igorek

I already see a law suit coming after impact with one of those things then they will be removed.

Troul 

x2. If I want to average 12+ on a bike path around here, it'd have to be between 10pm & 4am on a Sunday.

rseeker

What fresh hell is this?

(That's a grocery joke. But also a comment about the future we're creating. I would say more but this isn't P&R and I really like the way we usually keep politics out of it.)

(But look at those eyes. This may "detect spills", but those eyes will make people feel watched. If I catch one of these lurking around me I'm going to tip it up and slide a can of potted meat product under the base. And then think about whether grocery consolidation will allow me to shop at a different store.)

(But how can one talk about robots without considering who benefits from robots.)

Bill in VA

Well, I just read in the Washington Post that one local jurisdiction is going to do a test allowing electric scooters and skateboards in the bike paths. It is bad enough the small scooters weave in and out on sidewalks and run into pedestrians, so I guess it is share the pain.

MikeyMK

People on this site rarely have good things to say about motorists (despite many being one), but here they're often very polite - too polite!

Yes I'll be sat there waiting for the cars to pass, so I can cross. But a car will stop, the driver gesture for me to cross.

I'd really rather not.

For one, giving up your right of way confuses people. But it's often dangerous because they'll do it having just left a 70mph by-pass. Does it not occur to them that someone behind them might be following suit..?! It reminds me of when someone puts their car into reverse without checking behind them. Seen a few shunts in petrol stations from this. Utterly brain dead.

I'll do the stand-off all day when I have my kid on the back. These idiots think I'm putting a child in front of a car, on a main road, at the end of a slip lane, when the traffic has right of way..? These are the kind of air-heads you're contending with when you cycle on the roads. My technique for a fast result is to stand straddled, and fold my arms crossed whilst shaking my head. This way, the motorist can see I'm not going anywhere.

devianb

Delivery robot sounds great in theory, but I don't see how they would deliver packages more reliably than a human. Kids will mess with anything. What is to stop them from either taking it, pushing it over on its side, or destroying it?

Shimagnolo

18 days ago someone posted a video to the-site-that-must-not-be-linked, showing fools in the left lane stopping for no good reason to wave a left-turning motorist through...while traffic in the right lane was blowing by (4-lane street). The video was taken by the motorists dashcam. To find it, go to:

r-e-d-d-i-t
r/IdiotsInCars
Stop being "nice". I'm not going to get T-boned so you can feel good about yourself.

Joe Bikerider

Re: getting waved through. About a week ago on the MUP, as I approached a street crossing (Walden Ave) there was a Sheriff car there waving me to go ahead. He was passing from right to left. Usually In a case like this I don’t go. Maybe stop and fiddle with my pedals or something, better than trust a driver. But since he was a cop, I went ahead and turned left in front of him. I took the lane since this was a blind left curve and well he was a cop after all.

He went ahead and passed me by getting totally into the left lane. As he passed I yelled “P** F*****”. At the stop sign he rolled down his window and I yelled “why are you passing me on a blind curve?”
His response: “that was safe”. So I responded with some more porcine based abuse. It was clearly not safe since he could not see approaching traffic.

I knew at that intersection he would go straight because that’s where the county line is and I was going to turn right into the city limits. I restrained myself from using the finger but. Come on, cops, try to be a little reasonable.

indyfabz

I asked a cashier about it. She said it creeps out a lot of people.

UniChris

Are you sure they aren't required to? At least for a pedestrian?

In many situations they would be, it is possible that aren't confident that the particular situation is not one.

MikeyMK

Absolutely not in the least bit possible, no.

Not when i'm on a pavement with posts and lines stopping me, and they're on a clear road. If they have to stop, there'd be a major pedestrian crossing for it (pelican/zebra) with lighting and road markings.

The picture below is of a typical crossing where a bridge or underpass isn't immediately available. These cross the smaller roads (never the bypass). But whilst this is a 30mph residential road, that roundabout is on a 70mph dual carriageway.
The grey car approaching is typically doing 30-40mph (some faster), when i'm waiting to cross at the yellow posts. So what if he stops to give way to me?! He immediately creates a major hazard and there's absolutely no confusion about the correct course of action here.

MikeyMK

Police will sometimes deliberately push you or invite you to do something wrong. Don't fall for it.

As will other motorists, and it causes deaths regularly.

There's a well-known situation here that causes a horror crash, but people still do it. Scenario:

You're at a junction, wanting to turn out onto the main road. But you have to wait for a car to cross your path as they turn down the street you're sat on. They flash you to let you out, as they approach. This is really so they can cut the corner, it's convenient for you to go that bit earlier too, and tempting because it gives you a 'green light'.

But that green light is a false sense of security. Sometimes there was a car behind them, which is now obscured as it's passing them on the other side of their vehicle from yours. That vehicle can't see you either, whilst the flasher sits between you. You pull out, and are hit by a vehicle doing highway speed...

A local fatality also included a misunderstanding regarding a flash of the headlights. A truck flashed on the main road, a car then pulled out. It's believed the car driver thought the truck's lights were an invite. The truck driver had got nervous as the car 'crept' at the line, and was intending to just make himself visible to the maximum...

The only advice anyone can endorse safely is that you stick to the 'right of way' in any given scenario.

UniChris

Here that probably would have a painted pedestrian crossing, and one is effectively implied even when not painted. In some jurisdictions the law even now says that every intersection is a pedestrian crossing.

