Safe Speed Forums

You must be scamerati!

Why do you think a hard and fast blanket rule is likely to be better than a local judgement made by a competent, careful and responsible member of society?

I simply don't understand it at all.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Er, didn't Brunstrom park his estate car and trailer on the pavement outside his home for nearly TWO HOURS in Nov last year ?
(That's Completely Blocking the pavement, by the way!)

He left his Mercedes + trailer outside his home whilst he pruned trees in his garden!

And then, of course we have the Talivans blocking pavements and CYCLING LANES for hours on end, daily.......are they exempt, or what ?

No way, but I lived in Alberta where they tow your car straight to the pound for any funny business and you have to pay $100 to get it back, and no back chat allowed. Also, Montreal where, if you park in the way of a snow plough, they just plough you in under a 4 foot bank of snow. It takes hours to dig yourself out. Also Munich, where there is no excuse because public transport is so good. Here, we have, as ever, gone down the line of least resistance. Now cars dominate everything, and people can't see that there is another way. If motorists pay the full cost (e.g. finding or renting a proper place to park, not on the pavement), public transport would be more attractive. But no, we'd rather just park up on the pavement and harass young mums with prams, and poor old people on sticks have to make a detour to get around our cars. It's not on, man!



Too many yobbos, that's why. They've spoilt everything.

_________________
I stole this .sig

I can see an element of truth in that - but the last thing we should have allowed is for the "yobbos" to spoil everything.

Anti-yobbo laws or rules would have been just fine. Petty regulations for the rest of us is just barking as a response to yobbos.

A case of: "Something must be done. This is something. Let's do it" perhaps?

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Most drivers do - but those flleing my fashing plice car will do anything to evade capture. You have no idea what goes on whilst you are tucked up in bed sometimes...

But we are talking about folks who park up on he pavement - aren't we?

You appear to agree up to a point that:




However, you go on to say:



The difference is because you are not stationary . You are moving on a contraption with wheels. A car is parked - not moving and person has two eyes and a responsibilty not to walk into it. It is not that easy to leap out of the way of a cyclist - particularly if the person is walking ahead of the cyclist, and he does not ring any bell and shout a warning - as is often the case. Both parties can be injured - not necessarily seriously - but enough to be inconvenienced. You say you take out insurance via household inusrances - but what happens if person is not a householder and has not insured his household belongings. No legal obligation for cyclist to be insured - and many do not even exchange names and addresses. We have a number of people who complain about cyclists on pavements and we try to do something about this as and when we can - but question of prioriities and other emergencies. We are now deploying CSOs to deal with these people - and depends on hard nosed and law abiding people are as to their success anyway.


With respect - if you are moving to get from A to B - you are not using the pavement for same reason. Car is parked and you are travelling on the pavement.



Lot of roads around with wide pavements. In fact - roads around here where the part nearest the kerb is tarmacadamed and pavement is paved. Cars park on the tarmacadamed stretch and people walk on the paved bit. If the councils had the money and common sense- they could redesign into lay-bys anyway.


Also - you move the car onto pavement to access a driveway - and this is a perfectly legal manoeuvre per HC rule 123.

However - if there is a contravention of HC 218 - we tend to have a word with the driver - and if there are yellow lines, zig zags or anything absolutely illegal - then we act accordiingly.

Yep, not always practical and not always endorsed officially either. I'm sure I've seen places where extremely wide pavements have had parking bays painted entirely on the pavement rather than the road (probably for residents). Can't think of an example off the top of my head though. Point is, if the pavements on both sides of the road are together wider than the road itself (which sounds daft but there are such places) there's not going to be any inconvenience to pedestrians if cars are allowed to park enitrely on the pavement. It will be of benefit to road traffic though, especially large vehicles like buses that carry pedestrians from point to point. In such places everybody benefits by pavement parking.

More "normal" pavements, for want of a better term, are a different matter. I'd still avoid pavement parking anywhere near where I live as I can't think of a location that isn't likely to inconvenience pedestrians.

It's a bit of a balancing act, and the right answer might not be the same on two consecutive days. Perhaps the question to ask before we do either is simply "am I being a selfish b****** here?"

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

Basingwerk replied interestingly to my last post and I split it to a new topic:

Social Glue

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

Reading between the lines a number of apparently anti-car posters seem to be moving slowly but surely towards the pro-motorist position.

I seem to detect the following proposals being formulated:

Introduction and strict enforcement of Draconian jaywalking laws.

Strict enforcement of the laws against cycling on pavements (and other cycling related laws).

Strict enforcement of the laws against obstructing the Highway, including crossing slowly/ dallying on crossings/ setting off Pelican Crossings when you aren't going to cross, walking along roads with pavements at less then traffic speed...................

Surcharging council officials who have widened pavements.

Introducing a pedestrian and cyclist tax to pay for:

- All unnecessarily wide pavements to be narrowed and proper parking bays constructed.

- All buildings forced to be built with inadequate parking to have adequate parking provided.

- All buildings forced by planners to be built in such a way as to prevent rationalisation of road widths to be reconstructed to allow removal of pinch points.

Scrapping of planning controls so that you can build a house/ garage/ drive wherever you want.

All roads to be rebuilt as six lane Highways.

Councils to have a duty to maintain fleets of snowploughs and to actually use them to keep the roads clear.

Have I missed anything?

_________________
http://www.itsyourduty.org.uk

Nope!

I like a reasoned approach, with sensible resourced and substantiated debate. Extreme ideas are exactly that regardless of the source.

As before we will have to agree to disagree, my points are made above, and blatantly not what you are suggesting and trying to imply - I presume I am suppose to rise to this, but it's not going to happen - Mind you it sound like you and I are in agrement over Hobbesian theory and LEVIATHAN, except it applies to everyone.

You were on this thread too?

What did you say?

_________________
http://www.itsyourduty.org.uk

Nice try!