3 ms·

Wow, pretty brutal victim blaming here. You're driving on average a 4000 pounds vehicle at speed, you need to be the one responsible for it. "They got in my wa

by soperj 5y ago

Wow, pretty brutal victim blaming here. You're driving on average a 4000 pounds vehicle at speed, you need to be the one responsible for it. "They got in my way" doesn't really fly.

kodah 5y ago
Why are both not responsible? Something seems broken and I don't think it's just drivers. As someone else noted, a lot of these accidents (73%) do not occur at a crosswalk. I could only think that means parking lots and people j-walking. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29465068 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29465068 The rush to push blame on either drivers or pedestrians with these kind of vague statistics is really weird.
- soperj 5y ago
  What would happen if the driver was walking instead? They'd bump into each other and possibly even fall down. If you are operating something that has the ability to kill someone, you need to be responsible for it.
  - kodah 5y ago
    73% of these incidents are at non-intersections and 80% of them are at night. I'm not sure how much of that a driver can be totally responsible for. If a lot of people are dying at non-intersections that tells me the city likely has some obligation to investigate unsafe locations people are crossing at and make them safer. Point being, it doesn't mean it's the driver or pedestrians fault, but it's also certainly not automatically the person operating a machines fault. That's just silly.
    - soperj 5y ago
      >it's also certainly not automatically the person operating a machines fault It is. If you work on a factory floor and you are operating machinery and kill someone, it's your fault. If you play ice hockey and accidently stick someone in the face, it's your fault. If you kill someone with your car because it's night time...
      - kodah 5y ago
        > If you work on a factory floor and you are operating machinery and kill someone, it's your fault. I worked around heavy machinery and I know that's not true. I'm talking dramatically large forklifts for picking up massive shipping containers. It is the job of both the operator and the person on the ground to coordinate their activity. If the person on the ground has signaled it is safe for the operator to move the container and then steps into an unsafe position (eg: walking when there is no signal, or the signal is red) the operator isn't at fault. That doesn't mean that an operator can go around squashing people for fun, but there are rules and procedure for everyone's safety. This blame-the-driver rhetoric is just odd.
        soperj 5y ago
        >I worked around heavy machinery and I know that's not true. I'm talking dramatically large forklifts for picking up massive shipping containers. It is the job of both the operator and the person on the ground to coordinate their activity. You've actually worked somewhere that it wasn't the forklift operators fault? Was it the military? Because this sounds way out of step from my experiences. > there are rules and procedure for everyone's safety No drivers are injured in pedestrian collisions. >This blame-the-driver rhetoric is just odd. It really isn't if you've spent most of your life as a pedestrian, walking or biking. If I'm an idiot, I'm likely to die, if the car driver is an idiot, I'm likely to die. Who do you think is more likely to be the idiot in that situation?
        kodah 5y ago
        > Was it the military? Yes. The system seemed to work pretty well from my experience. Safety, in general, is everyones responsibility -- from the individual to the systems at play. If you've ever been to a civilian gun range and heard, "everyone is a safety officer", that's where that comes from. > It really isn't if you've spent most of your life as a pedestrian, walking or biking. If I'm an idiot, I'm likely to die, if the car driver is an idiot, I'm likely to die. Who do you think is more likely to be the idiot in that situation? I used to ride a motorcycle, can I use this logic for accidents as well? Anything bigger than I am is likely to kill me. The logic seems heavily flawed, and the binary representation of fault or no fault doesn't match with the reality that it could very well be that the city is not adequately equipping the pedestrians and drivers with viable signals to communicate with. It's also worth noting I live in the Bay area and bike across a good portion of it, including highways, and I do not share your view.
rootusrootus 5y ago
I think you might be reacting too strongly? Take a step back, and rather than making this a victim/perp situation, look for anything that can mitigate the end result. Some of that is changing how people drive, but some of it could also be how people walk -- at least when they are crossing roads. Texting on your phone while going across a sidewalk definitely increases the risk. And it doesn't matter if you're right and the driver is wrong, because you're still dead either way.
- matsemann 5y ago
  The strong reaction is from being used to getting blamed whenever a car and its driver slaughter someone. Now is the season for the reflective band discussion. Where pedestrians are being told they will be mowed down if not wearing any. Of course we will wear them, but that always moves the discussion away from the true problem areas. Pedestrians having to walk in the street because there is no curbside walkways, drivers driving too fast to be able to react in time, drivers not removing ice from their windows and lots of other factors contributing to accidents. But no, lets blame those getting hit.
- soperj 5y ago
  I don't think so. There's a victim in this situation, and it's never the driver.

