Road deaths spark crackdown on jaywalking texter menace Cops in Fort Lee have fined 117 pedestrians in a fortnight for jaywalking while engrossed in their smartphone screens - after three people died by wandering into traffic. So far this year officers have warned 575 citizens in the New Jersey borough that they risked, apart from death, an $85 (£52) ticket for strolling into …
@ItsNotMe
OK so you've never made a fuck up and got a second chance at something? What a perfect little life you must lead, you smug bastard!
I fell out of a moving car when I was 5 years old, it was only doing 20mph and my Mum panic liked crazy and I had to stay in hospital overnight. Perhaps she should have just said, "Sorry, no lifeguards on duty son, too bad!" and left me to bleed to death by the side of the road? We both learned valuable lessons that day. That was back in the early 70's and she became a serious campaigner for the compulsory wearing of seat belts and I learned not to be so bloody stupid.
Oooh Fuzzy, you're waaay too sensitive.
Why is he a smug bastard? Your answer is EXACTLY the point he was making.
YOU learned NOT to be an idiot.
This is the whole point - take responsibility for your own actions. If everyone did that there would certainly be far fewer accidents in the world, but nevertheless, accidents will still happen despite the best of intentions.
"At least they didn't want to make a new law."
No, but I doubt that fining the idiot will make any difference to the the offender or the others out there who do this all the time. Witness the last guy's comments.
Sounds good to me.
Now if only the UK's Met police would start handing out some tickets to the cyclists who seem to spend even less time looking where they are going than these iZombie pedestrians.
Only yesterday I almost put one over the bonnet of my car as I pulled away at a green light... Along he came, from the right (where he'd obviously jumped an orange or red light) and was looking over his right shoulder the whole time when it might have been wise to be paying attention to the slab of steel pulling out of the junction in front of him from the left. Luckily one of us was paying attention.
If I rode my motorbike with that level of care in London I'd be dead within a week.
I'm sure that within the month there will be another heart wrenching story about a father of 2 killed on his bicycle on the way to/from a charity fund-raiser, but it's getting harder and harder for me to feel much sympathy for the cyclist. Sure there are some shocking drivers out there, but they're not the ones who will end up on the slab. So please, pedal pushers, for f*ck's sake try to pay attention! To pinch a phrase from the motorcycle world - treat everyone on the road as if they are a f*cking idiot out to kill you, because the invariably are.
Queue flames from 100% if El Reg cyclists, who have never ever ever done anything but follow the highway code by the letter.
Yawn....
There's a percenatage of inept cyclists, there's a percentage of inept car drivers - and horror of horrors there's a percentage of inept motorcyclists as well. The trouble with motorcyclists is that the the menaces are in a majority. I'll gladly do as you say and treat you as a f*cking idiot, but it's because my experience leads me to believe that there's a significant chance that you are a f*cking idiot.
> The trouble with motorcyclists is that the the menaces are in a majority.
BALDERDASH!
From the Department of Transport:
* * * * *
4.1 Right of way violations
Of the total cases, 681 (38%) involve ROWVs. However, less than 20% of these involve a motorcyclist who rated as either fully or partly to blame for the accident. The majority of motorcycle ROWVaccidents have been found to be primarily the fault of other motorists.
This is an even higher level of ‘non-blameworthiness’ in ROWVaccidents than that observed in other in-depth studies, e.g. Hurt et al. (1981) The majority of ROWVs occur at T-junctions, which are three times as common as roundabouts or crossroads. This finding is in accordance with the work of Hole, Tyrell and Langham (1996), who found that the majority of such accidents occurred at ‘uncontrolled’ (i.e. no stop light or sign with only give-way markings and/or signs
present) T-junctions in urban environments.
