|
I think I must be one of the few cyclists that stop at red lights.
|
I think I must be one of the few cyclists that stop at red lights.
>>
No. You are the only one.
|
>> I think I must be one of the few cyclists that >> stop at red lights. >> No. You are the only one.
No he isn't.
|
|
|
|
Under these circumstances, is it acceptable to run a key down the paintwork?
That was presumably tongue-in-cheek.
If I ever caught anyone running a key down my paintwork (for whatever reason) they wouldn't walk away from it.
Back on topic, I'd guess that the 30mph speed limit is the most commonly broken law.
----
Life is complex; it has real and imaginary parts.
|
I know how you feel about your pride and joy getting scratched.
The chrome plate on the 1/2 inch bolt on the hood mechanism of my tandem silver cross pram has almost been worn off on the doors and wings of all the cars parked on the pavements both near my house and when we go for days out / holidays in places further a field.
And new the pram would cost well over £200, but we did get it 2nd hand.
Paul
|
And new the pram would cost well over £200, but we did get it 2nd hand.
Expensive isn't it. I had to spend over 300 quid to have a new headlight fitted after I crashed into a pram that was sticking out into the road, waiting to cross.
----
Life is complex; it has real and imaginary parts.
|
Hi
re
Life is complex; it has real and imaginary parts.
Now are we an engineerer and hence j notation
or a mathmatition and therefore i notation.
I 'imagine' that the 'real' cost of a bady is somewhat more than a headlight.
You must have hit the pram with some force to smash a headlamp. Based in Newton's 3rd law and on conservation of momentum laws, how was the baby?
Paul
Paul {Forest of Bowland}
|
Now are we an engineerer and hence j notation or a mathmatition and therefore i notation.
Neither. I just steal quotes from other people.
how was the baby?
The baby didn't exist. Neither did the pram. I was joking. I assumed you were too.
----
Life is complex; it has real and imaginary parts.
|
|
|
|
>> Under these circumstances, is it acceptable to run >> a key down the paintwork? That was presumably tongue-in-cheek. If I ever caught anyone running a key down my paintwork (for whatever reason) they wouldn't walk away from it.
So you'd get a spell in prison and probably end up paying compensation to the keyer - that'd be worth it, wouldn't it?
|
So you'd get a spell in prison and probably end up paying compensation to the keyer - that'd be worth it, wouldn't it?
Ok. So let's pretend I've stumbled across some scally running a key all over my paintwork. What is my correct course of action? Offer them a cup of tea?
----
Life is complex; it has real and imaginary parts.
|
>> So you'd get a spell in prison and probably end up paying compensation to the keyer - that'd be worth it, >> wouldn't it? Ok. So let's pretend I've stumbled across some scally running a key all over my paintwork. What is my correct course of action? Offer them a cup of tea?
If they've done it after some scally has parked your car on the pavement, you could try exchanging apologies.
|
If they've done it after some scally has parked your car on the pavement, you could try exchanging apologies.
Both times its happened in the past (my car's been keyed, I've not caught them at it) the car has been perfectly legally parked. I never park on the pavement and to date no-one has ever broken into my car in order to park it on the pavement.
The message I'm getting from people in this thread is that vandalism is acceptable behaviour if someone has inconvenienced you in some way. My faith in human nature has just sunk a little lower.
----
Life is complex; it has real and imaginary parts.
|
>The message I'm getting from people in this thread is that vandalism is acceptable behaviour if someone has inconvenienced you in some way.
Not really. If my choice is to take the pushchair on a busy road or squeeze it past a car parked on the pavement, I'll take the pavement, even if contact and horrible metal on metal grinding noises are guaranteed. This is because the paintwork of your illegally and inconsiderately parked car is less important than the safety of my child and me.
|
|
|
|
>> So you'd get a spell in prison and probably end up paying >> compensation to the keyer - that'd be worth it, wouldn't it? Ok. So let's pretend I've stumbled across some scally running a key all over my paintwork. What is my correct course of action? Offer them a cup of tea? ----
They'd probably be from a broken home, so you should arrange for some counselling for them. If you do give them tea, make sure it's not too hot in case they hurt themselves.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Under these circumstances, is it acceptable to run a key down the paintwork?
