San Fransisco "Cross Walks"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Sbe00lgHNM

The video above is of a police sting targetting drivers failing to give
way to pedestrians on San Fransisco cross walks.

I've never been to SF or indeed, the US, but from what I can see in the
video, this "crossing" is very badly marked. Are these types of
crossings standard across the country? Are there any warning signs
leading up to these crossings? Why not use a Zebra crossing layout instead?

On Sep 26, 8:46 am, Sir Lex > wrote:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Sbe00lgHNM
>
> The video above is of a police sting targetting drivers failing to give
> way to pedestrians on San Fransisco cross walks.

And documents the only incidences of that crosswalk ever being "used".

> I've never been to SF or indeed, the US, but from what I can see in the
> video, this "crossing" is very badly marked.

Irrelevant, since nobody is going to stop for some homeless loser,
regardless.

> Are these types of
> crossings standard across the country?

Pretty much.

> Are there any warning signs
> leading up to these crossings?

Often, if not always.

> Why not use a Zebra crossing layout instead?

Waste of paint.
-
Right-of-Way at Crosswalks

(b) <> No pedestrian may unnecessarily stop or delay traffic while in
a marked or unmarked crosswalk.
http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc21950.htm

Stopping traffic is never "necessary" since a pedestrian can wait for
nightfall, or whenever traffic might not be "inconvenienced".

If the ticketed drivers contest the charge, no prosecutor would
pursue, because no judge would convict. Attempting to cross such a
street at an uncontrolled intersection might be considered evidence of
insanity.
-----

- gpsman

Sir Lex:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Sbe00lgHNM
>
> The video above is of a police sting targetting drivers failing to give
> way to pedestrians on San Fransisco cross walks.

Something I see on a daily basis when I walk, save for the cops actually
doing anything about it. But then again, since it is a monetary fine
instead of jail time for the offender, I suspect that revenue and/or
quotas are the real reason for the sudden crackdown. I've pretty much
learned to just wait untill the intersection is clear and I can cross
before the next round of cars arrives before I proceed when walking.

> I've never been to SF or indeed, the US, but from what I can see in the
> video, this "crossing" is very badly marked. Are these types of
> crossings standard across the country?

Those crosswalks are pretty badly marked. One thing I will give this
little town I live in credit for is that the roads are fairly well
marked compared to other places I have been. That includes the
crosswalks.

> Are there any warning signs leading up to these crossings?

Sometimes, usually around school zones. Not that that gets the attention
of people like, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers Are MURDERERS," which the
roads are full of.

> Why not use a Zebra crossing layout instead?

Around here they use something similar. Next walk or pedalcycle ride,
I'll try to get a picture of one to show what they use here.



--
"Oh yeah. Well i've gone 3 1/2 years without a fatal crash
so i must be doing something right."

--Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend/laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE/
Speeders And Drunk Drivers Are Murderers (SADDAM), 9/24/2006

Ref: http://tinyurl.com/qdotr
Msg ID:

In article . com>,
gpsman > wrote:

> On Sep 26, 8:46 am, Sir Lex > wrote:
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Sbe00lgHNM
> >
> > The video above is of a police sting targetting drivers failing to give
> > way to pedestrians on San Fransisco cross walks.
>
> And documents the only incidences of that crosswalk ever being "used".
>
> > I've never been to SF or indeed, the US, but from what I can see in the
> > video, this "crossing" is very badly marked.
>
> Irrelevant, since nobody is going to stop for some homeless loser,
> regardless.
>
> > Are these types of
> > crossings standard across the country?
>
> Pretty much.
>
> > Are there any warning signs
> > leading up to these crossings?
>
> Often, if not always.
>
> > Why not use a Zebra crossing layout instead?
>
> Waste of paint.
> -
> Right-of-Way at Crosswalks
>
> (b) <> No pedestrian may unnecessarily stop or delay traffic while in
> a marked or unmarked crosswalk.
> http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc21950.htm

Interesting that you failed to post paragraph (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.

>
> Stopping traffic is never "necessary" since a pedestrian can wait for
> nightfall, or whenever traffic might not be "inconvenienced".

"inconvenienced" appears nowhere on the referenced page, and your
straight reading of the paragraph is just plain wrong. Once the
pedestrian is *in* the crosswalk, he cannot stop or delay traffic
unnecessarily (.i.e he can't just stand there, but must cross with
reasonable speed).



>
> If the ticketed drivers contest the charge, no prosecutor would
> pursue, because no judge would convict. Attempting to cross such a
> street at an uncontrolled intersection might be considered evidence of
> insanity.
> -----
>
> - gpsman

--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."

