8 ms·

Jaywalking drives me crazy... sometimes I wish American culture was more German/Japanese in this area and Americans walked the extra 20 feet to the nearest cros

by umvi 6y ago

Jaywalking drives me crazy... sometimes I wish American culture was more German/Japanese in this area and Americans walked the extra 20 feet to the nearest crosswalk and waited for the light. A few times now I've had to tap my brakes for some guy dashing across the street to the island in the middle because he was too impatient to wait for the light to change. Sometimes it's a lady with a shopping cart. These aren't slow residential roads either, but roads around commercial centers with speed limits around 45 MPH. > In the Netherlands, for example, traffic engineers and urban planners have actually worked to lower the country’s curbs so as to encourage people to cross wherever they like. This I don't understand at all unless it's in low/slow traffic areas.

jonplackett 6y ago
In lots of places cities are actually built for pedestrians not motorists. Some of us prefer it that way.
marricks 6y ago
Many US cities are designed to be downright hostile to pedestrians, California in particular. Some areas in Orange County have blocks before cross walks, or cross walks only on one side of the street so you had to make the right decision a block ago about which side of the street to be on! Strip malls seemed designed to have people drive the 1k feet between businesses rather than having accessible walking. With city planning focused on driving you start to realize why pedestrians can behave so badly? If you're talking specifically about urban cities, I still bet Japan/Germany have been urban planning for sidewalks which encourages "good behavior".
- nineplay 6y ago
  > Many US cities are designed to be downright hostile to pedestrians Exactly, which is why the decriminalization of jaywalking in those cities is a terrible idea. Orange County isn't going to be redesigned, so more jaywalkers means more pedestrian deaths.
  - marricks 6y ago
    "Hey we made an awful system many people can't follow, let's keep them criminalized or more bad stuff could happen." No option is perfect, but it's layering unfairness on unfairness, ESPECIALLY considering that such laws are often selectively enforced.
- armenarmen 6y ago
  I remember being in Kreutzberg in the dead of night with a bunch of other punks and them mohawks and and all waiting for the green man. Blew my mind
- bigbubba 6y ago
  I don't think I've ever seen an American strip mall without a wide sidewalk running in front of every business on the strip. The sidewalk is such an integral component of a strip mall, it sounds like what you're describing isn't a strip mall at all. And if people are so lazy that they drive around the parking lot instead of using the sidewalk, that reflects on them, not the sidewalk.
  - marricks 6y ago
    > And if people are so lazy that they drive around the parking lot instead of using the sidewalk, that reflects on them, not the sidewalk. I think this reflects a lot of comments, "American's are lazy" and "Look at this german punks walking and respecting traffic laws!" Is the argument US is just inherently lazy? Could there be something else at play? I think it's just that when a use case isn't a main focus of design those users will be stuck trying to hack the system or having a poor experience. USA isn't designed for walkers most places, those people will behave "badly" because of it. Also, yes there are strip malls that bad, I can show one but then we'll be having pedantic arguments over "hey if you walk an extra 600 feet you have a sidewalk!" or something. Like, even the idea of a strip mall inherently is car centric, with most square footage devoted to parking and who wants to walk (or even drive!) through a parking lot.
    - bigbubba 6y ago
      > Is the argument US is just inherently lazy? If the shoe fits... I've seen too many young slightly chubby people coasting around on mobility scooters at Walmart instead of walking a few hundred meters to think laziness isn't a strong component to this sort of behavior.
      - marricks 6y ago
        You're only thinking one level deep, what causes the laziness. My argument is US society actively encourages it on multiple levels starting from just the design of our cities.
  - rconti 6y ago
castlecrasher2 6y ago
Same here. In Utah, if there's a 4-way intersection, pedestrians always have right of way and police enforce it. I was pulled over for not yielding on a 45 MPH road and when the officer asked "do you know why I pulled you over?" I sincerely had no idea. I think I understand the intent of the law but I guess my own philosophy of "cross where you're far less likely to die" isn't the legal one.
francisofascii 6y ago
> a lady with a shopping cart Sounds like it is residential. That lady who has to risk death to get her groceries probably doesn't appreciate people going 45+ in her neighborhood.
- umvi 6y ago
  No, commercial. There are homeless people that jaywalk everywhere and the shopping carts hold their worldly possessions. If there is a shopping cart in a residential area, it usually means the shopping cart was stolen.
chrisseaton 6y ago
