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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m not fighting with a killing machine…I wait until it’s safe to cross.

Anyone who casually strolls in front of 1-2 tons of steel moving at 35 mph expecting it will just stop is insane.

Just because you have right of way legally won't save your life or limbs. Robbery is illegal, but we lock our doors. Theft is illegal, but we secure our wallets and purses, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not fighting with a killing machine…I wait until it’s safe to cross.

Anyone who casually strolls in front of 1-2 tons of steel moving at 35 mph expecting it will just stop is insane.

Just because you have right of way legally won't save your life or limbs. Robbery is illegal, but we lock our doors. Theft is illegal, but we secure our wallets and purses, right?

Nobody does that. We look, see if the car can stop in time, step into crosswalk, verify car is slowing, proceed.

Have you never crossed the street in a city before? You’d be totally lost lol.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, pedestrians are entitled to make the car stop.

"Drivers must stop for pedestrians in crosswalks. Drivers must come to a complete stop while a pedestrian crosses the street within a crosswalk if they are on the half of the roadway where their vehicle is traveling or approaching from an adjacent lane on the other half of the roadway." Maryland Pedestrian Safety Laws

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Which roads have a 35 mph speed limit and don't have crosswalks at lights?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Which roads have a 35 mph speed limit and don't have crosswalks at lights?

Not talking about a crosswalk at a traffic light with a signal. If a light is red then obviously you stop.

I am talking about a road with fast moving vehicles and crosswalks without signals.

For example RT 50 near me has a 45 mph speed limit and marked crosswalks (crosswalk is marked but there is not signal or even flashing crosswalk sign).

Can pedestrians jus walk into the roadways as they wish? do you really thing cars will come to a stop in the middle of a road with the car behind them going 45 just because someone is waiting to cross?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Which roads have a 35 mph speed limit and don't have crosswalks at lights?

Not talking about a crosswalk at a traffic light with a signal. If a light is red then obviously you stop.

I am talking about a road with fast moving vehicles and crosswalks without signals.

For example RT 50 near me has a 45 mph speed limit and marked crosswalks (crosswalk is marked but there is not signal or even flashing crosswalk sign).

Can pedestrians jus walk into the roadways as they wish? do you really thing cars will come to a stop in the middle of a road with the car behind them going 45 just because someone is waiting to cross?

NP. That seems like insane road design. There should be a light or better yet a pedestrian overpass. Pedestrians can't safely cross multiple lanes of traffic going 45mph.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Which roads have a 35 mph speed limit and don't have crosswalks at lights?

Not talking about a crosswalk at a traffic light with a signal. If a light is red then obviously you stop.

I am talking about a road with fast moving vehicles and crosswalks without signals.

For example RT 50 near me has a 45 mph speed limit and marked crosswalks (crosswalk is marked but there is not signal or even flashing crosswalk sign).

Can pedestrians jus walk into the roadways as they wish? do you really thing cars will come to a stop in the middle of a road with the car behind them going 45 just because someone is waiting to cross?

NP. That seems like insane road design. There should be a light or better yet a pedestrian overpass. Pedestrians can't safely cross multiple lanes of traffic going 45mph.

Then there are also roads like great falls rd with a 35mph limit and crosswalks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Which roads have a 35 mph speed limit and don't have crosswalks at lights?

Not talking about a crosswalk at a traffic light with a signal. If a light is red then obviously you stop.

I am talking about a road with fast moving vehicles and crosswalks without signals.

For example RT 50 near me has a 45 mph speed limit and marked crosswalks (crosswalk is marked but there is not signal or even flashing crosswalk sign).

Can pedestrians jus walk into the roadways as they wish? do you really thing cars will come to a stop in the middle of a road with the car behind them going 45 just because someone is waiting to cross?

NP. That seems like insane road design. There should be a light or better yet a pedestrian overpass. Pedestrians can't safely cross multiple lanes of traffic going 45mph.

but again everyone here is arguing that pedestrians always have the right of way when the law and common sense states that no, they do not. Just because a car must stop for a pedestrian who is physically in the crosswalk does not mean a pedestrian can enter that crosswalk and magically make a car a few feet away stop. They also need to only enter the crosswalk when it is safe to do so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Which roads have a 35 mph speed limit and don't have crosswalks at lights?

Not talking about a crosswalk at a traffic light with a signal. If a light is red then obviously you stop.

I am talking about a road with fast moving vehicles and crosswalks without signals.

For example RT 50 near me has a 45 mph speed limit and marked crosswalks (crosswalk is marked but there is not signal or even flashing crosswalk sign).

Can pedestrians jus walk into the roadways as they wish? do you really thing cars will come to a stop in the middle of a road with the car behind them going 45 just because someone is waiting to cross?

