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.
Not sure if pedestrians getting more brazen compared to the past, it seems like NYers have been that way
forever. I've always seen pedestrians walking against red light and daring cars to hit them. It's like they
expecting the cars to yield to them no matter who's got the light, and they actually get upset if your car
stopped too close to them.
Now you just got more careless pedestrians and drivers due to the popularity of texting and smartphones.
A nightmare for both good drivers and pedestrians. Maybe the NYPD should start enforcing the jaywalking
law a little more. But then I don't want to get a ticket when no cars was in sight and you have to wait.
Notice that only DRIVERS need to qualify for the state to give them a liicense to drive. There is no need for a license to WALK.
So before you go to the trouble of buying a license to roll around in your 2 tons of steel and aluminum, and proving that you can see, understand instructions, etc., make sure you are willing to show appropriate care for those whom you are capable of turning to hamburger in an instant.
Society has given you a LICENSE...don't abuse it.
In most states pedestrians are given complete right of way ALWAYS in a crosswalk. As in ALWAYS. Some states give pedestrians the right of way ANYWHERE in the street.
New York is not so generous towards pedestrians so we walkers must take more diligence of those wanting to haul their tonnage around as fast as possible.
Remember: When a car and a person collide, ALL the damage is suffered by the person. So pedestrians SHOULD own the road, even if New York State is too backward to give it to them.
New Jersey is more pedestrian friendly:
So why does the NJ law also say this: PEDESTRIANS MUST obey pedestrian signals and use crosswalks at signalized intersections. Both carry a $54.00 fine for failure to observe the law.
(C.39:4-32 and 33)
And driver don't. The worst thing that could happen to a hit & run driver is a slap on the wrist.
That is not true at all, not by a long shot.
First of all leaving the scene of any accident is an offense, it goes higher if a person is badly injured and or killed. If there are mitigating circumstances such as driving under the influence, reckless driving, driving without a valid NYS license and so forth things escalate further still. Those are just the criminal charges, there can and often will be civil actions for damages to property, person or life. All this will *not* do your insurance rates any huge favors.
I agree with a lot that was stated here. I've also like to note, I've been seeing more drivers running the red light lately and times at fast speeds, long after the light turned red. A lot of people seem to be losing patience these last 2 years.
I agree with a lot that was stated here. I've also like to note, I've been seeing more drivers running the red light lately and times at fast speeds, long after the light turned red. A lot of people seem to be losing patience these last 2 years.
That and zooming down streets while holding/talking on cell phones if not looking down at them (texting/reading) as well.
Am wondering if this plays no small role in many trying to flee or the increase in "hit and run" accidents. If it can be proven you were driving while distracted at least the civil liability can be greater.
So why does the NJ law also say this: PEDESTRIANS MUST obey pedestrian signals and use crosswalks at signalized intersections. Both carry a $54.00 fine for failure to observe the law.
(C.39:4-32 and 33)
A. The driver of a vehicle must stop and stay stopped for a pedestrian crossing the roadway within any marked crosswalk
Your quote is for the looser term signalized intersection. They are different. I chose my words carefully. Most intersections in major cities have pedestrian crosswalks, where pedestrians have full right of way in NJ unless a cop orders them otherwise: "Don't cross or I'll Taser you."
New York paints pedestrian crossings as make work jobs: they have no meaning.
Your quote is for the looser term signalized intersection. They are different. I chose my words carefully. Most intersections in major cities have pedestrian crosswalks, where pedestrians have full right of way in NJ unless a cop orders them otherwise: "Don't cross or I'll Taser you."
New York paints pedestrian crossings as make work jobs: they have no meaning.
OK. But my whole thread is about pedestrians crossing when they don't have the light. So I guess you are talking about crosswalks where there are no lights and just simply painted lines?
I don't really have the patience to read the legal and specific terms carefully. All I know is I was driving over the weekend and pedestrians repeatedly crossed in front of my moving vehicle when I had the light and they had a don't walk light. I suppose I mean to say this was at "SIGNALIZED intersections."
In NJ, as far as I can understand, pedestrians are not allowed to do this, just as they aren't allowed in NY.
That and zooming down streets while holding/talking on cell phones if not looking down at them (texting/reading) as well.
Am wondering if this plays no small role in many trying to flee or the increase in "hit and run" accidents. If it can be proven you were driving while distracted at least the civil liability can be greater.
That's a good point, I wouldn't be surprised one bit. I know for experience divers who react very slow when the light changes to green are on phone texting. I've seen this personally countless times.
First of all leaving the scene of any accident is an offense, it goes higher if a person is badly injured and or killed. If there are mitigating circumstances such as driving under the influence, reckless driving, driving without a valid NYS license and so forth things escalate further still. Those are just the criminal charges, there can and often will be civil actions for damages to property, person or life. All this will *not* do your insurance rates any huge favors.
and no criminal charges were brought on to the cab driver that hit the London tourist in New York.
even though we all know it was the cyclists fault,
so a driver that hits a person, doesnt always go to jail.
and no criminal charges were brought on to the cab driver that hit the London tourist in New York.
even though we all know it was the cyclists fault,
so a driver that hits a person, doesnt always go to jail.
IIRC that driver remained at the scene and there was that business with the cyclists.
Accidents are called that for just that reason. To raise everything to criminal charges would crowd the courts more then they already are.
Drivers have hit and caused great physical harm if not death to others but not charged with a crime. I mean if you are driving down a street under or at the legal speed limit and otherwise not in violation of known laws, and a child or adult zooms into the street and is hit, it usually will not result in criminal charges. Long as one remains at the scene that is.
Several years ago a woman hit and killed a boy on SI as he was riding his bike. She was charged and so forth but found not guilty at trial.
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.
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.
