Flutterby™! : Reframing pedestrian vs automobile

Next unread comment / Catchup all unread comments User Account Info | Logout | XML/Pilot/etc versions | Long version (with comments) | Weblog archives | Site Map | | Browse Topics

Reframing pedestrian vs automobile

2012-05-02 20:44:03.363452+00 by Dan Lyke 1 comments

The Atlantic Cities — The Invention of Jaywalking:

It wasn’t always like this. Browse through New York Times accounts of pedestrians dying after being struck by automobiles prior to 1930, and you’ll see that in nearly every case, the driver is charged with something like “technical manslaughter.” And it wasn’t just New York. Across the country, drivers were held criminally responsible when they killed or injured people with their vehicles.

Slate: The Crisis of Pedestrianism:

Simply by going out for a walk, I had become a strange being, studied by engineers, inhabiting environments whose physical features are determined by a rulebook-enshrined average 3 foot-per-second walking speed, my rights codified by signs. (Why not just write: “Stop for People”?) On those same signs in Savannah were often attached additional signs, advising drivers not to give to panhandlers (and to call 911 if physically intimidated), subtly equating walking with being exposed to an urban menace—or perhaps being the menace.

Via JWZ: A conspiracy of the auto industry, you say? Why that's just crazy talk.

[ related topics: Interactive Drama Weblogs Invention and Design Law Civil Liberties Automobiles Conspiracy New York Government ]

comments in ascending chronological order (reverse):

#Comment Re: made: 2012-05-03 11:39:23.990009+00 by: meuon

Re Savannah: the signs need to say "beware of drunk and stupid people". I walk a lot, but find bicycling more fun and less painful. The impact of walking eventually bothers some previously abused/broken body parts. It's one of the enjoyable parts of Downtown Chattanooga. Except for the panhandlers.