"Silly Girls" reprised

[400sm]

AFAIK this is the current law.

Land Transport (Road User) Rule 200411.5 Entering crossings
A pedestrian or a rider of a mobility device or wheeled recreational device must not suddenly enter a pedestrian crossing when an approaching vehicle is so close to the pedestrian crossing that the driver of the vehicle is unable to give way to the pedestrian or the driver or rider of the device.



An exchange of Letters to the Editor, BLENHEIM.


Stuff Home Marlborough Express Opinion
BlogsLetters to the editor
Last updated 08:29 25/02/2013

l
Careless pedestrians

As a driver I am becoming more and more concerned that pedestrians are getting confused about when to cross the road. People are walking straight out on to the pedestrian crossings in Blenheim, especially from Countdown to the library, without even looking for oncoming cars.

I stopped to ask one woman why she didn't look and got the answer that it was my job to stop for her as she was on the crossing.

She had absolutely no idea what the white diamond up the road meant - none at all.

I asked around and it seems hardly anyone knows that the diamond on the road marks the safe distance for a car to stop for the pedestrian crossing. One kid thought it was decoration.

That "decoration" means a car is required to stop for pedestrians if it is outside the diamond and the pedestrian is waiting at the crossing. If the car is inside the diamond mark, it is required to stop only if it is safe to do so - the pedestrian is required to let the car go first.

Walking out in front of a car two metres from the crossing will get you killed and you will be at fault - not the driver.

Please remember that you are flesh and bones and cars are metal and if you connect with one, it's you that will break first. That diamond is there for a reason and look for traffic - both ways, please.

LEIGH MADDISON

(400sm: that's the diamond rule I remember from my licence test in 1974. THIS RULE MAY NOT APPLY NOW.)

Blenheim
A response:

I do not know where Leigh Maddison found the information regarding the white diamond markings on the roads before pedestrian crossings [letters, Marlborough Express, February 25].

I have looked through the 2012-13 official Road Code book and the only references I can find regarding the white diamond is as follows:

■ Page 246: "White diamonds are generally painted on the road before a crossing and a white limit line shows where you have to stop."

■ Page 284: Question 528 of the learners licence theory test: "What does a white diamond on the road mean?" For the answer you are referred to page 246 as above.

As far as I can tell, the only reason for the white diamond is to show road users they are approaching a pedestrian crossing, and not for the reasons Leigh Maddison states.

WENDY WILSON

Blenheim

(400SM: Possibly a younger driver.)


NZ Transport Agency spokeswoman Jan McCarthy responds:

The white diamond markings on the road before pedestrian crossings are to warn drivers they are approaching a crossing. The markings are not intended to indicate to pedestrians when it is safe to cross. Since 2005, white diamonds have been optional to indicate the approach to a pedestrian crossing. However, road controlling authorities must now install pedestrian crossing warning signs and the road user rule requires a driver to give way to a pedestrian on a pedestrian crossing or a pedestrian who is obviously waiting to cross at a pedestrian crossing, unless the pedestrian is under the control of a school patrol.

(probably a law change. NZTA person probably is too young to remember.)

The Original writer responds:

Crossing rules

In response to Wendy Wilson [letters, Express, March 4], I got my information from the NZTA website - from a publication dated 2009 regarding pedestrian planning guides. It was also what I was taught by the officer who took me for my driver's licence over three decades ago; back in the days when people were also taught to stop at pedestrian crossings and look both ways before crossing and not simply stroll out as though it was an extension of the footpath.

I have had a chat with Jan McCarthy of the NZTA today and she was unaware of that publication herself. I will show her that crossing when she comes up for a visit.

Publications aside, though, people need to think about what they are doing before they cross the road. Considering a car can travel 900 metres in one minute at 54kmh (yep, another NZTA publication), I would think you would want to err on the side of caution.

After all, blood can be washed off a car, but it's a bit harder to wash a car off your body.

LEIGH MADDISON

Blenheim


No matter what opinions are taken, THIS law is still FACT !


