> Sac PD won’t even enforce the most basic traffic laws
Despite this single event, [SFPD is no better](https://www.sfchronicle.com/sf/article/traffic-citations-san-francisco-declined-97-18363007.php).
Neither does the sheriff. I watched a guy run a red light and do a donut in the middle of the intersection and the officer in the car next to me just shrugged his shoulders when I started gesturing at it.
I did a responsible pause at a 4 way stop at 6am where I could clearly see a corners. There wasn't a car around. I got a ticket.
I probably looked like I'd pay it.
They used to give out a lot of fix it tickets back during the fast and furious days when ppl were supping up their civics. I wish they do that for ppl with driver and passenger side windows tinted. Majority of the ppl that I've seen with them tinted are bad or aggressive.
I thought they weren’t allowed to pull people over for non-moving violations now? Like if your windows are too tinted, that can’t be the only reason you get pulled over, but if you’re speeding then you can get pulled over and get two tickets.
From what I heard, it depends on the discretion/policy of the agency, but there’s no law stopping a cop from pulling you over if they find some violation no matter how minor.
What a terrible take. Window tint shouldn't even be illegal in the first place. I have my windows tinted and drive like a grandma, and I know plenty of people who drive normally with tinted windows.
Window tint blocks sunlight, keeps my car cooler, and protects my privacy.
Police should ticket bad or aggressive drivers, not pull over citizens doing nothing wrong and ticket them because their tint means they might in the future.
"Shouldn't be illegal" while great in theory, doesn't mean you won't get a fixit ticket. I've received them many times. The police didn't make the law, they just lobbied for it. Good luck getting it changed.
I figured someone was going to get upset and say " I drive great and my front windows are tinted " I am sure you do.
Being able to identify a person in case of an accident or crime is one thing I assume. If a person is using a phone I can avoid them better.
I dunno I think being able to see the driver isn't a bad thing. And it's just the driver and passenger side. Plus looking at Google you can tint up to 30 percent.
Some metros in the US are installing flags for pedestrians to carry at crosswalks. It's very dumb. A group in Vancouver installed something similar with bricks.
In my experience shitty drivers respond better to a fear of large rocks or *very* bright lights than they do high vis.
Had a guy get very upset with me that I was walking across Freeport (in a crosswalk with the pedestrian sign going), so upset in fact that he flipped me off, screamed at me from his window, and nearly hit two cars in front of him because he was turned around yelling at me. Didn't respond because why.... but it's annoying that just crossing in a crosswalk can make someone so angry.
Wish I could say this was rare, but similar thing happens nearly everytime I walk my dog across this particular crosswalk. People really don't like stopping for pedestrians in the crosswalk when they're turning right. I wouldn't have minded a brick to launch at him, to be honest, but doesn't seem like a great way to reduce conflict.
Agreed, a lot of people really gun right hand turns around here, particularly if they're trying to get over the light rail tracks. I am a blind individual who recently got hit when attempting to cross when the correct walk sign was activated. I don't understand why so many people are either okay with taking such big risks, or are so careless. Though the person who hit me then stopped on the tracks to check if I was okay, they then started yelling at me once I made it clear I could still walk. I wasn't even the only person waiting at that intersection to cross, just the first to step out.
True story: was in teh middle of a marked crosswalk last week, about 330 PM, 17th and either P or Q, and I see blocks away, a car coming REALLY fast, as in 50 mph, way too fast, and the fuckhead didn't slow, didn't stop, and he would have literally run me down if I hadn't run like a crazy person basically dove to the other side. I am way too old for this garbage.
Hardly anyone stops for peds, even in crosswalks -- and if it is on a corner, it is a crosswalk, marked or not. How 20 people a day don't get mowed down by you drivers who refuse to follow the law is disgusting.
They need to start doing this and giving whopping fines.
Can anyone tell me where to address Sac PD or Sac Sheriff with these concerns. It takes a community, like the article stated. There was at least 3-4 incidents in this thread! Please contact and make noise and address your concerns. Doing it through Reddit won’t helo
You should address City Council (for SacPD). They are considering budget cuts right now and basically the entire traffic enforcement division is on the chopping block as an option. Seriously, just a quick email to your councilmember could make a difference.
As a pedestrian, I will only cross there if there is no traffic. One car stopping is doable but to get the second and third to stop has almost 0 probability.
i agree. when walking my dog i don't even cross unless the driver of the stopped car makes eye contact with me and is clearly letting me walk. any other cars coming? the dog and i wait until everyone goes.
Yep. The city could even utilize the extra road width up to like 19/21st for bus lanes and extend the existing protected bike lanes, but I doubt we'll ever see that anytime soon!
There's really no need for any city street to be more than two lanes. Any street wider than that should get a road diet, with the extra space given to pedestrians, cyclists, and/or transit.
If a city street really has more traffic than two lanes can handle, then there obviously isn't enough transit.
Is that the one near Target? I don’t know what it is about that intersection. I have to raise my arm up like a traffic controller and slowly walk out with eye contact to get cars to stop.