When these cases are examined, it can be seen that the most common failure of other drivers in motorcycle accidents is a failure in the continuity of their observation of the road scene. Over 65% of ROWV accidents where the motorcyclist is not regarded as to blame involve a driver who somehow fails to see a motorcyclist who should be in clear view, and, indeed, frequently is in view to witnesses or other road users in the area. Failures of observation that involve drivers failing to take account of restricted views of one kind or another, and failing to judge the approach speed and/or distance of a motorcyclist, are not included in this category.
Sometimes, accident-involved drivers in motorcycle accidents fail to see riders even when they are verifiably using visibility aids, such as daytime running lights and high-visibility protective clothing. This occurs in over 12% of such cases (but the level of use of these aids to visibility is felt to be under-reported by police).
* * * * *
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110509101621/http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roadsafety/research/rsrr/theme5/indepthstudyofmotorcycleacc.pdf
"Sorry Mate, I Didn't See you" really means "Sorry Mate, I Didn't Bother to LOOK Properly"!
Good example from my past. A friend was riding her motorcycle along the road, sunny day, headlight on, wearing a shiny silver-blue one-piece bikers suit, with a fluorescent yellow "Sam Brown" belt on. Car pulled out of a side road straight into her.
Driver's excuse? "I was dazzled by all the reflective gear you were wearing". This was followed by "you must have been going far too fast" - my friend was riding a 50cc limited bike, incapable of doing more than the 30mph limit.
For me, I'll say that roughly 90% of the pedal cyclists I encounter ignore road signs, traffic lights, and the rules of the road in general; they are often pretty ill-mannered and obnoxious too, jeering at people they have inconvenienced or harmed by their rotten behaviour. If all you can say about mortorcyclists is that "more than 50%" are rude and impatient I guess you encounter far nicer motorcyclists than I do pedal cyclists. Of course car drivers are pretty bad too - a lot will deliberately drive at pedestrians when there is no footway, waving at them to get off the road (presumably to try to walk along the tope of a hedge that won't take their weight). I personally think motorcyclists are generally the most polite and patient of road users, although it's more than half a century since I was last on a motorbike.
"The trouble with motorcyclists is that the the menaces are in a majority"
Policeman related to me during my advanced test.. he was sat there stationary at lights when a car he had overtaken caught him up then started pushing his bike forward repeatedly with the front of his car. Unfortunately most of us aren't able to dive off our machines and arrest the tossers.
As a cyclist, I quite agree that there's a lot of awful cyclists out there. Last Friday I had no fewer than three of them cut me up or pull out without warning when I was cycling home.
I tried to explain to my missus that the fine for pulling into traffic without looking should be a limb, but she thought that was harsh.
Other way round in my case. I was (legally*) riding on the footpath, and saw a tosser on his mobile, leave his car, and walk to the parking ticket machine. OK so far. Still on his mobile, he walks to the car, opens the door, ticket on dash, and locks car. By this time I was about 20 metres away, unbelievably said tosser walks *backward*, straight across my path. BANG!! I kept my balance, he went flying, his mobile bouncing off the bike, and land onto the pavement just in front of my wheels. Sickening crunch, I didn't even bother to stop. "That'll teach the fuc*ker!!!"
*In Finland, it's certainly inadvisable - if not illegal(?) - to ride on the road if there's a suitable footpath nearby.
If you read any cycling forum RLJers are despised, lowest of the low, scum of the earth second only to pavement pansies. Why? Not because they ever do much damage (except maybe to themselves) but because they give the rest of the cycle-hating car drivers an excuse to hate us.
Doesn't matter that a lot more of us (esp out in sticksville away from London) do obey the law when out on the road; one twunt doing a RLJ instantly puts all of us in there along with murders, rapists & paedophiles.
Me? I'd string em up, or have the police fine them on a par with similar offences committed by a driver. Personally I enjoy stopping at lights and baffling drivers who expect me to sail through regardless.
This post has been deleted by its author
Re: I can't wait to see how they twist this to be God's will and part of intelligent design...
Well, In the beginning we were created as being genetically perfect, more or less, by our alien overlord.
