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

Post by geggam » Tue, Dec 22, 2020, 2:08 AM UTC

mulmen wrote: post #162

pdonis wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If jaywalking was legal, the sacrifice is that we'd have to drive slower to watch for pedestrians. There is a middle ground: the law could say that, while you can't get a ticket just for crossing a street outside the marked crosswalks, if you do cross that way and get hit by a car, the presumption is that you were at fault--whereas, if you get hit by a car while you are in the marked crosswalks, the presumption is…

Who is at fault if I am jaywalking but get hit by a car that is speeding?

Post by thex10 » Tue, Dec 22, 2020, 2:11 AM UTC

agensaequivocum wrote: post #296

dragonwriter wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Indeed, more murders are committed in the US with hands, fists, and feet than rifles.

Post by howlgarnish » Tue, Dec 22, 2020, 2:25 AM UTC

hrktb wrote: post #324

twblalock wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think car-free cities are easily obtainable. I can't think of one that currently exists. Even cities with world-class mass transit, e.g. Tokyo and London, are full of cars, and taxis are still a better option for some trips -- even though there are also surface trains, subways, and buses to choose from. In those places, step 1 has already been solved: convince the population that mass transit is desirable and…

I don’t know for London, I wouldn’t describe Tokyo as full of cars. There are major axes to accross the city with constant traffic and most bigger blocks are accessible by car (even just for deliveries). But there are pretty large areas with no car entry, and small residential parts are often shared car/bike/pedestrian zones were cars are not privileged. I also think the goal shouldn’t be car-free, but to have clear…

Post by eeZah7Ux » Tue, Dec 22, 2020, 2:33 AM UTC

AtlasBarfed wrote: post #118

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…

1) I will be curious to see if the BEV revolution happens there will be a huge statistical change in cancer rates in the US. 3) as a cyclist who transitions from commuting by bike in the summer to car in the winter, it is astonishing how my psychology is impacted by driving in the two modes. I am so much more impatient and angry from driving. There is just a nasty psychological feedback cycle of the obvious pure pote…

Post by eeZah7Ux » Tue, Dec 22, 2020, 2:35 AM UTC

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?