no as there was not one nearby, however i was already part way across the road when he puled in
--
Im a student ive got time!!!
|
|
SO you were walking in the road?
|
SO you were walking in the road?
If so, then Cub Leader had priority.
See Highway Code, Rule 146: www.highwaycode.gov.uk/16.htm#146
|
Fair point if crossing VERY near a junction... but cub leader hasn't specified exactly how far away he is.
I'm well aware of the detail of the Highway Code, but if I'm walking, the "give priority to pedestrians crossing at a junction" rule is not something I want to put to the test if I can help it. I'm always cautious, as quoting "Highway Code rule 146" is not going to help me when I'm lying in the road after being run over at a junction!
|
So you guys are honestly saying that if a pedestrian is in the road, you believe the Highway code gives you authority over them and they should leap out of the way as you shouldn't need to slow down or stop to let them past?
You need to read it again if that's the case.
|
|
The Highway Code gives no-one the right to aggression...whoever was right and wrong.
|
|
|
|
It doesn't really matter where he was crossing the road, to a large extent, he took a value judgement, on his observations, that it was safe to cross. If the driver involved decided to break the law(mobile phone) instead of signalling, which he could have done, he is a danger. Would a safe driver ever knowingly risk a pedestrian's life in this way?
|
|
Is it any wonder that drivers are hounded by all and sundry when they display antagonism and ignorance of the rules as shown in some of the posts above. NoWheels, who usually gets on my wick,is absolutely right and if we drivers are going to hope to be taken seriously in our quest for less restrictive road rules we better damn well start to act responsibly and obey the existing ones.
|
Look the guy was J walking which is a criminal offence in US and should be in the UK.
I'm with the car driver I would have yelled at hom too.
|
"the guy was J walking"
"I'm with the car driver"
I'm not sure you are right in either case - but even if you are, there is no need for such a rude and aggressive (and dangerous?)response by the driver, especially since he was at least partly at fault by not indicating and was using a mobile.
|
|
OK Thommo, but this is not USA and the well established rule states that pedestrians actually on the road must be given priority. It is common sense really, if that were not the case then walkers would be run over willy nilly, they are quite unable to compete with vehicles on the road. Surely you can understand that by just obeying the rules that suit you and ignoring the others you are demolishing the neccessary consensus by which we all have to share the highways.
|
|
I dont drive on his pavement therefore........
|
|
RF that comment is facetious as I expect you well know.
|
|
From his last post it appears that RenaultFamily never crosses a road on foot and is never a pedestrian who sets foot on the highway, would we were all so gifted but we are not; so please RF allow a bit of slack for those of us who cannot levitate our poor bodies above or under the wheeled traffic.
|
RF that comment is facetious as I expect you well know.
Yes? of course? wouldnt have made it otherwise. nothing like a spot of water on a petrol fire ;)
|
Idiots step out in front of me all the time forcing me to take evasive action that is potentially dangerous to me.
In virtually all cases they are wearing their brain neutralising machines and operating their moron devices with their fingers. Those using the moron devices never ever look up and regulalry run in to lamposts as well as cars. I take great delight in pushing them out of the way when I am a pedestrians as well.
Let Darwin does his work I say...
|
Look the guy was J walking which is a criminal offence in US and should be in the UK.
So when there isn't a designated crossing point for miles, how would anyone on foot cross a road?
(It's not a problem in the USA, where walking is an Un-American Activity)
|
|
Thommo, you are an unreconstituted neanderthal and you would make a fortune if you presented yourself at the entrance to the Natural History Museum. Good luck.
|
NW,
You are showing your ignorance. In urban areas where most people walk there are copious light controlled crossings which you are required by law to use. Are you saying there are no crossings for miles in (say) downtown Chicago? Was it you that advised Bliar on the legality of the war?
No there are not crossing out in the boonies but neither are there many pedestrians or a lot of cars. In that situation should you be a pedestrian you wait for a safe gap in the (probably non-existent) traffic.
Simple easy and everyones happy. Only in anti-car (E)UK is the car driver always in the wrong.
|
|
Thallium what a brilliant repost. Your not the re-incarnation of Oscar Wilde are you?
|
You are showing your ignorance.