Land Transport (Road User) Rule 200411.5 Entering crossings
A pedestrian or a rider of a mobility device or wheeled recreational device must not suddenly enter a pedestrian crossing when an approaching vehicle is so close to the pedestrian crossing that the driver of the vehicle is unable to give way to the pedestrian or the driver or rider of the device.

[bogan]

http://funny-pics.co/wp-content/uploads/instant-death-200-fine-445x299.jpg

[Mike.Gayner]

Some people have too much time. Move on with your life, do something important, hug your kids, go outside, whatever.

[400sm]

Some people have too much time. Move on with your life, do something important, hug your kids, go outside, whatever.

It's 10pm BRO!!!!

It's all copy and paste.
Go and read my pointless drivel.
Thanks for your rant ....or rave.

[Berries]

Kind of related are the fucking idiots who think that once a pedestrian has crossed in front of you on a marked pedestrian crossing you have to wait until they get to the footpath on the other side before moving off. Hand your fucking licence in and shoot yourself.

But it's true, people used to be told that if you started crossing the road before the car reached the diamond they had to stop. The diamond meant nothing but an advanced warning, but that is how NZ road rules develop. So they changed the rule and now you have to give way to someone who is obviously standing at the side of the road waiting to cross, which makes perfect sense considering how inconsiderate NZ drivers are in general. If the NZTA rep does not know of the Pedestrian Planning and Design guide she should hand in her fucking licence as well. Wasn't Jan McCarthy a sailor?

Is it Friday yet? I am holding it in.

[haydes55]

Kind of related are the fucking idiots who think that once a pedestrian has crossed in front of you on a marked pedestrian crossing you have to wait until they get to the footpath on the other side before moving off. Hand your fucking licence in and shoot yourself.


.


When I sat my license the road code clearly states that, whilst giving way to a pedestrian, you must not take off again until the pedestrian has either left the other side of the road or has entered a traffic island.

It may just be bureaucracy, but it is the law, and if you don't want a ticket, you will wait patiently for the pedestrian to be off the road.

[Voltaire]

Kind of related are the fucking idiots who think that once a pedestrian has crossed in front of you on a marked pedestrian crossing you have to wait until they get to the footpath on the other side before moving off. Hand your fucking licence in and shoot yourself.

But it's true, people used to be told that if you started crossing the road before the car reached the diamond they had to stop. The diamond meant nothing but an advanced warning, but that is how NZ road rules develop. So they changed the rule and now you have to give way to someone who is obviously standing at the side of the road waiting to cross, which makes perfect sense considering how inconsiderate NZ drivers are in general. If the NZTA rep does not know of the Pedestrian Planning and Design guide she should hand in her fucking licence as well. Wasn't Jan McCarthy a sailor?

Is it Friday yet? I am holding it in.

yeah, stuff the road code, its bollocks.:lol:

http://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/roadcode/about-other-road-users/sharing-road-with-pedestrians.html

[Berries]

When I sat my license the road code clearly states that, whilst giving way to a pedestrian, you must not take off again until the pedestrian has either left the other side of the road or has entered a traffic island.

It may just be bureaucracy, but it is the law, and if you don't want a ticket, you will wait patiently for the pedestrian to be off the road.
The Road Code is just handy hints and pretty pictures and has no legal status. There is no actual rule that says you have to wait for a pedestrian to get back on the footpath.

Funny, the link posted above actually gives you this- "wait until the pedestrian has crossed in front of you and is clear of your vehicle before you proceed - see give way rules". The Road Code must be getting better, but if I really want to know a rule I would go to the legislation it is based on.

[unstuck]

I have been abused countless times by fuckwits who get upset at me slowing down to 20kmh for a stopped schoolbus. I thought that is what I was supposed to do. Mostly I just stop after that kind of abuse anyway, that makes em worse. :devil2:

[R650R]

I have been abused countless times by fuckwits who get upset at me slowing down to 20kmh for a stopped schoolbus. I thought that is what I was supposed to do. Mostly I just stop after that kind of abuse anyway, that makes em worse. :devil2:

Same here I'd catch the Bay view ones in morning when my truck was running late. That's one law you don't want to be breaking and a definite go to jail if something bad happens. The behaviour of some of the buses needs to be looked at, some of them pull up across a side road so technically they are off the road you are on and people think they have some legal out to not slow. But the high potential for tragedy is still there.
As for pedestrian crossings with no island, if you stay stopped it might just alert traffic coming other way that hasn't clicked yet to small kid crossing.

