liquidindian
Hello
Maybe it's the beard.
Pedestrian jailed for causing death of cyclist
- Thread starter xenon
- Start date
BigTom
Well-Known Member
I think I've realised what you are questioning here actually.
So the thing is that you cannot tell the intention of the cyclist from the sound of their bell.
If you don't need to do anything for them to come past then surely they are just letting you know they are coming past as advised by the highway code and generally by councils and the canal trust because people have asked for that.
Otherwise you're trying to judge between a polite "excuse me please" and a rude "get out of my way" and the only basis you gave for that is your own belief of the other person's intention.
So the thing is that you cannot tell the intention of the cyclist from the sound of their bell.
If you don't need to do anything for them to come past then surely they are just letting you know they are coming past as advised by the highway code and generally by councils and the canal trust because people have asked for that.
Otherwise you're trying to judge between a polite "excuse me please" and a rude "get out of my way" and the only basis you gave for that is your own belief of the other person's intention.
liquidindian
Hello
The end result is one angry bloke who is choosing to be angry, so no loss to anyone else, I'll keep tinkling away.
What I’m saying is that you are intruding into my conversation or my thoughts, and for what, exactly? Why are you so damned important that I have to give my attention to you rather than what I was doing? THAT’S what is rude about it — that demand for attention. It’s a countryside walk, not a highway.
Anyway, I shall leave it there. I don’t expect to change the mind of people who see nothing wrong in ringing their bell behind pedestrians. I just wanted to present the view from the other side of it.
liquidindian
Hello
I was in two minds, I'm now settled, so you've had an effect.
BigTom
Well-Known Member
You wanted people to follow the highway code, cyclists using the bell to let other people know they are there is exactly what the highway code says to do.
Ok that's fine but just understand that other people want cyclists to use their bell to let them know they are there and coming past in any circumstances, and for a cyclist there is no way of telling whether the person you are coming up to is someone like you or someone who wants them to ring their bell.
Last edited:
sleaterkinney
Well-Known Member
Yeah, my wife gets tons more abuse than me on the bike, it's shocking. I think its an ego/power thing, they get off on intimidating someone.Yeah, they won’t do that to the 6’ plus bloke and/or the cyclist who really is cycling in an intimidating or arsehole-ish way. They do it to those who aren’t actually causing a problem and who often have lived experience of this sort of shit in other areas of life.
And/or plain misogyny
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
I've seen lycra lout strava dads using their bell to mean 'I'm coming past you in a second and I'm not going to slow down' rather than 'excuse me please'. On one occasion I was out with a group of schoolkids on bikes, who were just not going fast enough for the shrink-wrapped arsehole in question. He kept frantically ringing his bell and shouting 'cyclist coming past!' as if all the other people on bikes in front of him didn't count as cyclists because they were actually enjoying themselves and their outfits weren't painted on. I shooed the kids over to one side and then sped up to follow the guy and tell him that a bell is not a substitute for brakes on a shared path and nobody else gave a shit about his pathetic fucking time trial.
maomao
普費斯
Your countryside walk may be someone else's commute? Why should they accept more than reasonable inconvenience because you don't want to share the space? Even if they're just out for a fun ride why should they? Why not try a cheery greeting rather than grumbling, they might be friendlier next time.
liquidindian
Hello
I'm always reminded of this Australian study when this sort of thing comes up.
www.sciencefocus.com
More than half of motorists view cyclists as subhuman 'cockroaches'
Drivers' strong negative opinions of cyclists can result in them committing deliberate acts of aggression against them.
BigTom
Well-Known Member
Some people are dicks, that's for sure.
But just from a bell ring? You can't tell.
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
Perhaps you'd prefer the sound of car engines instead. People have to get places.
If I'm walking on a shared path I just stick to one side of it. You hear a lot fewer bells that way, oddly enough.
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
Well no and in the case above it was a lot of ringing and a lot of shouting to go with it. That's actually very unusual. It's mostly understood by all parties that a bell should be a polite request to move aside, that a cyclist should be moving at a speed that actually gives walkers time to move aside and allows them to stop in plenty of time if someone doesn't hear the bell for whatever reason.
Most of my cycle commute is a shared path. Problems are vanishingly rare. When I do the same journey on roads in a car, there's some dangerous fuckery from another driver more often than not. The worst I see from cyclists on the roads is them putting their front light on flash and angling it upwards, which I find very annoying but which is at least non-fatal. Haven't seen a cyclist jump a red light since, well last time I was in London so three years ago now.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Doesn't apply to the canal paths in London. Along Regent's Canal, they're very narrow along much of the way and there are also plenty of other pedestrians to negotiate. I don't think there is any way to cycle along there that won't affect pedestrians at all.
And sometimes you want to enjoy the space around you, go and look at what the coots are doing, or whatever. Some shared paths are best avoided by bikes.
You are meant to give way to them - see H2 here The Highway Code changes for 2022: are you aware of the new rules? - Which? NewsI am considering starting to use my bell for turning into side streets when there’s a pedestrian who could step out the second I turn, given (and as much as I try to avoid generalisations) hardly anybody checks for the clearly indicating cyclist before stepping out if they can’t hear engine noise. On quiet streets it’s an annoyance, but when turning off busy roads it can significantly increase the risk to the cyclist.
Agent Sparrow
the age of slippers and migraines
You give way to them once they’ve stepped out yes, because you’re hardly going to plough into them. That link says nothing though about cycles giving way to pedestrians who haven’t started to cross yet at junctions. Happy to be corrected if you can find the change that says that it applies to cycles/peds though.
