Let's not forget that jaywalking was essentially created by the automotive industry and its lobbyists, to make life more convenient for drivers. It started in car-heavy places like California, and eventually became a law virtually everywhere in the US, but was never really enforced in New York City, where most people walk or take public transit, rather than drive. If, like most New Yorkers, you walk several kilometers a day, through dozens of intersections, it's ludicrous to suggest that you should only walk at crosswalks, and only when the walk sign is lit. New Yorkers don't have a concept of "jaywalking"; it's just "walking."
First, let's not forget that jaywalking is one of those "crimes" that is used as a pretense by police to harass people, usually young people and people of color.<p>Second, as a veteran jaywalker, my rule of thumb is that if a car has to hit their breaks even a little, or otherwise alter their trajectory, you're doing it wrong. The goal should be smooth movement for all.<p>Third, just because someone else is jaywalking does not mean you should follow them! Always asses your own path because someone else may be timing it differently.
Surprisingly the word jaywalking comes from jay-driving which was coined to describe drivers driving on the wrong side of the road. Initially the term jaywalking really only applied to poor etiquette when walking on the sidewalk.
Since they made this change in California last year, I cross where ever when it is safe and convenient. I'm surprised how big of difference it made to the convenience and speed of walking somewhere. No more waiting for 2 different lights just to get to the opposite corner.
The dichotomy is pretty interesting to me, given that most major cities in the country have been running high-publicity programs for the last decade to do everything possible to reduce car-related deaths, especially protecting pedestrians and bicyclists. (Cities like NYC and Seattle call it "vision zero", a vision of zero serious traffic injuries/deaths). They work to separate pedestrians and bicyclists from traffic, slow cars down with "traffic calming measures", lower speed limits, and so on.<p>Those stated goals seem, to me, to clash with the idea of now making it up to people's discretion to cross roads wherever and whenever they want, rather than at dedicated, marked, predictable, traffic crossings equipped with signal lights that tell cars and pedestrians who has the right of way.<p>I'm curious in X years if the data will or will not show more pedestrians got hit by cars following this change.
I remember visiting California in the 1990s and was amazed to see my California friends waiting patiently at the light, looking at me like I was uncivilized because I just crossed the street whenever it was safe.
Not growing up in america I never understood what jaywalking was - I legit assumed it was a pedestrian crossing a <i>freeway</i> because nothing else made sense. Growing up I was taught explicitly to do what in the US was a crime: crossing between intersections because it is vastly safer than crossing at intersections.<p>Obviously, there's a more complex issue with jaywalking where it is a crime that is trivially easy to enforce in a discriminatory manner, and it creates endless opportunities for pretextual searches once NY's clearly unconstitutional stop-and-frisk laws were overturned.
In general, jaywalking should be legal, but ...<p>There is one situation where some kind of enforcement is needed: crowds of people ignoring pedestrian signals, and flooding across crosswalks continuously. Then the traffic never gets a chance to move. Cars cannot safely crawl or nudge their way through the throng of people, who feel the protection of collective security.<p>One might argue that such large crowds are an indication that the road should be fully pedestrianized - perhaps by time-of-day, or only for specific shopping holidays (e.g. Black Friday, Xmas). The alternative for these peaks is often manual control of people and vehicles by a police/traffic/community officer, like a school crossing).<p>Perhaps there could be some critical crossings where there is a legally enforceable <i>'double-red'</i> pedestrian signal.
It's hard to tell from the article - is it still a violation if you don't yield to traffic with the right of way? If so, that's how jaywalking works in the vast majority of places. If you cross and imped the flow of traffic with the right of way, you are jaywalking and will be ticketed for it. This is just standard in most places.
As far as I know, NYC is unique in that pedestrians do <i>not</i> have the right of way. Everywhere else you must legally stop for a pedestrian but in NYC you don't. (edit, since people seem confused: This doesn't mean you can run them over. It just means you don't have to stop if you are going to block their path. Everywhere else, you have to stop if you are going to block a pedestrian's path, no matter where that pedestrian is.)<p>They have to do this or people would just block all traffic all the time.<p>So this really is just to stop racial profiling. It's really not going to change much in the day to day goings on in NYC.
In Hong Kong and Mainland China, the sidewalks are railed off everywhere except the crosswalk, presumably to prevent the anarchy that occurs when pedestrians are allowed to freely cross the road anywhere.<p>A little jaywalking is good, a lot of jaywalking renders the road unusable to cars. You don't have to be pro-car or anti-transit to recognize the inefficiency in having roads that are uselessly congested with erratic foot traffic.
I’m staying in Manila, Philippines for a while now, and road crossing is wild here. You can have a dozen of people staying at a <i>marked</i> uncontrolled crossing for <i>minutes</i>, yielding to traffic. I usually cross anyway whenever there’s an opening in the traffic, and people look at me like I’m an idiot and continue to stay. I have no idea how they manage to cross the roads at all here.
It was de-facto legal to begin with. The only people who were ever hurt by this law were the people who insisted on abiding by the law beyond the point of absurdity.<p>I appreciate that this is one less crime the average person commits every day that a capricious enforcer can make a big deal of but the flip side is that this reduces the competitive advantage of not being law abiding to the point of absurdity and your own detriment.
One consequence of legalizing jaywalking, may be increased prevention by fences and barriers.<p>Low railings may be jumped by an agile adult, but they stop children, elderly, wheelchairs, pushchairs, suitcases or people with heavy shopping.<p>Divided highways may get (more) high fences in the central reservation to deter jaywalking - but of course the frustrated locals will eventually cut convenient holes.
Good riddance. Crosswalks at intersections are nearly obsolete due to the thick A-pillars in modern cars. I would rather have mid-block crosswalks with warning lights and traffic calming devices.
is there a difference, legally, regarding vehicular involuntary manslaughter, between hitting someone who is jaywalking and someone who is not. Example, a person walks into a 65 mph thoroughfare after a curve, since they are no longer in the commencement of a crime, does that make the act tantamount to hitting someone in a crosswalk?
I will still be using the cross walks everywhere I go. Because there's no shortcut across the street that is worth me stopping traffic or getting hit by a car.<p>Jaywalking is for selfish and impatient people who are bad at assessing risk.<p>Unless the street is completely empty, I guess.
I grew up in Southern California. My parents strictly observed traffic laws, and riding in the car with them, I would often hear their disapproving gossip about pedestrians' <i>faux pas</i>, including wearing black at night.<p>In high school, a classmate tried to help me loosen up a bit, and he'd encourage our group to cross a busy stroad. "They'll stop! They'll stop for you!" he assured me. He was right...<p>I visited Catalonia awhile ago. My companion was a native there and helped me understand local customs. I was able to drive her car a little bit, LHD, although the roundabouts tended to bewilder me. On foot, we'd approach a busy street and she encouraged me to just cross. She showed me how to hold out a hand as a signal of my intent. Motorists would slow and yield. She was also right.<p>I heard that the walk signal buttons are called "beg buttons", as in "pedestrians beg to enter the street". I use them scrupulously. My justification is that a theoretical personal injury lawsuit is easier to litigate, if I can prove I was doing everything right.