Probably not. But if a driver is inconsiderate enough to grab with their car that small proprtion of the streeet which is reserved for pedestrians, I don't bother taking great care that anything I'm carrying doesn't bash into them.
Parking on the pavement is either thoughtless, or a bully thing: "I'll grab your pedestrian space, and there's nothing you can do about because my car is bigger than you are".
Where I live, I find a remarkably close correlation between people who park their cars on the pavement and people who let their hedges grow out to obstruct most of the pavement -- sometimes creating a blockage which I can't even squeeze through sideways. A few times I've seen them parking, and asked poltely "please can't you park on the road, so that pedestrians can use the pavement" ... and most of these cretins look back with a dumb stare as if the idea was mad.
It really ought to be something for which the police and/or council can give a fixed penalty, preferably with points on the licence.
|
i fully agree NoWheels
|
|
Following on from NW, I make a point of folding in the passenger mirror of each car I pass that is on the pavement. It makes me happy, and inconveniences the driver as he/she normally has to get out of the car to correct the mirrors position.
|
Following on from NW, I make a point of folding in the passenger mirror of each car I pass that is on the pavement. It makes me happy, and inconveniences the driver as he/she normally has to get out of the car to correct the mirrors position.
I do the same thing, just to make it easier to get past, but the incovenience to the inconsiderate driver is nice bonus :)
|
|
|
|
>>most of these cretins look back with a dumb stare as if the idea was mad.
Whether it is parking or something else entirely, don't you find it quite something these days when however daft, stupid, dangerous or idiotic the thing they have just done is, its you that is the nutter if you point it out, even in civil terms.
Whatever ever happened to the idea of "yes, I did pink fluffy dice that up a bit, sorry" and moving on ??
Tonight I was aproaching a roundabout in the right-hand lane so that I could turn right - not one of my more ridiculous manouveurs, I didn't think.
Some plonker in lane 1 pulled out at the same time as me and was going to go straight on, which also seemed reasonable. But he tried to adopt the inside lane on the roundabout ! Which I was already in ! We were side by side, he couldn;t even see the centre of the roundabout, I was in his field of vision. Quite literally about an inch before he hit me I parped the horn. Only parped, not "leaned on with gusto". He swerved away from me and then followed loads of verbal and gestures. Sufficiently excessive that in less calm days he would have got slapped.
But why ? He could have just pulled away from me and carried on with a wave. Why would he insanely risk my road rage, since unless he had a gun he wouldn't have stood much of a chance, he was only a little old chap.
Its quite beyond me. When did driving get to be such an angry activity ?
|
Its quite beyond me. When did driving get to be such an angry activity ?
When cars got much faster, quieter, better insulated, had louder and better quality radios, and power steering. ie in about 1975. Cars are now designed to totally insulate their drivers from all reality in the outside world. They are boxes to transport egos in. Everyone else hardly exists in the mind of the driver - they are just impersonal obstacles or aliens in a video game that is projected onto the windscreen.
|
Speaking of red lights, is it me or are people (particularly taxi drivers), treating a red light as "OK if I floor it" for about 5 seconds after it's turned red?
I almost got hit by a taxi today while moving away fairly sedately on a green light when he turned right almost directly into me.
|
Speaking of red lights, is it me or are people (particularly taxi drivers), treating a red light as "OK if I floor it" for about 5 seconds after it's turned red?
Amber has always meant 'Go faster'. The 1st 5 secs of red is a natural extension of that ;)
|
Speaking of red lights, is it me or are people (particularly taxi drivers), treating a red light as "OK if I floor it" for about 5 seconds after it's turned red?
More and more drivers are treating these lights the same(not just Taxi drivers) any drivers are, also making it difficult for pedestrians to cross- increasing risk of the odd child running across,which does and is going on,
Another point is kids are crossing at points of road where it is extremely dangerous to do so,with no fear at all.
when we had police on the beat and keeping an eye on them this was not such a risk..but where are they?
--
Steve
|
The police now allow parking on the pavement provided that there is a 1 metre width of the pavement remaining unobstructed. I don't know whether this is the law or whether it is merely police policy because (in view of the large number of drivers that now park on the pavement) it would be impracticable to do otherwise.
