Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Jaywalking decriminalization, 100 years after the auto industry made it a crime

virginiamercury.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 459 posts

Re: Jaywalking decriminalization, 100 years after the auto industry made it a crime

#141

Post by LordDragonfang »

jimbob45 wrote: post #121
LordDragonfang wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While that's interesting conjecture, it doesn't bear out in reality in this case. From an article linked elsewhere in this chain[1]: >From Jan. 1 to March 31, the NYPD wrote 80 tickets for illegal crossing — less than one a day in a city of more than eight million people — and only one went to a person identified in police logs as “white.” So unless you think the "lower class" is 98% people of color, it's clear that…

Right but we have no way of knowing how many walkers were blacks, how many black and white walkers actually jaywalked, and how many walkers of each race got let off on warnings. It’s a nice talking point, I’ll grant you, but it won’t hold up to scrutiny on HN.

>how many black and white walkers actually jaywalked

Are you seriously proposing that 98% people of color could be a representative sample of jaywalkers, or are you a bad troll? That pretty clearly shows a bias in the level of policing.

Re: Jaywalking decriminalization, 100 years after the auto industry made it a crime

#142

Post by pdonis »

rwhitman wrote: post #125

This is entirely about the same politics of safety we're seeing play out with the pandemic. If jaywalking was legal, the sacrifice is that we'd have to drive slower to watch for pedestrians. As Americans our priority has been individual convenience, over collective safety of our neighbors. Its shifting slowly, but for the most part this is a battle we're grappling with as a society on multiple fronts right now.

> If jaywalking was legal, the sacrifice is that we'd have to drive slower to watch for pedestrians.

There is a middle ground: the law could say that, while you can't get a ticket just for crossing a street outside the marked crosswalks, if you do cross that way and get hit by a car, the presumption is that you were at fault--whereas, if you get hit by a car while you are in the marked crosswalks, the presumption is that the driver of the car was at fault. That would basically reflect the same presumption that is in our current laws, but it would remove the excuse for cops to mess with people when they haven't caused any harm.

Note that "presumption" does not mean an automatic finding of fault; it just means that whoever is presumed to be at fault has the burden of establishing that they weren't, if they believe they weren't. That's a common situation in law.

In short, making jaywalking itself--crossing a street outside the marked crosswalks--illegal is not about safety at all; it's about local municipalities finding ways to shake down people for money. Just like most traffic laws.

Re: Jaywalking decriminalization, 100 years after the auto industry made it a crime

#143

Post by falcolas »

umvi wrote: post #122
chrisseaton wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All your arguments are about protecting yourself and limiting your liability at the expense of the pedestrian and you just slowing down and taking more care. You even talk in the passive voice about people being struck by your car rather than you striking them with your car. That's a shit attitude.

Why am I being villainized for a) going the speed limit, b) complaining about a legitimate safety issue? I would never intentionally strike a pedestrian in my vehicle, but a situation where a) I am driving the speed limit, b) a pedestrian jaywalking forces me to reflexively brake is not safe . So either the speed limit needs to be lowered, or pedestrians need to behave more safely. I would not need to reflexively bra…

> Why am I being villainized

Because cars bad, of course. Bicycles and pedestrians should always have the right of way in every situation, of course.

If a pedestrian is walking in the lane on the highway, it's obviously the car's legal responsibility to make way for them.

/s

Re: Jaywalking decriminalization, 100 years after the auto industry made it a crime

#144

Post by ajuc »

vorpalhex wrote: post #108
LordDragonfang wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I have unfortunately seen a pedestrian get hit by crossing on a red walk sign Which is an indication that jaywalking isn't the real problem here, it's inattentive drivers. How many of the 36 above were similar situations?

You're right, drivers should simply pause physics and magically stop their vehicle or wear nightvision goggles at all times. I was making a right turn on a 40mph road on a green light. There's a crosswalk there so I checked and the crosswalk was vacant, made the turn and proceeded to get up to speed on that road. And then immediately did a hard brake because a woman was illegally crossing the road around a bend, cove…

So you're driving at over 60km/h in the city (which is illegal in many countries and for a good reason) at night near a blind corner and narrowly avoid killing people and you think you did nothing wrong and it would be their own fault.

That's the exact attitude that criminalization of jaywalking is teaching drivers. And that's exactly why it's killing people every day.

It's just as absurd as making a law that forbids women to walk alone at night (for their own safety) and blaming them if they break that law and get raped.

