Runners in road

[VivienScott]

Since lockdown started, there have been increasing numbers of runners running in the road where I live. They’re running individually, and in the road even when the pavement is empty. The other day one was in the road running towards my very obvious oncoming car, despite the empty pavement. When I beeped at him, because I thought he hadn’t seen me somehow, he stepped straight in front of my car, forcing me to stop, proceeded to lecture me that runners are now allowed to run in the road because of social distancing (there was no one around, it was 6am) and I should move to the other side of the road i.e. the side for oncoming vehicles to allow him to pass.
I’ve not seen any change in the law to this effect, which I did mention to him.
AIBU to think runners and pedestrians in general should be on the pavements (pavements are for people etc) not on the road in the path of oncoming vehicles?

Did YOU have a good reason for being in the road op?

I am so sick of entitled car drivers thinking pedestrians/ runners/cyclists are not allowed to have the space to move around and travel.

More and more areas are becoming pedestrianised, and this attitude has had its day

Cars don't own the road, even if they do pollute them.

YABU. Just go around people. Car drivers don't own the road.

mosquitofest, there was a perfectly good pavement there that the runner was more than entitled and perfectly able to use, roads are generally perceived to be for motorised vehicles, for the safety of all concerned.

It is generally frowned upon for cars to go up on the footpath, however, the runner was more than able to. But no, they had to be a smug, arrogant arsehole about it.

Get the wrong driver, the one not paying attention, the one that has been drinking or doing drugs, the one who is having a psychotic episode, the runner in the road is a lot more likely to be dead than the motorist.

Runners are the new cyclists only cyclists haven’t reduced in numbers, or gotten less insufferable! 🤷🏻‍♀️

** Highway Code Rule 1 for pedestrians:

Pavements (including any path along the side of a road) should be used if provided. Where possible, avoid being next to the kerb with your back to the traffic. If you have to step into the road, look both ways first. Always show due care and consideration for others.

mosquitofest, there was a perfectly good pavement there that the runner was more than entitled and perfectly able to use

I very much doubt it was as good as the road

I just came on to say "meep meep", but I see that's what you said to the road runner already, OP...

@mosquitofeast do you really think it's a good idea for every pedestrian to ignore pavements and start using the roads now? Is that what you'd teach children to do? Tell them they have more rights to use the road than car drivers and to ignore perfectly good pavements just to exercise that right? Do you think this would be a smart move, going forward? Or do you think that a little common sense and consideration for and from everybody might be a better option?

Oh for goodness sake. I'm sure it was perfectly viable as a walking/running surface. For what, two whole seconds? Poor baby. If he's that inept as a runner, or that fragile, then perhaps he ought to take up something less fraught with peril.

@VivienScott

I should add, bendy country road, legal use of horn, overtaking could have been dangerous. But also, he had a pavement to use.

Sometimes I have to run in the road because the hedges haven’t been cut and the pavements are very uneven. If it was 6am I’m sure the roads would have been quiet and therefore you’d be able to pull out to pass, just as you’d have to if he were a cyclist

Next time just pull up in the road, without hooting. He'll have to run around you.

@Soontobe60 or, here's an idea - instead of the runner being in the path of oncoming traffic, and the driver having to swerve around him onto the other side of the road and into oncoming traffic, the runner could just have hopped up onto the pavement provided specifically for the sole use of pedestrians for maybe three strides, and gone back onto the road when the driver had driven past. Everybody could then get on with their day after this would-be non-issue and think no more about it.

[quote Ohtherewearethen]@mosquitofeast do you really think it's a good idea for every pedestrian to ignore pavements and start using the roads now? Is that what you'd teach children to do? Tell them they have more rights to use the road than car drivers and to ignore perfectly good pavements just to exercise that right? Do you think this would be a smart move, going forward? Or do you think that a little common sense and consideration for and from everybody might be a better option?[/quote]
I think that drivers need to stop assuming that

a) they have right of way over pedestrians

b) that the presence of a pavement doesn't mean the pavement is desirable or even usable

c) they are entitled to drive and pollute the world for no good reason, (and the OP hasn't confirmed yet whether they actually had any reason beyond laziness to be in a car at all)

What makes drivers think they are entitled to get in the way of pedestrians and cyclists whenever they feel like it?

We have such a deeply ingrained culture of entitlement among drivers that it is going to come as a seismic shock to some of them when car ownership and driving starts to become progressively more prohibitively restricted and expensive

Instead of investing more money into foothpaths and cycle lanes, can we petition the government to invest into building roads solely for cars? grin

They already have done for decades, they are called motorways! For info, the Road Lobby are doing a pretty good job of campaigning for you too!

The local highway network on the other hand has always been for "passing and repassing" no mention of cars because they need to be licensed, different legislation used in that case. That's why the Highway Code says "should" and not "must", because you're not legally obliged to use the footway if you're a pedestrian. If this needs changing there are ways and means though...

What makes pedestrians, who are the most vulnerable, stupid enough to think that they should demand that cars on the actual road, designed for the motorised traffic, will work around them? Particularly if there's a pavement. Personally, if there's not a pavement, I won't walk or run on that road, because it's not safe. I don't expect anyone to be more concerned about keeping my skin whole than myself. And I'm not stupid enough to jeopardise that to make a point.

That's the kind of dumb arsed thinking that gets pedestrians wandering onto motorways and then their family's lamenting their loss.

Oh, and mosquitofest? You may not like it, but people are perfectly entitled to drive and pollute the world, as you put it, for no good reason. Well, no reason that's acceptable to you.

*What makes pedestrians, who are the most vulnerable, stupid enough to think that they should demand that cars on the actual road, designed for the motorised traffic, will work around them?

Well the law is on their side, it's just it has not been routinely enforced for decades and so people have accepted the status quo to such an extent that this kind of attitude prevails. Then when some folk flag it up, and the lawbreakers get a bit stroppy! It happens across society in all sectors.

Oops sorry bold fail.

Please be careful running in the road. My friend was killed this way, leaving 2 small children.

PS motorways are different to local roads legally and in the way they are used. Apples and oranges...

Oh well, then I guess a few pedestrians (of which I am often one) or runners (which I should be one more often), will be more than happy to be maimed or killed making a point. I come at it from a pragmatic viewpoint. Oh, and the pissed off family member of an idiot that tried to cross a motorway and lost his life doing so.

Bendy country roads don't tend to have pavements... but even if it did, I would have just moved to allow him space and gone merrily on my way. No tooting required!

And as you say, motorways are different. Quite agree.

@Mosquitofeast - so your suggestion of making driving prohibitively expensive means that people will all have to move to towns, which will then have to become the size of cities because the countryside typically has appalling transport links. So all the green spaces between towns will have to be built on to accommodate all these people. Demand vs supply will make property so expensive that very few will be able to actually buy a home in these super towns. People who can't afford to live there won't be able to work as they can't afford to run a car to drive there. Again, demand for jobs withing walking distance will mean that unemployment will grow. People won't be able to get to appointments with doctors/physics/hospitals/opticians, etc, so more people will be too sick to work, if they were ever one of the lucky ones to be able to find a job in the first place. Sounds like a great plan. Well done.
Or, pedestrians and car drivers could just stick to the expensive infrastructure that has been specifically designed for them to use and everybody can rub along nicely together.