I Don’t Stop for Kids Crossing The Road

tomleonhart on 05/08/2020 - 08:56
Last edited 06/08/2020 - 16:17 by 1 other user

So had an argument with the Mrs.

My kid school is located in a secluded suburb, all the streets around the school are very quiet except from the school hours.

When I do the school runs and when I see kids trying to cross the street (not zebra crossing), I drive at a reduced speed (and do fully expect to stop should they walk out) BUT I do not stop for them to cross. I do this because I believe this helps them not to expect drivers to give way to them.

My wife always stops the car in the middle of the road and let them cross which drives me mad. Yes, the road is very quiet and yes there’s no car behind but that’s like teaching them kids to expect drivers to stop. She asks me “Would you stop for your own kid?” to which I replied “no, I’ll do the same thing. Don’t want her to cross the road when there’s a car coming”. To which she replies “you’re such an a**”

So am I an ahole or not? (=

update:

Without a word of a lie, today 6/8/2020, was putting my daughter in the car and saw a boy trying to zoom across the road 1 car ahead. He didn't see the Ford mondeo coming from the right. I shouted "stop" which he did. The Ford zoomed past and he said "thanks, they usually stop". oh well. Can't wait to tell the Mrs when she gets home. Lolz.

Automotive

Comments

  • SnowDragon on 05/08/2020 - 08:58
    +315

    The kids should be crossing at a zebra, traffic lights or a traffic island.

    Stopping for them will make them expect that cars will stop for them in the future, which will not be the case.
    You are right in slowing down but not stopping.Your wife is teaching them the wrong lessons.

    • tomleonhart on 05/08/2020 - 09:04
      +43

      Well glad i'm not the only one. Grinds my gear everytime i see a car stops and signal to them to cross. Roar!

      • legendary-noob on 06/08/2020 - 09:24
        +19

        definitely stick to your idea.
        i once stopped for a normal pedestrian to cross the road illegally…
        my driving instructor explained that it was more dangerous for pedestrian because if other cars didnt stopped then the pedestrian will be in trouble

        • capslock janitor on 06/08/2020 - 11:11
          +2

          I only wave people to cross(kids included) when they've effed up/walked half way on / stumbled onto the road whilst wearing airpods.

          As it can be uncertain to gauge what they'll do next! !

      • [Deactivated] on 06/08/2020 - 12:57
        -2

        women/

      • ronnknee on 06/08/2020 - 13:32
        +5

        Not only that. If your wife stops on the road and the car behind isn't expecting it (ie. same mentality as us - not stopping for a kid, no traffic ahead or simply not paying attention), then it can be an unnecessary risk for everyone.

      • dcash on 06/08/2020 - 15:42
        +7

        It sounds like you'd be better off driving an automatic.

        • KSMLJ on 06/08/2020 - 17:06
          +1

          Lol, under-rated comment!

      • stringbean402 on 07/08/2020 - 15:19
        +1

        Yeah i don't stop.

        Same problem as drivers stopping in stupid places as a 'courtesy' to let someone in. Think busy road leaving you a gap where you cannot see the traffic on the other side, especially when they give you the 'it's all clear wave' like your going to trust their judgement for something you cannot see for yourself.

        Road behavior needs to be consistent and predictable.

        Even where no pedestrian crossing exists they need to learn to wait for an appropriate gap in the traffic and cross when safe to do so.

      • cameldownunder on 08/08/2020 - 15:06
        +2

        Yes, you are an aHole, but for all the right reasons.

        I stopped giving way to cars going across 3 lines, if the line next to me is empty. Chances that an P plater just comes flying in that line and taking out the car crossing are very high. ( Happened just this week to my neighbour car - she had the front of her car taken out )

    • this is us on 05/08/2020 - 10:33
      +15

      Agreed. Your wife is making them think that they are the centre of the Universe (entitled?). If there is no zebra crossing around, that's fine, but if that's not the case there is no reason to stop for them to cross.

