5 ms·
Even when crossing roads where the speed limit is 40MPH+?
by fastball 6y ago
Even when crossing roads where the speed limit is 40MPH+?
- ghaff 6y agoYeah. I see the clowns in Cambridge who dart out into a poorly lit road at night not at a crosswalk wearing dark clothing. I'm watching for them because I know people do it. But the idea that a pedestrian can do anything they want to get across a medium speed road is idiotic.
- chrisseaton 6y agoWhy shouldn't they cross the road any way they like? Why do you think the space is yours by default and not theirs?
- fastball 6y agoBecause you are in a fast-moving, can't-stop-on-a-dime vehicle that society has agreed is useful and that society has agreed can (and should, for efficiency purposes) go certain speeds in certain areas.
- ghaff 6y agoBecause someone may well maim or kill them sooner or later, if you're going to have cars, and will be a great bother for everyone involved. Look, I live somewhere people in all modes of transportation including foot mostly treat traffic laws as vague suggestions, but it's not so much a case of a driver refusing to stop for a pedestrian but the fact that pedestrians randomly crossing roads, especially at night and/or rainy weather, are running a non-trivial risk of getting hit.
- leetcrew 6y agowhy is a sidewalk for pedestrians by default? is it unreasonable that cars aren't allowed on a sidewalk when pedestrians aren't using it?
- chrisseaton 6y ago> why is a sidewalk for pedestrians by default? Because pedestrians should have primacy. All areas should be for pedestrians by default, and minimal exceptions made. The majority of the street is a not a minimal exception.
- umanwizard 6y agoAlmost everyone walks (and even those who don’t can still use sidewalks, with wheelchairs). “Pedestrian” isn’t some separate class of people. Also, pedestrians don’t have negative externalities, and don’t take up nearly as much space. If car-only roads only took up as much room in cities as sidewalks do, I wouldn’t mind them!
- imtringued 6y agoYeah, I'm always terrified when someone crosses the street irresponsibly. Pedestrians are very unpredictable so often I just have to cross my fingers and hope they weren't stupid enough to make obvious mistakes but lazy enough to take dangerous shortcuts.
- chrisseaton 6y agoWhy not? People come first. That's how it works in other countries. I think in the UK pedestrians always have right of way, with a couple of exceptions (motorways and things.)
- fastball 6y ago1. The person in the car is also a person, why shouldn't they have right of way. 2. That's not how it works in other countries. Pedestrians do not have right of way in the UK if not at a marked crossing.
- chrisseaton 6y ago> Pedestrians do not have right of way in the UK if not at a marked crossing. Yes they do - look at the case law in practice. For example Brushett v Hazeldean (that was cyclists but it's being interpreted as cars as well.)
- fastball 6y agoI have. They do not have the right of way. Vehicle operators merely have a high duty of care which can supersede right of way. Also, the case you reference was a case of a pedestrian crossing at a designated pedestrian crossing, so I don't understand how that's relevant to your point – if anything it supports mine.
- Sodman 6y agoYou have to remember there are also people in the cars who are now put in unnecessary danger by pedestrians jumping out in front of them. The worst part is that they are at the mercy of others to avoid this danger. Even if they see you unexpectedly moving in front of traffic and react in time, the 2-3 cars behind them also have to do the same for everyone to avoid injury. If you jump in front of moving cars, you should be personally liable for any injuries and damages caused by cars trying to avoid you. And this is all avoidable if the pedestrian walks a little further to get to the crosswalk, or waits a little longer for a walk signal.
- umanwizard 6y agoSuch roads shouldn’t exist in cities.