Have the new "Stop for Pedestrian in Xwalk" signs ruined the car/pedestrian dynamic ???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Drivers didn't stop before. You say "of course" but they didn't.

I head into the crosswalk because people don't stop when they see you waiting, even if they are required to, and because where I am going is as important as where you're going, and me waiting for several minutes so that you don't have to wait for a several seconds while I cross is ridiculous.

but here is where you are wrong. Drivers are only required to stop for pedestrians who are physically in the crosswalk. They are not required to stop just because someone is waiting to cross. Stopping to let someone cross can be dangerous if it is on a busy road. It is up to the pedestrian to wait until there is a break in traffic to cross.

Yeah we know you don’t want to stop. That’s why we step off the curb, due to selfish drivers like you.

can you not understand that sometimes stopping is dangerous for both the driver and the pedestrian? I drive down rt 50 and there are crosswalks without signals. I can't imagine coming to a complete stop on RT 50 to let someone cross. It's an accident waiting to happen.

There was also a girl who was killed near where I grew up because a nice guy did stop on a road with 2 lanes of traffic going in one direction. The driver in the second lane never saw the girl as she came out from behind the first car, she was hit and killed.

Maybe pedestrians should be a little more patient when crossing the street.

Which is why the law in DC is that if someone is stopped in one lane, you stop in the other lane ("Whenever a vehicle is stopped at a marked crosswalk at an unsignalized intersection, a vehicle approaching the crosswalk in an adjacent lane or from behind the stopped vehicle shall stop and give the right-of-way to ensure the safety of pedestrians and bicyclists before passing the stopped vehicle"). This is also just common sense.

The driver in your story could chose to behave recklessly and killed a child. He belongs in jail not having you make excuses for him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Drivers didn't stop before. You say "of course" but they didn't.

I head into the crosswalk because people don't stop when they see you waiting, even if they are required to, and because where I am going is as important as where you're going, and me waiting for several minutes so that you don't have to wait for a several seconds while I cross is ridiculous.

but here is where you are wrong. Drivers are only required to stop for pedestrians who are physically in the crosswalk. They are not required to stop just because someone is waiting to cross. Stopping to let someone cross can be dangerous if it is on a busy road. It is up to the pedestrian to wait until there is a break in traffic to cross.

Yeah we know you don’t want to stop. That’s why we step off the curb, due to selfish drivers like you.

can you not understand that sometimes stopping is dangerous for both the driver and the pedestrian? I drive down rt 50 and there are crosswalks without signals. I can't imagine coming to a complete stop on RT 50 to let someone cross. It's an accident waiting to happen.

There was also a girl who was killed near where I grew up because a nice guy did stop on a road with 2 lanes of traffic going in one direction. The driver in the second lane never saw the girl as she came out from behind the first car, she was hit and killed.

Maybe pedestrians should be a little more patient when crossing the street.

Which is why the law in DC is that if someone is stopped in one lane, you stop in the other lane ("Whenever a vehicle is stopped at a marked crosswalk at an unsignalized intersection, a vehicle approaching the crosswalk in an adjacent lane or from behind the stopped vehicle shall stop and give the right-of-way to ensure the safety of pedestrians and bicyclists before passing the stopped vehicle"). This is also just common sense.

The driver in your story could chose to behave recklessly and killed a child. He belongs in jail not having you make excuses for him.

I wasn't making excuses. just pointing out that cars stopping randomly because god forbid the "selfish" drivers don't stop for every person they see waiting to cross a road.

but hey keep being impatient and playing frogger.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Drivers didn't stop before. You say "of course" but they didn't.

I head into the crosswalk because people don't stop when they see you waiting, even if they are required to, and because where I am going is as important as where you're going, and me waiting for several minutes so that you don't have to wait for a several seconds while I cross is ridiculous.

but here is where you are wrong. Drivers are only required to stop for pedestrians who are physically in the crosswalk. They are not required to stop just because someone is waiting to cross. Stopping to let someone cross can be dangerous if it is on a busy road. It is up to the pedestrian to wait until there is a break in traffic to cross.

Yeah we know you don’t want to stop. That’s why we step off the curb, due to selfish drivers like you.

can you not understand that sometimes stopping is dangerous for both the driver and the pedestrian? I drive down rt 50 and there are crosswalks without signals. I can't imagine coming to a complete stop on RT 50 to let someone cross. It's an accident waiting to happen.