        • [Deactivated] on 05/08/2020 - 13:56
          +48

          The physics of momentum doesn't care about status quos.

        • this is us on 05/08/2020 - 17:12
          +10

          No, let's keep the status quo where children/people disrespect zebra crossings and other traffic rules and just cross the road whenever they want. That works for Mario Bros when he gets a star, but real life is different, and everyone should respect the basic rules. When I am a pedestrian, I walk to the closest zebra crossing or traffic lights. If there is no crossing, people should complain and demand a solution. I'm quite sure the council is responsible for creating an alternative, even if it is only activated during busy hours.

          • ssquid on 05/08/2020 - 22:20
            +11

            @this is us: Why do we even have zebra crossings, I've never even seen a zebra on the footpath let alone crossing the road.

          • thanatos350 on 06/08/2020 - 12:49

            @this is us: You are correct. Basic rules are necessary to ensure that we both cross roads and operate our vehicles in predictable and consistent ways.

            If someone was to assume one car may stop, they're likely to apply the same logic to another situation where a motorist is unlikely to stop.

            I live in an area where people do not respect roads or even traffic light crossings. People quite literally walk out in front of cars moving at speed. It's infuriating. I don't care about delay or being a few minutes late - but I could not live with myself if I were to hit someone, regardless of whether I was in the right or wrong.

        • Triftyme on 06/08/2020 - 12:47
          +3

          A kid tragically lost her life jay walking across the main road to my high school when i was young. She didnt look before crossing. Even though the driver slowed down she still died. Teaching your kids the right lessons growing up is so so important when they face the real world.

          • dazweeja on 06/08/2020 - 17:59

            @Triftyme: Same here. A boy in my class at primary school was hit by a truck. Quiet country town too.

        • supersabroso on 08/08/2020 - 13:42
          +1

          The cost? Saving the kids lives by making them alert and waiting an extra 30 seconds to cross, thus avoiding a car accident and being crippled in the hospital?

    • leiiv on 06/08/2020 - 07:27

      Many roads don't have zebra, traffic lights or a traffic island. So does that mean you cannot cross the road?

      • samcro on 06/08/2020 - 08:22
        +45

        Of course you can. But don't expect cars to stop and wait for you to cross.

      • SnowDragon on 06/08/2020 - 08:28
        +3

        Generally roads around schools will have at least one, if not all three of them.

        Roads which don't have any of them likely don't see much traffic (i.e residential roads) and a kid can simply wait for the cars to go by.
        My argument is essentially that you shouldn't train your children to expect a car to stop for you. One day they could be running late and simply walk out expecting a car to stop, because cars often stop for them, and be hit by someone who doesn't expect a child to walk in front of their car.

      • legendary-noob on 06/08/2020 - 12:34

        They can but pedestrians needs to be careful
        When there are none of what you mentioned, chances are speed limit is higher
        And as a result would be dangerous to the driver AND pedestrians if pedestrians cross at a non-designated area and drivers have to hit break real hard.

      • this is us on 06/08/2020 - 12:56

        If that's in front of a school where people (children) are crossing, you must contact the council, the school (to demand a solution), or whoever is responsible for the road. I think that's a quite reasonable demand when people pay taxes. Not having zebra or alternatives is a risk by itself, it doesn't matter if people are stopping or not, driving slowly or not.

    • This Guy on 06/08/2020 - 12:43
      -2

      While I agree with you, how are you going to feel if a person falls in front of you and die? Yes it is rare, but it happens.

      You clearly are not a fault, but you still have to live with their death.

      If someone want's to get close to my path of travel I stop and wait for them. They can remove themselves from the gene pool with some other driver.

      • SnowDragon on 06/08/2020 - 12:55
        +5

        how are you going to feel if a person falls in front of you and die?

