We do not interfere with pedestrians at regulated intersections

First, I will give excerpts from the traffic rules:

14.1 Driver vehicle approaching an unregulated pedestrian crossing, is obliged to slow down or stop before the crossing in order to let pass pedestrians crossing carriageway or who joined it to make the transition.

13.1 When turning right or left, the driver must give way to pedestrians crossing the carriageway onto which he is turning ...

1.2 "Give way (do not interfere)" - a requirement meaning that the participant traffic must not start, resume or continue movement, carry out any maneuver, if this may force other participants in the movement, who have an advantage in relation to him, to change the direction of movement or speed.

"Road" - ... includes sidewalks ...

10.1 The speed must provide the driver with the possibility of constant control over the movement of the vehicle in order to comply with the requirements of the Rules.

4.5 ... At unregulated pedestrian crossings, pedestrians can enter the carriageway after they estimate the distance to approaching vehicles, their speed and make sure that the crossing will be safe for them.

Based on the systematic interpretation of the old version of clause 14.1 and clauses 14.5, 14.6 and 14.7, the concept of “letting pass” a pedestrian imposes a more severe restriction on movement than the concept of “give way”. It was deciphered by V. Kuzin in the comments " Russian newspaper"- Week No. 5193 (114) dated 05/27/10: "The driver, seeing a pedestrian on the zebra, instead of slowing down, thought about how he should give way. Now clear recommendations are given in the main driver's document: slow down or stop. For example, on the opposite side of the road, a person crossed a zebra, the driver will slow down, assess the distance and understand whether he needs to stop or not. Will the pedestrian have time to reach this side of the street or you can drive safely. "

That. when it comes to “give way”, the speed may not be slowed down; when it comes to “give way”, slowing down or stopping is mandatory.

Now the conclusions:

1. A pedestrian who walks along the sidewalk walks along the road - clause 1.2 of the SDA. If at an unregulated pedestrian crossing he has to cross the border of the sidewalk and the carriageway, he has the right not to change the direction and speed of movement, and you are obliged to let him pass or give way - clauses 14.1, 13.1, 1.2 of the SDA.

2. If the pedestrian has not crossed the border of the carriageway, then there is no offense on your part - clauses 13.1, 14.1 of the SDA.

3. To pass a pedestrian who is about to cross the border of the carriageway and the sidewalk, you must slow down in advance - clause 10.1 of the SDA, because. "Traffic hazard" occurs. But for violation of this paragraph, they can be punished only if it is proved that the speed limit has been exceeded. The inspector says that because of you the pedestrian slowed down on the sidewalk? Answer that by traffic rules duty he did not miss it, and there is no offense - clauses 13.1, 14.1 of the SDA.

4. If a pedestrian is standing on the sidewalk, then you are not required to take any action under paragraph 10.1, nor under paragraph 13.1 and 14.1 of the SDA.

5. In the event of a "danger to traffic", i.e. in the event of a threat of an accident, the driver can apply sound signal. If the pedestrian is actively moving towards the crossing, but you don't want to slow down, signal - everything is within the limits of the Rules.

6. If a pedestrian entered the carriageway when you were passing by, then from his point of view the crossing is safe - clause 4.5 of the SDA.

7. If a pedestrian entered the roadway, and the inspector declares that you did not let him through, then the violation of traffic rules is mutual - both you (clause 13.1, 14.1 of the traffic rules) and the pedestrian (clause 4.5 of the traffic rules) violated the Rules.

8. If the pedestrian did not change either direction or speed when crossing the carriageway to which you turned, then in the absence of a pedestrian crossing, you gave way to him - clause 13.1 and clause 1.2 of the SDA.

9. When a pedestrian appears at an unregulated pedestrian crossing, you must slow down or stop. This rule is very reasonable, because in order to reduce speed, you must at least take your foot off the gas pedal. Those. the distance traveled by the car during the reaction time of the driver is artificially excluded from the stopping distance. There remains a bare braking distance (brake response time + movement with steady deceleration).

In the above comment by V. Kuzin, it is said that the driver should slow down, and, having estimated the distance to the pedestrian, continue moving if he does not "have time to run to this side of the street." Because de facto, we have a presumption of guilt of the driver, then he needs to prove that he "missed" the pedestrian in a similar situation. The speed of a very fast walking pedestrian is known from school textbooks in physics - 5 km / h or 1.4 m / s. In 2.5 seconds, a pedestrian will walk 3.5 meters - the width of one lane. That is, if there was a whole lane between the pedestrian and the car at the moment of passing the crossing, the pedestrian had a driving range of at least 2.5 s. This criterion should be followed.

If there is no marking, then proceed from the width of your car. For example, the width of the VAZ-2110 without mirrors is 1.7 m. The width of two cars is ~ 3.4 m. about the width of one lane. If there are two widths of your car in the photo or video at the moment of passing the crossing between a pedestrian and a car, then minimum stock the pedestrian has the same 2.5 s, and you missed the pedestrian.

