Any English Dopers want to chime in re: Zebra crossings? They are everywhere in England, and the pedestrian always has the right of way. They are not well marked, there are lampposts at the side of the road and the stripes painted on the road, as opposed to the big flashing orange sign on Canadian ones. Furthermore, in Canada you push a button (to get the lights flashing), point, and then enter the street, while in England you can cross whenever you fancy, and the cars have to stop.
And they do. Not always but certainly with much more reliability than the Toronto drivers, who for some reason cannot see the big flashing orange sign until it’s too late. They may not ‘slow to a crawl’ each time but they have managed to adapt to a system which allows pedestrians to cross just about anywhere they like.
Read again the OP. The pedestrian chose to cross the road while cj finn’s car was on the crosswalk
That’s bollocks, plain and simple. The vehicles have no obligation to be ostructed by a lunatic trying to beat his PB over 200 metres. It would be an offense if the cars you block ran you over, if that is what you mean, but in that case I’m sure the law would turn a blind eye.
The pedestrian has to watch out for oncoming traffic too. If the pedestrian “looks like they might think about trying to cross” while the car is too close to the crosswalk(like in the OP’s case), the car won’t have enough time to brake.
Crosswalks are not like traffic lights. Its the pedestrian’s responsibility too, to cross the road safely.
Well, here in California, and I’d guess in a majority of America, it’s not “bollocks”. Here the Pedestrian has the ultimate Right of Way and the second their stupid pinky fucking toe touches the pavement by law we are to yield to them-at a corner, in an official corsswalk, at a light, Etc. Whether or not it is safe, prudent, or legal, this law stands.
In fact, in the ultimate slap in the face, on the street I work on, the police(who are working very hard locally to make up some of the budgetary losses), will stand on the side of the road and step out in front of drivers. If these drivers don’t halt immediately, they are pulled over and ticketed.
Errrr, excuse me if I’m hallucinating, but aren’t zebra crossing marked by great big flashing orange lights? And road markings? And black and white poles? If you can’t see any of those, I don’t think you should be driving.
Perhaps I wasn’t clear on the situation. The fellow with the dog was approaching the crosswalk at the same time I was. As I moved closer, he came to a complete stop on the side walk. He even took a moment to arrange his dog properly; perhaps he was trying to train it to heel properly. At this point I am traveling at a sedate 25 mph and am very close to the crosswalk. Mr. Depthperception then looks up and head across the crosswalk. A perfectly legal move in this jurisdiction, but one this is also completely asinine. Coupled with the dirty looks and the vulgar gestures, I would say that Mr. Depthperception is a fucking asshole.
Your suggestion that one needs to stop no matter what is correct insofar as the law reads. However, the idiocy of walking out in front of moving traffic and purposefully creating a situation where there is a significantly higher possibility of getting run over is patently obvious. With rights come responsibilities and Mr. Depthperception chose not to live up to his responsibilities when he excercised his rights.
Sorry, but I think you should have slowed down as soon as you saw the pedestrian by the side of the road. (The dog thing, incidentally, is entirely consistent with someone preparing to cross the road–many pet owners teach their dogs to sit before crossing the road. It helps train the mutt against rushing across intersections.)
Nope. They don’t. Pedestrians have universal right of way over vehicles. If a vehicle hits a pedestrian under any circumstances, the driver is automatically deemed to be at fault until they can prove that the pedestrian did something to get themselves run over. The driver is entirely responsible for anything he or she does while behind the wheel, and rightly so, too.
You’re going to load yourself into half a tonne of moving metal, it’s your sole responsibility to make sure no-one else is hurt by your actions. If you couldn’t stop in time, it’s because you failed to take circumstances into account, whether they be speed, visibility, weather, your car’s response or anything else.
Pedestrian crossings are there as a hint. They’re the government’s way of minimising the chance that you’re going to kill someone. That’s why it’s an offence to walk on a road within 20 metres of a marked crossing. But by putting yourself into a car, you’ve just yielded right of way to pretty much everything else out there.
And featherlou, if you don’t like driving at a safe speed - a “crawl” - stay the fuck out of a car. You obviously don’t have what it takes to not be a danger on the road. If you don’t have the skills to drive the limit without hitting something, don’t pretend it’s someone else’s fault.
No, that’s pretty much the way I read it. You both approached the crossing. You assumed wrongly that he’d yielded his right of way and acted on your assumption rather than allowing for the worst-case scenario. You broke the law and could have killed him. He got upset at this. When he voiced this, you were surprised.
If someone who was oblivious to the situation broke the law and almost hit me, I’d get pretty upset too.
In New Zealand, there are three types of crossings. Zebra-style marked crossings with white lines on the road and a yellow sign mean that the pedestrian has right of way. Those with white lines and no yellow sign mean the pedestrian must give way to vehicles. And then there are those with no lines, called pedestrian refuge crossings, where again, the vehicles have right of way.
Maybe pedestrians have right of way all over America. But it isn’t universal.
a) there are way more Zebras in England than crosswalks in N America
b) both have markings on the street and on the side of the road, but N American crosswalks have BIG FLASHING NEON ORANGE signs extending across the street and overhead of the cars, while the zebra crossings have short lampposts at the side of the road
So, if the suggestion that N American drivers are worse than stopping at crosswalks than English drivers (which from my experience they are), then
a) the fact that there are so many crosswalks in N America, and
b) the fact that N American drivers don’t see them
It seems to me that you should have started slowing down at this moment.
