Likes Likes:  27
Dislikes Dislikes:  1
ELITE ELITE:  1
Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456
Results 51 to 57 of 57

Thread: Cyclist killed by self-driving car while walking her bike in AZ

  1. #51
    dasgeh's Avatar
    dasgeh is offline Queen of Family Biking & All Things Kidical
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    5,383
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lordofthemark View Post
    What are we arguing about?
    I'm not sure. You seem to keep doubling down on your statement that crossing outside a crosswalk is illegal everywhere in the U.S. That's simply not true, unless you define "crosswalk" as "anywhere that's legal to cross".

  2. #52
    Judd's Avatar
    Judd is offline I really need to log off the internet and go for a ride.
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Arlington
    Posts
    2,849
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dasgeh View Post
    I'm not sure. You seem to keep doubling down on your statement that crossing outside a crosswalk is illegal everywhere in the U.S. That's simply not true, unless you define "crosswalk" as "anywhere that's legal to cross".
    This is the proper way to double down: https://www.pastemagazine.com/articl...icken-n-w.html

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Alexandria
    Posts
    771
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Thanks for the citation. I'd love it if somebody could explain what this means: "pedestrians shall not carelessly or maliciously interfere with the orderly passage of vehicles ... Where intersections contain no marked crosswalks, pedestrians shall not be guilty of negligence as a matter of law for crossing ... between intersections when crossing by the most direct route"

    Does that mean crossing mid block in, say, a residential area with unmarked crosswalks is only illegal if the crossing is "maliciously" interfering with cars?

    Also despite your highlighting, I think it's arguable that the first sentence is most relevant and the issue of where a pedestrian crosses is only relevant if the crossing "carelessly or maliciously interfere[s] with the orderly passage of vehicles".

  4. #54
    lordofthemark's Avatar
    lordofthemark is offline I really need to log off the internet and go for a ride.
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    The forgotten corner of Alexandria, VA
    Posts
    2,932
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peterw_diy View Post
    Thanks for the citation. I'd love it if somebody could explain what this means: "pedestrians shall not carelessly or maliciously interfere with the orderly passage of vehicles ... Where intersections contain no marked crosswalks, pedestrians shall not be guilty of negligence as a matter of law for crossing ... between intersections when crossing by the most direct route"

    Does that mean crossing mid block in, say, a residential area with unmarked crosswalks is only illegal if the crossing is "maliciously" interfering with cars?

    Also despite your highlighting, I think it's arguable that the first sentence is most relevant and the issue of where a pedestrian crosses is only relevant if the crossing "carelessly or maliciously interfere[s] with the orderly passage of vehicles".
    I am not a lawyer. I would rather have an attorney assist in statutory interpretation.

  5. #55
    lordofthemark's Avatar
    lordofthemark is offline I really need to log off the internet and go for a ride.
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    The forgotten corner of Alexandria, VA
    Posts
    2,932
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dasgeh View Post
    I'm not sure. You seem to keep doubling down on your statement that crossing outside a crosswalk is illegal everywhere in the U.S. That's simply not true, unless you define "crosswalk" as "anywhere that's legal to cross".
    All I am trying to do is understand the causes of a tragedy in Arizona. I made an aside about legality. I see no benefit to pursuing that discussion. If you are really interested in it, and are prepared to do it in a manner that is not hostile, assumes good faith, and recognizes we are on the same side, I would be happy to do so. Have a good night.

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Falls church
    Posts
    1,314
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Judd View Post
    This is the proper way to double down: https://www.pastemagazine.com/articl...icken-n-w.html
    I think the bike was an e-bike.......

  7. #57
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Valhalla
    Posts
    79
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Future is looking great....The big picture....

    https://electrek.co/2017/01/19/tesla...topilot-nhtsa/

    Good things come to all who wait.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •