If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#101
|
|||
|
|||
"Scott en Aztlán" > wrote in message
... > On Mon, 4 Jul 2005 23:45:40 -0700, "Daniel W. Rouse Jr." > > wrote: > > >"Scott en Aztlán" > wrote in message > .. . > >> On Mon, 04 Jul 2005 20:41:56 -0700, Garth Almgren > > >> wrote: > >> > >> >> The uncle of my co-worker got cut off by a bus. He honked, and the bus > >> >> driver just flipped him off. He sped ahead, parked his car, and waited > >> >> at the bus stop. When the bus pulled up and opened the doors, the > >> >> uncle got on, walked up to the driver, busted him in the chops, and > >> >> said "THAT's for flipping me off!" > >> > > >> >Back in present-day America... > >> > > >> >As your co-worker's uncle is being dragged away in handcuffs, the > >> >asshole bus driver says back, "And that's for felony assault of a > >> >transit operator!" > >> > >> How's the unconscious bus driver going to catch the uncle? > >> > >Most buses are equipped with two--sometimes three--video cameras and a > >digital recording system. > > > >If this story you are telling is actually true--in the present day as > >opposed to years in the past--the transit officials can just review the > >recordings of that day's events and get a positive ID of who they are > >looking for. > > Would they review the tapes and reprimand the driver for his asinine > driving? > Unfortunately, I don't think there are cameras on the outside of the back of the bus, so nothing would be recorded even if the bus driver was totally unsafe. It's best to get the bus number of the offending bus and--depending on the attitude of the transit agency--either call or e-mail that transit agency to report the incident: date, time, and bus number. |
Ads |
#102
|
|||
|
|||
In article >,
"Daniel W. Rouse Jr." > says: >The stupidity is on the part of the drivers, who conveniently forget that a >marked crosswalk plus a green light in the direction of the crosswalk, >regardless of the presence or absence of pedestrian signals, is a >legal/right-of-way crossing for the pedestrians. .... but in quite a few places back East, cars don't stop just 'cause some ped traipsed out into the street, yet the peds don't get hit and the traffic doesn't stall. I hear when Californicators go back East, it's funny to see them nearly get mowed down when they foolishly think other states have passed laws that are blind to the laws of physics (and expect drivers to stop for them just 'cause they're about to venture out into the street). -Kenny -- Kenneth R. Crudup Sr. SW Engineer, Scott County Consulting, Los Angeles H: 3630 S. Sepulveda Blvd. #138, L.A., CA 90034-6809 (310) 391-1898 |
#103
|
|||
|
|||
In article >,
Kenneth Crudup > wrote: >In article >, >"Daniel W. Rouse Jr." > says: > >>The stupidity is on the part of the drivers, who conveniently forget that a >>marked crosswalk plus a green light in the direction of the crosswalk, >>regardless of the presence or absence of pedestrian signals, is a >>legal/right-of-way crossing for the pedestrians. > >... but in quite a few places back East, cars don't stop just 'cause >some ped traipsed out into the street, yet the peds don't get hit and >the traffic doesn't stall. > >I hear when Californicators go back East, it's funny to see them nearly >get mowed down when they foolishly think other states have passed laws >that are blind to the laws of physics (and expect drivers to stop for >them just 'cause they're about to venture out into the street). I was walking with a group of people in Columbus recently. We came to an unsignalized crosswalk. I waited for a gap in traffic and started to cross. Halfway across I noticed that the others were not following me. My definition of a gap follows the law -- you can't jump close in front of a vehicle but you can make distant vehicles slow down. Their definition of a gap in traffic assumed vehicles do not yield to pedestrians, i.e. it ignored the legal effect of the crosswalk. (This crosswalk, on High Street near the North Market, has an illuminated overhead sign saying CROSS WALK. It is not a subtly different shading of the road surface from a ten year old paint job like a Boston-area crosswalk is likely to be.) -- John Carr ) |
#104
|
|||
|
|||
|
#105
|
|||
|
|||
"John F. Carr" > wrote in message ... > In article >, > Bernard Farquart > wrote: >> >>"John F. Carr" > wrote in message ... >>> In article >, >>> fbloogyudsr > wrote: >>>>How about Friday, when a Metro bus almost rear-ended me when I >>>>had to stop while turning right because a ped was about to step >>>>into the crosswalk? Bus driver actually had the chutzpah to honk! >>> >>> Your fault. The law does not require stopping for a pedestrian >>> who happens to be near the road. It may have been illegal to stop. >> >>If you are turning right, the pedestrian should have had a walk >>signal, and the right of way. > > The original poster said the pedestrian was not in the crosswalk. > Look above, the quoted text is still there. "About to step into the cross walk", the one with the walk signal. Not stopping, and clipping someone *as* he steps out into the crosswalk is still not good for your insurance rates. Bernard |
