Comment by kspacewalk2 | Hacker News Reader

Comment by kspacewalk2 | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

I make an important modification to this pattern. Whenever visibility is good, I act assertively when I cross streets, whenever my right of way is not in question. I leave just enough time to not be hit by the vehicle, but I don't hesitate nearly as much as other people. I want the driver to be uncomfortable, I want them to know they're doing something wrong, if they choose to go for it. Very often this is the difference between them deciding to cut me off and actually braking and yielding the right of way.

If pedestrians don't take what's theirs (in a safe manner), there are just far too many drivers who will ignore them. Fixing that will take decades, best case, but I want to walk around my neighbourhood as a first-class citizen now. So I do.

Disclaimer: I am tall, visible, only do this in good visibility, and live in Canada where driver behaviour is a bit better. If the situation is borderline, I never tempt fate, rather I throw my hands up in the air and make it obvious that yes, I hereby assert that this driver is being an asshole.

> I leave just enough time to not be hit by the vehicle

We need laws (and enforcement) that make it so that taking risks with pedestrian safety can be ticketed (or other consequences).

I've had experiences recently (in TX) of people forcing my action to avoid being hit. Had someone essentially play "chicken" with me where they were actively accelerating through a crosswalk timing it just so that we do not intersect. (but they were increasing velocity in such a way that if my trajectory were to change, such as tripping, stooping to pick up something I dropped etc, I'd be hit hard).

And many will say "Call the police" but the fact is in a large number of metros (including Austin and others in Texas), the police do not respond to much if anything. A lack of enforcement and consequences (on behalf of the perpetrator) is equivalent to a lack of laws entirely.

Absolutely, where I live pedestrians have right of way at all intersections, which includes some pretty busy wide roads the drivers think they own. When I'm crossing I don't stop at the curb and wait for it to clear, I'll enter the first safe lane, usually the parking lane.

Sometimes I'll do a big exaggerated step showing drivers that I do not intended to stop, unless they choose to kill me. I won't actually step into a lane when a driver might not have seen me so I feel safe doing it, but it breaks drivers expectations that they own the road.

What you said, but I'm considering carrying a rock now. Drivers seem to think I'm disposable for committing the crime of walking somewhere. Middle fingers are only so memorable, but that ding in the paint or a window might help them remember I have the right to not be hit in a crosswalk.

You will be quickly reminded by your local police force that throwing rocks at moving vehicles will result in at least a mischief charge.

Your edgy angst is better spent engaging with local levels of government.

Or it may anger them into jumping a curb to explicitly hit you.

Road rage due to damage to their pavement princesses is deadly when your in a cage of steel.

Victim blaming.

If a driver can be goaded into murder, perhaps they shouldn't have the tools to commit that murder so easily.

I don't read that comment as victim blaming at all, it's just a statement of our sad reality: it's de facto legal to murder someone in a car so long as you're not inebriated and you stay at the scene and plead your innocence.

As a general rule I go out of my way to not piss off drivers, not because I think they're in the right, but because they can murder me with impunity and they know it.

But we live in the kinds of society where a person has rights until they prove they shouldn't. Not the potential, but the actuality. Now I think the middle ground might be better enforcement of near misses... "No harm no foul" needs to be removed from the mindset of traffic cops.

> Victim blaming.

A rock thrown at a vehicle moving at speed can be (and has been) charged as attempted first degree murder. There are not really any victims in this scenario.

https://jalopnik.com/blood-brothers-kill-woman-after-throwin...

An armed society is a polite society

The driver of the vehicle (vehicles cause a dozen 9/11s worth of deaths a year) is armed. Only person that can stop a bad guy with a vehicle is a good guy with a rock.

You most likely will be punished more severely by the law for denting a car with your rock than a driver would be for killing you with their car as long as they were not drinking or ran away from the scene of the crime.

Killing someone with a car effectively counts as not killing someone.

That's a good way to get shot.

Pedestrians can conceal-carry.

Yep. As I lay dying on the ground, bleeding from every orifice, my organs and bones crushed to a fine pulp at the blunt end of a BMW X7 going 50mph. I will reach for my gun and shoot my assailant.

Yep definitely a real plan that solves real problems. /s

[edit] Or was the plan to prevent the collision in the first place? As I see the driver coming for me, murder in their eyes, I will smoothly draw my weapon, shoot the driver through the windshield, leap into the air and sail smoothly over my assailant's steel battering ram, executing a perfect three-point superhero landing as my fellow pedestrians cheer.

Was that the idea instead?

I'm not specifically advocating that everyone carry guns -- I was just responding to the phrase "that's how you get shot". Entitled drivers should recognize their own mortality in the event that they threaten pedestrians with a gun.

But I do prefer your scenario instead.

Only in uncivilized countries.

Toss some caltrops in the road in front of drivers who would choose to kill you for their own convenience. Or use one of these: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01N3D4J58

"The referee only sees the retaliation" - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWixJl8VFLs

(Bill Burr clip, very adult language)

I've always wanted some kind of throwable sticker that says "Watch out, I don't know how to drive!" That's close to what I yell when people playing with their phones almost hit me when I am bike commuting, "learn to drive!"

Something very similar to that was suggested about 35 years ago [1] but I don't think anyone tried it.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLmIR6MOFiE

I doubt you would actually do this, but even if you did, I don't see how you could seize the opportunity. Meaning by the time you knew to strike, the car would have to be less than a few feet away, right? Once they pass you, its impossible to hit them. Unless you just wanted to fire on anyone who didn't obey the ped xing (which isn't usually the same thing as a close call).

I want to carry a large illuminated weight on a fishing pole that I can hang at windscreen height in front of me, so I can claim the space I have the right of way to, without risking my body

I'm sure this works in some places, but if you try this somewhere like Philadelphia or New York (or indeed most of the USA) you'd be "asserting yourself" from the hospital.

I’ve actually found New York is fine - most of it’s so dense and slow the pedestrians really do claim the roads.

Boston, on the other hand - those motherfuckers speed up when they see you crossing.

Meh, I walked rather assertively around NYC and never had any issues.

I walk far far far more than I drive. My wife and I share one car and she almost always has it. I walk and pick my kids up from school every day and to stores, etc.

All this to say: I don’t mind waiting for traffic to pass and I find your aggressive style to be distasteful, dangerous and annoying. That said, I will still stop for you 10 feet away and smile as I think of terrible words in my head.

I think you misunderstand “Right of Way”. It’s not just an option for a pedestrian to cross, it’s incumbent on them to maintain predictable movement through the intersection.

Giving up Right of Way creates more confusion (think about the “go” / “no you go” game of a car not moving when it’s their turn at a 4-way stop).

As a child you are taught to approach the street, look both ways, and don’t cross until after the cars have passed or if they are all stopped for you.

no confusion there.

You mention living in the Bay Area, where right of way is clearly defined: https://california.public.law/codes/ca_veh_code_section_2195...

If you don’t want cars to stop for you the solution is easy, stay far enough back from the intersection so it’s clear you’re not trying to cross. Otherwise I will stop for you — it’s the law.

im pretty sure that is part of local cross-walk codes nationwide, but the pedestrian entitlement is extreme here.

I find it to be boorish.

Wonderful! Since I care not one bit what you think of my assertive use of my right of way, all is well! Howdy neighbour! And so forth.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com