[Banditbandit]

So hit the silly fuckers .. it's called Survival of the Fittest ... If these stupid people can't survive in an urban environment then Fuck 'em ...

[oldrider]

I have been abused countless times by fuckwits who get upset at me slowing down to 20kmh for a stopped schoolbus. I thought that is what I was supposed to do. Mostly I just stop after that kind of abuse anyway, that makes em worse. :devil2:

So true!

I slow down and if another vehicle is arround (either way) I flick my hazard lights on ... seems to work but then I am in the country most times!

[Laava]

One of the biggest differences I noticed about drivers in the UK when I lived there in the nineties, was they were shit scared of knocking someone over on a pedestrian crossing. Not a bad mindset really! And pedestrians there will just step out without looking, and a lot of the time too not just randomly

[slofox]

Kind of related are the fucking idiots who think that once a pedestrian has crossed in front of you on a marked pedestrian crossing you have to wait until they get to the footpath on the other side before moving off. Hand your fucking licence in and shoot yourself.

I do know someone who was prosecuted for driving off before the pedestrian had reached t'other side...a wee while ago now though. Dunno if that rule is still current.

[Katman]

In Taupo we have several raised paved pedestrian crossing areas that are not marked as standard pedestrian crossings and they even have signs informing pedestrians that they must give way to vehicles.

Doesn't stop the idiots from walking straight out in front of you though.

[neels]

In Taupo we have several raised paved pedestrian crossing areas that are not marked as standard pedestrian crossings and they even have signs informing pedestrians that they must give way to vehicles.

Doesn't stop the idiots from walking straight out in front of you though.

Same problem as exists in Blenheim, which I assume is what started the discussion in the OP.

From memory some of them are and some of them aren't marked as pedestrian crossings, but pedestrians tend to treat them all the same and just carry on across, head down texting away oblivious of the oncoming traffic.

[f2dz]

You should be riding/driving defensively at all times so it shouldn't really be a surprise if people step out in front of you. What would your excuse be if a toddler ran out at a crossing and you were past the diamond? "Sorry, but they should've know the rules."?

Not everyone drives a car so you can't expect every single pedestrian to know what the diamonds mean. I know people in their 30s that have no inclination to even get their license.

I've never heard of the diamonds being stopping distance markers at all; merely indicators that a crossing is coming up.

[bluninja]

Same problem as exists in Blenheim, which I assume is what started the discussion in the OP.

From memory some of them are and some of them aren't marked as pedestrian crossings, but pedestrians tend to treat them all the same and just carry on across, head down texting away oblivious of the oncoming traffic.

Also here in New Plymouth. They are in the CBD which is now a 30 zone so it's not as though you really need to get somewhere soon if you are choosing that route. Problem is cage drivers who don't know better stop as though it's a pedestrian crossing, and so everyone then expects other drivers to do the same. Raised crossings are certainly easier for people with mobility or vision difficulties or people with kids in pushchairs. It would be easier just to make them proper crossings and remove confusion.

OR.....they could put underpasses in. Keep traffic and people separate; also provide extra places for kids to skateboard, shag their friends, smoke dope, or lay in wait to mug people.

[400sm]

I've never heard of the diamonds being stopping distance markers at all; merely indicators that a crossing is coming up.


Yes, it seems to have been long forgotten except to us older folks.

May l ask what year you got your licence please.

[unstuck]

In Taupo we have several raised paved pedestrian crossing areas that are not marked as standard pedestrian crossings and they even have signs informing pedestrians that they must give way to vehicles.

Doesn't stop the idiots from walking straight out in front of you though.