#106
|
|||
|
|||
In article >,
Bernard Farquart > wrote: > >"John F. Carr" > wrote in message ... >> In article >, >> Bernard Farquart > wrote: >>> >>>"John F. Carr" > wrote in message ... >>>> In article >, >>>> fbloogyudsr > wrote: >>>>>How about Friday, when a Metro bus almost rear-ended me when I >>>>>had to stop while turning right because a ped was about to step >>>>>into the crosswalk? Bus driver actually had the chutzpah to honk! >>>> >>>> Your fault. The law does not require stopping for a pedestrian >>>> who happens to be near the road. It may have been illegal to stop. >>> >>>If you are turning right, the pedestrian should have had a walk >>>signal, and the right of way. >> >> The original poster said the pedestrian was not in the crosswalk. >> >Look above, the quoted text is still there. > > >"About to step into the cross walk", the one with the walk signal. And if the red light is "about to turn green" can you go? No. A pedestrian outside of a crosswalk -- i.e., on the sidewalk -- does not have right of way over traffic on the road and may not enter the road when a vehicle is approaching. Uniform Vehicle Code section 11-502(b) says "No pedestrian shall suddenly leave a curb or other place of safety and walk or run into the path of a vehicle which is so close as to constitute an immediate hazard." In other words, ties go to the vehicle. >Not stopping, and clipping someone *as* he steps out into the >crosswalk is still not good for your insurance rates. Massachusetts law does not allow personal injury claims to be considered in setting car insurance rates. -- John Carr ) |
#107
|
|||
|
|||
"John F. Carr" > wrote in message ... > In article >, > Bernard Farquart > wrote: >> >>"John F. Carr" > wrote in message ... >>> In article >, >>> Bernard Farquart > wrote: >>>> >>>>"John F. Carr" > wrote in message ... >>>>> In article >, >>>>> fbloogyudsr > wrote: >>>>>>How about Friday, when a Metro bus almost rear-ended me when I >>>>>>had to stop while turning right because a ped was about to step >>>>>>into the crosswalk? Bus driver actually had the chutzpah to honk! >>>>> >>>>> Your fault. The law does not require stopping for a pedestrian >>>>> who happens to be near the road. It may have been illegal to stop. >>>> >>>>If you are turning right, the pedestrian should have had a walk >>>>signal, and the right of way. >>> >>> The original poster said the pedestrian was not in the crosswalk. >>> >>Look above, the quoted text is still there. >> >> >>"About to step into the cross walk", the one with the walk signal. > > And if the red light is "about to turn green" can you go? No. > A pedestrian outside of a crosswalk -- i.e., on the sidewalk -- > does not have right of way over traffic on the road and may not > enter the road when a vehicle is approaching. If he has the "walk" signal, he has right of way.That is the purpose of the stinking signal. Here is an excerpt for WA (1) WALK or walking person symbol-Pedestrians facing such signal may cross the roadway in the direction of the signal. Vehicle operators shall stop for pedestrians who are lawfully moving within the intersection control area on such signal as required by RCW 46.61.235(1). So, you cross an intersection, and the pedestrian steps out as you turn. Guess who gets the ticket if there is pedestrian-vehicle contact? Uniform Vehicle > Code section 11-502(b) says "No pedestrian shall suddenly leave > a curb or other place of safety and walk or run into the path of > a vehicle which is so close as to constitute an immediate hazard." > > In other words, ties go to the vehicle. Dip****, that does not say anything about a crosswalk, that looks like it is talking about the middle of a block, or other unmarked area of roadway. Exactly *not* like the situation referenced above. > >>Not stopping, and clipping someone *as* he steps out into the >>crosswalk is still not good for your insurance rates. > > Massachusetts law does not allow personal injury claims to be > considered in setting car insurance rates. HA, like anyone can *prove* what the rates are set by. Bernard |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
"Black box" in cars to log toll road use in Britain coming | [email protected] | Driving | 1 | June 6th 05 10:33 PM |
YOU CAN'T DRIVE TOO SLOW | Laura Bush murdered her boy friend | Driving | 93 | April 21st 05 10:34 AM |
Road recordings for Kerouac Project | [email protected] | Driving | 0 | April 1st 05 09:58 AM |
Is it legal to hit other cars on the road? | Universal Soldier | Driving | 51 | February 26th 05 09:39 PM |
Audi All Road reliability | LIW | Audi | 2 | November 3rd 04 08:39 PM |