Interesting article at Slate, In Defense of Jaywalking
, where the author describes how the media and others often slant coverage of pedestrian vs auto accidents--examples include San Francisco Chronicle, Boston Globe
, and New York Post
Police, who are typically car-bound, are often biased in favor
of other drivers.
Not unexpectedly the Federal Highway Administration has curious language regarding walkers
--"Still, almost no one can avoid occasional pedestrian status". Even the term jaywalking
is commonly misused
Solutions? More money towards safer walking (including a reversal of funding policies that favor cars
), better places to walk, pedestrian-friendly engineering, lower urban speed limits, harsher penalties for drivers that violate pedestrian's rights, and critical reading of the often selective and sensationalized media coverage
of traffic crashes.
posted by aerotive
on Nov 10, 2009 -
"Your car will be watching the road even if you're not"
Or so says DaimlerChrysler in their new ad campaign. Electronic eyes, infrared systems, ways to keep your eyes on the road better.... All in good time, as we all expected - but wouldn't you be worried if your car could just stop itself if it saw a squirrel in the road? (via the Wall St. Journal ad 10/9/02)
posted by djspicerack
on Oct 10, 2002 -
the Good Morning Silicon Valley webpage at the SJ Merc (which I love since it keeps me from having to see CNET's god awful ads) had an interesting blurb as an offshoot of the whole NY cell-phone safety debacle (scroll to the last item.) Columnist John Paczkowski asked if it was possible to change your pants in a moving car at 65 miles an hour. He got some pretty funny responses. What have YOU done in a moving car that you shouldn't have?
posted by machaus
on Jun 29, 2001 -