From: Lars Chance on
F Murtz wrote:
> Lars Chance wrote:

>> The only law-breaker there was the jaywalker.
>>
> Is it illegal to walk across the road?
>
Not when there's no traffic no. Stepping out in front of a moving
vehicle is illegal though.
>
> Where was jaywalking mentioned?
>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaywalking
"Jaywalking is an informal term commonly used in the USA to refer to
illegal or reckless pedestrian crossing of a roadway. Examples include a
pedestrian crossing between intersections (outside a crosswalk, marked
or unmarked) without yielding to drivers (snip)

Seems the appropriate word to me.

--
Elsie.
From: G-S on
JL wrote:
> On Apr 24, 10:15 am, Lars Chance <lars.cha...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>> Kevin Gleeson wrote:
>>> On Fri, 23 Apr 2010 11:42:40 GMT, Lars Chance
>>> <lars.cha...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Kevin Gleeson wrote:
>>>>> Along these lines, I had to go down to Kent St in Sydney CBD the other
>>>>> day to pick up a security pass for another one of our buildings.
>>>>> Coming back I crossed Kent St after checking for traffic and saw none
>>>>> so wandered over the road. It is a quiet little street and there are
>>>>> road works going on so cars are avoiding it as it is bottlenecked. As
>>>>> I nearly got to the other side of the street a bicycle screamed past
>>>>> me and abused me for not looking. He was flying. Way faster than I'd
>>>>> drive any car or motorcycle through there. Estimate he may have been
>>>>> doing 60 kph. He nearly hit me. I felt the wind from him as he went
>>>>> past. (snip)
>>>> So you admit you were 100% in the wrong and you probably caused the
>>>> subsequent crash (after the *law abiding* cyclist had to avoid the
>>>> jaywalking non-attention-paying obstacle) yet you still try and put the
>>>> blame on *him*!!
>>>> You belong in aus.cars Kev!
>>> I was not in the wrong. I was crossing a clear street. This guy was
>>> traveling way too fast for the conditions.
>> >
>> If the guy was travelling on it, it wasn't clear was it?
>> >> There were bollards around
>>> the road, I had checked the road (I've managed to cross roads for
>>> nearly 50 years now and survive so think I have got an idea how to do
>>> it without accident). HE was totally out of an appropriate zone. He
>>> went on the inside of me and the footpath on the other side of the
>>> road just as I was about to reach the other side.
>> >
>> He was on the road obeying the rules (including the speed-limit), you
>> were crossing illegally.
>> He saw you, you didn't see him.
>> He swerved and avoided you (while on the roadway) yet you maintain HE
>> was in the wrong!!
>
> Logic failure. Regardless of any illegality Kev may or may not have
> made, the requirement to give way to pedestrians who have a green walk
> signal is absolute, and not relieved by any other negligence.
>
> JL

However if the pedestrian walks when the pedestrian walk signal is red
the situation IS different and the driver isn't automatically at fault.


G-S
From: G-S on
Kevin Gleeson wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Apr 2010 14:56:26 GMT, Lars Chance
> <lars.chance(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> JL wrote:
>>> On Apr 24, 10:15 am, Lars Chance <lars.cha...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Kevin Gleeson wrote:
>>>>>>> Along these lines, I had to go down to Kent St in Sydney CBD the other
>>>>>>> day to pick up a security pass for another one of our buildings.
>>>>>>> Coming back I crossed Kent St after checking for traffic and saw none
>>>>>>> so wandered over the road. It is a quiet little street and there are
>>>>>>> road works going on so cars are avoiding it as it is bottlenecked. As
>>>>>>> I nearly got to the other side of the street a bicycle screamed past
>>>>>>> me and abused me for not looking. He was flying. Way faster than I'd
>>>>>>> drive any car or motorcycle through there. Estimate he may have been
>>>>>>> doing 60 kph. He nearly hit me. I felt the wind from him as he went
>>>>>>> past. (snip)
>>>> He was on the road obeying the rules (including the speed-limit), you
>>>> were crossing illegally.
>>>> He saw you, you didn't see him.
>>>> He swerved and avoided you (while on the roadway) yet you maintain HE
>>>> was in the wrong!!
>>> Logic failure. Regardless of any illegality Kev may or may not have
>>> made, the requirement to give way to pedestrians who have a green walk
>>> signal is absolute, and not relieved by any other negligence.
>>>
>> Fact failure. No green walk signal in original story.
>
> I was not anywhere near pedestrian lights. The people he hit were
> crossing at green pedestrian lights. The point is still he simply
> should not have been traveling that fast in a built up area.
>
> And cars are required to give way to pedestrians regardless of whether
> they are crossing illegally or not.
>

Yes but the legal situation if they hit them is different.


G-S
From: BT Humble on
JohnO wrote:
>
> On Mon, 26 Apr 2010 02:39:58 -0700 (PDT), Marty H <hytram(a)gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >was that a F-111C or the D?
> >
> >seeing the F-111D had the newer Mark II avionics, he should have seen
> >you and thus avoided the situation
> >
> >mh
>
> D as in for diesel? How many MPG?

Nah Johno, the F111C was the one we bought in the sixties, where the
ignition key switch was in the dash. The F111D has it on the steering
column.


BTH

--
Posted at www.usenet.com.au
From: Lars Chance on
Marty H wrote:
> On Apr 26, 7:30 pm, Kevin Gleeson <kevinglee...(a)imagine-it.com.au>
> wrote:
>> On Mon, 26 Apr 2010 06:35:21 GMT, Lars Chance wrote:
>>> So there's no SMIDSY and yet a cyclist magically materialised out of
>>> thin air and nearly skittled you.
>>> He saw you and swerved to avoid you yet you had not an inkling he was
>>> there until he was past you.
>>> How come attentive-careful-you couldn't see him Kev? (And more
>>> importantly, why do you imagine that all this is *HIS* fault?)
>> I'll explain this one last time for the dense in here then give up.
>>
>> I'm walking down the road and an F111 comes in under ground following
>> radar at 700km/h. Oops SMIDSY.
>
> was that a F-111C or the D?
>
> seeing the F-111D had the newer Mark II avionics, he should have seen
> you and thus avoided the situation
>
Hah hah must've been the D as it *did* manage to avoid the Kevstroller!

--
Elsie.
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Prev: Changes to the NSW
Next: Unaugural 8.0 - Roll Call