On Sun, 15 Jun 2003 17:17:05 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you know?" <
[email protected]> wrote:
>On Sun, 15 Jun 2003 16:48:15 +0100, Garry Broad <
[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>>>when a pedestrian steps out into the road he/she is putting themselves at risk - going where
>>>>pedestrians shouldn't really be - on the open road, off the pavement.
>
>>>Another bit of cager victim-blaming, I'm afraid.
>
>>eh????? fraid not. I wasn't aware that er...*cagers* were being discussed here....<sigh>....but I
>>guess they're never far away.
>
>True enough. The point I was making is that the idea that the pedestrian doesn't belong on the
>road, and is therefore somehow to blame for his own downfall should he stray onto the
>carriageway, is a cager victim-blaming tactic, that's all. Pedestrians have the right to cross
>the road, and the right not to be killed if they choose to walk down the middle fo the road. It
>may be stupid but it's implied by driving within the distance which wecans ee to be clear, which
>also applies to bikes.
Sure. It may have been my ambiguous choice of words ("going where pedestrians shouldn't really be")
that led you to think I was of a mind that pedestrians didn't have the right to be on the road. This
was not my intention of meaning. What I was trying to say was when pedestrians do venture out onto
the road they are putting themselves at a certain risk, a certain awareness needs to be in evidence.
Remember 'stopping distances' for the driving test - at a certain speed a vehicle should (ideally)
be a *certain* distance behind the traffic object in front, in order to stop safely. And I'm
assuming that these figures are the result of experiments done over a period of time. How many car
drivers leave a safe distance between them and the car in front? - but that's a whole different
kettle of fish). So if a pedestrian wanders out into the road, giving the car driver/cyclist no
chance whatsoever to coordinate his/her reactions, what chance have they?
We're getting away from the original post a bit here. But my own cycling experiences of pedestrians
stepping out into the road in this way is that I'm seldom going fast enough not to stop. But how
many times I've muttered or cursed? I've lost count.
>>See also this, same page:
>
>Seen it. I've also seen materials aimed at primary school children teaching them to defer to cars
>and getting the idea that cars rule supreme on the roads and all other sources of danger (including
>bikes and roller skaters, for example) are therefore negligible. Which, statistically, they are.
>But what happens when those children have bikes and roller skates and haven't been told that they
>present a danger to others? And when they start driving, surely they will think "aha, all those
>pedestrians have been told to get out of my way - I am now a Road Owner!"
Children. Reminds me of yesterday. Cycling up to the market, I came across what looked like a
properly coordinated young persons highway code/cycling proficiency class. All these youngsters on
their bikes, with helmets, with luminous yellow tops, cycling along the side of the road doing hand
signals, stopping, left turns, slowing down etc... Stopped to have a quick chat to one of the guys
organizing it, who told me about the general abuse from car drivers that can happen from time to
time, and the story about a woman who actually 'drove' her car at the kids, stopping and 'revving'
in high defiance!!!!!! Depressing ****.
>ISTM that spending vast resources on educating the victims to get out of the way while letting the
>cause of the problem continue unchecked may not be the best way forward.
No sure, not disagreeing with you.
Garry
