Martin Underwood wrote:
Walter Briscoe wrote in
:
In message of
Thu, 12 Jan 2006 09:50:18 in uk.transport.london, Martin Underwood
writes
[snip]
first. But suppose he's a second or so later and is just behind me.
Should I delay setting off to let him overtake me or should he wait
until I've turned? I reckon the latter.
I reckon the former. You are turning across his path. He has right of
way. A similar thing would apply if you turn across the path of a bus
in a bus lane.
Even if I'm indicating that I'm turning. I thought it was an offence to
overtake a vehicle that's indicating, on the same side as he's indicating.
It all boils down to the absurdity of a road layout where the left-turning
traffic is not in the left-most lane.
The one that always gets me is the fact that pedestrians have priority over
vehicles that are turning into or out of a side road. Why should
pedestrians, who normally have to stop at the kerb to wait for a gap in the
traffic (except at zebra crossings and pedstraisn lights, obviously) be
given precedence over vehicles at the most dangerous part of a road, namely
a junction with another road?
Pedestrians only have priority if they have already begun crossing the
road, and that's because in the time between checking whether a vehicle
is approaching the turning and crossing, it's quite easy for a
fast-moving vehicle to catch a crossing pedestrian by surprise.
Personally, I check to see if approaching vehicles are indicating to
turn into the side road I want to cross. If they are, then I'll wait; if
no-one is indicating, then it's fine for me to cross (assuming there are
no vehicles coming out of the side road). If a vehicle reaches the side
road as I'm crossing, then they either didn't indicate (which is their
fault, so they can wait) or they got there faster than I can cross (in
which case, it's still my priority).
--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London
Similar Threads
Fascist cyclists
Threaded Mode