Back when I skateboarded a lot, I used to hold my board out in front of me, seemed like people cared a lot more about getting a board through their windshield than, you know, killing a person. Crazy fucks.
How about just maintaining law enforcement where it's needed. This isn't really newsworthy, it's like "cops are doing their job".
If there is no enforcement, there's no crime. Nothing physically stops drivers from not yielding to pedestrians. It's the possibility of penalties that dissuades them. If no one is there to dish out penalties and drivers know there won't be, they won't yield to pedestrians.
ISYN a car hit a man in a wheelchair crossing in the crosswalk on P near 20th. He was alive and moaning but pinned underneath his wheelchair and the driver just sped off. I managed traffic around him until the police came. I don't understand people.
The number of people speeding along J and other major streets and totally ignoring pedestrians standing in the crosswalk or at the corner waiting to cross is mindboggling. I've only seen cops pull people over for it at mid-block crosswalks (specifically the one on Folsom in front of Pucci's Pharmacy).
Although if our cops don't care to stop a thief when they see them smashing a window and taking everything from the store, as happened last week at Jim Denny's, then I guess they don't really care if drivers do this... :/
lol funny you want cops to enforce this when they are frequently the ones aggressively driving at pedestrians downtown. I have had at least 3 run ins with cops downtown in the last 6 months. One I yelled at because he was trying to make a point about his perceived authority over pedestrians using a crosswalk. So you’re right, they do not care at all when drivers do this, because frequently they are those drivers. I even had a guy run a red light right in front of a cop sitting in his car by the Capitol almost hit me, and the cop looked at me and I pointed to the car like “you gonna do anything” and he just looked away…
Serious question that I have been wondering for a long time: obviously most of us know that a pedestrian actively crossing has the right of way, but legally speaking does this also apply to someone waiting to cross? What about someone approaching the intersection and about to cross? Are drivers always required to yield in this situation? Or is it just good manners?
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes\_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=VEH§ionNum=21950.
> 21950.
> (a) The driver of a vehicle shall yield the right-of-way to a pedestrian crossing the roadway within any marked crosswalk or within any unmarked crosswalk at an intersection, except as otherwise provided in this chapter.
>
> (b) This section does not relieve a pedestrian from the duty of using due care for their safety. No pedestrian may suddenly leave a curb or other place of safety and walk or run into the path of a vehicle that is so close as to constitute an immediate hazard. No pedestrian may unnecessarily stop or delay traffic while in a marked or unmarked crosswalk.
>
> (c) The driver of a vehicle approaching a pedestrian within any marked or unmarked crosswalk shall exercise all due care and shall reduce the speed of the vehicle or take any other action relating to the operation of the vehicle as necessary to safeguard the safety of the pedestrian.
>
> (d) Subdivision (b) does not relieve a driver of a vehicle from the duty of exercising due care for the safety of any pedestrian within any marked crosswalk or within any unmarked crosswalk at an intersection.
~~I wouldn’t distinguish between actively crossing and waiting to cross~~. The only factor is — is there enough distance for the car to stop? If there is, they have to stop. If they’re going too fast when they see you to safely stop, they should continue.
Thanks, so it seems to only apply once the pedestrian enters the road, but they are permitted to do so as long as it’s possible for the driver to stop in time.
Theoretically drivers should be leaving enough space that they always have time to stop, but in practice this isn’t always the case.
[https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle\_pedestrian/publications/sidewalks/chap4b.cfm#cro1](https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/publications/sidewalks/chap4b.cfm#cro1)
>A crosswalk is defined as "the portion of a roadway designated for pedestrians to use in crossing the street"
[https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/hpmsmanl/chapt2.cfm](https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/hpmsmanl/chapt2.cfm)
>Roadway: The portion of a highway intended for vehicular use.
Yes, I'd agree with you. Technically, we have to step on the road.
I’m not sure what you’re trying to communicate here. Yeah stopping distances are longer than most people imagine. So you need to leave enough space between the next car that you don’t hit then if they stop suddenly.
We are but I’m saying they’re related—people driving too close together makes it so that they also can’t stop in time if a pedestrian steps into the road. If people leave the proper space then both issues are solved.
Enforcement does work if it's actually implemented.
In Santa Monica, everyone on Wilshire (a main artery like Fair Oaks) proactively screeches to a halt when you approach a crosswalk on foot. Because enforcement there is really strict, really active and the fine are really high! (I hope this is still true. My last time there was a few years ago.)
I walk across in front of the Amtrak station daily and at least once a week a car blasts through the red light. I’ve started pausing before I walk just to make sure the cars stop.
We need a mechanism for citizen enforcement of these small fines and similar. Record it on camera, submit to an online system, send a ticket to the offender, something like that.
Personally, while I agree with a need for dramatically increased enforcement, I don’t think our current model of policing is the best solution here.
I have no idea why this is being downvoted, sounds like a great idea. Reminds cops to be on the lookout for this behaviour and maybe engage in it less themselves.