They are called courtesy crossings, and most people think they are pedestrian crossings. At least thats how they treat them, the ones at queenstown airport are really bad for catching people out.

[400sm]

Same problem as exists in Blenheim, which I assume is what started the discussion in the OP.

Yes indeed.

(There is my earlier 'silly girls" thread which now resides in the Pointless Drivel section.)

It pertains to a TV clip of a car in Blenheim than ran over a girl that ran out into the ped. crossing.

I was defending the driver in this case as it was obvious to me that the poor driver was not given time to stop.

[Banditbandit]

In Taupo we have several raised paved pedestrian crossing areas that are not marked as standard pedestrian crossings and they even have signs informing pedestrians that they must give way to vehicles.

Doesn't stop the idiots from walking straight out in front of you though.

We have those here too ... and signs that say "Pedestrians Givfe Way" .. but the cars stop to let people cross the road ... they've even stopped and waved me across when I've stepped out between parked cars ..

Different breed in the eastern bay ... I like living here better.

[f2dz]

Yes, it seems to have been long forgotten except to us older folks.

May l ask what year you got your licence please.

2005, and I've never had a problem with people walking out on pedestrian crossings. I never drive or ride past them without lowering my speed for the very reason of someone stepping out or running out, especially children.

[400sm]

2005, and I've never had a problem with people walking out on pedestrian crossings. I never drive or ride past them without lowering my speed for the very reason of someone stepping out or running out, especially children.


Yes as we all do.
The problem is peds these days are not taught the common sense that is expounded in that Law....no self preservation instinct or notion.

[FJRider]

In Taupo we have several raised paved pedestrian crossing areas that are not marked as standard pedestrian crossings and they even have signs informing pedestrians that they must give way to vehicles.

Doesn't stop the idiots from walking straight out in front of you though.

If they have NO "Zebra Stripes" ... they are merely "Suggested crossing points" ... and are
not subject to Pedestrian crossing laws ....

Ignorance (of the said pedestrians) is bliss ... for THEM ..

[FJRider]

I've never heard of the diamonds being stopping distance markers at all; merely indicators that a crossing is coming up.

What the white Diamond means ....

It warns a driver that there is a pedestrian crossing ahead, and they are placed at a distance from the crossing to enable a vehicle to stop safetly if the driver sees a padestrian waiting to cross.

If the driver sees a padestrian waiting to cross before he/she passess over the white diamond he/she must stop and let the pedestrian cross.

If already past the diamond and a pedestrian approaches the crossing he/she should stop if can stop saftely. For the pedestrian : if they see a car beyond the diamond they can assume the driver of the appropaching car will be able to stop safetly to let them cross, but they should not not step onto the road until they are sure they driver is stopping. If the perdestrain sees the car is inside the diamond ( has already past the diamond) the pedestrian should wait until the car has passed before stepping onto the road, or step onto the road only if the car has stopped to let them past.

liabilty: If a pedesrtain steps onto the road after a car has passed the diamond, it is the pedestrian who is a at fault if hit by the car. If a pedestrian is hit by a car that was outside the diamond when they stepped onto the road, the car is at fault.

[Berries]

What the white Diamond means ....

It warns a driver that there is a pedestrian crossing ahead, and they are placed at a distance from the crossing to enable a vehicle to stop safetly if the driver sees a padestrian waiting to cross.

If the driver sees a padestrian waiting to cross before he/she passess over the white diamond he/she must stop and let the pedestrian cross.

If already past the diamond and a pedestrian approaches the crossing he/she should stop if can stop saftely. For the pedestrian : if they see a car beyond the diamond they can assume the driver of the appropaching car will be able to stop safetly to let them cross, but they should not not step onto the road until they are sure they driver is stopping. If the perdestrain sees the car is inside the diamond ( has already past the diamond) the pedestrian should wait until the car has passed before stepping onto the road, or step onto the road only if the car has stopped to let them past.

liabilty: If a pedesrtain steps onto the road after a car has passed the diamond, it is the pedestrian who is a at fault if hit by the car. If a pedestrian is hit by a car that was outside the diamond when they stepped onto the road, the car is at fault.
Perhaps once upon a time but not now.