Then, as you might know, over a longer period of time DNA breaks down and there are errors, which results in crap cyclists, disease, mental health issues, ConDem MPs, watching Corrie and Deadenders, etc, etc.
The reason that our creator allows this to happen is because we chose to essentially stick up two fingers to him and go on our own. So here we are a few thousand years later in the cesspit that we have created all by ourselves. Good innit?
Some people think they do: the Tory government is stuck firmly in the Victorian era.
I used to moan about having to avoid people who were texting as they ambled along, until I too received a must-read text which caused me to slip off the kerb and sprain my ankle. Never again.
Also reminds me of how my mum used to complain about the Saturday night drunks clogging up A&E, until she had one lunchtime glass of wine too many and ending up in A&E with all the other drunks. Never again again.
@AC 14:46 "...iZombie pedestrians.:
@cornz1 "...Podestrians...
Y'know -- if more Android smartphones are sold than iPhones (as Android fans gleefully chortle about whenever the subject comes up) then, without actual numbers being presented, we have to assume that, statistically, the majority of people texting in traffic are DroidDroids rather than iZombies.
@AC13:39 "...iSuppository device...
Is that what one uses when one has a major case of And-rrhoids...?
In the last few weeks had to do an emergency stop twice to avoid hitting a pedestrian, that wasn't a problem people are dicks so you learn to expect and counter them. What pissed me off was they got aggressive about the fact that I didn't send my insurance premiums soaring.
The roads around Eden Prairie in Minnesota horrified me. They have pedestrian controls at junctions but unlike the UK where all motorised traffic stops while pedestrians have their way all that happens in EP is that the road you are crossing is stopped. The side roads are free to go. I don't think there was a separate pedestrian cycle at all.
So at a four way junction (very common) you have to keep an eye out for traffic exiting the junction from a side street.
The idiots who walk at half speed or slower while gabbling or texting, usually in narrow places where you can't walk around them.
Oh, and...
Fuss, fuss... Drivers might or might not text with *alacrity*, which is largely a function of speed, but certainly do it with *impunity*.
I've always had a problem with jaywalking as an offence, I guess it comes from growing up in a country where we're taught common sense and the ability to judge traffic. Darwin takes care of the inattentive.
One of these days a cop in the US is going to get upset but so far I've managed to demonstrate my freedom to cross where I want to rather than slavishly walk all the way to the intersection even when there's negligible traffic.
Of course, one does have to be careful in California where it can induce panic braking in drivers a hundred yards or more away.
I don't get all the people piling on the person walking and texting. They're probably not walking very fast, and someone who's driving is supposed to be looking for hazards in the road. Someone walking near the road is someone who can step into the road; better slow down, in case they do.
Or is it Not Hitting People not the first priority of someone driving a car?
W O W the stupidity is off the scale!! Are you a woman driver perhaps?
"Someone walking near the road is someone who can step into the road; better slow down, in case they do."
REALLY!! So no one goes anywhere unless it’s at 10MPH in case the fukwit paying ZERO ATTENTION to their surroundings decides to just STEP OUT WITHOUT WARNING!
I really hope you don't have a driver’s license.
How about that a vast abundance of observed evidence indicates that as a rule women have no idea as to the appropriate priorities of attention whilst in command of a moving vehicle? This would be in addition to the usual complaints about the severe lack of any spatial awareness; inability to recognise important hazards within their field of vision; zero anticipation of the events which might unfold in traffic situations; extreme deficiency in observation skills and a common predisposition to act in an aggressive and inconsiderate manner.
Probability dictates that exceptions to this rule should exist, but I have never met one nor been exposed to an individual in the real world that constitutes such.
"REALLY!! So no one goes anywhere unless it’s at 10MPH in case the fukwit paying ZERO ATTENTION to their surroundings decides to just STEP OUT WITHOUT WARNING!" -- Yes, you are supposed to anticipate hazards whilst driving, it's part of the theory test.
