the problem with the law is, how does one decide if the pedestrian is really intending to cross, or if that's the spot they just happen to be hanging out at? This becomes especially problematic on a Saturday night, when pedestrians are, more often than not, just a little buzzed, having a good time, saying goodbye to some friends who are about to take a turn to head home in a different direction ... with the last thing on their mind being that the street corner they are standing on happens to contain a crosswalk four inches away.
I'm supposed to stop for them and wait out their farewells?
Back to the crosswalks. Yes, most states have a law that gives a pedestrian already in a crosswalk the right of way, and that's as it should be.
However, California's law is that if a pedestrian is waiting to cross, motor traffic must halt to allow it. That's way different.
In other words, a pedestrian waiting on the sidewalk to enter a crosswalk is the same as a red light. That's the part of it that peeves me.
I grew up in NC and VA, have lived here, in WV and Oregon, and I never heard of any such law in any of those states.
It's true that California law requires drivers to stop for pedestrians waiting to cross. However, almost no one follows that law, so public agencies are constantly trying new and inventive ways to remind drivers of the law -- additional signing, overhead flashing beacons, lighted crosswalks, shorter crossing distances, and educational campaigns. So far, it's not having much effect. :pan:
Quote from: donutbandit on June 26, 2009, 11:59:14 PM
Back to the crosswalks. Yes, most states have a law that gives a pedestrian already in a crosswalk the right of way, and that's as it should be.
However, California's law is that if a pedestrian is waiting to cross, motor traffic must halt to allow it. That's way different.
In other words, a pedestrian waiting on the sidewalk to enter a crosswalk is the same as a red light. That's the part of it that peeves me.
I grew up in NC and VA, have lived here, in WV and Oregon, and I never heard of any such law in any of those states.
Uh, everyplace I know of has this law. Anyplace that doesn't have it should have it, although I don't know of any place that doesn't have it. It's a good law designed to keep pedestrians safe. Hey, guess what? You have to stop for school buses who have their red lights flashing in most areas too, even if the bus hasn't started unloading or loading yet. Hey, guess what else? You have to come to a full stop at a red light and remain stopped until the light turns green even though no traffic may be in sight. Why would you have a problem with such a practical law?
Quote from: agentsteel53 on June 26, 2009, 06:25:40 PM
the problem with the law is, how does one decide if the pedestrian is really intending to cross, or if that's the spot they just happen to be hanging out at? This becomes especially problematic on a Saturday night, when pedestrians are, more often than not, just a little buzzed, having a good time, saying goodbye to some friends who are about to take a turn to head home in a different direction ... with the last thing on their mind being that the street corner they are standing on happens to contain a crosswalk four inches away.
I'm supposed to stop for them and wait out their farewells?
No, you're supposed to run the bastards down for being "buzzed" :pan:! How dare they inconvenience you by making you have to stop. Seriously, they usually put these crosswalks in areas where there is likely to be many people desiring to cross a rather busy street. Without such a crosswalk and w/o such a law people would be tempted to take unnecessary chances to get across the street, particularly if they're buzzed!
why should I stop when they are just hanging out on a street corner, talking to their friends? they have their business, and I have mine.
school buses that come out of nowhere and turn their red lights on are not exactly the solution either. I once was crossing a boulevard intersection (about 6 lanes wide) on a green when a school bus turned its lights to red. Of course I finished crossing - why should I stop in the middle of an intersection?
traffic laws should not be absolutes. People should not be expected to drop to their knees and surrender when the light turns an unfavorable color. That is why we have yellow lights, so that people have the ability to respond in a timely manner that preserves traffic flow.
What crosswalks? We have too many jaywalkers here in the Detroit area.
In California, just the act of a pedestrian standing by a crosswalk means that all traffic must come to a halt, even though the pedestrian has not even entered the crosswalk?
School busses flash yellow lights before red. Red lights are preceeded by yellow.
In California, a pedestrian walking up to a crosswalk to cross flashes an immediate red to which traffic must stop. No yellow, no warning. They can step in front of traffic, get hit, and win the lawsuit. Tell me what other state has this law. I want to know.
People in my area of the city do not know what a crosswalk is, unfortunately. We were coming home one night on FL 436, and there was a guy who got hit, laying in the middle of the road with some people who stopped; it was a hit and run. Now, if he had just walked a few more feet up to the traffic light, he would still be here with us today. My favorite is the parents who jaywalk with their children. That should be child endangerment and grounds for a citation or more; it's not right to teach your children to play Frogger unless it's on an Atari. But, I guess in their home country, it's commonplace to do this activity.
Here in the UK it is mandatory for traffic to stop if a pedestrian is waiting to cross at a crosswalk.
