So Let Me Get This Straight - If I Have A Green Light And Hit A Person....

[global1]

It's OK and I would be let go and wouldn't be charged. This is apparently what happened with Occupy D.C. as they protested the AFP/Koch Brothers shindig. The driver that hit those three people was let go and not charged because he had a green light.

[rocktivity]

1. Pedestrains ALWAYS have the right of way.

Even when they're walking where they aren't supposed to, like on a highway.

:mad:
rocktivity

[Rhiannon12866]

6. +1

I've always understood this, as well. :)

[RamboLiberal]

13. -1 No they do not

Ever hear of jaywalking? Do you cross when you have red/don't walk signal?

[ZombieHorde]

20. In Montana, pedestrians always have the right of way.

Jaywalking still applies, but they still have the right of way.

[RamboLiberal]

23. Not exactly DC or NYC in terms of traffic/pedestrians

[markpkessinger]

34. In NYC, where I live, pedestrians do, in facr, ALWAYS have the right-of-way! n/t

[RamboLiberal]

36. Seems I read a lot of deadly pedestrian accidents in NYC

There is a law not enforced. http://mobile.gothamist.com/2009/10/15/bloomberg_nypd_cant_enforce_jaywalk.php

[LWolf]

57. Pedestrians always have the right of way, jaywalking or not.

In CA, where I learned to drive and got my first license. Los Angeles.


In my current state, as well.

Is there a state in which pedestrians do NOT always have the right of way?

[dems_rightnow]

56. No they don't

This is a very common belief around the US, but generally not true. Obviously, a responsible driver will always yield to a pedestrian (or another vehicle), even when they have the right of way.

Here's Montana's:

http://opi.mt.gov/pub/TEModules/Module07MixingwithTraffic/M7%20Fact%20ROW.pdf

[RegieRocker]

82. Chaos.

[cherokeeprogressive]

84. Failure to yield the right-of-way is not necessarily an arrestable offense. n/t

[Chan790]

44. Let me clarify.

Under DCMR (District of Columbia Municipal Regulations, our codification of local laws here in the District), pedestrians always have the right of way over all traffic except emergency vehicles regardless of signals. MD has the same law. Neither jurisdiction has an enforceable jaywalking statute. To that end, vehicular traffic must always yield to pedestrian traffic already in the street or crosswalk. However both also hold that you may not be held accountable for any pedestrian collision which occurs when a pedestrian enters the roadway within an unstoppable distance of your front bumper as long as reasonable speed is being met.

VA has a jaywalking law, but it's also legal in VA to drink and commute as long as you're not driving, legal to marry your cousin & illegal to marry a gay person, even in a hetero-marriage. (I'm not seeing this last one as enforceable.) So VA...kinda fucked up.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

54. People get hit in DC every day...and the cops rarely go after the driver

I have nearly been hit in crosswalks even with a walk light many times there.

One time I was lightly hit. Being young and foolish I stuck the hood of the car, damaging it. Brother hustled me out of there before I could do the same to the driver. Turns out it had diplomatic plates.

Still waiting to hear about the circumstances in this one. Did they really intend to hit/frighten the protesters or were they texting. That kind of thing

[Motown_Johnny]

49. you still can't intentionally harm another human being, even if they are jaywalking

the guy needs to be charged with assault

[newspeak]

77. in most state, pedestrians always have the right of way

if the driver did not see them, it's a different story; however, just because the light is green, doesn't give the driver the right to run them over.

[meow2u3]

86. Jaywalking still doesn't give drivers a license to ram pedestrians

At best, that arrogant prick took traffic law into his own hands. At worst, he was trying to kill protesters using his car as a weapon.

[Obamanaut]

32. After being run over by a cement mixer truck as you were darting across the road, your mangled

remains can shout "Citizen's arrest! Citizen's arrest!"

[Tesha]

35. Is this another right you're willing to yield then? How many is that? (NT)

[KittyWampus]

61. LOL! There's Justice in a court of Law and then there's Life as we live it.

It's not about "yielding rights". It's about exercising common sense and prudence because not everyone obeys the law.

