On 24/02/2018 13:03, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/02/18 19:56, soup wrote:
On 21/02/2018 20:48, Brian Reay wrote:
On 21/02/2018 12:23, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , "dennis@home" wrote:

On 20/02/2018 22:55, Tim Streater wrote:

Glad to hear that - a sensible approach. I live in dread that some
pedestrian on one of the local lanes will have just read the
admonition
in the Highway Code about walking facing the traffic, and I'll meet
them going round a left hand bend. Most of the roads round here are
unsafe for pedestrians.

You mean the drivers around there are unsafe for pedestrians!

You unable to read?


We were walking in Battle today, a little after lunch time.
TheÂ* we were on the pavement, the road was quite wide and busy. I'm
not sure what the limit was, probably 30mph. The road was certainly
busy enough and the traffic moving so freely that, had I wished to
cross, I'd have looked for a crossing or, as min, somewhere with an
central 'island' etc.

Unfortunately, not everyone shows such caution. A woman of, perhaps
30-40 decided to try and run across the road. She 'made it' but only
because a car had better brakes/the driver had better reactions than
her running ability.Â* She blamed the driver, at least judging by her
shouts.

Who would you blame?


The driver.

=Translate that to 'an asteroid falls in the road and a car travelling
at 60mph crashes into it, who would you blame'

'the driver'

What a tosser you are, soup.

The first person I ever saw killed was at age 13, when a little old lady
without warning stepped off the kerb straight in front of a Rover doing
less than 30mph.

If the presence of a pedestrian on a pavement, less than a meter from a
car means that you have to slow down to a speed such that you can stop
IN that meter if they step out...well.

.. if you're reaction times is 0.2 seconds just to REACT in that yard
menas toy cant be travelling at more than = 5m/s -Â* about 11mph.

Add in the stopping distance, and its unlikely that anyone travelling at
more than about 6mph would be able to 'stop in time'

And indeed less for joggers, cyclists and horses whose brakes are much
inferior.

Tell you what, why don't we have a man with a red flag walk in front of
all our cars soup?


A great job for a sochslist I'd say.





Â*Â* It wouldn't matter if the limit was 60 MPH (the speed limit is a limit
it is NOT a recommended speed or anything like that).Â* An appropriate
speed would be one where you can cope with the unforeseen.

The whole point about the unforeseen is bty definition you cannot cope
with it.

I was narrowly missed by a pigeon falling out if the sky a fortnight
ago., It crashed two feet from where I was standing anbd died.


Â*Â*No-where do you indicate she was 'running out' between parked cars
(if she had then it would take a fuller knowledge of the facts to
ascertain blame) so the driver will have seen her for quite some
Â*Â*distance.

Â*Â* Knowing it was likely a tourist area (1066 and all that)Â* I would have
slowed right down (better to get honked at from behind than to kill
someone).


You have shown yourself to be a handwavy armchair theorist with no
abilitry to do maths or understand te real world.

I suggest you use your wavy hand for masturbation only, in future.

Its very 'right brain'


Indeed.

Years ago, pre 1983 (I remember the car I was driving), I was driving
down a road near here. Cars on both sides, very little room. Police car
behind me. I wasn't traveling quite slowly. There was an alley between
some houses- all but invisible until you were on it, I saw a 'flash', no
more and reacted. A young lad was being chased- he came out of the
alley, between the parked cars and fell in front of my car. Somehow I
stopped without hitting him. There must have been inches in it. To this
day I don't know how. He was up and off before I was out of the car. The
police spoke to me. I was still shaking. Obviously no problem on my part
but the officer said I didn't stand a chance.