4 ms·

Yes! Drivers often seem to only care about the possibility of colliding with another vehicle. So by default they pull right through the crosswalk and/or stop li

Yes! Drivers often seem to only care about the possibility of colliding with another vehicle. So by default they pull right through the crosswalk and/or stop line in order to maximize their visibility of cross traffic and maximize their speed of making the turn without hitting another vehicle. Their actions are both selfish and passive aggressive toward pedestrians, yet at the same time their actions are also completely _rational_ when the driver is ignorant of (or lacks empathy for) pedestrians. They get away with it because it's such a small violation of the law and because pedestrians take on the responsibility of not getting hit.

jasonmp85 9y ago
Yup. If you want to make roads safer for non-drivers, make design choices that make drivers feel more threatened. Turn one-way avenues into two-way streets with street parking, etc.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
olyjohn 9y ago
I see so many entitled, selfish pedestrians downtown, every day it's not even funny. People keep acting like drivers are the only people causing problems, but if pedestrians would quit crossing after the DO NOT WALK, a ton of collisions would be avoided there too. Pedestrians forget to check for, or blatantly ignore cars all the time. I can't count the amount of times I've avoided hitting some pedestrian, because I had to take the responsibility to look out for them.
- 7952 9y ago
  If cars teach us anything it is that having a massive sense of entitlement is an effective strategy for promoting your own interests. That is why cars are treated with priority in so many places and can delegate responsibility for safety onto other users. If you introduce the danger then you should take responsibility for safety.
- verylongname 9y ago
  The law puts most of the burden on drivers quite intentionally, and I think properly. My general impression is that the average driver doesn't understand the law and don't appreciate the extent to which it is designed to favor pedestrians. To give one example, drivers are required to yield to pedestrians in cross walks and to pedestrians approaching crosswalks while pedestrians are only required to "exercise due care," which is a much weaker requirement. If you want to see how weak this requirement really is, look at the case law. In many cases in which the average driver thinks the pedestrian is in the wrong, the law disagrees and would place the lion's share of blame on the driver.
  - u801e 9y ago
    > To give one example, drivers are required to yield to pedestrians in cross walks and to pedestrians approaching crosswalks Is that actually the case? I know that the former is true, but I haven't come across a law stating that drivers are required to yield to pedestrians who are not already in a crosswalk. Does case law differ from the text of the law it refers to? > while pedestrians are only required to "exercise due care," which is a much weaker requirement. If you want to see how weak this requirement really is, look at the case law. In many cases in which the average driver thinks the pedestrian is in the wrong, the law disagrees and would place the lion's share of blame on the driver. I would be curious about what case law would say about a collision like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=io_XBK0twtQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=io_XBK0twtQ. Specifically, who would be found at fault/liable.
- rconti 9y ago
  Nobody's acting like drivers are the only people causing problems. However, drivers seem unique in their ability to feel that they're doing everyone else a favor by allowing them to cross THEIR roadways. Heavier, faster-moving vehicles are typically expected to yield to slower ones, whether on the roads or on the local multi-use path, because they're the ones likely to cause the most damage when a collision occurs.

jasonmp85 9y ago

Yup. If you want to make roads safer for non-drivers, make design choices that make drivers feel more threatened. Turn one-way avenues into two-way streets with street parking, etc.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

olyjohn 9y ago

I see so many entitled, selfish pedestrians downtown, every day it's not even funny. People keep acting like drivers are the only people causing problems, but if pedestrians would quit crossing after the DO NOT WALK, a ton of collisions would be avoided there too. Pedestrians forget to check for, or blatantly ignore cars all the time. I can't count the amount of times I've avoided hitting some pedestrian, because I had to take the responsibility to look out for them.

7952 9y ago
If cars teach us anything it is that having a massive sense of entitlement is an effective strategy for promoting your own interests. That is why cars are treated with priority in so many places and can delegate responsibility for safety onto other users. If you introduce the danger then you should take responsibility for safety.
verylongname 9y ago
The law puts most of the burden on drivers quite intentionally, and I think properly. My general impression is that the average driver doesn't understand the law and don't appreciate the extent to which it is designed to favor pedestrians. To give one example, drivers are required to yield to pedestrians in cross walks and to pedestrians approaching crosswalks while pedestrians are only required to "exercise due care," which is a much weaker requirement. If you want to see how weak this requirement really is, look at the case law. In many cases in which the average driver thinks the pedestrian is in the wrong, the law disagrees and would place the lion's share of blame on the driver.
- u801e 9y ago
  > To give one example, drivers are required to yield to pedestrians in cross walks and to pedestrians approaching crosswalks Is that actually the case? I know that the former is true, but I haven't come across a law stating that drivers are required to yield to pedestrians who are not already in a crosswalk. Does case law differ from the text of the law it refers to? > while pedestrians are only required to "exercise due care," which is a much weaker requirement. If you want to see how weak this requirement really is, look at the case law. In many cases in which the average driver thinks the pedestrian is in the wrong, the law disagrees and would place the lion's share of blame on the driver. I would be curious about what case law would say about a collision like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=io_XBK0twtQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=io_XBK0twtQ. Specifically, who would be found at fault/liable.
rconti 9y ago
Nobody's acting like drivers are the only people causing problems. However, drivers seem unique in their ability to feel that they're doing everyone else a favor by allowing them to cross THEIR roadways. Heavier, faster-moving vehicles are typically expected to yield to slower ones, whether on the roads or on the local multi-use path, because they're the ones likely to cause the most damage when a collision occurs.