Due to vision problems, I have never driven a car and will be a lifelong passenger and pedestrian so you would think that most of my sympathies lie with the injured (or killed) pedestians. That is not always the case.

In Hawaii, pedestrian deaths are a problem. So much so that there are new "crosswalk laws" and the police are enforcing jay-walking laws more often. There are numerous crosswalks without traffic lights. Many people cross during the pre-sunrise and post-sunset times. Wearing dark clothing. Many senior citizens cross the street under these conditions. The biggest problem is that the pedestrians act with a sense of entitlement. "The drivers HAVE to stop for me." Well, what if the drivers DON"T SEE you? Even if the light is about to change, people hurry into the crosswalk. Once they are in the middle of the 4 lane road, they slow down, even if the traffic light is now green for the drivers.

Drivers need to be more aware of pedestrians, yes. Especially at corners, when making a right turn. Drivers often are only watching for traffic coming from their left and don't see that someone is crossing the street they are turning on to. BUT, pedestrians also have a responsibility to watch out for inattentive drivers. I've learned to make eye contact with the driver so I am sure that they know I am there. That is really the best way to avoid tragedy.

It is a huge problem when pedestrians think that the right of way allows them to ignore the laws of physics!

Why aren't the car drivers expected to know the laws of physics, as in "if that pedestrian stepped into the road (as it surely looks like they intend), I would be unable to stop unless I start slowing down RIGHT NOW". The tradeoff seems pretty minor, a few seconds of delay to insure that you don't harm someone, and you can probably make up the lost time after you pass.

It seems, to me, to be incredibly selfish on the part of the driver. It's not as if pedestrians weren't also in a hurry to get someplace, and they're not threatening anyone.

True!

dr2chase:

Why aren't the car drivers expected to know the laws of physics, as in "if that pedestrian stepped into the road (as it surely looks like they intend), I would be unable to stop unless I start slowing down RIGHT NOW".

That would be good, except that it's often much harder for a driver to notice a pedestrian than it is for a pedestrian to notice a car. And the reality is that the person who has to pay the price when it comes to conservation of momentum in an accident is a pedestrian.

You go physic girl!

@"Physics"Girl: Where did the cost, that the pedestrian must pay, come from? It came from you, and your car. Why is it not your problem? If your vision is impaired, you can obtain more time for looking, by slowing down (time to see is inversely proportional to speed -- you know, "physics"). Lower speed also reduces the consequences if you make a mistake (energy is proportional to velocity squared -- there's that physics again).

By your logic, if the pedestrian does not want to get stuck with the responsibility for looking, stopping, and waiting, all that is necessary is that he impair his vision and hearing, and become more dangerous -- just like a car. So, leave my glasses at home, and wheel a shopping cart full of concrete across the street when I cross. Your logic gives everyone an incentive to drive ever-larger cars, with more-tinted windows, and more distractions in the car -- because after all, if the guy in the Yugo has more at stake, and you're busy texting, why shouldn't HE look out for YOU? (game theory, not physics). The most antisocial person wins.

dr2chase:

Where did the cost, that the pedestrian must pay, come from? It came from you, and your car. Why is it not your problem?

I'm not going to be the one dying in the street after the accident. Listen, I agree with what you're saying, but the fact of the matter is that pedestrians have to be more cautious because the price they have to pay is so much higher. It's physics. Just as when I bike to school, I need to be more cautious because an accident between me and a car is going to go badly for me, regardless of whether I had the right away or not.

dr2chase:

Your logic gives everyone an incentive to drive ever-larger cars, with more-tinted windows, and more distractions in the car -- because after all, if the guy in the Yugo has more at stake, and you're busy texting, why shouldn't HE look out for YOU?

You simply don't get it. I'm not saying that it's right, or good or proper. I'm simply saying that it's a matter of physics and so it behooves a pedestrian to watch out instead of being dead right.