Still unlawful

SIR, — Having some months ago initiated the debate in your letters section on the topic of unlawful use of footpaths by cyclists, I have recently maintained a silence as the arguments put forward by those condoning the offence have been at best unconvinci

SIR, - Having some months ago initiated the debate in your letters section on the topic of unlawful use of footpaths by cyclists, I have recently maintained a silence as the arguments put forward by those condoning the offence have been at best unconvincing. Although I have to say it would appear their views are shared by the police.

I felt, however, that S. Beaver (Herts Advertiser, June 26) required a response to their statement: "Cycling on pavements, however, can in some circumstances be safer than cycling on roads".

I would respond by posing the question - safer for whom? Undoubtedly safer for cyclists, but what of the safety of pedestrians for whom the pavements are provided?

S. Beaver also remarks that the police appear to be tackling the issue with common sense. As far as I can see and from my communications with them, the police are not tackling the issue at all, with or without sense of any kind. The police are turning a blind eye to the offence which is tantamount to condoning it.

Allowing, even condoning, the offence of cycling on pavements, is another example of the erosion of respect for others, in this case pedestrians, and of the rule of law. If the police become discriminatory in which laws they prosecute and the general public in which laws they observe, the end result is anarchic.

THOMAS ANTHONY FISHER,

Culver Road, St Albans.