Trivial things that make you annoyed beyond expectations?

[Accy cyclist]

So, what you are saying is that...

• The driver has more right to use the road than the pedestrian does
• The driver's time is more important than the pedestrian's

It takes me back to quite a few years ago when there i was out on my bike,trying to beat my personal best blah blah when out steps school lollypop lady to let a parent across the road. At that moment i was the only vehicle on the road. I would've waited to let me pass as i was going downhill at approximately 20 mph,not crawling uphill at 8 miles an hour,so i would've passed in a few seconds or so . Would you have stepped out and stopped me?🤔
Yesterday i crossed a road at a pelican crossing,but didn't press the 'stop' button as i read the road and worked out that i could cross the road safely without having to stop the traffic..as there wasn't any. Would you have pressed the 'stop' button?🤔

 

[ColinJ]

It takes me back to quite a few years ago when there i was out on my bike,trying to beat my personal best blah blah when out steps school lollypop lady to let a parent across the road. At that moment i was the only vehicle on the road. I would've waited to let me pass as i was going downhill at approximately 20 mph,not crawling uphill at 8 miles an hour,so i would've passed in a few seconds or so . Would you have stepped out and stopped me?🤔

I reckon that you are twisting the truth there Accy... Admit it - it was YOU on the bike here and it was ME that stopped you, NOT a lollipop lady...

 

[Accy cyclist]

I reckon that you are twisting the truth there Accy... Admit it - it was YOU on the bike here and it was ME that stopped you, NOT a lollipop lady...

My head is now spinning Colin with thoughts of created by slobs oil slicks and crazy lollipop ladies.

 

[swee'pea99]

So, what you are saying is that...

• The driver has more right to use the road than the pedestrian does
• The driver's time is more important than the pedestrian's

Having said that, I would probably have let the car through first too; mainly because I wouldn't trust the driver to stop!

Or possibly, why put a crimp in another person's day (as well as causing pointless environmental impact) when you could just 'you first' them for the sake of a couple of seconds.

 

[ColinJ]

Or possibly, why put a crimp in another person's day (as well as causing pointless environmental impact) when you could just 'you first' them for the sake of a couple of seconds.

I 'you first' all the time, especially when I am out on the bike. I'd rather let drivers get on their way and out of mine instead of dithering about trying to work out who should go first. (Sometimes well-meaning drivers insist on ME going first though, even though it makes more sense for THEM to - for example when I am grovelling very slowly up a steep hill towards vehicles parked on my side of the road. It would be better for an oncoming driver to whiz down past the parked vehicles rather than waiting 30 seconds for me to crawl up the hill. I always smile and say thanks if a driver gives way to me.)

I was feeling grumpy last night because I was having flashbacks to an incident with a psycho driver at a crossing in Hebden Bridge! A similar scenario, only the car was actually further back from the crossing and I was already on the crossing before the car was anywhere near. There was no question in this case - definitely 'me first'. The driver saw me but instead of slowing down or stopping, he floored the throttle and headed straight at me, clearly expecting me to jump out of his way. I got a rush of blood to the head and just stood there glaring at him. He accelerated faster towards me; I glared a bit more... He then swerved round me onto the wrong side of the road, almost hitting a woman and child crossing the other way.

If there is only one car coming and the driver would have to brake, I'd let him/her go first. If they could just ease off the accelerator to let me cross safely then I'd expect them to let me go first.

They have put a crossing on the A646 next to our new Aldi store. It is close to a mini-roundabout and I worried that drivers might cause problems there. The old mini-roundabout was problematic because it was not clearly marked and many drivers on the main road just ploughed on across, barely noticing it. The new roundabout and crossing are much more clearly marked and humps have been put in the road surface to slow the traffic down. I've seen drivers stopping when they should and smiling at pedestrians, and pedestrians doing the 'you first' thing too. Isn't it nice when we all get on!

 

[Ming the Merciless]

Litter, grrrr

 

[Andy in Germany]

Or possibly, why put a crimp in another person's day (as well as causing pointless environmental impact) when you could just 'you first' them for the sake of a couple of seconds.

By slowing a driver down slightly, you aren't really causing environmental impact, at least not in comparison to the impact that the journey will cause overall, and that's the decision of the person driving: all car journey are by definition a decision that something is more important than the environmental impact. It may be so, but it's unfair to try and blame someone else for part of it.

