Viewing Thread:
"people who ride bikes on pavements"

Does anyone else get as irritated as I do about people that ride their bikes on pavements. I walk to work everyday and everyday I get some mad cyclist who comes up fast behind me and they cycle past so close that you can feel the wind rushing past. What if I was to suddenly move slightly over at that point? i would be badly injured I imagine. Does anyone else hate this as much as I do?

J Nash wrote:
> But he stopped to not crash into you. Who do you think would
> have been injured if he hadn't have stopped? Yes, it's a little
> stupid to ride so fast, but you don't know if he was in a rush and
> wasn't thinking straight. You could have at least gone and asked if
> he was alright.

Indeed, the poor guy's mother might have just phoned the guy saying she was in trouble and he was rushing to her aid, only for his mum to die because the guy hammered on his brakes and couldnt reach her in time.

Very_Metal wrote:
> old people mobiles are more irritating and their operators usually
> more obnoxious.

Old people who get onto a bus and then proceed to get out their purse/wallet and count out change for 5 minutes even though they know their exact fare while they were waiting at the bus stop. Thats irritating.

old people mobiles are more irritating and their operators usually more obnoxious.

i was behind a guy in one in tescos the other day, he got to the counter (crashing into the mars bar rack), realised he needed milk, said "hold on" to the till lass, got up and walked over to the milk. it was Little Britain-tastic.

cyclists like to think they have the right to be a part of 'real' traffic, and by law they're right. the moutnain bike is actually now classed as a vechile.

and exactly, why would u dodge if u hear a bike comin??

Don't register in to the forums if your just going to look for sympathy or some stupid thing like that.

And anyway,why the hell would you decide to edge to the right/left when you hear a bicycle coming behind you?

Or are you deaf.........

I hate people who drive in the road on their bikes when theres a perfectly good and empty bike lane painted on the path just for them.

J Nash wrote:
> But he stopped to not crash into you. Who do you think would
> have been injured if he hadn't have stopped? Yes, it's a little
> stupid to ride so fast, but you don't know if he was in a rush and
> wasn't thinking straight. You could have at least gone and asked if
> he was alright.

Regardless of whether or not you're in a rush, you don't ride into a blind corner on a crowded street.

Yes, he tried to stop because he saw me, but he wouldn't have needed to if he was going at a reasonable (and legal) pace. He didn't ask if I was alright after he'd just damn near given me a heart attack so I wasn't prepared to extend my courtesy any further than he had, seeing as he was the one in the wrong.

Maybe if he'd been seriously hurt I'd have been a bit nicer, but he got up and rode away, probably very embarassed.

But he stopped to not crash into you. Who do you think would have been injured if he hadn't have stopped? Yes, it's a little stupid to ride so fast, but you don't know if he was in a rush and wasn't thinking straight. You could have at least gone and asked if he was alright.

J Nash wrote:
> Chr1s wrote:
> I walked off chuckling to myself.
>
> and if he's stupid
> enough to go that fast on a footpath then he deserved to get hurt.
>
> You're a wan ker.

What for? Using the footpath as it was intended? It's not my fault if someone comes around a corner at a ridiculous speed on a bike while he's on a footpath and gets hurt.

I think I was entitled to a little chuckle after the guy had come incredibly close to ploughing right into me through his own sheer stupidity.

Chr1s wrote:
> I walked off chuckling to myself.

> and if he's stupid
> enough to go that fast on a footpath then he deserved to get hurt.

You're a wan ker.