At least in the US, there's both a social and legal trend that, contrary to your opinion, is increasingly making this a situation where cars must stop to let humans cross.

Effectively, you are the one "doing it wrong" . What should be happening is that the car coming one way stops when they see you waiting to cross, you check for traffic the other way and when it is safe you cross. Typically one car stopping is a *huge* signal to those going the other way to also stop, if they were not being mindful of their obligation to do so. And if following traffic is going to rear-end a car that has appropriately slowed and stopped, that following traffic was not following safely.

Of course, don't cross until you feel it is safe to. But do take the reasonable opportunities you are handed by the courtesy of others. If you are uncertain about traffic in the other direction or a faster lane, wait until you can see what you need to see.

MikeyMK

Here, we stick to the law, not trends.

If traffic had to stop just because a pedestrian was stood by a road, the country would come to a standstill.

UniChris

Except where there's a traffic signal with a walk phase, at places where it is legal for a pedestrian to cross, that is in fact pretty much the law in civilized countries.

Ironically the first place I really experienced drivers obeying that was in London. Sorry to hear things have fallen so far behind.

I-Like-To-Bike

Is that what motorists do in NYC, or any other East Coast metropolitan area in the U.S to allow pedestrians and cyclists to cross at unmarked locations without traffic controls? Yeah, sure.

UniChris

It's what they are obligated to. Also most intersections in the city itself have traffic lights or stop signs, so there are relatively few situations where you encounter an uncontrolled crossing.

And in practice it works out fairly well on the bike trail into the suburbs north of the city that has lots of situations geometrically similar to the posted picture. Sure, you get occasional self-absorbed ******* who blow by, even every once in a while one with a bike on the roof. But generally it works. And once one car stops, that reminds the other direction of their obligation. Don't go until you are confident it is safe, but don't obstinately refuse what you are offered on a silver platter, especially where the drivers are legally obligated to make that offer to at least some modes of trail use.

(Sadly the peer effect works the other way, too - if one car blows by a crossing, following ones are likely to as well. It may be that their attention is more on the car in front than the peripheral details of what is ahead)

Troul 

When I am faced with the above like crossing situations, I will stop my bicycle before the intersection, leaving at least a dozen bicycle lengths between the crossing & I.
That still causes drivers to "waive" for me to cross. At that point, it turns into "who can wait it out the longest". .. The vehicle eventually continues its direction before I am moving.

UniChris

This is a delay that you are causing by your refusal to take an offered opportunity, if it is in fact safe to do so.

Perhaps it's time to learn how to fit into cooperative road interactions, because in actuality the situation is not always adversarial.

No, don't do anything that is unsafe. But if a car is stopped and the driver is making eye contact, you can begin to cross in front of that car while waiting to see what happens on the other side. Typically the fact of the one lane being stopped, and of your crossing, will quickly resolve the situation on the other side in your favor, but yes, wait until you are sure.

I guarantee that those drivers you have this stalemate with leave with very uncharitable thoughts of your obstinance.

Digger Goreman

Ah, "Crosswalks", the other Stop Bar in Atlanta... when they actually stop....

UniChris

Here, for example, is a summary of a good set of pedestrian crossing laws from Minnesota:

Note that in particular there is no distinction between intersections that do and do not have a painted crosswalk unless there is a pedestrian signal, in which case that governs. This isn't yet the law everywhere, but it's a direction in which things are moving in practice, and likely eventually law.

And note that even in places where the law does not require drivers to preemptively yield to pedestrians who want to cross, it does require them to yield to pedestrians who are in the act of crossing, when that crossing is legal and was begun safely. If a car stops and you begin crossing, they are now obligated to yield to you. As are any other cars that then approach with reasonable time to react. Though that doesn't mean you should cross their paths before being sure they are doing so.

The more I look at this, the more surprised I am that it does not have a painted crossing. Then I notice it does not have a line between the two directional lanes, either. Is that normal in this location? It seems odd for that to be missing on a road with the kind of speed that has been implied. The paving looks very fresh, I cannot help but wonder if it has recently been resurfaced and none of the usual paint or stick-on markings yet re-applied.

Troul 

In the areas that I do this, I've seen or heard of the cars rear-ending the other car because of the evenflo disturbance, all because the driver wanted to be polite to a ped. My non moving distance away from the crossing should be a no-brainer for the vehicle to continue its course.

UniChris

This isn't really your problem, but theirs. Practically speaking, you can see if there is a car following the stopping one too closely to also stop, so of course in that case wait to see what happens. If a car that was not already in view is going to come flying around a blind curve too fast to stop for a car that is already stopped for you (when cars are exactly what driver brains expect to identify), that car would probably kill you even if you waited until there were none in sight to begin your crossing. At least those in the cars are protected by a lot of technology designed for this eventuality, and the collision with the stopped car will sap some of the energy before it is bulldozed into you.

If you believe that drivers are running a risk in stopping for you, then not making use of the opportunity it has cost them something to provide borders on being a bit insulting, no?

If you didn't even intend to cross, that, I understand. Sometimes I've found even having my back to the road doesn't work, but hey, I get it, they are being cautious and that is a good thing.

Troul 

Drivers at typically overly cautious or not cautious as all. That's the point being made.

Chinghis

It's great how this turned into a discussion of Right-of-way - another one of my pet peeves.

(How does the multi-quote work here? I clicked four or five posts, but don't see how to insert them. Anyway, I love all your comments. That's a great image of those sad little delivery bots in England.)