News   Sep 19, 2024
 251     0 
News   Sep 19, 2024
 467     0 
News   Sep 19, 2024
 442     0 

Toronto cops ignore pedestrians

M II A II R II K

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
3,944
Reaction score
1,061
Toronto cops ignore pedestrians


November 02, 2012

By Christopher Hume

thestar_logo.gif


Read More: http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/1281448--hume-toronto-cops-ignore-pedestrians


The view from One Yonge is spectacular. Watching the towers never fails to entertain, but now there’s something new to watch: It unfolds almost daily when the police arrive to take up a position on Yonge St. from which they reel in endless drivers making illegal left-hand turns from Harbour St., the exit ramp from the eastbound Gardiner Expressway.

Until fairly recently, drivers could turn left from two lanes. Then, at some point last year, the outside left-turn lane was eliminated, leaving just one. Not unexpectedly, drivers have been slow to catch on and police reel them in by the score. Most drivers feel the move was a straightforward cash grab. That’s easy to conclude: the removal of the left-turn lane serves no other apparent purpose. It actually slows traffic and causes backups and delays. On the other hand, city officials say the lane was taken out to make it easier and safer for pedestrians. Now they must contend with only one stream of traffic, not two.

Regardless, that intersection, maybe 30 metres south of the cops’ preferred spot, ranks as one of the most dangerous in Toronto. Pedestrians take their lives into their hands to cross Yonge. The police, of course, remain utterly oblivious. They’re too busy pulling over cars to cast a glance at what’s happening nearby. Their indifference is striking, but entirely consistent. From Chief Bill Blair down to the cop on the street, the police force’s contempt for pedestrians knows no bounds. For Toronto’s finest, pedestrians don’t exist, at least not until they are involved in accidents, at which point, they get all the attention they no longer need. And so few were surprised when 11 GTA pedestrians were struck by cars in a 24-hour period ending Thursday. Two were killed and nine injured. Hit-and-run drivers were responsible for three of the collisions.

But as the intersection of Yonge and Harbour makes clear, such a body count is entirely predictable; pedestrians in Toronto often find themselves sacrificial lambs, collateral damage or unintended victims of transportation policies that view them as expendable. The Yonge-Harbour corner is more awkward than most because Harbour veers to the north before continuing east. That means pedestrians cross at an angle that makes it difficult for drivers to see them as they exit, usually at high speed, from the expressway. Pedestrians must dodge cars trying to cut past them or play chicken with drivers until one or the other stops.

The current configuration, intended to keep vehicular traffic moving, makes few concessions to walkers. It provides them with the crosswalk they need, but grudgingly, and with little thought to their safety. At the same time, thousands now live in the condo towers popping up around this intersection. Five residential highrises have already appeared near the corner, and more are in the works. Like the rest of us, their inhabitants have kids and dogs and expect to be able to cross the road with a reasonable hope of making it in one piece.

.....




63f413fd410d95939642030d6672.jpg
 
The article was a dump as well. Hume should stick to reviewing architecture not traffic patterns.

1) The second left turn lane was eliminated nearly 2 if not more than two years ago not simply "last year" as he claims.
2) Shouldn't the lane reduction be praised by the star as it makes driving more difficult
3) FWIW the turn from the second lane was a slightly blind turn WRT to pedestrians so I can see the reasoning behind pedestrian safety.
4) If the police ticketed the pedestrians for "jaywalking" than he would claim that they are unfairly targeting pedestrians while cars make illegal, unsafe turns
5) Rather than whinge about the problem how about coming up with a solution. IIRC the Star owns the land south of Harbour St. (the parking lot). How about suggesting that the parking lot be given over to allow for Harbour St to continue more or less E/W rather than curving to the N RIGHT AT THE INTERSECTION WITH YONGE than curve N once it is E of Yonge st. That would go a long way to cleaning up some of the visibility issues and length of crossing that pedestrians face at this intersection due to it's awkward configuration.
 
What is this, just an article dump? Just bait to troll for discussion? Where are the original poster's comments or intro?

G'ah I hate article dumps.

So do I.

MARK, please have something to say, and link to articles (providing an excerpt to make a point), rather than just cut-and-paste.

The Fixer had a much better column about the same intersection, interviewing the cops who often stake it out. Even Streetview shows the centre dual-purpose lane converted, and that was taken in Summer 2009.
 
Last edited:
Worse in the States.

Nashville Police Call Driver Who Struck Protesters a “Victim”

From link.

A 68-year-old man who ran his car through a group of protesters in Nashville not only won’t be charged, but is being treated by local law enforcement as though he were the victim of a crime, according to the Tennessean.

Late last month, people gathered at the corner of West End Avenue and Murphy Road in Nashville to speak out against Donald Trump’s executive order on immigration. As the protest was winding down, a man behind the wheel of an SUV “drove for a distance with protesters on the hood of his vehicle,” the Tennessean reports.

In the ensuing investigation, the word of the driver and his wife seemed to hold greater sway with police than the protesters who were struck or witnessed the event. The driver told police he was sitting at the intersection when protesters started jumping on his car and threatening him, and he drove into them out of fear.

Jack Willey, a member of the protest’s safety team, told the Tennessean he was struck by the driver while helping people in a crosswalk with the right of way. He criticized the investigation, saying “there were dozens of witnesses” who weren’t interviewed.

The police report published by the Tennessean refers to the driver as “the victim” throughout. It says “officers asked the victim to sit in the back of a police car and was relocated away from the incident for his safety.”

As outrageous as this may seem, it fits a pattern. In 2014, when a teenage girl protesting police brutality in Minneapolis was run over by a driver who careened into the crowd, local authorities declined to pursue criminal charges. They also initially referred to the driver, 40-year-old Jeffrey Rice, as the “victim.” He was eventually charged with only minor traffic offenses.

In practice, the American legal system is already incredibly permissive toward people who use a motor vehicle to violently assault protesters in a roadway.

Nevertheless, to add insult to injury, Tennessee state rep Matthew Hill introduced a bill last week that would shield drivers from civil suits when they run over protesters, if the driver was exercising “due care.” The bill was introduced on February 8 and has been forwarded to the State Senate judiciary committee. A similar bill was introduced last month in North Dakota.

Nora Kern, executive director of Walk Bike Nashville, said the measure is abhorrent.

“Given how many pedestrians have been killed in Nashville, it’s crazy to even suggest this sort of bill,” she said. “I’m hoping though this was filed more as some sort of sick statement and that it has no chance of moving forward.”
 

Fake "news" sites (or an editorial without explicitly stating that it is one) only give you one side of the story. The Tennessean is a real newspaper that has both sides and is news

http://www.tennessean.com/story/new...-say-happened-sunday-protest-driver/97299780/

Sounds like a he said/she said. Other than the cops confirming that people where jumping on the car. Very scary that protesters who are complaining about a bully think nothing of becoming the bully. Eye for an eye mentality.
 

Back
Top