[Quietcars] Dos and Don'ts of the rules of the road.

[michael townsend]

I refer back to an earlier post regarding the pedestrian v. the driver.  The
report or the information I'd researched was directly gleamed from a
Canadian resource.  I undertook this research because a friend of mine had
been struck by a driver at an intersection as the pedestrian with a Seeing
Eye dog, was struck by this driver as she stepped into the street and the
vehicle operator turned right on a red light after coming to a complete
stop.  You are permitted to do this in the states at intersections that are
marked.  If an intersection is marked with a sign that forbids this type of
turning, you can be summoned to court and given a ticket for the
aforementioned violations.  




I'd like to discuss this report as a person who is not an attorney but
several things are clear to me after having read this.  

For example, it states that there aren't many investigations of accidents
that occur in parking lots and other areas of travel that are not highways
or secondary roads, i.e., neighborhoods:1.   Ontario should require inquests
for all pedestrian deaths where  a
vehicle of any type was involved.

This seems to differ here in the states, and police reports are mandatory
and are taken and summonses will be issued to the offending party.  Court
proceedings are begun if warranted in this country.


2.   The federal government immediately set up a task force on pedestrian
safety and motor vehicle design.  This should focus on reducing
impact  to the body by the front of the vehicle and eliminating
pedestrians  from being run over at low-speeds or dragged by
vehicles.  Further,  the federal government launch R&D activity to
develop a true urban  vehicle (not to be used outside cities) that is
smaller, slower, and  easier to handle.
Intersting that this should be proposed in Canada, for many of the issues
particularly surrounding blind travelers now are referencing the hybrid car,
which is less able to be heard than a "gasoline or diesel propelled"
vehicle.  These hybrid vehicles use a combination of a gasoline and electric
motor or multiple motors to propel the vehicles made by multiple
manufacturers at speeds up to and including 47 miles per hour (i.e.., the
Ford Fusion and several other Ford products using a tyota designed system).
Many vehicles, specially those of the higher end variety, use cameras and
radar to detect objects in the roadway that will slow or stop the vehicle to
avoid impact with the object or a pedestrian.

3.   The provincial government immediately place the onus for preventing
collisions with pedestrians completely on the shoulders of drivers
and to recognize "the right to cross the street".  It must recognize
the walking is a right (and very good for the collective and personal
environment) and that driving is a privilege.  Also, that urban speed
limits be reduced considerably, especially along residential streets
and those with high pedestrian volumes.

This is ludicrous at best.  Both driver and pedestrian do share in equal
responsibility when it comes to travel, and the use of cellular phones,
laptops and other communications devices has been legislated against while
driving, and common sense dictates that the same should hold true when it
comes to the pedestrian.  Whether one is blind or not doesn't give them the
right to violate any of these privileges of using the aforementioned
devices.  And, this also ensures that pedestrians who walk wear proper
clothing that allows a driver to "see" them in situations where a pedestrian
is walking in conditions where lighting of a street or walkway is not always
good.  Seeing Eye recommends, for example, that its handlers wear a
reflective vest, which has strips of reflective tape affixed to it in
strategic places, that are lighted by either street lamps or drivers'
headlamps when these lights are shined upon the tape.  Reflective tape is
also affixed to Seeing Eye's guide dog harnesses in strategic spots to also
help aluminates the animal; however, this doesn't negate the wearing of
brighter colored clothing to also assist a driver to see one walking in such
poorly lighted areas.  

4.   The federal government develop a "black box" for vehicles to record
driver activity and attention and vehicle condition during the period
just prior to collisions.

This black box idea is available, i.e., as it has been used to determine
situations in proving whether one applied the gas pedal or brakes prior to
collisions:  an example or two might involve the current investigations
regarding T90yota and the "run away" acceleration instances, where upon it
has been determined in two instances of which I know, where the driver
either prefabricated a story or did not apply the brakes at all in "runaway"
acceleration instances.

5.   That the authorities and the motor vehicle and insurance industry
refrain from using the word "accident" for motor vehicles
_collisions_.  Further,  the goal of these authorities must be
"zero pedestrian deaths".

This is at best ludicrous.

6.   The province should immediately give consideration to the following
measures to improve pedestrian safety: a) cutting speed limits on  all
urban streets to half their present level, b) ban distracting
activities for motorists while driving [see D-18 on distractions],  c)
phasing out street parking for any vehicle that creates blind  spots
for even the smallest pedestrian, and d) putting the burden  of proof
in the case of a vehicle-pedestrian collision on the driver  by
refusing to accept as "excuses": "The pedestrian darted  in front of
me", "It was dark/snowing/raining", "The pedestrian wore  dark
clothing", etc.

Some of these points have already been discussed.  A lot of these parking
measures are subject to city and state regulations and common sense where
space is at a premium.


7.   Finally, penalties for hitting a pedestrian must be increased.  For
instance, striking a pedestrian with sufficient force to cause any
injury to the latter will be given an automatic one-year driving
suspension;  serious injury, a five- year ban; and death, a life
suspension.  [None  of these preclude further civil remedies].  If the
driver is guilty  of being impaired or distracted by activities
initiated inside the  vehicle, a higher penalty will apply.  No fault will
any longer accrue  to the pedestrian, nor, in the case of minors or
those under supervisory  care, to those "in charge".
Resource:
http://www.ncf.ca/ip/community.associations/ottawalk/pospap/pp1.txt

As each situation is different, you may have different amounts of law suit
dollars " that are sued for", and wants and needs are different.  A judge
and jury are needed to determine the outcome of such law suits, but whether
these law suits are sufficient enough to determine whether clients are
satisfied or dissatisfied is an individual thing, indeed.  What determines
who is satisfied with an amount relative to pain and suffering cannot be
sufficiently determined by a  jury, per se, and this is reflective of the
costs of automobile insurance, and the horrendous amounts that are sued for
and often won or lost, dependent upon jury verdict or the selfishness and
greed of the lawyers and clients.  Some folks are truly in need of proper
medical and other compensation, while still others are just hangers on for
the ride and whatever they can get, and this clouds the role of a judge and
jury system tremendously.  







"I am accustomed to hearing malicious falsehoods about myself...but I think
I have
a right to resent, to object to, libelous statements about my dog."
-Franklin D. Roosevelt
Mike Townsend and Seeing Eye dog Brent
Dunellen, New Jersey  08812
emails:  mrtownsend at optonline.net; 
michael.townsend54 at gmail.com
Home Phone:  732  200-5643
Cellular:  732  718-9480