guy was clearly speeding. There were crosswalks on that road and a speed limit of no faster than 20 MPH (or 25 KPH) is my guess.

Reminds me of trying to use a crosswalk in Irvine, except instead of motorcycles and various scooters occupied by hardened citizens under the iron curtain, it's BMWs and Mercedes occupied by entitled business men on cellphones.

How true. Something like 1/5 of accidents involving pedestrians happen outside of crosswalks, meaning a full 80% happen inside of them. A jury in San Mateo California found that crosswalks with no traffic signals should be removed. >> ^rottenseed:

I don't EVER cross at those shady blinking-yellow-lights crosswalks. Seen too many near misses involving mothers with strollers. Don't use them...they shouldn't even exist because they give a false sense of security. Just spend the money on a pedestrian bridge.

>> ^longde:

In my town, we have an crosswalk that is frenquented by kids going to a park. This cross walk has yellow lights embedded in the road and on street signs for crossing pedestrians. And still you have assholes gunning past people who activate the lights.
I think drivers should absolutely always yield the right of way. I get annoyed too at slow walkers, but I figure I will get to where I'm going alot faster than they will half the time.
>> ^sixshot:
>> ^chilaxe:
She needs a new brain, but so does the pedestrian. A rationalist could never get hit by a car like that.

The bitch swapped lanes (or was that she went into incoming traffic lane to pass), which lead to hitting that elderly man. Sure the old guy should have looked one last time but that's besides the point. Reckless driving inevitably leads to shit like that.
I've seen assholes behind the wheel out on the roads all the time. And they do the most dumbest shit out there. Though I have yet to witness the result of their stupidity, it's only a matter of time when they get what they deserve.
At the same time, people who cross the street frequently needs to be more goddamn courteous. I've seen people who cross the street with no fucking regards to themselves or to whether or not it is even safe to cross. And that alone pisses me off as a driver and makes me hate the pedestrian law we have in America (whereas any vehicular hit to a pedestrian results in the driver being at fault 99% of the time). People like that makes me want to run 'em over Grand Theft Auto style. And in today's day and age of techno-gadgets, people are more prone to getting hurt due to not being attentive enough to their surroundings.



Yeah but if you give them a little push with your car they'll get to where they're going faster too, its win win!

I don't EVER cross at those shady blinking-yellow-lights crosswalks. Seen too many near misses involving mothers with strollers. Don't use them...they shouldn't even exist because they give a false sense of security. Just spend the money on a pedestrian bridge.

edit: I realize this is riddled with sentence fragments>> ^longde:

In my town, we have an crosswalk that is frenquented by kids going to a park. This cross walk has yellow lights embedded in the road and on street signs for crossing pedestrians. And still you have assholes gunning past people who activate the lights.
I think drivers should absolutely always yield the right of way. I get annoyed too at slow walkers, but I figure I will get to where I'm going alot faster than they will half the time.
>> ^sixshot:
>> ^chilaxe:
She needs a new brain, but so does the pedestrian. A rationalist could never get hit by a car like that.

The bitch swapped lanes (or was that she went into incoming traffic lane to pass), which lead to hitting that elderly man. Sure the old guy should have looked one last time but that's besides the point. Reckless driving inevitably leads to shit like that.
I've seen assholes behind the wheel out on the roads all the time. And they do the most dumbest shit out there. Though I have yet to witness the result of their stupidity, it's only a matter of time when they get what they deserve.
At the same time, people who cross the street frequently needs to be more goddamn courteous. I've seen people who cross the street with no fucking regards to themselves or to whether or not it is even safe to cross. And that alone pisses me off as a driver and makes me hate the pedestrian law we have in America (whereas any vehicular hit to a pedestrian results in the driver being at fault 99% of the time). People like that makes me want to run 'em over Grand Theft Auto style. And in today's day and age of techno-gadgets, people are more prone to getting hurt due to not being attentive enough to their surroundings.

In my town, we have an crosswalk that is frenquented by kids going to a park. This cross walk has yellow lights embedded in the road and on street signs for crossing pedestrians. And still you have assholes gunning past people who activate the lights.

I think drivers should absolutely always yield the right of way. I get annoyed too at slow walkers, but I figure I will get to where I'm going alot faster than they will half the time.

>> ^sixshot:
>> ^chilaxe:
She needs a new brain, but so does the pedestrian. A rationalist could never get hit by a car like that.

The bitch swapped lanes (or was that she went into incoming traffic lane to pass), which lead to hitting that elderly man. Sure the old guy should have looked one last time but that's besides the point. Reckless driving inevitably leads to shit like that.
I've seen assholes behind the wheel out on the roads all the time. And they do the most dumbest shit out there. Though I have yet to witness the result of their stupidity, it's only a matter of time when they get what they deserve.
At the same time, people who cross the street frequently needs to be more goddamn courteous. I've seen people who cross the street with no fucking regards to themselves or to whether or not it is even safe to cross. And that alone pisses me off as a driver and makes me hate the pedestrian law we have in America (whereas any vehicular hit to a pedestrian results in the driver being at fault 99% of the time). People like that makes me want to run 'em over Grand Theft Auto style. And in today's day and age of techno-gadgets, people are more prone to getting hurt due to not being attentive enough to their surroundings.

