Spate of Pedestrian Deaths in GTA

[W. K. Lis]

Actually, by law, failing to use a crosswalk or disobeying a "don't walk" signal is a traffic offence warranting a fine of $85. It might not be a crime, but it's a fineable offence.

So if you have a car parked on the other side of the side street where you live, crossing the road to get to your car will result in a fine? Or one of those supermailboxes are across the street from you?

What if there are no sidewalks? Automatic fine?

What if you want to watch a game on your neighbour's new TV across your street? Walk down to the the corner, cross at the corner, and walk to your neighbour?

And again, what if there are no sidewalks? Get into your car, back out onto the street, and then drive into your neighbour's driveway, which is directly across from you? Actually, I think I saw a movie that had that scene.

 

[PinkLucy]

The law doesn't state how far away the crosswalk needs to be, so that's up to interpretation. But yes, if there is one "near", wherever near might be, they're supposed to stay within the crosswalk lines. If crossing a road outside of the lines, pedestrians must yield to traffic. I suspect that the hundreds of people who received jaywalking tickets last year were dodging cars on busy downtown streets and not yielding to traffic.

I agree that the "don't walk" thing is silly.

I didn't say that the laws had to make sense, just that there is one.

And yes, rereading nfitz' original post, he's right ... crossing a clear road in the absence of crosswalk/signals is not against the law. Mea culpa. However, in some of the pedestrian deaths recently, crosswalks were available. That said, even if someone is "jaywalking", drivers are supposed to pay attention and avoid hitting them.

 

[W. K. Lis]

From copenhagenize.com:
[video=youtube;4_Bq1vxCUvo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_Bq1vxCUvo[/video]

A great little infofilm about the concept of Strict Liability, which is the norm in Denmark and The Netherlands, among other European countries. It was uploaded by Carlton Reid from Quickrelease.tv and I Pay Road Tax.com

With Strict Liability, it's always the motorist at fault when they collide with vulnerable road users like pedestrians and cyclists.

In the film, Hans Voerknecht, international coordinator of the Dutch Fietsberaad explains how this works in practice.

Basically, cars kill. Those who drive cars and kill or injure people are liable, simply because of the responsibility involved in operating a 2000 kg machine.

- The UK is only one of four Western European countries that doesnt have 'strict liability' to protect cyclists and pedestrians.
- Strict liability entitles a crash victim to compensation unless the driver can prove the cyclist or pedestrian was at fault.
- Strict liability encourages more careful driving (and cycling, because a cyclist would be deemed to be at fault for crashing into a pedestrian).
- Strict liability would be a matter of civil rather than criminal law so would not affect criminal prosecutions.

 

[Glen]

W.K. Lis,

You should look at our own HTA before you point to other countries. We have the same provision.

 

[MisterF]

To clarify the jaywalking issue, anything that the Highway Traffic Act doesn't prohibit is legal, which means that jaywalking is legal. AFAIK municipalities can prohibit jaywalking by by-law, but the by-laws in Toronto basically state that you can jaywalk as long as you're not impeding traffic.

Not quite sure on the "Don't Walk" law, but if that applies the second the orange hand starts flashing then it's a goddamn ridiculous law that everyone breaks.

It's illegal to start crossing when the hand is flashing, but once you've stepped off the curb it's legal to keep going if the hand comes up.

 

[Tza]

Last Monday at Dixon Rd & Kelfield Rd (Hwy 27) uniformed TPS officers in yellow reflective jackets just kept crossing at green lights seeing if people would make right/left hand turns into them without looking. It was part of the blitz they were doing for awareness last week. I also saw them doing this around Runnymede & Dundas W.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Last Monday at Dixon Rd & Kelfield Rd (Hwy 27) uniformed TPS officers in yellow reflective jackets just kept crossing at green lights seeing if people would make right/left hand turns into them without looking. It was part of the blitz they were doing for awareness last week. I also saw them doing this around Runnymede & Dundas W.

In Cabbagetown the police use my driveway and tree to watch for cars rolling through the stop sign. They're doing a great job, and my wife even brought them coffee once. I'm a big fan of our cops, well, the good ones.

 

[ShonTron]

As I understand it, the law only applies if there is a crosswalk in the immediate vicinity. Legally, pedestrians can 'jaywalk' anywhere provided the road is clear.

The law isn't that you must ALWAYS use a crosswalk, but rather that you must use a crosswalk if one is available to you.

Not quite sure on the "Don't Walk" law, but if that applies the second the orange hand starts flashing then it's a goddamn ridiculous law that everyone breaks.