by soperj 5y ago

Wow, pretty brutal victim blaming here. You're driving on average a 4000 pounds vehicle at speed, you need to be the one responsible for it. "They got in my way" doesn't really fly.

kodah 5y ago

Why are both not responsible? Something seems broken and I don't think it's just drivers. As someone else noted, a lot of these accidents (73%) do not occur at a crosswalk. I could only think that means parking lots and people j-walking. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29465068 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29465068 The rush to push blame on either drivers or pedestrians with these kind of vague statistics is really weird.

soperj 5y ago
What would happen if the driver was walking instead? They'd bump into each other and possibly even fall down. If you are operating something that has the ability to kill someone, you need to be responsible for it.
- kodah 5y ago
  73% of these incidents are at non-intersections and 80% of them are at night. I'm not sure how much of that a driver can be totally responsible for. If a lot of people are dying at non-intersections that tells me the city likely has some obligation to investigate unsafe locations people are crossing at and make them safer. Point being, it doesn't mean it's the driver or pedestrians fault, but it's also certainly not automatically the person operating a machines fault. That's just silly.
  - soperj 5y ago
    >it's also certainly not automatically the person operating a machines fault It is. If you work on a factory floor and you are operating machinery and kill someone, it's your fault. If you play ice hockey and accidently stick someone in the face, it's your fault. If you kill someone with your car because it's night time...
    - kodah 5y ago
      > If you work on a factory floor and you are operating machinery and kill someone, it's your fault. I worked around heavy machinery and I know that's not true. I'm talking dramatically large forklifts for picking up massive shipping containers. It is the job of both the operator and the person on the ground to coordinate their activity. If the person on the ground has signaled it is safe for the operator to move the container and then steps into an unsafe position (eg: walking when there is no signal, or the signal is red) the operator isn't at fault. That doesn't mean that an operator can go around squashing people for fun, but there are rules and procedure for everyone's safety. This blame-the-driver rhetoric is just odd.
      - soperj 5y ago
        >I worked around heavy machinery and I know that's not true. I'm talking dramatically large forklifts for picking up massive shipping containers. It is the job of both the operator and the person on the ground to coordinate their activity. You've actually worked somewhere that it wasn't the forklift operators fault? Was it the military? Because this sounds way out of step from my experiences. > there are rules and procedure for everyone's safety No drivers are injured in pedestrian collisions. >This blame-the-driver rhetoric is just odd. It really isn't if you've spent most of your life as a pedestrian, walking or biking. If I'm an idiot, I'm likely to die, if the car driver is an idiot, I'm likely to die. Who do you think is more likely to be the idiot in that situation?
        kodah 5y ago
        > Was it the military? Yes. The system seemed to work pretty well from my experience. Safety, in general, is everyones responsibility -- from the individual to the systems at play. If you've ever been to a civilian gun range and heard, "everyone is a safety officer", that's where that comes from. > It really isn't if you've spent most of your life as a pedestrian, walking or biking. If I'm an idiot, I'm likely to die, if the car driver is an idiot, I'm likely to die. Who do you think is more likely to be the idiot in that situation? I used to ride a motorcycle, can I use this logic for accidents as well? Anything bigger than I am is likely to kill me. The logic seems heavily flawed, and the binary representation of fault or no fault doesn't match with the reality that it could very well be that the city is not adequately equipping the pedestrians and drivers with viable signals to communicate with. It's also worth noting I live in the Bay area and bike across a good portion of it, including highways, and I do not share your view.

rootusrootus 5y ago

I think you might be reacting too strongly? Take a step back, and rather than making this a victim/perp situation, look for anything that can mitigate the end result. Some of that is changing how people drive, but some of it could also be how people walk -- at least when they are crossing roads. Texting on your phone while going across a sidewalk definitely increases the risk. And it doesn't matter if you're right and the driver is wrong, because you're still dead either way.

matsemann 5y ago
The strong reaction is from being used to getting blamed whenever a car and its driver slaughter someone. Now is the season for the reflective band discussion. Where pedestrians are being told they will be mowed down if not wearing any. Of course we will wear them, but that always moves the discussion away from the true problem areas. Pedestrians having to walk in the street because there is no curbside walkways, drivers driving too fast to be able to react in time, drivers not removing ice from their windows and lots of other factors contributing to accidents. But no, lets blame those getting hit.
soperj 5y ago
I don't think so. There's a victim in this situation, and it's never the driver.