Anyway your argument was that he should always have to stop and it is still not correct hence we have GIVE WAY
I didn't say that at all. I said he should be able
to. You can be in the right and still avoid accidents.
No you swerve to avoid them and crash in the process
Eh, perhaps. I'd try not to be in that position in the first place, it's not always possible but I like to have escape routes.
if they did jump that distance it would be your fault for not anticipating etc which is a very poor argument still
And if i pull out in front of you at say a roundabout where i should stop and give way its your fault
You seem to have invented something you think I've said or meant in order to argue against it. If someone pulls out on you and there's a collision then they're at fault for not giving way, of course. However, that doesn't mean you couldn't have done something to minimise that risk or avoid it completely. Observation, anticipation, appropriate speed.
I narrowally avoided an unbraked cyclist last week who shot out in front of me from a side street without looking or giving way.
I had one of those recently too, ran a red light on a lights-controlled roundabout. The lights went to green, I set off to move onto the roundabout, but even though the lights were in my favour I checked right before actually moving onto it. As such, I saw him and braked in time to allow him to shoot in front of me. I shouldn't have to check there, I had right of way, and a collision wouldn't have been my fault. However, by anticipating that red light jumpers are a higher risk on roundabouts due to the lights going red and green at the same time rather than on the normal delay, I managed to avoid killing an idiot.
Are you all really claiming that you drive at such a speed and with such control it would be impossible for someone to pull out on you and hit you
Impossible? No. I'd say it's reasonably unlikely though.