        If you see a pedestrian near the road, you automatically slow down a little bit and keep and eye on them. It's not like you drive around only looking forward and bad luck to anybody who "falls" in front off you.

        Check out this Dashcam video posted today

        The driver off the dashcam car is obviously wary of the car on the side of the road and is ready for anything. A door flying open, a kid running in front of it etc. You should always be defensive driving and doing that means you don't need to stop for anybody who wants to cross a road. Conversely, a pedestrian waiting to cross a road should also be looking and making sure old mate in a commodore isn't about to crash right into them. Nobody goes outside and thinks "I'm just going to walk and not take any notice of my surroundings at all. Whatever happens, happens."

        • John Kimble on 06/08/2020 - 13:46

          Man, something weird with the DCOA page on FB for me, I haven't seen any videos pop up in my feed in weeks…just caught up on them all thanks to you. I can't comment on any videos anymore either…weird.

        • capslock janitor on 06/08/2020 - 17:31
          +2

          A door flying open, a kid running in front of it etc. You should always be defensive driving and doing that means you don't need to stop for anybody who wants to cross a road.

          curious what would happen if there was a car on the right and he bumped it? would cam driver be in the wrong and pay up

          Check out this Dashcam video posted today(youtube.com)

          that was literal highway robbery happening

        • This Guy on 06/08/2020 - 20:24

          I have seen a dead man who literally fell into a car in town while waiting to cross.

          I have seen a drunk guy lying dead on the side of a highway as he was trying to cross it to get home.

          I personally have destroyed multiple cars when a guy day dreaming pulled out in front of me. If he had a passenger, I would have killed them with my car.

          The driver in that video was extremely lucky.

          If you are happy to risk that, that's your choice. If a pedestrian is with in two metres of where I am driving, they can go first. I do not care who is at fault. It is not something I want to try to live with.

      • nobro25 on 06/08/2020 - 13:12
        +3

        OP situation is different, he slows down such that in a scenario he'll be able to stop and avoid and accident.

        He's saying that when you see a person ready to cross a road with no pedestrian lights or zebra crossing, the car shouldn't giveway for the pedestrian.

        Basically by that logic if you do end up giving way, why can't you stop in a middle of a 100km freeway just to let some hobos cross the road.

        So the mentality basically is to slow down, but not stop your car and wave them to cross the road, that's just reinforcing bad behavior.

        • This Guy on 06/08/2020 - 20:32
          -2

          I have completely stopped multiple times in 100kmph and 110kmph zones. Both accidents and congestion happens, even on freeways.

          Are you their parent? A police officer? How do you know they are not trying to commit suicide by traffic? How do you know they won't fall?

          I don't know them. I don't care about their 'bad behavior'. Most days I honestly don't really care if someone else hits them. I just don't want to kill someone.

          • nobro25 on 07/08/2020 - 16:14

            @This Guy: Well by your logic it can work both ways. What if you stopped at a freeway and the cars behind you couldn't stop in time and serves and crashes into a concrete wall causing a mass carnage. In that sense you have killed those people.

            • This Guy on 07/08/2020 - 17:05

              @nobro25: Did you read my first sentence then turn your brain off?

              Both accidents and congestion happens, even on freeways.

              Both accidents and congestion happens, even on freeways.

              I have stopped on a freeway because the cars in front are stopped. How the **** can I continue driving if the car in front of me is stopped? Drive up the emergency lane and make congestion worse for everybody? Chase off the police and run over any casualties (or that one time a dead body)? Then use a tilt tray as a ramp and hope my suspension survives?

              How do you have a licence???

    • thomalfa on 06/08/2020 - 15:09

      you better have a camera installed, in case you run any one of them over and able to argue in court…

    • Munki on 06/08/2020 - 17:00

      You should give OP's wife a call and let her know you're SnowDragon and you think she's wrong. Please make sure you record the conversation.

