The Glade 4.0
https://gladerebooted.net/

An odd moment of clarity.
https://gladerebooted.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3703
Page 1 of 2

Author:  Micheal [ Tue Aug 03, 2010 8:07 pm ]
Post subject:  An odd moment of clarity.

You know those odd moments when you're about to break a rule and something tells you not to do it?

On the way into work today, going up a one-way street, preparing to turn left onto a two-way street, about half a block from the turn a woman in a fluorescent yellow top steps out as if to cross the street. She stops, already in the street, but looking unsure if I am going to stop. The law says stop. Pedestrians have the right of way. She's started her cross of the street. So I sighed and stopped to let her cross. She crossed the street.

I turn, go park my car, and turn toward the street I had just left because I had to cross it to get to work.

Surprise, surprise. Two motorcycle officers were sitting about ten feet in from the stop sign on the other side of the road. The woman in the bright yellow top was crossing the street back to where she had been. She was talking to them. While I was still on the sidewalk walking to the crosswalk and she was still in the intersection a shiny silver Camaro blew on through like she wasn't there. One of the Officers took off after it and the Camaro pulled over a couple blocks down. I said "Nice trap." to her as I passed. She said something like "Yeah, we've got better than a dozen of them already this morning." I went on into work.

Sometimes following the rules pays off.

Author:  Taskiss [ Tue Aug 03, 2010 8:10 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: An odd moment of clarity.

Micheal wrote:
Sometimes following the rules pays off.

Pretty much always, actually. Worst case, it's a wash.

Author:  Müs [ Tue Aug 03, 2010 8:39 pm ]
Post subject: 

Quote:
I said "Nice trap." to her as I passed. She said something like "Yeah, we've got better than a dozen of them already this morning." I went on into work.


Traps like this should be illegal.

Author:  Hopwin [ Tue Aug 03, 2010 8:40 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: An odd moment of clarity.

Taskiss wrote:
Micheal wrote:
Sometimes following the rules pays off.

Pretty much always, actually. Worst case, it's a wash.

^^

Author:  Jasmy [ Tue Aug 03, 2010 10:08 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: An odd moment of clarity.

Pedestrian in the street, I always stop...force of habit after being a school crossing guard for the city of San Jose for a good 10+ years. I had too many close calls with idiots to count!!

Author:  Shelgeyr [ Tue Aug 03, 2010 10:56 pm ]
Post subject:  Re:

Müs wrote:
Quote:
I said "Nice trap." to her as I passed. She said something like "Yeah, we've got better than a dozen of them already this morning." I went on into work.
Traps like this should be illegal.
At the very least, they seriously damage the credibility of officials who claim cops don't have quotas. Seriously, if there's a reason for traps like this - other than to meet quotas and add cash to the city's coffers - I can't think of it.
Speed traps, I can understand. The cops are there to bust people that are breaking the law, and seeing people get busted encourages others to behave. **** like this, though - it might not violate the legal definition of entrapment, but that doesn't mean that's not exactly what it is.

Author:  Müs [ Tue Aug 03, 2010 11:32 pm ]
Post subject: 

I also don't agree with the pedestrian always having the right of way.

If you're in a crosswalk, sure, as long as you're crossing with the light, or if there's no light, then ok. But to cause traffic to have to come to a screeching halt because you just stepped off the goddamn curb? **** that. You deserve to get hit. We learn not to jump in front of cars when we're little... then the state goes ahead and says its all fine, its the driver's fault for hitting you even if you're jaywalking across a 6 lane boulevard.

**** pedestrians.

Author:  Midgen [ Wed Aug 04, 2010 12:45 am ]
Post subject: 

There was a big crosswalk sting in Seattle a few years back. They made a big deal out of it. Invited news crews and brought along video cameras.

Not sure if this is the case everywhere, but here, it's illegal to enter the crosswalk in your vehicle if there is a pedestrian anywhere in said crosswalk, even if you are behind them and they are walking away on the opposite side of the street in the opposing lane.

Several of the videos they showed, the "pedestrian" had completely crossed the street, and was about to step up on the curb, then hesitated, leaving one foot in the street, until a car came around the corner and entered the crosswalk, behind them.

Needless to say, there were some pissed off motorists that day...

Author:  Emer [ Wed Aug 04, 2010 1:15 am ]
Post subject: 

They have these "stings" or as they call them pedestrian enforcement days at least once a month in each of the towns around here where I live. It pisses me off to no end to have someone just walk across the crosswalk back and forth all day long with half a dozen police cars laying in wait to get those that dont abide, or as usually the case, don't know the law.