There was also a girl who was killed near where I grew up because a nice guy did stop on a road with 2 lanes of traffic going in one direction. The driver in the second lane never saw the girl as she came out from behind the first car, she was hit and killed.

Maybe pedestrians should be a little more patient when crossing the street.

Which is why the law in DC is that if someone is stopped in one lane, you stop in the other lane ("Whenever a vehicle is stopped at a marked crosswalk at an unsignalized intersection, a vehicle approaching the crosswalk in an adjacent lane or from behind the stopped vehicle shall stop and give the right-of-way to ensure the safety of pedestrians and bicyclists before passing the stopped vehicle"). This is also just common sense.

The driver in your story could chose to behave recklessly and killed a child. He belongs in jail not having you make excuses for him.

I wasn't making excuses. just pointing out that cars stopping randomly because god forbid the "selfish" drivers don't stop for every person they see waiting to cross a road.

but hey keep being impatient and playing frogger.

I'm a DP and a driver. I'm describing what I do so that I don't murder a child behind the wheel, which should be every driver's main focus but sadly isn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Drivers didn't stop before. You say "of course" but they didn't.

I head into the crosswalk because people don't stop when they see you waiting, even if they are required to, and because where I am going is as important as where you're going, and me waiting for several minutes so that you don't have to wait for a several seconds while I cross is ridiculous.

but here is where you are wrong. Drivers are only required to stop for pedestrians who are physically in the crosswalk. They are not required to stop just because someone is waiting to cross. Stopping to let someone cross can be dangerous if it is on a busy road. It is up to the pedestrian to wait until there is a break in traffic to cross.

It's fascinating how this has turned into drivers having the right of way and pedestrians having to wait, no matter what the law says.

When a pedestrian is physically in the crosswalk they have the right of way. When a car is driving down the road and there is no pedestrian physically in the crosswalk then the driver has the right of way.

Now if a pedestrian jumps off the curb into oncoming traffic without giving a drive enough time to react then the pedestrian is at fault.

VA law clearly states this: https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title46.2/chapter8/section46.2-924/
The driver of any vehicle on a highway shall yield the right-of-way to any pedestrian crossing such highway by stopping and remaining stopped until such pedestrian has passed the lane in which the vehicle is stopped.
No pedestrian shall enter or cross an intersection in disregard of approaching traffic.

Notice it says "crossing" not waiting to cross.

This is not the law in D.C.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Drivers didn't stop before. You say "of course" but they didn't.

I head into the crosswalk because people don't stop when they see you waiting, even if they are required to, and because where I am going is as important as where you're going, and me waiting for several minutes so that you don't have to wait for a several seconds while I cross is ridiculous.

but here is where you are wrong. Drivers are only required to stop for pedestrians who are physically in the crosswalk. They are not required to stop just because someone is waiting to cross. Stopping to let someone cross can be dangerous if it is on a busy road. It is up to the pedestrian to wait until there is a break in traffic to cross.

It's fascinating how this has turned into drivers having the right of way and pedestrians having to wait, no matter what the law says.

No one has a right of way, one party needs to yield the right of way.

I seems you don’t understand the concept of “right of way.” The law requires that a driver yield to another who has the right of way. It’s the very essence of the concept of yielding, It also varies by state. In NJ drivers are required to stop for pedestrians in a marked crosswalk but yield to those in an unmarked crosswalk. In Connecticut a driver must yield to pedestrians standing at the curb.

Pedestrians must also yield the right of way to vehicles. A crosswalk doesn't give you a right to step out into the crsswalk without due consideration for the rights of way for the drivers.

But the driver doesn't have the right of way in that situation. If a driver is driving down a street and someone from a cross street who has a stop sign pulls out without looking, would you say the driver who didn't have the stop sign should have given "due consideration for the right of way for the driver" who had the stop sign?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Drivers didn't stop before. You say "of course" but they didn't.

I head into the crosswalk because people don't stop when they see you waiting, even if they are required to, and because where I am going is as important as where you're going, and me waiting for several minutes so that you don't have to wait for a several seconds while I cross is ridiculous.

but here is where you are wrong. Drivers are only required to stop for pedestrians who are physically in the crosswalk. They are not required to stop just because someone is waiting to cross. Stopping to let someone cross can be dangerous if it is on a busy road. It is up to the pedestrian to wait until there is a break in traffic to cross.

