Zebra crossings

[Honest]

There should be a clamp down on phone users while driving. Almost all truck drivers are on phone while driving and a lot of car drivers as well. Given the situation of social life in Finland I wonder who they are always talking to.


On the other hand I'm terribly annoyed by the pedestrians who are on phone or listening to music and don't show any urgency or no gratitude at all when you give them way when you are not legally bound to give.

[harryc]

On the other hand I'm terribly annoyed by the pedestrians who are on phone or listening to music and don't show any urgency or no gratitude at all when you give them way when you are not legally bound to give.

That's only the simpler part - more serious is that they are walking into traffic and not paying a bit of attention - idiot mothers are often pushing the kid in front of them (they don't care - the kid gets hit first). Regardless of the positive Darwin effect, I don't want to wake up with the nightmare that I've killed someone.

And they are joined in this 'March of the Jerks' by the cyclists who think they have a Cone of Protection around their bike and can drive in any damn way they want.

[Y77]

I completely agree with you Riku.It's incredible the amount of people driving while on the phone.Don't get me even started with the pedestrian crossing,the thing that pisses me off the most are cyclists that use them and think that simply because it's a zebra crossing they can use it,or for the matter anything or anyone on the zebra crossing has priority,like a sort of teletransport on the USS Enterprise in Star Treck.The reason why it's called PEDESTRIAN crossing it's because it's for pedestrian,if you are on a bike,you use da street!

[Upphew]

For the record, there are proper zebra crossing in UK. Apart from the zebra, they are marked with flashing yellow bowls, and pedestrians have priority there at any time.

Same as in Finland that there is also lanes for bikes on that crossing? And those poles positioned nicely on the bike path?

[Upphew]

if you are on a bike,you use da street!

Except drivers want cyclists out of the road. Driving bike in city tends to be harder, rules wise, than driving car or walking. Even police has problems knowing the rules... and you cycle without license. No wonder that cyclist drive like madmen. Oh, btw, if cyclist jumps from the bike and walks (running makes things iffy) to zebra crossing... cars yield.

[sinikala]

For the record, there are proper zebra crossing in UK. Apart from the zebra, they are marked with flashing yellow bowls, and pedestrians have priority there at any time.

Same as in Finland that there is also lanes for bikes on that crossing? And those poles positioned nicely on the bike path?

No. In the UK bikes, having wheels, go on the road with cars. If there is a cycle path it's a part of the road, not a part of the pavement.
Those dashed lines which you thought are cycle lanes are the lines behind which cars should wait when pedestrians are crossing, you can see one also in the bottom right of the photo, behind which cars coming from the right must wait.

On the topic of phones ... The number of fu#*wit drivers here with phones clamped to their faces amazes me.
Several times I've been on a crossing and drivers have sped through, oblivious to my presence as they've covered one side of their face with their hand / phone.

Most phones today have a speaker button, if you *must* use the phone whilst driving it's surely easier to use it hands free instead of blocking out half of your peripheral vision.

Anyone making a comparison with pedestrians on phones comes across as a bit dim. Pedestrians on phones are only going to kill themselves, drivers on phones will kill other people. There is a reason UK police are starting to seize drivers' phones at the scene of car accidents.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/492146 ... ous-deaths

[orys]

No. In the UK bikes, having wheels, go on the road with cars. If there is a cycle path it's a part of the road, not a part of the pavement.

Obviously I misunderstood the results of the recent referendum and Scotland is no longer in the UK

[riku2]

The number of fu#*wit drivers here with phones clamped to their faces amazes me.
Several times I've been on a crossing and drivers have sped through, oblivious to my presence as they've covered one side of their face with their hand / phone.

I've seen plenty of drivers go through red traffic lights in Finland let alone pedestrian crossings - something I've never seen in the UK. Generally following road signs and signals isn't a strong point of Finnish drivers. A road near me is being rebuilt and the end is now narrowed and reduced to one lane wide for bikes and pedestrians only. Despite the new no right turn signs put up, drivers of trucks and vans still turn down the street. A steel barrier will probably be needed to stop them.

The best thing i've seen is a woman driving behind me take off a sweater while driving (at 80), pulling it over her head and arms, presumably using her legs to hold the steering wheel!

[harryc]

Native Finns seem to have an obsession to pass everyone - no matter how narrow the street, they have to get by and be in 'front.'

[Upphew]

On the other hand I'm terribly annoyed by the pedestrians who are on phone or listening to music and don't show any urgency or no gratitude at all when you give them way when you are not legally bound to give.

People not walking on zebra? They break the law, no wonder they don't thank you. People walking on red lights? Same criminal posse as the previous example. I can't think any case where driver can give way to pedestrian (who is crossing legally) when they are not legally bound to give anyway.

[Honest]

I can't think any case where driver can give way to pedestrian (who is crossing legally) when they are not legally bound to give anyway.

Giving way to people who are standing near a zebra crossing on a straight road and waiting while talking on a phone or with a friend. Giving them way is not legally binding!

[Upphew]

I can't think any case where driver can give way to pedestrian (who is crossing legally) when they are not legally bound to give anyway.

Giving way to people who are standing near a zebra crossing on a straight road and waiting while talking on a phone or with a friend. Giving them way is not legally binding!

Thus my post about loitering. But how you manage to pass the zebra legally, without practically stopping, when there are people near by?

[Honest]

We are talking about the law not common sense or your reasoning.

Law clearly states that you should slow down to a level that you should be able to stop in case a person starts to cross the zebra crossing. There is no legal requirement to stop. You can continue to move at a reduced speed if you don't want to give way or if there is a reason not to give way.

Pedestrians are not supposed to run and cross a zebra crossing that you'll not have time to brake. There was an accident in Turku a couple of years ago when a bus ran over a school boy while making a turn. Later investigators found that the bus driver was turning slowly but the boy suddenly ran in front of the bus before driver could even notice him. At the end it was the boy who was found at fault not the bus driver.

[Upphew]

Law clearly states that you should slow down to a level that you should be able to stop in case a person starts to cross the zebra crossing. There is no legal requirement to stop. You can continue to move at a reduced speed if you don't want to give way or if there is a reason not to give way.

True. And I'd rather prefer drivers to creep (what is mielenosoituksellisesti in English?) over the zebra and give evil eye to the loitering wankers, than stop to give way and expect thanks. Morons should be schooled, be they on foot, in car or on bike.

[Honest]

Now here are the rules about the right of way. Only thing Yle failed to mention again is that almost all of these rules also apply to pedestrians on pedestrian (zebra) crossings.

http://yle.fi/uutiset/who_has_right_of_ ... st/7500884