[Obamanaut]

63. Common sense should prevail. A prudent pedestrian would not step out into

oncoming traffic and shout toward an oncoming Humvee "I have the right-of-way! Yield, I tell you!"

So, no, a 189 pound male (me) will happily give up the road to a 3,000 pound vehicle. But it is certainly within YOUR rights to challenge that vehicle.

See you on the other side.

[Laluchacontinua]

70. no, they *shouldn't*. but that doesn't mean if they do the humvee can plow them down willfully.

[DBoon]

75. and a prudent driver should always be careful around pedestrians

because pedestrians can behave unpredictably, and hitting one always causes problems even if you are not legally at fault

[Obamanaut]

88. Quite true. And, knowing that a motorcyclist, or bicyclist, or pedestrian can be

concealed by a window post, or some other obstruction, I am not going to step out into traffic insisting that I have the right-of-way simply because I am a pedestrian.

As the lighter and smaller of the two (vehicle vs person), I will yield every single time. From some of the posts here, others hold a different view.

[Obamanaut]

89. dupe, delete

[RB TexLa]

64. I always give cars the right of way when on foot, no matter what the law says. Cars are bigger than

I am.

[RebelOne]

76. Not always. It depends on the state traffic laws. n/t

[RamboLiberal]

2. I'd like to see a film & hear from witnesses

The driver is still innocent until proven guilty. Let the driver have their day in criminal and/or civil court.

Lt. Christopher Micciche of the D.C. police said the driver was not cited because he had a green light when his vehicle struck the three on Friday night.

He said witnesses told police that the three pedestrians "either ran toward or jumped in front of the moving vehicle." He said one pedestrian jumped on the hood of the car. One of them was cited for being in the roadway.

"The protesters were apparently trying to block the roadway," Micciche said. "It was essentially an accident where three individuals were injured but they were in violation by being in the roadway."

http://www.npr.org/2011/11/05/142046176/car-strikes-3-at-occupy-d-c-rally?ps=cprs#WTF

Jesse Folks, 29, of Riverdale, said he was standing in the street with several dozen protesters near the convention center when the car "just gassed it into a bunch of people."

When asked whether the protesters should have been standing in the street at all, Folks said, "we were in the street, but this guy didn't even give us a chance to get out of the way."

Earlier, however, near the rear of the convention center, another group of protesters stood in front of a chartered bus for more than a half-hour as it tried to leave from the area. The bus kept honking its horn and tried to advance forward, but was repelled by the protesters who refused to yield.

In other areas around the building, some drivers got out of their cars and confronted protesters who refused to move. Other motorists stuck in traffic were more receptive, honking their horns in support of the group.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post_now/post/occupy-dc-protesters-block-streets-near-convention-center/2011/11/04/gIQA05vunM_blog.html

[phasma ex machina]

3. A handy rule of thumb: anyone acting on behalf of the 1% can get away with murder.

[global1]

4. I Don't Believe It - Somebody Actually Unrec This Post....

I guess they never were a pedestrian. I too thought pedestrians always had the right of way. I guess that only is true for the 1%'ers.

[AngkorWot]

8. I'm often a pedestrian.

I just don't jump in front of traffic and expect them to stop.

Yes, you're supposed to yield to pedestrians. No, it does not necessarily mean you've committed a crime if you hit some one.

[newspeak]

80. unless you intentionally hit someone

it's one thing not seeing the pedestrian, it's another if you see them and intentionally hit them, no matter what you think about right of way.

[Raine]

10. Well if a pedestrian is hit while jaywalking

by a vechicle who had a green light the pedestrian will probably get his ass sued. Especially if the pedestrian caused damage to the vechicle because he was breaking the law by jaywalking.

[RamboLiberal]

11. Pedestrian can also be ticketed for jaywalking

[RamboLiberal]

12. No they do not always have right of way

Only in marked crosswalks and where traffic signals where pedestrian has green/walk.

[pintobean]

26. Unrecced for whining about it

[apocalypsehow]

91. +2. n/t.