Yeah we know you don’t want to stop. That’s why we step off the curb, due to selfish drivers like you.

can you not understand that sometimes stopping is dangerous for both the driver and the pedestrian? I drive down rt 50 and there are crosswalks without signals. I can't imagine coming to a complete stop on RT 50 to let someone cross. It's an accident waiting to happen.

There was also a girl who was killed near where I grew up because a nice guy did stop on a road with 2 lanes of traffic going in one direction. The driver in the second lane never saw the girl as she came out from behind the first car, she was hit and killed.

Maybe pedestrians should be a little more patient when crossing the street.

Amazing that you could type that out and think that the person being impatient was the pedestrian who was killed and not the driver who ran over a person in a crosswalk because he didn't want to stop his car for ten seconds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Drivers didn't stop before. You say "of course" but they didn't.

I head into the crosswalk because people don't stop when they see you waiting, even if they are required to, and because where I am going is as important as where you're going, and me waiting for several minutes so that you don't have to wait for a several seconds while I cross is ridiculous.

but here is where you are wrong. Drivers are only required to stop for pedestrians who are physically in the crosswalk. They are not required to stop just because someone is waiting to cross. Stopping to let someone cross can be dangerous if it is on a busy road. It is up to the pedestrian to wait until there is a break in traffic to cross.

Yeah we know you don’t want to stop. That’s why we step off the curb, due to selfish drivers like you.

can you not understand that sometimes stopping is dangerous for both the driver and the pedestrian? I drive down rt 50 and there are crosswalks without signals. I can't imagine coming to a complete stop on RT 50 to let someone cross. It's an accident waiting to happen.

There was also a girl who was killed near where I grew up because a nice guy did stop on a road with 2 lanes of traffic going in one direction. The driver in the second lane never saw the girl as she came out from behind the first car, she was hit and killed.

Maybe pedestrians should be a little more patient when crossing the street.

Amazing that you could type that out and think that the person being impatient was the pedestrian who was killed and not the driver who ran over a person in a crosswalk because he didn't want to stop his car for ten seconds.

I had a long debate with someone once on this. The law in most jurisdictions is that if you see a car stopped ahead of you at a cross walk, you also must stop.

[Anonymous]

Does anybody else remember the old Jiminy Cricket I’m No Fool series? They had one on pedestrians crossing the street that was less about their legal rights and more about keeping them alive. It also had a catchy song that I think of every now and then.

I absolutely think cars should yield to pedestrians, and as a driver, I do. It would be helpful if pedestrians cared about their safety as much as I do. I’ve also been nearly run down, crossing in the crosswalk, at a light, with the walk signal, pushing a baby carriage. I’ve noticed drivers making left turns seldom look for pedestrians crossing the perpendicular street. I gave up walking to the neighborhood shopping center as just too dangerous.

Anything involving a motor vehicle is inherently dangerous. Both sides need to not worry so much about their specific rights under the law, and more about cooperating to keep everyone safe. I don’t think it’s even a 50/50 responsibility split. It should be a 100/100 responsibility split. No matter how diligent someone is, human error, bad weather, blind spots, etc., make it all to easy for a tragic accident to happen. If each party is doing everything they can to make sure everyone is safe, then while still not guaranteed, the odds go way up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Drivers didn't stop before. You say "of course" but they didn't.

I head into the crosswalk because people don't stop when they see you waiting, even if they are required to, and because where I am going is as important as where you're going, and me waiting for several minutes so that you don't have to wait for a several seconds while I cross is ridiculous.

but here is where you are wrong. Drivers are only required to stop for pedestrians who are physically in the crosswalk. They are not required to stop just because someone is waiting to cross. Stopping to let someone cross can be dangerous if it is on a busy road. It is up to the pedestrian to wait until there is a break in traffic to cross.

It's fascinating how this has turned into drivers having the right of way and pedestrians having to wait, no matter what the law says.

When a pedestrian is physically in the crosswalk they have the right of way. When a car is driving down the road and there is no pedestrian physically in the crosswalk then the driver has the right of way.

Now if a pedestrian jumps off the curb into oncoming traffic without giving a drive enough time to react then the pedestrian is at fault.

VA law clearly states this: https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title46.2/chapter8/section46.2-924/
The driver of any vehicle on a highway shall yield the right-of-way to any pedestrian crossing such highway by stopping and remaining stopped until such pedestrian has passed the lane in which the vehicle is stopped.
No pedestrian shall enter or cross an intersection in disregard of approaching traffic.