NP. That seems like insane road design. There should be a light or better yet a pedestrian overpass. Pedestrians can't safely cross multiple lanes of traffic going 45mph.

Then there are also roads like great falls rd with a 35mph limit and crosswalks.

Also insane road design. I have no issue with midblock crosswalks where I live, but the speed limit is 20mph and realistically no one is going faster than 10mph because there are so many lights and pedestrians. I do get mad when cars see me waiting/starting to cross and speed up, but no one is ever realistically in danger of injury and most drivers are very polite about it. Why are your counties putting in these deathtrap crosswalks rather than building proper infrastructure? You should be mad at that rather than the poor people without cars who have no safe way to get to the other side of the street and have to play frogger with you.

[Anonymous]

As a driver, you must always honor the pedestrians’ right of way, but as a pedestrian, you’re crazy if you trust that rule of the road, alone, to keep you safe. Other people don’t value your personal safety and wellbeing as much as you do. Act accordingly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Which roads have a 35 mph speed limit and don't have crosswalks at lights?

Not talking about a crosswalk at a traffic light with a signal. If a light is red then obviously you stop.

I am talking about a road with fast moving vehicles and crosswalks without signals.

For example RT 50 near me has a 45 mph speed limit and marked crosswalks (crosswalk is marked but there is not signal or even flashing crosswalk sign).

Can pedestrians jus walk into the roadways as they wish? do you really thing cars will come to a stop in the middle of a road with the car behind them going 45 just because someone is waiting to cross?

NP. That seems like insane road design. There should be a light or better yet a pedestrian overpass. Pedestrians can't safely cross multiple lanes of traffic going 45mph.

Then there are also roads like great falls rd with a 35mph limit and crosswalks.

Also insane road design. I have no issue with midblock crosswalks where I live, but the speed limit is 20mph and realistically no one is going faster than 10mph because there are so many lights and pedestrians. I do get mad when cars see me waiting/starting to cross and speed up, but no one is ever realistically in danger of injury and most drivers are very polite about it. Why are your counties putting in these deathtrap crosswalks rather than building proper infrastructure? You should be mad at that rather than the poor people without cars who have no safe way to get to the other side of the street and have to play frogger with you.

on a road like great falls there are only 2 lanes and if you wait there is always a break in traffic enough so that a pedestrian can cross without having to jump into the raod claiming "right of way" in front of a car moving 35pph.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Which roads have a 35 mph speed limit and don't have crosswalks at lights?

Not talking about a crosswalk at a traffic light with a signal. If a light is red then obviously you stop.

I am talking about a road with fast moving vehicles and crosswalks without signals.

For example RT 50 near me has a 45 mph speed limit and marked crosswalks (crosswalk is marked but there is not signal or even flashing crosswalk sign).

Can pedestrians jus walk into the roadways as they wish? do you really thing cars will come to a stop in the middle of a road with the car behind them going 45 just because someone is waiting to cross?

NP. That seems like insane road design. There should be a light or better yet a pedestrian overpass. Pedestrians can't safely cross multiple lanes of traffic going 45mph.

The GW parkway outside Arlington has crosswalks. They have added some signage because pedestrians and cyclists just cross when they reach the parkway, regardless of how close the vehicles are.

[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.

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.

The driver must stop and yield to the pedestrian in a marked or unmarked crosswalk with the proviso that the pedestrian cannot “suddenly” enter the crosswalk. Don’t worry, MPD will more typically find the pedestrian at fault because that’s how they roll.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Which roads have a 35 mph speed limit and don't have crosswalks at lights?

Not talking about a crosswalk at a traffic light with a signal. If a light is red then obviously you stop.

I am talking about a road with fast moving vehicles and crosswalks without signals.

For example RT 50 near me has a 45 mph speed limit and marked crosswalks (crosswalk is marked but there is not signal or even flashing crosswalk sign).

Can pedestrians jus walk into the roadways as they wish? do you really thing cars will come to a stop in the middle of a road with the car behind them going 45 just because someone is waiting to cross?

NP. That seems like insane road design. There should be a light or better yet a pedestrian overpass. Pedestrians can't safely cross multiple lanes of traffic going 45mph.

The GW parkway outside Arlington has crosswalks. They have added some signage because pedestrians and cyclists just cross when they reach the parkway, regardless of how close the vehicles are.

You forgot the part about drivers exceeding the posted limit by 10-15 mph.

[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.

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.

The driver must stop and yield to the pedestrian in a marked or unmarked crosswalk with the proviso that the pedestrian cannot “suddenly” enter the crosswalk. Don’t worry, MPD will more typically find the pedestrian at fault because that’s how they roll.

I know this. Then why is everyone on here making it sound like drives are supposed to be driving down the road scanning the sidewalks so they can stop anytime they see someone standing on a sidewalk waiting to cross?