U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Should there be a 3-ft law or similar for yielding to pedestrians?
Yes 8 42.11%
No 11 57.89%
Voters: 19. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-24-2014, 06:31 AM
 
Location: Where my bills arrive
8,111 posts, read 9,551,230 times
Reputation: 8026

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by memph View Post
Any examples of someone in a car dying as a result of being hit by a jaywalker?
Not as you wrote it, but to often accidents occur or people are injured because pedestrians/cyclists aren't following practicing safe procedures forcing cars to swerve dangerously leading to accidents.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-24-2014, 07:03 AM
 
Location: Where my bills arrive
8,111 posts, read 9,551,230 times
Reputation: 8026
Quote:
Originally Posted by hurricaneMan1992 View Post
All I'm saying is that if I'm in a crosswalk and you pass within inches of me and hardly slow down at all, you did not yield the right of way, and there should be no ambiguity regarding whether any hypothetical ticket holds up in court. When people do properly yield, they generally do not pass within 3 feet, so this mainly just reflects everyday common practice. And a concrete number is easier to educate the public than the vague notion that you should yield (and we all know how many drivers simply don't get the difference between yield and merge...)

I would not necessarily be opposed to cyclists getting tickets for riding the wrong way or not stopping for a red light. Also for riding at night without a light. These are dangerous situations that cops should be giving citations for.

But when it comes to strictly enforcing jaywalking when there are gaps in the traffic, ok, fine, but only if you also strictly enforce driving 33 in a 30 and coming to a complete stop behind the line before turning right on red even when nobody else is near the intersection. These are all pretty harmless things that are technically illegal. But would we really want to live in that kind of police state...???
No argument from me that a pedestrian in a cross walk has the right of way provided they have the walk light (if applicable) or at least look before stepping into the road, and that should be respected. People seem to respect this rule without issue but like everything it's not absolute. Often I see someone step off the curb without looking first, that can be a problem.

I am looking at Jaywalking beyond the urban definition, perhaps I used the wrong word. Driving to work through country roads I too frequently encounter joggers who are not running facing traffic, running abreast in twos/threes, cyclists riding the wrong way or riding abreast. Coming around the bend and encountering one of these scenarios cars have been forced to slam the breaks or swerve wide which isn't always an option. Locally we had a fatality were a jogger was killed by a car, the car was at fault but jogging on this road is a danger unto itself for both parties.

I don't advocate a police state but if we are talking penalties lets apply them to both sides because just as often the pedestrian/cyclist has acting in a dangerouse manner.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-24-2014, 08:26 AM
 
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, originally from SF Bay Area
29,748 posts, read 54,373,866 times
Reputation: 31030
Here in Washington state the law does require that you allow 3' when passing a bicycle. If that's not possible on a narrow road, you have to slow/stop and remain behind them until there is 3' available. For pedestrians, you can just hit them. No, not really. There is no such 3' law, but when a car hits a pedestrian it's always the car's fault.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-24-2014, 01:48 PM
 
1,127 posts, read 1,519,133 times
Reputation: 1524
I could only agree with it IF there is a minimum speed coupled with it. (Ex: Law does not apply when moving less than 10mph). You shouldn't be flying past pedestrians that close at speed.

On the other hand, the "slow crawl" to exit a parking lot or make a turn in a busy area NYC is basically required in order for traffic to function at all and at the walking speed it occurs at is fine.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-29-2014, 02:57 PM
 
2,553 posts, read 2,003,488 times
Reputation: 1348
Quote:
Originally Posted by VA Yankee View Post
Not as you wrote it, but to often accidents occur or people are injured because pedestrians/cyclists aren't following practicing safe procedures forcing cars to swerve dangerously leading to accidents.
Which suggests that the driver is driving too quickly for the conditions. If a driver cannot react in time to avoid most incidents, that driver is driving too quickly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-29-2014, 10:41 PM
 
Location: M I N N E S O T A
14,800 posts, read 17,703,198 times
Reputation: 9029
I agree with you op.

We should never use our cars to a pedestrian by purposely nearly hitting them when they are jaywalking, who cares if they are breaking the law... you shouldn't nearly kill a person because someone made a little mistake...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-30-2014, 12:12 AM
 
409 posts, read 388,635 times
Reputation: 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hemlock140 View Post
Here in Washington state the law does require that you allow 3' when passing a bicycle. If that's not possible on a narrow road, you have to slow/stop and remain behind them until there is 3' available. For pedestrians, you can just hit them. No, not really. There is no such 3' law, but when a car hits a pedestrian it's always the car's fault.
Watch this compilation of insurance scammers in action and you may change your tune....


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7c8uZf1KBqg

Last edited by impala096; 10-30-2014 at 12:22 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-30-2014, 10:36 AM
 
2,553 posts, read 2,003,488 times
Reputation: 1348
Quote:
Originally Posted by impala096 View Post
Watch this compilation of insurance scammers in action and you may change your tune....


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7c8uZf1KBqg
None of those people were "hit" by a car. That only shows two things: that we should all have dash cameras, and that any law can be abused by individuals intent on abusing it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-30-2014, 12:30 PM
 
Location: Where my bills arrive
8,111 posts, read 9,551,230 times
Reputation: 8026
Quote:
Originally Posted by darkeconomist View Post
Which suggests that the driver is driving too quickly for the conditions. If a driver cannot react in time to avoid most incidents, that driver is driving too quickly.
Your continued position comes across that the pedestrian is always right well I disagree. If a vehicle is traveling the speed limit of 35 and someone steps out in the road why should the driver be at fault? Depending on the distance and traffic there may not be adequate time/distance to safely stop or slamming the breaks may cause an accident; but the drivers at fault?

Rather than assuming excessive speed if a driver doesn't stop in time you should look at the actions of everyone involved.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-30-2014, 12:31 PM
 
409 posts, read 388,635 times
Reputation: 495
The guy at 3:35 wasn't "hit" by a vehicle? The video clearly shows that drivers aren't always at fault when a pedestrian gets hit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top