Secondly, the idea that it "puts a crimp in someone's day leads to two possible conclusions, neither complimentary to the driver. Either:

1: The driver will have a crimp put in their day by every fractional delay, be ic caused by pedestrians, traffic lights, other drivers xercisinf their right of way, give way signs, dogs, quite large wildlife, low flying aircraft, unusually mobile plants, or Acts of God. If this is the case then they aren't really in the right emotional state to be in charge of a ton of lethal metal and probably should take a break. If this is a permanent emotional state they should seek professional help.

or

2: The driver can handle any and all possible slight delays of all of the above with the single exception of pedestrians exercising their right of way across the road, in the limited confines this exists in a pedestrian crossing. If a motorist can have their day crimped by this one event, then either they have a superiority complex regarding people who use their legs to move, or as stated above they really, really shouldn't be driving a car.

Either way, it is important for drivers and pedestrians to remember that the ability to drive a car does not confer the right to a certain space at all times, or the right to travel unimpeded. Nor does the lack of a car mean you have to defer to those who do in all circumstances.

Motorists wanting to drive unimpeeded for a long time can make use of the extensive network of motorways in the UK. Pedestrians have to cross roads and have little to no choice in the matter.

 

[ColinJ]

I thought I would 'spread the love' on my little bike ride this afternoon and make absolutely sure that I did NOT 'put the crimp on' anybody's day.

I was soon riding down a 300 metre length of narrow back street which had parked vehicles all the way along the other side. There was just about room for me to squeeze down the road if a car came the other way, but it would be a bit tight and I wouldn't want to risk it. Then I spotted the front end of a car appearing round the bend at the far end of the street. I was already proceeding down the narrowed stretch so the car should wait for me, but instead I stopped and waited at the kerbside to make space. The car accelerated towards me and I made eye contact with the driver...

It was so exciting - would he flash his lights in recognition of my kindness (no), toot his horn (no), make a friendly gesture with his hand (no), call out a cheery "Thanks, mate!" as he passed (no). What he actually did was to scowl at me as if I had let a dog crap on his doorstep, and not picked it up. Charming!

Oh well, it takes all sorts...

I set off again, but then, guess what? Yes, ANOTHER car appeared at the end of the street. Let's try again... I waited. Car accelerates towards me and passes. No flash of lights, no horn toot, no friendly wave, no cheery thanks. I got dog-crap-doorstep-scowl-of-death again...

I'm sorry, I really am. Yes, I was on a bike rather than driving a car. I can't apologise enough for being on the same planet as you, and even more so for being on the same road! Just drive straight over me next time; it's all I deserve...

 

[classic33]

I thought I would 'spread the love' on my little bike ride this afternoon and make absolutely sure that I did NOT 'put the crimp on' anybody's day.

I was soon riding down a 300 metre length of narrow back street which had parked vehicles all the way along the other side. There was just about room for me to squeeze down the road if a car came the other way, but it would be a bit tight and I wouldn't want to risk it. Then I spotted the front end of a car appearing round the bend at the far end of the street. I was already proceeding down the narrowed stretch so the car should wait for me, but instead I stopped and waited at the kerbside to make space. The car accelerated towards me and I made eye contact with the driver...

It was so exciting - would he flash his lights in recognition of my kindness (no), toot his horn (no), make a friendly gesture with his hand (no), call out a cheery "Thanks, mate!" as he passed (no). What he actually did was to scowl at me as if I had let a dog crap on his doorstep, and not picked it up. Charming!

Oh well, it takes all sorts...

I set off again, but then, guess what? Yes, ANOTHER car appeared at the end of the street. Let's try again... I waited. Car accelerates towards me and passes. No flash of lights, no horn toot, no friendly wave, no cheery thanks. I got dog-shoot-doorstep-scowl-of-death again...

I'm sorry, I really am. Yes, I was on a bike rather than driving a car. I can't apologise enough for being on the same planet as you, and even more so for being on the same road! Just drive straight over me next time; it's all I deserve...

Were the police out down there today?

 

[ColinJ]

Were the police out down there today?

I'm sure that they were probably out and about somewhere round here, but I didn't see them! Mind you, I was only out for about 15 minutes.

 

[classic33]

I'm sure that they were probably out and about somewhere round here, but I didn't see them! Mind you, I was only out for about 15 minutes.

Sounds as though there were some drivers trying to avoid them, taking to back streets down those parts.

 

[ColinJ]

Sounds as though there were some drivers trying to avoid them, taking to back streets down those parts.

Ah, they were proper ruffians and scallywags - that would explain it!

 

[classic33]

Ah, they were proper ruffians and scallywags - that would explain it!

They're catching them with no MOT, insurance round here, and seizing some of the vehicles as well.

They can't manage without their cars.

 

[swee'pea99]

By slowing a driver down slightly, you aren't really causing environmental impact, at least not in comparison to the impact that the journey will cause overall, and that's the decision of the person driving: all car journey are by definition a decision that something is more important than the environmental impact. It may be so, but it's unfair to try and blame someone else for part of it.