Why do you think the default should be that it's your right of way in the car? Why should pedestrians keep out of your way and not cross your path? Why don't we instead say you should keep out of the pedestrians way and not cross their path? Maybe we should reset the expectation that cars own the streets, and make them a guest there, deferring to human beings in the first instance.
- umvi 6y ago
  > Why do you think the default should be that it's your right of way in the car? a) Because it's the law, b) because there's a power dynamic. I can accidentally kill a pedestrian, a pedestrian can't accidentally kill me unless they throw a brick off an overpass. > Why should pedestrians keep out of your way and not cross your path? So that they take responsibility for their own safety. > Why don't we instead say you should keep out of the pedestrians way and not cross their path? Because I disagree I should be liable if someone darts out into traffic and is struck by my car. > Maybe we should reset the expectation that cars own the streets, and make them a guest there, deferring to human beings in the first instance. In dense cities... sure, I agree. In car-heavy suburban areas where everything is super spread out? I don't think this is a necessarily a good idea.
  - chrisseaton 6y ago
    All your arguments are about protecting yourself and limiting your liability at the expense of the pedestrian and you just slowing down and taking more care. You even talk in the passive voice about people being struck by your car rather than you striking them with your car. That's a shit attitude.
    - umvi 6y ago
      Why am I being villainized for a) going the speed limit, b) complaining about a legitimate safety issue? I would never intentionally strike a pedestrian in my vehicle, but a situation where a) I am driving the speed limit, b) a pedestrian jaywalking forces me to reflexively brake is not safe. So either the speed limit needs to be lowered, or pedestrians need to behave more safely. I would not need to reflexively brake if pedestrians waited their turn at a designated crosswalk.
BitwiseFool 6y ago
There is a noticeable anti-automobile crowd here on HN. Personally, anti-jaywalking laws just make sense and there doesn't need to be sinister motivations from the auto-industry to explain why we have them.
- reportingsjr 6y ago
  There are not anti-automobile people on here. There are people who are sick of cars being pushed as the /only/ way for things to be done. Almost every person you see advocating for better safety for pedestrians, people biking, etc understands that cars are necessary for some things. It just doesn't need to be forced for literally every small thing.
  - BitwiseFool 6y ago
    I get what you're saying. And for what it's worth I do like the idea of making city centers more walkable and pedestrian friendly. But based on some comments in this discussion there are absolutely anti-automobile people here and they are vocal. I just responded to someone calling a car a "murder machine".
    - ck425 6y ago
      Not that I disagree there's an anti car segment here (I'm personally very anti car) but a car can be (can not necessarily is) an effective murder machine. What other pieces of personal property does Western society openly embrace everyone owning but that can be used to murder people? I'm not saying that's the intent but when people call them murder machine the point they're raising (hyperbolically) is that cars and dangerous pieces of machinery and that has to be taken into account more when we consider urban design.
      - leetcrew 6y ago
        > What other pieces of personal property does Western society openly embrace everyone owning but that can be used to murder people? knives would be the obvious answer, though they probably don't cause as much accidental carnage as cars.
bluecalm 6y ago
The idea is that you should make it easier and more comfortable for pedestrians and cyclists at the cost of cars because cars in the city make our lives miserable, especially cars driving fast. The fewer and slower travelling cars there are the better city life is. Better as in healthier, more comfortable, pleasant to be outside and safer.
standardUser 6y ago
"commercial centers with speed limits around 45 MPH. I can't imagine how a "commercial center" could have a road with a 45 MPH speed limit. Lowering that to 20 would solve most of the problem.
- umvi 6y ago
  Here is the commercial center I was referring to and the road across which jaywalkers dangerously dart: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.17947,-77.2383268,3a,75y,359.54h,79.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sje6d-f5zSX8q4Jz8HAyLaA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192 https://www.google.com/maps/@39.17947,-77.2383268,3a,75y,359... And here is proof the speed limit is 45: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1826157,-77.2383985,3a,75y,1.04h,61.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snegT3tIgsUMVECvWQga59A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192 https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1826157,-77.2383985,3a,75y,1...
  - ck425 6y ago
    Yeah that's some terrible urban design there. If you're getting that close to an area worth pedestrians it should not be a 45mph limit.
throwaway0a5e 6y ago
I really don't care what other people do so long as they don't cut people off and force them to react (and I apply this heuristic to all types of traffic). Jaywalking into moving traffic is solidly an example of the latter.