"Are you a woman driver perhaps?" -- Sexist arsehole! Are you a white van man?
Jay walking is an offence in the US because pedestrians do not have right of way on the public highway, except at designated crossings.
In the UK pedestrians always have right of way, and can cross the road where they like, it is up to drivers to avoid them, no matter how stupid they are. The only exceptions are Motorways and Clearways where it is an offence to walk on the highway.
Good drivers always keep their eyes on pedestrians, and should assume they may suddenly decide to cross the road. A good plan with children and running pedestrians.
You may think running someone down is no problem, but it isn't, unless you are a sociopath, you will suffer emotional trauma. Even if you are a sociopath, you will still have all the hassle and cost of repairing your vehicle from the substantial damage caused from hitting a large solid object, unless you drive an HGV.
Funny thing is...
My friend got hauled into court, in Belfast, for jaywalking.. it was on the papers filed..
Granted she was hammered, and, granted, she just stepped into 4 lanes of 30mph traffic at kicking out time, and, granted, she done it two feet away from DMSU in their bloody obvious armoured landrover. She did also get a 'beep' and emergency stop from the taxi that was about to send her to the pearly gates.
But, she *did* get infront of the beak for it, so there must be a rule there somewhere.. just not widely used if everyone shows a bit of common sense..
In NYC, I got warned by a cop for turning 90Deg and taking a photo down times square, on a crossing (with only two people on it), while the walk sign was on (was still on when I finished my crossing to meet said cop)..
Cop in NYC was an idiot.. cops in Belfast where damn right... it just depends on the circumstances.. not everyone is a retard.. but I do like our UK system of evolution.. as long as the drivers (esp commercial) get compensation for time off road, if they happen to encounter Darwin ignorant pedestrians / cyclists.
How they're meant to use all these wonderful augmented reality/navigation/where's my nearest art gallery type apps, *for pedestrians*, without getting busted.
"This is a retrograde step", say El Goog, "How are we supposed to show our ads..I mean, make use of technology to improve our lives.."
Perhaps it would be sensible to STOP walking for the few seconds it takes to look at the wizzy, wonderful app or maybe slow down a bit or just maybe not try crossing the feckin road with their nose is buried in their mini-fondleslabs
Just a thought, (which is what these idiots need)
As an addenum...
They also need to get out of the way of other pedestrians if on the sidewalk or out of the middle of the aisle in the stores. They're almost as bad as the people who push a cart down the middle of the shopping aisle and have no concept of picking a side so everyone else can get through.
Around here at least most cyclists are pretty sensible. The only thing I don't like are ther assholes who think red lights don't apply to them especially cross walks. The number of times I've almost been hit or saw someone else at a crosswalk is far too high. Bikes come equiped with break so use them.
Motorcycles, imo, definitely seem to have a higher percentage of assholes who feel the road is theirs to racer around on.
With cars you obviously get a lot of dicks too but women, particularly mothers, just don't pay attention. Anytime I've been cycling if I've had a near accident without a doubt it was a mother. One even had the nerve to honk and have a go at me even though I entered the intersection way before she came up it. In fact I was exiting as she came racing up there only to notice me at the last moment.
Baby on board stickers only value is to warn you there's a fucking idiot behind the wheel so stay far away.
Surely walking and texting isn't that hard?
I've dont it for years and so far I've managed to avoid ever hitting anyone, falling into a fountain, and surprisingly I can walk in London, using my mobile to text and actually have the sense to look up and check for traffic as I approach a junction/crossing...
Really its a Darwinian thing, those who can't cope with technology in real life, will exit life...
In the same way that walking and reading anything is hard. It has never, ever occurred to me not to stop walking, move out of the way of other pedestrians where necessary, and then read/write the text. However, I may be odd, because I tend to do the same when talking on a mobile - stop, find an appropriate place to stand, and take/make the call.