Secondly, the idea that it "puts a crimp in someone's day leads to two possible conclusions, neither complimentary to the driver. Either:

1: The driver will have a crimp put in their day by every fractional delay, be ic caused by pedestrians, traffic lights, other drivers xercisinf their right of way, give way signs, dogs, quite large wildlife, low flying aircraft, unusually mobile plants, or Acts of God. If this is the case then they aren't really in the right emotional state to be in charge of a ton of lethal metal and probably should take a break. If this is a permanent emotional state they should seek professional help.

or

2: The driver can handle any and all possible slight delays of all of the above with the single exception of pedestrians exercising their right of way across the road, in the limited confines this exists in a pedestrian crossing. If a motorist can have their day crimped by this one event, then either they have a superiority complex regarding people who use their legs to move, or as stated above they really, really shouldn't be driving a car.

Either way, it is important for drivers and pedestrians to remember that the ability to drive a car does not confer the right to a certain space at all times, or the right to travel unimpeded. Nor does the lack of a car mean you have to defer to those who do in all circumstances.

Motorists wanting to drive unimpeeded for a long time can make use of the extensive network of motorways in the UK. Pedestrians have to cross roads and have little to no choice in the matter.

Other things being equal, anyone travelling from A to B would rather keep going than have to stop and then start again.

Stopping a car and starting up again involves greater environmental impact than not stopping and starting.

Given the option, I'll always prefer not pressing the button to pressing it. That's not betraying any craven attitude to the mighty car. It's just being courteous, and avoiding avoidable environmental impact. Why wouldn't you? You can't wait five seconds? Are you really in that much of a hurry? Or is it that you feel some pressing need to keep motorists from getting above themselves? ("I'm going to make you stop, so you don't get the idea the roads are just here for you. So there.") What benefit do you anticipate from such behaviour, and to whom?

Seriously, this is the kind of little, everyday civility and 'doing as you would be done by' that helps society function. Live and let live. Why do you want to put a crimp in drivers' days? What did they ever do to you? Don't you drive? I do. And if I see someone press the button in the manner described by Accy, it doesn't make me feel righteously reminded that as a motorist I am not supreme. It makes me think 'what a twat'.

Motorists wanting to drive unimpeeded for a long time can make use of the extensive network of motorways in the UK.

Give me strength...

 

[Andy in Germany]

Other things being equal, anyone travelling from A to B would rather keep going than have to stop and then start again.

Including pedestrians. The expectation is already there that pedestrians should wait at pedestrian lights after pressing the button, and when crossing the road anywhere that isn't a pedestrian crossing. That's at least 99% of roads. Why shouldn't pedestrians have right of way for 1%?

Stopping a car and starting up again involves greater environmental impact than not stopping and starting.

And driving a car involves greater environmental impact than not driving one: it's unfair to blame a pedestrian for this when the driver has already made the decision to use an environmentally damaging form of transport,

It's just being courteous, ...Why wouldn't you? You can't wait five seconds? Are you really in that much of a hurry?

I would ask the driver the same question. Why can't we expect a driver to be courteous in the same way by waiting for a fellow human being? And if they get that upset about it, they really shouldn't be in charge of a tone of fast moving metal in a place where people are.

Again, if you want to drive fast, use a motorway. If you drive in a town, you need to accept it is a different environment.

You can't wait five seconds? Are you really in that much of a hurry? Or is it that you feel some pressing need to keep motorists from getting above themselves? ("I'm going to make you stop, so you don't get the idea the roads are just here for you. So there.") What benefit do you anticipate from such behaviour, and to whom?

I remember reading a study that showed as pedestrians stopped using crossings because they felt unsafe, drivers drove faster on those roads; the same happened as people stopped cycling on roads and children stopped walking to school: as the squishy things were not present drivers drove even faster causing a vicious cycle.

Seriously, this is the kind of little, everyday civility and 'doing as you would be done by' that helps society function. Live and let live.

Well, quite: live and let live. Cars cause pollution which kills people, and in Germany 12 people die every day due to motor vehicles.

What did they ever do to you?

I've already had to rush one child to hospital by ambulance with breathing difficulties and I'd rather that I and others don't have to experience the same again. Live and let live, and all that.

Don't you drive?

No. I may have to in my new job, but I haven't driven in many years, largely since the aforementioned rush to take one of my kids to hospital. He was six months old and had breathing difficulties, made worse by pollution from a busy road passing the apartment. As I didn't want to do that to other people, I decided to "do as I would be done by" and not drive.