Not entirely right...the second you place a foot on the road (safely), cars are legally obliged to allow you to cross, the pedestrian has absolute right of way (barring a ped doing something stupid like walking into the side of a car, or stepping out when a car has no chance of stopping)An excellent example of how motor vehicles have come to dominate Western society. Instead of just mandating in the law that pedestrians, once they start to cross, should be allowed to completely cross the road, they place a "refuge" in the middle of the road, and force pedestrians to wait in the middle if motorists are crossing the other half of the road.
(I did just read the relevant rules in the UK Highway Code, by the way, in case anyone's wondering)
I was always under the impression that an 'intent to cross' was sufficient reason to give way and having just re-read the code on that it doesn't seem to contradict me in that while the 'must' is attached to someone crossing, the advice is tothe reason they use islands is to keep traffic moving whenthe ped is still 10 seconds away on teh otherside of say a 2 lanes each way road in towns.
zebra crossings are a poor concept full stop as the ped has to put themselves in danger to legally have hte right to cross. they used to workfine in the "old days" when drivers / cyclists were courteous and peds observant.
npw you gte cars and peds racing each other to get "control" of the crossing.
also nomination for most boring you tube video.
I think you are missing the point. I'm not blaming the ped for anything. I made the decision to stop as soon as she stepped onto the first crossing.Probably should have followed her to her place of work & told her employer that her walking abilities are atrocious...ger her sacked...it's not on...
So, you did nothing wrong, the pedestrain did nothing wrong.I think you are missing the point. I'm not blaming the ped for anything. I made the decision to stop as soon as she stepped onto the first crossing.