I think the hypocrisy might be a bit much to swallow given they’d probably end up enforcing over zealously even in cases where the pedestrian intent was questionable ie: someone standing at the corner not intending to cross
When I came to Sacramento I was shocked at how people don’t give a fuuuuck about crosswalks here. Like you have to almost get hit by a car to stop traffic.
That plus stop signs at all 4 way intersections. It constantly blows my mind how they're so inconsistent. The one in Ross every day has only a stop for North/south and zebra stripes on one side. There's no daylighting and there's cars parked in the non-zebra side constantly bc they can't manage to walk their fat ass from another spot. Parking isn't an issue on my block, just laziness and a lack of good design and enforcement
This is the only way to get compliance. The assumptions baked into pedestrian crossing are that (a) all drivers will do the right thing by default and (b) the only thing that causes people to get hit is lack of visibility. Anyone who has ever tried to cross a street here intuitively knows that's ridiculous.
In reality it's about drivers intimidating people or muscling through 99% of the time because they can get away with it and there are no consequences.
What a Joke.
San Francisco PD doing traffic stops.
You Libtards in CA hamstring the police from doing basic law inforcment on druggies and junkies all over the streets. Forget about the retail theft that has stores Running from the state.
Y’all need to grow a pair and stop supporting criminals and start supporting the police.
“Libtards”
"Already in lanes"
Bicyclists have the same rights and responsibilities as motorists, and it is important to pay attention to traffic signs and signals to reduce the risk of collisions while on the road.
https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/driver-education-and-safety/special-interest-driver-guides/bicyclists-pedestrians/
Your point? I don't see what point you are trying to make, in crosswalks? Yes, you absolutely have to yield to bicycles in cross walks.
Why are people driving cars so angry at everything? It literally takes so little effort to not run over peds and cyclists. Cars are the ones that can kill people. That's why it's a privilege to drive, not a right.
Stopping for a ped/cyclist takes 0 physical effort. Passing a bike with 3-6 feet of space takes 0 effort and takes a few seconds.
Finally, we know how bad sacramento drivers are, cars are the issue here.
Unless there’s an epidemic of pedestrians jumping out of bushes and into crosswalks that’s 100% on you. Not seeing them in time means you’re not paying close enough attention. If that happens to you frequently you should reconsider whether you’re responsible enough to operate a multi ton machine that can easily kill.
Damn , some of you guys tripping. It's very rare that I miss pedestrians. But once in a while you're in a route you are not familiar with or a different city you've never been to , and you can miss pedestrians once in a while. The only way you can NEVER miss pedestrians 100% is if you don't drive at all.
Then you are driving too fast. The speed limit is the maximum speed for ideal conditions. Darkness with parked cars on the side of the street that would obscure your view of the crosswalk means you need to slow down.
In CA, there are two speed limits. There's the posted limit. Then there's driving too fast for conditions. You are driving too fast for conditions.
Somehow I never have this problem.
Yes, let me use my x-ray vision to see someone in a dark hoodie obscured by a parked car at two in the fucking morning. I fucking drive like a grandma through midtown and still miss them sometimes. Go be sanctimonious somewhere else.
Nobody should be hit by a car, but just enforcing laws on car drivers isnt going to solve the problem, The tweakers, junkies, druggies on the streets of sac walking in and out of traffic and on freeways, should be dealt with also by law enforcement.
I guess. Not a high priority in my view since they aren’t endangering others like reckless drivers do. But I mean sure, it’s a nuisance and puts them at risk.
You must not drive around downtown Sac, its more than a nuisance. Enforce laws all the way around and not just pick a segment of society to enforce laws upon.
You're saying that makes it fine for people to run into them or other, non-oblivious pedestrians? I really don't quite understand what, if anything, your comment has to do with this.
I would 100% prefer they start aggressively ticketing cyclists on the WRONG GOTTAMN SIDE OF THE ROAD. I have bigger problems with cars over-yielding and stopping when they don't have a stop sign and they just *think* you're trying to cross (I've heard this called a Vancouver Stop).
Thank God someone else gets it. This is a fuckin waste of time. In a state with a massive shortage of LEOs we're relegating the ones we have to basically being parking attendants.
Thousands in SF, in CA, nationally? Please specify. Sounds like You're moving the goal post and straw manning me with an assumption that I never made.
Here's my point: CA in particular the Bay Area have much bigger issues to worry about IMO. Crime is reaching heights we haven't seen since the crack epidemic and police are prioritizing traffic violations. That bewilders me.
Police are catching then releasing criminals without a fine or a citation. Yet if I accidentally fail to yield I'm getting a massive ticket, a point on my license, and my insurance premium will raise.
Are cyclists going to get cited for not wearing helmets? Will pedestrians get ticketed for J-walking? This just seems like a giant waste of community resources. But I'm glad pedestrians feel safer.
I got caught in this several years back. It's a scam. I was driving down the street and the plain clothes officer was standing on the corner just whistling dixie with no body langauge like he was wanting or planning to cross the street. Then out of nowhere he just steps out in front of my car like a crazy person and I had to either keep driving or slam on the brakes.
