5 ms·

> there is no such thing as a too reflective vest for bicyclists And to not jaywalk a bike across a street in the dark!

freehunter 9y ago
Since I've seen this be a very controversial statement here in the past, I'd just like to point out to everyone that American drivers on four lane roads are not expecting pedestrians to be in the middle of the road and not at a crosswalk. That is not a normal thing to happen in America, and no one expects it to happen. It is a very rare situation. --edit: okay guys... no where did anyone argue that you shouldn't be watching for pedestrians crossing. Stop yelling "gotcha!" like you caught me in a trap. What I'm arguing against is the common refrain on these articles that there is no such thing as jaywalking and the pedestrian has the right to the road over the car. Maybe it's true in Europe judging by comments on previous articles, but it's not common in the US. It's illegal. Congratulations on expertly knocking down your own strawman, though.
- jakeogh 9y ago
  I have driven in the US for over 20 years and have the opposite experience. I am constantly looking for people, animals (deer are quite dangerous to hit, and they move _way_ faster) and lost count long long ago how many times I have been in very similar or worse situations. It's not even remotely rare. Drive on campus or downtown in AZ for a more than a few minutes.
  - freehunter 9y ago
    Yes, obviously you should watch for objects unexpectedly crossing the road. No one argued you shouldn't. The point is, some people have and will still argue that the pedestrian has more right to the road than the driver and pedestrians should be allowed to cross anywhere they please. But that's not how it works in the US, crossing roads like this is illegal unless it's done at a crosswalk, and normally people are not stupid enough to do it with oncoming traffic.
    - jakeogh 9y ago
      The proponents of pre-programmed cars would be wise to stop blaming "humans breaking the rules" for their mistakes.
      - freehunter 9y ago
        You're not even arguing against what I've said. You are not the intended audience for my comment.
        jakeogh 9y ago
        "obviously you should watch for objects unexpectedly crossing the road. No one argued you shouldn't." Strawman. I argued the opposite. You made the grossly incorrect assertion "That is not a normal thing to happen in America, and no one expects it to happen. It is a very rare situation." If preprogrammed cars cant handle random objects in unexpected places then they are uber DOA.
    - Domenic_S 9y ago
      There is a limerick to this effect with the same message -- you may have (or think you have) the right-of-way, but as a pedestrian you should never insist on it.
    - mhalle 9y ago
      Actually, the yielding rules for pedestrians and drivers vary widely from state to state. See this page for a summary: http://www.ncsl.org/research/transportation/pedestrian-crossing-50-state-summary.aspx http://www.ncsl.org/research/transportation/pedestrian-cross... But the legality is to some extent beside the point. Autonomous vehicles aren't going to be tuned to pedestrian yielding rules state-to-state, simply because hitting a pedestrian is never an acceptable outcome if avoidable no matter who is in the right/wrong.
- chki 9y ago
  I think you can generally say that there are few countries where one would expect people to cross a four lane road without watching out for cars. I'm not sure why you would think that to be a controversial statement, especially considering that the person being hit in the video is also not just walking on the street but crossing it. Obviously the concrete level of awareness that drivers usually have is probably related to a lot of other circumstances (light conditions/amount of traffic etc.)
  - freehunter 9y ago
    I don't think it to be a controversial statement, I know it to be controversial. Just look at the other reply posted at exactly the same time as yours with someone saying they totally expect pedestrians crossing illegally wearing black at night. The last thread about this contained a very long argument from some Europeans who disagree with the core concept of "jaywalking". Some people really do hold the belief that roads are for pedestrians first and cars last, contrary to US law.
