STOP!

Originally Posted by Patch

If the crossing was a traffic light controlled (pelican) crossing then the car/bike has right of way as long as the light is green.

It was a traffic light crossing.

Dan

To be fair to the kid - it probably didn't ask to be used to stop the traffic...

I don't think darwin rules can be applied here. The parent is doing the natural selection, the kid has no choice...

Stu

Originally Posted by Patch

I'd be interested where you believe the authority for this statement resides.

If the crossing was a traffic light controlled (pelican) crossing then the car/bike has right of way as long as the light is green.

If the crossing was a Zebra crossing then the pedestrian has right of way once their foot is on the crossing.

Have to agree with Patch on this one. However in the eyes of the law, you'd still could be looking at a Due Care and Attention rap if you DID knock someone over on a light controlled crossing, as its more likely for people to cross there if the traffic is stationary.

Originally Posted by jambo

Natural Selection. Darwin Rules. Stupid people have stupid kids....


I'll get me coat...

I read somewhere that its a government conspiracy. Allow the stupid people to live, so they can harness the rotational power of Darwins grave to power the world.

[jambo]

I'm not a cruel man, I agree with all above so I guess I should correct my above statement, if you can't avoid both pram and mum aim for the mum as the kid is currently an innocent. (Though it'll probably grow up to be as stupid as it's parents)!

Seriosly though well done on stopping!

itchingtogo:
I was using my hand to signal the camera man not to run into the road

Originally Posted by AlanSv

Have to agree with Patch on this one. However in the eyes of the law, you'd still could be looking at a Due Care and Attention rap if you DID knock someone over on a light controlled crossing, as its more likely for people to cross there if the traffic is stationary.

I've always understood the situation to be that, for a light-controlled crossing (with black/white stripes as per a Zebra crossing) then you MUST stop for the red light and if there's a green light you treat it as a normal (lightless) Zebra crossing. The red light is there for the safety of pedestrians rather to apportion some sort of contradictory right of way when compared to a Zebra crossing.

The reason for this that pedestrians have no licence, no insurance and do not need permission to be on the road. That pedestrian could be a child with no idea of rights of way, etc. Suppose the person trying to cross is both deaf and blind, or is mentally unable to assess the situation properly?

As AlanSv says, if you knock a pedestrian over on a black/white crossing (of any sort) you will be prosecuted. This implies that you didn't have right of way in the eyes of the law.

*goes to get Highway Code and copy of RTA*

[jambo]

I believe it states that when a light is green you may go only if it is safe to do so. Obviously it's not safe if soemone's crossing, but I think if someone darted out at full pelt on your green phase when the traffic was moving you'd be unlikley to be prosecuted.

As for arguments about people who are mentally incapable of crossing the road the answer is simple. They should not be unsupervised in a situation where they could come to harm. Deaf and blind people are usually very careful at crossing a road anyways.

Originally Posted by jambo

I believe it states that when a light is green you may go only if it is safe to do so. Obviously it's not safe if soemone's crossing, but I think if someone darted out at full pelt on your green phase when the traffic was moving you'd be unlikley to be prosecuted.

Let's hope that you've got witnesses in your favour

Actually, it would seem, from a brief search, that I am mistaken as to the question of priority; if the lights are green you don't have to stop. Having said that, there's nothing to stop a pedestrian waiting at the side from stepping out - they have no licence or NCB to lose

Originally Posted by jambo

As for arguments about people who are mentally incapable of crossing the road the answer is simple. They should not be unsupervised in a situation where they could come to harm. Deaf and blind people are usually very careful at crossing a road anyways.

Yep, but that's a social rather than road traffic issue. Know what you mean though.

The bottom line is that if you expect pedestrians to do the illogical and unexpected then you'll never be disappointed. Or caught out.

[fizzwheel]

Agree with Jabba, you cant rely on pedestrians to do anything logical

If you're filtering past stationary traffic, then you're overtaking.
This is not strictly legal through a pedestrian crossing - though I guess we all do it. I certainly would not want to test the legality of this.

Well done for being able to stop.