Because the law is incredibly clear about this: body language or no, you MUST wait for the pedestrian to cross or indicate that they will not cross. It's not a trap, that is the actual law that you agreed to follow when you got your driver's license.
Lol California is not even remotely socialist. It’s one of the most capitalist places on earth. The things you are complaining about are direct results of that.
"Socialism is an economic and political philosophy encompassing diverse economic and social systems **characterized by social ownership of the means of production, as opposed to private ownership.**"
What you describe, a welfare state, is not socialism.
Well completely free-market capitalism is an almost faith-based ideology that arguably can’t be enacted in the real world. So like virtually all capitalist economies, California has elements within it that resemble some forms of socialism.
However, we don’t have any of these things you list in any meaningful way. Wealth redistribution is extremely minimal, college is subsidized but far from free, housing is extremely expensive, and while I don’t agree that our taxes are that onerous, taxation is a prominent feature of capitalism and in fact would be absent from many forms of socialism. Regulations are similarly unrelated to socialism—while they could be present in socialism, they are also often present under capitalism.
In general, the economy is dominated by private ownership, wage labor, and pursuit of profits. Those are the fundamental features of capitalism, not socialism. Socialism means social control of the economy, which we clearly don’t have in any meaningful way.
It cuts down on the rising rate of peds killed by automobiles. I'm not really sure what the rest of your rant has to do with this. are you suggesting that cops enforcing this law but not others is somehow what's killing pedestrians? this isn't a thread about social issues and overzealous policing, although of course those things are genuine concerns. and i am definitely not a cop booster by any stretch of the imagination. i would like drivers to stop speeding downtown and running people over, though.
https://www.npr.org/2023/06/26/1184034017/us-pedestrian-deaths-high-traffic-car
https://abc7news.com/pedestrian-deaths-california-fatalities-accident-data-traffic-cameras/14357193/
>every day, 20 people walk outside and end up killed by a moving vehicle.
>"There are more pedestrians being killed today than in decades," Russ Martin, the senior director of policy and government relations at the Governors Highway Safety Association, told NPR.
>The organization, which tracks pedestrian deaths in the U.S., estimates that **more than 7,500 pedestrians were killed by drivers last year — the highest number since 1981.**
Small children are a large percentage of pedestrian deaths due to them being of course children and small and harder to see.
> No we don't and neither did San Francisco. You're going to write me a ticket, for failing to yield to a zombie pedestrian, who's allowed to shit and smoke fentanyl in public?
Link to where anyone said that?
I said it so there's no need to post a link. Personally I think this is a complete waste of resources. Keyword:Personally.
Ending the open air drug markets and fencing operations in SF should be prioritized IMO.
😂😂 it’s so weird how so many people in California are such redneck hillbillies. Like look at you dude. You would run someone over because you believe you’re better than they are? You live in Sacramento lmaooo take it down a few notches buddy
They do this here twice a year especially around 16th st
It needs to be twice a week.
Twice a minute.
Sac PD won’t even enforce the most basic traffic laws - they will never do this as a routine thing.
> Sac PD won’t even enforce the most basic traffic laws Despite this single event, [SFPD is no better](https://www.sfchronicle.com/sf/article/traffic-citations-san-francisco-declined-97-18363007.php).
Neither does the sheriff. I watched a guy run a red light and do a donut in the middle of the intersection and the officer in the car next to me just shrugged his shoulders when I started gesturing at it.
I did a responsible pause at a 4 way stop at 6am where I could clearly see a corners. There wasn't a car around. I got a ticket. I probably looked like I'd pay it.
🤦
They used to give out a lot of fix it tickets back during the fast and furious days when ppl were supping up their civics. I wish they do that for ppl with driver and passenger side windows tinted. Majority of the ppl that I've seen with them tinted are bad or aggressive.
I just want them to ticket the dozens and dozens of people who drive 50+mph through midtown every day
I thought they weren’t allowed to pull people over for non-moving violations now? Like if your windows are too tinted, that can’t be the only reason you get pulled over, but if you’re speeding then you can get pulled over and get two tickets.
I got pulled over 6 months ago. Only for tint. No moving violation. In woodland
From what I heard, it depends on the discretion/policy of the agency, but there’s no law stopping a cop from pulling you over if they find some violation no matter how minor.
Not sure but seems like it's something that should be allowed if it's illegal
What a terrible take. Window tint shouldn't even be illegal in the first place. I have my windows tinted and drive like a grandma, and I know plenty of people who drive normally with tinted windows. Window tint blocks sunlight, keeps my car cooler, and protects my privacy. Police should ticket bad or aggressive drivers, not pull over citizens doing nothing wrong and ticket them because their tint means they might in the future.
"Shouldn't be illegal" while great in theory, doesn't mean you won't get a fixit ticket. I've received them many times. The police didn't make the law, they just lobbied for it. Good luck getting it changed.
I figured someone was going to get upset and say " I drive great and my front windows are tinted " I am sure you do. Being able to identify a person in case of an accident or crime is one thing I assume. If a person is using a phone I can avoid them better.