Re: Jaywalking decriminalization, 100 years after the auto industry made it a crime

#145

Post by woodruffw »

nineplay wrote: post #140
woodruffw wrote: post #100

We in the US do an absolutely horrific job of recognizing and compensating for the externalities of our automotive culture. The criminalization of jaywalking is one major aspect, but also consider: 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 (dis…

> We in the US do an absolutely horrific job of recognizing and compensating for the externalities of our automotive culture. One of the ways we recognize the externalities of our automotive culture is by making jaywalking illegal.

> One of the ways we recognize the externalities of our automotive culture is by making jaywalking illegal.

You mean the law in one municipality that hasn't taken effect yet, and that took months of LEO-adjacent protests?

We're slowly getting better, to be sure. But I don't think anybody should be content with the rate of progress.

Re: Jaywalking decriminalization, 100 years after the auto industry made it a crime

#146

Post by DanBC »

rwhitman wrote: post #125

This is entirely about the same politics of safety we're seeing play out with the pandemic. If jaywalking was legal, the sacrifice is that we'd have to drive slower to watch for pedestrians. As Americans our priority has been individual convenience, over collective safety of our neighbors. Its shifting slowly, but for the most part this is a battle we're grappling with as a society on multiple fronts right now.

> If jaywalking was legal, the sacrifice is that we'd have to drive slower to watch for pedestrians.

Don't you need to do that anyway? Because dogs, deer, children, drunk people, etc etc.

Re: Jaywalking decriminalization, 100 years after the auto industry made it a crime

#147

Post by tom_ »

BitwiseFool wrote: post #133
tom_ wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why can't you take some responsibility for their safety? You're the one in a 200+ bhp murder machine, not them. If somebody can dart out into the path of your car, you should be asking yourself why you let yourself get into that situation.

>"You're the one in a 200+ bhp murder machine, not them. If somebody can dart out into the path of your car, you should be asking yourself why you let yourself get into that situation." If somebody can dart out in front of my car, isn't that the fault of the person who darted? Or, the civil engineer who designed the road? How can you possibly say that I let myself get into this situation?

My point is: why were you not more carefully assessing the situation, to ensure that you were driving at an appropriate speed, given the risk of having somebody leap into the path of your car? That is after all a situation you presumably want to avoid.

(Even if you don't care about hitting somebody, maybe at least consider that it's equivalent to having a 75 kg lump of meat fired at your car at, say, 35 mph.)

Re: Jaywalking decriminalization, 100 years after the auto industry made it a crime

#148

Post by [deleted] »

pengaru wrote: post #28
AlexandrB wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Creating laws that almost everyone breaks and then enforcing them selectively is a great way to hide bias and racism. Edit: See also - loitering.

Yep, or hell even ridiculously low highway speed limits in some states, where everyone goes 10+ over. But I think it's also just ensuring a ready and plentiful supply of fines for fundraising.

[deleted]

Re: Jaywalking decriminalization, 100 years after the auto industry made it a crime

#149

Post by BitwiseFool »

reportingsjr wrote: post #136
BitwiseFool wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a noticeable anti-automobile crowd here on HN. Personally, anti-jaywalking laws just make sense and there doesn't need to be sinister motivations from the auto-industry to explain why we have them.

There are not anti-automobile people on here. There are people who are sick of cars being pushed as the /only/ way for things to be done. Almost every person you see advocating for better safety for pedestrians, people biking, etc understands that cars are necessary for some things. It just doesn't need to be forced for literally every small thing.

I get what you're saying. And for what it's worth I do like the idea of making city centers more walkable and pedestrian friendly.

But based on some comments in this discussion there are absolutely anti-automobile people here and they are vocal. I just responded to someone calling a car a "murder machine".

Re: Jaywalking decriminalization, 100 years after the auto industry made it a crime

#150

Post by reificator »

LordDragonfang wrote: post #89
vorpalhex wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

>I have unfortunately seen a pedestrian get hit by crossing on a red walk sign Which is an indication that jaywalking isn't the real problem here, it's inattentive drivers. How many of the 36 above were similar situations?

> > I have unfortunately seen a pedestrian get hit by crossing on a red walk sign

> Which is an indication that jaywalking isn't the real problem here, it's inattentive drivers. How many of the 36 above were similar situations?

Perhaps your signals are different, but in my area a "red walk sign" means "Do Not Walk".

Your comment to me sounds like you're talking about a white walk sign, which would in fact be mostly attributable to inattentive drivers.

But if the sign is red, then while driver inattentiveness may be involved, it's not the primary culprit.

Post reply on HN