Jump to content

Recommended Posts

The problem, matthew123, is that you are wrong - and your own posts of the Code show that. You have made two points repeatedly: that "pedestrians have right of way at junctions" and that "pedestrians have priority at road junctions". Both statements are dangerously wrong as they miss a very, very important point.


Skidmarks' post is correct, though. The code says that pedestrians have priority provided they have started to cross. This is an important distinction. If a pedestrian steps out into the path of a car turning at that junction they will be at fault: as per highway code rule 7d [pedestrians] If traffic is coming, let it pass and highway code rule 8: [pedestrians] At a junction. When crossing the road, look out for traffic turning into the road, especially from behind you.


So, if a pedestrian wished to cross the road at a junction and a car wishes to turn at that junction the car has the right of way. If the pedestrian has already begun to cross then - and only then - do they have priority.


The exception to this is at a zebra crossing where pedestrians do indeed have right of way.

What LOZ said?

Totally.



I see so many pedestrians who don?t even bother looking.



Arrogant Footers?

Or death wish Footers?

Or followers of the Matthew123 school of walking?


? It?s bleedin annoying.



When I walk across junctions I look I wait for the cars I?m in no hurry to end up in hospital.


I?ve noticed pedestrians are getting more and more arrogant.


I see pedestrian rage every day at crossings they try to cross on the red man and then get annoyed when you drive through on a green light.



Rush Rush Rush



Pedestrians who are rushing for WHAT? An accident?




Idiotic ARROGANCE.



Edit


Forgot to add


"STUPID FOOTERS"!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I think it was her solicitor that identified past issues, not the survey, but yes the whole thing was very odd. As was the fact she posted it all on here! And kept referring to it as a "project." Maybe she never actually intended to live in it. Who knows.
    • Oh my.....FIFA.....still managing to embarrass themselves. Absolutely. Well said.
    • it did seem like a rediculous almost troll like post... I did'nt love the property/it was'nt priced like a probate property which is what I'd asked for/I can afford 5k (or whatever...) extra insurance premium its not about the extra cost/also considering Clapham etc etc.. I reiterate that anyone daft enough to put in an offer on a property which I gather is over 800k and go as far as having a survey done on a house they actually admit they did'nt like..then being 'embarrased' when they survey throws up previously unmentioned issues and posts on a forum asking what to do really needs to stand back and have a good look at what on earth they are doing. I may have implied that..I was incredulous when I read what she posted. it did'nt make sense throwing money into buying a house you didnt want then agonising over it.
    • Basically.     the whole thing is repugnant on every level.  And that’s before we get to any whim of Trump about countries in the summer first time Ireland are in the pot for 24 years and instead of being excited I just don’t wanna look
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...