
How automakers invented the crime of “jaywalking” - smacktoward
http://www.vox.com/2015/1/15/7551873/jaywalking-history
======
harmonicon
"It's strange to imagine now, but prior to the 1920s, city streets looked
dramatically different than they do today. They were considered to be a public
space: a place for pedestrians, pushcart vendors, horse-drawn vehicles,
streetcars, and children at play."

I think this point is very important. After the automobiles took over, the
street slowly ceased to be the #1 public space where people hangout, shop,
play or shoot the bull. Fast forward to today's US, spending an extended time
on the street is associated with being poor, homeless or conducting criminal
activity. Streets' sole purpose is for travel and commute.

Countries with less developed economy still enjoys a vibrant street life much
like the pre 1920 US (i.e. Mexico, Brazil, Turkey, China, Thailand etc). As
they get richer and purchase more automobile though, the same street
transformation is happening again. One can notice a big difference if one
visited China in 2000 vs today. They are in some dire need for parking lots.

Of course, there are definitely developed wealthy countries in Europe that
also enjoy vibrant street life. However car ownership there is not as
widespread as in the US due to a number of economic constraints (space cost,
gas price, taxes).

~~~
saraid216
The interesting thing about this is that it's very nearly a First Amendment
infringement on the right to assemble. In order to assemble on a street–a
fairly obvious place to do so, for a protest, since it has good exposure and
visibility–you have to ask the police to explicitly redirect traffic on your
behalf. That's not a small hurdle.

~~~
dtech
I assume the US has parks and squares too.

~~~
whoopdedo
Parks are considered private property owned by the city/state/federal
government and police can charge you with trespassing.

~~~
mcv
Private property owned by the government? What sort of odd concept is that?

------
adregan
99 percent invisible did a great episode about the invention of jaywalking in
2013: [http://99percentinvisible.org/episode/episode-76-the-
modern-...](http://99percentinvisible.org/episode/episode-76-the-modern-
moloch/)

It's linked at the bottom of the article as further reading, but it's such a
good podcast, I thought I'd mention it (emphatically).

------
svantana
It may be interesting to note that here in Sweden, "jaywalking" is not a
crime, and we have what may be the lowest rate of driving-related deaths in
the civilized world. People here do indeed jaywalk more than in many other
countries, but we look both ways first.

~~~
Someone1234
In the UK either [0].

The entire country would be completely unworkable if you could only cross at a
"cross-walk." Some villages literally don't have any. The only jaywalking-type
laws in the UK are for motorways (70 MpH).

The whole jaywalking thing seems very authoritarian are arbitrary in the US.
But the US has a lot of that type of thing in general. Just look at the recent
articles about New York's ticketing strike, some of the things they were
ticketing for on mass were a little odd and petty.

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaywalking#United_Kingdom](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaywalking#United_Kingdom)

~~~
smackfu
Remember that the US has a thousand different sets of laws. Jaywalking is not
enforced in small towns.

~~~
snorkel
It varies by city in the US:

* Seattle: Pedestrians don't even jaywalk on empty streets at 1AM

* Manhattan: Jaywalk at your own risk

* Boston: Everyone jaywalks all of the time, everywhere. Pedestrians cross streets anywhere at free random and do not acknowledge the existence of motor vehicles.

~~~
saraid216
> * Seattle: Pedestrians don't even jaywalk on empty streets at 1AM

What? Yes I do.

~~~
RyJones
Let him be provincial. I work downtown Seattle and see people jaywalking all
the time

------
Zikes
The article seems to paint the automakers as a cabal of villains for
convincing people to not walk in front of a moving vehicle. I'm not sure what
I'm supposed to make of it.

~~~
aliston
I think the point is that perhaps we've swung too far to the extreme in favor
of cars. We've lost a social gathering place. Not to mention, when other modes
of transportation (i.e. bikes) share the road with cars, in cases of bike-car
collisions, it is almost always assumed that the bicyclist is at fault.

Also, I think the tide is shifting. Many cities are moving towards more
pedestrian friendly corridors, replacing some streets with parks etc.

~~~
baddox
I can certainly agree that the car culture in the US is a bad thing. But I
don't quite understand why streets make sense at all as a social gathering
place. Why not parks or people's yards/driveways/patios?

~~~
saosebastiao
Because in urban areas, people live next to the street, and their neighbors
live next to the street, and the closest park is a few blocks away, and almost
nobody has a yard/driveway/patio.

------
dictum
Jaywalking is not a crime here, but I'm always amazed when a TV segment
indignantly shows people jaywalking and talks about its risks.

I actually find it safer to cross the street somewhat away from the crosswalk.
Crosswalks are usually close to road intersections and other places with
increased traffic, where the traffic seems to be less predictable.

------
lotsofmangos
I didn't realise quite how mental the US is over something as simple as
crossing the road till I read this:

 _" A distinguished British historian claims he was knocked to the ground by
an American policeman before being arrested and spending eight hours in jail —
because he crossed the road in the wrong place._

 _Felipe Fernandez-Armesto said he had been the victim of "terrible, terrible
violence" after he inadvertently committed the offence of "jaywalking" in
Atlanta, Georgia, last week and failed to realise the man telling him to stop
was an officer._

 _The slight, bespectacled professor claimed that five burly officers pinned
him to the ground after Kevin Leonpacher kicked his legs from under him as he
hesitated to show his ID._

 _He was left "traumatised and disorientated" and with a gashed forehead as he
was taken to the local jail and charged with pedestrian failure to obey a
police officer and physical obstruction of police."_

[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1539148/Historian-
pin...](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1539148/Historian-pinned-to-
ground-by-US-police-and-beaten-for-jaywalking.html)

In the UK, we were just taught this thing called the _" Green Cross Code"_ as
children in a series of slightly surreal public information films, though the
message in it is basically no more complex than to just to stop and pay
attention to what the traffic is doing, before deciding to cross the road.
Pedestrians aren't allowed on motorways (freeways), but that is about it.
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Cross_Code](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Cross_Code)

~~~
eru
Oh, they weren't getting him for crossing the road, but for subsequent
contempt of cop.
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contempt_of_cop](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contempt_of_cop))

------
andrewtbham
It's increasingly obvious to me that in the future we won't have flying cars.
Transportation will be below ground and the people will take back the streets.

Examples of this trend include: boston big dig, atlanta beltway.

