This is false equivalence, much like the train comparison before. We don't teach children that cars are supposed to run them over if they're in the road. We teach them that cars physically can't avoid running them over (or crashing into something else if they swerve away) if they're in the road. You're comparing a physical law of reality to a personal belief about proper decorum.

If the soldier was moving too quickly to stop, slow down, or adjust his direction, that would simply be an accident. Instead the soldier chooses to keep moving regardless of who is in his way, because of his belief that this course of action is the right and proper one. And children in the UK are likewise taught that this is right and proper. It is entirely a matter of formality. It makes no sense to say "it is right and proper because children are taught that it's right and proper", that's circular reasoning.