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

Jaywalking legalized in New York City

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 370 posts

Re: Jaywalking legalized in New York City

#281

Post by 0dayz »

dathinab wrote: post #187
gxonatano wrote: post #87

Let's not forget that jaywalking was essentially created by the automotive industry and its lobbyists, to make life more convenient for drivers. It started in car-heavy places like California, and eventually became a law virtually everywhere in the US, but was never really enforced in New York City, where most people walk or take public transit, rather than drive. If, like most New Yorkers, you walk several kilometer…

>New Yorkers don't have a concept of "jaywalking"; it's just "walking." It's also not a word in the German language at all, it's just "crossing the road". If you do it safely grate, if you don't not grate and if there are children nearby unsafe road crossing is really something you shouldn't do, especially it it's just because you are to lazy to walk a small bit more (I think crossing a road close by a pedestrian cro…

Most likely because jaywalking was an insult before a legal word.

Re: Jaywalking legalized in New York City

#282

Post by altacc »

thegrim33 wrote: post #130

The dichotomy is pretty interesting to me, given that most major cities in the country have been running high-publicity programs for the last decade to do everything possible to reduce car-related deaths, especially protecting pedestrians and bicyclists. (Cities like NYC and Seattle call it "vision zero", a vision of zero serious traffic injuries/deaths). They work to separate pedestrians and bicyclists from traffic,…

Maybe there's some negative American exceptionalism here (the idea that what works in other countries can't work in the US because reasons) but many other countries have no jaywalking laws or much more lax versions (e.g. only applies to motorways) and have much lower pedestrian deaths than the US. Road safety is a cultural thing and relates to how unequal a person's rights are based on their mode of transport.

Growing up in the UK, which is car-centric but not as much as the US, jaywalking was an alien term and concept. I remember being confused by the concept when I first visited the US. In the UK there be many crossing with or without lights and regular traffic islands for pedestrians. You get used to crossing the road without signal controlled crossing. And yet the vehicle death rate in the UK is 4 times lower per 100,000 population than the US, 2 times lower per distance driven and the pedestrian death rate is 5 times lower.

Re: Jaywalking legalized in New York City

#283

Post by ulrikrasmussen »

mncharity wrote: post #209
standardUser wrote: post #108

First, let's not forget that jaywalking is one of those "crimes" that is used as a pretense by police to harass people, usually young people and people of color. Second, as a veteran jaywalker, my rule of thumb is that if a car has to hit their breaks even a little, or otherwise alter their trajectory, you're doing it wrong. The goal should be smooth movement for all. Third, just because someone else is jaywalking do…

> rule of thumb is [...] trajectory [...] The goal should be smooth movement for all. A more restrictive one is avoiding driver cognitive load and distraction. City driving can be exhausting. And attention budget allocated to one concern, is less available for that other thing that's about to unexpectedly bite. > just because someone else is jaywalking does not mean you should follow them! Another is attending to cro…

I think I've read that narrow and cluttered roads which require the full attention of drivers are actually safer than wide and uncluttered roads because it instills a false sense of security and makes drivers more reckless. Perhaps having to look out for pedestrians all the time actually statistically improves safety.

Re: Jaywalking legalized in New York City

#284

Post by stratocumulus0 »

dathinab wrote: post #187
gxonatano wrote: post #87

Let's not forget that jaywalking was essentially created by the automotive industry and its lobbyists, to make life more convenient for drivers. It started in car-heavy places like California, and eventually became a law virtually everywhere in the US, but was never really enforced in New York City, where most people walk or take public transit, rather than drive. If, like most New Yorkers, you walk several kilometer…

>New Yorkers don't have a concept of "jaywalking"; it's just "walking." It's also not a word in the German language at all, it's just "crossing the road". If you do it safely grate, if you don't not grate and if there are children nearby unsafe road crossing is really something you shouldn't do, especially it it's just because you are to lazy to walk a small bit more (I think crossing a road close by a pedestrian cro…

At the same time, a great deal of pedestrian crossings is not marked for cars at all, and only at most hinted towards for pedestrians. Sometimes there is a small pedestrian crossing sign painted on the road facing the sidewalk, sometimes there's just a slight decline in the curbside on both sides. I guess that this is some legal loophole to give cars priority, since legally they have to stop if someone wants to cross the street on a marked crossing with no traffic lights.

Re: Jaywalking legalized in New York City

#285

Post by ssl-3 »

fragmede wrote: post #256
ssl-3 wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless I'm missing something: Defining traffic laws is something that the states do on their own, and these aren't things that the federal government generally gets involved with. Thus, there are 50 different sets of these laws, plus DC. Any similarities between them may be nothing more than incidental.