In article >, Alan Baker wrote:
> In article . com>,
> gpsman > wrote:

>> Right-of-Way at Crosswalks
>>
>> (b) <> No pedestrian may unnecessarily stop or delay traffic while in
>> a marked or unmarked crosswalk.
>> http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc21950.htm
>
> Interesting that you failed to post paragraph (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.
>
>>
>> Stopping traffic is never "necessary" since a pedestrian can wait for
>> nightfall, or whenever traffic might not be "inconvenienced".
>
> "inconvenienced" appears nowhere on the referenced page, and your
> straight reading of the paragraph is just plain wrong. Once the
> pedestrian is *in* the crosswalk, he cannot stop or delay traffic
> unnecessarily (.i.e he can't just stand there, but must cross with
> reasonable speed).

Gpstroll is probably like the asshole I encountered last week. I am
walking along and get to the point where a parking lot drive way crosses
the sidewalk. This asshole in his crown vic or MGM starts turning into
the parking lot and then stops just short of me then lurches his car to
threaten to run me over stopping with his drivers window behind me. And I
mean inches... as in a handful. I turn around and rap my knuckles on his
driver's side window and keep on walking. Asshat lowers the window and
starts yelling... then he lurches his car forward and decides to fling
open his door. Asshat realizes I'm about 4-50 years younger and a good
deal taller than him, closes the door and then rushes off to the mailbox to
mail his oh-so-important mail.

Just another day in MFFY land....

On Sep 26, 12:14 pm, Alan Baker > wrote:>
> gpsman > wrote:
>
> > (b) <> No pedestrian may unnecessarily stop or delay traffic while in
> > a marked or unmarked crosswalk.
> >http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc21950.htm
>
> Interesting that you failed to post paragraph (a)

Duh. It's irrelevant.

ROW is based on velocity. Highest velocity has the ROW. Any lower
velocity must yield. The vehicles were traveling at higher velocity
than the "pedestrians".

I would think this would be obvious.

> > Stopping traffic is never "necessary" since a pedestrian can wait for
> > nightfall, or whenever traffic might not be "inconvenienced".
>
> "inconvenienced" appears nowhere on the referenced page, and your
> straight reading of the paragraph is just plain wrong. Once the
> pedestrian is *in* the crosswalk, he cannot stop or delay traffic
> unnecessarily (.i.e he can't just stand there, but must cross with
> reasonable speed).

You gotta be ****tin' me.

(b) <> No pedestrian may unnecessarily stop or delay traffic while in
a marked or unmarked crosswalk.

Did you see any drivers who seemed to believe a stop or delay was
necessary?

Therefore, any stop or delay -was- "unnecessary".

What are ya, stupid?
-----

- gpsman

In article >, Sir Lex wrote:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Sbe00lgHNM
>
> The video above is of a police sting targetting drivers failing to give
> way to pedestrians on San Fransisco cross walks.
>
> I've never been to SF or indeed, the US, but from what I can see in the
> video, this "crossing" is very badly marked. Are these types of
> crossings standard across the country? Are there any warning signs
> leading up to these crossings? Why not use a Zebra crossing layout instead?

That was nothing. When I lived on chicago's south side, drivers AIMED at
peds crossing in the cross walk. Well except near the projects.... there
peds would step out at panic-stop distances looking for a lawsuit or just
doing some power-trip.

In article >,
Alan Baker > wrote:
>
>Interesting that you failed to post paragraph (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.

Unfortunately, the cops seem to think this means that all traffic must
stop for a little-old-lady crossing a 6-lane highway, even if there's
no way Carl Lewis could get to the driver's lane before the driver was
gone. If there's no conflict of right of way, there should be no
issue of yielding it.
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.

Sir Lex:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Sbe00lgHNM
>
> The video above is of a police sting targetting drivers failing to give
> way to pedestrians on San Fransisco cross walks.
>
> I've never been to SF or indeed, the US, but from what I can see in the
> video, this "crossing" is very badly marked. Are these types of
> crossings standard across the country? Are there any warning signs
> leading up to these crossings? Why not use a Zebra crossing layout instead?

Is this what you mean by "Zebra crossing layout?"

http://tinyurl.com/28lq8w

--
necromancer

Deadly Psychopath. And Proud of it, Man!!

"Sir Lex" > wrote in message
...
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Sbe00lgHNM
>
> The video above is of a police sting targetting drivers failing to give
> way to pedestrians on San Fransisco cross walks.
>
> I've never been to SF or indeed, the US, but from what I can see in the
> video, this "crossing" is very badly marked. Are these types of
> crossings standard across the country? Are there any warning signs
> leading up to these crossings? Why not use a Zebra crossing layout
instead?

Most crossings are just double white parallel lines marking the pedestrian
crossing area.