Notice it says "crossing" not waiting to cross.

This is not the law in D.C.

So what is dc law? All I have seen discusses stopping for pedestrians actively crossing/in the crosswalk. Nothing about cars having to stop just because the see someone waiting to cross.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Drivers didn't stop before. You say "of course" but they didn't.

I head into the crosswalk because people don't stop when they see you waiting, even if they are required to, and because where I am going is as important as where you're going, and me waiting for several minutes so that you don't have to wait for a several seconds while I cross is ridiculous.

but here is where you are wrong. Drivers are only required to stop for pedestrians who are physically in the crosswalk. They are not required to stop just because someone is waiting to cross. Stopping to let someone cross can be dangerous if it is on a busy road. It is up to the pedestrian to wait until there is a break in traffic to cross.

It's fascinating how this has turned into drivers having the right of way and pedestrians having to wait, no matter what the law says.

No one has a right of way, one party needs to yield the right of way.

I seems you don’t understand the concept of “right of way.” The law requires that a driver yield to another who has the right of way. It’s the very essence of the concept of yielding, It also varies by state. In NJ drivers are required to stop for pedestrians in a marked crosswalk but yield to those in an unmarked crosswalk. In Connecticut a driver must yield to pedestrians standing at the curb.

Pedestrians must also yield the right of way to vehicles. A crosswalk doesn't give you a right to step out into the crsswalk without due consideration for the rights of way for the drivers.

But the driver doesn't have the right of way in that situation. If a driver is driving down a street and someone from a cross street who has a stop sign pulls out without looking, would you say the driver who didn't have the stop sign should have given "due consideration for the right of way for the driver" who had the stop sign?

The driver who didn't look failed to yield the right of way. No one ever "has the right of way." Driving is not my turn, my turn, my turn, me, me, me!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Drivers didn't stop before. You say "of course" but they didn't.

I head into the crosswalk because people don't stop when they see you waiting, even if they are required to, and because where I am going is as important as where you're going, and me waiting for several minutes so that you don't have to wait for a several seconds while I cross is ridiculous.

but here is where you are wrong. Drivers are only required to stop for pedestrians who are physically in the crosswalk. They are not required to stop just because someone is waiting to cross. Stopping to let someone cross can be dangerous if it is on a busy road. It is up to the pedestrian to wait until there is a break in traffic to cross.

It's fascinating how this has turned into drivers having the right of way and pedestrians having to wait, no matter what the law says.

No one has a right of way, one party needs to yield the right of way.

I seems you don’t understand the concept of “right of way.” The law requires that a driver yield to another who has the right of way. It’s the very essence of the concept of yielding, It also varies by state. In NJ drivers are required to stop for pedestrians in a marked crosswalk but yield to those in an unmarked crosswalk. In Connecticut a driver must yield to pedestrians standing at the curb.

Pedestrians must also yield the right of way to vehicles. A crosswalk doesn't give you a right to step out into the crsswalk without due consideration for the rights of way for the drivers.

But the driver doesn't have the right of way in that situation. If a driver is driving down a street and someone from a cross street who has a stop sign pulls out without looking, would you say the driver who didn't have the stop sign should have given "due consideration for the right of way for the driver" who had the stop sign?

The driver who didn't look failed to yield the right of way. No one ever "has the right of way." Driving is not my turn, my turn, my turn, me, me, me!

Yes and the driver in that scenario who didn't look is in the same position as the driver in the original scenario who didn't look or stop for the pedestrian. The pedestrian has the legal right to cross and the driver approaching to crosswalk has to stop just as if it were a stop sign. Just as the driver in the second situation has to stop at a stop sign and not crash into the person on the road who doesn't have a stop sign.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Drivers didn't stop before. You say "of course" but they didn't.

I head into the crosswalk because people don't stop when they see you waiting, even if they are required to, and because where I am going is as important as where you're going, and me waiting for several minutes so that you don't have to wait for a several seconds while I cross is ridiculous.

but here is where you are wrong. Drivers are only required to stop for pedestrians who are physically in the crosswalk. They are not required to stop just because someone is waiting to cross. Stopping to let someone cross can be dangerous if it is on a busy road. It is up to the pedestrian to wait until there is a break in traffic to cross.