Yeah, in the Netherlands too, and I guess most of Europe. They're called "Zebra crossings" over here. :nod:
Quote from: agentsteel53 on June 27, 2009, 02:02:54 AM
school buses that come out of nowhere and turn their red lights on are not exactly the solution either. I once was crossing a boulevard intersection (about 6 lanes wide) on a green when a school bus turned its lights to red. Of course I finished crossing - why should I stop in the middle of an intersection?
traffic laws should not be absolutes. People should not be expected to drop to their knees and surrender when the light turns an unfavorable color. That is why we have yellow lights, so that people have the ability to respond in a timely manner that preserves traffic flow.
Remind me to steer clear of California. You and/or donutbandit may be out driving! :sombrero: I don't what the law says in California, but in most states you're not required to stop for a school bus on the other side of a median.
Quote from: donutbandit on June 27, 2009, 03:08:42 AM
In California, just the act of a pedestrian standing by a crosswalk means that all traffic must come to a halt, even though the pedestrian has not even entered the crosswalk?
School busses flash yellow lights before red. Red lights are preceeded by yellow.
In California, a pedestrian walking up to a crosswalk to cross flashes an immediate red to which traffic must stop. No yellow, no warning. They can step in front of traffic, get hit, and win the lawsuit. Tell me what other state has this law. I want to know.
Every state I know of has this law. Your crosswalks are well marked, are they not? You see a marked crosswalk with people nearby, you slow down and prepare to yield. If you see someone waiting to cross, you stop and wave them through. No reasonable person is going to step in front of moving traffic hoping to get hit so (s)he can win a lawsuit. Likewise, no reasonable person is going to fail to yield to pedestrians in or at the crosswalk. Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be a lot of reasonable people in California. :pan: And your analogies are wrong. A person walking up to the crosswalk is the yellow light. Don't be in such a hurry and don't be so inconsiderate of other people, not to mention the laws.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on June 27, 2009, 02:00:11 AM
why should I stop when they are just hanging out on a street corner, talking to their friends? they have their business, and I have mine.
Why should they not throw rocks at your car? For all they know you may be a terrorist or, worse yet, a politician! They have their business and you have yours. Seriously man, I don't how the state of California allows you to drive with such an attitude towards others.
Quote from: donutbandit on June 26, 2009, 11:59:14 PM
Back to the crosswalks. Yes, most states have a law that gives a pedestrian already in a crosswalk the right of way, and that's as it should be.
However, California's law is that if a pedestrian is waiting to cross, motor traffic must halt to allow it. That's way different.
In other words, a pedestrian waiting on the sidewalk to enter a crosswalk is the same as a red light. That's the part of it that peeves me.
Once again, it's not way different. Every state either has this law or should have it if they don't. Why would this peeve you? What are pedestrians supposed to do, walk out and hope and pray that all the traffic stops? That's why you're required to stop for someone waiting to cross-so that the pedestrians can cross safely w/o having to worry about whether traffic is going to stop or not. But I guess it's more important for you to get to where you're going as quickly as you can than to be concerned about the safety of others.
I would imagine then that you're not too crazy about having to stop for emergency vehicles who have their lights flashing and sirens sounding, even if you're on the other side of the road, right?
Quote from: donutbandit on June 26, 2009, 10:08:06 AM
My pet peeve is the stupid California pedestrian crosswalk law. If a pedestrian is standing at the entrance to a crosswalk, I have to bring my 3,000 pound vehicle to a screeching halt to allow them to cross. It's idiotic.
Where I work, there is a crosswalk across a very busy 4 lane street. In the 3 years I have been there, I have seen 2 peds hit and 3 rear end collisions where unattentive drivers plowed into the back of vehicles stopped for that crosswalk.
When I cross that street, I wait for a break, and jaywalk. I'm not going to hang myself out to dry in that crosswalk. What if I'm crossing in front of someone who's stopped and that vehicle gets rearended? What's going to happen to me then?
Good thinking! Cross the street illegally where the road isn't marked and no one is prepared to stop rather than cross the street legally in a marked area where drivers should be prepared to stop.
Uh, how many times have you been hit and landed on your head? :spin:
you know, a cop is going to cite a driver rather than a jaywalker so the driver is screwed either way :eyebrow:
IMHO, it really bugs me that pedestrians think the car is going to stop, so they enter the crosswalk while the cars are still coming :banghead:
Ian
honestly, when I'm pedestrianing, I just wait my turn in the cycle. Then, I expect the cars to stop! Until then, I expect them to go go go and not assume they are filled with politicians.
Now if you don't stop when your light is red ... then I may very well throw a rock at you! To date, one of the funniest things I've ever seen is when a car ran a red and nearly hit a pedestrian. It was a convertible. She had a coffee...
If I'm waiting to cross, I enter the crosswalk just enough to see oncoming traffic. If I'm driving, I stop if the person is crossing on my half, or I may just be nice and let them cross. If traffic is stopped on the other side of the crosswalk, I stop early and let the person cross.
Quote from: Terry Shea on June 27, 2009, 08:44:34 AM
I don't what the law says in California, but in most states you're not required to stop for a school bus on the other side of a median.
