout or take some other action. - Sorted!

Frankly, if you can't manage to ring-one & retain control at the same time, I'd have to wonder if you should even be on a bike in the first place?

 

[lighterthief]

Thats good becuase it's a stupid idea . And to be honest now is the time to froth at the mouth because if their are sufficient complaints about this it won't even get to the "we could make this law" stage !

QED write to your MP.

 

[pogofish]

Hence my comment in the OP saying about Jaywalking. If that were an offense in this country,

Trouble-is that such a law would also serve to strengthen the dominance of the car. How long do you think it would be before it would be expanded to further restrictions on cycling. See the suggestion that is also going around for a rule that cycle lanes be used in preference to the road where possible. Slippery slope etc.

 

[pogofish]

If this law is going to be imposed it needs to be sensible which I don't believe it is .

Probably not & I doubt it would be applied fairly either but that is just what tends to happen when folk stop using common-sense.

 

[Kanda]

Trouble-is that such a law would also serve to strengthen the dominance of the car.

It would also serve to reduce the amount of accidents seeing that popular view seems to be the pedestrian is never at fault....

But... a jaywalking in bus lanes law doesn't actually strengthen the dominance of cars does it? It makes for safer roads on Public Transport/Cycle Routes.

 

[fen_boy]

The idiocy is your assumption that anyone mildly critical is automatically prejudiced. Simply, I lost paitence longsince with the sort of "individualist" who thinks the rules for everyone else don't aply to them. No matter how good & considerate you might be, you are your own worst enemy & give the people who want to enact these restrictions full justification.

No the idiocy is your inability to read my posts As has already been pointed out a number of times there is no law that requires me to have a bell on my bicycle - that hardly makes me an 'individualist' in not having one. To suggest that a bell is likely to make me anymore safe than using my own voice to shout is nonsense.

 

[pogofish]

But you sir are the one that misinterpreted the rules. It is not a legal requirement to have a bell, as stated throughout this post. If it was, they wouldn't be looking to close the loophole.

There is a clear-enough intention & advice, in a document that has real legal weight. It amounts to almost the same thing.

 

[fen_boy]

There is a clear-enough intention & advice, in a document that has real legal weight. It amounts to almost the same thing.

tish and pish

 

[pogofish]

Once again, no consideration for the basic rules that govern everyone else.

 

[Lindy bird]

Get a bell with a better ring then. Even I've managed to find a couple.

Or a pea whistle on a string, hang around neck and voila!

 

[gentlegreen]

Or, how about :-

 

[gentlegreen]

Or, somewhat more of a challenge :-

 

[Lindy bird]

 

[fen_boy]

Once again, no consideration for the basic rules that govern everyone else.

We've already established it's not a rule - I can only assume you're taking the piss so I'm not playing any more.

 

[nonamenopackdrill]

I don't have a bell.

 

[gentlegreen]

I don't have a bell.

rebel

 

[mauvais]

I've got one, and it's ace. I ride round nature reserves, countryside routes and towpaths, and use it all the time. It's useful for getting people out of the way, or alerting them to your presence so they don't panic when you ride by. Some people don't hear or ignore it, but they're the minority. It's much more polite and accepted than any of the alternatives.

However, on the road? Fairly pointless to be honest.

 

[Kanda]

Once again, no consideration for the basic rules that govern everyone else.

How about pedestrians follow the Highway Code??? Nowhere do I see you admit that pedestrians walking out in front of cyclists are at fault at all, yet you are happy to make sweeping generalisations about all cyclists?

How about pedestrians abide by rules that actually bloody exist? The accident rate would plummet.

 

[pogofish]

Nowhere do I see you admit that pedestrians walking out in front of cyclists are at fault at all,

yet you are happy to make sweeping generalisations about all cyclists?

How about pedestrians abide by rules that actually bloody exist? The accident rate would plummet.

Because that goes without saying. Don't be a complete cretin.

Im not generalising I'm afraid. I've got years of hearing that sort of self-important shite from far too many cyclists & of course plenty of other road users too.

Maybe because out of all road users, the pedestrian is the least bound by any of them.