Pedestrians

Status
Not open for further replies.
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

Angelfishsolo

A Velocipedian
I'll tell you what, tomorrow when I go out for my ride I'll keep track of the number of people that I see walking or running while listening to their iPods. Today when I was on my ride I had two runners in front of me with several yards between us. Both were running faster than I was riding and both had their iPods in.

Were there any collisions or near collisions?
 
So by your logic a deaf person is screwed.

No, but given that they're the one at risk it's on them to remain safe. Such as deaf drivers at least here in the States are required by law to have more and/or larger mirrors on their car.
 
[QUOTE 1484840"]
A pedestrian wearing headphones is no risk to a cyclist. The headphones only stop them being aware of you, not vice versa. If you've seen them, you know they've got headphones on and are less likely to hear you so you deal with them slightly differently. That's all.

I pass about 5 headphones wearers every day on a narrow path on my commute. In 8 years not one of them has ever been a risk to me.


[/quote]

Lucky you. I pass more than that, they're also usually to distracted by their cell/mobile phone.

I would have to argue with you, in that in order to take evasive action to avoid hitting them I end up running into a tree/bush/fence or what have you to avoid them. As a distracted person is placing everyone else around them at risk.

Those who are talking on their cell/mobile phone are so distracted by said conversation that their reaction time is worse then someone who is drunk. Just a couple of weeks ago I had two close calls with drivers who were so distracted by their cell/mobile phone conversation while driving that they didn't see me and cut me off and almost hit me.
 
[QUOTE 1484842"]
Nope, no-one is saying that. All that's being said is that cyclists are responsible for dealing with what's in front of them appropriately.

And in your case, you should have stopped.
[/quote]

Your comments that a pedestrian can behave in any manner they want and that cyclists have to somehow be able to read their mind to know where they are going seems to contradict what you have just said.
 
[QUOTE 1484843"]
If I see a pedestrian in front of me, where he shouldn't be, and I still ride into him, then the collision is a result of my action, not his.
[/quote]

Ah, but IF the pedestrian HADN'T been where s/he WASN'T suppose be to then they would NOT have been in any danger of being hit by anyone. So it's THEIR action (or lack thereof) that caused them to be hit.

As I've said before (I believe) on one of the main multi use/shared path here in St. Pete the Pinellas Trail. It is clearly marked that pedestrians are to remain on the right side and cyclists are to remain on the left side. The only "pedestrian" allowed to be on the cyclist side of the trail are runners and skaters. Otherwise pedestrians are required and expected to remain on their side of the trail. Also those who are walking dogs are required to keep their dogs on a leash no longer then 6'.

Today (04 August) while I was on the final leg of my ride there was a gal who was behaving in an irresponsible manner. She had a small dog on one of those stupid retractable leashes and was allowing it to run willy nilly all over the path, with it's leash stretched out across the path creating a trip hazard to other users.

If someone was jogging or cycling and got caught in the leash it would have been her fault for not having had better control of her dog.
 
OP
OP
benb

benb

Evidence based cyclist
Location
Epsom
How much space is enough? What happens when said pedestrian stops, changes directions and starts running in the direction of the cyclist? That does happen. I've seen pedestrian suddenly stop, change directions and start running. If there was a cyclist following behind at a previously safe distance gets hit by the now running pedestrian, I'm guessing that in your mind that the cyclist is still at fault. And was somehow either traveling too fast or was too close to the pedestrian in question, or both.

I'm sorry, but that is totally asinine. If the pedestrian is behaving in an unpredictable manner, and suddenly and without warning changes direction and speed how is the cyclist suppose to know what they are planning on doing? Why shouldn't they take responsibility for their own safety and behave in a predictable manner?

It's very telling that you constantly have to resort to extreme and implausible scenarios to defend your position.

The above could never happen to a responsible cyclist, because they would have left enough room for the sudden change of direction to not be an issue, and by the time the ped had started running they would have stopped.

Pedestrians do behave unpredictably. It's not irresponsible, it's just normal behaviour.
 
OP
OP
benb

benb

Evidence based cyclist
Location
Epsom
Why the bloody hell do you keep harping on one isolated incident? And how many times do I have to say that if I had stopped it would have caused a much worse crash involving the people behind me?

Because you're talking bollocks. You were completely surrounded by a crowd of pedestrians. Straight away that means you should have stopped and walked.

If you were going at 4mph, and the lady you hit was going (as you said, double your speed) at 8mph that's a 12mph impact.
If you had stopped, the people walking behind would probably have had time to avoid you at that low speed, and even if they hadn't it would be an impact of <3mph.

Your justification for just carrying on and not avoiding the collision just doesn't make sense.
 

Angelfishsolo

A Velocipedian
It's very telling that you constantly have to resort to extreme and implausible scenarios to defend your position.

The above could never happen to a responsible cyclist, because they would have left enough room for the sudden change of direction to not be an issue, and by the time the ped had started running they would have stopped.

Pedestrians do behave unpredictably. It's not irresponsible, it's just normal behaviour.

DC is now so deep in a hole he has nowhere to turn :sad: Or maybe it's possible that people in Florida do behave in this way and we are being very unfair on him.
 

Angelfishsolo

A Velocipedian
Because you're talking bollocks. You were completely surrounded by a crowd of pedestrians. Straight away that means you should have stopped and walked.

If you were going at 4mph, and the lady you hit was going (as you said, double your speed) at 8mph that's a 12mph impact.
If you had stopped, the people walking behind would probably have had time to avoid you at that low speed, and even if they hadn't it would be an impact of <3mph.

Your justification for just carrying on and not avoiding the collision just doesn't make sense.

Ah but the Policeman told him it was ok to ride so he blindly followed the instructions.
 
OP
OP
benb

benb

Evidence based cyclist
Location
Epsom
I'm done with this thread. I refuse to believe that someone can be as obtuse as Digital_Cowboy and still function as a human, so I think he's just winding us up.
duty_calls.png
 

just jim

Guest
But it is possible fo
r one to be behaving in both an irresponsible and unpredictable manner.

That would be your scary bloke deliberately jumping out from behind a tree into your path, not a scared bloke jumping into your path whilst running away from a hungry alligator. The 'gator may or may not be persuing with an iPod on listening to AC/DC's greatest hits.
 
OP
OP
benb

benb

Evidence based cyclist
Location
Epsom
That would be your scary bloke deliberately jumping out from behind a tree into your path, not a scared bloke jumping into your path whilst running away from a hungry alligator. The 'gator may or may not be persuing with an iPod on listening to AC/DC's greatest hits.

Surely the gator would be listening to Swamp Thing by Malcolm McLaren.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Top Bottom