Sorta. > The Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 required in §362(c)(5) that in order for a state to receive federal assistance in developing mandated conservation programs, they must permit right turns on red lights. All 50 states, the District of Columbia, Guam, and Puerto Rico have allowed right turns on red since 1980, except where prohibited by a sign or where right turns are controlled by dedicated traff…

I know. I was even alive and aware when Sammy Hagar's "I can't drive 55" was published.

Can you explain more of which part of anything about WTF you're going on about?

[Please don't hold back. I hope you don't mind much, but sometimes I get off pretty spontaneously when other people go digging in my shit.]

Re: Jaywalking legalized in New York City

#286

Post by Arnt »

bitcharmer wrote: post #133
mysterydip wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you allow pedestrians to cross anywhere at any time with right of way, that can work to a certain density. On the other end of the scale, traffic will be at a standstill due to a constant stream of pedestrians. I don't know exactly where on that scale either of those cities is, but the argument that it works in the UK where the density is 5x less seems flawed.

I'm struggling to believe London Brigde area and the square mile get 5x less congested than New York. What areas of London and New York are we comparing?

Greater London compared to Manhattan, apparently. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_London. I don't see what conclusions can be drawn from that comparison, which is why I asked GP to be explicit.

Re: Jaywalking legalized in New York City

#287

Post by Arnt »

mysterydip wrote: post #223
bitcharmer wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comparison makes no sense. If this was in good faith, you'd compare Manhattan and the square mile or westminster.

It was in good faith. Not knowing much about the UK, I took the largest city to be the densest. Seems I was off.

London is the densest, but the comparison was between the central area of one city and the entire area of another, perhaps even including suburbs beyond the formal city limits of the second. When you're leave out enough detail and just post two numbers, you're apt to make such mistakes while posting and thereby post something meaningless.

One good way to avoid posting meaninglessly is to write meaningful sentences and explain your conclusions/inferences explicitly.

Re: Jaywalking legalized in New York City

#288

Post by lazyasciiart »

stratocumulus0 wrote: post #284
dathinab wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>New Yorkers don't have a concept of "jaywalking"; it's just "walking." It's also not a word in the German language at all, it's just "crossing the road". If you do it safely grate, if you don't not grate and if there are children nearby unsafe road crossing is really something you shouldn't do, especially it it's just because you are to lazy to walk a small bit more (I think crossing a road close by a pedestrian cro…

At the same time, a great deal of pedestrian crossings is not marked for cars at all, and only at most hinted towards for pedestrians. Sometimes there is a small pedestrian crossing sign painted on the road facing the sidewalk, sometimes there's just a slight decline in the curbside on both sides. I guess that this is some legal loophole to give cars priority, since legally they have to stop if someone wants to cross…

Laws vary. In Washington every street corner is an unmarked crosswalk, where pedestrians have priority. Many drivers don’t know this, of course.

Re: Jaywalking legalized in New York City

#289

Post by fragmede »

ssl-3 wrote: post #285
fragmede wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorta. > The Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 required in §362(c)(5) that in order for a state to receive federal assistance in developing mandated conservation programs, they must permit right turns on red lights. All 50 states, the District of Columbia, Guam, and Puerto Rico have allowed right turns on red since 1980, except where prohibited by a sign or where right turns are controlled by dedicated traff…

I know. I was even alive and aware when Sammy Hagar's "I can't drive 55" was published. Can you explain more of which part of anything about WTF you're going on about? [Please don't hold back. I hope you don't mind much, but sometimes I get off pretty spontaneously when other people go digging in my shit.]

I was responding to

> Any similarities between them may be nothing more than incidental.

Due to the 1970's fuel crisis, the Federal government flexed it's power and threatened to withhold money from states if they did not adopt Right Turn On Red (RTOR), thus it seems that the commonality between states with respect to RTOR might be more than incidental.

(Also, your original comment was easier to understand.)

Re: Jaywalking legalized in New York City

#290

Post by lazyasciiart »

wahern wrote: post #136
frmersdog wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These deaths largely occur on high-speed roadways where people shouldn't be walking, or where the speed should be lower. The issue in both cases is a lack of public transit density. If you're in a dense area with a ton of pedestrians, the speed should be low enough that you CAN react, and there should be transit options that lower the number of car trips. In less dense areas, where automobile speeds are higher, auto…

I live in SF. We just had an accident the other day that indisputably can be pinned on jaywalking--late at night, cross where there was an actual fence, and the car hadn't been speeding. In fact, the limit is 25 there. Jaywalking figures prominently in pedestrian deaths in this city, and it's not simply because of speeding as there simply aren't that many streets where you can go that fast, and in fact in some of the…

> late at night, cross where there was an actual fence, and the car hadn't been speeding. In fact, the limit is 25 there

How far away was the legal crosswalk they could have used?

Post reply on HN