"TimC" <
[email protected]> wrote in message
news:
[email protected]...
CHOPPED OUT BIT
> There's a footpath. There's a carpark into a shopping centre, and
> cars need to cross the footpath to get into it. It is required of
> cars to give way to pedestrians when entering and leaving private
> property (in fact, I believe the road regs say cars are required to
> give way to peds crossing the road when the car is entering or leaving
> a sidestreet too; but mum still tells me to hurry up and go through
> the roundabout when I'm waving peds through the roundabout). I see so
> many peds realise that a driver is waiting for them while they are
> walking along a footpath with right of way, and so they rush along the
> footpath.
>
> But why?
>
>
MORE CHOP...
"I see so many peds realise that a driver is waiting for them while they are
walking along a footpath with right of way, and so they rush along the
footpath.
But why?"
Sometimes courtesy (why hold someone else up unnecessarily?), sometimes that
they have the same level of knowledge as other drivers, sometimes
uncertainty and sometimes a combination of the above.
How a person behaves when they walk/cycle/drive is often an indication of
how they behave when using any of the modes of transport. For instance,
someone who stops walking and lets a car drive up a driveway MIGHT
("indication" - no more) be as thoughtful when driving and will stop to let
pedestrians cross a driveway. They MIGHT also stop because thay are aware of
the law and blindly abide by it. The MIGHT also stop because they think
pedestrians have no right of way and they (the now-driver) thinks he/she is
being nice by stopping. In all cases, the driver has stopped to let
pedestrians through, but is doing the right thing for the wrong reasons
valid? What happens when the driver is in a bad mood and doesn't stop,
thinking he/she has right of way and isn't going to be nice today?
The point is that, in every event, it's the human element that is at the
root. That's the part that needs to be at least predictable and consistent.
One way (not perfect, but what is?) to produce that predictability is to
have everyone trained the same and with the same starting knowledge (which
is then built upon differently by individual experience). At least then the
motive matters less and actions are more consistent. If NOBODY stopped their
car at driveway crossings, at least I can, when walking, predict a driver's
action and act accordingly. It's when some do and some don't that accidents
occur.
me
me
