Pedestrian and car at the Abbey Road crossing

[Finlandia]

vonhosen said:

For the offence they committed of exceeding the limit.
There is no speed limit for pedestrians.

Or for cyclists for that matter, wonder why?

[vonhosen]

Finlandia said:

vonhosen said:

For the offence they committed of exceeding the limit.
There is no speed limit for pedestrians.

Or for cyclists for that matter, wonder why?

Because they rarely kill others when they collide with them?

[Finlandia]

vonhosen said:

There is no speed limit for pedestrians, you want to charge them for running to a bus stop to catch a bus?
What speed limit are you proposing for pedestrians?
What happens to joggers?

Edited by vonhosen on Friday 14th November 17:13

I want to make them aware of the dangers of running out in the road, no matter where.
Joggers can jog or run as much as they like on designated paths, not run across busy city streets without a care in the world, while jamming along with the music blaring in their headphones.

[Finlandia]

vonhosen said:

Because they rarely kill others when they collide with them?

But often cause injuries of various degree, and can sometimes cause other road users to have accidents with much worse outcome.

[Devil2575]

Finlandia said:

vonhosen said:

For the offence they committed of exceeding the limit.
There is no speed limit for pedestrians.

Or for cyclists for that matter, wonder why?

Because cyclists and pedestrians travelling at speed tend not to be able to do enough damage to warrant a limit. Also neither come with speed measuring devices from the factory.

[vonhosen]

Finlandia said:

vonhosen said:

There is no speed limit for pedestrians, you want to charge them for running to a bus stop to catch a bus?
What speed limit are you proposing for pedestrians?
What happens to joggers?

Edited by vonhosen on Friday 14th November 17:13

I want to make them aware of the dangers of running out in the road, no matter where.
Joggers can jog or run as much as they like on designated paths, not run across busy city streets without a care in the world, while jamming along with the music blaring in their headphones.

So your attempt to compare it with the car has no relevance.
They have no legal protection just running out into the road, they do in very limited circumstances such as zebra crossing where they have right of way.

[Finlandia]

vonhosen said:

Finlandia said:

vonhosen said:

There is no speed limit for pedestrians, you want to charge them for running to a bus stop to catch a bus?
What speed limit are you proposing for pedestrians?
What happens to joggers?

Edited by vonhosen on Friday 14th November 17:13

I want to make them aware of the dangers of running out in the road, no matter where.
Joggers can jog or run as much as they like on designated paths, not run across busy city streets without a care in the world, while jamming along with the music blaring in their headphones.

So your attempt to compare it with the car has no relevance.

So you think it's a good idea to run out in the street without checking then?

[vonhosen]

Finlandia said:

vonhosen said:

Finlandia said:

vonhosen said:

There is no speed limit for pedestrians, you want to charge them for running to a bus stop to catch a bus?
What speed limit are you proposing for pedestrians?
What happens to joggers?

Edited by vonhosen on Friday 14th November 17:13

I want to make them aware of the dangers of running out in the road, no matter where.
Joggers can jog or run as much as they like on designated paths, not run across busy city streets without a care in the world, while jamming along with the music blaring in their headphones.

So your attempt to compare it with the car has no relevance.

So you think it's a good idea to run out in the street without checking then?

See above, no.
They have no legal protection running out into the street without checking.
They have legal protection in limited circumstances such as at zebra crossings. The onus there is for the vehicles to take care there because it is they crossing a pedestrian right of way.

[Finlandia]

vonhosen said:

Finlandia said:

vonhosen said:

Finlandia said:

vonhosen said:

There is no speed limit for pedestrians, you want to charge them for running to a bus stop to catch a bus?
What speed limit are you proposing for pedestrians?
What happens to joggers?

Edited by vonhosen on Friday 14th November 17:13

I want to make them aware of the dangers of running out in the road, no matter where.
Joggers can jog or run as much as they like on designated paths, not run across busy city streets without a care in the world, while jamming along with the music blaring in their headphones.

So your attempt to compare it with the car has no relevance.

So you think it's a good idea to run out in the street without checking then?

See above, no.
They have no legal protection running out into the street without checking.

Good, we agree then. Now we just need to educate people to look before crossing a road, be it wherever.

[vonhosen]

Finlandia said:

vonhosen said:

Finlandia said:

vonhosen said:

Finlandia said:

vonhosen said:

There is no speed limit for pedestrians, you want to charge them for running to a bus stop to catch a bus?
What speed limit are you proposing for pedestrians?
What happens to joggers?

Edited by vonhosen on Friday 14th November 17:13

I want to make them aware of the dangers of running out in the road, no matter where.
Joggers can jog or run as much as they like on designated paths, not run across busy city streets without a care in the world, while jamming along with the music blaring in their headphones.