--
L\'escargot.
|
Where I live yellow lines (double or otherwise) are completely ignored. I think it became worse after the local paper ran an article about the fact that the town didn't have a single traffic warden and that there were no plans to have one!
--
L\'escargot.
|
The most frequent flouters of the rules are cyclists ~ cycling on the pavement and in pedestrianised areas, ignoring traffic lights, cycling on the wrong side of the road, having no red rear reflector at night, having no amber pedal reflectors at night on cycles made after 1/10/85, having no front or rear lights at night, cycling across pedestrian crossings that are not toucan crossings, crossing cycle-only crossings before the green cycle symbol is showing, not ensuring that their brakes are efficient, and not keeping to the side intended for cyclists when using segregated cycle tracks.
--
L\'escargot.
|
|
When cars got much faster, quieter, better insulated, had louder and better quality radios, and power steering. ie in about 1975.
The first new car I bought that had power steering was in 1991.
--
L\'escargot.
|
I can't say that I've ever parked in a manner that would actually obstruct a pavement totally, yes I've narrowed a few in my time, but there has still been a good gap through which a wheelchair, tandem pushchair etc. could be pushed through with ease. If I found someone using their tandem to scratch my car under those circumstances I would assume it was a case of vandalism and call the Police.
Apart from circumstances like No Wheels has pointed out, where you physically can't fit through the gap, I think there is an element of over-exageration in this, and I think it runs along the "I'm blinded by people's brake lights/fog lights" lines...
Just remembered that Newcastle City Council ran a "Don't park on the pavement" campaign during the summer, don't know if it had any effect though.
Blue
|
I can't say that I've ever parked in a manner that would actually obstruct a pavement totally, yes I've narrowed a few in my time, but there has still been a good gap through which a wheelchair, tandem pushchair etc. could be pushed through with ease.
You are forgetting that footpaths are two-way routes, usually wide enough for a pram going in one direction to pass someone walking in the other direction. If cars are parked leaving room only for people walking one way, it takes ages to to walk the length of a street -- effectively the pavement becomes a series of short one-way passages.
Anyway, why do you assume that you, as a car driver, are entitled to further narrow the small proportion of the road reserved to pedestrians?
If I found someone using their tandem to scratch my car under those circumstances I would assume it was a case of vandalism and call the Police.
So, the footpath has been designed to give adequate space for pedestrians and pushchairs, and because you chose to restrict that space in contravention of the highway code, you reckon that it's the fault of the person whose passage you have intentionally made more difficult?
I hope the police would give you a fairly sharp answer: if you don't want your car scratched by passing foot traffic, park it on the road like you are supposed to do.
Apart from circumstances like No Wheels has pointed out, where you physically can't fit through the gap, I think there is an element of over-exageration in this,
I could you you to a street near me which is like this along nearly its entire length -- cars parked with 2 wheels on the pavement, even though there is plenty of off-road parking. Sure, there's room to get through, but it's very tight. Why should a pedestrian worry about taking extra care to avoid scratching a car when the driver has chosen to put in the way?
|
Why should a pedestrian worry about taking extra care to avoid scratching a car when the driver has chosen to put in the way?
Stop being stupid. I don't agree with people parking on the pavements and I never do it myself. But the fact that someone has put something in your way does NOT give you the right to vandalise their property. Vandalism is lower than theft and I have no respect for anyone who thinks it is condonable in any circumstances.
Sometimes people put themselves in my way. I always take extra care not to damage them. The same goes for people's property.
----
Life is complex; it has real and imaginary parts.
|
well this thread has greatly amused me. I bet I could list who the vegetarians are.
--
let me be the last to let you down....
|
|
How am I supposed to cycle at night, with my lights off and the reflectors removed, if some inconsiderate driver has parked on pavement?
|
>> Why should a pedestrian worry about taking extra care to >> avoid scratching a car when the driver has chosen to >> put in the way? Stop being stupid.
Oooh, that's a really-well reasoned reply, isn't it?
I don't agree with people parking on the pavements and I never do it myself.
Good.
But the fact that someone has put something in your way does NOT give you the right to vandalise their property.
I agree -- and I didn't claim that it does. The issue is whether I endanger my person by walking onto the road to reduce the risk of accidental damage to a metal box.