The location of the white diamond was always hit and miss so much so that it is not even a requirement now. When it was required only a minimum distance was specified, and it was purely to tell a motorist that a pedestrian crossing was coming up, nothing more, even though because it was there it was used as a guide by some people.

The rule is that you must give way to pedestrians who are either on the crossing or who are obviously waiting to cross it. That's it. Nothing about white diamonds and nothing about waiting until they have got back on the footpath before you pull away. Part 10 of the Road User Rule if anyone wants to know the actual rules.

As for liability, again, the white diamond is not going to come in to it. If the pedestrian runs out and gets hit it is probably their fault, if they walk out and get hit it is probably the rider/drivers fault. I have always found it is best not to hit anyone so as not to worry about liability.

[FJRider]

As for liability, again, the white diamond is not going to come in to it. If the pedestrian runs out and gets hit it is probably their fault, if they walk out and get hit it is probably the rider/drivers fault. I have always found it is best not to hit anyone so as not to worry about liability.

As is usual in this day and age ... we remember the rules that suit our needs ... and the ones we like at the time.

We know pedestrians have right of way on the Zebra crossings ... but there are still rules THEY have to abide by. Children are taught they are the safe place to cross the road and cars have to stop for them (and little more is remembered). But few children (and some adults) have no comprehension of stopping distances of cars/trucks etc ...

Actual liability/fault is of little consequence ... if you hit anybody ... kid or not.

[unstuck]

I have only ever been hit by a car once while crossing a pedestrian crossing, and that was by a copper. :laugh:

[Kickaha]

I have only ever been hit by a car once while crossing a pedestrian crossing, and that was by a copper. :laugh:

Probably well deserved

[unstuck]

Probably well deserved

You are correct, I was walking across the thing at the time. :niceone:

[neels]

Common sense would suggest that if you step out in front of a car that is a metre away from you it won't be able to stop (much like the silly girl in Blenheim), however modern thinking seems to be that as it is the pedestrians right to step out on the crossing, all laws of physics should be suspended and if this fails the driver will be at fault. Unfortunately this is bullshit, perpetuated by the current generation that thinks that everything is their right, and they have no responsibility for their actions

[unstuck]

Im Fucking retarded and need a tablet.

Fixed that for ya. :2thumbsup

[skippa1]

When I sat my license the road code clearly states that, whilst giving way to a pedestrian, you must not take off again until the pedestrian has either left the other side of the road or has entered a traffic island.

It may just be bureaucracy, but it was the law, and if you don't want a ticket, you will wait patiently for the pedestrian to be off the road.
Fixed that for you, I remember it changing, just don't remember when.....

[f2dz]

After this thread I've only just started taking notice of how far away those diamonds are from crossings.

In a lot of cases they are miles away. I know this isn't really the topic, but if you seriously can't stop in time travelling between the diamonds and the crossing markings then you are going way too fast.

I passed some yesterday that looked about 20m away apart. Makes sense that this old rule isn't enforced because in a lot of cases this would be ridiculous.

[400sm]

Common sense would suggest that if you step out in front of a car that is a metre away from you it won't be able to stop (much like the silly girl in Blenheim), however modern thinking seems to be that as it is the pedestrians right to step out on the crossing, all laws of physics should be suspended and if this fails the driver will be at fault. Unfortunately this is bullshit, perpetuated by the current generation that thinks that everything is their right, and they have no responsibility for their actions

Right on !

[caspernz]

Common sense would suggest that if you step out in front of a car that is a metre away from you it won't be able to stop (much like the silly girl in Blenheim), however modern thinking seems to be that as it is the pedestrians right to step out on the crossing, all laws of physics should be suspended and if this fails the driver will be at fault. Unfortunately this is bullshit, perpetuated by the current generation that thinks that everything is their right, and they have no responsibility for their actions

Not that I'm that cold blooded, but in the truck (camera equipped) it doesn't worry me too much. Not that many take a self righteous approach when faced with a big rig. On the bike it can be annoying...