[Closed] Why do people walk/jog against traffic ?

because they have read the highway code

One can only react to cars if one can see them coming - granted being on the inside of a blind bend is inadvisable and the direct consequence of the advice

EDIT: Actually a score draw

Rule 2
If there is no pavement, keep to the right-hand side of the road so that you can see oncoming traffic. You should take extra care and

be prepared to walk in single file, especially on narrow roads or in poor light
keep close to the side of the road.
It may be safer to cross the road well before a sharp right-hand bend so that oncoming traffic has a better chance of seeing you. Cross back after the bend.

It's in the highway code. So you can see cars coming and get out the way I guess.

The Highway Code, innit ?
So that the walkers can see traffic approaching them, instead of having motor vehicles passing them from behind without warning.

What junky said. Edit, and everyone else...

Following the advice rigidly, as opposed to applying a dollop of common sense, in your case.

I've always understood that it's so they can see as well as hear you coming and get out of the way ..as opposed to just hearing you

So you get to look them in the eye before you're mown down, rather than just rear ended.

A cyclist and a pedestrian using the highway at the same time. Inconceivable. I hope they didn't cause you to have to slow your motor vehicle at all.

Never understood why?

Then you should never have been allowed to pass your driving test.

I’ll hand my license in

Went round a blind bend today on a narrow road and had cyclists coming towards me on the other side and joggers coming at me on my side.

Which of course is absolutely fine, because you were driving round a blind bend slowly enough to react.

I’ll hand my license in

Because there is absolutely no where else they can go for a jog obviously. Inconsiderate aholes.

Yeh it's a piss take. They don't even pay ****ing road tax.

I always expect a cyclist or a walker on a blind bend and adjust my speed accordingly

Thank god the sun wasn't in your eyes!!!

davidtaylforth - Member
Yeh it's a piss take. They don't even pay **** road tax.

I jogged on the road today against traffic. Yesterday I paid £1200 in 'road tax'. Where does that leave me?

I’ll hand my license in

Thanks. Wish more people would too.

I’ll hand my license in

clearly this is in jest, but... then question is now, what kind of person are you:

A) the kind who goes "huh? I wonder what else I've forgotten/don't know" and goes off to re-read the HC to keep yourself up to date

or

B) the kind who carries on as before safe in the knowledge that you're a good driver so there's no need to revise occasionally to keep yourself fresh and up to date.

😉 Happy new year from the smug-fest of STW!

I had this discussion with someone at work a while back after a typical '2 abreast' rant and explaining that it's not only allowed but often safer and better for all to do so. I tried to politely point out that there might be other stuff in the HC that they'd forgotten and might be worth brushing up, naturally I got told to 'eff off.

I have a soon to be 17 year old who is revising for her theory test by doing practice tests, not actually reading the HC - "none of my friends read it they just practiced the test" 🙄

I actually hope she fails it, and the practical test, until she realises she's not as great a driver as she thinks she's going to be.

Never understood why?

Perhaps they don't trust your driving and want a chance to jump out of the was as you take a call, text or use your phone as a sat nav.

There's nowt as queer as folk, as they say.

In case you recognise the driver, so you can smile and waive as they mow you down. 😉

I jogged on the road today against traffic. Yesterday I paid £1200 in 'road tax'. Where does that leave me?

With an ability to read but very little capacity to understand. 🙂

Just look again at who posted it.

OP next time you have to make a decision, stop and think about it a bit longer, because you are not as intelligent as you think you are.

Happy new year

[quote=davidtaylforth ]Yeh it's a piss take.

😆 HNY dtf!

Yesterday I paid £1200 in 'road tax'. Where does that leave me?

In the minority of those who still pay the tax now there's no paper discs if the papers are to be believed

The last person who told me cyclist's don't pay road tax was driving a Prius. 😆

The last person who told me cyclist's don't pay road tax was driving a Prius.

Well he/she was right, bloody Pruis driving know-it-alls 😉

#nosuchthingasroadtax

😀

I have to admit I break the walking into traffic rule when walking down Cheddar Gorge as I walk down on the left as it has the best verge. But I do insist on crossing over before the blind bends to give us the best chance of not being taken out by some muppet on a car/motorbike/bicycle/driftscooter

I even ran on the road the other day when there was a pavement *right there*

It’s narrow, uneven, unlit and full of cars parked on the pavement and (usually on Sunday, or Monday, but not always...) wheels bins.

ticsmon - Member
Never understood why?

Went round a blind bend today on a narrow road and had cyclists coming towards me on the other side and joggers coming at me on my side.

You forgot the first rule of STW club.

If you post a driving comment that even slightly infers you might, might have done something wrong, or be negligent of a fact you WILL be called arrogant and told to get off the road by all the other drivers that have never, ever made a mistake on the road. Ever. That also know the HC to the letter and really are perfect drivers. In every way.

So in that spirit, can I ask if you drive a white BMW?

Someone else will be along to ask you if you live in a modest house and have out side lighting shortly. 😀

While I'll agree to a certain point, that it may well be people in glass houses throwing stones also consider it from the other side and the benefit it provides.

First off, driving is a privilege, not a right. The whole country, if not the world, could benefit from an attitude shift on that.

Secondly, after passing the L test, very few people actually bother to try and improve their driving skills, or even maintain the knowledge they had when they passed that L test. Watch cars turning right at a roundabout and you'll see 3 do the same manoeuvre but come off that roundabout with all 3 different indicator options.