    - chki 9y ago
      That is strange. Maybe they were not talking about 4 lane roads? Because on smaller streets I would also expect pedestrians, especially if there is not boardwalk. But in my opinion this is indifferent to the situation at hand anyway because this video is about somebody crossing the street without respecting the cars right of way, which can't be deemed common behaviour by anybody.
      - deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
      - freehunter 9y ago
        >which can't be deemed common behaviour by anybody. Judging by the replies in this thread, it would seem some American roads are more pedestrian than they are pavement.
      - user5994461 9y ago
- LukaAl 9y ago
  Wow! You are saying no one in the US expects, or at least consider that could be an obstacle on the street in front of you? It doesn't mean necessarily a pedestrian. An animal? Cargo lost by a truck in front of you? It is the responsibility of the driver to be alert and try to minimize the impact. Just because a cyclist shouldn't cross a four-lane road in the middle of the night, doesn't mean you shouldn't look for obstacles.
  - freehunter 9y ago
    You're not arguing against anything I've said. Read it again.
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  As an American, this general kind of situation is a reasonably common situation with people and animals (people more in urban environments, large animals more in rural ones, and both in many suburban ones) and something I was taught to be aware of in public school driver's education classes. The particular combination of speed and distance may not be common, but the general situation isn't rare.
- cmac2992 9y ago
  People crossing streets mid block is such a common in pheonix that last week Arizona announced a plan spend $250k on educating the community on this very problem. Pheonix is one of the most dangerous cities for pedestrians and bikers. Pheonix is built for cars not people, a ton of roads are fast 4 Lanes in residential areas.
- hcknwscommenter 9y ago
  >the pedestrian has the right to the road over the car. Maybe it's true in Europe judging by comments on previous articles, but it's not common in the US. It's illegal. You are conflating two different concepts. In every state in the U.S., it is illegal to hit a pedestrian whether or not they are where they are supposed to be. If you see a pedestrian jaywalking then you are required to avoid the pedestrian to the greatest extent possible. Anything less is at least manslaughter.
- yelloweyes 9y ago
  Do you realize how much of a sociopath you sound like? A person died.
taneq 9y ago
Also maybe to look both ways before crossing the road? Still, the bike and rider were in view front-and-center for plenty of time for an alert driver to brake (if not avoid).
- jonknee 9y ago
  Perhaps, but the pedestrian also did not react at all to the car. Even though she knew she was crossing a street and should look for cars, see the headlights, hear the engine, etc.
  - theclaw 9y ago
    The pedestrian was a homeless person. I don't mean to be insensitive but there's a chance she wasn't in a condition to recognise the danger of what she was doing. Regardless, it is the driver's responsibility to perceive and avoid hazards like this and I think that would've been pretty easy given it's a big wide empty road with overhead lighting. This looks like the kind of bad low light footage my cheap dashcam produces in similar conditions.
  - taneq 9y ago
    For better or worse, it's not the pedestrian on trial here. It's the self-driving vehicle which completely failed to register a significant obstacle directly in front of it for nearly two seconds. There is no scenario where this is an acceptable response from a control system in charge of a 1500kg projectile in a shared public space.
jlg23 9y ago
"And not to drive any faster than possible under the assumption that someone will cross the road in camouflage at night."
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