That. I recommend that on two-lane roads, when a pedestrian appears on the roadway, both on the right and on the left, stop and wait until the pedestrian will pass first. On four-lane roads, when a pedestrian appears on the carriageway on the right, the driver should do the same. If there is a pedestrian on the left, the driver must always slow down. If there is more than one lane between the driver and the pedestrian at the time of passing the crossing, then you can continue driving. Less than stop.

I remind you that the dividing strip (and the tram tracks on it), marked out constructively or with the help of continuous marking 1.2.1, is a separate element of the road that does not belong to the carriageway. Those. its boundaries are the boundaries of carriageways. If a pedestrian appears on the left side of the median, there is no need to stop.

If the tram tracks are on the same level as carriageway and are not marked with marking 1.2.1, then there is no unambiguous opinion whether the road has two carriageways or one. A pedestrian who crosses such tram tracks must be allowed to pass. If the inspector stops you for not allowing you to pass, open Article 1.5 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, and show that all doubts should be interpreted in your favor - let them first write clear rules on whether tram tracks are an element of the roadway, and only then let them punish.

The border between the tram lines and the carriageway is very conditional.

If you are driving in the extreme right lane and you have the slightest doubt that a pedestrian on the nearest sidewalk will have time to cross the border of the carriageway, slow down or stop to let him pass. Be extremely careful with a pedestrian who stands on the edge of the sidewalk, incl. back to the road. In order to turn around and "jerk" across the road, he needs a fraction of a second, which you do not have.

10. If the inspector stopped you and started a conversation about the fact that you are obliged to let a pedestrian pass, i.e. wait until the pedestrian crosses the road, from which side he would not appear, ask the inspector to get the Code of Administrative Offenses and read article 12.18. There is no penalty for not allowing a pedestrian to pass. There is a punishment for: “Failure to comply with the traffic rules requirement to give way to pedestrians,” and you gave way to a pedestrian.

11. If a pedestrian crossed the border of the carriageway and the inspector stopped you, ask him to invite the pedestrian, because only a pedestrian can say:

1. Did he change direction and speed of his movement when you passed by? Those. did you interfere with his movement or not?

2. Has he renounced the advantage given to him in your favor?

If a pedestrian becomes a participant in your conversation with the inspector, then before asking questions, explain to him: if the crossing was unsafe for him, but he crossed the border of the carriageway, then the inspector must issue a fine for him, too, because. he did not have the right to start the transition - clause 4.5 of the SDA. In addition, if a pedestrian does not have documents, then he will be detained for 3 hours until his identity is clarified in the event that any protocol is drawn up, incl. and your wrongdoing.

At this point, you are not intimidating the pedestrian. You bring to his attention his rights and obligations, which the inspector must read to him. In the end, do not forget to warn the pedestrian about Article 51 of the Constitution, according to which he has the right not to testify against himself. After explanations, the pedestrian will say that you did not create any interference with him, or he will remain silent.

In fact, the inspector can do without detaining a pedestrian for identification. He has access to the information base of the address bureau. If a pedestrian blurts out someone else's last name, then either the address will not match, or the year of birth will not match. And then - if you please, go to the police department.

For a pedestrian, there is one loophole - the inspector can announce a remark to the pedestrian, and not draw up a report on him. But you do not agree with the offense, and therefore you will definitely call a pedestrian for analysis in the traffic police and for an appeal to the federal and regional courts. The word "judgment" has an indelible effect on ignorant people.
On the other hand, drawing up a protocol on you, and announcing a remark to a pedestrian, speaks of a biased attitude towards you.

If the case could not be resolved on the spot, write in the protocol: “Driver's explanations on 1 sheet”, and fill out Appendix 9. If the decision is not in your favor, then it should be:
a) motivated - subparagraph 6 of part 1 of article 29.10 of the Code of Administrative Offenses;
b) they should evaluate your explanations - Article 26.2 and Article 26.11 of the Code of Administrative Offenses.

The traffic police are not very fond of these points, and in an hour they generally make a stamp “a la Polykhaev”, which they slap in the right place of the decision. However, if these points are not met, then the driver has a good chance of appealing the decision.

If all this looks complicated, you can offer the inspector to announce a warning for not allowing a pedestrian to pass (see Insignificance), and to repent of yesterday's crossing of the road with a dividing strip outside the pedestrian crossing (clause 4.3 of the SDA) without interfering with vehicles. The inspector will draw up a report on you as a pedestrian under part 1 of article 12.29 of the Code of Administrative Offenses with a fine of 200 rubles. and you will save at least 600 rubles. not allowing a pedestrian to pass under Article 12.18 of the Code of Administrative Offenses is punishable by a fine of 800 to 1000 rubles.