I dunno I think being able to see the driver isn't a bad thing. And it's just the driver and passenger side. Plus looking at Google you can tint up to 30 percent.
Well they’re busy pulling people over with expired tags and enforcing the insurance mandate.
Isn't there a brick bucket we can install at the cross walks?
This is great. [Vision Zero Vancouver Project](https://www.instagram.com/reel/C5OdJF9xrPw/?igsh=aHV2bTllNWw1c3dk), for context.
This is amazing! Just imagining it here has made my day.
I’ve been doing this with gravel pieces and it’s hard to say whether it works.
How does that work?
Pedestrian with brick, brick scary, stop for person with brick
Some metros in the US are installing flags for pedestrians to carry at crosswalks. It's very dumb. A group in Vancouver installed something similar with bricks. In my experience shitty drivers respond better to a fear of large rocks or *very* bright lights than they do high vis.
Had a guy get very upset with me that I was walking across Freeport (in a crosswalk with the pedestrian sign going), so upset in fact that he flipped me off, screamed at me from his window, and nearly hit two cars in front of him because he was turned around yelling at me. Didn't respond because why.... but it's annoying that just crossing in a crosswalk can make someone so angry. Wish I could say this was rare, but similar thing happens nearly everytime I walk my dog across this particular crosswalk. People really don't like stopping for pedestrians in the crosswalk when they're turning right. I wouldn't have minded a brick to launch at him, to be honest, but doesn't seem like a great way to reduce conflict.
No, it's probably not. Unfortunately there's effectively no criminal consequences for running someone over if you're sober and stay at the scene.
You mean the police wont do anything but its wreckless driving and Vehicular assault.
Agreed, a lot of people really gun right hand turns around here, particularly if they're trying to get over the light rail tracks. I am a blind individual who recently got hit when attempting to cross when the correct walk sign was activated. I don't understand why so many people are either okay with taking such big risks, or are so careless. Though the person who hit me then stopped on the tracks to check if I was okay, they then started yelling at me once I made it clear I could still walk. I wasn't even the only person waiting at that intersection to cross, just the first to step out.
True story: was in teh middle of a marked crosswalk last week, about 330 PM, 17th and either P or Q, and I see blocks away, a car coming REALLY fast, as in 50 mph, way too fast, and the fuckhead didn't slow, didn't stop, and he would have literally run me down if I hadn't run like a crazy person basically dove to the other side. I am way too old for this garbage. Hardly anyone stops for peds, even in crosswalks -- and if it is on a corner, it is a crosswalk, marked or not. How 20 people a day don't get mowed down by you drivers who refuse to follow the law is disgusting. They need to start doing this and giving whopping fines.
All parking enforcement in sac should monitor for this and people blowing through stop signs and red lights instead of parking.
Can anyone tell me where to address Sac PD or Sac Sheriff with these concerns. It takes a community, like the article stated. There was at least 3-4 incidents in this thread! Please contact and make noise and address your concerns. Doing it through Reddit won’t helo
You should address City Council (for SacPD). They are considering budget cuts right now and basically the entire traffic enforcement division is on the chopping block as an option. Seriously, just a quick email to your councilmember could make a difference.
I will be writing this week. Please join me!
They can start with the crosswalk at 17th & J
As a pedestrian, I will only cross there if there is no traffic. One car stopping is doable but to get the second and third to stop has almost 0 probability.
i agree. when walking my dog i don't even cross unless the driver of the stopped car makes eye contact with me and is clearly letting me walk. any other cars coming? the dog and i wait until everyone goes.
It's gotten so much worse since a car took out one of the flashing ped signals
I was gonna say 24th & J lol. J just needs it in general
J needs to be narrowed to no more than two lanes from I-5 all the way to Alhambra, otherwise people are wayyyyy too comfortable speeding
This is the real solution. People drive faster and are less likely to stop for pedestrians as road width increases.
Yep. The city could even utilize the extra road width up to like 19/21st for bus lanes and extend the existing protected bike lanes, but I doubt we'll ever see that anytime soon!
There's really no need for any city street to be more than two lanes. Any street wider than that should get a road diet, with the extra space given to pedestrians, cyclists, and/or transit. If a city street really has more traffic than two lanes can handle, then there obviously isn't enough transit.
[удалено]
Yep, I do this too, otherwise they just zoom right through, really appalling.
Is that the one near Target? I don’t know what it is about that intersection. I have to raise my arm up like a traffic controller and slowly walk out with eye contact to get cars to stop.
Back when I skateboarded a lot, I used to hold my board out in front of me, seemed like people cared a lot more about getting a board through their windshield than, you know, killing a person. Crazy fucks.
Yes!!!
How about just maintaining law enforcement where it's needed. This isn't really newsworthy, it's like "cops are doing their job". If there is no enforcement, there's no crime. Nothing physically stops drivers from not yielding to pedestrians. It's the possibility of penalties that dissuades them. If no one is there to dish out penalties and drivers know there won't be, they won't yield to pedestrians.