by umvi 6y ago

jonplackett 6y ago

In lots of places cities are actually built for pedestrians not motorists. Some of us prefer it that way.

marricks 6y ago

Many US cities are designed to be downright hostile to pedestrians, California in particular. Some areas in Orange County have blocks before cross walks, or cross walks only on one side of the street so you had to make the right decision a block ago about which side of the street to be on! Strip malls seemed designed to have people drive the 1k feet between businesses rather than having accessible walking. With city planning focused on driving you start to realize why pedestrians can behave so badly? If you're talking specifically about urban cities, I still bet Japan/Germany have been urban planning for sidewalks which encourages "good behavior".

nineplay 6y ago
> Many US cities are designed to be downright hostile to pedestrians Exactly, which is why the decriminalization of jaywalking in those cities is a terrible idea. Orange County isn't going to be redesigned, so more jaywalkers means more pedestrian deaths.
- marricks 6y ago
  "Hey we made an awful system many people can't follow, let's keep them criminalized or more bad stuff could happen." No option is perfect, but it's layering unfairness on unfairness, ESPECIALLY considering that such laws are often selectively enforced.
armenarmen 6y ago
I remember being in Kreutzberg in the dead of night with a bunch of other punks and them mohawks and and all waiting for the green man. Blew my mind
bigbubba 6y ago
I don't think I've ever seen an American strip mall without a wide sidewalk running in front of every business on the strip. The sidewalk is such an integral component of a strip mall, it sounds like what you're describing isn't a strip mall at all. And if people are so lazy that they drive around the parking lot instead of using the sidewalk, that reflects on them, not the sidewalk.
- marricks 6y ago
  > And if people are so lazy that they drive around the parking lot instead of using the sidewalk, that reflects on them, not the sidewalk. I think this reflects a lot of comments, "American's are lazy" and "Look at this german punks walking and respecting traffic laws!" Is the argument US is just inherently lazy? Could there be something else at play? I think it's just that when a use case isn't a main focus of design those users will be stuck trying to hack the system or having a poor experience. USA isn't designed for walkers most places, those people will behave "badly" because of it. Also, yes there are strip malls that bad, I can show one but then we'll be having pedantic arguments over "hey if you walk an extra 600 feet you have a sidewalk!" or something. Like, even the idea of a strip mall inherently is car centric, with most square footage devoted to parking and who wants to walk (or even drive!) through a parking lot.
  - bigbubba 6y ago
    > Is the argument US is just inherently lazy? If the shoe fits... I've seen too many young slightly chubby people coasting around on mobility scooters at Walmart instead of walking a few hundred meters to think laziness isn't a strong component to this sort of behavior.
    - marricks 6y ago
      You're only thinking one level deep, what causes the laziness. My argument is US society actively encourages it on multiple levels starting from just the design of our cities.
- rconti 6y ago

castlecrasher2 6y ago

Same here. In Utah, if there's a 4-way intersection, pedestrians always have right of way and police enforce it. I was pulled over for not yielding on a 45 MPH road and when the officer asked "do you know why I pulled you over?" I sincerely had no idea. I think I understand the intent of the law but I guess my own philosophy of "cross where you're far less likely to die" isn't the legal one.

francisofascii 6y ago

> a lady with a shopping cart Sounds like it is residential. That lady who has to risk death to get her groceries probably doesn't appreciate people going 45+ in her neighborhood.

umvi 6y ago
No, commercial. There are homeless people that jaywalk everywhere and the shopping carts hold their worldly possessions. If there is a shopping cart in a residential area, it usually means the shopping cart was stolen.

chrisseaton 6y ago

Why do you think the default should be that it's your right of way in the car? Why should pedestrians keep out of your way and not cross your path? Why don't we instead say you should keep out of the pedestrians way and not cross their path? Maybe we should reset the expectation that cars own the streets, and make them a guest there, deferring to human beings in the first instance.

