DOI fails again

[philwebs]

The French have their own rules for pedestrians on crossings (maybe the Spanish and Portuguese as well).

There are times when pedestrians are fair game:

Death Race 2000 (1975)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bf1VQBP6jPE

 

[Happier diner]

2 hours ago, La Colombe said:

Not really. Pedestrians only have right of way if they have started to cross. 

You don't need to worry if they haven't started to cross. 😀

[The Voice of Reason]

3 hours ago, CrazyDave said:

Lunacy would be turning you car into a side road with a pedestrian approaching it without half expecting them to step out in front of you without looking.

Most usually because they are too busy staring down at their phone, and their awareness of approaching traffic is impaired by the headphones stuffed into their ears.

Edited September 3, 2023 by The Voice of Reason
Substituted word. Just reads better. Doesn’t change the meaning

[La Colombe]

1 hour ago, Happier diner said:

You don't need to worry if they haven't started to cross. 😀

I don't worry. 

[Happier diner]

3 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

Most usually because they are too busy staring down at their phone, and their awareness of approaching traffic is impaired by the headphones stuffed into their ears.

That's very true and it's not good. However as a driver you are obliged to take that into account if you notice it. So if you saw a person was clearly distracted you have guilty knowledge. If then then run them over it could well turn out to be your fault even if they were the ones making the mistake. 

[WTF]

2 hours ago, Happier diner said:

That's very true and it's not good. However as a driver you are obliged to take that into account if you notice it. So if you saw a person was clearly distracted you have guilty knowledge. If then then run them over it could well turn out to be your fault even if they were the ones making the mistake. 

if you run them over you didn't notice they had earphones in , simples. 

[doc.fixit]

In reality, if you did run someone over you would likely be totally devastated!

[La Colombe]

Exactly, the assignation of blame would be rendered irrelevant. 

[Happier diner]

29 minutes ago, La Colombe said:

Exactly, the assignation of blame would be rendered irrelevant. 

Not when it came to multi million pound insurance claims it wouldn't. 

[emesde]

The latest uk highway code makes it clear that pedestrians have priority even before they start to cross. I imagine when the IOM eventually gets round to updating their version it will be likewise. 

"At a junction you should give way to pedestrians crossing or waiting to cross a road into which or from which you are turning." 

[Two-lane]

Perhaps the changes to the Highway Code are a result of a change in thinking of whoever designs this stuff.

The design up until now is that pedestrian crossings need to be marked with zig-zag lines and other paraphernalia and that it is safer if they are not located at a junction.

The result is that a pedestrian walking up to a crossroads has to turn left, walk 50 yards down the road, wait for the pedestrian light to change, and then walk 50 yards back up the road to continue.

In other countries, the pedestrian crossing is right on the junctions (Dustin Hoffman - I'm walkin' here), which is a better idea. It is easier for pedestrians, and drivers know that whenever they make a turn there will be a pedestrian crossing.

The latest Highway Code seems to want to go in this direction, but this cannot be done because of the legal requirement for zig-zags and stuff.

 

 

[emesde]

This isn't about, zebra  or other types of crossing. This refers to any junction  where a pedestrian is crossing. Similarly the whole length of the prom from summerhill to Broadway the pavement has been built as a continuous walkway and vehicles have to give way to pedestrians crossing junctions, entrances to hotels and apartment entrances etc etc. 

[Max Power]

There's not much hope of people understanding this rule, many still think the roundels on the prom are roundabouts and not unmarked junctions!

[Ringy Rose]

12 hours ago, CrazyDave said:

My concern is that it lulls pedestrians into a false sense of security that they can just step out and assume vehicles will give way.

As you say, the vehicles should give way.

Sadly there are a lot of Honda Jazz-driving old duffers who are as thick as the proverbial. No doubt it’ll be another of those thick twats who’ve driven at 37 all the way from Ramsey and still drive at 37 turning into a side road.

Hope the pedestrian is OK and the halfwit in the car loses their licence.

[Ringy Rose]

2 hours ago, Two-lane said:

In other countries, the pedestrian crossing is right on the junctions (Dustin Hoffman - I'm walkin' here), which is a better idea. It is easier for pedestrians, and drivers know that whenever they make a turn there will be a pedestrian crossing.

Yep, in most of Europe cars turning right will have pedestrians in the side road, even at traffic lights, as the pedestrians have priority.