WARNING = Highway Code Changes - A disaster in the making

[motorbiking]

I must admit, what frustrates me slightly in some cases is stretches of road that were historically 60 limits changed to 40.

or 20mph

 

[AngleEyes]

@AngleEyes - I was rear ended on a zebra once when I stopped to let someone cross. Lady who rear ended me got done for careless driving. asked me to be her witness

Clearly nothing to do with the current discussion, then.

Evidence ? expertise? what qualifies/leads you to conclude this?

Anecdotal reality of over 55 years of driving, and more cycling, contrasting with the few anecdotal hypothetical scenarios presented.

 

[motorbiking]

jeez, I never had you as in your 70s

 

[AngleEyes]

jeez, I never had you as in your 70s

Don't forget, I'm on my umpteenth reincarnation, (according to some).
And if I accumulated all the driving experience of all my other usernames, that would be how much, hmmm!

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

I always used to stop if someone was crossing the road or looked like they weren't paying attention. However, the problem is that every time I do this there is always the chance I will get rear-ended or something even more fatal will happen on the main road as drivers don't expect someone to stop mid corner.

That's why advanced driving teaches to ease off in plenty of time and to lead your followers to a gentle stop if necessary. Lots of observation and anticipation, so you don't have to brake sharply.

 

[Deleted member 18243]

Ultimately, we do not need new laws, we need the existing, perfectly adequate laws enforcing and bad drivers taken off the roads.

Same goes for all other crimes. There needs to be more punishment, and the punishments need to be more severe.

 

[Android 07]

When I am about to turn, I notice what the pedestrian about to cross does. If they stop and look towards me, I go through. If they carry on regardless, I stop and wait until they are out of the way. Remember kids, speed of car > speed of man

However, if you are a pedestrian crossing in the middle of a 30mph road without looking left or right, I will hit you on purpose for being a muppet!

 

[Android 07]

Pedestrians have always had right of way when you are turning into a junction. Sensible pedestrians look for cars turning and wait for them to do so. Selfish/idiotic pedestrians just walk out and expect you to stop on a sixpence. Of course, if a tail-gater runs into the back of you then it is 100% their fault for not leaving a safe distance between vehicles.
Regarding cyclists. I was one for many years, (as well as being a car driver during that period), so know some of the things 'stupid' cyclists do, such as ignoring red lights, swerving to miss pedestrians crossing a side road or even a zebra crossing. As a cyclist I have been cut up by vehicles passing too close for comfort or sounding their horn as they try to turn left whilst I was cycling ahead of them and going straight on. I have always given cyclists plenty of room when driving a vehicle. Can't understand why people are saying this is a new law as it has always been in the highway code ever since I was a nipper.

I have always wondered who is at fault if a cyclist runs a red light and a car hits him ? The car is legally correct as his lights are green, right?

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

I have always wondered who is at fault if a cyclist runs a red light and a car hits him ? The car is legally correct as his lights are green, right?

A green is slightly better than a proceed with some caution. if I am first away after the lights change, then I always look and am wary of red light runners, likewise if come upon a green light and I am the only vehicle. Red light runners includes all vehicles and bikes.

If someone does run a red light, then I will make their progress just as difficult as I possibly can. As a pedestrian, on a crossing I make cyclists ignoring the crossing or pelican just as difficult as possible, in other words I force them to a stop, if they can't get their feet off the pedals quick enough and they fall over - so be it, no sympathy from me.

I'm not a cyclist hater, I have been one myself and I never pass close, or cut them up.

 

[fillyboy]

I wonder how 'driverless technology' will cope with working out the thoughts and intentions of random pedestrians?

 

[motorbiking]

I have always wondered who is at fault if a cyclist runs a red light and a car hits him ? The car is legally correct as his lights are green, right?

It depends if the driver could have stopped or not. The cyclist will certainly have some contributory negligence if blame can be established against the driver at all. Malasi v Attmed [2011] EWHC 4083 went 80/20 against the cyclist, for not stopping at the red and not wearing a helmet. The driver's 20% was because he was speeding.

 

[conny]

I have always wondered who is at fault if a cyclist runs a red light and a car hits him ? The car is legally correct as his lights are green, right?

You are advised to be prepared to stop when approaching traffic lights so cyclists should do the same. If it goes to amber as they cross the light then, theoretically, they have a much better chance at stopping than a car would in that circumstance.

I wonder how 'driverless technology' will cope with working out the thoughts and intentions of random pedestrians?

There is a report this morning that says drivers should be responsible for anything that goes wrong if their car is classed as autonomous. Don't like the sound of this.
Autonomous-car 'users not legally accountable' call - BBC News

 

[AngleEyes]

There is a report this morning that says drivers should be responsible for anything that goes wrong if their car is classed as autonomous. Don't like the sound of this.
Autonomous-car 'users not legally accountable' call - BBC News

The Mail Online would be proud of your reporting style, conny.

Autonomous-car 'users not legally accountable' call
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-60126014​

It goes into more depth and talks about levels of autonomy.

 

[conny]

The Mail Online would be proud of your reporting style, conny.

Autonomous-car 'users not legally accountable' call
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-60126014​

It goes into more depth and talks about levels of autonomy.

I should have said, 'should NOT be responsible. Sorry, my mistake.

 

[Dork Lard]

I wonder how 'driverless technology' will cope with working out the thoughts and intentions of random pedestrians?

There have & always will be incidents that just could not reasonably have been forseen. Driverless technology (I hope) will be programmed to react for the best possible outcome in the time/space available.

Human drivers are held legally accountable for the consequences of their reactions. There is already a lot of thought being put into how this translates to driverless technology. Is it the human being transported by the driverless technology? Is it the manufacturer of the vehicle? Is it the developer of the driverless technology?

I don't have much legal training but I do know someone who does, he reckons this is a problem that they will never be able to fully legislate for.