> It's a slippery slope with a 2 ton SUV driving at 50mph and a person "interpreting" that it's not disrupting it.
Maybe the problem here is that a 2 ton SUV shouldn't be driven at 50mph when pedestrians are anywhere near. I always find it interesting how the ones advocating for the absolute freedom of owning and driving an SUV everywhere, to carry 70kg of human flesh, are usually also the ones asking for the restriction of the freedom of other users of the public space.
The problem is not how big is the car or any other subject.
The problem with any rule that is badly formulated is the ambiguity it creates. In this instance this bad definition can lead to very bad consequences.
Bad rules = ambiguous rules and need for interpretation and that leads to many bad consequences.
There is no ambiguity here, if you don't have the right of way you will be liable if something happens. But "something happening" will likely have to be more than just disrupting an SUV driver going at 50mph by making him slow down a bit.
Maybe the problem here is that a 2 ton SUV shouldn't be driven at 50mph when pedestrians are anywhere near. I always find it interesting how the ones advocating for the absolute freedom of owning and driving an SUV everywhere, to carry 70kg of human flesh, are usually also the ones asking for the restriction of the freedom of other users of the public space.