  • Fredfloresjr on 05/08/2020 - 09:03
    +15

    staff and the parents are the total ahole for not teaching their kids the right thing to do. Obviously, they growing up lacking of discipline. I am not stopping as well.

  • John Kimble on 05/08/2020 - 09:04
    +17

    Zomg, had the exact same argument with the wife only a few weeks ago. 🤦‍♂️

    I was going to post about it too, but was too lazy 😂

    • BenDoverson on 06/08/2020 - 10:19
      +19

      Your wife is cheating on you with tomeleonhart. Only logical explanation.

      • John Kimble on 06/08/2020 - 10:25
        +3

        😳

      • tomleonhart on 06/08/2020 - 10:40
        +3

        Oops 🥺🥺

      • Jackson on 06/08/2020 - 11:58
        +3

        Is it cheating if she's married to both of them though?

        • tomleonhart on 06/08/2020 - 12:57
          +3

          something I got to ask her about hmm

  • popsiee on 05/08/2020 - 09:09
    +16

    When turning at any intersection (except a roundabout), you must give way to any pedestrians crossing the road you are entering.

    I hope you are saying away from intersections .

    Anyway I teach my kids all places look both ways and don't expect cards to stop at pedestrian crossing as I would have been hospitalized many times if I didn't follow that rule .

    • John Kimble on 05/08/2020 - 09:13
      +9

      Completely different scenario.

      • sheamas88 on 06/08/2020 - 09:01
        +10

        Yes, but in my experience 99% of cars do not follow this rule at all so worth reminding people. Same goes for cars exiting/entering driveways, most of them make no effort to give way to pedestrians on the footpath

        • John Kimble on 06/08/2020 - 09:29
          +2

          It's common sense though? If course you should not mow down a pedestrian already crossing a road you are turning into. This applies to any situation really…if you can avoid a collision with a pedestrian, then you must do so, regardless of who's in the wrong.

          If they are waiting for a gap in traffic on the footpath, it doesn't mean you stop and let them cross though (happy to be corrected).

          Eg in the below video, the pedestrian really should have checked and waited till the car went through, but because he was already crossing, the car must give way.

          https://roadsafety.transport.nsw.gov.au/stayingsafe/pedestri…

          • sheamas88 on 06/08/2020 - 10:46

            @John Kimble:

            It's common sense though

            Obviously you are new to Australia if you think drivers use common sense here.

            if you can avoid a collision with a pedestrian, then you must do so, regardless of who's in the wrong.

            Correct, as we do not have "right of way" in Australia, so hitting someone even if you're not required to give way means you can be blamed to some extent.

            If they are waiting for a gap in traffic on the footpath, it doesn't mean you stop and let them cross though

            Yep, completely agree, I don't like when people stop randomly in free-flowing traffic to let people cross or to let cars merge either. Driving to the law is more important than driving "politely", as the laws usually exist for a reason.

            My reply to your first comment wasn't that you are wrong, but just explaining why it's worth people reminding people of laws all the time as people don't seem to make any effort to actually learn or remember them.

          • SlickMick on 06/08/2020 - 12:24

            @John Kimble: I nearly mowed down a neighbour recently. Any pedestrian who would cross a driveway when a car is backing out must value their rights more than their life.

            I give way to pedestrians on the footpath when I see them, and I do try to detect them to the best of my ability, but my detection skills clearly aren't as good as some pedestrians' jump-out-of-nowhere skills.

          • brazen00 on 06/08/2020 - 14:49
            +1

            @John Kimble: Sorry John, but that's not correct. In the video, the car must give way to the pedestrian. The pedestrian does not have to "check and wait till the car goes through". Think about it like this: "The person who is continuing straight ahead [pedestrian in this case] has priority".

            • John Kimble on 06/08/2020 - 14:51

              @brazen00: Noted. Although that logic seems odd to me if/when a pedestrian is crossing a road though…kids should be taught to check for cars always, even when crossing at a marked pedestrian crossing/a green man, because a pedestrian that values their health/life should probably still check though, agree?