In New York, you have to stop for a bus on the opposite side of a divided highway. I've never had that happen yet, though.
[originally posted by Duke87]
...the problem is it's not always obvious that someone's looking to cross the street. They could just be standing there waiting for a bus, for their friend to show up, etc. They could only be looking to get into their car which is parked right there as opposed to actually crossing.
Besides, I'd argue that that law, if enforced and followed, might actually decrease overall safety. Because it gives drivers that much more to worry about. It's obvious that I'm going to stop for someone in the street because I can't just run them over. And they're directly in my line of vision. But, as I'm driving, I tend not to be focusing on the sidewalk too much. If I have to specifically check to make sure there's no one on the sidewalk waiting to cross, that means taking my eyes off the road to do it. Giving drivers a reason to take their eyes off the road is never a good thing.
Not to mention the absolute mess it would make of traffic to have drivers stopping all the time when if the pedestrian just waits for an opening, traffic can continue to flow much more smoothly.
And think about something else here: the car has a lot more mass and can't maneuver or stop as easily. So, really, making drivers stop and wait for there to be no pedestrians coming at a crosswalk is like making trains stop and wait for there to be no cars coming at a railroad crossing. It's just bassackwards. It doesn't work that way, it's simply not practical.
Anyone who thinks that cars shouldn't have to stop for pedestrians waiting hasn't seen the entrance of Brighton High School on Winton Road. It's nearly impossible to cross the entrance of the parking lot at the start and end of the day. There is no traffic light for the entrance of a school where about half of the students are driven to school (either by themselves or their parents) on a major county road that should have four lanes but only has two (due to local opposition). Most of the students/parents and sometimes even teachers just blaze on through (even though there is a stop line and marked crosswalk). Most people go around via the back of the parking lot just to avoid it. Very few use the crosswalk, and those that do must risk getting hit to avoid a 20 minute wait for the lot to clear. Additionally, there is no way to get to the other side of the road; the nearest traffic light to the south (where most people need to go at this time) is five minutes away (walking).
Quote from: AlpsROADS on June 27, 2009, 02:02:04 PM
[originally posted by Duke87]
...the problem is it's not always obvious that someone's looking to cross the street. They could just be standing there waiting for a bus, for their friend to show up, etc. They could only be looking to get into their car which is parked right there as opposed to actually crossing.
Besides, I'd argue that that law, if enforced and followed, might actually decrease overall safety. Because it gives drivers that much more to worry about. It's obvious that I'm going to stop for someone in the street because I can't just run them over. And they're directly in my line of vision. But, as I'm driving, I tend not to be focusing on the sidewalk too much. If I have to specifically check to make sure there's no one on the sidewalk waiting to cross, that means taking my eyes off the road to do it. Giving drivers a reason to take their eyes off the road is never a good thing.
Not to mention the absolute mess it would make of traffic to have drivers stopping all the time when if the pedestrian just waits for an opening, traffic can continue to flow much more smoothly.
And think about something else here: the car has a lot more mass and can't maneuver or stop as easily. So, really, making drivers stop and wait for there to be no pedestrians coming at a crosswalk is like making trains stop and wait for there to be no cars coming at a railroad crossing. It's just bassackwards. It doesn't work that way, it's simply not practical.
Well if there is a bus stop and a crosswalk in the same location than that indeed is bad planning, if for no other reason the stopped bus may be blocking a drivers view of oncoming pedestrians. I haven't witnessed such a setup around here, although many of the bus stops are right in front of an intersection which creates a host of other problems, especially if you have to turn right.
But putting that aside, every crosswalk I've seen is well marked and it should be obvious that anyone approaching the crosswalk may want to cross. Why would you not slow down and be prepared to stop when approaching such a situation. And it shouldn't be such a big deal to slow down and/or stop anyway because these crosswalks are typically on downtown city streets with a speed limit of 25 MPH.
And please don't give me this tunnel vision bunk. If your peripheral vision is so poor that you can't see a pedestrian entering a crosswalk while you're driving then you shouldn't be on the road. You can't just stare straight ahead at the pavement in front of you. You have to look for changing traffic signals, check your rearview mirror every so often and be alert to the conditions around you.
Again, the flow of traffic shouldn't be much of a factor. We're talking about a downtown city street, not a rural freeway. Traffic is already likely to be slow and congested since there are traffic lights at nearly every block and maximum speed limits of 25 MPH.
And thank you for bringing up the train analogy. A railroad crossing is much like a crosswalk and may even have similar markings. I'm assuming you stop for trains approaching the crossing, do you not? Why would you not extend the same courtesy to pedestrians waiting to cross?
I don't really understand what you guys are talking about. All the crosswalks here (with the exception of some school zones ) have traffic lights. If not there is a stop sign there anyway. And ofcorse if there is someone in the street, jaywalking or not, you must yeild as always. Are you saying there are marked crosswalks in the middle of the road with no stop signs or traffic lights? And if someone is waiting there you must yeild?
