AddThis SmartLayers

Local magazine editorial suggests pavement cyclists should be decapitated

A local magazine editor has  urged a regional daily to republish a controversial editorial which suggested stringing up razor wire to decapitate cyclists riding on pavements.

The editorial appeared in Grapevine magazine, which is delivered free to 23,000 homes in Sheffield each month, and recounted a conversation between editor Ian Macgill and an “old chum Mr Smith” in which the latter called for wire to be introduced at head height so pavement riders are “taught a lesson.”

Sheffield daily The Star subsequently published a reaction piece from the city’s cycling community, in which Ian was accused of “legitimising hatred” against cyclists.

But rather than apologise, Ian has challenged the paper to republish the editorial in full and send a photographer out to “name and shame” cyclists who ride on pavements.

The controversial editorial

The controversial editorial

Ian told The Star: “Here’s what to do – reproduce my July editor’s article and ask for your readers’ comments regarding cyclists using Sheffield pavements as racetracks.

“Then send out a snapper to see how many of these idiots can be photographed in a couple of hours. Name and shame them, especially those with a camera on the helmet. In (the) olden days, cyclists dismounted when passing through pedestrian areas.”

Grapevine largely covers stories about people who have had work done on their properties by Sheffield tradespeople, as well as other local interest articles.

In the blog, Ian had himself expressed reservations about the idea touted by “Mr Smith” and said his companion had eventually calmed down and agreed that his plan was “a bit too radical (and messy).”

Sheffield-based cycling blogger Chris Maloney told The Star: “This kind of comment – joking or otherwise – legitimises the anti-cyclist hatred and rhetoric that groups like Ride Sheffield, Peak District MTB and me – as well as others such as CycleSheffield have worked hard – successfully I might add – to combat.

“And more than that, as well as legitimising the bile, Macgill has gone one step further and suggested ways in which an easily led idiot could cause serious bodily harm.

“It’s not surprising that there have been a number of people calling for the police to be involved.”

A South Yorkshire Police spokesperson said nobody has reported the issue to the force.  HTFP has approached The Star for a comment.

3 comments

You can follow all replies to this entry through the comments feed.
  • July 4, 2019 at 12:14 pm
    Permalink

    The reason cyclists are vilified is because motorists live in fear of injuring them. I find it especially annoying when they ride side by side on country roads with no corner vision but only for that reason. If I hit one, I will be found at fault with no questions asked. Questions like ‘Was the cyclist wearing high viz clothing’ ‘Was the cyclist close to the pavement/verge’ ‘Was the cyclist performing a dodgy manoeuvre?”Were there twenty cyclists on your route home?’ ‘Did the cyclist make an attempt to allow you to pass?’ ‘Did the cyclist pedal harder to race you and make it pretty impossible for you to pass?’ All valid questions which should be asked. Unfortunately it’s never the cyclists fault. And that makes people vary wary and somewhat annoyed to be put in that position. Of course all car drivers should be careful, but cyclists are especially vulnerable and there are so many of them. All this adds up to ‘guys I worry about hurting you and you have to help me here by making it easier for me to pass you’.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(5)
  • July 4, 2019 at 12:54 pm
    Permalink

    It’s already illegal to ride on the pavement, garnering a £50 fine. The problem is enforcement. Anyone seen a bobby in their area lately? No.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(8)
  • July 4, 2019 at 5:11 pm
    Permalink

    the stupid comment that started all this brings to mind the expression “headless chicken”.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(2)