              • brazen00 on 06/08/2020 - 15:02
                +2

                @John Kimble: Of course, everyone should act defensively including drivers, cyclists, pedestrians, pilots, dogs and fish. However, I don't like it when the discussion descends into "what should people do" (happens all the time on the dept of transport FB "do you know your road rules" posts). The point of discussions like this is generally to educate the less vulnerable (e.g. drivers) on their responsibilities towards the more vulnerable (e.g. pedestrians, cyclists).

                Regarding the "pedestrian crossing a road" comment it's only weird if you consider roads to be the sole domain of cars and therefore consider pedestrians to be trespassing on that space. If you consider roads to be for people (including those in and out of cars), it makes much more sense.

                • John Kimble on 06/08/2020 - 15:07

                  @brazen00: That's why I find it weird. For me a road is built for cars, the footpath is for people/pedestrians.

                  Obviously there are times when there is legitimate crossover of course. But that's why they install marked crossings and try to make clear rules about it.

                  • brazen00 on 06/08/2020 - 15:10

                    @John Kimble: It's also a question of design. The Dutch principle is much better, where the footpath continues rather than the road, in terms of height and surface. This makes it clear that the road is crossing the footpath rather than the other way around.

        • kabammi on 08/08/2020 - 11:08

          Agreed @sheamas88 and for that reason, I tell my kids to never expect a car to ever give way. If they can see a car approaching from any direction faster than the time it would take them to get across the street/road/intersection by walking, then wait.

          Soft tissue vs 750kg+ metal/plastic beast.

          I'd always assume that someone driving a car is not guaranteed to always be in control of their vehicle. It's just a fact.
          For that reason, pedestrians should never trust vehicles.

    • jjjaar on 05/08/2020 - 09:18
      +6

      don't expect cars to stop

      *drivers.

      Let’s not use object language, when the reason for car crash is due to human error. Cars don’t cause crashes, humans driving cars do.

      Not trying to attack you at all, honestly. I just work in road safety and the mentality that a “car hit a pedestrian” significantly takes away that it was actually a human that hit the pedestrian. Saying human (or driver) makes it much more real and emotional.

      The media has a lot to answer for with this kind of language.

      • kahn on 05/08/2020 - 09:38
        +3

        *cards

        Never interrupt a card player.

        • jjjaar on 05/08/2020 - 09:59

          You’re right. Cards never stop.

      • poohduck on 05/08/2020 - 13:28

        the problem is, if a "car" hits you, it's going to do a lot more damage than if a "human" walks into you. Yes, the human is to blame either way. That doesn't help much when you're lying in a hospital bed.

        • jjjaar on 05/08/2020 - 13:36
          +3

          It takes away the human aspect of it.

          Of course, include the car in the sentence. But it should be a “car hit a pedestrian” it should be a “person driving a car hit a pedestrian”. It sounds much more shocking, and more importantly, avoidable.

      • Kangal on 05/08/2020 - 22:49

        Not drivers, "vehicles" is the right term.
        Where a driver may stop, the car may not. You can thank Elon for increasing his profit margins by continually disregarding LiDar sensors on autonomous vehicles.

        And even if a driver saw the pedestrian and slammed the brakes, the driver is intending to come to a complete stop, but the car won't always react as such. It could skid. Or there could be an issue with the braking system, or computer, or it could even be hacked.

    • tomleonhart on 05/08/2020 - 09:14
      +61

      hello wife ?

    • k-rokfm on 05/08/2020 - 09:18
      +4

      So the question is, if i see a pedestrian (child or not) waiting on the side of any road I should stop? Cause what if I accidentally killed them?

      • SlickMick on 06/08/2020 - 12:30
        +1

        A1) No
        A2) always try to avoid killing pedestrians, including children. But there's no point in going into hypotheticals.

    • [Deactivated] on 05/08/2020 - 09:19
      +13

      Yes, binary outcomes.