But it’s also just sensible and courteous to wait 10 more seconds on a safe pavement (much safer than walking straight into a road without looking certainly) than expect a cycle to wait those 10 seconds or much longer stopped in the middle of the road with cars behind and beside them. Though I don’t think they are expecting me to wait, they just haven’t bothered checking my existence. So it’s quite fortunate I am anticipating it and not riding like a dickhead.
Also have to say, I don’t think most car drivers have got that memo about giving way to waiting pedestrians - there’s still an expectation that you should wait for them.
Edit: ok I’ve reread it and you’re right. As a ped though I’m still never going to expect that a cyclist should stop before turning from a busy main road into a quiet one so I can cross 5 seconds earlier, whilst having the option to wait safely.
Last edited:
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Cyclists always have to assume that everyone hasn't seen them, until evidence is provided otherwise. I've no problem with being belled at by a cyclist who's turning. Cars beeping their horns in the same situation is more annoying - yes, I know, fuck off! 
I'm a bit like maomao as a cyclist in that I used to positively enjoy the danger of cycling around London. Not so much nowadays. And I'm sure I'm much less of a twat than I used to be. (I try to remember when teenagers cut me up that I did that sort of thing, too, at their age.)
I'm a bit like maomao as a cyclist in that I used to positively enjoy the danger of cycling around London. Not so much nowadays. And I'm sure I'm much less of a twat than I used to be. (I try to remember when teenagers cut me up that I did that sort of thing, too, at their age.)
I agree that the law change does not seem sensible. As a pedestrian I’m not going to walk in front of oncoming traffic just because the Highway Code says I have priority. As a driver, are you expected to give way to someone who might potentially be thinking about crossing or thinking sensibly that they are not going to walk in front of oncoming traffic. The law change seems quite dangerous to me.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Reads to me like the intention here is more to change the behaviour of drivers rather than that of pedestrians. The change in the law makes it much more clearly the driver's fault for running someone over when turning. That aspect of it is sensible imo. Cars are dangerous to other people. Pedestrians aren't .
Artaxerxes
Look out, he's got a gnu!
Look, I try and give space to everyone when I’m a pedestrian and a cyclist (I’m a soft cyclist I haven’t ridden since August ffs so I’m not jumping about town shouting through red lights on the reg here) when using shared spaces and paths so how’s about a little less outrage and just let me bitch about things without assuming I’m a total cunt.
People not paying attention is just as fucking annoying when I’m on foot and they amble about taking up all the fucking space on this country’s shitting shitty crumbling infrastructure.
Artaxerxes
Look out, he's got a gnu!
We all know the real path enemy are joggers anyway, fuckers don’t even have a bell
BigTom
Well-Known Member
The previous rule meant you had to guess if someone was actually going to step out or not, it's easier to tell if someone is wanting to cross so it makes the situation better.
Agent Sparrow
the age of slippers and migraines
Yeah, I’ve just gone into a mini Highway Code rabbit hole
and this is the way the junction thing is described for peds:And of course, once a ped is actually on the road then anyone in the traffic who thinks they should maintain priority shouldn’t BE on the road. But giving priority for those who are waiting is certainly not the case for busy junctions though, both those with traffic lights and those without (usually desperately in need of them).
And I did also note the code says that peds should stop and look before crossing
sleaterkinney
Well-Known Member
I don't have a bell on my bike, people just ignore them anyway. I have to avoid pedestrians stepping out in front of me all the time, even when they see me coming.
Artaxerxes
Look out, he's got a gnu!
By the time I’m near them I’m basically stopped you indignant bell end. I’m not blasting through them.
It’s possible to y’know be annoyed and still not act like a dick, you should practice it
Agent Sparrow
the age of slippers and migraines
Really, everyone just needs to be aware of their surroundings, be thoughtful of the ways various road users can be vulnerable and act accordingly, have a bit more empathy for each other and regularly sit down for a nice cup of tea*. 
*though not in the middle of the road
*though not in the middle of the road
Agent Sparrow
the age of slippers and migraines
Actually the above ^^^ probably isn’t such a bad idea of how we should treat each other on here too
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
The beatles took this a step furtherReally, everyone just needs to be aware of their surroundings, be thoughtful of the ways various road users can be vulnerable and act accordingly, have a bit more empathy for each other and regularly sit down for a nice cup of tea*.
*though not in the middle of the road
Plumdaff
joy in people
I tend to use my bell to let people know I'm there, so I don't startle them, so I can pass them safely with them aware I'm doing it, so they can keep an eye on their dog or toddler, because we're sharing a space and it's better if we all try to make minimal adjustments to make sharing that space easier for everyone. You don't have to do that, but if you're a pedestrian who gives no mind at all to other users (not suggesting that you are actively blocking them, it's a very small minority, the sort I reckon are probably pricks in their cars and on bikes too) then you're actively contributing to making these shared spaces worse.
And bells would be as rude as car horns if all pedestrians had rear view mirrors they were obliged to check when walking and cyclists had to use overtaking lights. As that is ludicrous, I don't think bells are that obnoxious really.
planetgeli
There's no future in England's dreaming
Well that was a bizarre read. People are wound up by a silent, dangerous piece of metal giving them warning they are behind them/in their vicinity? Really?
Is it the bell that's the problem? There's millions of bikes in Asia and to my knowledge most don't have bells. Instead they rely on the rider making some vocal noise, a whistle or whatever, to warn you of any apparent danger. Nobody takes offence.
Is it the bell that's the problem? There's millions of bikes in Asia and to my knowledge most don't have bells. Instead they rely on the rider making some vocal noise, a whistle or whatever, to warn you of any apparent danger. Nobody takes offence.
Similar threads