Often, it's not just a matter of one car. On one particular local street, I have a choice of walking up the pavement with my bags bashing against pavement-mounted cars most of the way up, or of walking the whole way on the carriageway.
I would hope that you could distinguish between that and a vandal who takes out an implment to deliberately damage a car.
Vandalism is lower than theft and I have no respect for anyone who thinks it is condonable in any circumstances.
So we agree! I too have no time for vandalism.
Sometimes people put themselves in my way. I always take extra care not to damage them. The same goes for people's property.
I may be misreading what you are saying, but I'd always put people ahead of property ... and I'm not going to walk out onto the road and endanger myself simply because a car driver has decided to grab the small bit of safe space provided for pedestrians.
In any case, when someone steps out in the road, you can slow down or stop and they'll be gone in a moment, but a parked car could be there for an hour or a day or a week.
So when a driver parks a car on the pavement, leaving just enough room for a pram to get through, are you really saying that the pram should be pushed out onto the road rather than risk scratching the car?
|
So when a driver parks a car on the pavement, leaving just enough room for a pram to get through, are you really saying that the pram should be pushed out onto the road rather than risk scratching the car?
No. If there is genuinely no room to pass, don't try it. If there is room to pass, do it carefully, even if you are annoyed. Skritching your pram or pushchair or shopping down the side of someone's car without attempting to be careful falls somewhere in between negligence and vandalism, in my opinion.
It makes me sick to see people sinking to the lowest level. What do you think the guy who owns the car is going to say? "Oh, that serves me right, I've learned my lesson" - no. He's just going to be in a bad mood and irritate a load of other people as a result.
So somebody's parked on the pavement? So what? Let it go. Do you go around seeking petty revenge for every little thing that everyone does that irritates you?
----
Life is complex; it has real and imaginary parts.
|
>> So when a driver parks a car on the pavement, >> leaving just enough room for a pram to get through, are >> you really saying that the pram should be pushed out onto >> the road rather than risk scratching the car? No. If there is genuinely no room to pass, don't try it. If there is room to pass, do it carefully, even if you are annoyed. Skritching your pram or pushchair or shopping down the side of someone's car without attempting to be careful falls somewhere in between negligence and vandalism, in my opinion.
C'mon E34, think this through. What are you really saying that the person pushing the pram should do?
Abandon their attempt to walk up the street to their home? Or push the pram along the road against the oncoming traffic?
Of the available options, which do you really think is more negligent -- endangering a child by pushing the pram against the traffic for a hundred yards, or risking scratching a car?
|
Of the available options, which do you really think is more negligent -- endangering a child by pushing the pram against the traffic for a hundred yards, or risking scratching a car?
C'mon NW, now you're the one getting carried away
Why do you have to push the pram 100 yards against the traffic to walk past 1 car?
Nobody disagrees that anyone who parks a car inconsiderately on the pavement is a muppet and I for one in that situation would push the pram on the pavement and hard luck on the car but what I understood E34 to be saying was that if there's room to pass carefully without scratching the car then that's the best option of all.
|
>> Of the available options, which do you really think is more >> negligent -- endangering a child by pushing the pram against the >> traffic for a hundred yards, or risking scratching a car? >> C'mon NW, now you're the one getting carried away Why do you have to push the pram 100 yards against the traffic to walk past 1 car?
Not to walk past one car. I was thinking of the street I'd mentioned earlier where nearly every house has a car parked on the pavement, usually leaving just enough room for someone to walk through inside -- if they aren't carrying or pushing anything, and don't mind brushing against the overgrown hedges.
Nobody disagrees that anyone who parks a car inconsiderately on the pavement is a muppet and I for one in that situation would push the pram on the pavement and hard luck on the car but what I understood E34 to be saying was that if there's room to pass carefully without scratching the car then that's the best option of all.
Yes, it's the best option of all -- if possible. But where I differ from E34 kid is that if a driver chooses to narrow the pavement, they shouldn't assume that their assumption about an adequate remaining gap is going to be accurate.
Have you seen how much width is taken by a wheelchair with a bag of shopping hanging off the side? Try adding that to the width of someone walking the other way, and you risk getting what happened to my neighbour -- a scratched car.
|
I don't recall NW saying she would vandalise the vehicles, just that she wouldn't take care in passing them. And why should she?
