No respect or consideration for pedestrian crossings

[Dan B]

Do you have kids Dan? I have, and even they can use a ped crossing safely without knowing the legal rules, loopholes, clauses and minutiae behind its existence and use. They have been taught to stand at the crossing, a safe distance from the traffic, where they can see and be seen. Once they can see the road is clear or that the approaching traffic has stopped (and not before!), they can then proceed to cross the road, still watching in both directions for any other approaching vehicles.

It's child's play really, any idiot can do it (or not as the case may be).

And your point is? Just because we have to teach our children that car drivers are dangerous and don't follow the rules, doesn't mean car drivers have an excuse for being dangerous and not following the rules.

 

[I like Skol]

Exactly! Which is why he should have been going slower

That will fit almost perfectly on the poor pedestrians gravestone when they step out in front of a moving vehicle once too often.....

 

[Markymark]

Do you have kids Dan? I have, and even they can use a ped crossing safely without knowing the legal rules, loopholes, clauses and minutiae behind its existence and use. They have been taught to stand at the crossing, a safe distance from the traffic, where they can see and be seen. Once they can see the road is clear or that the approaching traffic has stopped (and not before!), they can then proceed to cross the road, still watching in both directions for any other approaching vehicles.

It's child's play really, any idiot can do it (or not as the case may be).

I also have children. I teach them to watch out for twats like the van driver who should have anticipated the woman crossing the road. I teach them that twats exist all over the world and that you shouldn't expect van drivers to pay attention and to do dangerous stupid things. Even on cycling forums you will find people saying that they couldn't possibly be expected to notice people walking to a crossing with the likelihood of stepping out.

Either the cyclist is magical in reading the future of the van driver is a twat who either wasn't paying attention or more likely didn't care.

 

[mr messy]

White vanman is generally self-employed, time is money, he can't afford niceties like 'giving way'....

 

[Dan B]

That will fit almost perfectly on the poor pedestrians gravestone when they step out in front of a moving vehicle once too often.....

Oh, I get it! The van driver has thoughtfully taken it upon himself to drive like a daffodil, in order that pedestrians he meets will learn the important lesson that some people who drive cars are daffodils

 

[I like Skol]

And your point is? Just because we have to teach our children that car drivers are dangerous, doesn't mean car drivers have an excuse for being dangerous.

My simple point, which has sailed over your head completely, is that regardless of whether the approaching vehicle is driven by a murderous maniac or a slightly inattentive saint, it is rather foolish to step out in front of the moving vehicle because [(edit) your interpretation of] the rules say you can.

 

[Turbo Rider]

I think if you have to wonder about points like that then maybe you aren't safe to go out on your own. Personally, I don't worry too much about the minute details of the rules and pay more attention to making sure I stay safe

Oh, I'm definitely not safe to go out...I have accidents walking through doors...but I was more wondering about standpoint from the pedestrian point of view, as its debatable, in this instance, as to whether or not she's on the crossing...I would have stopped to check the traffic had stopped, incidentally, but the rider has stopped anyway and the van driver has ignored the flow of the traffic...just wondering where the vanm driver stands if someone were walking out from the other side, say...and the cyclist hadnt been there...murky...

 

[glasgowcyclist]

Exactly! Which is why he should have been going slower

Can a pedestrian, placing a foot on the crossing, command traffic to stop regardless of how close to the crossing that traffic is?


GC

 

[benb]

My simple point, which has sailed over your head completely, is that regardless of whether the approaching vehicle is driven by a murderous maniac or a slightly inattentive saint, it is rather foolish to step out in front of the moving vehicle because [(edit) your interpretation of] the rules say you can.

No one has said you should just step out.

 

[benb]

Can a pedestrian, placing a foot on the crossing, command traffic to stop regardless of how close to the crossing that traffic is?


GC

That's the wrong question.

Should a driver slow down such that they can stop if that pedestrian steps onto the crossing?

 

[I like Skol]

Here it goes again! Cycle chatters prepared to argue to the death

Personally, I am happy to walk away without silencing all opposition. I also do the same on the roads, it makes me a lot safer. I would rather be alive than right!

I'm sure this little discussion can continue quite nicely without me....

 

[Markymark]

Flounce!!!

Nobody denies its better to be alive than right. Some, however, also argue that it's not an excuse for people in 1.5 tonne metal boxes to be extra careful and shouldn't be forgiven for infringements which any competent driver would have and should have anticipated and avoided.

 

[summerdays]

I'll weigh in my tu'pence worth here.

The lady didn't wait to see the road was clear.
The van driver could not know she was going to cross the crossing. Up to a second or two before she stepped on to the crossing she was a person walking along the pavement.
The van driver should not have overtaken you at the crossing, but most drivers fail to register cyclists as other vehicles on the road so simply do not realise they are 'overtaking' (wrong but true ).
Way to go shouting out crude expletives in front of the lady at the crossing!

In the big scheme of things, another pointless video of a non-event.

Theoretically it doesn't matter if the lady was there or not... The Zig-zags mean no overtaking so the driver was in the wrong.

 

[PK99]

Theoretically it doesn't matter if the lady was there or not... The Zig-zags mean no overtaking so the driver was in the wrong.

Another who does not know the law....

Check upthread

 

[MontyVeda]

...
Way to go shouting out crude expletives in front of the lady at the crossing!

...

sexist!