Motorist 'operating risk'

[Norm]

Are you a lawyer Thomas? Have a little think about what you wrote. Or, at least, the way I interpret what you wrote because it's not very clear.

If someone is crossing a road into which a car is turning, they have priority. If someone walks across a road which already has a vehicle (car, bus, bike or whatever) in it, they do not have priority. The vehicle enters the road when it crosses the white lines.

Which is another point. This thing about peds having priority if they are already crossing has all been about cars. It works for bikes too, if someone is walking across a road that you are turning into, they have priority if they have started to cross before you enter that road.

 

[summerdays]

Which is another point. This thing about peds having priority if they are already crossing has all been about cars. It works for bikes too, if someone is walking across a road that you are turning into, they have priority if they have started to cross before you enter that road.

Agreed - however given the size of bikes it is often fairly easy to go behind them (note I didn't say squeeze). But some pedestrians will indicate that you are to continue anyway (same as they sometimes do at zebra crossings).

 

[thomas]

taht is dealt with in rule 7 c for pedestrians:

Are you a lawyer Thomas? Have a little think about what you wrote. Or, at least, the way I interpret what you wrote because it's not very clear.

My point was that the rule quoted:

rule 170: watch out for pedestrians crossing a road into which you are turning. If they have started to cross they have priority, so give way

Does not back up the point made in the post

i trust you only do that when you have started to cross before the car begins to turn, if you step off the pavement after the car has started to turn you do not have priority

Rule 170 does not give a car priority over pedestrians when they start to make the turn, if the pedestrian is not already crossing. It just does not say that! (I'm not arguing that elsewhere it might be different...but don't make a point with a rule that doesn't say what you're arguing!)

My view is that cars should give way to pedestrians, if the ped is being sensible. The most vulnerable should always take priority.

+1....it's just good manners really. So many times on the way to UNI a driver will block the bit that I would cross at, just so the can sit behind a waiting car or wait for a few minutes at the junction. It would not add anything to their journey just to let me cross first, and save me having to trek around the back of their car.

 

[Norm]

My point was that the rule quoted:

rule 170: watch out for pedestrians crossing a road into which you are turning. If they have started to cross they have priority, so give way

Does not back up the point made in the post

Rule 170 does not give a car priority over pedestrians when they start to make the turn, if the pedestrian is not already crossing. It just does not say that! (I'm not arguing that elsewhere it might be different...but don't make a point with a rule that doesn't say what you're arguing!)

Thomas, I don't think that you were talking about my post, because I didn't mention any "rules", but then you did quote my reply. And I'm not arguing anything, I'm just trying to help you understand what the rules mean.

Your collar-heating appears to be about whether or not the car has started to make the turn. That is, IMO, completely irrelevant. Lose the thought about started to turn or about to turn, that's nonsense because the road which the car is entering could just as easily be straight ahead, with no turning required.

It's about whether or not you have entered the road. The important bit is not about starting to turn or whatever, it's all about whether the car has crossed the white lines which mark the boundary of the road.

 

[marinyork]

Are you a lawyer Thomas? Have a little think about what you wrote. Or, at least, the way I interpret what you wrote because it's not very clear.

If someone is crossing a road into which a car is turning, they have priority. If someone walks across a road which already has a vehicle (car, bus, bike or whatever) in it, they do not have priority. The vehicle enters the road when it crosses the white lines.

Which is another point. This thing about peds having priority if they are already crossing has all been about cars. It works for bikes too, if someone is walking across a road that you are turning into, they have priority if they have started to cross before you enter that road.

It's academic anyway. There's a notorious road here why people swipe into the side road at 25mph. I have priority and can do everything in my power to check before crossing but the speed at which they come makes it a distinct possibility someone will get run over one day. If I do get run over, the police classify it as my fault that I have "carried on walking".

Contrast this with other bits of the world, even places like california where the car is king but if you do that and the ped reports you, you'll have your ass hauled up for remedial lessons for not giving way to the ped.