      If OP doesn't stop, children die.

      If OP stops, they learn their lesson and live happily ever after.

      It is impossible that the children get positive reinforcement to cross as they wish and eventually get thenselves or someone else hurt. Nah. Impossible.

    • John Kimble on 05/08/2020 - 09:22
      +1

      Increases
      - wear and tear on car
      - fuel consumption
      - travel time and "butterfly effect" on traffic lights (potentially)
      - traffic congestion (potentially)
      - chance of being rear ended

      I drive at a reduced speed (and do fully expect to stop should they walk out)

      OP is not killing any kid in this scenario. If he happened to not notice a kid who tries to cross at an unmarked crossing until too late, then maybe, but then all drivers should be driving slower around schools to reduce the chances of an accident in the first place.

    • one man clan on 05/08/2020 - 11:37
      +3

      Wow the downvote brigade hit this hard. I agree with the second part of the sentence. I doubt kids are "learning" from this anyway.

      • SlickMick on 06/08/2020 - 12:38

        They'd learn if my wife was the driver.

        It was only my smooth talking that saved one of us from being beaten up when she nudged a pedestrian trying to cross in front of us when I was teaching her to drive.

        Just the other day she was saying how she wants to get air horns like she had in that car to scare the bejesus out of pedestrians doing the wrong thing.

        I'm not condoning her methods, but prefer them far above letting pedestrians think they own the road.

    • N1NJ4W4RR10R on 05/08/2020 - 21:42
      +3

      OP slows down to make sure he isn't mowing down kids, he doesn't stop so they don't think cars should stop and thus not look/stop when crossing.

      Drivers are unpredictable, maybe some bloke misses the fact it's a school zone or doesn't slow down. You being nice isn't doing them any favours, best case it saves them half a second anyway.

    • CocaKoala on 06/08/2020 - 10:02
      +1

      No kids are being killed by simply letting them know that drivers won't stop for them. Once they learn this, and they need to, they will then use the pedestrian crossing or traffic islands as they should.

      No need to exaggerate and modify the narrative to suit your uninformed ideology.

    • syousef on 06/08/2020 - 11:30
      -1

      This shouldn't have been downvoted once never mind 29 times. I'll keep saying it. Anon downvoting on Ozbargain is toxic.

    • JungliChilli on 07/08/2020 - 19:30

      Umm ceebs

  • jjjaar on 05/08/2020 - 09:14
    +13

    I completely agree that people of all ages should be using designated places to cross, but these crossing locations are only ever placed where it suits the movement of cars and often not in the location where pedestrians actually want to cross.

    Definitely don’t stop for them as it may reinforce to them that drivers will stop. However, many pedestrians aren’t expecting the drivers to stop and are completely willing to wait. They’re just choosing to cross there as it suits their journey better.

    Also note: in Vic pedestrians are allowed to cross anywhere as long as it is 20m away from a designated crossing. So while they may not have right of way, and have to give way to drivers, they are allowed to cross.

    • [Deactivated] on 05/08/2020 - 09:21
      +8

      but these crossing locations are only ever placed where it suits the movement of cars and often not in the location where pedestrians actually want to cross.

      Because pedestrians can stop at any point and they can weave between other pedestrians.

      Cars stopping randomly causes collisions and/or gridlocks.

      • jjjaar on 05/08/2020 - 10:06
        +6

        Well, if there was an actual crossing, it wouldn’t be random, would it? They would never place crossings every 15m, and nor should they.

        And most of the time yes, crossings are placed to “avoid gridlock”, but after years of research from all over the world, placing crossings in the ideal locations for pedestrians rarely causes gridlock. Of course in some instances they would, but it’s often the excuse used but not the actuality.

