Were we wrong to cross the road in this way?

[UndertheCedartree]

I was taking my DD to school this morning. There is a junction where we need to cross over the road in front then cross over the road to the left. Lots of families including us cross diagonally as it is quicker than crossing both separately.

We were late this morning so there were no other families around. We were crossing the junction and a few seconds before we got onto the pavement a car sounds it's horn loudly at us (scaring poor DD) then came round the corner and started shouting and pointing at us. I just ignored the driver as they were clearly very angry so no point in trying to have a civil conversation.

I always thought if a pedestrian was crossing a road then a car needs to give way to them. Or are we wrong to cross diagonally?

I think crossing diagonally is common practice.

Exactly the same happens at the crossroads at our local primary. Most families anticipate the sequence of lights and start before the green man appears - they run diagonally across the four crossings with scooters, bikes and dogs. I've often wondered what would happen if someone tripped/fell.

I just have the one road to cross so I wait for the green man with my granddaughter (she can clearly see others crossing diagonally) but I just about reach the centre of the road before the red man appears. I don't walk slowly.

It would be better just to give pedestrians a few more seconds to get across.

The lollipop man stands much further up the road but not many people bother to walk the extra distance. Most use the crossings on the crossroads. There are two primary schools 500 yds apart - the lollipop man stands in between. (C of E and Catholic.)

There's exactly the same set up with crossings a couple of miles further up just before the town centre but there are railings preventing people crossing diagonally. Some people (blokes) still run diagonally and jump the railings.

Pedestrians in the road should have right of way, but you should also be using the quickest route across possible which is not a diagonal route.

KrisAkabusi

its not a must not rule you've given, its a do not rule. So not advised but you'll not be in trouble if you do so

You should be teaching your child to cross the road safely, this is probably why the majority of kids crossing roads I see, cross dangerously because their parents do. It doesn’t matter if you’re late, just make sure you get to school safely.

Yeah probably best not to come on whinging about her DD being scared then, it's a don't do, she did it, her DD was frightened, she took the risk, stop blaming others?

So you are teaching her to do as you say.... not as you do.
As a driver I HAVE to wait on lights changing to allow me to progress so I REALLY dont see why pedestrians and cyclists cant do the same.
AND I have to PAY for the privilege!!

@HELLITHURT

it's a do not rule not a must not rule though, so the do not is advisable and the must not means don't do it. So is advisory advice now mina you can't do it opposed to just being advised not to do it?

Bonbon21 what do you pay thats different to use the road?

You'll have to explain that, I cannot make head nor tail of it!

Try again?

HELLITHURT. there are different rules in the Highway Code the

must not

do not

thats what Im talking about

The mina bit caused me confusion!

Yes, you are correct that there is do not and must not.

So, are you saying the OP is correct in doing what she is doing? Teaching a 10 year old to take a risk (but of course she is so sensible this 10 year old, she wouldn't do it alone), the 10 year old was frightened, due to OPs actions.

That's all fine is it, because she doesn't have to not do it, it's only a shouldn't do it. Some people have the intelligence to be able to know when it is acceptable and when not. With a child it's not acceptable for the reasons stated.

Honestly, we should be able to credit people with making decent parenting choices, but clearly some can't be given that option. Maybe they should change the highway code for these sorts of people and say must not, if you've children with you and they are going to be frightened as a consequence of your actions.

I'm not sure that people have said the OP is going to be jailed for the offence, they have said she shouldn't do it....... which she shouldn't?

You can't disagree with that surely!

I doubt the driver was beeping because you were crossing diagonally rather than straight across, they just sound impatient and a bit twatty. The only time it would be ok to beep a pedestsian would be in warning if they weren't looking and about to step in front of your car and you had no time to stop so like a warning that you are there.

Its advisory not to cross diagonal and not a must not, if you cross in this manner it's not an offence.

I doubt the Highway Code would be changed to make pedestrians cross in straight line though, on some roads this would be impossible due to storage of vehicles

But you surely agree that OP shouldn't have done it?

Yes, we've established that!

Repeating it is boring!

tomatopsste

so much concentration on the pedestrian and the driver with road rage and inappropriate use of the horn seems to be almost forgotten, oh they are just a knob or a twat

Road rage......... well that's a reach.....

Sounding your horn is now road rage?

this thread reminds me of this skit

Maybe they thought they were going to smash into OP

started shouting

@tomatopsste shouting is considered road rage, along with use of the horn when inappropriate

What a lot of fuss over a very simple situation: you were in the road when the lights went amber, so somebody beeped at you.

Can’t believe how much discussion and debate this has generated.

Is that a must not or a should not?

Asking for a friend.

SmileyPiuPiu

then they should use the middle pedal and concentrate on the driving rather than shouting out at people

tomatopsste. its a £1000 fine