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

[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.

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.

That shouldn't keep you from being able to judge the vehicle speed.

[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.

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?

Well, you are required to yeild to pedestrians by law. The fact that the MPD doesn’t enforce it doesn’t mean the law isn’t there. Also even if it wasnt the law you should scan to make sure no pedestrians are about to cross so you don’t um, kill someone. Is that not enough? What if it was a kid about to cross the street?

[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.

Do you mean overpass? There aren’t “crosswalks” on GW Parkway.

[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?

Where on Rt 50 is this? They need the flashing light crosswalk thing.

[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.

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.

Do you mean overpass? There aren’t “crosswalks” on GW Parkway.

There is at least one crosswalk on GW parkway just south of the George Washington Bridge.

[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.

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?

You should generally be scanning the environment, but also when you come to a marked crosswalk, check both sides as you approach it and stop if you see someone about to cross. Obviously you can’t be speeding so fast that you don’t have time to look and time to stop.

[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:

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.

Do you mean overpass? There aren’t “crosswalks” on GW Parkway.

There is at least one crosswalk on GW parkway just south of the George Washington Bridge.

Oh you’re right. BUT that has significant measures to slow traffic there - reduces to a single lane - and there is a flashing cross light. Is it marked 45mph in that section?

[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:

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.

Do you mean overpass? There aren’t “crosswalks” on GW Parkway.

There is at least one crosswalk on GW parkway just south of the George Washington Bridge.

Oh you’re right. BUT that has significant measures to slow traffic there - reduces to a single lane - and there is a flashing cross light. Is it marked 45mph in that section?

I have no idea why the speed limit is there. They added those mitigations recently. My guess is because it creates a very unsafe situation for everyone.

[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.

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.

Do you mean overpass? There aren’t “crosswalks” on GW Parkway.

Yes there are. There are numerous crosswalks on the GW parkway near Memorial Bridge.

[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?

Where on Rt 50 is this? They need the flashing light crosswalk thing.

RT 50 between Annandale Rd and Graham road. There is no flashing light and it is over a mile between stoplights so walking to a light to cross is not an option.

[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.

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?

That’s exactly what a competent, responsible driver is supposed to be doing as they approach an intersection. Be prepared for a pedestrian entering the crosswalk. Be prepared for a signal light change. Be prepared for a cyclist or another vehicle entering the intersection.

[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.

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?

That’s exactly what a competent, responsible driver is supposed to be doing as they approach an intersection. Be prepared for a pedestrian entering the crosswalk. Be prepared for a signal light change. Be prepared for a cyclist or another vehicle entering the intersection.

Because, they ARE supposed to do this? You seriously drive down the street looking straight ahead and not looking to see if you need to stop in order to properly yield 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:

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?

Where on Rt 50 is this? They need the flashing light crosswalk thing.

RT 50 between Annandale Rd and Graham road. There is no flashing light and it is over a mile between stoplights so walking to a light to cross is not an option.

It's the same on Route 1 in Fairfax County. A crosswalk every mile, whether or not you need it. There are plans to lower the speed limit to 35 mph.

I actually don't like using the crosswalks. The people turning right on red usually don't stop or race me for the crosswalk.

[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.

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?

That’s exactly what a competent, responsible driver is supposed to be doing as they approach an intersection. Be prepared for a pedestrian entering the crosswalk. Be prepared for a signal light change. Be prepared for a cyclist or another vehicle entering the intersection.

Because, they ARE supposed to do this? You seriously drive down the street looking straight ahead and not looking to see if you need to stop in order to properly yield the right of way?

I don't look straight ahead, but again I do not stop for pedestrians simply waiting on the sidewalk waiting to cross. If they are actually in the crosswalk i stop, but no i do not stop for every pedestrian 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: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?

That’s exactly what a competent, responsible driver is supposed to be doing as they approach an intersection. Be prepared for a pedestrian entering the crosswalk. Be prepared for a signal light change. Be prepared for a cyclist or another vehicle entering the intersection.

Because, they ARE supposed to do this? You seriously drive down the street looking straight ahead and not looking to see if you need to stop in order to properly yield the right of way?

I don't look straight ahead, but again I do not stop for pedestrians simply waiting on the sidewalk waiting to cross. If they are actually in the crosswalk i stop, but no i do not stop for every pedestrian waiting to cross.

Am curious why not- I always scan and stop if a pedestrian is waiting to cross or looks like he or she might cross, especially if it is a road with no parking so the only other way for a pedestrian to cross is to step into the crosswalk- which many drivers on here seem to think means they have a death wish.