I’ve altered my route to work recently as I’ve discovered a set of lights that pretty much change to red as soon as you hit the button. It’s ace. Sometimes I’ll cross then press the button on the other side just because I can.
Hence stopping cars, public transport, delivery vehicles, cyclists: delaying any emergency vehicle in subsequent queue, irritating all road users, causing an increase in polution,
F..ing genius, feel proud
Nope, not at all. I applaud your critical thinking and reasoned argument.
Cool. Is it an example you're going to start following?
delaying any emergency vehicle
Have a think about that.
‘delaying any emergency vehicle,
He means the Deliveroo guy.
Hence stopping cars, public transport, delivery vehicles, cyclists: delaying any emergency vehicle in subsequent queue, irritating all road users, causing an increase in polution,
F..ing genius, feel proud
Err.....it won’t stop emergency vehicles. If you’re that concerned about pollution I hope you don’t drive? You think pedestrian crossing lights work long enough to form a substantial queue? The amount of traffic is what causes the queues any way. I could go on, but it’s way too easy. Oh and there are no bus routes on the road.
Basically I’m a twelve year old at heart and find it amusing. Drivers regularly far exceed the speed limit on the stretch of road. It’s good to slow them down a bit.
If you’re that concerned about pollution I hope you don’t drive?
*sigh*
The point was that stopping people unnecessarily makes an already polluting activity more so and unnecessarily so.
Strawman arguments back don't make it any less valid.
The point was that stopping people unnecessarily makes an already polluting activity more so and unnecessarily so.
‘Tis necessary for my amusement 😉
The fact that some people actually think it causes harm is laughable. Stopping emergency services, nope the worst it does is ever so slightly inconvenience about three people for around thirty seconds. None most days. It’s getting way too easy to get a rise out of angry late middle aged men on here recently.
FWIW, when I walk up to a crossing, I look both ways, as one should, and if there’s any traffic I’ll press the button and wait, or if it’s a zebra crossing, I’ll stand and wait for cars to stop. I will walk across if I think a car is far enough away that I can walk safely without needing a red light, but as I can’t run, because of my shonky arthritic knee, a reasonable stroll is the best I can do.
It’s the peds who, when I’m driving towards them and they’re approaching a crossing, instead of walking up to it and waiting for me to stop walk up and step straight onto the crossing! This, I believe, is contrary to what the Highway Code says, that one should wait for approaching traffic to stop before putting a foot onto the crossing.
This, I believe, is contrary to what the Highway Code says, that one should wait for approaching traffic to stop before putting a foot onto the crossing.
Sort of although it isnt a Should or Must (in the highway code sense)
Its actually a tad confused and really unhelpful.
Whilst the pedestrian section does say wait until traffic is stopped until crossing the rules for cars only has the MUST when the pedestrian is on the crossing.
So its a bit of a catch 22 situation for the pedestrian. If you dont step out then you are relying on the driver to give way and if you do you are counting on them to be competent.
As such I would tend to go for the stepping out (with a certain paranoia factor).
The point was that stopping people unnecessarily makes an already polluting activity more so and unnecessarily so.
I think it's great that the forum's Jeremy Clarksons have so much concern for the environment.
I think it’s great that the forum’s Jeremy Clarksons have so much concern for the environment.
Haha, well said Ransos!
Is anyone who drives a Jeremy Clarkson then?
I guess that makes you a proper Lance Armstrong.
