Automakers Invented the Crime of Jaywalking

[mrsbright]

[h=2]The forgotten history of how automakers invented the crime of "jaywalking"[/h]is the title of an article I got in my FB newsfeed yesterday. Very interesting indeed.

"In the early days of the automobile, it was drivers' job to avoid you, not your job to avoid them," says Peter Norton, a historian at the University of Virginia and author of Fighting Traffic: The Dawn of the Motor Age in the American City. "But under the new model, streets became a place for cars — and as a pedestrian, it's your fault if you get hit."

This was also part of the final strategy: shame. In getting pedestrians to follow traffic laws, "the ridicule of their fellow citizens is far more effective than any other means which might be adopted," said E.B. Lefferts, the head of the Automobile Club of Southern California in the 1920s. Norton likens the resulting campaign to the anti-drug messaging of 80s and 90s, in which drug use was portrayed not only as dangerous, but stupid.
(...)


Auto campaigners lobbied police to publicly shame transgressors by whistling or shouting at them — and even carrying women back to the sidewalk — instead of quietly reprimanding or fining them. They staged safety campaigns in which actors dressed in 19th century garb, or as clowns, were hired to cross the street illegally, signifying that the practice was outdated and foolish. In a 1924 New York safety campaign, a clown was marched in front of a slow-moving Model T and rammed repeatedly.

Complete article: The forgotten history of how automakers invented the crime of "jaywalking" - Vox

I mean, jaywalking probably is the most ridiculous crime I can think of and, like the article mentions, it can lead to a fine of a few hundred dollars.

How surprising is it really that this was invented to profit the car industry?

 

[donnalynn47]

I will never forget my husband,and I were at the hospital to see his mama. It was in the city here I am a country girl. I started to walk across the street. He yelled at me what are you doing? I'm fixing to cross the street I said. He said they'll get you for Jaywalking. I've heard of Jaywalking, but then I understood it. I had to go to the cross walk instead of cross the street where I wanted. Like I do in the sleepy little town I go to when running errands.

 

[Patrick]

That's a pretty interesting read. I think that with the advent of automobiles some rules had to be made to enforce public safety on roads. While it certainly is possible that automakers invented them I think we can agree that jaywalking can be dangerous to both drivers and pedestrians on crowded roads, and should be avoided.

 

[mrsbright]

That's a pretty interesting read. I think that with the advent of automobiles some rules had to be made to enforce public safety on roads. While it certainly is possible that automakers invented them I think we can agree that jaywalking can be dangerous to both drivers and pedestrians on crowded roads, and should be avoided.

Yeah, sure. And we are so used to this that now, this is the norm.

I think the article is interesting to show that the streets did not always belong to the cars. But a lot of drivers sure act like the streets were made for them -- haivng no problem turning right without checking if there is a passerby crossing the street (and it's green light and they use the designated lines), or bullying cyclists, or acting like public buses are a pain and blocking them... Basically, we live in a narrative where the world belongs to cars now, and everything else has to get out of the way to satisfy this individualistic trait.

I think jaywalking is also a cash cow. If I cross an empty road where I want instead of walking 500m more to wait for the light, I don't think that I should have to pay a hefty fine for it. I would see any car coming -- unless they would break the law and drive 30km/h faster than the zone allows for, basically.

 

[Kittyworker]

I think jaywalking is also a cash cow. If I cross an empty road where I want instead of walking 500m more to wait for the light, I don't think that I should have to pay a hefty fine for it. I would see any car coming -- unless they would break the law and drive 30km/h faster than the zone allows for, basically.

Most jurisdictions have a limit to the distance that a person would need to travel to a crossing in order to avoid the fine. In New Zealand if there is no crossing within 20 meters of you then you are allowed to cross anywhere. I recall stuff.co.nz doing an article about a person who was fined and challenged the fine in court over $45. The court found that the nearest crossing was 23 meters away from where he crossed and rescinded the fine.

 

[Onionman]

How funny. I hadn't even considered this concept of the story of jaywalking as being possible. And the strange thing is that countries without auto industries have still adopted the principle of jaywalking, partly I guess as a control thing.

 

[Shimus]

It definitely is an enforceable law. Got nailed for it on several occasions because I like to cut when I see no traffic - apparently, when even there's no traffic it's still a huge NO NO and the cops had nothing better to do (rural town, not a city). Never got nailed for it in a bigger city though. I always thought it should be always-enforced or never-enforced.

 

[mrsbright]

It definitely is an enforceable law. Got nailed for it on several occasions because I like to cut when I see no traffic - apparently, when even there's no traffic it's still a huge NO NO and the cops had nothing better to do (rural town, not a city). Never got nailed for it in a bigger city though. I always thought it should be always-enforced or never-enforced.

I think it should be only enforced in situations where the walker does not realize he's doing something stupid -- like jaywalking in a tight curb or a few meters away from an intersection -- in places where a car would not even see the person walking through the road, and thus it would be harder to avoid the collision because of the lack of foresight. That they nail people for it in situations where it's clear *nothing* could go wrong, that's just annoying.

 

[Shimus]

Yeah, trust me the citations speak to how "annoying" it truly is. The fact was there were no cars at all and he was bored. And he and I had a pre-existing "thing".

I know in bigger cities this is enforced more on a citizen/civilian safety issue - too much traffic in congestion can shift at any time and it could potentially cause 'problems' (kersplat!!)

 

[Kittyworker]

Never got nailed for it in a bigger city though. I always thought it should be always-enforced or never-enforced.

If cops always enforced it they would never be doing anything but issuing citations for it. Jaywalking is so common place in most cities that I can't even imagine getting a ticket for it.

 

[Shimus]

I think it's all in the way some cops want to be viewed as hardasses, handing tickets out. It's fine to enforce the law, but in my experience it's always better to blend into the scenery then to stand against it as more people reveal their true natures when they feel relaxed and not threatened.

But to Jaywalking yeah it's there but it's not that common.

 

[OMGnoWAY]

I used to live in Hawaii and when I first moved there I jaywalked. I'm from a larger city than Honolulu and still no one takes jaywalking laws seriously. But I guess they have SUCH a problem with tourists jaywalking and getting hit by cars that they actually started enforcing jaywalking laws. You can get a $50 ticket for jaywalking and the cops there WILL give you one if they see you jaywalk.

My racist friend said it's because there's so many Asian drivers in Hawaii and Asians are bad drivers, so they're trying to protect tourists. I don't know about that, but there are certain Asian countries where pedestrians DO NOT have the right of way so maybe the enforcement IS because of Asians visiting the island, to a degree :/

 

[mrsbright]

My racist friend said it's because there's so many Asian drivers in Hawaii and Asians are bad drivers, so they're trying to protect tourists. I don't know about that, but there are certain Asian countries where pedestrians DO NOT have the right of way so maybe the enforcement IS because of Asians visiting the island, to a degree :/

Isn't that part of a racist joke where the punchline is about how they almost have their eyes closed and thus cannot see much?

But I actually get that they prefer to enforce the law than to have more accidents and possibly having less tourism if they get a bad rep and all.

 

[donnalynn47]

It is a good law to protect those that are walking.Because these folks driving cars aren't paying the best amount of attention. Especially now that cell phones are here. At least it may help more then it hurts.

 

[Shimus]

It is a good law to protect those that are walking.Because these folks driving cars aren't paying the best amount of attention. Especially now that cell phones are here. At least it may help more then it hurts.

But people shouldn't be using cellphones to begin with and causing crashes either. People are morons. I just hope these laws don't get over-enforced on us poor pedestrians