umvi 6y ago
> Why do you think the default should be that it's your right of way in the car? a) Because it's the law, b) because there's a power dynamic. I can accidentally kill a pedestrian, a pedestrian can't accidentally kill me unless they throw a brick off an overpass. > Why should pedestrians keep out of your way and not cross your path? So that they take responsibility for their own safety. > Why don't we instead say you should keep out of the pedestrians way and not cross their path? Because I disagree I should be liable if someone darts out into traffic and is struck by my car. > Maybe we should reset the expectation that cars own the streets, and make them a guest there, deferring to human beings in the first instance. In dense cities... sure, I agree. In car-heavy suburban areas where everything is super spread out? I don't think this is a necessarily a good idea.
- chrisseaton 6y ago
  All your arguments are about protecting yourself and limiting your liability at the expense of the pedestrian and you just slowing down and taking more care. You even talk in the passive voice about people being struck by your car rather than you striking them with your car. That's a shit attitude.
  - umvi 6y ago
    Why am I being villainized for a) going the speed limit, b) complaining about a legitimate safety issue? I would never intentionally strike a pedestrian in my vehicle, but a situation where a) I am driving the speed limit, b) a pedestrian jaywalking forces me to reflexively brake is not safe. So either the speed limit needs to be lowered, or pedestrians need to behave more safely. I would not need to reflexively brake if pedestrians waited their turn at a designated crosswalk.

BitwiseFool 6y ago

There is a noticeable anti-automobile crowd here on HN. Personally, anti-jaywalking laws just make sense and there doesn't need to be sinister motivations from the auto-industry to explain why we have them.

reportingsjr 6y ago
There are not anti-automobile people on here. There are people who are sick of cars being pushed as the /only/ way for things to be done. Almost every person you see advocating for better safety for pedestrians, people biking, etc understands that cars are necessary for some things. It just doesn't need to be forced for literally every small thing.
- BitwiseFool 6y ago
  I get what you're saying. And for what it's worth I do like the idea of making city centers more walkable and pedestrian friendly. But based on some comments in this discussion there are absolutely anti-automobile people here and they are vocal. I just responded to someone calling a car a "murder machine".
  - ck425 6y ago
    Not that I disagree there's an anti car segment here (I'm personally very anti car) but a car can be (can not necessarily is) an effective murder machine. What other pieces of personal property does Western society openly embrace everyone owning but that can be used to murder people? I'm not saying that's the intent but when people call them murder machine the point they're raising (hyperbolically) is that cars and dangerous pieces of machinery and that has to be taken into account more when we consider urban design.
    - leetcrew 6y ago
      > What other pieces of personal property does Western society openly embrace everyone owning but that can be used to murder people? knives would be the obvious answer, though they probably don't cause as much accidental carnage as cars.

bluecalm 6y ago

The idea is that you should make it easier and more comfortable for pedestrians and cyclists at the cost of cars because cars in the city make our lives miserable, especially cars driving fast. The fewer and slower travelling cars there are the better city life is. Better as in healthier, more comfortable, pleasant to be outside and safer.

standardUser 6y ago

"commercial centers with speed limits around 45 MPH. I can't imagine how a "commercial center" could have a road with a 45 MPH speed limit. Lowering that to 20 would solve most of the problem.

umvi 6y ago
Here is the commercial center I was referring to and the road across which jaywalkers dangerously dart: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.17947,-77.2383268,3a,75y,359.54h,79.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sje6d-f5zSX8q4Jz8HAyLaA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192 https://www.google.com/maps/@39.17947,-77.2383268,3a,75y,359... And here is proof the speed limit is 45: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1826157,-77.2383985,3a,75y,1.04h,61.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snegT3tIgsUMVECvWQga59A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192 https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1826157,-77.2383985,3a,75y,1...
- ck425 6y ago
  Yeah that's some terrible urban design there. If you're getting that close to an area worth pedestrians it should not be a 45mph limit.

throwaway0a5e 6y ago

I really don't care what other people do so long as they don't cut people off and force them to react (and I apply this heuristic to all types of traffic). Jaywalking into moving traffic is solidly an example of the latter.