321–330 of 370 posts
I kind of wonder now whether that was the most broken law in history.
Nah it's definitely speeding.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Laws that allow cyclists to treat stop signs and red lights as yield signs are called "Idaho stop" laws and are debated fiercely.
Unfortunately, New York seems to be odd in this respect. Even at lightly used stop lights, such as the lights inside of Central Park when most vehicles can’t use the roads, the police have been known to ticket cyclists. Then again, I’ve also seen the police ticket cyclists for speeding in the park. Numerous Reddit threads for both topics.
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…
Most likely because jaywalking was an insult before a legal word.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, crossing at intersections is much more complex, with traffic typically coming from many more directions than away from intersections.
And yet jaywalking accounts for the majority of pedestrian deaths, despite being a fraction of the number of crossings. Believe it or not, most drivers do look out for pedestrians. Some better than others, but another set of eyeballs is invaluable, especially from the actual car that risks hitting you. Unfortunately, drivers do not expect people to cross in the middle of the street. And they never will, generally spe…
This is simply false.
While most pedestrian deaths happen on open roadways (with a 3:1 ratio), that isn't the same thing as jay walking. Indeed, most of these fatalities involve people on the side of the road, usually in the dark.
Most pedestrian deaths happen at night. This is when it is easiest to see cars coming and avoid getting hit when crossing, (atleast if the cars have their lights on, which is frequently not the case).
Most pedestrian deaths happen in areas with no sidewalk. If there's no sidewalk, then there isn't going to be a safe option to cross.
https://www.ghsa.org/resources/news-releases/GHSA/Pedestrian...
Please don't make up and share facts because they support your worldview.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, this is a misunderstanding of what right of way means. Drivers are never allowed to intentionally cause accidents, either with other cars or with pedestrians. If you have right of way in an intersection but a car is nevertheless not yielding to you, you are not allowed to plow into them if you can reasonably avoid it. That doesn't mean that you don't actually have right of way, or that you need to stop at every i…
We're saying the same thing, so "misunderstanding" is a bit of a strong claim. > At a crosswalk, drivers will slow down if they see a pedestrian heading towards the crossing; they don't need to (and won't) at other places. They literally must. It's in the law I cited: https://law.justia.com/codes/new-york/vat/title-7/article-26... You can go to jail if you don't take due care to avoid hitting a pedestrian, or even an…
That law requires them to exercise due care if a pedestrian is already on the road. This doesn't mean in any way that they have to slow down if they think the pedestrian might cross the road, as long as they are not endangering them. Even if the pedestrian is already on the road but far away, say on the first lane while the driver is on the third lane, the driver doesn't need to slow down.
Conversely, when a pedestrian is on a crosswalk and thus has right of way, the car needs to slow down even if the pedestrian is relatively far on a different lane.
> You can go to jail if you don't take due care to avoid hitting a pedestrian, or even an animal.
Please explain how this is different from a car that is blocking your way. Would you not be liable for jail if you intentionally hit a car idling on your lane just because it wasn't allowed to be there?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And yet jaywalking accounts for the majority of pedestrian deaths, despite being a fraction of the number of crossings. Believe it or not, most drivers do look out for pedestrians. Some better than others, but another set of eyeballs is invaluable, especially from the actual car that risks hitting you. Unfortunately, drivers do not expect people to cross in the middle of the street. And they never will, generally spe…
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…
Most deaths happen on non-freeway arterial roads.
Most deaths do not note the presence of a sidewalk.
You talk about "alternative transit options" but the reality is that large parts of our cities have no sidewalks or crosswalks and it is killing people.
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…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most likely because jaywalking was an insult before a legal word.
Like 75% of these kinds of phrases in American English, without looking it up I'm going to assume there is a racist etymology behind it.
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…
>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. Generalize it more: "If anyone else has to go out of their way to alter their trajectory to avoid you you're doing it wrong." This applies to just about every road interaction between any two users regardless o…
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…
>like most New Yorkers, you walk several kilometers a day I don't think I can take this claim for granted.
On days where I work from home and never leave my 950 sqft apartment, 2000ish steps is trivial to reach.