- 主题发起人 小雷音
- 发布时间 2017-05-03
我家离kingsway很近，但附近的路口不仅没有转弯灯，是根本就没有灯，只有 2 way stop sign两个，所以过马路总是很挑战的。有时候好不容易等到车应该都通过了，但stop这边的车又停下来，虽然是停下来也不敢走因为司机只看其他车不看人。没有行人灯，司机大多数都是不让的，等它走了，其他车又过来了。我们家两边的十字路口我在短短几个月都左右 各有一起车祸，一次是刚拉着儿子过马路七八米就听到后面巨响二车相撞。另一次是看到车已撞有人倒地上等救护车。呆长时间了，经验是是马路中间走最安全，只要看着两边车还很远就行。
这是维基上的，事实上随便搜一下，很多文章都在说jaywalking比没有控制灯的十字路口安全。安全是自己的，做人不要死脑筋。
Jaywalking is generally perceived as an urban traffic safety problem. ... When practiced with caution, jaywalking or crossing away from intersections, where legal, can be safer for pedestrians than exercising their right-of-way at crosswalks that are not equipped with pedestrian signals.
Jaywalking is generally perceived as an urban traffic safety problem. ... When practiced with caution, jaywalking or crossing away from intersections, where legal, can be safer for pedestrians than exercising their right-of-way at crosswalks that are not equipped with pedestrian signals.
Perhaps Toronto police should heed their own advice and look both ways before they talk.
Well-intentioned though the force's Pedestrian Safety Blitz may be, it is a misguided and paternalistic exercise doomed to failure. The program, launched Wednesday after a rash of pedestrian deaths across the GTA, is flawed in its understanding of how people actually make their way through the city.
Despite what the police would have us believe, we are all jaywalkers. We have no choice; to negotiate the city on foot requires endless street crossing without benefit of traffic light, crosswalk or corner.
The police are now stopping jaywalkers and other pedestrians whose behaviour they don't like to hand out tickets and deliver a lecture on street safety. It's for our own good, of course. Pedestrians are naughty children who must be protected from themselves.
And sometimes we do need to be protected from ourselves. Anyone who saunters into the path of an oncoming streetcar while engrossed in a cellphone conversation is asking for trouble.
But the reality of jaywalking is quite the opposite. In fact, jaywalking can be much safer than crossing at a green light, corner or crosswalk.
That might sound counterintuitive, but the reason is simple: Jaywalkers assume nothing; those crossing legally assume everything.
Pedestrians at a green light take it for granted that vehicles will come to a stop, that drivers turning right or left will see them, and that their right-of-way will be respected. As we know, it's not.
By contrast, jaywalkers look both ways, wait for a break in the traffic and often make eye contact with drivers before proceeding.
The concept of "naked streets," or as the Dutch call them, woonerfs, is based on the same principle. Because street signs have been removed, drivers and pedestrians are forced to pay close attention to each other. Fewer accidents result.
No one should hold their breath waiting for naked streets to appear in Toronto; that's never going to happen. On the other hand, it would be worth employing a bit more subtlety and intelligence than the police have managed. Imposing fines and wagging fingers will accomplish nothing. Deaths will continue.
And let's not forget that the majority of the 14 pedestrians killed by drivers in the last few weeks were doing exactly what the law stipulated. They weren't jaywalking, though they might have been better off had that been the case.
The police response, which is to blame the victim, misses the point and reinforces tired old prejudices against pedestrians.
In recent days, officers have been telling Toronto pedestrians that it doesn't matter if they are in the right; cars are bigger and go faster. But, they remind us, it's pedestrians who get killed, not drivers.
That may be true, but one wonders whether the argument would hold if, for example, we were talking about domestic violence. Husbands tend to be bigger and stronger, so if you're a woman, just stay out of their way. Highly unlikely.
Not all pedestrian deaths are the drivers' fault, but that's not the point. The issue is that we don't share the roads. Simply banning pedestrians from the streets, as the police would like, might please drivers, but even they must occasionally climb out from behind the wheel.
We have learned not to expect too much from the police, but their handling of the pedestrian deaths has revealed a force well behind the times.
"Be smart and be safe," Elmer the Safety Elephant used to say. So far, we have achieved neither.
Well-intentioned though the force's Pedestrian Safety Blitz may be, it is a misguided and paternalistic exercise doomed to failure. The program, launched Wednesday after a rash of pedestrian deaths across the GTA, is flawed in its understanding of how people actually make their way through the city.
Despite what the police would have us believe, we are all jaywalkers. We have no choice; to negotiate the city on foot requires endless street crossing without benefit of traffic light, crosswalk or corner.
The police are now stopping jaywalkers and other pedestrians whose behaviour they don't like to hand out tickets and deliver a lecture on street safety. It's for our own good, of course. Pedestrians are naughty children who must be protected from themselves.
And sometimes we do need to be protected from ourselves. Anyone who saunters into the path of an oncoming streetcar while engrossed in a cellphone conversation is asking for trouble.
But the reality of jaywalking is quite the opposite. In fact, jaywalking can be much safer than crossing at a green light, corner or crosswalk.
That might sound counterintuitive, but the reason is simple: Jaywalkers assume nothing; those crossing legally assume everything.
Pedestrians at a green light take it for granted that vehicles will come to a stop, that drivers turning right or left will see them, and that their right-of-way will be respected. As we know, it's not.
By contrast, jaywalkers look both ways, wait for a break in the traffic and often make eye contact with drivers before proceeding.
The concept of "naked streets," or as the Dutch call them, woonerfs, is based on the same principle. Because street signs have been removed, drivers and pedestrians are forced to pay close attention to each other. Fewer accidents result.
No one should hold their breath waiting for naked streets to appear in Toronto; that's never going to happen. On the other hand, it would be worth employing a bit more subtlety and intelligence than the police have managed. Imposing fines and wagging fingers will accomplish nothing. Deaths will continue.
And let's not forget that the majority of the 14 pedestrians killed by drivers in the last few weeks were doing exactly what the law stipulated. They weren't jaywalking, though they might have been better off had that been the case.
The police response, which is to blame the victim, misses the point and reinforces tired old prejudices against pedestrians.
In recent days, officers have been telling Toronto pedestrians that it doesn't matter if they are in the right; cars are bigger and go faster. But, they remind us, it's pedestrians who get killed, not drivers.
That may be true, but one wonders whether the argument would hold if, for example, we were talking about domestic violence. Husbands tend to be bigger and stronger, so if you're a woman, just stay out of their way. Highly unlikely.
Not all pedestrian deaths are the drivers' fault, but that's not the point. The issue is that we don't share the roads. Simply banning pedestrians from the streets, as the police would like, might please drivers, but even they must occasionally climb out from behind the wheel.
We have learned not to expect too much from the police, but their handling of the pedestrian deaths has revealed a force well behind the times.
"Be smart and be safe," Elmer the Safety Elephant used to say. So far, we have achieved neither.
Similar threads
中国话题
2024回国记录
- 0.07 超赞 赏
- Jacklyns ,#485
- 2024-01-18
- 聊天・灌水・娱乐・新闻・时事
2024-01-28有新回复
全楼:0.96
wisdom
2023-02-24有新回复
全楼:0.01
q7yy