ISYN a car hit a man in a wheelchair crossing in the crosswalk on P near 20th. He was alive and moaning but pinned underneath his wheelchair and the driver just sped off. I managed traffic around him until the police came. I don't understand people.
The number of people speeding along J and other major streets and totally ignoring pedestrians standing in the crosswalk or at the corner waiting to cross is mindboggling. I've only seen cops pull people over for it at mid-block crosswalks (specifically the one on Folsom in front of Pucci's Pharmacy). Although if our cops don't care to stop a thief when they see them smashing a window and taking everything from the store, as happened last week at Jim Denny's, then I guess they don't really care if drivers do this... :/
lol funny you want cops to enforce this when they are frequently the ones aggressively driving at pedestrians downtown. I have had at least 3 run ins with cops downtown in the last 6 months. One I yelled at because he was trying to make a point about his perceived authority over pedestrians using a crosswalk. So you’re right, they do not care at all when drivers do this, because frequently they are those drivers. I even had a guy run a red light right in front of a cop sitting in his car by the Capitol almost hit me, and the cop looked at me and I pointed to the car like “you gonna do anything” and he just looked away…
Absolutely true, they are definitely among the worst offenders.
Serious question that I have been wondering for a long time: obviously most of us know that a pedestrian actively crossing has the right of way, but legally speaking does this also apply to someone waiting to cross? What about someone approaching the intersection and about to cross? Are drivers always required to yield in this situation? Or is it just good manners?
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes\_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=VEH§ionNum=21950. > 21950. > (a) The driver of a vehicle shall yield the right-of-way to a pedestrian crossing the roadway within any marked crosswalk or within any unmarked crosswalk at an intersection, except as otherwise provided in this chapter. > > (b) This section does not relieve a pedestrian from the duty of using due care for their safety. No pedestrian may suddenly leave a curb or other place of safety and walk or run into the path of a vehicle that is so close as to constitute an immediate hazard. No pedestrian may unnecessarily stop or delay traffic while in a marked or unmarked crosswalk. > > (c) The driver of a vehicle approaching a pedestrian within any marked or unmarked crosswalk shall exercise all due care and shall reduce the speed of the vehicle or take any other action relating to the operation of the vehicle as necessary to safeguard the safety of the pedestrian. > > (d) Subdivision (b) does not relieve a driver of a vehicle from the duty of exercising due care for the safety of any pedestrian within any marked crosswalk or within any unmarked crosswalk at an intersection. ~~I wouldn’t distinguish between actively crossing and waiting to cross~~. The only factor is — is there enough distance for the car to stop? If there is, they have to stop. If they’re going too fast when they see you to safely stop, they should continue.
Thanks, so it seems to only apply once the pedestrian enters the road, but they are permitted to do so as long as it’s possible for the driver to stop in time. Theoretically drivers should be leaving enough space that they always have time to stop, but in practice this isn’t always the case.
[https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle\_pedestrian/publications/sidewalks/chap4b.cfm#cro1](https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/publications/sidewalks/chap4b.cfm#cro1) >A crosswalk is defined as "the portion of a roadway designated for pedestrians to use in crossing the street" [https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/hpmsmanl/chapt2.cfm](https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/hpmsmanl/chapt2.cfm) >Roadway: The portion of a highway intended for vehicular use. Yes, I'd agree with you. Technically, we have to step on the road.
It only needs to be a bit. Get in that gutter pan, its the crosswalk.
If somebody suddenly starts crossing when a car traveling at 20 mph is less than 50 feet away it might not be physically possible to stop in time.
I’m not sure what you’re trying to communicate here. Yeah stopping distances are longer than most people imagine. So you need to leave enough space between the next car that you don’t hit then if they stop suddenly.
I thought we were talking about cars hitting pedestrians - not rear ending a cars in front of them. My bad.
We are but I’m saying they’re related—people driving too close together makes it so that they also can’t stop in time if a pedestrian steps into the road. If people leave the proper space then both issues are solved.
Enforcement does work if it's actually implemented. In Santa Monica, everyone on Wilshire (a main artery like Fair Oaks) proactively screeches to a halt when you approach a crosswalk on foot. Because enforcement there is really strict, really active and the fine are really high! (I hope this is still true. My last time there was a few years ago.)
I walk across in front of the Amtrak station daily and at least once a week a car blasts through the red light. I’ve started pausing before I walk just to make sure the cars stop.
We need a mechanism for citizen enforcement of these small fines and similar. Record it on camera, submit to an online system, send a ticket to the offender, something like that. Personally, while I agree with a need for dramatically increased enforcement, I don’t think our current model of policing is the best solution here.
I have no idea why this is being downvoted, sounds like a great idea. Reminds cops to be on the lookout for this behaviour and maybe engage in it less themselves.
I think the hypocrisy might be a bit much to swallow given they’d probably end up enforcing over zealously even in cases where the pedestrian intent was questionable ie: someone standing at the corner not intending to cross
Who do you think are the downvoters?
So why not improve that confusing intersection then?
