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

351–360 of 459 posts

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

#351

Post by recursive »

umvi wrote: post #314
anigbrowl wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have more power, therefore a greater burden should fall on the pedestrian than you? Hmm.

Yes. If you disagree, jump in front of an oncoming train at the last second. After all the train has much more power than you and therefore the burden falls on the train operator to keep an eye out for you and save your life.

And in fact, train operators, do in fact make significant efforts to avoid killing people. It doesn't prevent all deaths. I believe it's reasonable to hold motorists to the same standard. "Make significant effort to avoid killing people". It's not a guarantee, if that's what you wanted to hear.

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

#352

Post by throwaway0a5e »

standardUser wrote: post #285
frickenhamster wrote: post #278

Fucking stupid. I used to live in a college town where no one obeyed traffic laws. I can't tell you how many car on car, car in bike, car on people accidents were caused by dumbasses walking into open traffic.

If bike and pedestrian traffic is that dense, they should lower speed limits and install speed bumps.

It's not the density, it's the predictability.

Predictably traffic is safe traffic. It doesn't matter whether you're talking about pedestrians, cars or bikes, the ability to accurately anticipate other parties moves is what makes for safety.

College campuses suck so bad for safety because you have people from tons of different regions with different etiquette and standards, in a new environment and nobody can predict what anybody else is about to do. Add in the drunks and it's amazing they're as safe as they are.

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

#353

Post by BXLE_1-1-BitIs1 »

throw0101a wrote: post #258
twblalock wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There were quite a few other factors that led to the decline of streetcars: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_consp... One of the biggest is that people actually like living in suburbs, and they could afford to do so after WWII. The promise of the suburbs is a detached house, with some private outdoor space like a back yard, in a quiet area: essentially what the rich had always preferred and been…

> The promise of the suburbs is a detached house, with some private outdoor space like a back yard, in a quiet area: essentially what the rich had always preferred and been able to afford. You can do that and still have density. Things were built like that pre-WW2; see street view of this Toronto, Canada neighbourhood: * https://www.google.com/maps/place/150+Westminster+Ave,+Toron... Those houses (actually land) are…

Post WWII bylaws mandated super wide streets and wide separation between houses, ostensibly for fire protection. I spent Grade 6 through 13 (Ontario prolonged the torture) in a new build Toronto suburb. Virtually no transit to speak of and the nearest bus stop a twenty minute walk away, followed by nearly an hour to get downtown. Cycling was faster - still is,even with decades of transit improvements.

After high school I moved to the inner city and stayed clear of the suburbs.

Today I'm in a walkable century old dense neighborhood in a small regional center, but have to drive to get groceries. The car can stay parked for a week.

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

#354

Post by yw3410 »

inglor_cz wrote: post #187
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.

From a city that has a lot of public transport (Prague): some people will dart in front of fully loaded buses, trams, or even trains at a railway crossing. That is humanity at its finest. (/s) I would be pissed off if maximum speed of a train (a 20000+ bhp murder machine, by your standard) that I use to commute was lowered to some 10 kph in order to keep those candidates of the Darwin Award alive. Being weaker (pedes…

Please think a little about what you've said; that you'd rather a fellow human would be killed for less than 5 minutes of convenience for you.

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

#355

Post by throwaway0a5e »

umvi wrote: post #21

Jaywalking drives me crazy... sometimes I wish American culture was more German/Japanese in this area and Americans walked the extra 20 feet to the nearest crosswalk and waited for the light. A few times now I've had to tap my brakes for some guy dashing across the street to the island in the middle because he was too impatient to wait for the light to change. Sometimes it's a lady with a shopping cart. These aren't…

I really don't care what other people do so long as they don't cut people off and force them to react (and I apply this heuristic to all types of traffic). Jaywalking into moving traffic is solidly an example of the latter.

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

#356

Post by throwaway0a5e »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #217

Lots of vitriol and stories. The bottom line is, pedestrians and cars don't belong on the same piece of road. The difference in speeds is too great to be safe.

They figured all this "mixed traffic safety" stuff out during the industrial revolution (the first time people frequently shared the workplace with big fast rolling things that could kill them).

The only reason we're still arguing about the details is because everyone wants their pet favorite type of traffic to be favored by law.

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

#357

Post by RobRivera »

teloli wrote: post #251
twblalock wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There were quite a few other factors that led to the decline of streetcars: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_consp... One of the biggest is that people actually like living in suburbs, and they could afford to do so after WWII. The promise of the suburbs is a detached house, with some private outdoor space like a back yard, in a quiet area: essentially what the rich had always preferred and been…

Oh man, am I glad to be European. Walk to the bar, cycle to work, take the tram if it rains. American cities built for cars are just so sad.

I love my kansas city sprawl. It's not for everyone, but it certainty isn't sad in my eyes, or that of my friends.

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

#358

Post by biztos »

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. :/

Totally doable in San Francisco, Santa Monica, and Downtown Los Angeles, just to name three I know well enough in California to know that about them.

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

#359

Post by quadrifoliate »

DanBC wrote: post #119
castis wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a wordpress installation containing news for Virginia in the US. No one outside this area is the target market.

Which means they can safely ignore GDPR. But they're not, they're blocking visitors. That's an incoherent response: if they need to pay attention to GDPR blocking doesn't protect them, and if they don't need to pay attention to GDPR blocking visitors just deprives them of page views.

> if they need to pay attention to GDPR blocking doesn't protect them

Could you explain why? I thought that GDPR was applicable only to residents of the EU, and blocking them was a “good enough” way used by websites who do intensive personalized data tracking to avoid having to follow it.

I don't personally approve of this way, but fail to understand why it's supposedly ineffective.

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

#360

Post by tristor »

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…

> The construction of highways through poor (read: minority) urban areas, causing mass respiratory disease and premature deaths[1].

This has nearly nothing to do with automotive culture and everything to do with the system of governance in the US. In local politics in the US, your level of representation is roughly equal in proportion to your property tax bill every year. If you're renting, or otherwise in a situation where you don't directly pay (significant) property tax, your voice doesn't matter.

The rest is pretty much true, but would be worth noting that the only options for the US are for every city to have extensive sprawling underground metros interlinked by high-speed rail, or to have most people own a car and have highways everywhere. Any middle ground or half measure is untenable in our current society without causing direct, real, dire consequences to the very people you're trying to champion.

Post reply on HN