If you're being a blatant arse, sure, but I don't believe towns with populations of 600 do this out of the kindness of their hearts to notify people of the law. It fills the coffers well tho.

Author:  Micheal [ Wed Aug 04, 2010 1:17 am ]
Post subject: 

It is like shooting fish in a barrel, you know someone is going to make a great target of themselves in short order, just sit and wait.

I'm just happy I wasn't one of the fish.

Author:  Nevandal [ Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:07 am ]
Post subject:  Re:

Müs wrote:
Quote:
I said "Nice trap." to her as I passed. She said something like "Yeah, we've got better than a dozen of them already this morning." I went on into work.


Traps like this should be illegal.



this.


fortunately it's an effective method for controlling most of the population.


deterrence is a powerful method.

Author:  Raell [ Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:38 am ]
Post subject:  Re:

Müs wrote:
I **** pedestrians.



What???


:twisted:

Author:  Nevandal [ Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:46 am ]
Post subject: 

love?


lol

Author:  Hopwin [ Wed Aug 04, 2010 6:44 am ]
Post subject:  Re:

Müs wrote:
**** pedestrians.

**** Canadian Geese too.

Author:  Rynar [ Wed Aug 04, 2010 8:10 am ]
Post subject: 

I stop out of courtesy and concern. Not because it is the law. And yes, traps like this should be illegal.

Author:  Elmarnieh [ Wed Aug 04, 2010 8:27 am ]
Post subject: 

Just stand out right there and say "Police sting in progress. Please stop your car before entering cross walk or you will help them make their quota."

Author:  LadyKate [ Wed Aug 04, 2010 8:36 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Re:

Shelgeyr wrote:
Müs wrote:
Quote:
I said "Nice trap." to her as I passed. She said something like "Yeah, we've got better than a dozen of them already this morning." I went on into work.
Traps like this should be illegal.
At the very least, they seriously damage the credibility of officials who claim cops don't have quotas. Seriously, if there's a reason for traps like this - other than to meet quotas and add cash to the city's coffers - I can't think of it.
Speed traps, I can understand. The cops are there to bust people that are breaking the law, and seeing people get busted encourages others to behave. **** like this, though - it might not violate the legal definition of entrapment, but that doesn't mean that's not exactly what it is.


This. Really, I KNOW law enforcement has bigger fish to fry. The one and only reason for something like this is money. Shame shame shame.
Good job for not falling for it, Micheal.


Müs wrote:
I also don't agree with the pedestrian always having the right of way.

If you're in a crosswalk, sure, as long as you're crossing with the light, or if there's no light, then ok. But to cause traffic to have to come to a screeching halt because you just stepped off the goddamn curb? **** that. You deserve to get hit. We learn not to jump in front of cars when we're little... then the state goes ahead and says its all fine, its the driver's fault for hitting you even if you're jaywalking across a 6 lane boulevard.

**** pedestrians.



George Carlin? Dude! I thought you were dead!

Author:  Aethien [ Wed Aug 04, 2010 12:08 pm ]
Post subject: 

The whole crosswalk-thing has bugged the crap out of me since moving to CA ... crap, almost 20 years ago. I came from the East Coast, where it's much as Mus says - traffic shouldn't stop just because you decide to cross the street. I even coined the term "crosswalk mentality" for it - because it breeds in individuals a sense of entitlement and obliviousness, that they can just go walking across an intersection without taking a nanosecond to look and see if anyone's coming. And, I've seen it happen - they expect cars to stop, so they just blunder out. A friend of mine, visiting from the East Coast, was driving through the UCLA campus (there are a number of roads that go through), and he nearly creamed a few students who stepped out in front of him. He had trouble understanding that (a) they hadn't looked, and (b) assumed he was going to stop. I had to disabuse him of both notions.

I have always had a strong feeling that the crosswalk mentality in CA spills over into other patterns of behavior, but I won't go there right now.

And, stings? Oh, yeah, they sting us here. Two years ago (and yes, I'm still irate about this), I came out of the subway in downtown LA and crossed the street to get to work, right behind someone else who'd also come out of the subway. Some motorcycle cop stands up off his bike on the corner and motions to me, saying, "Can I talk to you?" Sure, I dunno, why not? I think. Because he gave me a **** $128 dollar ticket for CROSSING THE STREET WHILE THE DON'T WALK SIGNAL WAS FLASHING. Note that it was flashing, not solid. Note that there is a countdown timer. Note that every other jurisdiction - and even some areas of LA - have completely different signals; some go straight to Don't Walk without flashing; some flash with numbers, etc. I ended up with a $128 ticket. I meant to fight it, but it just ended up not being worth the effort. At least by starting the process of contesting it, I somehow got out of the extra $10 or whatever that they charge for paying online.

