Opening the door with the wrong hand?

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
You're imagining a legal requirement that isn't there.
I completely understand the difference between ā€œshouldā€ and ā€œmustā€ in the Highway Code.

The issue is twofold:
  1. Some people donā€™t understand that difference
  2. If a Ped walks out in front of you and you collide, the ā€œshouldā€ will be interpreted as an aggravating factor
 
We need a bigger country.

If we're fast enough we could get Ukraine.
I'm outside the UK at the moment and I love that the British media are focussing on Partygate, a stabbed (probable) lover in Maida Vale, and the Highway code, when the rest of Europe and the USA are wetting themselves at the prospect of a Russian invasion of Ukraine while NATO doesn't have a clue what its position should be. (And a variety of Covid19 lockdowns and intrusions that would give the UK collywobbles)

Curious times. But this isn't the thread to discuss those things.

.
 
Back in the dark ages when I was young stupid and 17 I swung open my van door and sent a tree hugging stumpy alike into the path of a bus and got a smack in the face and a bloody nose for the pleasure of it. I could have had the weasel as had a large collection of bludgeoning plumbing implements on the passenger seat but even my testosterone filled 17 year old brain could see the natural justice of it all.


Never done it since :)
 
I completely understand the difference between ā€œshouldā€ and ā€œmustā€ in the Highway Code.

The issue is twofold:
  1. Some people donā€™t understand that difference
  2. If a Ped walks out in front of you and you collide, the ā€œshouldā€ will be interpreted as an aggravating factor

1. Ignorance of the guidelines isn't really an excuse. The issue of people not understanding the difference between 'should' and 'must' is not new.

2. As with anything that goes to court video evidence will play a large factor. So I can only advise everyone to record their driving at all times.

I suspect that in large the behaviour of people will not change as a result of this slight rewording. Pedestrians are not going to suddenly start stepping out into the road without looking (beyond what they currently do) and drivers are similarly not going to behave much differently either (those that are currently overly considerate will stop and wait, and those less so will continue on their way as they have always done).

There may be some slightly nuanced changes in how a court/judge interprets an accident if it comes to that but for most of us this is an incredibly unlikely scenario to ever happen.
 
I feel sorry for the staff on the Ukraine border who will have to try and get some order/stop the soldiers jostling as they check their Covid certificates as they enter :doh:
 
Hi ,please don't shout at me but.

Jonnie foreigners have one major advantage over us , they are right handed ( most people are ) but using the left hand is not easy for me.

My solution when I remember is , check all mirrors , wait a couple of seconds , check mirrors again , and crack the door open with my left hand and then open to get out ( continually checking for all road users ) with my right hand.

The committee who wrote this clearly have not driven a C207 because they would know how heavy the doors are !
 
I guess a lot of people don't look in their door mirror to make sure there are no passing cars or bikes before opening their door.
If they can't be bothered to look, that attitude would extend to the Dutch door opening.

Rear passengers with no rear door mirror are potentially the bigger risk than the driver, less clued up about the highway code unless drivers themselves.

My car has automatic detection of cars/bikes/pedestrians with blind spot monitoring, but there was no provision in the highway code revisions for automatic systems that provide for this exact scenario.
 
Here's some thoughts for you. If you take a boat out to sea around mainland Europe you have to have a test and get a license, not applicable for the UK, but if you do hold a license and collide with another vessel, through no fault of your own, you are to blame as you should have known better.
Crazy.
So if there is a collision between two licence holders, which one is to blame?
 
So if there is a collision between two licence holders, which one is to blame?
The one that wasn't following the rules, and there's lot's of them, just like the highway code only bigger.
 
So if there is a collision between two licence holders, which one is to blame?
The rules are international whether private or commercial, ( not for private in uk waters for some crazy reason) from a kayak to a super tanker. There's no must and should confusion.
 
You did say "collide with another vessel through no fault of your own", though...
 
Does happen from time to time, especially tankers.
In some circumstances the rules actually say "stand on" which means proceed as you are to save confusing the other vessel who should be giving way to you.
 
Much the same sort of thing applies to aircraft flying under Visual Flight Rules, but if both pilots were following those rules, assuming due care was taken the collision was an accident, neither pilot was at fault, and neither can be held to blame.

The same applies if both aircraft are in cloud, neither under any form of Air Traffic control, neither contravening any regulations, and a collision occurs. Neither is to blame.

It is contrary to natural justice that somebody who is not at fault in any way can be held to blame for any occurrence. That said, if you look hard enough into the circumstances of any accident you can probably find some small thing; istr that under German law, one or both parties to an RTA collision must always be held to blame - a 'no blame on either side' conclusion is not permitted.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom