On the other hand, when it's "the pedestrian must be IN the crosswalk" no one ever bothers to stop, and you're pretty much risking your life stepping out in some areas.

Not to mention the people who will try to PASS a car in front of them that's stopped at a crosswalk, so you cross halfway only to almost get creamed by that car in the far lane.

If someone's on the curb and actively looking out into traffic it's not so hard to tell they want to cross. Of course, people who don't want to cross should have a bit of sense and not stand right on the edge of the road, too. Make clear your non-interest.

I dunno, maybe require people to wave their hand, or something, but if the requirement is that you actually have to step out into fully flowing traffic before anyone will begin to slow down, it can get crazy on busy streets. Though, some of the really busy streets around me could really stand to have actual signals, even if one of the directions is just pedestrians crossing the street.

/misses pedestrian bridges

In Texas the speed limit in school zones is 35 mph.

Texas has the fastest kids in America.

Coincidence? I think not.

Shostie: oldebayer: In Texas the speed limit in school zones is 35 mph.

Where is this? The one I go through during the week is 20 mph

I've seen it at 35 in Lubbock, Odessa and Midland, plus several small towns.

Football country.

Some cities actually appreciate drivers who flatten pedestrians.

/Ann Arbor is ungrateful

If you guys have ever driven in Ann Arbor the pedestrians there are absolutely insane and will walk right out in front of you no matter where you are or how fast you're going and they will become super-angry at you if you get anywhere close to them and smack their hands down on your hood or kick your tires.

FloydA: ricewater_stool: sigdiamond2000: FTFA:

It now states that when traffic control signals are not in place or not in operation, drivers must stop - before entering a crosswalk - and yield to any pedestrians "stopped at the curb or ramp leading to a crosswalk." Drivers also must continue to stop for pedestrians within crosswalks, and without regard to which portion of the roadway the pedestrian is using.

Completely, utterly insane.

Vehicles yielding to pedestrians at crosswalks? What is this, Soviet Russia?

You're missing the point. Michigan state law already mandates that cars stop for pedestrians in a crosswalk. The Ann Arbor law ups that to if a pedestrian is "about to enter or approaching a crosswalk" cars must stop. So a driver is supposed to be monitoring the sidewalk for people who might decide to cross the street, i.e. predicting intent. It's really, really stupid. I drive though Ann Arbor several times a week and I have personally witnessed several near accidents because of this.

When traffic lights are not working, aren't drivers supposed to stop at all intersections anyway, and treat them as though they were four way stops? That's the way it is everywhere I've ever lived. Is it different in Ann Arbor?

No. The basic traffic code still applies. Drivers on a highway wouldn't have to stop at an intersection with a smaller, local street that has a traffic light that lost power. This is stupid, and the legislature should change it.

As somebody who has nearly been run over a few times, while trying to walk across a street, I welcome the proposed changes.

/Would rather not temp fate.

Also the same behavior I would expect out of clueless conservative nutjobs.

So if cars stop for some jackass who stands on the corner, who is just standing there watching traffic and never intending to cross,,,, Can we beat the shiat out of the jackass for having to stop, due to some stupid law that would have the cops beating you up for not stopping.

/Next up on the docket: Should the cops ticket asshole bicycle riders, for causing accidents, via the rider failing to abide by traffic laws.

Good luck trying to cross a street at a crosswalk in California. Seriously, good luck, it won't happen, ever. The way I have to get asshats to slam on their breaks is to wave my arms and yell, jumping and hopping and just waltz right into that crosswalk, hoping i will get hit by someone with insurance, a high income and terrible lawyers. Better odds at winning the Martian Lottery.

Sorry drivers but crosswalks are there for the simple reason that no one would ever be able to cross a street at all in many cities. Yes, you pay the gasoline taxes which supposedly all go to pay for roads ( haha keep on believing that lie ), but that doesn't make them "your" road -- as I often have to remind every single driver I know. And some even aim for pedestrians and cyclists, screaming about being delayed, angry about these hippy walkers and cyclists making them even more angry in an angry day of anger.

Fark you asshats. The next time I am hit in a crosswalk by some asshat in an SUV not yielding will be the time I go to prison. I am packing now because I have been hit so many times by Road Owners, including in crosswalks with the right of way.. Your move.

/Back off!

Something tells me neither the police or the citizen drivers will even bother with this kinda bullcrap traffic law. Imagine how many people could be ticketed in a single day. Not to mention the potential unintentional side effect of drivers hitting cars because they were paying too much attention to the sidewalk looking for pedestrians that feign the slightest interest in crossing.

ricewater_stool: sigdiamond2000: FTFA:

It now states that when traffic control signals are not in place or not in operation, drivers must stop - before entering a crosswalk - and yield to any pedestrians "stopped at the curb or ramp leading to a crosswalk." Drivers also must continue to stop for pedestrians within crosswalks, and without regard to which portion of the roadway the pedestrian is using.

Completely, utterly insane.

Vehicles yielding to pedestrians at crosswalks? What is this, Soviet Russia?

You're missing the point. Michigan state law already mandates that cars stop for pedestrians in a crosswalk. The Ann Arbor law ups that to if a pedestrian is "about to enter or approaching a crosswalk" cars must stop. So a driver is supposed to be monitoring the sidewalk for people who might decide to cross the street, i.e. predicting intent. It's really, really stupid. I drive though Ann Arbor several times a week and I have personally witnessed several near accidents because of this.

Monitoring the road and things about to enter the road is called driving. Do you only look directly forward when driving in Michigan?

FloydA: When traffic lights are not working, aren't drivers supposed to stop at all intersections anyway, and treat them as though they were four way stops? That's the way it is everywhere I've ever lived. Is it different in Ann Arbor?

I think every place you have ever been has "recommended" that intersections with non-functional traffic control devices be treated like a 4 way stop. It's a common misconception that the law mandates it. In most places, what happens under the law is that the intersection simply changes from a controlled intersection to an uncontrolled intersection and drivers must follow the rules of uncontrolled intersections.

This headline was not worthy of Fark and whoever gave it the go ahead should be removed.

GAT_00: So this means those protestors hit by the car in DC would be OK? Why don't Republicans like this?

All those republicans in Ann Arbor. They have a bigger lock on the place than Martha's Vineyard.

Pedestrian ordnance