It's fascinating how this has turned into drivers having the right of way and pedestrians having to wait, no matter what the law says.

No one has a right of way, one party needs to yield the right of way.

I seems you don’t understand the concept of “right of way.” The law requires that a driver yield to another who has the right of way. It’s the very essence of the concept of yielding, It also varies by state. In NJ drivers are required to stop for pedestrians in a marked crosswalk but yield to those in an unmarked crosswalk. In Connecticut a driver must yield to pedestrians standing at the curb.

Pedestrians must also yield the right of way to vehicles. A crosswalk doesn't give you a right to step out into the crsswalk without due consideration for the rights of way for the drivers.

But the driver doesn't have the right of way in that situation. If a driver is driving down a street and someone from a cross street who has a stop sign pulls out without looking, would you say the driver who didn't have the stop sign should have given "due consideration for the right of way for the driver" who had the stop sign?

The driver who didn't look failed to yield the right of way. No one ever "has the right of way." Driving is not my turn, my turn, my turn, me, me, me!

Yes and the driver in that scenario who didn't look is in the same position as the driver in the original scenario who didn't look or stop for the pedestrian. The pedestrian has the legal right to cross and the driver approaching to crosswalk has to stop just as if it were a stop sign. Just as the driver in the second situation has to stop at a stop sign and not crash into the person on the road who doesn't have a stop sign.

Reverse the situation. The person can't just step into the crosswalk, ignoring any approaching traffic, and "declare" their right of way. The must yield to approaching traffic that would be unable to safely stop. Yes, you have to use your judgement. It's not a black and white world.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Drivers didn't stop before. You say "of course" but they didn't.

I head into the crosswalk because people don't stop when they see you waiting, even if they are required to, and because where I am going is as important as where you're going, and me waiting for several minutes so that you don't have to wait for a several seconds while I cross is ridiculous.

but here is where you are wrong. Drivers are only required to stop for pedestrians who are physically in the crosswalk. They are not required to stop just because someone is waiting to cross. Stopping to let someone cross can be dangerous if it is on a busy road. It is up to the pedestrian to wait until there is a break in traffic to cross.

It's fascinating how this has turned into drivers having the right of way and pedestrians having to wait, no matter what the law says.

No one has a right of way, one party needs to yield the right of way.

I seems you don’t understand the concept of “right of way.” The law requires that a driver yield to another who has the right of way. It’s the very essence of the concept of yielding, It also varies by state. In NJ drivers are required to stop for pedestrians in a marked crosswalk but yield to those in an unmarked crosswalk. In Connecticut a driver must yield to pedestrians standing at the curb.

Pedestrians must also yield the right of way to vehicles. A crosswalk doesn't give you a right to step out into the crsswalk without due consideration for the rights of way for the drivers.

But the driver doesn't have the right of way in that situation. If a driver is driving down a street and someone from a cross street who has a stop sign pulls out without looking, would you say the driver who didn't have the stop sign should have given "due consideration for the right of way for the driver" who had the stop sign?

The driver who didn't look failed to yield the right of way. No one ever "has the right of way." Driving is not my turn, my turn, my turn, me, me, me!

Yes and the driver in that scenario who didn't look is in the same position as the driver in the original scenario who didn't look or stop for the pedestrian. The pedestrian has the legal right to cross and the driver approaching to crosswalk has to stop just as if it were a stop sign. Just as the driver in the second situation has to stop at a stop sign and not crash into the person on the road who doesn't have a stop sign.

Reverse the situation. The person can't just step into the crosswalk, ignoring any approaching traffic, and "declare" their right of way. The must yield to approaching traffic that would be unable to safely stop. Yes, you have to use your judgement. It's not a black and white world.

The person doesn’t need to declare anything- the pedestrian has the right of way. The fact that the driver could kill the pedestrian doesn’t change who has the right of way, it just means that the driver can bully it’s way into not yielding the right of way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Drivers didn't stop before. You say "of course" but they didn't.

I head into the crosswalk because people don't stop when they see you waiting, even if they are required to, and because where I am going is as important as where you're going, and me waiting for several minutes so that you don't have to wait for a several seconds while I cross is ridiculous.

but here is where you are wrong. Drivers are only required to stop for pedestrians who are physically in the crosswalk. They are not required to stop just because someone is waiting to cross. Stopping to let someone cross can be dangerous if it is on a busy road. It is up to the pedestrian to wait until there is a break in traffic to cross.

