Moron Motorists #3

[Lukeyboy]

That's how a zebra crossing works Of course don't do it without looking .

Which is what I'm getting at Most people stop and look. Most drivers stop. Its just a few that don't stop be it pedestrian or driver as a result of being preoccupied with something else or just not taking their and the safety of others into account.

I really take umbrage at Police or Safety Council recommendations which, because of the willful law-breaking of motorists, advise people to do the reverse to what is the law.

By making sure that its safe before crossing? There are no traffic lights at Zebra crossings and people aren't always the most visible.

[KonaCommuter]

I really take umbrage at Police or Safety Council recommendations which, because of the willful law-breaking of motorists, advise people to do the reverse to what is the law.

By making sure that its safe before crossing? There are no traffic lights at Zebra crossings and people aren't always the most visible.

It's victim blaming. That's why it's abhorrent.

[il padrone]

By making sure that its safe before crossing? There are no traffic lights at Zebra crossings and people aren't always the most visible.

Maybe you didn't read the rule I posted. Until you step out the law says motor vehicles don't need to stop - just drive at a speed so that they can....... at all times

Whether there is a pedestrian near or not. This is the bit I said where motorists willfully ignore the law. So by the letter of the rule, if you just stand there, drivers can continue to proceed - you may be waiting a long time. All you need to do on a zebra crossing is approach the crossing and put one foot out on the crossing. This is the point at which (legally) drivers must stop. Nothing reckless, no "bloody idiot".

The Police should be advising drivers in the strongest possible terms, to slow down near pedestrian crossings and zebra crossings in particular. Also taking a great deal more action to fine drivers who simply fly through - whether there is a pedestrian there or not.

[AKO]

The Police should be advising drivers in the strongest possible terms, to slow down near pedestrian crossings and zebra crossings in particular. Also taking a great deal more action to fine drivers who simply fly through - whether there is a pedestrian there or not.

Maybe I'm being a little cynical, but there isn't much revenue to be raised by doing that.

[Lukeyboy]

Meh. I honestly don't care. As long as the ped is predictable in their movements prior to the crossing and shows intent by moving towards the crossing/stopping/looking to both sides/about to step out onto the crossing then its fine for me. If they run out on to the crossing at the last minute without looking expecting the traffic to have read their mind, seen them and stopped then I take issue with that. Its just a couple seconds to stop and look. It shows anyone oncomming that you intend to cross which they can start to slow and the ped to cross. If a ped thinks I'll stop a bike doing 40kph in a 60kph zone 5m from the crossing because they darted out from behind a tree/laneway without looking then they have another thing coming... most likely a headache or concussion.

[Aushiker]

The guy is committing an offence by walking into the path of a vehicle and could be fined for it. As a driver, you are nevertheless obliged to give way to him. If you hit him, you will probably be liable, notwithstanding any contributory negligence on his part..

Interesting conclusion based on a photo of a moment in time. For all you know the cyclist could have been changing his or her line and actually ridding directly at the pedestrian who was walking at a pace to safely cross the road had the cyclist maintained their line. We don't don't what happened prior to the image nor afterwards.

Photos can suggest all sorts of stories which may or may not be the true position. I personally would prefer to form an opinion based on a decent video evidence, i.e., video footage which provides sufficient lead in to establish what actually occurred and what follows (if possible); it may well be the pedestrian was trying it on but without more detailed evidence I am withholding my judgement.

Andrew

[London Boy]

The guy is committing an offence by walking into the path of a vehicle and could be fined for it. As a driver, you are nevertheless obliged to give way to him. If you hit him, you will probably be liable, notwithstanding any contributory negligence on his part..

Interesting conclusion based on a photo of a moment in time. For all you know the cyclist could have been changing his or her line and actually ridding directly at the pedestrian who was walking at a pace to safely cross the road had the cyclist maintained their line. We don't don't what happened prior to the image nor afterwards.

Photos can suggest all sorts of stories which may or may not be the true position. I personally would prefer to form an opinion based on a decent video evidence, i.e., video footage which provides sufficient lead in to establish what actually occurred and what follows (if possible); it may well be the pedestrian was trying it on but without more detailed evidence I am withholding my judgement.

Andrew

Yeah mate, aware of that. I took the photo as illustrative of what the OP was talking about, so for the sake of discussing a point of law it was useful and informative. I could have been pedantic about it and discussed the range of possibilities, but that would not have added much to the conversation.

[Aushiker]

This just popped up in my mailbox ... seemed quite relevant to the discussion of late.