Quote from: AZDude on June 27, 2009, 09:13:34 PM
I don't really understand what you guys are talking about. All the crosswalks here (with the exception of some school zones ) have traffic lights. If not there is a stop sign there anyway. And ofcorse if there is someone in the street, jaywalking or not, you must yeild as always. Are you saying there are marked crosswalks in the middle of the road with no stop signs or traffic lights? And if someone is waiting there you must yeild?
Yes. They're common in many downtown areas, usually in the middle of a long city block. The ones around here don't have stop signs per se but have signage alerting drivers to the crosswalk and informing the drivers to stop for pedestrians waiting to cross.
QuoteGood thinking! Cross the street illegally where the road isn't marked and no one is prepared to stop rather than cross the street legally in a marked area where drivers should be prepared to stop.
And many times aren't.
No, I'm smart enough to know how to cross the street the way my parents taught me. You wait until nothing is coming, then you cross. Just like cars waiting to pull out from a sidestreet wait until nothing is coming before they pull out. Is this rocket science or something?
How about we pass a law that if motorists on a thoroughfare see a car pull up on a side street that they all have to come to a halt to let it out? It's the same damned thing. No difference at all.
Hmm.....maybe if pedestrians walked faster in the crosswalks, most of us would be a bit happier. :)
Quote from: AZDude on June 27, 2009, 09:13:34 PM
Are you saying there are marked crosswalks in the middle of the road with no stop signs or traffic lights? And if someone is waiting there you must yeild?
That's how it works in Europe.
Credibility is what counts. If there is a crosswalk with people often passing, motorists will probably stop most of the times. If there are many of them which are hardly used, motorists tend not to stop if someone wants to cross. It becomes more complicated when there are crosswalks at roundabouts. You not only have to yield to traffic on the roundabout, but also for pedestrians (if a marked crosswalk is painted).
They must have this sign:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwiki.autosnelwegen.nl%2Fimages%2Fthumb%2FNederlands_verkeersbord_L2.svg%2F180px-Nederlands_verkeersbord_L2.svg.png&hash=5323aa3235732c95b7763b21313b6f07f92c9fb6)
Quote from: donutbandit on June 28, 2009, 01:08:38 AM
QuoteGood thinking! Cross the street illegally where the road isn't marked and no one is prepared to stop rather than cross the street legally in a marked area where drivers should be prepared to stop.
And many times aren't.
No, I'm smart enough to know how to cross the street the way my parents taught me. You wait until nothing is coming, then you cross. Just like cars waiting to pull out from a sidestreet wait until nothing is coming before they pull out. Is this rocket science or something?
How about we pass a law that if motorists on a thoroughfare see a car pull up on a side street that they all have to come to a halt to let it out? It's the same damned thing. No difference at all.
Just a couple of problems here. On a busy city street people may be waiting all day to cross if traffic doesn't stop. Maybe you are able-bodied and can cross wherever you like, but not everyone can. These crosswalks are designed with the elderly and the handicapped in mind. Let's add children and those who are just plain slow afoot into the mix. You want them to have to wait until they think traffic is clear and then have to "race" traffic across a busy street?
A car waiting to pull out is a different situation since a car can pull out and accelerate much faster than a human can. That being stated it can sometimes take a long time to pull out onto a busy street which is why some considerate people (probably nonexistent in California :-D ) will stop and wave you on in front of them in such a situation.
So why the selfish, inconsiderate attitude towards others?
Quote from: deanej on June 27, 2009, 02:41:16 PM
Anyone who thinks that cars shouldn't have to stop for pedestrians waiting hasn't seen the entrance of Brighton High School on Winton Road. It's nearly impossible to cross the entrance of the parking lot at the start and end of the day. There is no traffic light for the entrance of a school where about half of the students are driven to school (either by themselves or their parents) on a major county road that should have four lanes but only has two (due to local opposition). Most of the students/parents and sometimes even teachers just blaze on through (even though there is a stop line and marked crosswalk). Most people go around via the back of the parking lot just to avoid it. Very few use the crosswalk, and those that do must risk getting hit to avoid a 20 minute wait for the lot to clear. Additionally, there is no way to get to the other side of the road; the nearest traffic light to the south (where most people need to go at this time) is five minutes away (walking).
Few questions then:
Why no crossing guard?
Why no stop sign?
Why no police presence?
Why is this setup still acceptable if it is so chaotic and dangerous?
So, either it's blown out of proportion, or the school, town, parents, students, teachers, etc completely lacking urge to do anything about it.
Sykotyk
Wow, I never knew of such a thing. It seems really dangerous to have a crosswalk like that. IMO, it's an accident waiting to happen. Plus there needs to be a traffic signal (that is only activated with a push of a button from a ped) to stop traffic so they can cross safely.
