"He was right, dead right, but just as dead as if he had been dead wrong."
Outside of HN, in real life safety is a responsibility of everyone. You are careful when you drive, careful when you walk. You don't text while driving, you don't text while crossing the street. Everyone stays safer.
The 'you can be right and dead' trope is so tired.Of course we should always be looking to mitigate dangerous and distracted drivers.
>Outside of HN, in real life safety is a responsibility of everyone.
The person driving the gas propelled two ton vehicle has more responsibility to avoid hitting things than pedestrians have to avoid getting hit.
>. You are careful when you drive, careful when you walk. You don't text while driving, you don't text while crossing the street. Everyone stays safer.
Pedestrians *should* be able to text while they cross the street. The only reason they can't/shouldn't is because American drivers are largely allowed to operate their machines in a negligent manner at all times.
Walking is an inherently safe activity. Driving is an inherently dangerous activity. Drivers should have more a burden for safety than walkers. You, as a driver, should expect things to enter the road. That's why we have speed limits. That's you watch the road instead of playing on the road.
In every city I've lived in the US jaywalking is actually illegal, perhaps it should be legal and even encouraged in your opinion but until it is - it's your responsibility to follow the rules.
Sure! And motorist need to follow the rules of the road. Unfortunately when they break the rules, which they do most of the time, they can easily end someones life.
I'm guessing you're one of the good ones who definitely doesn't speed every time they are in the car.
The conversation is about pedestrians walking into traffic while staring in their phones, jaywalking in other words. Please don't try to ad hominem, it just shows that you don't have any arguments of substance and degrades the discussion.
> pedestrians walking into traffic while staring in their phones, jaywalking in other words
This is... not the definition of jaywalking. It is legal to use one's phone while crossing the street.
Aside - history of the term "jaywalking," from Wikipedia: "The word was promoted by pro-automobile interests in the 1920s, according to historian and alternative transportation advocate Peter D. Norton. Today, in the US, the word is often used synonymously with its current legal definition, crossing the street illegally."
It depends on the state, I guess, in which state you can walk into traffic without paying attention, with or without phone, legally? Please be specific. And yes, I've seen this article in Wikipedia, it forgot to explain how pro-automotive interests managed to enforce that in USSR, for example.
You're the one that brought up jaywalking when that wasn't the crux of the argument, are confused about what jaywalking actually entails and then you accuse them of trying to ad hominem.
> The conversation is about pedestrians walking into traffic while staring in their phones, jaywalking in other words
Sorry, you are not understanding what jaywalking is. If you can find a definition of jaywalking that mentions phone, I'll concede your point, but you can't, because it has nothing to do with phones.
Sorry, the rules don't work like that. Jaywalking with a phone is still jaywalking, same as speeding with a phone is still speeding or littering with a phone is still littering. Here is the definition from Wiki:
Jaywalking is the act of pedestrians walking in or crossing a roadway that has traffic if that act contravenes traffic regulations.
Please show me how using a phone suddenly stops contravening with traffic regulations or whatever definition you believe is true that cancels jaywalking somehow when you stare at a phone.
Outside of HN, in real life safety is a responsibility of everyone. You are careful when you drive, careful when you walk. You don't text while driving, you don't text while crossing the street. Everyone stays safer.