It is interesting to see so many people's take on the legalities surrounding pedestrian use of roadways in the US.
The fact is; there is no unified law surrounding this in the US; each state (and even county and cities) get to set their own laws. In most states jay-walking is illegal, but, also in most states, the pedestrian always has the right of way. In most places, even if jay-walking is illegal, it is not enforced. Also, in most places if you are at a 4 way intersection with a light and pedestrian crossing lights, the street you are crossing is stopped, but the other street is green, however it is still incumbent on anyone turning off that street to give deference to any traffic (pedestrian or otherwise) that they will be crossing during the course of their turn.
Think of all of the sick people that would benefit from the donor organs!
The Americans (and other capitals) need to install Trolley Buses* to keep up with the iPodestrian generation, and the demand for transplant organs.
The World population will benefit as halfwits will be removed from existence, leaving people with common sense left. Which means that we won't need as many health & safety rules, and once more our children will be allowed to climb trees, play conkers, and run around the house with scissors in relative safety.
*= Trolley Bus - electrically propelled bus, powered by overhead power cables, which runs on conventional wheels/roads, unlike a tram which requires a track. Because they are almost silent in operation, as known to the locals as "The Creeping Death".
Yes, let's get them out of the gene pool. Mobile phone drivers (texters should already be on the endangered list) are also fair game. They'll kill a few smart people before they go extinct but that is a price we'll have to bear.
Going every where with headphones on should have died out with the now extinct walkman.
"In the UK pedestrians always have right of way, and can cross the road where they like, it is up to drivers to avoid them, no matter how stupid they are. "
If that is the case, why did they teach the Green Cross Code? If they have right of way, just walk out and everyone will stop for you... as far as I know, other than legal crossing points*, pedestrians only have right of way when crossing a side street and you are turning into said side street
*On a side note pedestrians only have right of way at a Zebra crossing when they have a foot on the crossing, otherwise you do not have to stop!
They taught the Green Cross Code because of the dangerous drivers who weren't looking out for pedestrians.
If a pedestrian is already crossing the road at any point (except for the aforementioned Motorways etc) then they gain right of way over oncoming vehicles who must slow down and stop to let them continue to cross. The legality of stepping out in right in front of a moving vehicle presumably becomes a matter for the law court to determine on a case by case basis.
Whilst you may only have to stop when they have a foot on the crossing, you DO have to stop. So you are driving without due care and attention if you have not slowed down in anticipation of the foot being placed on the crossing.
What amazes me is the number of pedestrians, cyclists, bikers and drivers who think that skill is defined by how fast you can go in a straight line.
> If that is the case, why did they teach the Green Cross Code?
Because being right doesn't help much when you're dead.
> pedestrians only have right of way when crossing a side street and you are
> turning into said side street
Rule 206 of the Highway Code says differently. RTA probably has a section to make that enforceable, but I can't be arsed to check right now.
Vic.
Having struck pedestrians in my 20 years on the road, I can assure you that every legal instrument under the sun is against the driver. In one case, the drunk girl actually jumped onto the bonnet of my car then fell on the ground (I had stopped by this time) and though she was totally uninjured, I got to pay for the ambulance that someone else called. Another time, a young girl ran across the road (with headphones and not looking) and actually struck the side of my car and broke her legs under my back wheel. There was no way it was my fault or anything and yet I got to pick up her £12,000 bill and had my car insurance hiked by 50% for 5 years! Because motorists are insured, you'll alwys be found partially liable :(
I only wish there was a compulsory insurance for cyclists and pedestrians, might level things a little.
... walking back from the pub with a friend, coming the other way on the pavement was a young woman who was clearly *totally* oblivious to our presence because she was so engrossed with her mobile phone's display.
It wasn't until she was about six feet from us that I gave a little whilstle and she suddenly looks up and stops dead, realising that she has almost walked into us.
At least she had the good grace to apologise through her blushes...
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
