Jay Walking (time for U.S laws ?)

[Profpointy]

@Profpointy

I agree with your hierarchy statement & enjoyed your Edit too.

Presumed Liability though ?

Would you like to have to prove in court that Johhny A or whoever wasn't completely responsible for their untimely demise ?

Think of the grief it would cause you generally.

Not a slur, just different perception i suppose & thanks for your comments.

A serious response now - on the "presumed liability" notion; at first I was sceptical, as it sounds like "guilty until proved innocent" as the Daily Mail et al might have it. Then I started thinking about liability law and what not. At the risk of a legal digression, for most claims in Tort (eg personal injury or damage to property) there's a balance of probabilities to the legal decision, with plaintiff having to prove the defendant had been negligent in some way, eg driving badly. However for certain activities judged to be inherently hazardous, then the defendant is liable even if negligence hasn't been proved - simply that the consequences arose from the dangerous activity albeit not his fault. Perhaps you are keeping lions at home, and one eats the postman even though you had checked the lion was chained up, and had an otherwise exemplary safe system to keep it chained up. You would still be held liable. Currenlty, for driving a car, you would likely not be held liable for an accident resulting from something like being stung by a bee, where you were otherwise driving perfectly sensibly. Presumed liability would treat operating a car as an inherently dangerous activity just like operating a chemical works or keeping lions, thus accident due to bee sting would still mean you were liable - albeit not something you could have avoided. Thus, unless the plaintiff had himself blatantly caused the problem to himself (by being proved to have jumped in front of your car, or by breaking into the lion's cage) you would be held liable by dint of being the one in charge of the dangerous activity, however careful you'd been. Anyhow, long winded answer, but that's why "presumed liability" is "a good thing", and not wildly different from how non-car things are treated anyway. Just to be clear, this isn't the same as being criminally guilty, in which case you'd have had to do something blameworthy as well.

(edit for clarity)

 

[Sara_H]

So the idea is that a company in central London would have to operate 4 local offices rather than one central one and would be good for business?

Yes, it's more about what's good for people than what's good for business.

 

[Markymark]

Yes, it's more about what's good for people than what's good for business.

Well that's simple then, not good for business means no business will be done here. People won't have far to travel to work as there will be no work to go to.

 

[User482]

Again, not sure about your experience in London but it is incredible. People complain about the tube yet on the central line (my line) one arrives every 2-3 minutes rush hour each holding around 900 people. Buses galore, cyclists everywhere. The only bit that doesn't work are the roads. Scrap the single occuapncy cars and it would be a dream for commerical vehicles, cyclists and pedestrians too.

My only issue is that it does appear to be at capacity so with population increase something does need to give.

The least sutainable, most selfish and greatest danger are cars and we could easily do away with them in central London.

Those of us who live and work in other UK cities look upon London's public transport system with envy!

 

[PK99]

No, people will be living close to where they work.

in which bit of Cloud Cuckoo Land is that?

 

[User482]

Correct... Well done &

dense doesn't even cover you,

now excuse me while I re press the ignore button

...and people complain about SC&P

 

[Profpointy]

in which bit of Cloud Cuckoo Land is that?

What's so silly about living close to work ? We've made it difficult to do so by the way cities are planned, but it's not a stupid idea surely?
(I regard 1/2 hour cycle as "close" in this context, so not merely living above the shop)

 

[Sara_H]

What's so silly about living close to work ? We've made it difficult to do so by the way cities are planned, but it's not a stupid idea surely?
(I regard 1/2 hour cycle as "close" in this context, so not merely living above the shop)

That's sort of my point. Being able to live and work locally had been made difficult for many people because of the way that urban areas and transport have been planned over the last fifty years with private motoring at the heart of those plans.
It's not sustainable on a individual level or a sociological level, and we really need to start planning to reverse the trend.

 

[Profpointy]

That's sort of my point. Being able to live and work locally had been made difficult for many people because of the way that urban areas and transport have been planned over the last fifty years with private motoring at the heart of those plans.
It's not sustainable on a individual level or a sociological level, and we really need to start planning to reverse the trend.

Sadly, after 4 years living said 1/2 hour cycle from work, and walking distance from shops, pubs, theatre, concerts, I'm going to be long distance commuting / staying away for the foreseeable future - bah !

 

[PK99]

What's so silly about living close to work ? We've made it difficult to do so by the way cities are planned, but it's not a stupid idea surely?
(I regard 1/2 hour cycle as "close" in this context, so not merely living above the shop)

Peoples jobs move at the whim of employers as the result of reorganisations etc House moves are not so simple.

 

[snorri]

I often wish the citizens of the USA were like proper foreigners and had a language of their own, maybe then we would be spared hearing of jay walking and other crazy aspects of life over there

 

[User482]

Peoples jobs move at the whim of employers as the result of reorganisations etc House moves are not so simple.

That's true of course, but I bet you know people who've taken a job further from home, and then start complaining about the commute.

I did the opposite - move closer - and greatly value the extra free time and daily cycle.

 

[ColinJ]

My daughter spent one of her Uni years in Germany and there they have rigid adherence to the traffic signals. She remarked how strange it was when she was retuning to her flat in the early hours of the morning and her friends would all stop at the pedestrian crossing, waiting for it to turn green, even though there was no traffic in sight for miles!

Ha ha - my stepdaughter had exactly the same experience - LINK!

 

[SteCenturion]

...and people complain about SC&P

Sorry, I have deleted this post as it was something I was trying to avoid...

the person it referenced is on my ignore list & in hindsight should have stayed that way.

Anyhow my equilibrium has been reinstated now.

 

[Sara_H]

That's true of course, but I bet you know people who've taken a job further from home, and then start complaining about the commute.

I did the opposite - move closer - and greatly value the extra free time and daily cycle.

Me too. I used to travel 30 miles to work, unsocial hours too, so public transport not available.
One winter I had to stay over on a disused ward for five nights because the roads weren't safe and the trains weren't running. I decided to get a job closer to home after that.
Since that time I've passed up some good opportunities in neighbouring towns and cities, it's just not worth the hassle.
Sod's law, I can walk to work if need be, but I've had to take a day off as my sons school is closed because not enough teachers gave been able to get to work.