Quote from: Sykotyk on June 28, 2009, 01:00:47 PM
Few questions then:
Why no crossing guard?
There are, at the intersections with signals further north. People heading north of the school have no problem, only south.
QuoteWhy no stop sign?
In New York, a stop line has the same force of law as a stop sign, but many people ignore them (incidentally, the marked crosswalk is new, but the stop line was always there with an unmarked crosswalk).
QuoteWhy no police presence?
One of the nearby side streets has a restricted left turn during certain hours and the police do love to use the area to get tickets. Hedge rows would make it difficult to enforce the lot (and are partly responsible for drivers blocking the crosswalk to begin with), but I have never, ever seen police in NY enforcing traffic laws in/around parking lots. I think NY considers parking lots outside of traffic law.
QuoteWhy is this setup still acceptable if it is so chaotic and dangerous?
So, either it's blown out of proportion, or the school, town, parents, students, teachers, etc completely lacking urge to do anything about it.
Sykotyk
Actually, the students moving to/from the south are all concentrated in a certain age group (mostly the graduating class +/- a year or two), so it has only been an issue recently. Most are very observant and only cross when traffic in the lot is stopped/moving slowly and when there is a gap on the Winton Road traffic (in that case). It's only an issue from 7:20-7:40 AM and 2:30-2:50 PM, so in "we desperately need more money New York" it would be a low priority (the town can't even be bothered to pick up leaf piles in the fall on time or to fix the potholes in my neighborhood). The situation is compounded by the fact that the high school and middle school are right next to each other, so there is a ped-only traffic light between the two (north of the high school), but unless you live in the subdivision by the street near it (or go to the middle school, which is between this light and Elmwood Ave) there is no convienent way to cross Winton Rd.
Here's the site on bing maps: http://www.bing.com/maps/default.aspx?v=2&FORM=LMLTCC&cp=r5mdjh8j2d93&style=b&lvl=1&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&phx=0&phy=0&phscl=1&scene=9413578&encType=1 (http://www.bing.com/maps/default.aspx?v=2&FORM=LMLTCC&cp=r5mdjh8j2d93&style=b&lvl=1&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&phx=0&phy=0&phscl=1&scene=9413578&encType=1)
The street near the ped-only signal is Greenwich Ln. Most people leave the building at the southwest corner. The trees do more to restrict visibility than is shown in the birds-eye view, as well as a fragment of a hedge row that once went from the parking lot entrance to the bus loop (barely visible; a lot of this row was taken out for snowplow access).
Quote from: donutbandit on June 27, 2009, 03:08:42 AM
In California, just the act of a pedestrian standing by a crosswalk means that all traffic must come to a halt, even though the pedestrian has not even entered the crosswalk?
School busses flash yellow lights before red. Red lights are preceeded by yellow.
In California, a pedestrian walking up to a crosswalk to cross flashes an immediate red to which traffic must stop. No yellow, no warning. They can step in front of traffic, get hit, and win the lawsuit. Tell me what other state has this law. I want to know.
Oregon does. And really, it shouldn't be a law; it should be common sense. Pedestrians have the right-of-way, but they're not going to win against a 1.5 ton brick of metal and plastic. Hence why the law exists, because drivers seem to focus on everything but what they need to be paying attention to as a driver.
Several times, while waiting to cross US 26 in SE Portland, I have to actually hold out my hand in a 'Stop' gesture just to get traffic to notice that I'm intending to cross, at a crosswalk near a high school, no less. Other times, drivers notice and stop, and yes, I've seen inattentive drivers nearly rear end the courteous drivers.
QuotePedestrians have the right-of-way, but they're not going to win against a 1.5 ton brick of metal and plastic. Hence why the law exists, because drivers seem to focus on everything but what they need to be paying attention to as a driver.
Yes, I'm paying attention to 4 lanes of traffic, not complicated by sidestreets or by peds waiting to cross.
I'm reminded of an incident many years ago. I'm trying to cross a 4 lane street into a gas station. I finally get a break and cross, and I'm accosted by a bicycle rider I did not see.
He threatens me, and my reply is "why don't you put on something that people might see? Like orange socks or a flag pole?"
Idiot reasoning. I'm looking at 4 lanes of traffic, and I'm supposed to see him.
The same reasoning that I'm supposed to see a ped who walks up to a crosswalk, and pulls out the red on me on a 4 lane street.
I'm supposed to be paying attention to idiot peds who walk up and request admission when I''m paying attention to 4 lanes of traffic that demands my attention.
Stupid, anal reasoning.
I did most of my pedestrianing around Springfield, MO back in 07-08. I would generally simply wait along the sidewalk for traffic to clear before attempting to cross. Occasionally traffic would stop to let me out on John Q Hammons Parkway, which I always interpreted as a nice but strictly optional gesture; I would always wave "thanks" to the driver and hurry across so as to minimize their delay. If the traffic is so thick that you can't cross the street without forcing traffic to stop, you should really consider finding some way of crossing at a light or something.