Here recently I turn left into my dormitory area. I turn into the left lane (of which there are three pieces in one direction). And on the right, a pedestrian is just starting to walk. And without a second thought I drive past him and drive on. Suddenly, a policeman slows down (with a luminous rod and 2 cars stand nearby - not the traffic police, but the police).

Such and such, documents.
-Here, what happened?
- Yes, you violated the paragraph of such and such and such and such traffic rules.
- what's this?
- missed a pedestrian
I honestly don’t even understand what pedestrian I didn’t miss:
- where?
- at a pedestrian crossing in the zone of action of the sign. The green light was on for the pedestrian, but you didn't let him through.
- so it was still 3 meters to the pedestrian, I didn’t even bother him
- (with a smile) well, our Russian logic begins: but it was far from him, but I did not interfere with him. The driver, when a pedestrian enters the road at a green light, are you obliged to let him through?
- Yes
- and you didn’t miss it, do you know what responsibility is for this?
- Yes, a fine of 1000 rubles.
- right, but I think you understood everything and won’t violate it anymore?
- Yes
- hold the papers, goodbye.
- happily.

Prizel home, told the family. Father-in-law says that you have not violated anything, read the traffic rules.

I open traffic rules:
13.1. When turning right or left, the driver must yield the road for pedestrians crossing the carriageway of the road onto which it turns, as well as for cyclists crossing it along the cycle path.

Let's watch coap:
Article 12.18. Failure to give priority to pedestrians or other road users
Failure to comply with the requirements of the Rules of the Road yield the road to pedestrians, cyclists or other road users (with the exception of drivers of vehicles) who have priority in traffic - shall entail the imposition of an administrative fine in the amount of eight hundred to one thousand roubles.

What is "give way"?

We look at traffic rules:
"Give way (do not obstruct)" - a requirement that a road user must not start, resume or continue moving, perform any maneuver, if this may force other road users who have an advantage in relation to him to change direction movement or speed.

Thus, if I did not force the pedestrian to change directions or speed, then I never violated the traffic rules.
So right?

Z.Y. I do not encourage you not to let the pedestrians through. They SHOULD be skipped. I'm talking about how to prevent divorce by unscrupulous traffic police

By the way, there was another contradiction:
clause 14.1 obliges the driver to slow down or stop.

14.1. The driver of a vehicle approaching an unregulated pedestrian crossing (the concepts of regulated and unregulated pedestrian crossings are similar to the concepts of regulated and unregulated intersection set in clause 13.3. of the Rules), is obliged to slow down or stop before crossing in order to let pass pedestrians crossing the carriageway or entering it to make the transition.

And in Koapa, in fact, a fine for interfering with a pedestrian.
And for what in the end you can get a fine? For not slowing down or stopping or interfering?

Consider this situation: the driver is moving through the intersection, and at the green traffic light I turn right, the pedestrians cross the roadway, but have not yet reached the lane the driver enters after the turn, the driver, of course, drives further, and here he is! There is an inspector who is very strongly convinced that the driver violated the traffic rules because he did not let the pedestrian pass, while the inspector begins to convince the driver that, according to the new rules, if the pedestrian stepped on crosswalk, the driver is obliged to wait until the pedestrian has completely crossed the carriageway, even though the driver does not interfere with this pedestrian with his vehicle.

Let's figure out what the driver should do in this situation. According to clause 13.1. SDA, when turning right or left, the driver is obliged to give way to pedestrians crossing the carriageway on which he is turning, as well as to cyclists crossing it along the cycle path. Thus, from this paragraph of the traffic rules it follows that the driver is still obliged to give way to pedestrians in this case, but another question arises, does the inspector correctly interpret the concept of “give way to pedestrians” in itself?

It is the concept of giving way that is actually a stumbling block for the preparation of obviously illegal protocols and decisions in the case of an administrative offense and the bewilderment of law-abiding drivers who correctly pass regulated intersections.

Clause 1.2. SDA gives this definition of the concept of "Give way". "Give way (do not interfere)" - a requirement meaning that a road user must not start, resume or continue moving, perform any maneuver, if this may force other road users who have an advantage in relation to him to change direction movement or speed.

From which it follows that if, when turning right at a regulated intersection, continued movement will not create obstacles for a pedestrian, i.e. will not force him to change direction or speed, no traffic violations will not, respectively, ask the inspector who is trying to convince you that you did not let the pedestrian: 1) prove the fact that the direction of the pedestrian or his speed changed as a result of the movement of your vehicle after turning right; 2) catch up with the pedestrian himself and interrogate him, in order to obtain evidence of the creation (or lack of creation) of any obstacles for him, essential for the correct consideration of the case.

The inspector’s refusal to do the first and / or the second, be sure to record it in the protocol, along with an objection of approximately the following content: I don’t agree with the protocol, I didn’t create any obstacles for the pedestrian, the inspector refused to interview the pedestrian for a comprehensive consideration of the case, he did not provide evidence of my guilt. I believe that in this case you will have a chance to prove your case in court.