Would You Transgress To Assist An Emergency Vehicle?

[ToraToraTora]

https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/cars/1899561/drivers-fine-2500-moving-ambulance

....don't. This is not new to me but I'm amazed how many people think it's ok to go through a red light or stop in a yellow box to assist and emergency vehicle.

[youngmafbog]

I thought this was well known.  Move out the way but dont break the law in doing so.

[barry1010]

How many motorists have been penalised for it?  I read about a chap who went in to a bus lane and challenged the fine but was told the ambulance behind him could have used the bus lane if necessary 

[ToraToraTora]

I don't know the figures but I do know of at least one example. near me there are some traffic lights that have cameras and a work colleague was stopped at a red light and an ambulance came up behind, blues and twos etc, so he pulled forward into a right turn filter. Got 3 points and a fine. He appealed, months of wrangling but in the end he was advised to not take it to court because he could not say he was not guilty. The standard advice for motorists is do not react, let them find their way around you, they are trained to. Often motorists make it worse and end uop blocking the EV anyway. Many examples on YT.

[douglas9401]

Saw an example in Inverness yesterday when a car driver mounted the pavement to get out of the way of an ambulance.

Panic and inexperience seem to grip some folk.

 

[Old_Geezer]

Probably because logic dictates the emergency vehicle is the priority. It's not instinctive to believe it isn't important enough.

[bookbinder]

If a blue-light vehicle comes up behind you, it's natural and instinctive to get out of its way. Somebody, somewhere is suffering, so a driver won't want to prolong that suffering by being awkward, and quoting rules of the road.

[ToraToraTora]

16:26 fine but if the law does not allow an exemption then you can't expect people to do illegal things. If they can pul over legally and safely then great.

[douglas9401]

I think we all know someone who would bluster on endlessly about how they were only trying to help and an exception should be made for them because...

[andy-hughes]

I think common sense should apply, both in the action of making room for an emergency vehicle, and any inadvertent transgressions as a result. 

[ToraToraTora]

yes Andy, but does that include going through a red light to make room?

[andy-hughes]

Move through to let the ambulance through, and then stop - yes, I would.

A level of common sense has to be in play here.

[jno]

I think you'll find the councils/courts don't do common sense, unfortunately.

[tomus42]

If an emergency vehicle is to be treated the same as any other vehicle, why do they bother equipping them with hi viz stripes and loud blaring horns?

It seems a bit strange.

[ToraToraTora]

AH: "Move through to let the ambulance through, and then stop - yes, I would.

A level of common sense has to be in play here." - ok so you don't mind getting 3 points + fine. How very public spirited of you. I don't think the "so rule" is being contravened here, you just admitted you would willingly incur the penalty.

[ToraToraTora]

tomus, they are not to be treated the same, get out of the way if legal, safe and possible, just don't break the law.

[andy-hughes]

TTT - // ok so you don't mind getting 3 points + fine. How very public spirited of you. I don't think the "so rule" is being contravened here, you just admitted you would willingly incur the penalty. //

Clearly it has.

I did not 'admit' anything.

I made no mention at all of a potential penalty, or my reaction to any penalty.

Yet again you are putting an interpretation on my post that is not there.

If I'd meant to say I would 'willingly incure the penalty', those words would be in my post.

I did not mean to say that, so they are not there.

I am perfectly capable of stating my view thank you, I don't require additional embroidery from your fevered imagination.

[ToraToraTora]

AH, you said you would knowingly break the law to assist an ambulance. Now you may get away with it but in doing so you are undeniably deciding the break the law, that seems pretty unambiguous to me.

[retrocop]

Once you cross the stop line you have run a red light for whatever reason.

[andy-hughes]

TTT - // AH, you said you would knowingly break the law to assist an ambulance. Now you may get away with it but in doing so you are undeniably deciding the break the law, that seems pretty unambiguous to me. //

Yes, that is what I said.

What I did not say, was that I would willingly accept the penalty.

I never mentioned the penalty, you made that up - again.

[andy-hughes]

retrocop - // Once you cross the stop line you have run a red light for whatever reason. //

I am not disputing that.

I am simply arguing with TTT's 'additions' to my point.

I would take responsibility for breaking the law for what I believe is a valid reason, and I accept that my opinion does not affect the law I am breaking, or the potential penalty for it.

I would contest any penalty, on the basis that I broke the law for a valid reason.

Should the police / court not accept my argument, then of course, the law is on their side, and I would pay the penalty.

But, to return to TTT's immagination, I would not pay willingly, and I would not be happy about it, but the law is the law, and I abide by it.