I wonder how often JSK decides what she will wear to work based on how late she plans to be at the office.

Responsibility lies with the bearer of the consequences. There is no righteousness in being correct and dead. Notwithstanding the imposition of rules and such on drivers, I have no issue with these signs. 

When the city wanted to stop the epidemic of children falling from windows, they required changes in the infrastructure so that rental apartments that housed children had bars on the windows. When the city wanted to stop the epidemic of needle-borne diseases, they added needle-exchange infrastructure so folks could get clean works when they were about to shoot up.

Apparently the city doesn’t want to reduce pedestrian casualties because if they did, they would change the infrastructure to eliminate them. Putting up cutesy “warning” signs doesn’t count.

Jaywalking when you don’t know if it’s safe or not is stupid and risky, I don’t have any mixed feelings on that front. As a frequent jaywalker in SF who recently visited NYC I found unsafe jaywalking was far more common than I expected. When I cross against the lights in any place I consider myself to be responsible for my own wellbeing given that I’m ignoring the safety of the engineering controls.
As for the dark clothing signs, yeah sure they are kind of blaming the victim to some extent but it’s just a smart thing to do knowing that you’re not able to prevent other people’s idiocy when behind the wheel or on a bike. Like somebody else said, there’s no joy in being right and dead.
Possibly the focus should be more positively orientated like reducing the length of signal phases to enable a faster turnover – if pedestrians didn’t have to wait so long to cross safely in NYC they might jaywalk less often?
Honking is one of many undesirable noise elements in a streetscape / driving environment and should be considered an occasional necessity (not to mention it loses potency with excessive use), but I doubt signage is going to change such hardened attitudes. It ideally should come from within the community, friends telling friends that honking is aggressive and a sign of a poor driver, but unfortunately better enforcement is probably the only way forward in the short term.

“Jaywalking” (an epithet invented by the auto lobby) is unsafe because drivers aren’t made to slow down and watch what they’re doing.

“Responsibility lies with the bearer of the consequences.” Isn’t that a corollary to the “forcible rape” theory?

@abb249055208c7af4d35568e422dfd63:disqus No, I’m not. You used the word “responsibility,” not me. Own up to it and go tell Roxana Sorina Buta’s mother her daughter was “responsible” for her death. You can amend it and say “responsible but not culpable,” if you want. And then tell her she should have been, per these signs, wearing clothes that are clearly visible to the poor, poor motor vehicle drivers of NYC.

If you’re enjoying a stroll on the sidewalk and a driver jumps the curb and kills you, are you responsible?

@google-ada61bbf78a6dd2555deffacf8be6807:disqus I agree wholeheartedly that jaywalking without checking for traffic is risky behavior. Same thing for jaybiking. I also agree that the sheer number and timing of traffic signals in NYC makes waiting for a green signal impractical (both on foot and when riding). Granted, some pedestrians/cyclists do obey the letter of the law with regard to signals, but they’ll always be a minority. Unfortunately, both of these facts are a perfect storm for blaming the victim. Our streets are set up to speed auto traffic. As a result, cycling or walking, at least if you obey the signals, are highly suboptimal. Therefore, most pedestrians and cyclists don’t obey red signals because doing so would double or triple travel time. And when something happens to these pedestrians or cyclists, the media latch on to this fact, and blames them for their own deaths.

In the end, this won’t change unless the infrastructure changes. We need to slow down auto traffic by changing street design. We also need to greatly reduce the number of motor vehicles in the streets because traffic volume is why all these traffic lights exist in the first place. No traffic lights means everyone needs to look out for everyone else, at each and every intersection. Now we have motorists on autopilot when they have a string of green lights in front of them. That’s a recipe for disaster.

@Doug_Gordon:disqus  You’re responsible if you are the one who suffers the consequences. Finding a driver guilty doesn’t bring you back to life, or get you out of that chair. Like I initially said, responsibility lies with the bearer of the consequences. This isn’t just for pedestrians versus cars, rape victims vs. perpetrators, laid-off worker, etc. There is no being “made whole”, of going back to as if it never happened. Restorative Justice is a myth. Time only moves in one direction.

