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

41–50 of 71 posts

Re: California's Broken Jaywalking Law

#41

Post by flurp »

Maybe the problem is the length of countdown timers? I don't know how they are determined and set but anecdotally I often see 10 seconds or sometimes others in excess of 15s or even 20s on a road that takes ~5s to cross.

It seems to me like this is a reasonable law IF the timers were set to only give the pedestrians minimal amount of time to cross the street. Given it takes 5s to cross, timer starts with 5 remaining. Pedestrians in the road see it and rush to either side. Pedestrians about to enter the road will have an easier decision to make: I can't make it in 5s so I wait. Obviously some will think they can, then fine them; I think that's reasonable. But holding up pedestrians with 20s remaining seems unreasonable to me.

The main problem I see is for slower pedestrians; seniors, handicapped etc. They might need more time and could be caught of guard in the middle of the street with no time remaining... An immediate thought would be a white flashing hand as a warning that time is running low (no counter!)... Probably requires lots of reprogramming though.

Re: California's Broken Jaywalking Law

#42

Post by Swizec »

dmitrygr wrote: post #20

Refuse to talk to cops (always, not just about jaywalking). Do not provide ID ever (unless driving, since it also happens to be your DL) and do not answer questions as to whether you have ID. The amount of paperwork they'll need to fill out in order to arrest you (and thus allow them to search you [the claim will be that the search is for weapons for their safety, but anything they find is free for them to use/look a…

> Do not provide ID ever (unless driving, since it also happens to be your DL) and do not answer questions as to whether you have ID.

Isn't it technically illegal for an adult not to have ID on them?

Re: California's Broken Jaywalking Law

#43

Post by _delirium »

killerdhmo wrote: post #35
dmitrygr wrote: post #20

Refuse to talk to cops (always, not just about jaywalking). Do not provide ID ever (unless driving, since it also happens to be your DL) and do not answer questions as to whether you have ID. The amount of paperwork they'll need to fill out in order to arrest you (and thus allow them to search you [the claim will be that the search is for weapons for their safety, but anything they find is free for them to use/look a…

This isn't really an endorsement though is it. IANAL and I'm not often in court with cops and I say cooperate they're people too. shrugs

In my experience, American cops are indeed 100% people, but a significant proportion are not good people. The worst, most vicious people I knew from high school became policemen. There are no standards. The police admit any ol' gun-fetishist idiot who wants to beat up "hippies and negroes". It barely even matters if he can hold a gun straight, because there are no standards and no accountability.

Re: California's Broken Jaywalking Law

#44

Post by thanksgiving »

killerdhmo wrote: post #35
dmitrygr wrote: post #20

Refuse to talk to cops (always, not just about jaywalking). Do not provide ID ever (unless driving, since it also happens to be your DL) and do not answer questions as to whether you have ID. The amount of paperwork they'll need to fill out in order to arrest you (and thus allow them to search you [the claim will be that the search is for weapons for their safety, but anything they find is free for them to use/look a…

This isn't really an endorsement though is it. IANAL and I'm not often in court with cops and I say cooperate they're people too. shrugs

I agree with grandfather here. Do not cooperate with law enforcement when you have an option. This does not mean be rude to them or try to be difficult. It just means that you have to assert your rights. Any cop who does not respect a person's rights does not, in my eyes, deserve cooperation.

Of course, almost everyone would love to help the police with their investigation as much as they can but in a litigious climate with plea bargaining (and not to even talk about the illegal quotas that officers need to meet), I am simply not convinced that there is enough incentive for law enforcement to get the right person.

Life is not CSI. Cops are people too. They want to go home at the end of the day. I am not saying all police officers are corrupt all the time. I am simply saying most of them are overworked (and perhaps underpaid) a lot. If you think about it from this perspective, I hope you'll agree that not asserting your rights and helping law enforcement is a terrible idea. There is a video on YouTube that talks about the same thing. If they tell you the investigation is not directed towards you, have them give you something in writing (make sure your lawyer reads it) that grants you a full and unconditional pardon. Of course, they will not grant it.

In case of jaywalking, I'd say the law is flawed. If the people who allocate resources for law enforcement think that it is enough of a problem, they should allocate enough resources to cover for people's right to refuse to identify themselves unless presented with a warrant.

In the same vein, I really wish that the monies from fines and tickets not go to the police or to the general treasury at all. I wish we treated such money as bad money. I don't know what we'd do with it but doing any good with bad money taints the good efforts and will eventually rot the effort. (E.g., civil forfeiture in the incredibly stupid war on drugs)

IANAL.

