I can’t believe some of you took Otto seriously!
–
I have over 2000 posts, dammit! Show some respect.
http://fathom.org/opalcat/showmerespect.jpg
O p a l C a t
www.opalcat.com
NEW UBB board, all are welcome:
http://fathom.org/cgi-bin/Ultimate.cgi?action=intro
Our friendship requires that I break the news.
Yes, Otto you did. You always over-react.
::
Just wanted to take a moment and point out that we learned in Driver’s Ed (back in the Pleistocene Era–perhaps they’ve changed it) that “The Pedestrian Always Has The Right Of Way”. This means, we were told, that even if it’s a green light and you have the right to turn right, and the snot-nosed little bastards jaywalk right out in front of your car against the “walk” sign–if you don’t at least TRY to stop, if you just go ahead at ramming speed and smear them all over the pavement, you are then legally at fault.
And then you might get points on your driver’s license or something… :rolleyes:
“Why, sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast!” - the White Queen
I believe that’s absent any additional guidance by sign or signal. If the intersection is un-signed the pedestrian has the right of way. If there’s a solid unflashing Don’t Walk sign, the pedestrian is legally to stop. Which isn’t to say that if I plowed these bastards under next time I wouldn’t still be charged with a crime.
Then you were taught incorrect data. As I can personally attest, if one jaywalks in Alameda, California, and gets struck by a slow moving Toyota pick-up and a local policeman witnesses the whole thing:
(1) Chipped tooth (Laws of Physics)
&
(2) Ticket for jaywalking (Laws of California)
ensue.
And the ticket for jaywalking had the appropriate cite from the California Vehicle Code listed.
My thoughts exactly. That’s why I threw in the little pistol whipping comment. I found the OP funny, not scary.
Zette
“If I had to live your life, I’d be begging to have someone pop out both my eyes. Just in case I came across a mirror.” - android209 (in the Pit)
Zettecity
Voted “Most Empathetic”- can you believe that?
I knew you were kidding, Otto! Pretty funny. A nice fantasy. Gosh, I need more fantasies like that!
Polydactyl Cats Unlimited
“A Cat Cannot Have Too Many Toes”
You can be guilty of jaywalking and still have the right of way. In Georgia (and I think this rule is pretty typical from state to state), a car must yield to any pedestrian (even a jaywalking one) if the car has time and room to avoid hitting the pedestrian.
So, in your example, even if you were ticketed for jaywalking, you might still be able to pursue a successful lawsuit against the driver, using the argument that the driver should have seen you and had plenty of time to stop. (If that is in fact the case.)
(Note: I am not advocating such a suit or even commenting on whether the rule is a good one. Just clarifying the legalities.)
There is even a reported case in Georgia where a pedestrian (if you can call him that) was drunk and passed out in the middle of the road at night. A car then ran over him. The guy sued, and the appellate court refused to throw the case out, holding that a jury would have to decide whether the drunk was visible enough that the driver should have seen him and if so, whether the driver would have had time and room to stop.
{whew}
Esprix
{This space reserved for a Genuine WallyM7 Sig™}
Color me wooshed.
The SDMB Smoke-Out Continues
Delta-9 Stats
1 week, 12 hours, 24 minutes and 38 seconds
150 cigarettes not smoked, saving me $30.07
Life Saved: 12 hours, 30 minutes
I’m moving to Georgia! Too long have my rights as a semi-conscious alcoholic jaywalker been trampled! I just wish the rest of the world was as civilized as Georgia!
http://www.theonion.com/onion3613/south_postpones.html
I refuse to take abuse from some goofy-assed Canuck! Go crawl back in your bottle of Moosehead, eh?
Lest anyone think I’m serious, I’m just having some fun with my Canadian friends in the Pit.
So lighten up, you mukluk-wearing, LaBatt’s-guzzling, flannel-loving, “eh?”-saying, “about”-mispronouncing, big-ass-mosquito-dodging, moose-molesting, drowsy-talking, backwoods goofballs. 
Well, if you had brandished a gun, it could have been considered assault with a deadly weapon. You don’t need to shoot, only to threaten.
Hmmmm, there is a law against such behavior, yet nuts (not Otto, bot others I am sure) still do it. It is unbelievable that psychos would disobey the law. Maybe Gore is right, we should make a law against carrying a handgun. The psychos will surely obey that law.
