Re: House arrest after killing cyclist in hit and run.

On 2/28/2025 9:05 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On 2/28/2025 8:09 PM, AMuzi wrote:

On 2/28/2025 5:40 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On 2/28/2025 3:18 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

>
In my view, a person who kills someone with their car should never, ever be allowed to drive again.
>

First, let's acknowledge that rule will never be implemented in the U.S. But if it were, driver caution would increase many times over.
>
After the first few "dumbshit walks in front of car" episodes actually resulted in "no more driving" and were publicized, motorists might begin slowing to non-fatal speeds when pedestrians (or bicyclists) are within walk- in- front range.
>
As I've said here before, if an overhead crane operator killed someone in a factory, I think they'd never be allowed to operate the crane again, no matter what their excuse.
>
Humans have given up far more than we should have to motordom. Streets and roads were once the domain of pedestrians, of kids playing, of people interacting. Turning them entirely over to motorists was a deliberate campaign goal of the car manufacturers.
>
https://marker.medium.com/the-invention-of-jaywalking- afd48f994c05
>
>

>
I (naively?) assumed you meant 'by negligence or malice' and I was happy to agree with that.
>
But I can't agree with you here.  Extend that argument and we'll charge train operators with murder when jerkoffs drive around the gate.  Or auto drivers who hit red light running cyclists for that matter.

 Given the legal system of the United States, I'd assume that if such a law were implemented, there would be gaggles of lawyers rushing to any accused motorist to defend his right to run down anyone who impeded his speed.
 So think of my position as an initial step in negotiations. Let it apply in, say, residential areas, where kids should be able to play in streets. Or in pedestrian heavy business districts.
 But as we all know, the present situation is closest to "I didn't see him!" or "He came out of nowhere!" followed by at most a slap on the wrist. And any imperfection in the pedestrian's behavior is a coupon for no motorist penalty at all.
 Locally, about six months ago we had a young, well loved, well respected music teacher, church organist killed by a car when walking across a street. About a week ago, another young man was killed crossing the plaza-infested five lane at 6 AM. Details on the first are sketchy to me - it sounds like he was in a legal crosswalk - but cops said the latter was "not crossing in a designated crosswalk" so the motorist is off completely free. And in a different city, a young woman I know well was knocked to the ground and injured while crossing in a crosswalk with a green "walk" signal.
 (BTW, Ohio law has a virtual crosswalk at any intersection, whether it's marked or not. Still, expecting pedestrians to walk an extra half mile to avoid being called a "jaywalker" seems unfair to me.)
 I'd like a law that makes motorists think "Holy shit, there's a pedestrian. I'd better be _really_ careful."
 

No one discounts those or other tragedies such as that of my friend Jeff Archer:
https://www.wbtv.com/story/32500249/popular-owner-of-local-bike-shop-killed-after-struck-by-car/
But we have a few hundred years of statutes and tort case law (i.e., this is not new ground for humans), and although errors do exist, the system works fairly well in principle.
We can agree that legal and criminal responsibility is all too frequently passed over by weak enforcement/sentencing. This is a significant and untoward trend but there are better remedies than punishing the innocent.
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971