Andrew

[wellington_street]

Interesting to see that Queensland road rules about giving way to pedestrians crossing the road do not apply to Victorians.

Your snaps don't make it clear here, I can't see where he has failed to give way although it does appear he has overshot the red arrow at the start?

Maybe not. But atleast I can use the bike lane.


Oh FFS.

What's wrong with that? He's turning left so he's placed himself in the left lane. Sit behind and you can turn left when the light goes green. No need to be a MGIF-on-bicycle.

[wellington_street]

There's being obliged and then there's just being a right of way d**khead. I almost took out someone at a zebra crossing the other week where they just simply stepped out as I was riding past. She was jogging along the footpath showing no signs of using the zebra crossing and then suddenly makes a sharp right and without looking enters the crossing. I was doing 45kph and if I had of hit here it wouldn't have been a very pretty result that's for sure. The ones that really s**t me off are the ones that do it 20m before/after the crossing. Especially the ones where your vision is obsecured by other peds/cars/trees on a corner. The crossing is clear. No one about to cross. Maintain speed around the corner/thru the crossing and bam someone is suddenly walking/jogging into your path. Your slowing down for a red light and suddenly people run infront of you. You taking off from a red light and suddenly someone is running into your path.

Doesn't matter, as a vehicle on the road it's your responsibility to be extra vigilant at ped crossings, that means slowing way down if people are around even if they don't appear to have any intention of crossing the road because if they decide to and you hit them it's your fault. Out of self preservation I wouldn't go out of my way to jump out unexpectedly at a pedestrian crossing but I'm sure as hell not going to dither around and wait to see which of us is the most polite either. If you can't handle being on the road and following the road rules then perhaps you should stay off it?

Agree. You wouldn't fly through a give way sign with no visibility so why would you do it at a zebra crossing which is also a give way situation?

Same with <language> drivers who don't give way turning into a side street - treat it as a zebra crossing. If the ped has to stop or slow to avoid being hit then you haven't given way.

[wellington_street]

As for a pedestrian walking onto a zebra crossing being a safety hazard

Failing to observe and wait for oncoming traffic to slow is creating a traffic hazard be it walking, jogging or running onto the crossing. If you walk out onto any road be it at a ped crossing, zebra crossing and traffic lights without looking then you are as the TAC's famous ad campaign says "A bloody idiot". Its well known that drivers don't or are unable to stop all the time so the Queensland Police Service inconjunction with councils, schools, The Road Alliance and theQueensland Government run several community safety campaigns about pedestrian safety.

I really can't believe what I'm reading in your posts.

As I said above, a zebra crossing is a give way situation. If you are riding along at 45km/h on Waterworks Road and someone comes out of a side street (from either a T-junction or a cross-roads facing a give way requirement) and T-bones you, are you at fault for proceeding through the junction without slowing down to make sure that they will stop? Same thing at a traffic signal?

Obviously anything more than a red light and a green light is far too complicated for some road users.

[zero]

As for a pedestrian walking onto a zebra crossing being a safety hazard

Failing to observe and wait for oncoming traffic to slow is creating a traffic hazard be it walking, jogging or running onto the crossing. If you walk out onto any road be it at a ped crossing, zebra crossing and traffic lights without looking then you are as the TAC's famous ad campaign says "A bloody idiot". Its well known that drivers don't or are unable to stop all the time so the Queensland Police Service inconjunction with councils, schools, The Road Alliance and theQueensland Government run several community safety campaigns about pedestrian safety.

I really can't believe what I'm reading in your posts.

As I said above, a zebra crossing is a give way situation. If you are riding along at 45km/h on Waterworks Road and someone comes out of a side street (from either a T-junction or a cross-roads facing a give way requirement) and T-bones you, are you at fault for proceeding through the junction without slowing down to make sure that they will stop? Same thing at a traffic signal?

Obviously anything more than a red light and a green light is far too complicated for some road users.

Nope - but the faster you go, the more you have to take responsibility for managing your own momentum in areas of potential conflict, which can mean applying the brakes because there is a chance of an accident, even if the other road user is supposed to give way to you. You can softpedal and ride the brakes a bit if you want to continue to convey the intent to cross the intersection immediately, and riding well out from the kerb also conveys your intent to travel straight.

[Ross]

This just popped up in my mailbox ... seemed quite relevant to the discussion of late.



Andrew

But that is ok because they pay rego /sarcasm

I wonder if the cops would do anything about those drivers if you showed them the video?