~~~
vmarsy
This trend is quite old if you think about other means of transportation like
the train:

\- London Underground: 1863

\- Paris Métro : 1900

But you're right about cars tunnels, the infamous Seattle project can also be
mentioned
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaskan_Way_Viaduct_replacement...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaskan_Way_Viaduct_replacement_tunnel)

------
kevin_thibedeau
The unfortunate thing is that the police won't even bother to ticket drivers
who fail to yield to pedestrians in a crosswalk. Most US drivers have no
concept of how right-of-way works and their obligations to yield. I've taken
to using an airhorn for busy crossings and have been chewed out by cops for
expecting my traffic rights to be observed.

~~~
jkyle
In my town, they take pedestrian rights very seriously. They even have
undercover officers use cross walks and ticket driver who do not yield.

~~~
seanmcdirmid
Bay Area? Many of the mid-west bay towns run crosswalk sting operations along
El Camino often.

~~~
jkyle
Mountain View ;)

------
grkvlt
Interestingly, when pedestrian crossings were being introduced in the UK it
was decided that a statement like 'DON'T CROSS' was problematic. There was no
legal basis on which pedestrians could be prevented from crossing a road and
the instruction was therefore being given without due authority! The town
council had no right to tell a law-abiding Englishman _not_ to cross the
street! So, we got the 'Green Man' signs intead, and of course there is still
nothing preventing you from crossing the street wherever you wish here in the
UK. Another interesting snippet was the fact that in East London it was
thought that signs on crossings would not work due to the large number of
Russian immigrants, since "[...] these people are excitable and ill-
disciplined." See this article for more information
[http://www.cbrd.co.uk/articles/pedestrian-
crossings/](http://www.cbrd.co.uk/articles/pedestrian-crossings/)

------
grecy
> _In the early days of the automobile, it was drivers ' job to avoid you, not
> your job to avoid them. But under the new model, streets became a place for
> cars — and as a pedestrian, it's your fault if you get hit._

I drove Alaska->Argentina [1] and I was extremely lucky that someone told me
that the minute you cross into Mexico (and further south) you should expect
the old way of doing things. Roads in Developing countries are not a right of
way for cars. They are places to play volleyball, dry coffee beans, change
your rear axle, get a tan or herd your cattle. I saw all of these and many
more, even on the Pan-American highway in 60mph zones.

Expect the unexpected!

[1] theroadchoseme.com

~~~
seanmcdirmid
In China, if you hit a pedestrian with a car, it is your fault no matter what.
So a lot of poor people will camp out in a road waiting for a car to hit them
to make some money.

On the other hand, a dog (or child) running out into the road in China is less
likely to be struck by a car because this happens so often that the drivers
are hyper aware. Still, I've seen a girl on a bicycle struck and killed at a
Beijing intersection (the light was green for the car). You never forget that.
Also, yielding on a right turn is a western myth.

It is really not that great; I mean, the cars have to go slower overall, the
traffic gets congested, everyone is out for themselves, there are no
courtesies, and people die. There has to be a middle ground between pedestrian
friendly streets and sanity.

~~~
eru
The Netherlands, perhaps?

~~~
seanmcdirmid
Ya, the Netherlands is nice. Population densities are much lower, however.

~~~
eru
You mean in the Netherlands or in China?

As a whole, the Netherlands have one of the highest population densities in
the world. Per city, I am sure China has some of the denser cities in the
world.

~~~
seanmcdirmid
Ya, that's what I meant. Also, the Netherlands has more roads and
infrastructure per capita.

------
harmonicon
I didn't understand the Chinese wall reference in the pro automobile cartoon.
Thought it was interesting.
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_wall](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_wall)

~~~
oxryly1
A historic American term related to China this is not racist... that is a
surprise.

------
kazinator
Damn it, pedestrians should be able to go anywhere at any time they please.

Airport tarmacs, power stations, water treatment plants, you name it! If I
want to step off the train station platform and onto the tracks, it's my god-
given right.

"Authorized Personnel" or "Staff Only" be damned, along with "No
Tresspassing".

"Sign sign, everywhere a sign / Blocking out the scenery, breakin' my mind
..." goes the song.

It's all just a scheme to repress the people. Or rather, to repress them in a
small way so their attention is thwarted from the big ways. Yeah, that's it!

~~~
smacktoward
I never realized there were people who had to walk across an airport tarmac or
a water treatment plant to get from home to the corner store.

~~~
scott_s
I think we hit Poe's Law.

~~~
kazinator
You think so? Did I neglect to make a clear indication of sarcasm that would
distinguish the posting from a frank expression of extremism?

I'm reminded that when Jonathan Swift published _A Modest Proposal_, it was
taken seriously by some. Or at least legend has it.

~~~
scott_s
I caught it. But it looks like smacktoward did not.