That said, I would be livid and probably would want to hunt down and skin alive anyone who damaged my car, even if i was illegally and inconsideratly parked.
|
Just to draw on one of my earlier posts on this perennial topic:
"A while ago now I saw a young mother with toddler in pushchair. She was apologizing to a driver for knocking his car (gently) with the pushchair. The car was so far onto the pavement that she barely had room to pass. I have rarely observed such an absurd inversion of responsibility.
Not long ago I found (perhaps on this board) a report of a fire engine having churned up a whole row of front gardens, because the pavement was obstructed by cars that could have been on the drives. The fire officer had no sympathy and explained that he would have had no need to cross the gardens had the cars been on the drives."
Highway Code, section 218:
"DO NOT park partially or wholly on the pavement unless signs permit it. Parking on the pavement can obstruct and seriously inconvenience pedestrians, people in wheelchairs, the visually impaired and people with prams or pushchairs."
I was in a locality recently where "signs permit it": SE inner Cambridge. The streets are so narrow that it is unavoidable and the pavements are marked accordingly. But the result is horrendous, with cars seemingly barely a metre from the front doors of the terraced houses.
Posted by a non-vegetarian.
|
"No. If there is genuinely no room to pass, don't try it. If there is room to pass, do it carefully, even if you are annoyed. Skritching your pram or pushchair or shopping down the side of someone's car without attempting to be careful falls somewhere in between negligence and vandalism, in my opinion.
It makes me sick to see people sinking to the lowest level. What do you think the guy who owns the car is going to say? "Oh, that serves me right, I've learned my lesson" - no. He's just going to be in a bad mood and irritate a load of other people as a result.
So somebody's parked on the pavement? So what? Let it go. Do you go around seeking petty revenge for every little thing that everyone does that irritates you?
----
Life is complex; it has real and imaginary parts"
If you park on double yellows - expect a ticket, be pleased if you don't get one
If you park in a bus lane - the same applies
If you park up on the pavement - expect to maybe get your car scratched and be happy if it isn't as in all these cases you know you should not really be doing it
I've done all these as have the majority at some point and have got away with it sometimes and sometimes been caught out
Cars are metal boxes that can be fixed easily enough
It's funny how having a kid changes the way you behave as a pedestrian as I'm a lot more aggressive about my "rights" to the pavement and green man crossings these days.
|
Well I think we're going to have to agree to disagree here. In m experience having a kid seems to change the way people behave altogether. Around where I live it seems to make people think they can park on the yellow chevrons outside the schools, but that's an argument for another day.
Once upon a time I walked out of a local store and a bunch of kids had left their bikes lying down outside the door. I got irritated and I kicked one as I walked past. At that point it was like I saw myself from the outside. I've never been so disgusted with myself. A grown man kicking a bike because it was in his way.
As I said before, I never park on the pavement and I'm not trying to defend those who do. I just don't like to see people employing such a vigilante "two wrongs make a right" attitude. If someone irritates me in any way I do my best not to get wound up about it.
Except when someone scratches my car.
----
Life is complex; it has real and imaginary parts.
|
Fair point about the school run lot and maybe "aggressive" is too strong a word to use
Where I live everyone kind of bump parks when they parallel park which makes you a bit more relaxed about the odd ding.Then some idiot in a Smart car (of which there are 2 or 3)parks nose in behind you.
I have in the past knowingly reversed into their door to get out the space but would put that down to tough luck on their part
|
Anyway the original poster said he towed a caravan so can we not round on that.
Caravans towers speeding, not keeping to thier lane properly on narrow straights and not having big enough wing mirrors for the job are surely common broken laws
|
The point that I was trying to make earlier, that No Wheels missed as usual, was that when I park on the pavement (which I'm only doing to prevent the road been blocked) I ensure that I only do so if there is AMPLE room for people to comfortably get past, i.e. I park slightly on the kerb of a wide pavement.
Now, forgive me if I have misread your posts No Wheels, but the way I read it, you intimate that even under circumstances such as these, you would, bordering on deliberately, walk past with bags, buggies, or anything else dragging along the car purely because you don't like the fact that it is on the pavement regardless of the fact that it would be no effort for you to avoid them. Have I read it right? If I have then you are nothing short of a contemptable vandal, regardless of how you choose to define the term.