As a cyclist, I think we should get More tickets. Really.
Of course not for riding safely, and within the bounds of the law (which, it seems that the guy in the video was), but for breaking the laws.

As is often the case, blankfist's comment was an excellent example of what is wrong with the world. Cyclists routinely don't know, or ignore, the traffic laws. Motorists are even more ignorant, and don't know how to treat cyclists. We end up with a huge cluterf@*K, where it is unnecessarily dangerous to ride a bike.

My hope is that, were cyclists subject to more tickets (or at least friendly police reminders), they would be more aware of and more likely to follow the laws, and the perception of cyclists as legitimate users of the road increase. Police would, of course, need to lean these laws themselves.
An even more effective tactic might be to put questions about bike laws on driving license tests, or make pamphlets on cycling laws readily available at every department of motor vehicles and every bike shop.

I suspect other cyclists here may react fiercely to any suggestion that we might be part of the problem, but please think it over for a second. I stop at all stop signs, and signal, etc.. and I'm sure you do too, but every single day I see other cyclist who don't. I've seen a young man thrown 4 m after being hit by a car while darting across a crosswalk on a bike. I've seen a woman slam into a police car as she reached an intersection while riding on the wrong side of the road. On the other hand, I'm sick of cars waving me through when they have the right-of-way; it's dangerous and a waste of time. I'm sick of feeling like I'm risking my life every time I make a left turn in traffic because the cars around me don't know understand what that involves. Something has to change.

F**k cyclists. They can't decide if they're cars or pedestrians. When there's a red light, they're a pedestrian using the crosswalk. When the light is green, they're a car slowing down traffic. Other times they take the sidewalk. My name is blankfist and I'm an assholic.

>> ^gwiz665:

Alcohol is not the killer, the gun is. You can't kill anyone with alcohol, you need the car (or a weapon).
>> ^Psychologic:
>> ^gwiz665:
This is why amateurs should not have guns and this is why gun laws in the states are also crazy.
Might as well outlaw alcohol too then. Idiot drunks kill people on the highway, so obviously no one can be trusted to drink.
On a side note, I know an "Alcohol Enforcement Officer"... drinks more than anyone I've ever met, and not in a good way.



the same could be said for guns. it takes someone pulling the trigger to kill.

i do want to add a bit of commentary on these developing stories. between this and the jose guerera case, both cases piss me right the fuck off and heres why. In both instances you have an overwhelming force subduing another. in this case, gun toting cop vs knife toting dude. in jose's case, an entire swat team vs one armed man. the end result was death, fucking wrongful, wasteful death.

now having said that, the commentary i would like to add is this: i know that in armed conflict and escalating situations such as these (presumably, even hypothetically, ie, he could have charged the cop with the knife off screen and an attacker can close distance in most cases faster than the shooter can react and fire) it takes steel nerves and lightning reflexes reinforced by training to make the decision to fire or not fire.

........however, when i was in afghanistan, i found myself in the middle of a legit "mexican standoff". long story short, my PCC team were to accompany the scout platoon to escort a rogue afghan border patrol police general back to our FOB to speak with his superiors. When we arrived to our PCC compound we found that he was there, along with over 100 of his loyals, preparing to mount a raid of their own (they were usually running illegal checkpoints, shit like that). Naturally when they figured out that we were there to detain their leader (in their eyes, our direct orders were to not detain but persuade him to come with us, if he refused we were to leave without incident). My CO talked with the general and persuaded him to willingly come with us.....but to his loyals, we were capturing him. within seconds, the guards they had in their towers had oriented their crew served weapons inwards, ANP loyals were loading their RPG's with armor piercers and taking fighting positions behind buildings oriented at us, you could hear dozens of ak's "racking" (chambering a round). There was over a hundred of them and less than 20 of us. Had it exploded into a firefight, we certainly woulved fucked all shit up.......but few, if any, of us were leaving alive. all it wouldve taken was one round to go off from either side to fully escalate that encounter to a full on gun battle. fortunately we kept our cool (as did the anp loyals), assessed the situation, navigated the battle space, reinforced by our training which emphasizes self control, discipline, and situational awareness, and we were able to diffuse the situation without incident. Not a single round was fired. and we had accomplished our mission (btw turns out the general had been hoarding police gun stocks, by the thousands, and had cached them at his house and was selling them off to taliban)

now my point being if i and the members of my team had the intestinal fortitude and mental tenacity to diffuse that highlyvolatile situation without incident, especially considering the higher stakes (this was in the middle of a fucking war, not in someones neighborhood or on a crosswalk), so to speak.......what is your fucking excuse Tucson swat team? what is your fucking excuse, cop in this video?

But seriously, @shinyblurry I go into a debate with the mindset that I am either going to change the opinion of the person I'm debating with or I'm going to change my own opinion.

