We would need 75% fewer laws if people took responsibilty for themself and we apply common sense. Who gets hurt when car meets jay walker? Jay walker. Then it is the jay walkers responsibility to protect themselves, by not getting hit by the car. PERIOD.

Right-on.

I agree,yet in the city I ive in,the cross sections are spaced very wide...a block in most cases...just be aware of your surroundings...we can all get along...i'm not usually in a hurry and i doubt the jaywalker is either in most cases...but jeezus...use common sense

Did you read the article, dude? What I took away from it was that a great, underreported number of pedestrian fatalities are the responsibility of the driver. How about the case of the pedestrian who was, in fact, jaywalking vs. the driver who was drunk and doing double the speed limit? Would you say it was the responsibility of the gunshot victim not to have gotten in the way of the bullet? When each of us takes the controls of a very large, very fast piece of machinery, it is our responsibility to use that machinery in a way that doesn't lead to death. PERIOD.

who gets hurt when a mugger runs up to you out of nowhere and shoots you? You, therefore it's your fault when you get mugged. PERIOD. That was some pretty faulty logic you had going there.

Muggers and drunk drivers are committing willful criminal acts. Motorist are not. If you get hit by a drunk driver jay walking you are STILL responsible. The Jay Walker made it possible, You will never get hit by a car crossing a street if you make it impossible to get hit by a car. Mom told you all you need to know in kindergarten, look both ways and only cross if it is safe. PERIOD.

first off, stop with the PERIOD stuff, it's annoying and it doesn't help you get your point across. I don't disagree that if you are obeying the laws of the road and someone jumps out in front of your car, they are at fault. But there are large sets of complicated scenarios in which both people share blame, and for you to just say the walker is automatically at fault just because they are more likely to get injured doesn't make any sense at all. It's true the person with more to lose ought to be more careful, but legally, that doesn't mean the motorist should get away scott free when they were drunk, running a red light, and speeding, just because the walker wasn't in a crosswalk.

We would need 75% fewer laws if people took responsibility for themself (sic) and we apply common sense. Who gets hurt when cops get shot? Cops. Then it is the cops (sic) responsibility to protect themselves, by not getting shot by criminals.

DUUUUHH STUPID TOM VANDERBILT AND SLATE MAGAZINE UR SO STUPID!