        My location train station doesn’t have the crossing right outside the station exit, but rather people have to walk an additional 20m to get there. Why? No reason. It’s a slow 40km/hr street, and the exit is mid-block, with people only using cars to access the station. And yet the pedestrian desire line is ignored. Naturally, as it is 20m from the crossing, pedestrians cross here anyway and after an entire train full of people exit, drivers have no choice but to give way. So now they’re stopping twice due to poor design.

        • [Deactivated] on 05/08/2020 - 10:14
          +2

          It doesn't have to be random to cause traffic and collisions.

          You can have poorly designed roads.

          Being planned doesn't exclude it from being bad.

        • Dancasper on 08/08/2020 - 07:49

          In NSW the RMS is pretty stringent on a number of requirements being satisfied before they will approve a pedestrian crossing. These include satisfying minimum sight distance on approach to the crossing and may require the removal of onstreet parking. In some instances it can be significant (20m on approach?).

          Unfortunately some people value the parking in front of their store/ property rather than you safely crossing the road. I'm guessing your train station has a bus stop / zone or a pickup/dropoff zone at the exit which has forced placing the crossing down the road from the exit.

      • SlickMick on 06/08/2020 - 12:44
        +1

        and road rage.

        It gets me wild when a car in front is more courteous to some pedestrian (or whoever) than the cars waiting behind.

        • [Deactivated] on 06/08/2020 - 12:49

          Yup. The flow is disrupted when someone does something outside of predefined parameters.

          That is why self driving cars will reduce congestion significantly.

          • ssquid on 06/08/2020 - 14:24
            +1

            @[Deactivated]: Won't self-driving cars stop for any obstacle they detect, meaning pedestrians will get even more complacent about when/where they cross?

            • [Deactivated] on 06/08/2020 - 15:05

              @ssquid: They will but i imagine part and parcel of self driving car laws would be that jay walking laws will be further enforced.

              • Antikythera on 07/08/2020 - 00:18

                @[Deactivated]: the software designer will have to make the car stop no matter what the law says about right of way. there would be too much liability otherwise.

                what is more interesting, is once car AI gets sophisticated enough, it will be able to determine and apportion risk. say there is a 90% chance of killing the 60 year old, or if swerving to avoid her, a 50% chance of killing the 10 year old. the software designer will have to give each of those results a utility value.

  • 7hours 44min ago on 05/08/2020 - 09:18
    +43

    I do the same.

    On top of this I will sit at a 4 way intersection with my right blinker on and stare at the person in a car facing me wanting to go straight. They are waving me on but since they clearly have the right of way I will ignore them. Wife tells me just to go but there is a life lesson to be had.

    Another time I was approaching a left turn into a street and a cyclist was approaching from the opposite direction and clearly was going to turning the same street; so a right turn for him. I assume he wanted to keep his momentum and essentially cut me off instead of stopping. I didn't slow down (more than I needed to for the corner) and narrowly missed him. He went ballistic. I explained that if he wanted to be treated like an equal on the road, he should obey the road rules.

    • tomleonhart on 05/08/2020 - 09:25
      +3

      LulZ at the cyclist 🤣

      • JungliChilli on 07/08/2020 - 19:31

        Lulz at the captial Z 🤣

        • kiitos on 08/08/2020 - 08:33

          Lulz at the spelling mistake when pointing out a case mistake 🤣

          • JungliChilli on 08/08/2020 - 10:28

            @kiitos: Wasn't pointing out a mistake and im not one that ever would point out a spelling mistake. I just liked the upper case more than the lower case LulZ 🤣

    • dcash on 06/08/2020 - 15:45

      Be careful mentioning cyclists. I said the same thing (suggested that if cyclists want to be treated as equal on the road they should act like it) and got permanently banned from WP.

      • 7hours 44min ago on 06/08/2020 - 16:48

        You can mention almost anything these days and get banned from WP, mods are beyond a joke over there.

        • dcash on 06/08/2020 - 17:07

          And that's precisely the problem — they don't have even the slightest inkling of a sense of humour.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join