The point is, a sign asking anyone to take a moment to secure their own safety is never a bad thing. Never ever. I’m not willing to bear the consequences of a wrecked body or a grieving family. I’ll like 4 or 5 times if need be. It’s better than the alternative no matter how culpable a driver is. 

@abb249055208c7af4d35568e422dfd63:disqus 

The point is, a sign asking anyone to take a moment to secure their own safety is never a bad thing. 

Yes, let’s put up signs everywhere with witty sayings letting women know that they should never be alone with a man they know–most rapes being perpetuated by men known to their female victims. A little slut shaming goes a long way!

Meanwhile, I’m trying to figure out how the very straightforward word “responsible” has been twisted in what you’ve written to mean–what exactly? “Object of event with significant negative consequences” is about all I can come up with.Not that it really matters. In the real world, no one would have the guts to tell a rape survivor or someone who’s suffered the consequences of a driver’s criminal indifference to others that they’re “responsible” for those events.

> You’re responsible if you are the one who suffers the consequences… This isn’t just for pedestrians versus cars, rape victims vs. perpetrators…

This immoral hogwash has no place in civilized society. If you want to live in a jungle and rape your neighbors then go ahead, if you can find a jungle that will take you.

As animals we are all inclined to struggle to survive. It’s not a fancy instinct and it doesn’t need a self-congratulating title like “personal responsibility”, especially as this formulation has been used to drain the meaning from our responsibilities to others. Anybody who thinks it’s irresponsible to die should visit a cemetery. Maybe the one at Arlington.

Responsibility is about the conscientious exercise of power. Parents are responsible for their children. Pilots are responsible for passengers and crew. Cyclists are responsible for not hitting slower moving pedestrians. And once upon a time, motorists were responsible for the same. Having escaped those responsibilities for a time does not mean motorists get to escape them forever. As a society, we decide what happens next.

one sign is of a man, one a woman, both attempt to educate people on the dangers of walking out into the road (jay-walking), and do so in a way that puts people’s thinking caps on, because all too often people do just walk out into the street with no care… they don’t look, rely on sound to alert them to on-coming traffic, think they’ll be seen, expect others to have their same casual attitude, assume drivers will be able to change lanes to avoid them, don’t account for the momentum of the vehicles, etc. I agree with others, how can a sign that attempts to inform the public about safety be a bad thing?  Well I suppose if you hate all forms of vehicles then hack away, but if you care, then both pedestrians and the driving public should be reminded about safety at every opportunity. 

The percentage of non-law abiding people is about the same for both pedestrians and drivers… it’s because those who break the law have an attitude, an attitude that certainly results in traffic accidents and pedestrian deaths. So lets not address this and attempt to remove all vehicles from the roads, or, change attitudes. On my YT dash cam channel of roads in Brooklyn I do have examples of women walking in the street wearing dark cloths at night… they’re just walking down the street when there’s a perfectly good sidewalk next to them. I also have examples of people texting and walking right in front of me, or bicyclists almost running down pedestrians. And of course there are examples of drivers doing u-turns on crosswalks, etc. There is a percentage of people who ignore the law because it is inconvenient to them, and, they have no consideration for others. They’re sloppy pigs who put themselves and others at risk. Instead of bitching about something that attempts to educate, why not propose other ways to help educate so more people stop breaking the law and less pedestrians (who are obviously vulnerable because there isn’t a vehicular structure surround them) end up injured or dead?

Dang “2,000-pound vehicles”.

As a regular jaywalker, I realize I’m taking a risk. I’m extra careful at night when I’m wearing dark clothing and in the rain, when stopping distance is much higher.

As for those saying that these signs are blaming the victim and there should be more signs for motorists- last I checked, there are speed limit signs, don’t block the box signs, yield signs, etc. 

As for those saying that cyclists/pedestrians don’t abide by traffic signals because it’ll double or triple their travel time- have you ever driven down a street in NYC that isn’t timed for cars (e.g. 34th st)? It takes 3 times as long, and yet the drivers still obey the red lights.