home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
/ NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #27 / NN_1992_27.iso / spool / uk / misc / 628 < prev    next >
Encoding:
Internet Message Format  |  1992-11-23  |  1.1 KB
  1. Path: sparky!uunet!pipex!warwick!uknet!edcastle!william
  2. From: william@castle.ed.ac.uk (William Warburton)
  3. Newsgroups: uk.misc
  4. Subject: Re: Pavements
  5. Message-ID: <28557@castle.ed.ac.uk>
  6. Date: 23 Nov 92 16:57:21 GMT
  7. References: <JC.92Nov19092339@mr-potter-t-crosser-i-dotter.fulcrum.co.uk> <H1eJuB16w165w@mantis.co.uk> <1992Nov23.152114@axion.bt.co.uk>
  8. Sender: nntpusr@castle.ed.ac.uk
  9. Reply-To: W.Warburton@ed.ac.uk
  10. Distribution: uk
  11. Organization: Edinburgh University Computing Service
  12. Lines: 21
  13.  
  14. In article <1992Nov23.152114@axion.bt.co.uk>, jpennell@axion.bt.co.uk (John Pennell) writes:
  15. |> 
  16. |> Er, Pedestrians do *NOT* have "right-of-way" at all times.
  17.  
  18.  Not on motorways, for example.
  19.  
  20. |>                ...  For example, had the car been turning right
  21. |> at a road junction, the car would have right-of-way.
  22.  
  23.  Nope.
  24.  
  25. |>                                   ...  This
  26. |> would mean it would be the car driver's fault if the pedestrian jumped out
  27. |> in front of them into the road.....
  28.  
  29.  Yes. Precisely, it would. The pedestrian would be dead right.
  30.  
  31.  An interesting thought to reflect on whilst driving in a built up area.
  32.  
  33.     W.
  34. +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
  35.