Just because you can legally walk the road does not mean you should.

[walkthisway0]

Firstly I am in Ireland, but google makes me think it is the same in the UK.

Around where I live there are plenty of very busy, narrow, country roads that are 80km (50mph). Filled with many cars, tractors, lorries etc.

Some people walk these roads or run on them. I know legally they are allowed to but I think it is pure madness. There is one person who is often out walking with a baby in a pram. I have had to stop and wait to pass as there is a stream of traffic coming the other way. But I have also nearly been hit by a lorry who coming around a bend met her and over took as he would never have stopped in time.

I don't go around corners at 80km but I proceed as 'expecting something to be there' but it's still a shock to find a lorry on your side!

There is also a person who regularly runs towards the traffic (as recommended) in roughly the middle of the lane and does not move closer to the side.

I pass other people who are aware of the traffic around themselves and adjust. When my car was broken I walked into town a few times and would step in when a car came.

AIBU to think that while yes you are legally allowed to do this, no it is not a good idea?

I get where you're coming from in a way, I live in a tiny village while pavements run out and then it's just national speed limit applies B roads. There's not really any walks other than the village paths (alot of people think countryside village= lovely walks but usually opposite) so there's no choice for some but to walk on the roads.

However, I wouldnt ever have dreamt of taking my baby in his pushchair on the roads, as bored as I was of the tiny circuit round the play park. I just wouldn't risk it, it's a common sense thing. An alert walker is one thing, and an alert runner, but no to prams on those roads. If I was walking on the roads I'd also expect to step into the verge if there is one when a car comes, but I'd also expect cars not to drive at mad speeds on winding country roads too.

The analogy doesn't work

A car broken down is not moving. Isn't it part of the traffic code, that when a car breaks down, you have to try to get it on the side?

A pedestrian, cyclist or a horse rider is using the road to move. They are slower, but they are using the road for moving. The can chose to move out if it is reasonable to do, but they don't have to if it means going to bushes/falling from the verge, stepping in the pool of mud.
If you meet a tractor, you just wait and overtake when safe. This is the same.

It is actually safer for the slower moving participants to be closer to the middle, as it makes it more visual for the drivers, that they can't try to overtake within the line, that they have to wait for proper overtaking opportunity the same way they would for a tractor.

Yes, the whole situation is less safe for the pedestrians &co, but they are not hazard for the drivers. Other drivers are hazard for everyone.

Why would two cars potentially crash on a narrow road because a pedestrian doesn't step on a grass verge?

The only person to blame on that situation is the car driver who is driving too fast to react to a hazard in the road (in the form of a legitimate road user) and/or is too inpatient to wait for a safe opportunity to pass the hazard.

It's actually scary that you presumably have a driving licence.

What do you do when both sides of the road have walls or ditches (as is frequently the case where i live), are you expecting the pedestrians to scramble on top of the wall or jump in a muddy ditch for you?!

Responsible drivers drive as if there is a pedestrian, with a buggy, around every single bend. It's not that hard. I do it and you can too and then you'll find driving less "scary".

Talk about patronising!! Behave yourself!

I live in an area where there are roads exactly as the op describes. County road with no footpaths. These roads used to be much quieter and people drove under the speed limited as it was well known that there would be walkers on the road.

However as the town expanded more and more people are using these roads and unfortunately are travelling at high speed. It is very hard on the local people who need to walk on these roads. Most now ask neighbour for lifts as it is so dangerous.

Not patronising at all. Replying to a poster blaming other road users for her own bad driving. You should not be "scared" to come on a pedestrian.

The worst one I saw was two small children (maybe 5 and 8) on bikes about 50m ahead of their mother (presumably) also on a bike with a baby on the back and a dog tied to the handlebars on a busy single track road with no pavement. Just a terrible accident waiting to happen. I was coming towards them, the two small children were a bit all over the road and the mother was having trouble controlling the dog.