Absolutely correct.

If a car is coming towards you when crossing mid-block or at an unprotected crossing, and you cross, you are interfering with traffic and therefore illegally jaywalking.

If you cross midblock without interfering with traffic, you are fine. If you cross against a red light or solid red hand, that is also illegal jaywalking.

I think the red flashing hand is so vague that there needs to be some change. I suggest a white flashing walk signal to show that pedestrians still have the right of way (which they already do), but there is not enough time to start if you aren´t quick. Some nearby US cities, like Washington, use a white flashing hand.

 

[W. K. Lis]

The 905 is especially notorious for requiring pedestrians to press a button to operate the pedestrian signals. Even in Toronto, I have seen pedestrians waiting at an intersection as they see the countdown occuring, but then face no walk signal because only a automobile triggered the change. They then walk across with the stop hand and a green light for the traffic, because they didn't press the button.
Automobiles only have to be over the loop in the roadway to trigger the signal change. Pedestrians have to consciously press the pedestrian button to trigger the signal change. If there are no automobiles, some have to wait several minutes.
However, there are cities where the pedestrian only has to step on an activation plate or area to activate the pedestrian signal.

 

[nfitz]

Even in Toronto, I have seen pedestrians waiting at an intersection as they see the countdown occuring, but then face no walk signal because only a automobile triggered the change. They then walk across with the stop hand and a green light for the traffic, because they didn't press the button.

Been there ... done that. For some bizarre reason the traffic light on Danforth right outside the Greenwood subway station does this. I can kind of understand in the middle of nowhere, but you don't expect to walk out of a subway station to a traffic light that is already flashing ready to change, and think you have to push a button to actually get the light to change.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Been there ... done that. For some bizarre reason the traffic light on Danforth right outside the Greenwood subway station does this. I can kind of understand in the middle of nowhere, but you don't expect to walk out of a subway station to a traffic light that is already flashing ready to change, and think you have to push a button to actually get the light to change.

Worse are the pedestrian buttons that are not right at the crossing, but far from there on some post not closeby.

 

[madmolecule]

Yes, I find that annoying too that, if a car triggers the traffic light to turn green, the corresponding pedestrian signal doesn't also turn green automatically. I suppose it is designed that way so that, if there are no pedestrians, the light will cycle back to red more quickly. But my impression is indeed that different traffic lights are not consistent - with some, you don't have to press the button, and the pedestrian signal will turn green anyway - making it all even more confusing.

 

[Admiral Beez]

One thing we could change is with the scramble crossings. I'm in full support of the concept, and I think it's great that everyone can cross at once in all directions while traffic has red lights in all directions. However, changing the system so that after the scramble crossing, then pedestrians get "do not walk" on the green lights so that cars can turn right? Otherwise, traffic backs up for ages while the pedestrians get their scramble crossing, and then still get to cross regularly on the green, meaning that no cars can turn right at all.

 

[Long Island Mike]

Everyone: One thing I remember from the 80s was how drivers would obey pedestrian crosswalks on busy streets like Yonge Street-just stepping into them would slow down drivers and then they would yield or stop upon noticing your intentions. I remember Toronto or Ontario drivers were more courteous then Montreal or Quebec drivers in those days.

It seems like today everyone goes that much faster in all we do so we have problems just being pedestrians-it can be "survival of the fittest" out there at times!

I am all for pedestrian "countdown" signals compared to the WALK/DON'T WALK signals of the past - one thing I recall reading is that with many people not speaking/reading English in large cities the "hand" signal was developed to counter that.

I also noticed "Right on Red" mentioned - a potential problem for crosswalks in many places. In NYS the rule is that it is allowed unless there is a specific "NO TURN ON RED" sign posted.
In the 5 Boroughs of NYC the rule is exactly opposite - it is NOT allowed unless there is a sign posted permitting right turns on red.
Something that I have also heard is that you must come to a full stop before proceeding in NYS - something that is rarely enforced.
How does Ontario traffic law compare on this subject?

LI MIKE

 

[Admiral Beez]

I also noticed "Right on Red" mentioned - a potential problem for crosswalks in many places. In NYS the rule is that it is allowed unless there is a specific "NO TURN ON RED" sign posted. In the 5 Boroughs of NYC the rule is exactly opposite - it is NOT allowed unless there is a sign posted permitting right turns on red.

I'd support this, provide there was another light that told pedestrians not to cross while the right hand turn light is on.