4 ms·

Since they made this change in California last year, I cross where ever when it is safe and convenient. I'm surprised how big of difference it made to the conve

by bragr 2y ago

Since they made this change in California last year, I cross where ever when it is safe and convenient. I'm surprised how big of difference it made to the convenience and speed of walking somewhere. No more waiting for 2 different lights just to get to the opposite corner.

Gud 2y ago
As a veteran jaywalker, let me propose that you avoid crossing at junctions, where crossings are usually located, ideally cross at one leg, especially good if it’s a one way street. Less traffic, fewer inputs/outputs to keep under observations.
- prophesi 2y ago
  Where I live, just about all of the downtown streets are one-ways and it does wonders for getting around both on foot and in an automobile. Though the latter will be more punishing if you don't know the lay of the land, and there will be congestion near on-ramps during rush hour.
  - WorldMaker 2y ago
    In my experience, some types of one-way streets are some of the least trustworthy for crossing on foot because drivers treat them as race courses or interstates with speed limits (and sometimes worse, traffic lights) as barely a suggestion. It's interesting how much excitement as a pedestrian I find at the elimination of one-way streets and replacement with calmer two-way street "diet" patterns. (Street "diets" reduce lanes, add more dedicated turn lanes, smarter medians and parking.)
metabagel 2y ago
I had to look this up. "Safe jaywalking" is legal in California, but if you risk a collision, you can be cited. ---------- VC 21955. (a) Between adjacent intersections controlled by traffic control signal devices or by police officers, pedestrians shall not cross the roadway at any place except in a crosswalk. (b) (1) A peace officer, as defined in Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 830) of Title 3 of Part 2 of the Penal Code, shall not stop a pedestrian for a violation of subdivision (a) unless a reasonably careful person would realize there is an immediate danger of a collision with a moving vehicle or other device moving exclusively by human power. (2) This subdivision does not relieve a pedestrian from the duty of using due care for their safety. (3) This subdivision does not relieve a driver of a vehicle from the duty of exercising due care for the safety of any pedestrian within the roadway.
- bragr 2y ago
  >I cross where ever when it is safe and convenient
  - ssl-3 2y ago
    I do, too. But -- in California -- it remains illegal to do so in sections of roadway that are betwixt two traffic lights, no matter how safe an convenient it is. (We've got very similarly-worded restrictions here in Ohio, too, FWIW.)
    - toast0 2y ago
      If it's illegal but you can't be stopped for it, it might not really be illegal? Also, there's not that many adjacent controlled intersections. Driveways are intersections, too, and are rarely controlled.
      - ssl-3 2y ago
        Ah. Sovcit logic. How...detestable.
    - nomel 2y ago
      > Between adjacent intersections controlled by traffic control signal devices Does this mean diagonally? What's the distance to "adjacent"? One city block? Two? Does this mean that jaywalking is still practically illegal in most dense cities/downtown areas? The lack of clarity is pretty frustrating with many of these laws. I understand the practical need for wiggle room, but this almost seems like a trap! My naive interpretation is that police will still have plenty of opportunity to use jaywalking in the ways that the law was trying to prevent, especially in densely populated areas. I used to live on a street where crossing it legally meant a one mile trek, so it's appreciated, especially since I was warned once, but I now have no idea if it would be legal or not, since there was a light half mile in either direction.
      - ssl-3 2y ago
sigwinch28 2y ago
>waiting for 2 different lights just to get to the opposite corner. A solution sometimes seen in London is a “Pedestrian Scramble”, where pedestrians are explicitly given full (and even diagonal) access to a junction with all other traffic stopped. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedestrian_scramble https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedestrian_scramble
- mywittyname 2y ago
  In Seattle, they call these "all walks" or officially, "all way walks." I love them, since I don't feel like I have to watch out for drivers making left turns.
cryptonector 2y ago
> Since they made this change in California last year, I cross where ever when it is safe and convenient. You used to comply? Don't comply with dumb laws and rules -- it encourages them to pile on more.

by bragr 2y ago

Gud 2y ago

As a veteran jaywalker, let me propose that you avoid crossing at junctions, where crossings are usually located, ideally cross at one leg, especially good if it’s a one way street. Less traffic, fewer inputs/outputs to keep under observations.

prophesi 2y ago
Where I live, just about all of the downtown streets are one-ways and it does wonders for getting around both on foot and in an automobile. Though the latter will be more punishing if you don't know the lay of the land, and there will be congestion near on-ramps during rush hour.
- WorldMaker 2y ago
  In my experience, some types of one-way streets are some of the least trustworthy for crossing on foot because drivers treat them as race courses or interstates with speed limits (and sometimes worse, traffic lights) as barely a suggestion. It's interesting how much excitement as a pedestrian I find at the elimination of one-way streets and replacement with calmer two-way street "diet" patterns. (Street "diets" reduce lanes, add more dedicated turn lanes, smarter medians and parking.)

metabagel 2y ago

I had to look this up. "Safe jaywalking" is legal in California, but if you risk a collision, you can be cited. ---------- VC 21955. (a) Between adjacent intersections controlled by traffic control signal devices or by police officers, pedestrians shall not cross the roadway at any place except in a crosswalk. (b) (1) A peace officer, as defined in Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 830) of Title 3 of Part 2 of the Penal Code, shall not stop a pedestrian for a violation of subdivision (a) unless a reasonably careful person would realize there is an immediate danger of a collision with a moving vehicle or other device moving exclusively by human power. (2) This subdivision does not relieve a pedestrian from the duty of using due care for their safety. (3) This subdivision does not relieve a driver of a vehicle from the duty of exercising due care for the safety of any pedestrian within the roadway.

bragr 2y ago
>I cross where ever when it is safe and convenient
- ssl-3 2y ago
  I do, too. But -- in California -- it remains illegal to do so in sections of roadway that are betwixt two traffic lights, no matter how safe an convenient it is. (We've got very similarly-worded restrictions here in Ohio, too, FWIW.)
  - toast0 2y ago
    If it's illegal but you can't be stopped for it, it might not really be illegal? Also, there's not that many adjacent controlled intersections. Driveways are intersections, too, and are rarely controlled.
    - ssl-3 2y ago
      Ah. Sovcit logic. How...detestable.
  - nomel 2y ago
    > Between adjacent intersections controlled by traffic control signal devices Does this mean diagonally? What's the distance to "adjacent"? One city block? Two? Does this mean that jaywalking is still practically illegal in most dense cities/downtown areas? The lack of clarity is pretty frustrating with many of these laws. I understand the practical need for wiggle room, but this almost seems like a trap! My naive interpretation is that police will still have plenty of opportunity to use jaywalking in the ways that the law was trying to prevent, especially in densely populated areas. I used to live on a street where crossing it legally meant a one mile trek, so it's appreciated, especially since I was warned once, but I now have no idea if it would be legal or not, since there was a light half mile in either direction.
    - ssl-3 2y ago

sigwinch28 2y ago

>waiting for 2 different lights just to get to the opposite corner. A solution sometimes seen in London is a “Pedestrian Scramble”, where pedestrians are explicitly given full (and even diagonal) access to a junction with all other traffic stopped. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedestrian_scramble https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedestrian_scramble

mywittyname 2y ago
In Seattle, they call these "all walks" or officially, "all way walks." I love them, since I don't feel like I have to watch out for drivers making left turns.

cryptonector 2y ago

> Since they made this change in California last year, I cross where ever when it is safe and convenient. You used to comply? Don't comply with dumb laws and rules -- it encourages them to pile on more.