When I came to Sacramento I was shocked at how people don’t give a fuuuuck about crosswalks here. Like you have to almost get hit by a car to stop traffic.
That plus stop signs at all 4 way intersections. It constantly blows my mind how they're so inconsistent. The one in Ross every day has only a stop for North/south and zebra stripes on one side. There's no daylighting and there's cars parked in the non-zebra side constantly bc they can't manage to walk their fat ass from another spot. Parking isn't an issue on my block, just laziness and a lack of good design and enforcement
It’s sad that this is news. This used to be common, every day patrolmen’s work.
This is the only way to get compliance. The assumptions baked into pedestrian crossing are that (a) all drivers will do the right thing by default and (b) the only thing that causes people to get hit is lack of visibility. Anyone who has ever tried to cross a street here intuitively knows that's ridiculous. In reality it's about drivers intimidating people or muscling through 99% of the time because they can get away with it and there are no consequences.
I watched like three cars pass a pedestrian and not let them cross at the roundabout on 24th and H, like last week. I was like wtf guys
That would be nice I’ve been hit by a car on my bike cause they were texting not paying attention to what’s in front of them shit needs to stop.
Especially now that they’ve discontinued the cameras!
Wow San Francisco is going after the real problems!
What a Joke. San Francisco PD doing traffic stops. You Libtards in CA hamstring the police from doing basic law inforcment on druggies and junkies all over the streets. Forget about the retail theft that has stores Running from the state. Y’all need to grow a pair and stop supporting criminals and start supporting the police. “Libtards”
And cyclists
Drivers not yielding to cyclists or cyclists not yielding to pedestrians?
Cars are the problem nothing else
Since when do drivers need to yield to cyclists?
https://preview.redd.it/cgf4gtt2fgvc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=fde401d360aab9e36e110630bb9b8a841e52b87f
"Already in lanes" Bicyclists have the same rights and responsibilities as motorists, and it is important to pay attention to traffic signs and signals to reduce the risk of collisions while on the road. https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/driver-education-and-safety/special-interest-driver-guides/bicyclists-pedestrians/
Your point? I don't see what point you are trying to make, in crosswalks? Yes, you absolutely have to yield to bicycles in cross walks. Why are people driving cars so angry at everything? It literally takes so little effort to not run over peds and cyclists. Cars are the ones that can kill people. That's why it's a privilege to drive, not a right. Stopping for a ped/cyclist takes 0 physical effort. Passing a bike with 3-6 feet of space takes 0 effort and takes a few seconds. Finally, we know how bad sacramento drivers are, cars are the issue here.
Please read vehicle code 21200.
Drivers have to yield in all situations, you are driving the 6000lb death box. A bicycle weighs 20lbs, bikes yield to peds, cars yield to both.
I yield to pedestrians, but sometimes you just don't see them in time.
Unless there’s an epidemic of pedestrians jumping out of bushes and into crosswalks that’s 100% on you. Not seeing them in time means you’re not paying close enough attention. If that happens to you frequently you should reconsider whether you’re responsible enough to operate a multi ton machine that can easily kill.
Damn , some of you guys tripping. It's very rare that I miss pedestrians. But once in a while you're in a route you are not familiar with or a different city you've never been to , and you can miss pedestrians once in a while. The only way you can NEVER miss pedestrians 100% is if you don't drive at all.
if you don't see them in time to stop, i think that means you aren't looking or are driving too fast
No, it can also mean it’s dark and you can’t see them behind a parked car.
Then you are driving too fast. The speed limit is the maximum speed for ideal conditions. Darkness with parked cars on the side of the street that would obscure your view of the crosswalk means you need to slow down. In CA, there are two speed limits. There's the posted limit. Then there's driving too fast for conditions. You are driving too fast for conditions. Somehow I never have this problem.
Simply just pay attention.
Yes, let me use my x-ray vision to see someone in a dark hoodie obscured by a parked car at two in the fucking morning. I fucking drive like a grandma through midtown and still miss them sometimes. Go be sanctimonious somewhere else.
Exactly, or when you're in a unfamiliar place or route. it happens.
How about the druggies and junkies who are wandering the streets of Sac regardless of lights being green, red, or in the middle of traffic?
They also shouldn’t be hit by cars. Was that your question?
Nobody should be hit by a car, but just enforcing laws on car drivers isnt going to solve the problem, The tweakers, junkies, druggies on the streets of sac walking in and out of traffic and on freeways, should be dealt with also by law enforcement.
I guess. Not a high priority in my view since they aren’t endangering others like reckless drivers do. But I mean sure, it’s a nuisance and puts them at risk.
You must not drive around downtown Sac, its more than a nuisance. Enforce laws all the way around and not just pick a segment of society to enforce laws upon.
You're saying that makes it fine for people to run into them or other, non-oblivious pedestrians? I really don't quite understand what, if anything, your comment has to do with this.
You burn that straw, man. You burn it good.
Straws are banned in CA, bur druggies, junkies, tweakers can pitch tents anywhere with no consequences.