I agree that the pedestrian was being foolish, but you’re hardly in a position to call him a an asshole – you stole the right of way from him and he stole it back, if I understand your description correctly.
What you must remember is that I was extremely close to the crosswalk even before Mr. Depthperception came to a stop to deal with his dog. When he did begin to cross a moment later, I was ridiculously close to the intersection. I was able to stop and therefore was able to fulfill my legal duties to the putz. I was, after all, travelling at less than 25 mph.
But it is not too much to ask that a pedestrian, right of way or no, look before crossing the street and consider whether it is a good idea. I expect Mr. Depthperception’s pique was caused in no large part by the sight of my car coming to a sudden stop very close to him. He either didn’t look or he didn’t consider what type of situation he was creating. While it was my duty to stop, I am under no obligation to graciously submit when an idiot creates a difficult situation for everyone involved.
If Mr. Depthperception chooses to force an auto that is already in the danger zone of the cross walk to come to a sudden stop by stepping out in front of it, he is entitled to do so by the law. He is not entitled, however, to exhibit righteous
anger at the manner in which I was able to recognize his rights. I would likely have been content to mutter under my breath about his idiocy had he not chosen to flip me (and my family) off. I believe he was an idiot to step off the sidewalk when he did and an asshole for reacting the way that he did.
It seems to me that this does not contradict my basic point, which is that (IMHO) you should have started slowing down the moment you saw him approaching the street at the crosswalk.
**
Sure, but it doesn’t make your conduct any more or any less culpable. IMHO of course.
**
You didn’t recognize his rights until he insisted upon them. I’m not sure whether “the bird” is an appropriate response, but again – you’re not really in a position to complain.
I think that if one can stop safely - that is, if one is able to coast to a stop without slamming any brakes - then one should stop. By the same token, if a pedestrian sees that a car is bearing down on the crosswalk and realizes that the car will not be able to stop easily, then that pedestrian should wait until the car passes.
Being in a crosswalk does not mean the car will bounce off you. Being a pedestrian does not mean that you have the right to cause a car’s driver to slam on the brakes to avoid hitting you.
BigNik and others, I don’t think you fully understand the law.
The pedestrian has always the right-of-way. That’s true. For example, if the traffic lights turn green (for the cars) and there are still people on the crosswalk, the cars have to wait for the pedestrians to cross and not the pedestrians for the cars. Or, if for example, a senior citizen (slow) started crossing the road while the road was clear and then a car comes, it has to stop and wait.
That’s all there is. The law doesn’t give pedestrians the right to cross the road whenever they like, even in a crosswalk. If the “pedestrian has right-of-way” was always true, then there wouldn’t be jaywalking offences.
In case of a crosswalk, the pedestrian has to check for oncoming traffic and make clear his intention of crossing the road to the oncoming drivers. The crackhead in the OP didn’t even turn his head to check for vehicles.
I’m not sure what your point is – do you disagree that motorists must stop for pedestrians who wish to cross the street using a crosswalk?
**
For what it’s worth, I’ve been complaining about the OP’s conduct. Certainly the pedestrian was foolish to, in effect, play chicken with an asshole. Was the pedestrian’s conduct unlawful as you seem to suggest? I doubt it, but it doesn’t change what the OP did.
Perhaps you should have looked up the law first? linky
So the pedestrian can leave the place of safety as long as it’s possible for the driver to yield. Since the driver did yield, I submit that what the pedestrian did was perfectly legal and he was within his rights to do so. Of course, there is a difference between what you have a right to do and what is smart to do, and the pedestrian was not smart.
Oh, and the statute goes on to say that if the pedestrian is jaywalking, then it’s his responsibility to yield the right of way to traffic. Thereby blowing your “if X is true, then Y has to be true, too” arguement to hell.
Sorry dude, no matter how many times I read your OP, I can’t help coming to the conclusing that you’re the asshole in this scenario.
The pedestrian had enough time to approcah the crosswalk, heal his dog and step out into the crosswalk with you still stopping, albiet by jaming the breaks.
While he was approaching and healing his dog (at the crosswalk) you should have been slowing down so you didn’t have to jam the breaks.
Your OP reads as though you think because you were approaching the crosswalk at the same time as the pedestrian, and he wasn’t actually IN the crosswalk you wern’t obligated to stop. Obviously that’s not legally true, but I don’t think it’s true from a social contract point of view either.
Obviously leaping out in front of a moving vehicle is a dumb thing to do, but it doesn’t sound to me like that’s what this pedestrian did - it sounds like he assumed you would obey your half of the social contract by yielding to the person who had the right of way. That you chose not to doesn’t make him an asshole - it kinda makes you one.
…No pedestrian shall suddenly leave a
curb or other place of safety and walk or run into the path of a
vehicle which is so close that it is impossible for the driver
to yield…
That of course implies that the pedestrian has to check for oncoming traffic, and decide whether the oncoming traffic can come to a halt in time.
From the OP it is clear that the guy with the dog didn’t even turn his head to check for oncoming vehicles.