So your attempt to compare it with the car has no relevance.

So you think it's a good idea to run out in the street without checking then?

See above, no.
They have no legal protection running out into the street without checking.

Good, we agree then. Now we just need to educate people to look before crossing a road, be it wherever.

There is already education, as there is for drivers that they should accord precedence. It doesn't stop some still not doing that though.
If the driver is doing what they should be doing it won't matter if someone runs or not when it comes to zebra crossings.

[Finlandia]

vonhosen said:

Finlandia said:

vonhosen said:

Finlandia said:

vonhosen said:

Finlandia said:

vonhosen said:

There is no speed limit for pedestrians, you want to charge them for running to a bus stop to catch a bus?
What speed limit are you proposing for pedestrians?
What happens to joggers?

Edited by vonhosen on Friday 14th November 17:13

I want to make them aware of the dangers of running out in the road, no matter where.
Joggers can jog or run as much as they like on designated paths, not run across busy city streets without a care in the world, while jamming along with the music blaring in their headphones.

So your attempt to compare it with the car has no relevance.

So you think it's a good idea to run out in the street without checking then?

See above, no.
They have no legal protection running out into the street without checking.

Good, we agree then. Now we just need to educate people to look before crossing a road, be it wherever.

There is already education, as there is for drivers that they should accord precedence. It doesn't stop some still not doing that though.
If the driver is doing what they should be doing it won't matter if someone runs or not when it comes to zebra crossings.

As the study in Sweden shows, remove own responsibility and the accidents rise. Put some responsibility on the pedestrian and they will open their eyes, because all of the sudden the law isn't protecting them.

[vonhosen]

Finlandia said:

vonhosen said:

Finlandia said:

vonhosen said:

Finlandia said:

vonhosen said:

Finlandia said:

vonhosen said:

There is no speed limit for pedestrians, you want to charge them for running to a bus stop to catch a bus?
What speed limit are you proposing for pedestrians?
What happens to joggers?

Edited by vonhosen on Friday 14th November 17:13

I want to make them aware of the dangers of running out in the road, no matter where.
Joggers can jog or run as much as they like on designated paths, not run across busy city streets without a care in the world, while jamming along with the music blaring in their headphones.

So your attempt to compare it with the car has no relevance.

So you think it's a good idea to run out in the street without checking then?

See above, no.
They have no legal protection running out into the street without checking.

Good, we agree then. Now we just need to educate people to look before crossing a road, be it wherever.

There is already education, as there is for drivers that they should accord precedence. It doesn't stop some still not doing that though.
If the driver is doing what they should be doing it won't matter if someone runs or not when it comes to zebra crossings.

As the study in Sweden shows, remove own responsibility and the accidents rise. Put some responsibility on the pedestrian and they will open their eyes, because all of the sudden the law isn't protecting them.

There is education already & that makes people fully aware of the potentially dire consequences in a collision with vehicles, fines will not concentrate the mind any further than that.
To place further responsibility on pedestrians would mean removing their priority over traffic & that makes zebra crossings redundant. What then happens is A) People don't bother using the crossing because there is no benefit &/or B) You have more light crossings which will mean more traffic stopped for longer in normally quiet pedestrian areas, every time one person wants to cross. More expense for the public purse, all because drivers can't take care crossing another's priority.

[DonkeyApple]

heebeegeetee said:

Phatboy317 said:

The first page was reasonable, until a couple of posters appeared who started banging on about the law to the exclusion of all else- and the rest of you just followed on like sheep.

We are referring to this case. She was already on the crossing, indeed she came from the other side of the road to the car so it's not even as though she stepped straight off the pavement in front of the car.

What the driver could or couldn't see is irrelevant. The only bit that matters is that he crossed the zebra without checking that it was clear to do so.

That's all there is to it.

That does seem a little disingenuous though. She wasn't near the crossing on his approach and I suspect that as she suddenly started to run as soon as the black Cayenne was crossing the other way the driver probably could have seen or imagined that the person walking to the crossing would have suddenly started running.

And then I don't think any driver could have predicted the runner would then veer into the direction of the car rather than stay on the crossing or alter course to pass behind the car.

The law may be against the driver, that's fine, but it does strike me as one of those absolutely bizarre actions from a pedestrian that really cannot be accounted for as it is so anomalous. I do feel sorry for the driver as I don't think they stood a chance however well they were driving.

[Finlandia]

vonhosen said:

Finlandia said:

vonhosen said:

Finlandia said:

vonhosen said:

Finlandia said:

vonhosen said:

Finlandia said:

vonhosen said:

There is no speed limit for pedestrians, you want to charge them for running to a bus stop to catch a bus?
What speed limit are you proposing for pedestrians?
What happens to joggers?