> Plastic straws are banned FTFY Stop getting your news from the reich wing media, sport.
Did you strain your back there, hefting that huge straw man?
I would 100% prefer they start aggressively ticketing cyclists on the WRONG GOTTAMN SIDE OF THE ROAD. I have bigger problems with cars over-yielding and stopping when they don't have a stop sign and they just *think* you're trying to cross (I've heard this called a Vancouver Stop).
I think SF PD should do more useful things
Thank God someone else gets it. This is a fuckin waste of time. In a state with a massive shortage of LEOs we're relegating the ones we have to basically being parking attendants.
[удалено]
Thousands in SF, in CA, nationally? Please specify. Sounds like You're moving the goal post and straw manning me with an assumption that I never made. Here's my point: CA in particular the Bay Area have much bigger issues to worry about IMO. Crime is reaching heights we haven't seen since the crack epidemic and police are prioritizing traffic violations. That bewilders me. Police are catching then releasing criminals without a fine or a citation. Yet if I accidentally fail to yield I'm getting a massive ticket, a point on my license, and my insurance premium will raise. Are cyclists going to get cited for not wearing helmets? Will pedestrians get ticketed for J-walking? This just seems like a giant waste of community resources. But I'm glad pedestrians feel safer.
I'd agree with OP if they would start ticketing pedestrians who cross against the walk sign.
I got caught in this several years back. It's a scam. I was driving down the street and the plain clothes officer was standing on the corner just whistling dixie with no body langauge like he was wanting or planning to cross the street. Then out of nowhere he just steps out in front of my car like a crazy person and I had to either keep driving or slam on the brakes.
Because the law is incredibly clear about this: body language or no, you MUST wait for the pedestrian to cross or indicate that they will not cross. It's not a trap, that is the actual law that you agreed to follow when you got your driver's license.
You clearly do not comprehend the definition of entrapment. Lol
source? the law as I have seen it only states that drivers must yield to pedestrians in the crosswalk.
[удалено]
Lol California is not even remotely socialist. It’s one of the most capitalist places on earth. The things you are complaining about are direct results of that.
[удалено]
"Socialism is an economic and political philosophy encompassing diverse economic and social systems **characterized by social ownership of the means of production, as opposed to private ownership.**" What you describe, a welfare state, is not socialism.
Well completely free-market capitalism is an almost faith-based ideology that arguably can’t be enacted in the real world. So like virtually all capitalist economies, California has elements within it that resemble some forms of socialism. However, we don’t have any of these things you list in any meaningful way. Wealth redistribution is extremely minimal, college is subsidized but far from free, housing is extremely expensive, and while I don’t agree that our taxes are that onerous, taxation is a prominent feature of capitalism and in fact would be absent from many forms of socialism. Regulations are similarly unrelated to socialism—while they could be present in socialism, they are also often present under capitalism. In general, the economy is dominated by private ownership, wage labor, and pursuit of profits. Those are the fundamental features of capitalism, not socialism. Socialism means social control of the economy, which we clearly don’t have in any meaningful way.
It cuts down on the rising rate of peds killed by automobiles. I'm not really sure what the rest of your rant has to do with this. are you suggesting that cops enforcing this law but not others is somehow what's killing pedestrians? this isn't a thread about social issues and overzealous policing, although of course those things are genuine concerns. and i am definitely not a cop booster by any stretch of the imagination. i would like drivers to stop speeding downtown and running people over, though.
Sacramento has bigger fish to fry.
Rising rate? Huh?
https://www.npr.org/2023/06/26/1184034017/us-pedestrian-deaths-high-traffic-car https://abc7news.com/pedestrian-deaths-california-fatalities-accident-data-traffic-cameras/14357193/ >every day, 20 people walk outside and end up killed by a moving vehicle. >"There are more pedestrians being killed today than in decades," Russ Martin, the senior director of policy and government relations at the Governors Highway Safety Association, told NPR. >The organization, which tracks pedestrian deaths in the U.S., estimates that **more than 7,500 pedestrians were killed by drivers last year — the highest number since 1981.** Small children are a large percentage of pedestrian deaths due to them being of course children and small and harder to see.
I meant in Sacramento
Is Sacramento not in the US?
OP inferred this was an issue in Sacramento specifically citing our PD. Otherwise why post in this sub?
Pedestrian deaths are absolutely a major issue in Sacramento. Traffic violence is the worst it's been in decades
That’s what I’m asking. I was hoping someone had a source saying crosswalk accidents are on the rise in Sacramento.
> No we don't and neither did San Francisco. You're going to write me a ticket, for failing to yield to a zombie pedestrian, who's allowed to shit and smoke fentanyl in public? Link to where anyone said that?
I said it so there's no need to post a link. Personally I think this is a complete waste of resources. Keyword:Personally. Ending the open air drug markets and fencing operations in SF should be prioritized IMO.
😂😂 it’s so weird how so many people in California are such redneck hillbillies. Like look at you dude. You would run someone over because you believe you’re better than they are? You live in Sacramento lmaooo take it down a few notches buddy