As someone that has done a lot of urban driving I take offense to the fact that the writer feels the need to defend jaywalkers. There are some situations when jaywalking is necessary and it would be ridiculous to do otherwise, but most instances I have witnessed involve pedestrians that just feel like the rules don't apply to them. While driving in downtown L.A. one weekend I was patiently waiting at a red light to turn left. As I was waiting a couple started to cross against the red light. "Ok", I said to myself, "none of my business, they're not hindering my progress". But, then the light turned green, and as I still waited patiently for the pedestrians to finish their walk accross the intersection, one of the pedestrians stops mid-intersection to tie both of their shoes! This is just one example of outrageous pedestrian behavior that I've witnessed personally. Do we need to make the streets safer for pedestrians? Yes, but only because we need to make the streets safer for everyone! Let's not be devisive among drivers and walkers. Solutions are best found while working together, not while fighting against eachother.

You make a great point. So good that instead of belittling you like I do the others in the drivers' camp, I'm going to try to have an appreciable conversation with.

First off, I think that it ought to be mentioned that laws can only enforce a minimum standard - not a standard of excellence. Having said that, I think that the law ought to protect the weak, in this case, the pedestrian. The law ought to state clearly that vehicles have access to a road only insofar as they help people... The road ought to serve people first. And to do that, cars (who happen to have drivers) should always have to wait for pedestrians.

A standard of excellence should demand two things:
1) that pedestrians are courteous (which, obviously, they aren't always; but, truthfully, very often are.); and,
2) that drivers are patient (again, most, but not all, are in this camp).

As a society, we should be willing to hold ourselves to such higher standards because they are the right things to do, but it won't do to hold ourselves to these standards by law - thankfully we have other means to correct behavior than just rules!

But safety should always be the primary responsibility of the driver - and this should be by law. Drivers are the only ones in a Vehicle-vs-Pedestrian who are controlling something capable of doing damage, and as such they must be held to a higher standard.

Obviously, this kid that tied his boot in front of you deserves a smack on the back of the head to smarten him up, but he does not deserve to get run over... And in this case it wasn't your patience (a social obligation, not a legal one) that demanded that you waited, it was his safety (a legal obligation, not a social one). If you lost your patience in a way that society chose to be over-the-top (honking too long, calling racist names), then you too would have had to have been corrected; but had you used your vehicle in a dangerous way, either out of negligence, incompetence or spite, it would make sense that legal repercussions should follow.

We get this so easily in most every other facet of society, why is it so difficult when it comes to driving? You have many responsibilities as a driver that you would not and should not have as a pedestrian because for the very reason that you are controlling something capable of so much damage. Legality should almost always protect the pedestrian, they're the ones in danger.