Phone zombies vs road users

[FoxEye]

(No, not another cute Pop Cap game)

There are many things in this world I don't understand, and here is another (e: added more links so both lefties and righties can read the story

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...epped-road-looking-mobile-phone-wins-damages/

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...-down-while-on-phone-wins-payout-from-cyclist

https://metro.co.uk/2019/06/18/cycl...on-woman-stepped-front-looking-phone-9996411/

Pedestrian walks into road absorbed in looking at phone, whilst traffic lights were green for traffic.

Gets hit by cyclist; sues cyclist for damages; wins.

Judge declares 50/50 liability and that "cyclists should expect the unexpected". Like, seriously, what the actual? Orders cyclist to pay her compensation.

Basically phone zombies can cross the road without looking and the law will allow them to sue anyone who fails to avoid a collision with them.

This seems decidedly silly.

Anyway besides this crazy ruling, I know from my own personal experience that more and more pedestrians are crossing the road (or otherwise behaving in an unsafe manner) whilst glued to their phones.

Not only are these people indefensible idiots, but extremely anti-social too.

Just the other day I had to stop my car as a runner - with attached dog - was running in the the road utterly unaware of my existence. She never looked up once from her phone. Never attempted to control the dog who was running slap-bang in the middle of the road, towards me.

And yes, of course I stopped, but mainly because I'm an animal lover Who knows what was on her phone - maybe her pal had eaten a really spiffy lunch - but it was clearly more important than either her safety or the safety of her pooch.

Does anyone else look at phone zombies and basically think, "This is how our civilisation ends. Slaves to social media and unable to function for the slightest moment without staring at our phones."

Sure I post a lot of inane, useless **** here - but from my PC, in the living room. Out and about, however, I like to actually look at the scenery/my surroundings; look both ways before I cross the road; avoid walking into people and objects as best as my aging senses allow. Phone zombies are a modern plague of biblical proportions.

And it's getting worse all the time. As in, more accepted. Expected. That people absolutely can't wait even a single minute to check their social media is slightly tragic. Even when their own safety is at stake.

 

[FoxEye]

Right yeah, that's the bit I couldn't picture. I guess if there was a throng in the road technically he should have stopped....but if there was a gap to the left and she had carried on walking right he would have missed her.

Guess that's why it was 50/50

All of the articles say she stepped out. Also that she tried to "step backwards onto the pedestrian island". If she was in the middle of the road a backstep wouldn't take her onto the pavement/island.

Also the judge ruled that cyclists should be always able to avoid a collision if a pedestrian acts contrary to common sense/the law/the best interests of their own safety.

In other words, peds can step out into the road with no warning and it's the road-user's problem to avoid them.

 

[FoxEye]

No, stop making this country an authoritarian *******. I will walk on an empty road if i want to.

Chances are you'd only be walking on the road unlawfully if you were doing something unsafe, like the woman in this story. Disobeying traffic lights for example. You don't get angry about having to abide by traffic lights as a road user, so that should be equally acceptable as a pedestrian.

I doubt any law is going to seek to stop you walking on the roads. Heck, down here that would be impossible, since we haven't invented pavements in most places yet.

 

[FoxEye]

Speaking as a cyclist it makes perfect sense, I mean if it had been a child that stepped out and he killed them would it have been okay to just say the child should have been paying attention and move on?

All road users should excise a certain level of competence/awareness, regardless of if they are driving a truck, a car, riding a motorbike, a bicycle or on rollerblades. If he hit her then he either wasn't paying attention or was going too fast for the area, either way it's his own incompetence/unawareness at fault. Yes she should have looked before entering the road but once in the road a pedestrian has right of way and road users are expected to know this and act accordingly.

Sadly too many cyclists these days lack proper care and attention and just think "the speed limit is X so I can do anything up to X!" despite the fact our braking distance is longer than a vehicle doing the same speed.

There are circumstances already mentioned in the thread where, yes, a child walking into the road (eg from behind a bus) and getting themselves run over/killed would be 100% nobody else's fault.

As a driver or a cyclist (I have been both), you cannot - despite some people assertions - guarantee that you will never collide with a pedestrian, unless you drive everywhere at 1mph. And hire an escort to clear the roads in front of you.

As a driver/cyclist you cannot reasonably be expected to make such accidents impossible, by virtue of your awareness and driving skill. It just isn't humanly possible.

People who claim they are such good drivers they can avoid accidents are frankly deluding themselves.

e: To clarify: regardless of how good a driver you are, there could arise a situation where there was nothing you could have done to prevent an accident. Short of giving up driving or driving everywhere at 1mph. The skill of th edriver can never reduce the chance of an accident to 0%. Never, ever, ever.