Jon wrote:
> On 14 May, 19:40, Cynic wrote:
>> On Wed, 14 May 2008 11:07:50 -0700 (PDT), Jon
>>
>> You are gravely mistaken. There are definitely laws that dictate that
>> cyclists and pedestrians should get out of the way of cars and trucks.
>> Laws that Parliament is powerless to change.
>>
>> The duty is on the overtaking cyclist to avoid hitting the pedestrian.
>> Which is the same situation as a car driver has to avoid hitting a
>> cyclist
>
> Read those two points again.
>
OK, I've read them again. They still make perfect sense.
In the general case, drivers do try very hard to avoid hitting anything,
including pedestrians and cyclists. As do cyclists. For all sorts of
reasons, including that there could be legal and financial implications.
However, in a situation where a collision appears inevitable,
pedestrians do have the unique ability to almost instantaneously
accelerate orthogonally to the collision vector. They are not usually
legally required to do so - the law of self-preservation may not be on
the statute book, but applies never the less. Cyclists, too, can execute
manoeuvres not available to other wheeled vehicles which can remove
them from the collision vector, usually involving "falling off". Again,
the law of self-preservation applies, even if the other participant is
the one legally in the wrong.
The idea of cyclists travelling against the traffic flow would certainly
reduce cyclist accident rates. After a short blip removing almost all of
them from the roads, the rate would fall to an all-time low..
--
Sue
As a pedestrian I can achieve something that few road vehicles can
manage - an almost instantaneous acceleration orthogonal to my current
direction of motion. |