[Obamanaut]

68. A pedestrian intent on surviving will yield the right-of-way to a vehicle

that is a few thousand pounds heavier, even if that pedestrian is in the right.

But no, pedestrians do not always have the right-of-way.

[sabrina 1]

5. It's open season on the American People. They were supposed

to shut up and meekly 'share the sacrifice' so the bankers could continue to live the lifestyle they are accustomed to. They would rather not see the rabble, as Bush once said 'what protests, I didn't see any protests'. The people are merely fodder, commodities to be bet on or bet against, for profit. But now they have found a way to force these Rulers of the World to actually see them.

They are being beaten to a pulp for no reason and run over by Mercedes and Lexuses. So symbolic that it was a Lexus and a Mercedes. And Veterans who our leaders CLAIM to respect and love, are being beaten and assaulted and rendered speechless and nearly killed by cowardly thugs in robo costumes and not a word of condemnation is coming from our 'leaders', not a single word.

Something is terribly wrong with the way all this happening. No one is listening, but someone is giving orders. And the silence is deafening from those we helped elect.

[canetoad]

9. If I had a hijack

I'd hijack in the morning, tra la la....

[PoliticAverse]

7. In general you don't get arrested if you have a traffic accident...

even if you were at fault.

[PoliticAverse]

66. Reuters version of yesterday's incident...

http://news.yahoo.com/washington-protesters-hit-car-no-visible-injuries-police-172931659.html

[meow2u3]

87. If that isn't a hit piece, I don't know what is

This Reuter's version is entirely one-sided. The would-be killer's driver's excuse for deliberately ramming the protesters is being presented as if it were fact. They didn't even bother to get the side of the victims or witnesses; instead, they treated the victims as if they were committing vehicular assault instead of the arrogant prick behind the wheel.

Police just made up a brand new law out of whole cloth: millionaires, lobbyists, and criminals driving luxury cars no longer have to abide by the same set of laws applicable to average citizens. They can even skate on attempted murder charges and blame their victims with impunity. :sarcasm:

:puke:

[JDPriestly]

14. Lots of info re D.C. law on this at the website below:

6. Pedestrians must cross at the crosswalk for any street which is bounded at both intersections by a traffic light. In other words, for many streets, it is perfectly legal for a pedestrian to cross mid-block since one or more intersections is controlled by a stop sign (or no traffic control device at all). When crossing mid-block, pedestrians are supposed to cross perpendicular to traffic, not at an oblique angle, and they are required to cross in a manner that does not interfere with the flow of traffic (i.e., when crossing mid-block, pedestrians must yield the right of way to vehicles).

http://alllifeislocal.blogspot.com/2010/10/dcs-pedestrian-laws-drivers-pay.html

Any pedestrian walking in the street who is not on the crosswalk is probably putting his life in danger unless the street has been blocked off.

I understand the driver in D.C. is being given a sobriety check, but I could be wrong.

[RamboLiberal]

15. Driver was released so I assume passed sobriety

[Laluchacontinua]

17. You don't have liberty to murder people for jaywalking. And you don't have the liberty to maim them

for jaywalking. If people are in the street illegally, that doesn't mean you are free to run them over.

[Laluchacontinua]

16. The people here saying that pedestrians DON'T always have the right of way are arguing

that you can run over people if they're not in a crosswalk or crossing with a light.

Maybe they don't realize what "pedestrians always have the right of way" means.

It doesn't mean they can't be ticketed for jaywalking. It means you can't murder them for jaywalking.

[RamboLiberal]

18. No one said that!

Of course you can't deliberately run over them. Thankfully we have courts beyond DU or Free Republic.

And even if not criminally chsrged the protesters have right to sue driver.

[DCBob]

21. It doesnt matter.. some posters here are on a "mission from V".

Facts dont matter to them.

[Fumesucker]

37. And some are evidently on a mission from the Heritage foundation.

[RamboLiberal]

40. yeah they must have invented innocent until proven guilty

[DCBob]

42. like who??

please clarify.

[Fumesucker]

43. Your statement about "mission from "V"" wasn't exactly specific..

So you ask me to be more specific than you.