I think there are two cultures conflicting in this thread. In eastern cities the culture is more amenable to peds, and out west you have more of a car culture. It follows from the way cities are designed (eastern cities being more compact and western cities being more spread out and car-oriented).
Quote from: donutbandit on June 29, 2009, 01:38:17 AM
QuotePedestrians have the right-of-way, but they're not going to win against a 1.5 ton brick of metal and plastic. Hence why the law exists, because drivers seem to focus on everything but what they need to be paying attention to as a driver.
Yes, I'm paying attention to 4 lanes of traffic, not complicated by sidestreets or by peds waiting to cross.
I'm reminded of an incident many years ago. I'm trying to cross a 4 lane street into a gas station. I finally get a break and cross, and I'm accosted by a bicycle rider I did not see.
He threatens me, and my reply is "why don't you put on something that people might see? Like orange socks or a flag pole?"
Idiot reasoning. I'm looking at 4 lanes of traffic, and I'm supposed to see him.
The same reasoning that I'm supposed to see a ped who walks up to a crosswalk, and pulls out the red on me on a 4 lane street.
I'm supposed to be paying attention to idiot peds who walk up and request admission when I''m paying attention to 4 lanes of traffic that demands my attention.
Stupid, anal reasoning.
As a driver, the opposing lanes of traffic are of less concern than the ones I'm in. Ergo, I don't necessarily worry about four lanes of traffic, but two. That frees up my attention to see if there are pedestrians on my right that want to cross, and it doesn't take much to note that opposing traffic has stopped for a pedestrian.
Quote from: Terry Shea on June 28, 2009, 09:41:12 AMJust a couple of problems here. On a busy city street people may be waiting all day to cross if traffic doesn't stop. Maybe you are able-bodied and can cross wherever you like, but not everyone can. These crosswalks are designed with the elderly and the handicapped in mind. Let's add children and those who are just plain slow afoot into the mix. You want them to have to wait until they think traffic is clear and then have to "race" traffic across a busy street?
A car waiting to pull out is a different situation since a car can pull out and accelerate much faster than a human can. That being stated it can sometimes take a long time to pull out onto a busy street which is why some considerate people (probably nonexistent in California :-D ) will stop and wave you on in front of them in such a situation.
So why the selfish, inconsiderate attitude towards others?
are you advocating socialism? ;) I have the choice to be courteous and stop for a pedestrian, but when it is codified into law, and I am forced to be courteous (at the risk of disrupting traffic patterns, and the integrity of my rear bumper) then I call shenanigans!
Quote from: agentsteel53 on June 29, 2009, 01:36:05 PM
are you advocating socialism? ;) I have the choice to be courteous and stop for a pedestrian, but when it is codified into law, and I am forced to be courteous (at the risk of disrupting traffic patterns, and the integrity of my rear bumper) then I call shenanigans!
Mmm, I'd rather be slowed down by traffic stopping to let someone cross than by drivers who drive too slow and slow everyone behind them down.
And, though it's no small comfort, if you get rear ended, it's their fault and bear all responsibility for rear ending you.
Quote from: donutbandit on June 29, 2009, 01:38:17 AM
QuotePedestrians have the right-of-way, but they're not going to win against a 1.5 ton brick of metal and plastic. Hence why the law exists, because drivers seem to focus on everything but what they need to be paying attention to as a driver.
Yes, I'm paying attention to 4 lanes of traffic, not complicated by sidestreets or by peds waiting to cross.
I'm reminded of an incident many years ago. I'm trying to cross a 4 lane street into a gas station. I finally get a break and cross, and I'm accosted by a bicycle rider I did not see.
He threatens me, and my reply is "why don't you put on something that people might see? Like orange socks or a flag pole?"
Idiot reasoning. I'm looking at 4 lanes of traffic, and I'm supposed to see him.
The same reasoning that I'm supposed to see a ped who walks up to a crosswalk, and pulls out the red on me on a 4 lane street.
I'm supposed to be paying attention to idiot peds who walk up and request admission when I''m paying attention to 4 lanes of traffic that demands my attention.
Stupid, anal reasoning.
I alluded to this earlier, but how exactly did you ever get a drivers license in the first place and/or how have you been able to maintain your drivers license with such reportedly (by you none the less) poor driving skills and such a terrible attitude and lack of concern towards other people you are supposed to be sharing the road with? Watching traffic and being alert for pedestrians, especially at well marked crosswalks, should not be a difficult task at all. If that's too much to handle then perhaps you shouldn't be driving.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on June 29, 2009, 01:36:05 PM
Quote from: Terry Shea on June 28, 2009, 09:41:12 AMJust a couple of problems here. On a busy city street people may be waiting all day to cross if traffic doesn't stop. Maybe you are able-bodied and can cross wherever you like, but not everyone can. These crosswalks are designed with the elderly and the handicapped in mind. Let's add children and those who are just plain slow afoot into the mix. You want them to have to wait until they think traffic is clear and then have to "race" traffic across a busy street?
