3 ms·

A crosswalk by definition is marked. Drivers expect other drivers to follow the rules of the road, not to be nice. Did you hear about the woman in Canada [1]

A crosswalk by definition is marked. Drivers expect other drivers to follow the rules of the road, not to be nice. Did you hear about the woman in Canada [1] who tried to "be nice" and stopped in the middle of a highway to let some ducks cross? She killed a motorcyclist and his passenger. Don't be nice -- be predictable. Same is the reason why the bots get rear-ended -- everyone expects them to roll through a stop, who in the world does a complete, 3 second stop? [1] https://www.google.ca/search?q=Quebec+woman+stopped+for+ducks+fatal+crash+-who https://www.google.ca/search?q=Quebec+woman+stopped+for+duck...

saosebastiao 9y ago
A crosswalk by definition is a place where pedestrians can cross with the right of way. They absolutely can be and often are unmarked, and exist in practically every first world country, including yours. Here are the rules by state in the US. http://www.ncsl.org/research/transportation/pedestrian-crossing-50-state-summary.aspx http://www.ncsl.org/research/transportation/pedestrian-cross... You should probably learn the rules of the road before you kill someone.
dragonwriter 9y ago
Anytime a vehicle gets rear-ended, fault belongs with the rear-ending vehicle’s driver for either failing to maintain safe following distance or failing to pay adequate attention to conditions in front. And rolling a stop is not following the rules of the road, it is a dangerous violation.
- dingo_bat 9y ago
  > Anytime a vehicle gets rear-ended, fault belongs with the rear-ending vehicle’s driver for either failing to maintain safe following distance or failing to pay adequate attention to conditions in front. I don't think that's true on a highway or similar road. Stopping in the middle of the highway is very dangerous. You cannot blame the 150km/h+ cars to be able to stop safely in all situations.
  - dragonwriter 9y ago
    > I don't think that's true on a highway or similar road. It's definitely true on a highway (which is anything that's not an alley), and even a freeway (which is probably what you meant.) > Stopping in the middle of the highway is very dangerous. Failure to maintain adequate following distance on any road is dangerous; encountering stopped traffic or needing to stop rapidly, even on freeways, is a regular occurrence. > You cannot blame the 150km/h+ cars to be able to stop safely in all situations. I don't blame cars for anything, I do blame drivers for failing to maintain a safe combination of speed and separation. And there's virtually no road, freeway or otherwise, where 150km/h+ (93mph+) is a safe and reasonable speed for any driver, irrespective of separation, so I can quite easiky blame a driver for choosing to drive at such a speed in the first place.
  - Saaster 9y ago
    Absolutely you can always blame the car that does the rear-ending, it is your responsibility to maintain distance and speed such that you can stop if the car in front of you slams on the brakes. Which can happen for a multitude of valid reasons, like something dropping of a truck in front, or an accident. You will absolutely be at fault and stuck with the bill in every single rear-ending case, good luck arguing otherwise.
- btbuildem 9y ago
  The Supreme Court of Canada disagrees with your.. opinion https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/quebec-woman-who-caused-fatal-crash-after-stopping-to-help-ducks-loses-appeal/article35255208/?ref=http://www.theglobeandmail.com& https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/quebec-woman-... She was sentenced in December 2014 to 90 days in jail to be served on weekends, three years' probation and 240 hours of community service, and given a 10-year driving ban.
  - saosebastiao 9y ago
    That's not the Supreme Court of Canada...that's the Quebec Appeals Court. Regardless, it was dumb of her to stop there. But nowhere near as dumb as your idea that crosswalks are marked by definition. If you're going to give driving advice, don't be wrong. Especially on something like that, where you could easily kill someone and where the penalty could be as severe as manslaughter.

saosebastiao 9y ago

A crosswalk by definition is a place where pedestrians can cross with the right of way. They absolutely can be and often are unmarked, and exist in practically every first world country, including yours. Here are the rules by state in the US. http://www.ncsl.org/research/transportation/pedestrian-crossing-50-state-summary.aspx http://www.ncsl.org/research/transportation/pedestrian-cross... You should probably learn the rules of the road before you kill someone.

dragonwriter 9y ago

Anytime a vehicle gets rear-ended, fault belongs with the rear-ending vehicle’s driver for either failing to maintain safe following distance or failing to pay adequate attention to conditions in front. And rolling a stop is not following the rules of the road, it is a dangerous violation.

dingo_bat 9y ago
> Anytime a vehicle gets rear-ended, fault belongs with the rear-ending vehicle’s driver for either failing to maintain safe following distance or failing to pay adequate attention to conditions in front. I don't think that's true on a highway or similar road. Stopping in the middle of the highway is very dangerous. You cannot blame the 150km/h+ cars to be able to stop safely in all situations.
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  > I don't think that's true on a highway or similar road. It's definitely true on a highway (which is anything that's not an alley), and even a freeway (which is probably what you meant.) > Stopping in the middle of the highway is very dangerous. Failure to maintain adequate following distance on any road is dangerous; encountering stopped traffic or needing to stop rapidly, even on freeways, is a regular occurrence. > You cannot blame the 150km/h+ cars to be able to stop safely in all situations. I don't blame cars for anything, I do blame drivers for failing to maintain a safe combination of speed and separation. And there's virtually no road, freeway or otherwise, where 150km/h+ (93mph+) is a safe and reasonable speed for any driver, irrespective of separation, so I can quite easiky blame a driver for choosing to drive at such a speed in the first place.
- Saaster 9y ago
  Absolutely you can always blame the car that does the rear-ending, it is your responsibility to maintain distance and speed such that you can stop if the car in front of you slams on the brakes. Which can happen for a multitude of valid reasons, like something dropping of a truck in front, or an accident. You will absolutely be at fault and stuck with the bill in every single rear-ending case, good luck arguing otherwise.
btbuildem 9y ago
The Supreme Court of Canada disagrees with your.. opinion https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/quebec-woman-who-caused-fatal-crash-after-stopping-to-help-ducks-loses-appeal/article35255208/?ref=http://www.theglobeandmail.com& https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/quebec-woman-... She was sentenced in December 2014 to 90 days in jail to be served on weekends, three years' probation and 240 hours of community service, and given a 10-year driving ban.
- saosebastiao 9y ago
  That's not the Supreme Court of Canada...that's the Quebec Appeals Court. Regardless, it was dumb of her to stop there. But nowhere near as dumb as your idea that crosswalks are marked by definition. If you're going to give driving advice, don't be wrong. Especially on something like that, where you could easily kill someone and where the penalty could be as severe as manslaughter.