[outnabike]

[quote="Lukeyboy

Maybe not. But atleast I can use the bike lane.


Oh FFS. [/quote]

Hi Lukeyboy,
With all the talk of motorists turning across bikes, I would have thought this vehicle was following correct procedure. The indicator is on and the driver cannot run you over if you hop in behind.

[il padrone]

Yeah, maybe things are different in QLD, but in Victoria the rules are pretty clear

1. A left-turning vehicle must begin their turn from as close "as practicable" to the kerb.

2. A motor vehicle may enter a bike lane for up to 50m to enter or leave the road.


The driver pictured is just adhering to the road rules

[Aushiker]

I wonder if the cops would do anything about those drivers if you showed them the video?

I believe the cyclist with the camera does report to NZ Roadwatch (?). I believe the response is to send a letter to the vehicle owner if it is a first offence; not sure what happens with repeat offenders.

Andrew

[Lukeyboy]

Hi Lukeyboy,
With all the talk of motorists turning across bikes, I would have thought this vehicle was following correct procedure. The indicator is on and the driver cannot run you over if you hop in behind.

Might have help if I showed how they got there in the first place by making their own lane using the bike lane and the gap to cars already in the lane. At the end of the lights there is also a buzzer for cyclists to activate the lights.

[wellington_street]

I still don't have a problem with that - the driver is turning left from the left lane and making sure there's no conflict between straight cyclist/left vehicle.

[il padrone]

Might have help if I showed how they got there in the first place by making their own lane using the bike lane and the gap to cars already in the lane. At the end of the lights there is also a buzzer for cyclists to activate the lights.

You may not like it, and it looks a bit cheeky, but it is all still a perfectly legal maneuvre, as long as it is done safely, allowing appropriate clearance from other vehicles. Not really too much different to cyclists overtaking on the left side of vehicles at lights.

[human909]

I still don't have a problem with that - the driver is turning left from the left lane and making sure there's no conflict between straight cyclist/left vehicle.

Agreed.

Might have help if I showed how they got there in the first place by making their own lane using the bike lane and the gap to cars already in the lane. At the end of the lights there is also a buzzer for cyclists to activate the lights.

Nup, no issue there! Bike lanes are not and never have been bike only spaces. They are part of the road space and available to be driver and ridden in by all vehicles if it is required, safe and legal. The car seems to be legally moving to the far left to make its turn.

If it is blocking you reaching your little button for the light I would say the bigger issue is the fact that you need to push a button!

[wellington_street]

I'm not sure why you would need to press a button in that case anyway as vehicles waiting there have already triggered the signals.

[Summernight]

I'm not sure why you would need to press a button in that case anyway as vehicles waiting there have already triggered the signals.

I think it's a peculiar design unique to that area which is meant to activate a bicycle specific green light so the bicycles can go ahead of the main traffic. Correct me if I'm wrong.

[Lukeyboy]

Yep. Press the buzzer and the left turn signal turns/remains red allowing cyclists to turn right or go thru because the intersection doesn't allign properly. Sort of like the bus jump lanes that you can find up here.

Next time I'm driving I'll make sure to filter to the front in my car if there is that tiny little gap in the lane because the car is aligned to the right

[il padrone]

Next time I'm driving I'll make sure to filter to the front in my car if there is that tiny little gap in the lane because the car is aligned to the right

You don't seem to accept that it is OK, but if there is space (because the lane has been marked out unusually widely for example) and can be done safely (like at low speed at an intersection) it is quite within the road rules. The car concerned is hardly squeezing through a tiny gap - there is a good metre or more of clearance from the other car as far as I can tell.

Our road rules are prohibitive ie. if there is no rule that prohibits an action it is allowable. So by my reading, I don't see any rule that specifically states "only one car per road lane". YMMV

[redned]

Might have help if I showed how they got there in the first place by making their own lane using the bike lane and the gap to cars already in the lane. At the end of the lights there is also a buzzer for cyclists to activate the lights.

You may not like it, and it looks a bit cheeky, but it is all still a perfectly legal maneuvre, as long as it is done safely, allowing appropriate clearance from other vehicles. Not really too much different to cyclists overtaking on the left side of vehicles at lights.

He definitely shouldn't be along side the white wagon, unless it is indicating a right hand turn. It is different to a cyclist, which is allowed to pass a stationary car on its left. I don't disagree with positioning himself to the left of the carriageway, and even over the bicycle lane, to make the left hand turn, but he shouldn't be alongside.