A car waiting to pull out is a different situation since a car can pull out and accelerate much faster than a human can. That being stated it can sometimes take a long time to pull out onto a busy street which is why some considerate people (probably nonexistent in California :-D ) will stop and wave you on in front of them in such a situation.
So why the selfish, inconsiderate attitude towards others?
are you advocating socialism? ;) I have the choice to be courteous and stop for a pedestrian, but when it is codified into law, and I am forced to be courteous (at the risk of disrupting traffic patterns, and the integrity of my rear bumper) then I call shenanigans!
Why would the person behind you not stop? Do they ram your rear end at red lights and stop signs in California too? Or should stopping for red lights and stop signs be optional and just a "courtesy" to other drivers?
Remind me to never drive or cross the street in California. Too many selfish/inconsiderate people who think they're above the law and don't care about anyone but themselves. :sombrero:
Quote from: Bickendan on June 29, 2009, 03:56:21 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on June 29, 2009, 01:36:05 PM
are you advocating socialism? ;) I have the choice to be courteous and stop for a pedestrian, but when it is codified into law, and I am forced to be courteous (at the risk of disrupting traffic patterns, and the integrity of my rear bumper) then I call shenanigans!
Mmm, I'd rather be slowed down by traffic stopping to let someone cross than by drivers who drive too slow and slow everyone behind them down.
And, though it's no small comfort, if you get rear ended, it's their fault and bear all responsibility for rear ending you.
I think these guys have been playing too much Grand Theft Auto and think they're supposed to drive the same way in real life.
:-D
Stop signs are placed, for visibility, both eight feet in the air and away from parked cars. Furthermore, they are unambiguous in their intent.
I will stop for pedestrians if it is sensible to do so, but I'm not going to slam on the brakes because someone made a move that looked like they possibly might be wanting to intend to start to plan to potentially think about crossing the street!
Quote from: Terry Shea on June 29, 2009, 09:15:28 PM
Watching traffic and being alert for pedestrians, especially at well marked crosswalks, should not be a difficult task at all.
Pedestrians should also watch out for me. If I am physically incapable of stopping in time, then they should not step into the crosswalk. If I can come to a reasonable stop, I will.
If the only way I can stop is to react with Usain Bolt reflexes, slam on the brakes, and just barely skid to a stop halfway into the crosswalk, so that they can watch from six feet to the side as the car behind me plows into my rear end... nah.
Let
them stay on the curb for another four seconds and watch for
me, as opposed to me risking an accident for their convenience.
Quote from: Bickendan on June 29, 2009, 03:56:21 PM
And, though it's no small comfort, if you get rear ended, it's their fault and bear all responsibility for rear ending you.
the "you must never, ever, ever, under pain of citation, rear end anyone, ever" law is equally as stupid as the "you must never, ever, ever, under pain of citation, drive through a pedestrian crossing when there are any pedestrians hinting at the potential desire to cross" law that we've been bickering over for the last three days!
Both are examples of codification over common sense.
oh, and ...
Quote from: Terry Shea on June 29, 2009, 09:22:53 PMshould stopping for red lights and stop signs be optional and just a "courtesy" to other drivers?
ask your average bicyclist!
Quote from: agentsteel53 on June 29, 2009, 09:32:51 PM
Quote from: Terry Shea on June 29, 2009, 09:15:28 PM
Watching traffic and being alert for pedestrians, especially at well marked crosswalks, should not be a difficult task at all.
Pedestrians should also watch out for me. If I am physically incapable of stopping in time, then they should not step into the crosswalk. If I can come to a reasonable stop, I will.
This, actually, is the thesis.
Quote from: Terry Shea on June 29, 2009, 09:15:28 PM
I alluded to this earlier, but how exactly did you ever get a drivers license in the first place and/or how have you been able to maintain your drivers license with such reportedly (by you none the less) poor driving skills and such a terrible attitude and lack of concern towards other people you are supposed to be sharing the road with? Watching traffic and being alert for pedestrians, especially at well marked crosswalks, should not be a difficult task at all. If that's too much to handle then perhaps you shouldn't be driving.
Please do feel free to disagree with the opinions of other posters here, but avoid making attacks upon them such as this. Thank you.
Quote from: Scott5114 on June 30, 2009, 03:32:05 AM
Quote from: Terry Shea on June 29, 2009, 09:15:28 PM
I alluded to this earlier, but how exactly did you ever get a drivers license in the first place and/or how have you been able to maintain your drivers license with such reportedly (by you none the less) poor driving skills and such a terrible attitude and lack of concern towards other people you are supposed to be sharing the road with? Watching traffic and being alert for pedestrians, especially at well marked crosswalks, should not be a difficult task at all. If that's too much to handle then perhaps you shouldn't be driving.