Oh, I also wouldn't have any fear in calling the Police if my parking was reasonable and left a good wide space left on the pavement, as I understand it, if you cause damage, whether through negligence or criminal intent, you are still liable for it, regardless of whether you think the car should be there or not.
Blue
|
The point that I was trying to make earlier, that No Wheels missed as usual, was that when I park on the pavement (which I'm only doing to prevent the road been blocked) I ensure that I only do so if there is AMPLE room for people to comfortably get past, i.e. I park slightly on the kerb of a wide pavement.
No I didn't miss that point. I just don't see why you assume that it's OK for you to judge how much pedestrian space you take away from pedestrians, or why you assume that the space you leave is going to be adequate. A lot of car drvers seem to assume that space for one person to walk past without bags will be adequate :(
If it's a very wide pavement, we may be talking a different issue, but that depends how busy the pavement is. Some wide pavements can be pretty crowded.
Now, forgive me if I have misread your posts No Wheels, but the way I read it, you intimate that even under circumstances such as these, you would, bordering on deliberately, walk past with bags, buggies, or anything else dragging along the car purely because you don't like the fact that it is on the pavement regardless of the fact that it would be no effort for you to avoid them. Have I read it right? If I have then you are nothing short of a contemptable vandal, regardless of how you choose to define the term.
No. If there is adequate space to walk past without banging anything, I will. And if a driver has been courteous enough to park on the road as he is supposed to, I'll take great care not to touch the car.
But if it's a tight squeeze, I'm not going to rearrange my bags just because some car driver has decided that the space allocated by the council is too generous, and he's going to nick some of it.
I'll give you an example of what I mean by a tight squeeze. I travel with a wheelie case for my clothes etc, and another smaller one for my laptop: one goes on my r/h side, the other on the left. There's plenty of room for it all on nearly all pavements, and if there's someone walking t'other way on a narrow pavement I'll pick up my laptop bag and carry it, or stand aside to let the other person past.
But on a narrowish pavement, plenty of cars park on the pavement in such a way that even if there's nobody else around, there's very little space to for me to pass them without risking my bags making contact with the car. I'm not going to injure my back carrying my bags up the hill past each of the cars on the pavement, and there are roads where that is the choice.
Oh, I also wouldn't have any fear in calling the Police if my parking was reasonable and left a good wide space left on the pavement, as I understand it, if you cause damage, whether through negligence or criminal intent, you are still liable for it, regardless of whether you think the car should be there or not.
First of all, you know as well as I do that it's not a question of whether I "think" the car should be there or not -- you know as well as I do what the Highway Code says.
It depends what space you think is reasonable. If it's enough for me to pass with reasonable ease, there'll be no damage for you to complain about. (I say "reasonable ease", because I have tried gingerly rearranging everything to get past parked cars, and it's just far too exhausting to do that along the length of a street).
At the other extreme, if your car gets scratched because you have so restricted the space that I would have to rearrange or carry my luggage, then I'd have no problem at all with you calling the police and complaining that the consequences of your choice to endanger my safety by parking in breach of the Highway Code are all my fault.
|
Well never mind, I've made the point that I was trying to make, and I think we may actually be in agreement on some areas of the topic, but we won't let that spoil things when there's a good "victim status" to wallow in. :-)
Blue
|
No Wheels, I don't always agree with your posts in the backroom, but I must say that on this subject I am with you 100%. To turn the arguement round, I am sure that as a motorist I would not be pleased at having to mount the pavement occasionally to miss groups of pedestrians who had decided to "park" themselves on the road to hold a meeting.
|
Not wanting to be left out of an argument with NoWheels;
I park on the pavement sometimes. Where? Outside my house. Why? Because the road is narrow and if the drive's full, to park on the road would effectively block it to anything bigger than a Mini. Can people get past? Yes. Can people in double wheelchairs with shopping get past? Yes - should they want to.
Granted we live in a cul-de-sac and never see anyone walking past and I would happily move it if someone couldn't get past but what are my alternatives?