Re: California's Broken Jaywalking Law

#45

Post by flurp »

Swizec wrote: post #42
dmitrygr wrote: post #20

Refuse to talk to cops (always, not just about jaywalking). Do not provide ID ever (unless driving, since it also happens to be your DL) and do not answer questions as to whether you have ID. The amount of paperwork they'll need to fill out in order to arrest you (and thus allow them to search you [the claim will be that the search is for weapons for their safety, but anything they find is free for them to use/look a…

> Do not provide ID ever (unless driving, since it also happens to be your DL) and do not answer questions as to whether you have ID. Isn't it technically illegal for an adult not to have ID on them?

EDIT: I found better documentation on this.

Some US states require ID.

> The person approached is not required to identify himself or answer any other questions, and may leave at any time

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_and_identify_statutes#Stat...

http://www.quora.com/In-the-US-under-what-situations-are-you... --old:

Depends. A quick google found this: http://www.flexyourrights.org/faqs/when-can-police-ask-for-i...

> As of 2013, 24 states had stop-and-identify laws. Regardless of your state’s law, keep in mind that police can never compel you to identify yourself without reasonable suspicion to believe you’re involved in illegal activity

Re: California's Broken Jaywalking Law

#46

Post by cauterized »

MichaelGG wrote: post #13
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…

Yet the countdowns are also at intersections that have no middle place. In such cases, it's a binary decision, made for people of all ability ranges. The countdown provides no useful information to act upon and should thus be removed. Though I agree - there should be some way to indicate "do not attempt crossing, even if you think you're so fast." Perhaps adjust the countdown and keep the hand for several seconds mor…

What does a median have to do with it?

The countdown allows me to choose to cross if there are 20 sec left (enough time for me to get across anything less than an 8-lane highway) or not to cross till the next light if there are only 3 sec left when I reach the curb.

With old-school flashing lights all I know is that the light will change soon, but gives me no idea HOW soon. In pedestrian friendly cities generally people will cross if it's flashing (esp. on a narrower street) because they have right of way. Heck, most of us will cross a one-way street AGAINST the light if the nearest oncoming car is a third of the way down the block. That's not the least bit dangerous and doesn't interrupt the flow of traffic.

Re: California's Broken Jaywalking Law

#47

Post by FAC3B33F »

killerdhmo wrote: post #35
dmitrygr wrote: post #20

Refuse to talk to cops (always, not just about jaywalking). Do not provide ID ever (unless driving, since it also happens to be your DL) and do not answer questions as to whether you have ID. The amount of paperwork they'll need to fill out in order to arrest you (and thus allow them to search you [the claim will be that the search is for weapons for their safety, but anything they find is free for them to use/look a…

This isn't really an endorsement though is it. IANAL and I'm not often in court with cops and I say cooperate they're people too. shrugs

The cops are not your friends. They are not there to protect you, your safety or your property. They are rapists, extortionists and killers, employed by the State to maintain its thuggish power through violence and intimidation and protect the status quo.

The Second Amendment of the US Constitution exists because the Founding Fathers understood that the State should be kept always at the point of a gun. The relationship between the People and the State be one of brevity and violence, otherwise tyranny is inevitable.

Never talk to them. Never cooperate with them. Never help them. Never see them as your fellow citizens. They are not.

Re: California's Broken Jaywalking Law

#48

Post by iopq »

jballanc wrote: post #32
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…

I definitely don't think it's just you. Once, when I lived in the valley, I was at a restaurant on one side of the street and wanted to go to a shop across the street, but it was the middle of the block and I didn't feel like walking to the cross-walk. The road was 3 lanes in either direction, but there was a wide grassy median, so I did what I've always done growing up in NYC: I crossed the near 3 lanes and waited o…

Even worse, you get to street that has no sidewalk at all, you cross and the other side has no sidewalk either. Literally no sidewalk on either side of the street!

Re: California's Broken Jaywalking Law

#49

Post by iopq »

flurp wrote: post #41

Maybe the problem is the length of countdown timers? I don't know how they are determined and set but anecdotally I often see 10 seconds or sometimes others in excess of 15s or even 20s on a road that takes ~5s to cross. It seems to me like this is a reasonable law IF the timers were set to only give the pedestrians minimal amount of time to cross the street. Given it takes 5s to cross, timer starts with 5 remaining.…

I can make it in 5 seconds, some grandma can't. Shouldn't it be based on your speed, not the timer?

Re: California's Broken Jaywalking Law

#50

Post by iopq »

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?

It would increase up to the point where people wouldn't feel comfortable driving faster.

There's a huge benefit to this: there would be less inconsistency between driving speeds. It is more dangerous when someone is going 85 and someone else is going 65 compared to 85 and 75.

The most dangerous is when one car is much faster than the others. There is little difference in terms of the chance of a crash if everyone is going 65 or everyone is going 75. The crash is more likely to be serious, but at least the people who are speeding are less likely to plow into someone when they're distracted.

Post reply on HN