Since then, whenever I see Mr. **** Motorcyle officer standing on the corner, I warn people either (a) not to cross, or (b) not to talk to him. I'll probably get beaten on the kidneys till I piss blood someday for it.

I really should put this into Rants, I suppose.

Author:  Vindicarre [ Wed Aug 04, 2010 12:57 pm ]
Post subject: 

I'm with you Aethien.
I don't understand why people out here feel they must slow down when they are in the cross walk. Back East people seem to break into a trot when they see a car waiting (that's people, not teenagers ;) ).

I've got a question regarding the crosswalk laws:
If someone is crossing a a multi-lane street divided by a median (concrete), and they're on the other side of the median from you (walking away, or coming toward you), are you required to stop? I can see it both ways - they'r in the crosswalk, yes, but they're at least thirty feet away separated by a concrete barrier. I imagine, like anything else, if they decide to ticket you, they'll ticket you.

Author:  Müs [ Wed Aug 04, 2010 1:15 pm ]
Post subject:  Re:

Vindicarre wrote:
I've got a question regarding the crosswalk laws:
If someone is crossing a a multi-lane street divided by a median (concrete), and they're on the other side of the median from you (walking away, or coming toward you), are you required to stop? I can see it both ways - they'r in the crosswalk, yes, but they're at least thirty feet away separated by a concrete barrier. I imagine, like anything else, if they decide to ticket you, they'll ticket you.


Depends on the municipality. Here in Vegas, I think you're required to stop if they're crossing with the light in the crosswalk... but noone really ever does.

In Cali, if they're in the street *at all* you have to stop.

Author:  Lenas [ Wed Aug 04, 2010 1:17 pm ]
Post subject: 

Yeah right, try enforcing that **** here in San Diego.

Author:  Müs [ Wed Aug 04, 2010 1:21 pm ]
Post subject: 

Yeh, can't swing a dead cat by the tail without hitting a half a dozen jaywalkers.

Author:  Vindicarre [ Wed Aug 04, 2010 2:48 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Re:

Müs wrote:
Vindicarre wrote:
I've got a question regarding the crosswalk laws:
If someone is crossing a a multi-lane street divided by a median (concrete), and they're on the other side of the median from you (walking away, or coming toward you), are you required to stop? I can see it both ways - they'r in the crosswalk, yes, but they're at least thirty feet away separated by a concrete barrier. I imagine, like anything else, if they decide to ticket you, they'll ticket you.


Depends on the municipality. Here in Vegas, I think you're required to stop if they're crossing with the light in the crosswalk... but noone really ever does.


After further research:

Quote:
V C Section 21950 Right of Way at Crosswalks

Right-of-Way at Crosswalks

21950. (a) The driver of a vehicle shall yield the right-of-way to a pedestrian crossing the roadway within any marked crosswalk or within any unmarked crosswalk at an intersection, except as otherwise provided in this chapter.

(b) This section does not relieve a pedestrian from the duty of using due care for his or her safety. No pedestrian may suddenly leave a curb or other place of safety and walk or run into the path of a vehicle that is so close as to constitute an immediate hazard. No pedestrian may unnecessarily stop or delay traffic while in a marked or unmarked crosswalk.

(c) The driver of a vehicle approaching a pedestrian within any marked or unmarked crosswalk shall exercise all due care and shall reduce the speed of the vehicle or take any other action relating to the operation of the vehicle as necessary to safeguard the safety of the pedestrian.

(d) Subdivision (b) does not relieve a driver of a vehicle from the duty of exercising due care for the safety of any pedestrian within any marked crosswalk or within any unmarked crosswalk at an intersection.

Amended Sec. 8, Ch. 833, Stats. 2000. Effective January 1, 2001


So, if they're walking away from you, there is no "yield" needed, yeah, that'll fly.

Müs wrote:
In Cali, if they're in the street *at all* you have to stop.


Quote:
V C Section 21954 Pedestrians Outside Crosswalks

Pedestrians Outside Crosswalks

21954. (a) Every pedestrian upon a roadway at any point other than within a marked crosswalk or within an unmarked crosswalk at an intersection shall yield the right-of-way to all vehicles upon the roadway so near as to constitute an immediate hazard.

(b) The provisions of this section shall not relieve the driver of a vehicle from the duty to exercise due care for the safety of any pedestrian upon a roadway.