And then there's the weather, dark nights and fog and pedestrians wearing dark clothing. It's easy to say you should see them and give them space and obviously drivers do or it would be carnage, but I don't think some pedestrians put themselves in the position of the drivers and consider whether what they are doing is sensible. Wear a hi-vi if you must be walking in the road in the dark, it's not rocket science, give the drivers a fighting chance.

The car brain mentality or 'motornormativity' is astounding. If you are driving on a road where there could be pedestrians/ cyclists then you should adjust your driving accordingly. A road with no pavement is a road that is to be shared with more vulnerable road users. The UK highway code is very clear on this (not sure about Ireland, sorry). If a car driver hits one of these vulnerable road users then it is entirely on the car driver. We as a society need to stop seeing driving as the only way (and I say this as a driver). It is dirty, dangerous, noisy and isolating. We should be demanding more of our town planners to make sure pedestrians, bikes, wheelchairs and pushchairs etc are prioritised over motorised vehicles every single time. If that means car drivers are inconvenienced then too bad.

Yes agree, some people do get too caught up in forcing their entitlement - the drivers

Its not the drivers who need a fighting chance

It is entirely sensible to be wary or nervous of meeting a pedestrian, plus or minus buggy, around a blind bend.
The bad driving bit is in your own head.

No. Drive slowly enough and carefully enough around a blind bend and you have no need to be nervous, wary or scared.
Drive too fast and you are a bad driver. Simple as that.

But it's shocking how many people out there do not go slowly around the bends. There are a few bends I know to be very cautious of as so many people don't reduce their speed enough and come around over the white line.

I'm sure it's great if you don't have somewhere else you specifically need to get to.

No ,you behave yourself. Bloody lunatic.

There are bad drivers for sure, many of them on this thread. But why not start a thread about their bad driving, rather than one labelling pedestrians as "pure mad"?

But no matter how careful you are, you can’t account for another driver tearing round on the wrong side of the road, or going way too quickly for the conditions, or a dog running loose and in the wrong place.

You can be the best driver in the world and still have an accident.

Sure you can. But it's still not the fault of a pedestrian, which is the subject of this thread.

Speed limits need to be changed then.
Theres no point someone walking that road (with a baby!!) because ‘roads are for everyone’ so why shouldn’t they, then they end up dead.

Or cars can just drive safely

Hm, agree to disagree. It absolutely can be the fault of the pedestrian in some circumstances.

So the issue isn’t the pedestrians it’s the vehicles not driving suitably for what potential hazards there could be? The lorry for example you first mentioned. They should of waited until they could see round the bend before overtaking

When my car was broken I walked into town a few times and would step in when a car came.

So it’s ok for you to walk the roads because you needed to but the other people walking on the roads shouldn’t when you’re in a car because they inconvenience you?

You mean unpaved footpaths going through fields or parks etc, right? Basically unpaved rights-of-way?

They are not very common in Ireland. You'd be trespassing if you cut through a field.

Ireland is very car-oriented and it is terrible for pedestrians outside urban/suburban areas. I don't think this fact can be appreciated by the majority UK-based Mumsnet users (not a dig, it's understandable if you've not experienced it).

I live in the UK now, but my mum lives in a hamlet about 4km from a town. There are no shops etc, and no bus service. That's a feasible walking distance for me, but I would not dare to walk it because it's so unsafe. Cars come flying around bends really quickly. Even on quieter roads it's hard to relax because you're always looking over your shoulder for vehicles. Whenever I go to visit my mum I am dependent on her driving me places, or else I am trapped.

If you can't afford a car, or can't drive due to medical issues or are too young, it's a shit place to live

In England and Wales (not sure about Ireland) pedestrians have a legal right to use the roads (with the exception of motorways, tunnels and some other restricted roads).

Vehicles, on the other hand, are only allowed on the roads if certain strict conditions are met: the vehicle is safe and roadworthy; the driver has a valid license to drive the vehicle; the driver is insured; the vehicle is taxed.

Pedestrians, as the most vulnerable road users, must be given a wide berth when passing of at least two metres. If the road is not wide enough to allow for 2 metres, the driver should wait until either the road widens or the pedestrian is able to move into a lay-by or gateway to allow the vehicle to pass.