91–100 of 459 posts
Can we do shoplifting next? Make it a civil offense like wage theft?
Please don't post flamebait to HN. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Seems like a relevant sub thread.
Can we do shoplifting next? Make it a civil offense like wage theft?
> Before the advent of the automobile, pedestrians in America were widely recognized as having the right of way in all situations. OK, let's go back to this. You can argue right-of-way with a ton of fiberglass and steel going 35 mph. Tell us all how that works out for you. Placing blame doesn't mean anything when the laws of physics dictate which one's going to be the winner in any given scenario.
Before the advent of the automobile, you had carriages drawn by teams of oxen. If there was lesser risk to pedestrians, it's because the oxen themselves don't enjoy walking on humans. Irony being that the automobile places more responsibility on the driver, who (ITT) sees an opportunity for manslaughter as a justification for manslaughter.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Decriminalization without functioning social work infra is this result. Just because SF is incompetent in this regard does not mean continued criminalization of minor offenses should continue. There’s nuance, and that nuance is critical to the discussion.
Oh please. These crimes have real consequences, both financially and in quality of life for the people who live in these areas. Almost everyone I know has had their car broken into. I know multiple people who have been assaulted. I personally have had to run from a homeless man with a knife. I’ve seen people grind up pills on the roof of a trash can and snort them next to a police officer. We deserve a better quality…
> Before the advent of the automobile, pedestrians in America were widely recognized as having the right of way in all situations. OK, let's go back to this. You can argue right-of-way with a ton of fiberglass and steel going 35 mph. Tell us all how that works out for you. Placing blame doesn't mean anything when the laws of physics dictate which one's going to be the winner in any given scenario.
In Norway pedestrians have the right of way on zebras. There was a fair bit of discussion a few years ago about how someone jogging in the dark would dart across a zebra and then drivers had to slam on the brakes not to hit them. As a driver though, most roads to my right have the right of way. So if there is a road to the right where the view is blocked by some bushes or a house ... I will slow down just in case a c…
For only a moment, my brain thought you meant that Norwegians riding zebras had the right of way, but half a second later my brain realized they could no longer be considered pedestrians if they were riding an animal. Is "zebra" the real term for "crosswalk" and I've been wrong my whole life?
Seeing as encounters with law enforcement are probably more deadly on average than jaywalking - I wholly support this change. Being poor in a car city is something most folks in the circles I run in now have never experienced or thought about. The documentary “Los Angeles Plays Itself” has a fantastic section about this.
> encounters with law enforcement are probably more deadly on average than jaywalking 36 pedestrians were killed last year in accidents in my city. We have one contested police shooting. 31 the year before that, two contested shootings. At least biweekly there's an article in the local paper about someone hit while illegally crossing a highway, often at night. I have unfortunately seen a pedestrian get hit by crossin…
Same with people running don't walk signs. Often (but not always) they are set to be incredibly short for pedestrians and very long green for cars (to reduce traffic). This again makes people chance it.
The solution isn't criminalising it, it's building better cities.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In Norway pedestrians have the right of way on zebras. There was a fair bit of discussion a few years ago about how someone jogging in the dark would dart across a zebra and then drivers had to slam on the brakes not to hit them. As a driver though, most roads to my right have the right of way. So if there is a road to the right where the view is blocked by some bushes or a house ... I will slow down just in case a c…
> In Norway pedestrians have the right of way on zebras. For only a moment, my brain thought you meant that Norwegians riding zebras had the right of way, but half a second later my brain realized they could no longer be considered pedestrians if they were riding an animal. Is "zebra" the real term for "crosswalk" and I've been wrong my whole life?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For that matter, make wage theft criminal, since it accounts for so much more real value stolen.
Very much not interested in locking up more people. Have you seen our (USA) numbers?
> Before the advent of the automobile, pedestrians in America were widely recognized as having the right of way in all situations. OK, let's go back to this. You can argue right-of-way with a ton of fiberglass and steel going 35 mph. Tell us all how that works out for you. Placing blame doesn't mean anything when the laws of physics dictate which one's going to be the winner in any given scenario.
Maybe that's not a place the vehicle should be going 35mph, then. Maybe the vehicle should be smaller, instead of ever-larger SUVs and trucks. Maybe there should be crosswalks and signals. There's nothing in the laws of physics that dictate that roads should be hard to cross on foot, and that cars should move at their current speeds, and be designed the ways they are. Those are all choices.
SUVs exist and are so large because emissions standards don't allow for large enough family vehicles in sedan or wagon format. That's why families have SUVs instead of sedans now. If you legislate away every vehicle capable of carrying more than five people you're essentially banning families larger than that, especially in places in the US which don't have public transit, which is most of the country.
THIS is the kind of clueless urban elite childless Coastal DINK perspective that drives regular people raising families in flyover country absolutely bananas with its complete lack of perspective for other lifestyles than the ones in San Francisco and New York! Not all of us want to live in tiny apartments and on crowded trains for our whole lives and the people who do want that life do not have the right to dictate that to the rest of us through limits on what kind of vehicles we're allowed to drive
1. The construction of highways through poor (read: minority) urban areas, causing mass respiratory disease and premature deaths[1].
2. Allocation of free public space (car parking) to drivers, effectively subsidizing (disproportionately suburban) commuters at the expense of residents.
3. A general culture of entitlement to the road among motorists, resulting in tens of thousands of pedestrian and cyclist injuries a year with virtually no legal (beyond costly civil) recourse.
[1]: https://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/29/nyregion/29asthma.html