That is all.
|
I will add - and this probably doesn't make me sound any better, but I don't park on a pavement anywhere else.
|
>>and this probably doesn't make me sound any better, but I don't park on a pavement anywhere else.
what annoys me and regardless of what anyone says,if permission is granted from council to park partly (two wheels)on pavement two on road,you still get people complaining no matter what you do to help ie park so enough room for both/pedestrians or drivers..I live in a road where you can,and I do,Also looking from point of view Emergency vehicles may need to get through I also take this into account,what isnt considered by visitors to road is (as they are not allowed to park this way where they live) they will not where they can..causing grief to vans and lorries that pass my way.
--
Steve
|
I park on the pavement sometimes. Where? Outside my house. Why? Because the road is narrow and if the drive's full, to park on the road would effectively block it to anything bigger than a Mini. Can people get past? Yes. Can people in double wheelchairs with shopping get past? Yes - should they want to. Granted we live in a cul-de-sac and never see anyone walking past and I would happily move it if someone couldn't get past but what are my alternatives?
Adam, move if asked may sound like a nice idea, but it doesn't really help much. Can you imagine how long it would take to walk down a steet if at every house you had walk up the door, call the car owner, and wait for them to move it before proceeding 10 yards to the next house?
I guess that pedestrian traffic is going to be low at the end of a cul-de-sac, so there won't be many people inconvenienced, and I'm pleased to hear that you don't do it elsewhere.
But as to what your alternatives are, I think you're missing the point: why do you presume that you are any entitled to use the pavement? It's up to you to find safe and legal alternatives, even if those are inconvenient (such as parking further away from home).
One possibility is to ask your neighbours if you can park on their drive. The houses on my side of the road have offstreet parking for only one car, so when my neighbours had two cars and my drive was empty, I always used to invite them to use my driveway unless I had a car-driving guest staying.
|
Lol. You do make me laugh NW.
|
Hi,
well I do have extention mirrors when towing my 23 foot caravan.
I've never done over 75 when towing the caravan {bikes on roof, pram in boot} bet that's less than many a 'solo' motorist.
**** Solo = a caravanning term for a car without a caravan ****
The only time I did not keep to my lane was when my caravan;s inside blew on the M40 - I was all over the place.
Wow, a lot of posts to this thred too !!!!!!!!!!!1
Thanks
Paul
Paul {Forest of Bowland}
|
. . . and a tandem in-line pram, is easier to pass cars on pavements than is a double {side by side} pram.
I know, as I've had both, and paid road tax on neither, as with my push bikes & caravan.
However the latter is better for crossong roads, as you do not need to stick the pram's nose out as far into the road too see whats comin' and so miss head amps {see on of the first fews posts from Life is Complex IT chappy} of oncoming cars.
Paul
Paul {Forest of Bowland}
|
Pavements are for people, not cars
Roads are for cars, not people
Enough said. P.S If you parked on the pavement and I has to take my son or daughter into the road in the pram or buggy I would GLADLY run a key down the side of your car or wrench a wing mirror off. And somebody keyd my car for no apparent resaon either.
|
If I saw you gladly running a key down the side of my car or wrenching a wing mirror off, I would happily wrench your head off.
And yet I'd be the one seen to be in the wrong.
I've never - and this includes when my sister was a baby in a pram - had to walk in the road to get past a parked car. I'm not saying it doesn't happen to others, just I think people are getting worked up needlessly over it.
I really think we need to take a step back and realise that we're arguing over cars on pavements.
|
I've no particular issue with two wheels on a wide pavement to keep the road flowing. That's how it used to be.
Unforunately there are now lots of selfish gits who park four square on the pavement because they think it makes their car less vulnerable to offside scrapes.
|
|
Taxis stopping where they like, cars on pavements, swearing, spitting, mouthy kids, people who dont bother to use indicators, people dropping litter, late buses, buses, buses that dont arrive, people who push in in ques, sales assistants who cant be bothered to help, people who never have the correct change, people full stop, the council, people who drive Audi's./BMW's and/or Mercs who think they own the road because they drive flashy cars. All of these things get different peoples tempers up in different ways. Cars on pavements gets mine. Rant over.
|
|
you missed police car drivers including traffic who drive with their right arm swinging out of the window on balmy days,apart from that very good.
