For many years I rode my bikes without a bell. Recently I bought a new bike and it did have a bell fitted. Within a year the new bike was mowed down by a car whose driver did not see me. Regardless to say the bell did not make one jot of differnce. I now have four bikes of varying vintage and use. Three of them have a bell fitted to the handlebars and I don't find this an encumberance. On trails ramblers and dog walkers mainly do not hear the bell, and worst of all joggers with their i-pods on cannot hear the bell but nearly all manage to hear me shout "Excuse me, please" Perhaps also the trail users should be educated that a bell is an audible warning device warning of a bikes presence.

John, Ilkeston, Derbyshire

When walking with friends in the country side it's nice to walk side by side to facilitate conversation. Cyclists wishing to pass use a range of techniques to gain attention; from pulling a little skid, which makes the heart jump, to a cheery hello. I rarely hear a bell, and if I did I should think it as rude than the rider pulling a skid. Our voices are for communicating with; horns, sirens and bells are for scaring animals.

Please put this ridiculous argument to rest and forget about bells on bikes. People should talk to one another and acknowledge each others right to do what they want to do.

Jessica, Dorking, Surrey

I cycle into central London everyday for work. I do have a bell and I often use to but most f the time to no avail. Pedestrians for the most part are either wired into there personal stereos or simply don't -want- to here the bell. I've even had people say comments like "oh, I wondered what that noise was" after stepping out in front of me in a cycle lane. Shouting out is a far more effective method of getting someone to see you.

Mark, London,

When a considerable number of pedestrians have I Pods glued in their ears and cannot hear a shouted warning I doubt whether they would hear the 'ping' of a bell.

Richard Davis, Sheffield,

Even if I had a bell on my bike I would be more inclined to shout and go for the brakes as the pedestrian may be deaf. I also go fot the brake before the horn in my car.
By the way I AM DEAF!

Alan Jones, Barnsley, South Yorkshire / UK

This is an example of "safety" measures being pushed forward by people who have no practical experience. Choosing not to have a bell has nothing to do with fashion, sexiness or masculinity. It is a simple fact that taking a hand away from a brake in order to ring a bell is more dangerous than keeping the hands where they are and controlling the bike.

The human instinct is to shout rather than reach for a bell. How many car drivers actually use their horns to prevent accidents rather than to show anger after the event? If you are driving and see an obstacle, the first thing you do is you brake and keep both hands on the wheel. The same is true of a bike.

Tony Lane, London, England

Here in New York, the police do indeed issue summonses to cyclists who don't have bells on their handlebars, but very rarely--only at "checkpoints" that they very sporadically set up at bike paths, and most cyclists feel that those checkpoints are not for public safety, but for pure bullying--the cycling community and the NYPD had not been the best of friends in recent years.

I for one have always felt what the Scottish cyclist quoted above says: what's better and faster when a pedestrian bends over in your path to pick up his umbrella: reaching your thumb for a novelty noisemaker, or shouting with your clear, human voice, "watch out," or "heads up"?

Imposing the installation of bells on shopkeepers strikes me as ridiculous

David, New York, NY

I find slightly squeaky brakes to be more effective than a bell. They usually get the message across without seeming rude, and on the rare occasion when the pedestrian doesn't move out of the way your hands are already on the brake levels, so it's easy to stop.

Peter Taylor, Valencia, Spain