It's so nice to be able discuss things politely, isn't it?
In urban areas where most people walk there are copious light controlled crossings which you are required by law to use. Are you saying there are no crossings for miles in (say) downtown Chicago?
No idea, never been to Chicago, and in any case that's a problem for Chicagoans (or whatever they call themselves).
But where I get off my bus at the garden nursery, the nearest crossing point is half a mile in one direction, and three miles in the other.
Are you suggesting that I should walk an extra mile when I go to the nursery, just so that car drivers will never have to slow down for a few seconds?
Or would you prefer your journey to be delayed even more by the installation of trafic-light-controlled crossing points every few hundred yards along a three-mile stretch currently devoid of them?
Was it you that advised Bliar on the legality of the war?
If he'd asked me, I'd have told him it was probably illegal and a really bad idea in either case. Unsurprisingly, he didn't ask.
No there are not crossing out in the boonies but neither are there many pedestrians or a lot of cars. In that situation should you be a pedestrian you wait for a safe gap in the (probably non-existent) traffic.
Exactly what I do here ... but you told us that's illegal in the USA.
Simple easy and everyones happy. Only in anti-car (E)UK is the car driver always in the wrong.
Nope. The car driver isn't in the wrong if they share the road sometimes by slowing for a few seconds: but you are demanding that the pedestrian should always be in the wrong. You want people to walk a huge extra distance in order to give cars exclusive use of the streets. Do you always have a problem with sharing, or is it only when you are in your car?*
* just responding in tone to your opening comment
|
Thommo,
just to clarify - you being with the car driver would mean
that you condone not signalling at a junction and using a mobile phone whilst driving. (Not to mention a possible breach of the
highway code).
|
|
It means I am fully on the side of the driver when some muppet steps out in to the road without looking.
|
"some muppet steps out in to the road without looking."
Very inconsiderate of them - except that the first post, the one you are apparently responding to, says that the pedestrian was already crossing when a non-indicating car turned while the driver was on the phone. Perhaps you observe pedestrians as accurately as you read posts and respond accordingly.
|
|
Thommo, being fully on the side of the driver is all very well, but should the there be a collision between the driver and the pedestrian the latter would almost certainly be injured. Surely you don't wish that on anyone, even a 'J walker'? Added to which the driver would find themselves collared by plod and agro all round. All for the sake of a little patience and understanding. Not really worth it, surely.
|
I think that what we have here is not so much a discussion, but more a meeting of closed minds. When I was taught to drive, it was punched into me that you must look ahead at all times and drive according to the conditions in existence. I try to abide by that mantra. If I see an idiot leap into the road without warning, I do my best to avoid them. I had a youngster walk out in front of me a few years ago, without warning. I didn't blare my horn, I skidded to a halt and he actually had his hands outstretched and placed them on my bonnet. That is how close it was and I pooped my pants. Now, as a pedestrian, I also try to cross safely....especially where there is no crossing point. It is not in my interests to become a vegetable!
Now..... drivers do play chicken just to gee up pedestrians if they view that they are getting in the way of their progress. Arrogants sods, I know. But I also know pedestrians who will press the button and step out in the road as soon as the pedex light goes amber in the hope that they upset the driver of the nearest car.
It is a matter of human reflex or self preservation to avoid an accident, I am sure that the arrogant pink fluffy rice (driver or pedestrian) will blink at the last moment
So....pack it in and behave....all of you. Or I'll have you up in front of the headmaster!
|
|
Tack it is a debate, no closed minds I hope. Anyway duty calls I must away. Back tomorrow, all being well. Safe and enjoyable driving everyone.
|
So NW you stated there are no pedestrian crossings in the US on the basis of what you see when you get off a bus in UK.
Er... for once even I am speechless...
|
So NW you stated there are no pedestrian crossings in the US on the basis of what you see when you get off a bus in UK.
Thommo, sweetie, read what I wrote.
