h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Fathom, I'd be very much interested in discussing this further if more facts can be attained.
Being an immigrant to the UK, I tend to look at some laws and rules as a bit odd from Sweden, where the rules, as far as I can remember, is that a pedestrian can blatantly walk out in front of a car if he does so on a zebra crossing and it's the responsibility of the motorist to stop. Legal right of way.
However, if the pedestrian tries to cross the road at a non-marked part of the road, then he can, if causing an incident, be fined for that.
I'm going to have to double check that, though.. (Good thing to be able to look up Swedish laws on the internet.)

Count, interesting tidbit about the Jaywalking origin. Thanks.

y'all.

Still doing the research. Just thought I'd reawaken the thread.

F

I found the appropriate texts in the Swedish traffic laws. They state:

"83 § En förare som närmar sig ett obevakat övergångsställe skall
anpassa hastigheten så, att han inte åstadkommer fara för gående som är ute på övergångsstället eller som just skall gå ut på detta. Om det behövs för att lämna gående tillfälle att passera, skall föraren stanna."

In English, that would be:

"83 § A driver approaching an unsupervised crossing (zebra crossing) shall amend his speed so that he does not pose any danger to pedestrians that are on the crossing or about to walk onto the crossing. If necessary, as to allow the pedestrian to pass safely, the driver shall stop the vehicle."

Also

"136 § Gående som skall gå ut på ett obevakat övergångsställe skall
ta hänsyn till avståndet till och hastigheten hos de fordon som närmar sig övergångsstället. Utanför övergångsställe får gående korsa vägen endast om det kan ske utan fara eller olägenhet för trafiken. Förordning (1985:380)."

For anyone that doesn't know Swedish that means:

"136 § Pedestrians who are about to walk onto an unsupervised crossing (zebra crossing) shall take into consideration the distance to and the speed of those vehicles that are approaching the crossing. Outside the crossing the pedestrians can only cross the road if they can do so without endangering or inconveniencing the traffic.
Regulation (1985:380)."

That means, if I'm correct, that if you're a pedestrian at a zebra crossing, you need to look before you cross. If you're a driver, you need to look and let pedestrians pass, and if a pedestrian wants to cross the road where there's no crossing, he does so at his own peril.

Hi Ku, I'm glad you did the translation.



Postings in foreign languages often get moderated - even when translated - because they could contain some unsuitable material and the translation might not be genuine. Yours might disappear if it gets spotted.



The rule for drivers is much the same in the UK but I don't think there is any written equivalent of "Outside the crossing the pedestrians can only cross the road if they can do so without endangering or inconveniencing the traffic".

Unfortunately showing that such a rule *doesn't* exist in 1000 years of British legal statutes is going to be hard. I will need to find an example where such a law would have been used if it existed but wasn't, I think.

I assume 'övergångsstället' is 'pedestrian crossing'? What a splendid word. Although I'm glad English words are free of all those umlauts and things. And how did you manage to insert a § in plain text? I just did it by copy & pasting yours?

Do I get a prize for pointing out that the specificity of your reply is admirable?

F

Hey, Fathom.

Yeah, I know that they usually hide the postings in another language even if they're translated, but I thought I'd see what happens.. Have to puch the envelope, you know.

The § sign, I've got as a specific key (just left of the 1 and above the Tab) as I'm using a Swedish keyboard. I can also type a ½ without trying to find the ASCII code for it. Kind of nifty things, I think..

Quite literally, the word "övergångsställe" means "Crossing place"
Actually, it took me not that long to find the information, as the Swedish laws and regulations can be found on the web. Quite handy, if you ask me.

I looked on the web last night for the relevant UK laws but didn't have time to track down what I was looking for. I can't do a general web search from work - just some trusted sites.

We'll manage to get it clarified eventually - it could be well worth knowing.

F

Look, it's real simple.

Cross the road through heavy traffic at somewhere other than a controlled crossing and you are responsible for the consequences.

Unless you've just come out of a pub, in which case you sue the publican for all they've got, as you were blind drunk at the time and the bartender should have known you were too pissed to give any more beer too.

Hi BadZen.

You could be right.

>> makes personal note to visit pubs near BadZen where publicans give you beer <<

Round here they only sell it!

>> crosses unsteadily back through rush hour traffic <<



F

(Guess who'd been 'given' too much beer when they posted to this conversation last...)

I am a recently born-again biker and was involved in a scrape with a car on my first morning out on my new bike. I arrived at traffic lights where there was a short queue of cars in two lanes, so I made my way between them to the front. Just when I stopped the lights changed. I wasn't ready to pull away immediately but the car beside me did, clipping my wing mirror in the process. I set off thinking I must take account of this bike being a little wider than the ones I used to ride around London. But I soon came across the driver of the car signalling for me to pull over, so I did. She got out of her little black Audi looking very cross, and didn't agree when I pointed out that she had clipped my mirror. She started examining the faint mark my mirror had left on hers and seemed a little disappointed when it just rubbed off. She left saying "That's what happens when you get a motorbike."
I've been thinking about this. As a car driver I can get irritated if a car pushes in front of me, but not the bikes, as they won't hold me up. Could her reaction have been justified? On the other hand, I could have pointed out that our vehicles had been involved in a collision while mine was stationary, so basically she had driven into mine from behind. It seems silly to sit on a bike at the back of a queue of cars when there's room to get past, but is that what we should do?

That's basically a matter of local laws. I know that in most U.S. states it is illegal to split lanes. There was an attempt to change that rule in my state a few years ago. The proposed change would have specifically allowed lane splitting only when traffic was moving below 25 mph and would only allow motorcycles to travel between lanes at 5 mph faster than the other vehicles. Seems sensible to me.