Amended Ch. 1015, Stats. 1971. Operative May 3, 1972.


LOL:
Quote:
V C Section 21961 Local Regulation of Pedestrians

Local Regulation of Pedestrians

21961. This chapter does not prevent local authorities from adopting ordinances prohibiting pedestrians from crossing roadways at other than crosswalks.

Author:  Darkroland [ Wed Aug 04, 2010 2:53 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: An odd moment of clarity.

I believe we're avoiding the important issue here.

Was the woman in the fluorescent yellow top hot?

That could completely skew the ticket numbers! I know I'd be more inclined to stop and let her cross....

Author:  Müs [ Wed Aug 04, 2010 2:59 pm ]
Post subject: 

NV Revised Statutes on the matter:
Quote:
NRS 484B.280 Duties of driver of motor vehicle to pedestrian. A driver of a motor vehicle shall:
1. Exercise due care to avoid a collision with a pedestrian;
2. Give an audible warning with the horn of the vehicle if appropriate and when necessary to avoid such a collision; and
3. Exercise proper caution upon observing a pedestrian on or near a highway, street or road or in or near a school crossing zone marked in accordance with NRS 484B.363 or a marked or unmarked crosswalk.
(Added to NRS by 1997, 739)—(Substituted in revision for NRS 484.3245)
NRS 484B.283 Right-of-way in crosswalk; impeding ability of driver to yield prohibited; overtaking vehicle at crosswalk; obedience to signals and other devices for control of traffic. Except as otherwise provided in NRS 484B.287, 484B.290 and 484B.350:
1. When official traffic-control devices are not in place or not in operation the driver of a vehicle shall yield the right-of-way, slowing down or stopping if need be so to yield, to a pedestrian crossing the highway within a crosswalk when the pedestrian is upon the half of the highway upon which the vehicle is traveling, or when the pedestrian is approaching so closely from the opposite half of the highway as to be in danger.
2. A pedestrian shall not suddenly leave a curb or other place of safety and walk or run into the path of a vehicle which is so close that it is impossible for the driver to yield.
3. Whenever a vehicle is stopped at a marked crosswalk or at an unmarked crosswalk at an intersection, the driver of any other vehicle approaching from the rear shall not overtake and pass the stopped vehicle until the driver has determined that the vehicle being overtaken was not stopped for the purpose of permitting a pedestrian to cross the highway.
4. Whenever signals exhibiting the words “Walk” or “Don’t Walk” are in place, such signals indicate as follows:
(a) While the “Walk” indication is illuminated, pedestrians facing the signal may proceed across the highway in the direction of the signal and must be given the right-of-way by the drivers of all vehicles.
(b) While the “Don’t Walk” indication is illuminated, either steady or flashing, a pedestrian shall not start to cross the highway in the direction of the signal, but any pedestrian who has partially completed the crossing during the “Walk” indication shall proceed to a sidewalk, or to a safety zone if one is provided.
(c) Whenever the word “Wait” still appears in a signal, the indication has the same meaning as assigned in this section to the “Don’t Walk” indication.
(d) Whenever a signal system provides a signal phase for the stopping of all vehicular traffic and the exclusive movement of pedestrians, and “Walk” and “Don’t Walk” indications control pedestrian movement, pedestrians may cross in any direction between corners of the intersection offering the shortest route within the boundaries of the intersection when the “Walk” indication is exhibited, and when signals and other official traffic-control devices direct pedestrian movement in the manner provided in this section and in NRS 484B.307.
(Added to NRS by 1969, 1492; A 1981, 669, 1918; 2003, 364)—(Substituted in revision for NRS 484.325)

NRS 484B.287 When pedestrian must yield right-of-way to vehicle; when crossing at crosswalk is required; crossing diagonally. Except as provided in NRS 484B.290:
1. Every pedestrian crossing a highway at any point other than within a marked crosswalk or within an unmarked crosswalk at an intersection shall yield the right-of-way to all vehicles upon the highway.
2. Any pedestrian crossing a highway at a point where a pedestrian tunnel or overhead pedestrian crossing has been provided shall yield the right-of-way to all vehicles upon the highway.
3. Between adjacent intersections at which official traffic-control devices are in operation pedestrians shall not cross at any place except in a marked crosswalk.
4. A pedestrian shall not cross an intersection diagonally unless authorized by official traffic-control devices.
5. When authorized to cross diagonally, pedestrians shall cross only in accordance with the official traffic-control devices pertaining to such crossing movements.
(Added to NRS by 1969, 1493; A 1981, 670, 1919)—(Substituted in revision for NRS 484.327)

Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/