I described the situation in my part of the UK, where you would like to apply an American rule. Sorry if that's all too complicated for you.
|
|
How about when stepping out into the road with looking? which apppears to be the cae here. The US law is predicated on their unique lifestyle - walking is alien. We share the highway, and its drivers who have to be licensed, therefore of lower entitlement. The ordinary roads in the UK are open to all, whatever their limitations, some of which come to us all sooner or later.
|
|
There certainly does seem to be a lot of the (US inspired) 'I'M WALKING HERE!' loud and aggressive attitude amongst pedestrians who shouldn't be where they are.
|
If you read the post the 'muppet' was looking but the driver wasn't indicating, probably because he was too busy using his mobile.
If you're still fully on the side of the driver I'm sorry for you, it would appear that you have more in common that you might imagine.
|
I think more people should attend Advanced Walking courses where they will receive training in Defensive Walking and can qualify for full membership of OAP (Organisation of Advanced Pedestrians).
The course is wide ranging but includes sections on risk management in walking at the vehicle/pedestrian interface. In particular, it teaches a hierarchical approach to managing risk on pedestrian road crossing.
Before crossing a road: Identify all hazards and then work out severity and control measures. Remember that the act of signalling is not a legal contract to turn, nor is the omission of a signal a legal contract not to turn.
Further, make a general assessment of the driving behaviour of all drivers who may come into contact with you during the crossing. If there is evidence of lack of concentration from the driver such as mobile-phone use then show more caution in deciding whether or not to cross.
Finally, if there is some 'post-near miss altercation', remember that it is impossible to rationalise with irrational people. A judgement needs to be made as to the benefits of achieving 'street justice' compared to the risk of assault & serious injury from an angry motorist. In serious cases it may be best to simply note down the number-plate and leave the scene.
|
You chaps get so exercised about such trivia. In Manila there are only two types of pedestrians, the quick and the dead. And anyway I've spent so much money on my nice shiny car I'm way up the food chain so of course I have priority.......
|
Given the number of posts above that seem to condone knowingly and deliberately running over a pedestrian who was trying to cross the road safely, I think I'll stick to the pavement from now on.
There is a world of difference between waiting a moment for someone to complete their crossing, and an idiot stepping out without looking. If you can't tell the difference then perhaps you should ask your primary school for a refund.
|
why can't anyone else spell 'aggressive'?
>>
or "lose" - many backroomers think it is the same as "loose"
or "led" - many think it is spelt "lead"
etc. etc.
|
|
And 'definitely'-not 'definately'.
|
|
The one that caught my eye was "fone"!
|
ok hands up I cant spell very well
--
Im a student ive got time!!!
|
The one that caught my eye was "fone"!
or licenses, instead of licences.
|
|
As I understand it, in UK usage, the spelling of "licence" depends on whether it is used as a noun, where licence is the correct spelling, or as a verb, where license is the correct spelling. Thus, the phrase "to be licensed" is a verb and is correctly spelled.
|
nortones2 -
please refer to the first post in this thread, last sentence of the first paragraph.
"it makes you wonder how people keep their licenses!!! "
|
|
Dalglish: Ah so....Must be Americanese:)
|
As I understand it, in UK usage, the spelling of "licence" depends on whether it is used as a noun, where licence is the correct spelling, or as a verb, where license is the correct spelling. Thus, the phrase "to be licensed" is a verb and is correctly spelled.
Thanks for the advise.
;-)
|
And why can't anyone else spell 'aggressive'?
>>
I did, but I had to think twice because, although I am an ex-proof reader who takes pride in my English, I see so many identical errors (mainly on the 'net) that my poor old brain starts accepting them as normal.
|
I was leaving the scene when the driver backed up following me!!! and started the 'street justice' argument.
--
Im a student ive got time!!!
|
Well this is a lovely thread isn't it?
Poor old Cub Leader must be wondering if his original post was mistakenly presented to the world in Sanskrit, given the myriad of (mis)interpretations of a clearly represented situation.
Deep breath and..... relax.......
There. Better?
ND
ps. No the irony of me, serial cross-interpreter of posts, adding this to the thread hasn't escaped me.
No Do$h - Alfa-driving Backroom Moderator
mailto:moderators@honestjohn.co.uk
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
