Charlie Alliston case - fixie rider accused of causing pedestrian death

[MacB]

That is true, I only used the term 'jaywalking' because I prefer using one word to using 10 words.

To some others on here, jaywalking has a perjorative meaning.

To some others, it does not.

It's a matter of opinion, or rather perception, not a matter of right or wrong.

Liar

or to keep the playground theme going

Liar liar pants on fire

There is no opinion or perception here, YOU WERE WRONG

 

[Inertia]

Of course no issue, but to be clear: I attach a pejorative meaning to the use of the term, but I do not agree that such negative connotations should be attached to either pedestrian in these cases, so far as I have understood the facts which are available.

Noted but by using the term jaywalking a person can imply that the pedestrian was not paying attention, without actually saying it.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

But those people were just walking along a rural road with no pavement, not attempting to cross, as far as we know.

Yep, and the victim blaming has already begun elsewhere.

http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/1552...for_life_after_being_hit_by_car_in_Portslade/
Here's a link to the Brighton Argus, reporting how an 11-year-old is 'fighting for her life' after being hit by a car in Hove. The below-the-line comments (which are always extremely unpleasant in that paper) are already saying that she was 'jaywalking' because she seems not to have been on a crossing when she was hit, therefore it is her own fault that she was nearly killed. Pale Rider and his ilk should be proud. We all know that he thinks he speaks for the entire UK judicial system because he is or has been some minor court official, but 'nobber' isn't strong enough for some of the awful stuff he comes out with.

I never go BTL on The Argus. I wonder how far her detour would have had to be to find a traffic-light controlled crossing point? I don't say safe crossing point as my family's experience of the traffic-light crossing round ours shows it is anything but safe as stopping at the red light is increasingly optional.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

I can't find one example in this thread of anyone claiming that jaywalking is a crime in the UK, so no-one is labelling the actions as a crime. In that regard, the statement is no different than saying "The pedestrian should have been on the crossing". Both are opinions, and both apportion some blame to the pedestrian. Perhaps let's try and keep the debate on whether the pedestrian should have been on the crossing or not, as opposed to over-worked criticism of a perfectly understandable word.

Why should?

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Absolutely, we should fight the use of a word that helped to make american roads the way they are.

Absolutely. The word expresses, and its use is characteristic of, a particular motor-centric mindset. It implies that pedestrians need to be controlled, corralled, hearded and fenced-in, forced to go out of their way to make way for King Car.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

To some others on here, jaywalking has a perjorative meaning.

To some others, it does not.

It's a matter of opinion, or rather perception, not a matter of right or wrong.

Those who claim jaywalking does not have a perjorative meaning continue to embarrass others by their ignorance. It is a matter of meaning not perception.

"A campaign of ridicule directed toward the extermination of the "Jay Walker Family" was inaugurated [in Tacoma WA] today by the local automobile club. The "Jay Walker Family" according to explanations made today is numerous. It is composed of those pedestrians who cross congested streets without first looking to see if it is safe to do so. The local automobile club today adopted resolutions suggesting propaganda to be distributed all over the country to "kill off the Jay Walker Family." Automobile clubs all over the country ... will be asked to aid in exterminating "Mr. and Mrs. Jay Walker and all the little Walkers."

 

[jefmcg]

I can't find one example in this thread of anyone claiming that jaywalking is a crime in the UK,

And this is why we shouldn't use the term. Jaywalking means crossing the road without regard to traffic regulations. That has no meaning in the UK on Old Street, and using the term implicitly indicates that they are breaking a law.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

And this is why we shouldn't use the term. Jaywalking means crossing the road without regard to traffic regulations. That has no meaning in the UK, and using the term implicitly indicates that they are breaking a law.

Apparently it is the law in NI. They are so much closer to America obvs.

 

[jefmcg]

Apparently it is the law in NI. They are so much closer to America obvs.

Edited

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Just finished reading a fascinating piece from Ireland where they have unenforced jay walking laws (50m of a crossing - which is pretty much the same as in Denmark). Apparently pedestrians on the mobile phones are the main menace. Oddly the article was silent about the greater menace of drivers on their mobile phones.

 

[Inertia]

Just finished reading a fascinating piece from Ireland where they have unenforced jay walking laws (50m of a crossing - which is pretty much the same as in Denmark). Apparently pedestrians on the mobile phones are the main menace. Oddly the article was silent about the greater menace of drivers on their mobile phones.

That's very strange, I feel sure it says something but I cant put my finger on it.

 

[jefmcg]

[QUOTE 4951189, member: 1314"]Jaywalking was introduced in the States as their highways were in main built for cars,[/QUOTE]
That's not true. The term jay-walking dates back to the time when the roads were nearly entirely populated by walkers, riders and wagons. And the smooth surfaces required for motoring were introduced following lobbying by .... cyclists! So the highways were built for horses and bicycles, not for cars.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2011/aug/15/cyclists-paved-way-for-roads

1913:

(note the charming language "kill off" and "exterminate")

 

[mjr]

This will make it countless plus one then

That still makes countless.

I don't know, the use of the term jaywalking in that context made perfect sense to me. Oh well!

Henry Ford wants you for a spark plug :P

Whilst in local FFS! news http://www.wscountytimes.co.uk/news...after-car-collides-with-pedestrians-1-8143687

Naughty car, deciding to collide with pedestrians instead of doing what its driver told it

 

[GrumpyGregry]

That's not true. The term jay-walking dates back to the time when the roads were nearly entirely populated by walkers, riders and wagons. And the smooth surfaces required for motoring were introduced following lobbying by .... cyclists! So the highways were built for horses and bicycles, not for cars.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2011/aug/15/cyclists-paved-way-for-roads

1913:
View attachment 372912
(note the charming language "kill off" and "exterminate")

Strange how jaydriver (the "nobber driver" of its day) died out whilst jaywalker got legs and persists to this day.

 

[jefmcg]

We keep talking as if crossings are a panacea, but I'm reflecting on the pedestrian collisions I have personal knowledge of -

1. There was a busy pelican crossing near St Paul's. I stopped for a red light and the pedestrians had stepped onto the road when a motorcyclist ran the red and knocked a woman down. I'd guess the woman sustained a broken wrist, and the motorcyclist came down heavily, but she seemed to be ok.
2. The aforementioned pedestrian unconscious and face down on a zebra crossing in old street.
3. My brother standing on the pavement waiting for the light to change when two cars collided in the junction and one of them spun into him, throwing him into the air, breaking his leg, and his laptop.

And two things from just today

1. Just half an hour ago I hesitated stepping off the kerb when the green man appeared as a car ran the light at speed.
2. From just upthread, 7 people walking legally on a country road, 2 dead, two badly injured. Jesus.

I wonder if we subtracted every example of "jaywalking"* from the road deaths, how much lower the total would actually be?

And without accusing CA of any further offences, I have seen cyclists (especially fixie riders) skimming around pedestrians on zebra crossings. I am not at all convinced that using a crossing would have saved her.

*FWIW, the definition of jaywalking from where I grew up would be something like (it's not a legal term):

1. Crossing against a red or amber OR
2. Crossing within 20m of a crossing point and not using it. Ie if the nearest pedestrian crossing is 21 metres away, you don't have to use it OR
3. Not choosing the most direct route across the road OR
4. Because it's Melbourne, extra rules about trams.