3 ms·

In my state, the law says the Tesla's action here is fine, since the pedestrian wasn't close to the car's lane. > Vehicles are required to stop when you are cr

In my state, the law says the Tesla's action here is fine, since the pedestrian wasn't close to the car's lane. > Vehicles are required to stop when you are crossing their lane or when you are close to entering their lane.[1] For California, I couldn't find an independent reference for the situation here but did find one saying a stopped driver doesn't have to wait until the pedestrian fully exits the crosswalk.[2] [1] https://leddylaw.com/what-are-my-rights-as-a-pedestrian-in-south-carolina https://leddylaw.com/what-are-my-rights-as-a-pedestrian-in-s... [2] https://www.karlaw.com/blog/do-drivers-have-to-wait-for-pedestrians-to-cross-the-street https://www.karlaw.com/blog/do-drivers-have-to-wait-for-pede...

ohgodplsno 3y ago
On a 2 lane road, you are about two seconds away from entering the other lane the moment you step on one. How damn close does it have to be ? Also, even taking law out of account: stop when there are goddamn pedestrians. At all times. Even if the law is with you. Heaven is full of people who had the right of way, and I'd rather not add each individual's perception of "but I had the right to speed up as the deceased was crossing!".
ahahahahah 3y ago
For California the law is here: https://law.justia.com/codes/california/2022/code-veh/division-11/chapter-5/section-21950/ https://law.justia.com/codes/california/2022/code-veh/divisi... The Tesla vehicle violated this. subdivision (3) kinda implicitly confirms that a driver doesn't need to wait for a pedestrian to fully exit (what allows for that though is just the definition of and requirements around "right of way").
- wilg 3y ago
  It’s not clear cut IMO. It doesn’t say you have to stop because a pedestrian is in the crosswalk, just that cars have to yield the right of way to pedestrians. You could argue no yielding was required because there was no conflict, the car and the pedestrian just proceeded at pace and did not interfere with each other. Also, since we’re being pedantic, the vehicle can’t violate the law because it isn’t a person. The driver would be in violation.
  - ahahahahah 3y ago
    > You could argue no yielding was required because there was no conflict, the car and the pedestrian just proceeded at pace and did not interfere with each other. Sure, you could argue that. Were it true it'd be fine. But the pedestrian clearly slowed nearly to a stop (and shot the Tesla a disparaging look).
    - wilg 3y ago
      > But the pedestrian clearly slowed nearly to a stop (and shot the Tesla a disparaging look). Unless we’re looking at different videos I don’t see either of those things happening. They don’t appear to change their pace at all after entering the crosswalk and they don’t seem disturbed in the slightest.

ohgodplsno 3y ago

On a 2 lane road, you are about two seconds away from entering the other lane the moment you step on one. How damn close does it have to be ? Also, even taking law out of account: stop when there are goddamn pedestrians. At all times. Even if the law is with you. Heaven is full of people who had the right of way, and I'd rather not add each individual's perception of "but I had the right to speed up as the deceased was crossing!".

ahahahahah 3y ago

For California the law is here: https://law.justia.com/codes/california/2022/code-veh/division-11/chapter-5/section-21950/ https://law.justia.com/codes/california/2022/code-veh/divisi... The Tesla vehicle violated this. subdivision (3) kinda implicitly confirms that a driver doesn't need to wait for a pedestrian to fully exit (what allows for that though is just the definition of and requirements around "right of way").

wilg 3y ago
It’s not clear cut IMO. It doesn’t say you have to stop because a pedestrian is in the crosswalk, just that cars have to yield the right of way to pedestrians. You could argue no yielding was required because there was no conflict, the car and the pedestrian just proceeded at pace and did not interfere with each other. Also, since we’re being pedantic, the vehicle can’t violate the law because it isn’t a person. The driver would be in violation.
- ahahahahah 3y ago
  > You could argue no yielding was required because there was no conflict, the car and the pedestrian just proceeded at pace and did not interfere with each other. Sure, you could argue that. Were it true it'd be fine. But the pedestrian clearly slowed nearly to a stop (and shot the Tesla a disparaging look).
  - wilg 3y ago
    > But the pedestrian clearly slowed nearly to a stop (and shot the Tesla a disparaging look). Unless we’re looking at different videos I don’t see either of those things happening. They don’t appear to change their pace at all after entering the crosswalk and they don’t seem disturbed in the slightest.