What a surprise.

[DCBob]

52. I believe its a violation of DU rules to suggest another member is a Republican.

Can you at least clarify if that was the meaning of your comment?

[Fumesucker]

53. I was just showing how your rhetoric could be perceived by someone who disagrees with you..

Didn't like it much, did you?

[DCBob]

55. except your comment is totally baseless.

If you have read any of my near 10,000 posts I have never taken a position that promotes the Republican agenda.

[Fumesucker]

58. You have no way of knowing who has seen or not seen V For Vendetta..

For instance, I haven't seen the movie although I've heard a lot of comments about the plot.

[DCBob]

60. Its actually a great movie. Its a must see for folks like us.

peace.

[JDPriestly]

24. Right. It's a matter of whether it is a criminal or a civil claim.

The guy had a Lexis -- not a cheap car.

[JDPriestly]

22. There is probably video which will show whether he did this intentionally

or with reckless disregard for the rights of others.

Someone could maybe sue him. He is driving a Lexis. It would be interesting to find out more about him because he did not look at all shocked or remorseful after driving into the people. He appears to be a pretty cold fish.

But I'm just looking at the video after the incident so I could be wrong.

[Cid_B]

51. I know a guy who lives in the crappiest projects ever and he drives a lexus...

What is your point...?

[JDPriestly]

25. I'm looking at what I find out about the law in D.C.

And I am reporting it here so that DUers will know that this can happen if they walk in the street even if it is civil disobedience.

Civil disobedience means you are taking a risk to yourself of some sort -- arrest or whatever -- in order to make a political point.

People have the right to commit civil disobedience but they need to know what price they might have to pay for it before they do it.

[fishwax]

48. it also doesn't mean that a driver is automatically guilty if a pedestrian is hit

[treestar]

65. Not true

Merely being a pedestrian does not mean you are not at fault for causing the accident.

Obviously a driver with an opportunity to avoid hitting them must take it if at all possible.

But it doesn't mean pedestrians can go wherever they want without fault.

This also applies to DUI drivers or those without licenses. Merely because they were in an accident does not mean they are automatically at fault. Chances are, the DUI did cause the accident, but it is possible they are not at fault. The facts have to be considered first.

[RegieRocker]

83. If they are stupid enough to walk through an intersection when cross traffic

has a green light then.....it's their fault. Lights should give time for the slowest of individuals to cross. Responsibility falls on everyone's shoulders. Not just one and not the other.

[RamboLiberal]

19. Film of car & driver

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=_XTak003iHc

[meow2u3]

90. Youtube removed the video

Pretext: hate speech.

[rucky]

27. It depends on who you are, what you're driving and where you're going.

apparently

[B Calm]

28. Imagine if the pedestrian was driving a car and ran a red light, you had a green

light and collided. . . just saying. . .

[cherokeeprogressive]

85. I'm trying to imagine a pedestrian driving a car...

Just can't get my mind around that.

Hell, I can't walk and chew gum at the same time, and you're telling me there are people out there who can walk and DRIVE A CAR at the same time? No wonder I feel so inadequate.

[no_hypocrisy]

29. You still have the duty of driving carefully through a green light when

a pediastriain is involved, jaywalking notwithstanding. The driver should have been given a ticket of careless driving at least. The pedestrian still can sue civilly for damages under the doctrine of "Last Clear Chance" wherein the driver has the option of avoiding injuring another under any circumstance.

[hack89]

39. Pedestrians have responsibilities too

irresponsible or illegal actions on the part of the pedestrian need to be accounted for.

[no_hypocrisy]

45. Comparative negligence would be considered by the judge or jury.

[hack89]

46. Or the cops on the scene

they make those kind of judgments daily - the courts are overloaded as it is.

[Behind the Aegis]

30. WOW!

:eyes:

[taterguy]

31. I blame Bill Hicks . . .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dk2tEZ6ZfZU

[RamboLiberal]

33. occupyDC account at link

http://occupydc.org/

[hack89]

38. It depends on the situation - sometime it is a crime and sometimes it is a tragic accident.

The actions of the pedestrians are equally important in determining whether a crime was committed.

