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

California's Broken Jaywalking Law

systemicfailure.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 71 posts

Re: California's Broken Jaywalking Law

#21

Post by _asummers »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #7
deadfall wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I agree. The flow of traffic for most commuters, like myself, seem to around 75 mph. "The speed limit is commonly set at or below the 85th percentile operating speed (being the speed which no more than 15% of traffic is exceeding)[41][42][43] and in the US is typically set 8 to 12 mph (13 to 19 km/h) below that speed." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_limit

On the other hand, if the speed limit was set at 75mph, would that remain the common speed of traffic, or would the common speed increase with the limit?

Speed limits are 70MPH, 75MPH even 80MPH in some places in the US, apparently.[0] One could probably look at percentages of speeding tickets and reckless driving violations compared to states with lower limits and get some interesting results.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_limits_in_the_United_Sta...

Re: California's Broken Jaywalking Law

#22

Post by JoshTriplett »

cozzyd wrote: post #14
JoshTriplett wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed; this isn't at all ambiguous. If you were allowed to cross, it would be a walk signal with countdown.

No other place treats it that way (and most police departments have better things to do than to target pedestrians).

To the best of my knowledge, that's the meaning it has in Portland, and many other cities. (Now, on the other hand, I don't think that's vigorously enforced.)

Re: California's Broken Jaywalking Law

#25

Post by raldi »

cozzyd wrote: post #18
JoshTriplett wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand, if the speed limit was set at 75mph, would that remain the common speed of traffic, or would the common speed increase with the limit?

On the Autobahn people drive at infinity km/h

Could you convert that to mph please?

Re: California's Broken Jaywalking Law

#27

Post by _asummers »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #8
vacri wrote: post #5

Otherwise, what’s the point of having a countdown signal? It tells people currently on the crossing how long they have. If they're infirm, they may be better off waiting at a traffic island than trying to rush across. The red hand is pretty clear - it means "don't start crossing", not "start crossing if you're confident you can make it in time" (though that is the way the countdown is used). $200 is a ridiculous fine…

Agreed; this isn't at all ambiguous. If you were allowed to cross, it would be a walk signal with countdown.

Some intersections I cross in Chicago have the walking man for literally one to two seconds before it starts the blinking hand or countdown (typically in the 10-15 sec range). This is barely enough time to enter the intersection, even if the individual is paying complete attention. Given this, I'd never even considered that it could be a fineable offense to begin crossing when the countdown was happening.

Re: California's Broken Jaywalking Law

#28

Post by Cymen »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #8
vacri wrote: post #5

Otherwise, what’s the point of having a countdown signal? It tells people currently on the crossing how long they have. If they're infirm, they may be better off waiting at a traffic island than trying to rush across. The red hand is pretty clear - it means "don't start crossing", not "start crossing if you're confident you can make it in time" (though that is the way the countdown is used). $200 is a ridiculous fine…

Agreed; this isn't at all ambiguous. If you were allowed to cross, it would be a walk signal with countdown.

That is a joke -- people walk at different speeds. Walking in carland is enough punishment. The worst are burbias where the walk signal never comes on if you don't press a button.

Re: California's Broken Jaywalking Law

#29

Post by anigbrowl »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #8
vacri wrote: post #5

Otherwise, what’s the point of having a countdown signal? It tells people currently on the crossing how long they have. If they're infirm, they may be better off waiting at a traffic island than trying to rush across. The red hand is pretty clear - it means "don't start crossing", not "start crossing if you're confident you can make it in time" (though that is the way the countdown is used). $200 is a ridiculous fine…

Agreed; this isn't at all ambiguous. If you were allowed to cross, it would be a walk signal with countdown.

No it wouldn't. Around here I know of many intersections that only display the walk signal for a second or two before going into the countdown, such a short time that you can miss it if you briefly glance away. I pay attention to crosswalk signals and spent months training my dog to do the same so that he sits when we arrive at a crosswalk. When the city is setting up the lights so that they change in the time it takes to walk a single step then your interpretation isn't reasonable.

Re: California's Broken Jaywalking Law

#30

Post by [deleted] »

menssen wrote: post #15

Anecdotally (I'm posting this to see if I'm the only one who's noticed), there's something culturally (or legally) unique about jaywalking in California. The ambiguity of countdown timers should have been a problem in every city/state that put them in. But I can't imagine reading this article about anywhere else because everywhere else, everybody jaywalks all the time and the laws are rarely enforced. But relatively…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN