One of the cycling laws I break is the requirement that my bike is fitted with a bell if I take it on the road. The bike I recently purchased through eBay did not have one and I've not added one since taking ownership. Had it been fitted with a bell I would almost certainly have removed it along with any other bits I deemed surplus to my requirements. I like the slick, bare-bones look of my commuter ride; a bell would ruin the aesthetic and render me less courieresque. But yes, it would render me legal. For what it's worth I tend to shout - politely - in lieu of ring a bell. On the very rare occasions when I need to alert someone of my prescence I use 'excuse me please' and a 'thank you' as I pass. It works as well as if not better than an abrupt bell ring.
Anyway. The bell is, I assume, to alert pedestrains of my approach when I am on their pavement (extremely rare) or they are in my road (somewhat less rare) or we are sharing. So if I'm required to have a bell I think it fair that aurally-unchalleneged pedestrains maintain the ability to hear it. And that may mean not listening to iPods or other personal stereos at volumes that effectively prevent them from hearing me. The defense I employ to my No Bell Fitted position is Two Wrongs Equals Right. If you can't hear me, I'm not going to have a bell.
Unless, of course, I am expected to replace my (theoretical) bell with a (theoretical) air-horn. A better solution, I believe, is that just as I substitute the ringing of my bell with a polite shout the iPodded substitute their hearing with paying attention to where they're going. Use one or more of their other sense. Sight springs immidiately to mind. It is amazing how having a look around can prevent someone from being an utter twat.
All the above goes for walking-phone-talking too.
No comments:
Post a Comment