[Cerebral Assassin]

41. I don't know

To be honest, I'm having some trouble working up any kind of sympathy. If you purposefully wander out into the road, and you get hit by a car, whose fault is that really? Sidewalks are there for a reason, you know.

[TBF]

47. Picture that you hit Glen Beck. OK, after you stop thinking about how happy you are -

imagine how that is going to go down with the police. I doubt they are going to say "oh, it's ok, the light was green you just go home now"

[dems_rightnow]

59. I'd imagine they would

Obviously, the only way to be certain is for somebody to run down Glenn Beck and post back.

[TBF]

62. good point - this looks like a perfect test case :)

[HappyMe]

50. People are usually not arrested when involved

in traffic accidents. Unless they are driving drunk.
I usually wait a few seconds after the 'walk' sign lights up. I figure it's my responsibility to keep myself safe.

[PoliticAverse]

67. Reuter's version of yesterday's incident...

(Reuters) - Three activists protesting economic inequality were struck by a car and mildly injured late on Friday night as they attempted to block traffic near a gathering of conservatives in the nation's capital, police said on Saturday.

The protesters, who were transported to area hospitals with no signs of visible injury, were cited for obstructing traffic late on Friday night, said Araz Alali, a spokesman for the Metropolitan Police Department.

"The driver saw he had the green light and the protesters then basically jumped in front of the vehicle to block traffic," Alali said. "It appears that the protesters jumped into the path of the vehicle."

Angry protesters circled the vehicle after it struck the protesters, police said. The driver was not cited.

Read the rest: http://news.yahoo.com/washington-protesters-hit-car-no-visible-injuries-police-172931659.html

[B Calm]

69. #1 rule of the road: The one with the biggest wheels wins!

Moral of the story: You don't jump in front of moving vehicles. .

[PoliticAverse]

71. Washingtonpost version of the incident...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dueling-versions-between-dc-police-protesters-at-convention-center/2011/11/05/gIQAHDTAqM_story.html

[PoliticAverse]

72. Associated Press version of the incident...

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/authorities-car-strikes-occupy-dc-protest-14886990#.TrYxubKnefU

[cwydro]

73. Learned this as a child:

Here lies the body of Michael O'Day
who died maintaining the right of way-
He was right, dead right, as he walked along,
But he's just as dead as if he'd been wrong.

[crazyjoe]

74. they jumped in front of a moving car, what do you think is going to happen?

[datasuspect]

79. in normal land, the driver applies the brakes rather than the gas pedal.

yup.

[datasuspect]

78. their own damn fault for not having the moxie necessary to buy their own Mercedes

with all those German safety features, they wouldn't have been hurt.

[louslobbs]

81. Pedestrians might have the right of way, but 1%rs or those who think they will be 1%rs, believe that

they always have the right of way over the "let them eat cake masses." The "little people," the "masses of rabble," have very little rights against the 1%.

Imagine someone (not a bussed in Koch bagger,) running over a teabagger at one of those Koch/FOX/Americans for Temerity astro turf gatherings, you remember, where bussed in baggers were dropped off, given a lunch and some pay to march in the fake protests and town halls sponsored by Koch, FOX Republican Corporate Propaganda News, and silently sanctioned by the 1% and therefore, left alone by their militant police forces, paid with our tax payer money, but working on behalf of the 1%?

Imagine what might have happened to that person. Would that person have been dragged from their vehicle and beaten by the corporate sponsored, angry crowd? Would they have then been arrested and beaten by the police, and then had their face and name plastered on every corporate news show 24/7, telling of the danger of the "extreme and violent left wing?"

Even if there was a green light that gave someone on our side, the right to proceed, if the person who ran over that teabagger, was labeled as, "not being one of them," does any one really believe, that the police would have ever considered just letting them go?.......I think we all know the sad answer to that.

Absolute power, corrupts absolutely.

Lou

[yurbud]

92. you have to have a Mercedes--it comes with immunity from prosecution.

[RamboLiberal]

93. Lexus in this case