Since I've seen this be a very controversial statement here in the past, I'd just like to point out to everyone that American drivers on four lane roads are not expecting pedestrians to be in the middle of the road and not at a crosswalk. That is not a normal thing to happen in America, and no one expects it to happen. It is a very rare situation. --edit: okay guys... no where did anyone argue that you shouldn't be watching for pedestrians crossing. Stop yelling "gotcha!" like you caught me in a trap. What I'm arguing against is the common refrain on these articles that there is no such thing as jaywalking and the pedestrian has the right to the road over the car. Maybe it's true in Europe judging by comments on previous articles, but it's not common in the US. It's illegal. Congratulations on expertly knocking down your own strawman, though.

jakeogh 9y ago
I have driven in the US for over 20 years and have the opposite experience. I am constantly looking for people, animals (deer are quite dangerous to hit, and they move _way_ faster) and lost count long long ago how many times I have been in very similar or worse situations. It's not even remotely rare. Drive on campus or downtown in AZ for a more than a few minutes.
- freehunter 9y ago
  Yes, obviously you should watch for objects unexpectedly crossing the road. No one argued you shouldn't. The point is, some people have and will still argue that the pedestrian has more right to the road than the driver and pedestrians should be allowed to cross anywhere they please. But that's not how it works in the US, crossing roads like this is illegal unless it's done at a crosswalk, and normally people are not stupid enough to do it with oncoming traffic.
  - jakeogh 9y ago
    The proponents of pre-programmed cars would be wise to stop blaming "humans breaking the rules" for their mistakes.
    - freehunter 9y ago
      You're not even arguing against what I've said. You are not the intended audience for my comment.
      - jakeogh 9y ago
        "obviously you should watch for objects unexpectedly crossing the road. No one argued you shouldn't." Strawman. I argued the opposite. You made the grossly incorrect assertion "That is not a normal thing to happen in America, and no one expects it to happen. It is a very rare situation." If preprogrammed cars cant handle random objects in unexpected places then they are uber DOA.
  - Domenic_S 9y ago
    There is a limerick to this effect with the same message -- you may have (or think you have) the right-of-way, but as a pedestrian you should never insist on it.
  - mhalle 9y ago
    Actually, the yielding rules for pedestrians and drivers vary widely from state to state. See this page for a summary: http://www.ncsl.org/research/transportation/pedestrian-crossing-50-state-summary.aspx http://www.ncsl.org/research/transportation/pedestrian-cross... But the legality is to some extent beside the point. Autonomous vehicles aren't going to be tuned to pedestrian yielding rules state-to-state, simply because hitting a pedestrian is never an acceptable outcome if avoidable no matter who is in the right/wrong.
chki 9y ago
I think you can generally say that there are few countries where one would expect people to cross a four lane road without watching out for cars. I'm not sure why you would think that to be a controversial statement, especially considering that the person being hit in the video is also not just walking on the street but crossing it. Obviously the concrete level of awareness that drivers usually have is probably related to a lot of other circumstances (light conditions/amount of traffic etc.)
- freehunter 9y ago
  I don't think it to be a controversial statement, I know it to be controversial. Just look at the other reply posted at exactly the same time as yours with someone saying they totally expect pedestrians crossing illegally wearing black at night. The last thread about this contained a very long argument from some Europeans who disagree with the core concept of "jaywalking". Some people really do hold the belief that roads are for pedestrians first and cars last, contrary to US law.
  - chki 9y ago
    That is strange. Maybe they were not talking about 4 lane roads? Because on smaller streets I would also expect pedestrians, especially if there is not boardwalk. But in my opinion this is indifferent to the situation at hand anyway because this video is about somebody crossing the street without respecting the cars right of way, which can't be deemed common behaviour by anybody.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - freehunter 9y ago
      >which can't be deemed common behaviour by anybody. Judging by the replies in this thread, it would seem some American roads are more pedestrian than they are pavement.
    - user5994461 9y ago
LukaAl 9y ago
Wow! You are saying no one in the US expects, or at least consider that could be an obstacle on the street in front of you? It doesn't mean necessarily a pedestrian. An animal? Cargo lost by a truck in front of you? It is the responsibility of the driver to be alert and try to minimize the impact. Just because a cyclist shouldn't cross a four-lane road in the middle of the night, doesn't mean you shouldn't look for obstacles.
- freehunter 9y ago
  You're not arguing against anything I've said. Read it again.
dragonwriter 9y ago
As an American, this general kind of situation is a reasonably common situation with people and animals (people more in urban environments, large animals more in rural ones, and both in many suburban ones) and something I was taught to be aware of in public school driver's education classes. The particular combination of speed and distance may not be common, but the general situation isn't rare.
cmac2992 9y ago
People crossing streets mid block is such a common in pheonix that last week Arizona announced a plan spend $250k on educating the community on this very problem. Pheonix is one of the most dangerous cities for pedestrians and bikers. Pheonix is built for cars not people, a ton of roads are fast 4 Lanes in residential areas.
hcknwscommenter 9y ago
>the pedestrian has the right to the road over the car. Maybe it's true in Europe judging by comments on previous articles, but it's not common in the US. It's illegal. You are conflating two different concepts. In every state in the U.S., it is illegal to hit a pedestrian whether or not they are where they are supposed to be. If you see a pedestrian jaywalking then you are required to avoid the pedestrian to the greatest extent possible. Anything less is at least manslaughter.
yelloweyes 9y ago
Do you realize how much of a sociopath you sound like? A person died.

taneq 9y ago

Also maybe to look both ways before crossing the road? Still, the bike and rider were in view front-and-center for plenty of time for an alert driver to brake (if not avoid).

jonknee 9y ago
Perhaps, but the pedestrian also did not react at all to the car. Even though she knew she was crossing a street and should look for cars, see the headlights, hear the engine, etc.
- theclaw 9y ago
  The pedestrian was a homeless person. I don't mean to be insensitive but there's a chance she wasn't in a condition to recognise the danger of what she was doing. Regardless, it is the driver's responsibility to perceive and avoid hazards like this and I think that would've been pretty easy given it's a big wide empty road with overhead lighting. This looks like the kind of bad low light footage my cheap dashcam produces in similar conditions.
- taneq 9y ago
  For better or worse, it's not the pedestrian on trial here. It's the self-driving vehicle which completely failed to register a significant obstacle directly in front of it for nearly two seconds. There is no scenario where this is an acceptable response from a control system in charge of a 1500kg projectile in a shared public space.

jlg23 9y ago

"And not to drive any faster than possible under the assumption that someone will cross the road in camouflage at night."

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]