|
>>Pavements are for people, not cars
Roads are for cars, not people
try telling that to pedestrians that just walk into the road without looking,expecting drivers to stop as and when they do so.
pavement is down to discretion of council as to whether a car can part park on it or not,if permission given and you key a car for doing it you are in the wrong.there is a difference between those that go out of way to cause grief to others and those that dont..even those that inconsideratly park dont deserve being keyed and suspect you would not like it either,think some of us need to grow up instead of saying things they may do but doubt they will,its a fact of life it happens so get used to it
--
Steve
|
|
Like I said - IF I COULDENT GET THE BUGGY THROUGH.
|
bacon&eggs,I think this discussion getting nowhere fast.as for shouting,no need. I wont be posting on this thread anymore, some cannot see beyond end of nose;)
--
Steve
|
I've counted 7 posts which boast (yes, boast!) that the writer would be happy to vandalise a car that was parked on the pavement. I'd always assumed that, by and large, Backroomers were nice people. Now I'm not so sure.
--
L\'escargot.
|
I've counted 7 posts which boast (yes, boast!) that the writer would be happy to vandalise a car that was parked on the pavement. I'd always assumed that, by and large, Backroomers were nice people. Now I'm not so sure. -- L\'escargot.
Not sure they all advocate deliberate vandalism, more a question of not being too careful. Given that too many pavement parkers are cringing against the minimal risk of offside knocks, highlighting the the quid pro qou of nearside damage is no bad thing.
|
L'escargot, I think this proves that we're all only human, and we've all got the potential (so we think) to do some damage to another person or person's property if pushed far enough. It just depends what pushes your button. It's even easier to admit to this on a nameless forum. Parking on pavements? never been an issue for me, either way. Yes i am sure i have done it in the past, yes, i have two small children who i have had to get past cars parked in such a way. Big deal. If however, anyone directly tried to hurt my children, then yes, i would react with swift violence. Who wouldn't? Who would disagree with that? Like i said, whatever pushes your button. Now, who will give me a fiver on No Wheels being a vegetarian? ;)
--
let me be the last to let you down....
|
Now, who will give me a fiver on No Wheels being a vegetarian? ;)
Try a forum search before you place your bets ;)
|
To everyone who parks on pavments, please try the following experitment, and then see if your attitude changes. Borrow a wheelchair and have a 20st+ friend sit in it. Now try wheeling your friend around a town cntre, preffably a pedestrianised area. You will find that a large no of abled bodied will either expect you to manuvre you friend around them or try and walk straight through your friend and the wheelchair. No having learned that lesson, try to walk home down roads where there are cars parked on the pavment! You will find that your having to manuvere your friend past these cars trying to avoid your friend getting hit in the face by the door mirrors or trying to avoid damaging the car due to someone walking in the opposite direction expecting you to manuvre your friend out of the way because they are to selfish or ignorant to wait a second and step out of the way to allow you to pass. As for the situation where you have to go into the road to get past the car, imagine having to bump your friend (now remember they weigh 20st+) down a curb, walk in the road way with cars driving past you, as once again because your freind is in a wheelchair so they don't see him/her. And then having to bump your friend back up the curb. All because one selfish driver could not be bothered to park in a sutable place, and use their legs to walk that extra distance. Sounds like a petty gripe? No this is what I face on a regular basis at many locations! If you park on a pavment ilegaly you should not be parked there, if I come across any cars parked on a pavment which forces me to put my wife at risk due to the fact that I have to go into the road with her to pass the car, I phone the police and make a formal complaint! I don't see why my wife should be put at danger just because someone believes they've parked in a responcible maner to other road users by parking on a pavment to allow other cars to pass by! Try the experitment and then come back and tell me I'm wrong.
Dave
|
|
Carer: I agree, having a relative prevented from going to the shops by careless drivers who block the pavement. But be careful, you could be accused of vegetarianism. But there are worse things....
|
"try the following experitment, and then see if your attitude changes. Borrow a wheelchair and have a 20st+ friend sit in it."
Sounds fun, I?m up for this. Just need a backroomer who?ll admit to being 20 stone.
Adam...?
|
Yes Dave?
I'll happily undertake this challenge.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
