ok .. IMO if you hit a pedestrian, you are generally at fault. if a ped steps out behind a car and you crash into them, you either weren't covering the brakes well enough, or you had crappy brakes, or you are a bad rider and need to improve/improve your reflexes, or you were riding too close to left, reducing your maneuvering room...
if you can not see behind an obstacle and you are passing it, you should pass it at a speed where you can slow down if something were to come in to the road. this is especially true for two-wheeled vehicles, who are smaller, so less visible, and can filter easily and pass in between small gaps - also any collision could easily result in both parties being injured...
yes peds can be annoying stepping out of nowhere, but i think they should always have right of way. the onus should be on the rider to avoid a collision. in the UK, Ped is King, and rightly so.
ok .. IMO if you hit a pedestrian, you are generally at fault. if a ped steps out behind a car and you crash into them, you either weren't covering the brakes well enough, or you had crappy brakes, or you are a bad rider and need to improve/improve your reflexes, or you were riding too close to left, reducing your maneuvering room...
if you can not see behind an obstacle and you are passing it, you should pass it at a speed where you can slow down if something were to come in to the road. this is especially true for two-wheeled vehicles, who are smaller, so less visible, and can filter easily and pass in between small gaps - also any collision could easily result in both parties being injured...
yes peds can be annoying stepping out of nowhere, but i think they should always have right of way. the onus should be on the rider to avoid a collision. in the UK, Ped is King, and rightly so.