B********* parents

[Pinhead]

I was returning home yesterday from Tregaron when a kid, about 12 came OFF the pavement toward me on MY side of the road NO helmet, I hit the brakes and horn scared the crap out of him AND ME, fortunately I am a slow driver, I swore and pointed that he should be on the other side, in fact the pavement IS the safest 100% just don't ride OFF it into on coming cars.

What annoyed me is behind him there were TWO more

1. No helmets
2. Cycling OFF the pavement INTO oncoming traffic

Where are the parents do they give a toss.

I was a single father of three when their mother walked out, from 12/11 and 9 they all had bikes.

ALWAYS wore helmets, and at that age we cycled at Sherwood Pines and off road in Devon never pavements and roads and when they did come to a road OFF the bike, WALK and cross safe


https://youtu.be/EYW51KNN0Qs

[Nearholmer]

Kids have been doing daft and dangerous things since kids first existed, and I should imagine 99% of us did at least one daft or dangerous thing as a kid (my most spectacular involved showing off in front of girls, and ending-up with my arm broken in two places, very painfully - no bicycles were involved, just a 12ft high wall), so you can either be a bit philosophical about the follies of youth, or get really steamed-up, which will do precious little to change things, except possibly your own risk of heart attack.

PS: when I was a kid, nobody wore a bike helmet, unless they were in the Tour de France, in which case it was one made from leather sausages.

[mjr]

Helmets probably won't matter if hit by a car. It's not a legal requirement and they're very unhelpful.

But that said, riding on the pavement is illegal, jumping into the carriageway is risky and into the wrong side doubly so. I doubt the parents know what they were up to. If someone had tried to limit me to riding in the awful Sherwood Pines gravel cycle routes, I would probably have bunked off to ride some tarmac. Safely, not dangerously like in this anecdote.

But that said, the horn is not for use as a rebuke and drivers should not get angry at the mistakes of others, so you broke two highway code rules too. Maybe concentrate on improving your behaviour on the roads before being so scathing about others?

[Mike Sales]

I was a single father of three when their mother walked out, from 12/11 and 9 they all had bikes.

ALWAYS wore helmets, and at that age we cycled at Sherwood Pines and off road in Devon never pavements and roads and when they did come to a road OFF the bike, WALK and cross safe


https://youtu.be/EYW51KNN0Qs

At what age did you start to teach them how to cope with motor traffic? At eleven years old I was riding four miles on an A road into town for school on my own. I was beginning to go out on exploring rides. A bag of sandwiches in the saddlebag and a bottle of squash, and I was happy. A regular Saturday ride was to the Odeon for the children's matinee, with sandwiches and squash in the Gardens.
Less traffic then of course, but some will tell you the roads are safer now!
I did have my Cycling Proficiency badge.

[sizbut]

err... He was proceeding along the the road in a residential area until, coming round the bend, he was faced with some opinionated swearing B****** objecting to having the passage of their motor carriage halted. Fortunately nothing consequential happened as the sweary B****** insisted of forcing him off the road so that they could continue on their way through.

To put it the other way round, you were in housing, on the road reduced to a single lane, and unsighted due to the bend - all signs to proceed with caution because things might happen - just like they did. So get a grip and stop trying to make such a drama out of what most people would call 'life'.

[Paulatic]

Why you didn’t move over to the other side of the road and give him space I’ll never know. Looks like you hugged the kerb stopped and threatened the kid with your car.
If I an adult was walking towards you on that same part of the road would you do the same? Let me tell you I wouldn’t mount the pavement for your convenience.

[Manc33]

I see it so often here I don't even have a reaction anymore. They are usually dressed all in black at night with no lights, meandering into the road and back to the pavement, meandering out, then back again. With electric cars being nearly silent I can see a lot of accidents starting to happen in future, if they aren't already.

[Pebble]

Didn't see anything wrong with the first encounter, you were able to stop in time. (don't know why you felt the need to swear at him, he wasn't doing anything wrong!. Second and third child you should have moved away from the kerb (straddled the white line) just in case they fell or came onto the road (I think its called 'equalising your dangers')

As for 'not wearing helmets' so what. Thankfully its not law.

[drossall]

... in fact the pavement IS the safest 100% ...

Not necessarily. Doubt has been cast on conversions to dual use, where cyclists are allowed. It would be no different on pavements where, according to the rules, cyclists should not be riding. The issue is that cycle accidents mostly happen at junctions, i.e. where cars are turning in or out. On the pavement, proximity to walls and hedges means that sight lines are often very poor by comparison with leaving the cyclist on the road, especially where motorists are emerging from drives. In addition, cyclists on pavements are "out of sight, out of mind" so, instead of both parties looking out for each other, as the law intends, the cyclist is left as the only one trying to avoid an accident.

All in all, studies suggest that riding on the road may be safer than riding on what is, in the end, just a standard pavement. This is different from a purpose-designed cycle facility.

[Manc33]

I blame the council for making the pavement so narrow.

Hey mate, can you just chop the corner off your house?

[mattsccm]

Might I suggest that helmets are completely irrelevant. No need for them , purely a matter of opinion and thus should only be mentioned in the Helmets section of this forum.
As for behaviour. Kids do stupid things. Virtually all get away with it so no real harm done.
Parent probably doing their own thing. Kids of that age don't need accompanying. Bet you that the kids by themselves bear no resemblance to what they are like when parents are about. Almost all kids are like this. I was and I bet the OP was.

[a.twiddler]

Hindsight is all very well, but you can see that the corner of that last cottage creates a pinch point for anyone on the pavement. Even someone walking past it is going to need some consideration from oncoming traffic. Supposing that boy was riding on the pavement, he would have had to hop off on to the road (however ill advisedly, facing traffic) to get past. Having seen one boy, it's reasonable to expect a tribe of his friends to be following behind. It's school summer holidays. It's easy to forget that however foolish his actions might be, the pedestrian, particularly a child, still has right of way.

The road was clear, and there looks to be plenty of room to move over despite the parked cars. By the way you describe your reaction it seems as though you were taken by surprise, yet the whole point of anticipation is that since you can't see what is there, you might expect someone to pop out from behind that building, and would be further out without having to think about it. A bit of anticipation will stop you coming across as Mr Angry. Not everyone can brush things like this off, but it helps to have a philosophical attitude to things.

In the end, you avoided a collision, no one was hurt, and everyone went about their business. It was a near miss. Perhaps the child will learn something from it, and you will put it down to experience and be a bit more wary. Maybe swearing at the child made you feel better, maybe the chlid just added it to his vocabulary if he hadn't heard it before. Perhaps he already has an enormous collection of swear words. Who knows?

From the way that that elderly bystander was looking at you, he didn't seem too impressed by your response either.

[re_cycler]

Regardless of the wrongs and rights, I was slightly envious of that dismount, left leg over the crossbar whilst still moving and seated.

[Stradageek]

Kids have to learn what is dangerous, looks like he's making progress

[Carlton green]

The thread tittle interested me as it’s long been the case that some parents don’t look after their children properly and then blame others when there’s an injury or even loss. As such the OP’s description looked a bit classic to me and eventually I got around to viewing the video.

Surely this is a ‘storm in a tea cup’ or, besides the OP’s reaction, really not much of an event. On first viewing what struck me was the narrowness and none straight nature of the road with parked vehicles and buildings obscuring the view ahead, so actually a place to look out for the unexpected and to moderate one’s speed … to me the OP’s pace felt marginally too brisk but maybe I’m a slow driver.

Like most events there’s a second side too and it’s to the OP’s credit that he wants children to be safe. The polarised black and white bottom line is that the boy on the road was at some risk and that his parents have a responsibility to their child to provide appropriate care and appropriate instruction that is both noted and used - really not unreasonable expectations. However, is real life polarised and do people always honour their responsibilities? In my experience of it I’d say not so.

It’s an interesting set of events, both in the video and in this thread. Let’s be glad that all ended well and consider how we as riders and drivers can better manage the - unfair to our eyes - events that life will throw at us. We might remember too that occasionally we’ve been the one doing what (in later life we realised to be) was somewhat dangerous.

Kids have to learn what is dangerous, looks like he's making progress

Yep, and such lessons learnt can save a life latter on.

Regardless of the wrongs and rights, I was slightly envious of that dismount, left leg over the crossbar whilst still moving and seated.

Yes, pretty slick. One might say the child was showing ability, agility, swiftness of reactions and some of the limited judgement common to young lads - learn as you go.

That aside he should not have been on the road and meeting him a second or so earlier (even less sighted) would have been worse. We can guess but who knows how long he’d been cycling along for on the wrong side of the road? I looked at the video many times and observe that there’s a drop kerb just beyond the blind corner and the child was first visible some distance away (four parked cars length on the opposite side of the road).

Are pavements for little lads to cycle on? That’s a question for another thread.