Three, with changes in policing, most forces no longer have traffic specialists who have the power of discretion and could decide that a little road side chat might improve things out there. Without the sheffiffs, it's getting more and more like the wild west.

Four, short of don't text and drive and don't drink and drive, there's very little in the way of public information campaigns now to help keep peoples driving standards up.

What that all means, is that the STW specialist driving kangaroo court is about the only place I can think of, where driving behaviour is discussed. Given the effect poor driving can have on entire families in the blink of an eye, if hurting one persons feelings on a thread like this, causes one contributor, or forum lurker, to think a little more about how they behave on the road, then long may it continue.

Sorry/not sorry for the rant, but having worked in traffic management/road safety for a local authority for a number of years, as well as being a DSA instructor and an advanced instructor, it's a subject close to my heart.

Just for balance, I punish pass walkers who walk in the wrong side of the road in the countryside.

In my silent electric eco car (no road tax) they don’t hear you coming so you can clip them with the wing mirror. Teaches them a lesson

First off, driving is a privilege, not a right. The whole country, if not the world, could benefit from an attitude shift on that.

And that would be re-enforced by removing peoples licenses more readily. Even a bit of 'careless' driving resulting in a death will only have you off the road for a year or so.
But unfortunately because of this

Three, with changes in policing, most forces no longer have traffic specialists who have the power of discretion and could decide that a little road side chat might improve things out there.

It wouldn't make any difference anyway. As a teenager I was an irresponsible driver and I got stopped all the time because there were police around to stop me. The problem was I always got let off as I was polite, laughed at their 'okay Nigel Mansell' comments etc,. so my behaviour didn't change. Taking my license away for 6 months would have been the best thing.

Perhaps they don't trust your driving and want a chance to jump out of the was as you take a call, text [b]or use your phone as a sat nav[/b].

I use my phone as my satnav every day for my job, I had no idea that what I was doing was a crime!

There appears to be some confusion on what is defined as 'using a mobile phone'. Some people have been fined for using it as a sat nav.
The wording in the law isn't clear. There was a bit in one of the papers on Saturday.

@Onzadog +1 to that.

When I was learning to drive my parents and my driving instructor impressed upon me that passing the driving test was the minimum standard and that I should aim to improve after that. I probably have improved in some areas but not in others, hopefully I haven't regressed too far in anything. I'm definitely not perfect.

I'd like to see the excuse of "I need a driving licence for my job" being counted against drivers - if you need a licence for your job then you should be held to a higher standard not a lower one.

Maybe a mandatory eye test with results sent to DVLA for anyone getting points on their licence. Of course The Daily Hate would characterise that as a "war on drivers" when in fact it's a "campaign against bad drivers"

Sorry, you’ll have to explain the particular significance of that last bit,

No i don't.

Walking against the flow of traffic does help you to identify the oncoming blind drivers, the speeding arseholes, and the texting twits.

That gives you time to leap into the muddy ditch so you do not inconvenience them by holding them up with an accident enquiry, or almost as bad, force them to put a furious post up on dickheaddriverworld.com forum.

Simple good manners from the ambulatory lower orders.

What's everyone so angry about?

[quote=whitestone ]Of course The Daily Hate would characterise that as a "war on drivers" when in fact it's a "campaign against bad drivers"

Well to be fair, as far as their readership is concerned that would be accurate.

1. I wasn’t having a go at people walking against the traffic. It was a genuine question. Obviously didn’t remember that from the HC. I’ll probably give it another look at.

2. I think I’m a considerate driver especially towards walkers, cyclists and horses.

3. I’d slowed down enough before the bend so I didn’t come close to slamming on.

4. Drive the most boring car in the world (grey Passat). Someone asked.

5. Happy new year!!!

[quote=richmars ]There appears to be some confusion on what is defined as 'using a mobile phone'. Some people have been fined for using it as a sat nav.

Not if it's in a holder they haven't. If they're holding it in their hand then they deserve to be fined, whatever apps are running at the time.

Not if it's in a holder they haven't. If they're holding it in their hand then they deserve to be fined, whatever apps are running at the time.

I'm just repeating what the newspaper article said. The offence is using a mobile phone, not holding one, so it could be down to interpretation, according to someone from the Criminal Bar Association.

You can be prosecuted for having a conversation on total hands free if your deemed to be driving in an unsafe manor while doing so.

Family member got pulled over while having an arguement on the phone driving along. The policeman saw the animated arm movements and decided he was driving distracted.....rightly so imo.

Phone was in a holder on the windscreen with voice activated blue tooth. Made no odds

Best place for the phone when driving is out of the drivers reach.

[quote=richmars ]the offence is using a mobile phone, not holding one

The offence is using a [b]hand-held[/b] mobile phone or device - section 110 of the construction and use regs. Personally I'd rather rely on what the law actually says rather than the contents of a newspaper article (whether or not they're quoting a lawyer). The only scope for interpretation is over what is defined as use - whether a satnav counts appears to be a grey area (a standalone satnav which doesn't connect to the internet certainly wouldn't count), but it would still have to be hand-held for the law to apply.

Of course you can also be prosecuted if you're distracted or otherwise driving unsafely, but not specifically for the hand-held device offence.