The new law permits pedestrians to cross a roadway at any point, including outside of a crosswalk. It also allows for crossing against traffic signals and specifically states that doing so is no longer a violation of the city’s administrative code. But the new law also warns that pedestrians crossing outside of a crosswalk do not have the right of way and that they should yield to other traffic that has the right of way.

  • stupidcasey@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    55
    ·
    2 days ago

    Eh, keeping car traffic smooth is way more challenging than keeping pedestrian traffic smooth. Also people tend to be more chaotic in there direction than cars. If a car stops in front of you you’re sorta stuck if a human stops in front of you you can always bash him in the head with a bar stool or go around or whatever.

    I know it was auto manufacturers lobbying for the law but can you imagine people just randomly darting across an interstate moving at 80+ mph? I can because I have seen it before and not once have I thought wow I sure am glad that’s legal.

    • drake@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      56
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      I think you might have picked a bad community to share your sympathies for smooth car traffic, I’m afraid.

      For what it’s worth, I think it’s reasonable enough to forbid pedestrians from crossing high-speed (60+ mph) roads, but otherwise they should have full right of way over any road, and fuck the cars. They can just be patient and deal with it.

      • 佐藤カズマ@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        But what if those roads didn’t have to exist at all. We could replace those with dedicated high speed rail corridors.

      • stupidcasey@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Maybe, but the alternative is unrealistic and simply not the reality we Live in.(at least in the United States)

        • drake@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 day ago

          That’s how every progressive movement starts, until activists make them reality. If it’s a good idea, it’s a good idea - and if that’s not the way that things are done, the question stops being “is this a good idea”, and starts being “how can we implement this good idea”.

    • PriorityMotif@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      The entire concept of a car is a scam from manufacturing to driving it. Source: Former car mechanic who has hated cars since before it was cool.

      • Lightor@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        What, wait, no. I’ve lived in very rural areas, wtf was I supposed to do without a car? Bike back and forth a few hours for groceries?

        • AA5B@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 hours ago

          There will always be edge cases. The trick is that your scenario ought to be an edge case rather than the most common case.

          Some one is free to search actual numbers but in the US something like

          • 50% of the population is urban

          • 75% of the population is suburban or urban

          For sure different transit or walking options are better for different scenarios but most people, including in the US, are in places where buses or trains can be useful

          • Lightor@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            So people should only live in dense, crowded cities? Because even in the suburbs it’s not possible to grocery shop without a car.

              • Lightor@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                10 hours ago

                Yeah but until then a man’s gotta eat lol and I don’t see them putting grocery stores every 2 miles any time soon.

    • 佐藤カズマ@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      2 days ago

      I will never be sad when car brains like you learn the hard way that cars are nothing but weapons. This is exactly why cars should be completely illegal, full stop.

      • stupidcasey@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Ok, Let’s assume you are perfectly correct in every way, Now according to your hypothesis Cars have no purpose other than being a weapon, now since cars exist at least for the moment, it is probably for the best to make it illegal to dash across shooting ranges.

        • DarkThoughts@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 day ago

          You see, here’s the problem. It’s not actually a shooting range. Streets weren’t made for cars, but for people. Before cars you’d see humans, carriages, horses, etc. all coexisting within the same space.

          • stupidcasey@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            You think in a legally licensed clearly posted shooting rang someone darting through the range illegally should be allowed to retaliate?