Please do feel free to disagree with the opinions of other posters here, but avoid making attacks upon them such as this. Thank you.
That wasn't an attack. Please reread his posts. He's the one stating that he has trouble stopping in time for pedestrians, seeing pedestrians and refers to pedestrians as "idiots" and such. I think I showed remarkable restraint in my response and it was simply a suggestion, not an attack by any means. On the other hand, referring to pedestrians as "idiots" may well be an attack.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on June 29, 2009, 09:27:28 PM
Stop signs are placed, for visibility, both eight feet in the air and away from parked cars. Furthermore, they are unambiguous in their intent.
I will stop for pedestrians if it is sensible to do so, but I'm not going to slam on the brakes because someone made a move that looked like they possibly might be wanting to intend to start to plan to potentially think about crossing the street!
So your intent is ambiguous. It's always sensible to stop for pedestrians and it also happens to be the law.
QuoteIt's always sensible to stop for pedestrians
no, no it is not. If I am almost up to the crosswalk and the pedestrian has not yet entered it, then I will proceed to go, because it is physically impossible for me to stop in time.
Pedestrians are idiots! Believe me, I am both on a regular basis!
Drivers and pedestrians can be idiotic.
If you're a pedestrian, give the driver enough time and distance to safely give way to you; don't just step off of the curb into that driver's lane without following the aforementioned steps.
If you're a driver, slow down around crosswalks, as someone may step out in front of you. If you hit them in the crosswalk, you'll be the ass. There's no two ways about it.
Be well,
Bryant
Quote from: agentsteel53 on June 30, 2009, 07:38:41 PM
QuoteIt's always sensible to stop for pedestrians
no, no it is not. If I am almost up to the crosswalk and the pedestrian has not yet entered it, then I will proceed to go, because it is physically impossible for me to stop in time.
I think we're splitting hairs here. :D
it sure is! which is why I think it should be left as judgement, not codified law :)
May I enter this without fear of moderation? Terry Shea is an idiot. He has not only completely misread everything I've posted in this thread, but continued to argue based on his total clueless takes on what I said (I said peds are idiots?) I said that peds who step into crosswalks believing that people who are driving 3,500 pound autos will always see them, respect them, and be able to stop are idiots. And that laws that mandates this are a freaking farce. I don't trust laws to protect me. I trust my instincts.
QuoteIf you're a driver, slow down around crosswalks, as someone may step out in front of you. If you hit them in the crosswalk, you'll be the ass. There's no two ways about it.
California law specifically prohibits this. A pedestrian may not step in front of a moving vehicle and claim right of way. Try to prove if you hit one. A lot of them think they have this right. Someone taught them wrongly.
Here's another misconception they have. I can come motoring down the freeway onramp at 35, and everybody has to get out of my way. Wrong. You are expected to mergwe into traffic at highway speed, and there is no law that anyone has to move over for you.
A lot of people do it out of courtesy, but I stopped doing it long ago, the reason being that the vehicle I allowed out quickly matched my speed, and hung me out in the fast lane. Let them figure out how to get on the freeway. It's a basic driving skill, isn't it?
Quote from: donutbandit on July 03, 2009, 01:54:12 AM
May I enter this without fear of moderation? Terry Shea is an idiot.
No, that is not acceptable.
Quote from: donutbandit on July 03, 2009, 01:54:12 AM
May I enter this without fear of moderation? Terry Shea is an idiot. He has not only completely misread everything I've posted in this thread, but continued to argue based on his total clueless takes on what I said (I said peds are idiots?) I said that peds who step into crosswalks believing that people who are driving 3,500 pound autos will always see them, respect them, and be able to stop are idiots. And that laws that mandates this are a freaking farce. I don't trust laws to protect me. I trust my instincts.
Quote from: donutbandit on June 29, 2009, 01:38:17 AM
Yes, I'm paying attention to 4 lanes of traffic, not complicated by sidestreets or by peds waiting to cross.
I'm reminded of an incident many years ago. I'm trying to cross a 4 lane street into a gas station. I finally get a break and cross, and I'm accosted by a bicycle rider I did not see.
He threatens me, and my reply is "why don't you put on something that people might see? Like orange socks or a flag pole?"
Idiot reasoning. I'm looking at 4 lanes of traffic, and I'm supposed to see him.
The same reasoning that I'm supposed to see a ped who walks up to a crosswalk, and pulls out the red on me on a 4 lane street.
I'm supposed to be paying attention to idiot peds who walk up and request admission when I''m paying attention to 4 lanes of traffic that demands my attention.
Stupid, anal reasoning.
Okay, obviously this topic is just going to further degrade into people sniping at each other, so I'm locking it.
For future reference, it's okay to say stuff like "idiot pedestrians" and "idiot drivers" since it's quite well understood (or should be) that nobody present is being insulted....but you can't call other people here names no matter how much you disagree with them. Nothing good comes of it. Attack the opinion, not the person.