It's fascinating how this has turned into drivers having the right of way and pedestrians having to wait, no matter what the law says.

No one has a right of way, one party needs to yield the right of way.

I seems you don’t understand the concept of “right of way.” The law requires that a driver yield to another who has the right of way. It’s the very essence of the concept of yielding, It also varies by state. In NJ drivers are required to stop for pedestrians in a marked crosswalk but yield to those in an unmarked crosswalk. In Connecticut a driver must yield to pedestrians standing at the curb.

Pedestrians must also yield the right of way to vehicles. A crosswalk doesn't give you a right to step out into the crsswalk without due consideration for the rights of way for the drivers.

But the driver doesn't have the right of way in that situation. If a driver is driving down a street and someone from a cross street who has a stop sign pulls out without looking, would you say the driver who didn't have the stop sign should have given "due consideration for the right of way for the driver" who had the stop sign?

The driver who didn't look failed to yield the right of way. No one ever "has the right of way." Driving is not my turn, my turn, my turn, me, me, me!

Yes and the driver in that scenario who didn't look is in the same position as the driver in the original scenario who didn't look or stop for the pedestrian. The pedestrian has the legal right to cross and the driver approaching to crosswalk has to stop just as if it were a stop sign. Just as the driver in the second situation has to stop at a stop sign and not crash into the person on the road who doesn't have a stop sign.

Reverse the situation. The person can't just step into the crosswalk, ignoring any approaching traffic, and "declare" their right of way. The must yield to approaching traffic that would be unable to safely stop. Yes, you have to use your judgement. It's not a black and white world.

The person doesn’t need to declare anything- the pedestrian has the right of way. The fact that the driver could kill the pedestrian doesn’t change who has the right of way, it just means that the driver can bully it’s way into not yielding the right of way.

Ok so let's say you are driving down a street with a 35 mph speed limit and I step out in front of your car when you're 10 feet away because I have the right or way. You're saying it is still 100% your fault that you hit me and are cool with being charge as such?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Drivers didn't stop before. You say "of course" but they didn't.

I head into the crosswalk because people don't stop when they see you waiting, even if they are required to, and because where I am going is as important as where you're going, and me waiting for several minutes so that you don't have to wait for a several seconds while I cross is ridiculous.

but here is where you are wrong. Drivers are only required to stop for pedestrians who are physically in the crosswalk. They are not required to stop just because someone is waiting to cross. Stopping to let someone cross can be dangerous if it is on a busy road. It is up to the pedestrian to wait until there is a break in traffic to cross.

It's fascinating how this has turned into drivers having the right of way and pedestrians having to wait, no matter what the law says.

No one has a right of way, one party needs to yield the right of way.

I seems you don’t understand the concept of “right of way.” The law requires that a driver yield to another who has the right of way. It’s the very essence of the concept of yielding, It also varies by state. In NJ drivers are required to stop for pedestrians in a marked crosswalk but yield to those in an unmarked crosswalk. In Connecticut a driver must yield to pedestrians standing at the curb.

Pedestrians must also yield the right of way to vehicles. A crosswalk doesn't give you a right to step out into the crsswalk without due consideration for the rights of way for the drivers.

But the driver doesn't have the right of way in that situation. If a driver is driving down a street and someone from a cross street who has a stop sign pulls out without looking, would you say the driver who didn't have the stop sign should have given "due consideration for the right of way for the driver" who had the stop sign?

The driver who didn't look failed to yield the right of way. No one ever "has the right of way." Driving is not my turn, my turn, my turn, me, me, me!

Yes and the driver in that scenario who didn't look is in the same position as the driver in the original scenario who didn't look or stop for the pedestrian. The pedestrian has the legal right to cross and the driver approaching to crosswalk has to stop just as if it were a stop sign. Just as the driver in the second situation has to stop at a stop sign and not crash into the person on the road who doesn't have a stop sign.

Reverse the situation. The person can't just step into the crosswalk, ignoring any approaching traffic, and "declare" their right of way. The must yield to approaching traffic that would be unable to safely stop. Yes, you have to use your judgement. It's not a black and white world.

The person doesn’t need to declare anything- the pedestrian has the right of way. The fact that the driver could kill the pedestrian doesn’t change who has the right of way, it just means that the driver can bully it’s way into not yielding the right of way.

No one has an absolute right of way. There is a duty to yield the right of way.