For example: I recently bickered with a friend about a bunch of new roundabouts that were put in near my home. I thought it was a stupid idea that would do more harm than good because people don't know how to use roundabouts. I argued that it would probably lead to more accidents because of all of the interweaving traffic.

My friend argued that while they were sometimes hard to maneuver in, they would make it easier for everyone because you wouldn't have to stop. And while that seems dangerous, most people are hurt in cross traffic because some people blow red lights. At that point I needed some verification *smartphone in a bar to the rescue!* and it turned out he was right. Roundabouts caused far fewer accidents because people were FORCED to slow down; this eliminated all of the red light blowing and accidents associated with it.

So what's the point here? Well in the weeks since this conversation when the topic came up, I was an ardent supporter of roustabouts and even though I don't like learning to use them, I appreciate that they save lives. I jump on neigh-sayers who hang onto the ideas that I did with statistical data to support my position.
----------
IF on the other hand, tomorrow I see, that roundabouts cause a sharp spike in (insert horrible death scenario here) and that outweighs the crosswalk statistical data, I would jump right back on the other bandwagon. It's not so much about just how I FEEL, it's about what I can prove and what is more important to me.

As it stands right now, and you yourself must admit, the idea of religion hinges on faith. I, like many others here, can not accept that as a good proposition because, like the cross-street vs the roundabout, my intuition about something is usually not what is the most important. I value rigorous analysis, and thorough argument over my gut. Since my guts, after all, have shit for brains.

Thanks! That one has sat around for a while.
In reply to this comment by marinara:
*promote

reminds me of http://videosift.com/video/Crosswalk-Madness except with more zaniness

Most establishments have video surveillance in use signs up. And it's common sense that you "watch where you are going", but perhaps they need a sign up for that too.

But let's do a little common practices and expectations when it comes to workplace conduct. Most businesses don't mind if you use your phone sparingly, but they will be pissed if you text while driving or handling machinery or putting yourself in dangerous situations by doing so. So they probably have a clause that says no cell phone use while on their time or unless it's company related.

I mean this is along the lines of thinking for activities such as driving without your prescription glasses, doing possibly dangerous or strenuous activities when you just started taking a new medication, carrying something that obstructs your vision on uneven or uncleared terrain, etc, etc. Things you can get away with sometimes doing, but you know you shouldn't be doing it. It's just more convenient to risk it than it is to take the time to do it in a safer way. And when things go wrong and it doesn't work out for you, the fault falls on you.

If she had been doing that and walked into traffic and got drilled by a car and the video caught her doing this.....I'd be thanking my lucky stars if I was the driver of that car. Because it was clearly her fault for not heeding right of way/jaywalking/whatever. Just like it would have been my fault if I was texting and driving and drilled her with my vehicle while she was legally crossing at a crosswalk.

The biggest crime here is that she hasn't learned that she bears responsibility for the consequences of her actions. If she had realized this and stepped to the side to quickly type her message and move on, there would be no video to be shown. People SHOPPING at malls would be shocked if they weren't being filmed nearly their whole time on the premises, so I highly doubt an employee could expect otherwise.

And that she claims she's humiliated by this video, but comes forward to identify herself....give multiple interviews and hint at lawsuits. Rape victims have more difficulty doing this due to humiliation and public scrutiny and they are victims of an actual CRIME. This lady is a victim of her own stupidity.

I view the guards who filmed and released this video as an entirely different subject than what this woman's problem is. Their punishment should not be based on the content of the video but if they violated any policies, laws, or agreements made to not release video unless authorized. The content of the video could be an empty hallway or someone doing donuts in their vehicles in the parking lots, and it should be judged in the same manner.

The only caveat to this video existing is if someone took this video in a place where there was a reasonable expectation of privacy. In her house, in her yard surrounded by privacy fence, even a public restroom. But the corridors of a mall are in no way private and someone could have captured her stupidity on any recording device and released it.

If she's being harassed at work over this, that's yet another subject......but it probably doesn't fall any under illegal form...since I don't think your incompetence or stupidity is legally protected. She could quit, and if I were her employer I would hope she did...because she's a "work injury" claim waiting to happen.

Geez, I thought we had poor city planning on the west coast in the United States. This is pretty bad.

Why create a tiny roundabout without massive YIELD notifications in the middle of a four lane intersection -- and with a crosswalk? It's a recipe for disaster. Just put up some stop signs/lights and turn it back into a normal intersection.

The only roundabouts that I know of that work (and even these have some problems) are larger, multi-laned roundabouts with a solid structure/island in the middle to prevent driving straight through it and other similar moving violations due to ignorance/impatience.

We have a decent number of larger roundabouts in California, mostly in south Orange County (as well as the Orange circle, which is more inland) and there's a couple in Long Beach. I've NEVER seen these types of problems. Reminds me of what happens when street lights go out due to a power outage.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

They never have ped crossings at roundabouts here - they are usually place 50 meters back or more, on the incoming roads.>> ^AeroMechanical:

How do roundabouts work in places with lots of pedestrians crossing the street? Do you just keep driving around until the crosswalk is clear?