Edited by vonhosen on Friday 14th November 17:13

I want to make them aware of the dangers of running out in the road, no matter where.
Joggers can jog or run as much as they like on designated paths, not run across busy city streets without a care in the world, while jamming along with the music blaring in their headphones.

So your attempt to compare it with the car has no relevance.

So you think it's a good idea to run out in the street without checking then?

See above, no.
They have no legal protection running out into the street without checking.

Good, we agree then. Now we just need to educate people to look before crossing a road, be it wherever.

There is already education, as there is for drivers that they should accord precedence. It doesn't stop some still not doing that though.
If the driver is doing what they should be doing it won't matter if someone runs or not when it comes to zebra crossings.

As the study in Sweden shows, remove own responsibility and the accidents rise. Put some responsibility on the pedestrian and they will open their eyes, because all of the sudden the law isn't protecting them.

To place further responsibility on pedestrians would mean removing their priority over traffic & that makes zebra crossings redundant. What then happens is A) People don't bother using the crossing because there is no benefit &/or B) You have more light crossings which will mean more traffic stopped for longer in normally quiet pedestrian areas, every time one person wants to cross. More expense for the public purse, all because drivers can't take care crossing another's priority.

Here is a zebra crossing in Helsinki, not many cross there without looking. The best part is that it works, even kids and drunkards know to keep clear.

[DonkeyApple]

vonhosen said:

Finlandia said:

vonhosen said:

Finlandia said:

vonhosen said:

Finlandia said:

vonhosen said:

There is no speed limit for pedestrians, you want to charge them for running to a bus stop to catch a bus?
What speed limit are you proposing for pedestrians?
What happens to joggers?

Edited by vonhosen on Friday 14th November 17:13

I want to make them aware of the dangers of running out in the road, no matter where.
Joggers can jog or run as much as they like on designated paths, not run across busy city streets without a care in the world, while jamming along with the music blaring in their headphones.

So your attempt to compare it with the car has no relevance.

So you think it's a good idea to run out in the street without checking then?

See above, no.
They have no legal protection running out into the street without checking.

Good, we agree then. Now we just need to educate people to look before crossing a road, be it wherever.

There is already education, as there is for drivers that they should accord precedence. It doesn't stop some still not doing that though.
If the driver is doing what they should be doing it won't matter if someone runs or not when it comes to zebra crossings.

Getting hit by a car is a pretty efficient education. But better for parents to educate their offspring in the first instance.

[Finlandia]

vonhosen said:

There is education already & that makes people fully aware of the potentially dire consequences in a collision with vehicles, fines will not concentrate the mind any further than that.

So why is it that drivers get fined? Surely peoples mind works the same, regardless if you are walking or driving?

[Finlandia]

DonkeyApple said:

Getting hit by a car is a pretty efficient education. But better for parents to educate their offspring in the first instance.

But when it was the others fault, you didn't do anything wrong, you have the right to do just as you did.

If you knew you're in the wrong, or at least partly to blame and not protected by the law, then you might just look more carefully.

[vonhosen]

Finlandia said:

vonhosen said:

There is education already & that makes people fully aware of the potentially dire consequences in a collision with vehicles, fines will not concentrate the mind any further than that.

So why is it that drivers get fined? Surely peoples mind works the same, regardless if you are walking or driving?

No because driver's are cocooned & removed from it, they won't die when they hit the pedestrian, they care even less.
Drivers's also get points for failing to accord precedence, so they'll loose their ability to drive if they keep doing that (removing that problematic person).

[vonhosen]

Finlandia said:

DonkeyApple said:

Getting hit by a car is a pretty efficient education. But better for parents to educate their offspring in the first instance.

But when it was the others fault, you didn't do anything wrong, you have the right to do just as you did.

If you knew you're in the wrong, or at least partly to blame and not protected by the law, then you might just look more carefully.

Some pedestrians run across the road where there aren't crossings, where they have no legal protection, so making them responsible there doesn't stop them doing it.

By giving them a place to cross where they have priority it puts them in a place where drivers can anticipate them moving into the road in front of them & approach accordingly. It's also a method of crossing that doesn't unduly delay vehicles where it's a single crosser time after time.

[Finlandia]

vonhosen said:

Finlandia said:

vonhosen said:

There is education already & that makes people fully aware of the potentially dire consequences in a collision with vehicles, fines will not concentrate the mind any further than that.

So why is it that drivers get fined? Surely peoples mind works the same, regardless if you are walking or driving?

No because driver's are cocooned & removed from it, they won't die when they hit the pedestrian, they care even less.
Drivers's also get points for failing to accord precedence, so they'll loose their ability to drive if they keep doing that (removing that problematic person).

But they die when they crash into something bigger at higher speed, surely that knowledge is enough to sharpen their concentration, so why fine them?