Unlawful drivers and pedestrians tend to rationalize their behaviors as time saving; bicyclists similarly rationalize their illegal behaviors but were more inclined to cite increasing their own personal safety and/or saving energy.
You come across a street that is one way. It is very steep (we're talking SW England) and the one way is uphill. So it can lawfully only be cycled uphill. There are many streets like this in SW England! You know that this could not have been intentional so you make the best of it and cycle down it (with care) the "wrong way".
When the pestilence strikes from the East, go far and breathe the cold air deeply. Ignore the sage, stay not indoors. Ho Ri Zon 12th Century Chinese philosopher
Mine is,I know a couple of short cut footpaths that cut off a 1mile loop of busy urban traffic with two or three right turns on them,I ride the footpath with care and stop or dismount for any pedestrians on it. Another 1 mile or so of smooth footpath that in 20 years of use I've yet to see anyone using that I ride became the road is a 60mph(read 70+)four lane asylum.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
I would love to obey the law when cycling but it is not possible Oncoming motons do not give me enough room so I 'have' to ride on the pavement Fortunately almost no-one walks here
Entertainer, juvenile, curmudgeon, PoB, 30120 Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott We love safety cameras, we hate bullies
There is a very useful string of bridleways leading south from Outer London to the North Downs. Unfortunately one of the paths is legally a footpath - as can be imagined there are plenty of tyre marks and I will lead groups that way. It is pretty wide so we give give any pedestrians a very good clearance. There is a good case for a review of rights of way based on usefulness not just precedence.
There are two or three traffic-light controlled junctions that I often cross and that have a pedestrian-only sequence (all traffic stopped, including cycles). I cross (illegally but safely) on the pedestrian sequence. Not the worst of crimes but more logical than obeying the letter of the law.
When the pestilence strikes from the East, go far and breathe the cold air deeply. Ignore the sage, stay not indoors. Ho Ri Zon 12th Century Chinese philosopher
I sometimes "break the law", but not in a way to cause danger either to myself or to others, eg riding across a non toucan light controlled crossing. Motorists breaking the law can frequently be dangerous, but a cyclist breaking the law is often more of an irritation rather than a danger, especially to motorists who see the "slower" vehicle being faster!
"It takes a genius to spot the obvious" - my old physics master.
I don't peddle bikes.
PRL wrote:There is a very useful string of bridleways leading south from Outer London to the North Downs. Unfortunately one of the paths is legally a footpath - as can be imagined there are plenty of tyre marks and I will lead groups that way. It is pretty wide so we give give any pedestrians a very good clearance. There is a good case for a review of rights of way based on usefulness not just precedence.
I agree with what you are saying, but the path you mention is not a "bridleway" yet, though you want it to become one. Bridleway is a specific class of highway. I think you know that but others might not be clear about it. Sadly, changing the status any PROW seems to take an age, even when there are no objections.
MikeF wrote:I sometimes "break the law", but not in a way to cause danger either to myself or to others, eg riding across a non toucan light controlled crossing. Motorists breaking the law can frequently be dangerous, but a cyclist breaking the law is often more of an irritation rather than a danger, especially to motorists who see the "slower" vehicle being faster!
I agree with the gist of what you say, but I would add that someone cycling on a pavement with pedestrians on it can be a hazard, especially to the elderly. I know you are not that sort of cyclist.
There are plenty of cases where it's easier/safer to ignore road markings or even traffic lights. One place I go to has a miserable excuse for a roundabout - the centre is a hump about 2 metres across - and since visibility is good in all directions it's far safer to take a smooth curve from entrance to exit than execute a sharp hook round the lump. Similarly, temporary lights controlling traffic at road works are usually timed so that when they switch to red cars will have time to clear the restriction before they turn to green at the other end, but cyclists will still be in the middle when the opposing traffic arrives. If the road is clear I have no trouble with cycling through on red and stealing a march on them.
MikeF wrote:I sometimes "break the law", but not in a way to cause danger either to myself or to others, eg riding across a non toucan light controlled crossing. Motorists breaking the law can frequently be dangerous, but a cyclist breaking the law is often more of an irritation rather than a danger, especially to motorists who see the "slower" vehicle being faster!
I agree with the gist of what you say, but I would add that someone cycling on a pavement with pedestrians on it can be a hazard, especially to the elderly. I know you are not that sort of cyclist.
It's all to do with context. There's a mile of fast busy A road I use regularly to connect two quiet minor roads.It's four lanes wide without a central reservation that I'd be mad to ride on,especially as there's a smooottthhh 2m wide footway running alongside that in 20 years using it,I've yet to see anyone walking on,perfectly safe lawbreaking territory
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
MikeF wrote:I sometimes "break the law", but not in a way to cause danger either to myself or to others, eg riding across a non toucan light controlled crossing. Motorists breaking the law can frequently be dangerous, but a cyclist breaking the law is often more of an irritation rather than a danger, especially to motorists who see the "slower" vehicle being faster!
I agree with the gist of what you say, but I would add that someone cycling on a pavement with pedestrians on it can be a hazard, especially to the elderly. I know you are not that sort of cyclist.
It's all to do with context. There's a mile of fast busy A road I use regularly to connect two quiet minor roads.It's four lanes wide without a central reservation that I'd be mad to ride on,especially as there's a smooottthhh 2m wide footway running alongside that in 20 years using it,I've yet to see anyone walking on,perfectly safe lawbreaking territory
I know situations like that and, yes, no problem. On the other hand I saw a bloke cycling at about 15mph this morning, on a pavement and with no more than a couple of feet between his bars and the garden entrances he was passing. With the shrubs in the gardens and the gate pillars he could not see that an elderly person or a child was not about to step out into his path. He could have cycled safely there, with a bit more care, but plainly it hadn't occurred to him what might go wrong.