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

271–280 of 459 posts

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

#271

Post by leetcrew »

ck425 wrote: post #250
BitwiseFool wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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".

Not that I disagree there's an anti car segment here (I'm personally very anti car) but a car can be (can not necessarily is) an effective murder machine. What other pieces of personal property does Western society openly embrace everyone owning but that can be used to murder people? I'm not saying that's the intent but when people call them murder machine the point they're raising (hyperbolically) is that cars and d…

> What other pieces of personal property does Western society openly embrace everyone owning but that can be used to murder people?

knives would be the obvious answer, though they probably don't cause as much accidental carnage as cars.

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

#272

Post by RandallBrown »

dijit wrote: post #257
RandallBrown wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can do that in my American city too.

Oh! Which one? I can only think of NYC but that’s really inhospitable to cyclists too. :/

Seattle.

I have 3 major grocery stores (Safeway, QFC, Target) within 15 minutes walking from me. And at least 20 bars and restaurants within the same distance. Public transportation to downtown takes about 35 minutes, which isn't great, but it's okay. Uber works well if you need to be faster.

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

#273

Post by wnevets »

godshatter wrote: post #264
wnevets wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should shoplifting be punished more harshly than wage theft?

Why not punish both? Shoplifting and wage theft involve theft. It's not okay to harm some random business because some other business made you bus tables after your shift ended or whatever.

Who suggested in this thread that we shouldn't punish them? The grand parent commenter asked for them to be punished the same, the parent commenter for some reason thought that was so outlandish it must've been sarcasm.

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

#274

Post by nomel »

CalRobert wrote: post #199

Criminalizing jaywalking wasn't about making it illegal to walk across the street. It was about making it legal to kill people doing so with your car. If you want to kill someone in the US it's de facto legal to do so with your car. Just be sober and say you didn't see them.

As someone that nearly hit someone that walked out from behind a bush, with a chemically fueled disregard for the world, I don't think the rules are so bad. As unpopular as the opinion appears to be here, I don't like the idea of having to dodge humans randomly entering the road. Should we also take down the signals and barriers that prevent cars from crossing train tracks, since they have the similar goal of preventing a high speed object, with orders of magnitude more weight, from colliding with something relatively squishy?

edit: No need to immediately downvote. I would enjoy some discussion.

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

#275

Post by chrisseaton »

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…

You are the safety issue. Without you there is no safety issue. And you should drive accordingly.

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

#276

Post by frickenhamster »

woodruffw wrote: post #123
whydoyoucare wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it possible that "people of color" account for 90% of the total people who jaywalked in NYC in 2019? Unless all data and all variables in the argument are made available for inspection, it is difficult to derive any meaningful conclusions.

> Is it possible that "people of color" account for 90% of the total people who jaywalked in NYC in 2019? No. I cannot say this in strong enough terms: every single person in NYC jaywalks. Jaywalk ticketing is part of a longstanding policy of the NYPD, which is to use any occasion that presents itself to frisk people they deem "suspicious." The NYPD's definition of "suspicious," in turn, looks a lot like a colorwheel…

There's different levels of jaywalking. There's walking across the streets when there's no car and everyone is doing it. And then there's the crazies who walk across open traffic on a green light where there are cars speeding along causing accidents. A large percent of the homeless and drug addicts in cities are minorities.

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

#277

Post by dragonwriter »

ck425 wrote: post #250
BitwiseFool wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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".

Not that I disagree there's an anti car segment here (I'm personally very anti car) but a car can be (can not necessarily is) an effective murder machine. What other pieces of personal property does Western society openly embrace everyone owning but that can be used to murder people? I'm not saying that's the intent but when people call them murder machine the point they're raising (hyperbolically) is that cars and d…

> What other pieces of personal property does Western society openly embrace everyone owning but that can be used to murder people?

Knives. Belts. Ropes. Electrical cords. Hammers. Chairs. Frying pans. Scissors. Etc., Etc., Etc., as nauseum, ad infinitum.

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

#279

Post by stainforth »

leetcrew wrote: post #215
reportingsjr wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

there are at least a few commenters here who repeatedly advocate for banning cars altogether in cities. if not "anti-automobile", how would you describe this position?

Perhaps that's where we are in making sure the overton window doesn't cede ground to vested interests; only the extreme alternative as a starting point if negotiations of whats possible are being made.

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

#280

Post by nomel »

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.

> As Americans our priority has been individual convenience, over collective safety of our neighbors.

Wouldn't walking across the road into traffic, rather than the crosswalk, be individual convenience rather than collective safety?

Post reply on HN