Dozy bleedin' pedestrians...

[theclaud]

It's a thorny issue.

Is it? I think we just need to get over the fact that pedestrians can be annoying (and I do acknowledge that they can be). It's only because we're used to the domination of our public space by cars that we think people should go about their business in a permanent state of vigilance, and defer to people who threaten their lives with anti-social forms of transport. Why shouldn't people wander about aimlessly, eating ice creams, chatting, and thinking about sex, Home and Away and whats-for-dinner? Pedestrians deserve top spot in the hierarchy, and we should aim to be their friends and allies.

I could kill those people with extending dog-leads, though...

 

[swee'pea99]

Why shouldn't people wander about aimlessly, eating ice creams, chatting, and thinking about sex, Home and Away and whats-for-dinner?

Well, they can of course. And there are any number of places ideally suited for it. Not including the middle of major highways. It's got nothing to do with the tyranny of the motor car; it's just horses for courses. Walk on the pavements, and when you want to cross the road, use your eyes, your brain and the green cross code. Oh yes, you know it makes sense.

 

[hackbike 6]

As I said I dont particulary enjoy hitting peds because they suddenly bolt across the road or cross in stupid places.Peds should take responsibility too.I know I do.

 

[theclaud]

[quote name='swee'pea99']It's got nothing to do with the tyranny of the motor car; it's just horses for courses. Walk on the pavements, and when you want to cross the road, use your eyes, your brain and the green cross code. Oh yes, you know it makes sense.[/quote]

Yes it has. I'd agree with you if busy roads were just rare hazards that pedestrians had to put up with and behave accordingly (like railway tracks), but they're everywhere, affecting just about every move they make. Why have right of way for cars in urban streets where people are crossing from the butcher to the baker, or in residential streets where kids wand to play football?

 

[hackbike 6]

Nah I'd agree with sweetpea and we are all peds at one time or another.

Why should a ped cross the road or between traffic with a mobile phone in his or her ear or the 101 dodgy other tricks they do?

They endanger themselves towards a ton of metal or a motorbike or god knows what.It's not about cars ruling the road,it's about personal safety.

 

[theclaud]

Why should a ped cross the road or between traffic with a mobile phone in his or her ear or the 101 dodgy other tricks they do?

They endanger themselves towards a ton of metal or a motorbike or god knows what.It's not about cars ruling the road,it's about personal safety.

Why should pedestrians not have automatic right of way to cross everything except motorways? Then cars would have to travel at 20mph or less most of the time, and they would no longer seem quite so convenient. People would stop using them and then everyone could wander wherever they liked. My latest strategy is to be a deliberately annoying militant pedestrian - deliberately and overtly slowing down cars (whilst of course being ready to jump out of the way if they get nasty).

 

[hackbike 6]

Militant here but I have found it different in other countries i.e Spain and Japan...not so sure about Hong Kong though,they seem a bit mad there.

Peds are impeccable in Japan...I was even allowed to cycle up the pavement...not that I wanted to as I don't think peds and traffic mix.I think Spain are more laid back and English traffic is more aggressive.

Must admit I don't like the English way and as a ped I tend to play a more defensive role.People don't tend to look when they have started crossing...esp at ped light's.Fine but all you need is some lunatic high on something or a RLJer of any variety and you have a hit and run.Next time you stop at the light's (sic) watch the peds...they are normally looking the other way (or not concentrating).I was hit by a car at a young age so I learnt the hard way.

What about the idiot on his mobile or a lorry driver who's misjudged his speed braking distance due to (tiredness)?

deliberately and overtly slowing down cars (whilst of course being ready to bunny hop out of the way if they get nasty).

I like doing that on my bike when im feeling saucy.

 

[jonesy]

Why should pedestrians not have automatic right of way to cross everything except motorways? Then cars would have to travel at 20mph or less most of the time, and they would no longer seem quite so convenient. People would stop using them and then everyone could wander wherever they liked. ....

Quite. That is a perfectly valid question. There is absolutely no reason why drivers shouldn't be expected to avoid driving into pedestrians on the road just as they are expected to avoid driving into other cars. The only reason why cars are given priority is because of an unstated assumption that car travel should always be a fast mode of travel; that roads are for cars, rather than any fundamental principle of safety.

 

[hackbike 6]

I do mean it like that mjones of course cars *should* make allowences for peds but this isn't the perfect world...I have seen some real dodgy crossings more than once and heard about and seen probably more peds in accidents than anything else on the road (whatever happened to the Green X Code?)..I would like peds to take more responsibility...There are some real nutters out there who shouldn't be driving cars though.

As I say I believe the car driving in this country is more aggressive as opposed to Japan where it's more passive.

Lack of Plods?

 

[PBancroft]

[quote name='swee'pea99']Give me strength...[/quote]

You have to wonder sometimes don't you?

On the way back from my hollibobs a couple of months back, we were cycling through the New Forest. Big long stretch of open road a girl wanders across, chatting on her mobile phone and completely oblivious. My mate who was cycling with me was slightly ahead, and passed to the left of her. I passed to the right.

I glanced backwards.

I'm certain she hadn't noticed we were ever there. She just carried on chatting.

 

[hackbike 6]

There is absolutely no reason why drivers shouldn't be expected to avoid driving into pedestrians on the road just as they are expected to avoid driving into other cars.

Trouble is motorists drive into other cars as well as PEDS,they are expected to avoid but sometimes don't.

Not everyone is as clever as you .Have you seen some of the shocking driving on Police,Camera Action?

 

[jonesy]

You've missed the point. theclaud's question was about the fundamental principle of what roads are for, and why it is assumed that cars should have priority. There is absolutely no reason why the law couldn't say that cars have exactly the same priority as pedestrians and that drivers have full responsibility for not causing injury with their vehicles (as is exactly the case for operators of industrial equipment). The consequence of this would be that driving significantly faster than walking pace wouldn't be possible, which clearly makes cars vastly less useful, which is why the law is otherwise. But that is a decision society makes about what purpose is assigned to different types of public space and what priority to different modes of travel, rather than any intrinsic characteristic of different modes.

Just because cars have the potential to go faster than pedestrians doesn't mean they have to; they are just less useful and desirable as status symbols if they can't.

 

[hackbike 6]

Yeah I would like that but I can't see it happening in this country.

Not enough Plod for a start.

 

[jonesy]

... It's only because we're used to the domination of our public space by cars that we think people should go about their business in a permanent state of vigilance, and defer to people who threaten their lives with anti-social forms of transport. Why shouldn't people wander about aimlessly, eating ice creams, chatting, and thinking about sex, Home and Away and whats-for-dinner? ...

Nice to have lots to agree with theclaud today! (We can return to the failure of socialism in P&L another day! )

This also highlights one of the problems of putting cycle paths on pavements: they result in the values and behaviours of the road, with arguments about priority, giving way, lane-discipline, being on-guard and attentive all the time, intruding into pedestrian space, thus destroying the freedom to wander aimlessly thinking about what you will; basically turning yet more public space into a transport mode where only its travel utility is valued. And on that note I'll hand it back to the day shift...

 

[swee'pea99]

Um, dare I interject a word or three from Planet Earth? It's not wicked naughty *cars* that have priority; it's wheeled vehicles. On account of we have created roads for wheeled vehicles travel on. It's not about them and us; it's us. We create roads because we want to use wheeled vehicles. There is plenty of provision for us when we want to travel on foot - and it is up to us to use it sensibly. Which, at the risk of labouring the point, wandering around oblivious isn't.