Richmond RCMP pedestrian safety video accused of victim blaming draws online ire : vancouver

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

When a distracted pedestrian bumps into another, it is resolved with a "sorry!". However, a collision between a pedestrian and a motor vehicle means broken bones or worse.

Since the car is what turns collisions into tragedies, education campaigns should primarily focus on reminding drivers that they are operating a vehicle that can easily maim and kill, so they must be in the lookout for unprotected people.

Want to remind children to look both ways? Great. Because they are children. But when it comes to adults the campaign should remind drivers.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

LMAO @ them whining "but we worked really hard on it"

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Hey, RCMP! Put down the boson cream and do your fuckin jobs. Stop some stolen cars from being shipped to Africa, stop some handguns from crossing the US border, arrest a pharma exec for allowing so much of their product to hit the black market.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Hi I'm Gurt, and this is my brother, Bert!

If you're going onto the street, make sure you look both ways... And always stay alert!

STAY ALERT! STAY SAFE!

I never thought those safety rabbits message would become controversial.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

The problem isn't with reminding pedestrians to be alert. Nobody would have cared about that. The problem is that the ad portrays a driver on their phone being blatantly negligent and ignoring flashing amber lights after the pedestrian hit the crosswalk button. The ad implies it's somehow "equally" the pedestrian at blame if something happens, even though the pedestrian did everything they should reasonably be expected to do.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The pedestrian in the video wasn't paying attention to what was going on on the street. They had their hood up so they couldn't see traffic, were looking perpendicular to the traffic at all times, and had their earbuds in so they couldn't hear.

It's such a bizarre perspective to look at safety from a "fault" or "blame" perspective. It isn't about right, wrong, justice, or entitlement... If the choice is being "right" or being "dead".

It's entirely the drivers fault.

That doesn't imply that people shouldn't be actively involved in their own safety... By doing the most basic actions of merely using their eyes and ears.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It’s the responsibility of the individual to be aware for their own safety. Nobody else is gonna do it for them. In pedestrian vs car, pedestrian loses every time.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I don't know about you, but as a child I was taught pedestrians have right of way but to look both ways, etc. When I learned to drive, I was never taught that I should rely on either pedestrians or other drivers to always behave predictably. Literally the opposite. Where I'm at, people were even taught to slow down at crosswalks regardless of whether someone is there. (Maybe that part isn't universal, though?) The one in the fast-moving vehicle naturally has primary responsibility.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

People can choose to stand on moral high ground and say pedestrians have the right of way, or just realize all it takes is one distracted driver to either end their life, or change their life permanently with a serious injury.

Never something I’d ever trust another human with when it comes to my life.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

People can choose to stand on moral high ground and say pedestrians have the right of way, or just realize all it takes is one distracted driver to either end their life

You can and should do both.

And when a collision happens, the blame should lie on the person operating the heavier vehicle unless proven otherwise.

Education campaigns should reflect this: they should primarily focus on reminding drivers that they are operating a vehicle that can easily maim and kill, so they must be in the lookout for vulnerable road users such as pedestrians.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You can and should do both.

I really feel like this is exactly what happened in the video. The driver was like "oh shit, I should have been paying attention", and the pedestrian was like "oh shit, I should have been paying attention"

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Only one of them is putting other people in danger, though.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Literally nobody doesn't understand that.

The question at hand is if it appropriate to remind people that paying attention when you're crossing the street, because a driver may be distracted, is an appropriate thing to do.

Apparently, for some people the answer is a resounding "no", with a slight resonating harmonic of "and how dare you"

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Literally nobody doesn’t understand that.

And yet we see drivers speeding on a daily basis in densely populated areas with tons of foot traffic. Several pedestrians have been killed in the past decade in an intersection next to where I live. No, they were not "jaywalking", in every instance the drivers were speeding and ran over people on the sidewalk.

Apparently, for some people the answer is a resounding “no”, with a slight resonating harmonic of “and how dare you”

Perhaps being part of the community of people who are being killed has something to do with it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

My brother:

Despite the saturation of polarized media, the world does not exist as a set of mutually exclusive options.

Saying "Pedestrians can use their eyes and ears to help them avoid danger"

DOES NOT MEAN

Drivers, therefore, have no responsibility.

It's like you're reading words, and conjuring all kinds of meaning that is not there.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Saying “Drivers can use their eyes and ears to help them avoid danger”

DOES NOT MEAN

Pedestrians, therefore, have no responsibility.

It’s like you’re reading words, and conjuring all kinds of meaning that is not there.

If you read my comments in this thread you will see me explicitly saying that it is a good idea for pedestrians to look both ways, several times in fact.

My brother.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Then we agree, as you'll see that I also repeatedly state that drivers need to pay attention. I go so far as to say that ultimately, in an accident, the driver is at fault.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

And when a collision happens, the blame should lie on the person operating the heavier vehicle unless proven otherwise.

So when a pedestrian steps into traffic while messing around on the phone and there’s no evidence, of course they’ll deny doing anything wrong.

They’d be insane to do otherwise. So, we just blame the driver?

Take some responsibility people.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So, we just blame the driver?

Have you looked at official municipal statistics for who is at fault in pedestrian fatalities? Because I did and the yearly reports consistently show the driver being at fault in 75%-80% of the cases.

Take some responsibility people.

Indeed, indeed.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You said unless proven otherwise. I was going with your hyperbole. Maybe you should’ve gone with facts first instead and said “where fault is proven, the driver should be blamed?” And infact that’s already the case. Shocking!

But that sounds too reasonable for online.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

You said unless proven otherwise

I was referring to the burden of proof in the law. In my opinion blame should be placed on the heavier vehicle by default unless proven otherwise. Some jurisdictions like the Netherlands do exactly that. It makes drivers more cautious and it protects vulnerable road users.

And given that statistically drivers tend to be found at fault in pedestrian and cyclist fatalities even in Canada, there is even more reason to put the blame on them by default, in the absence of data to the contrary.

The law should protect the vulnerable. Shocking, I know.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

It’s up to the “vulnerable” to take some responsibility for taking care of themselves and not pretending the world cares about doing it all for them.

I say “vulnerable” because if they’re actually paying attention they’re not vulnerable at all, but that might mean taking their nose out of their phones for a portion of their lives.

Maybe distracted walking should be as much of a crime as distracted driving?

Not PC but that’s the way the world actually works, and it’s hard lesson to learn I’m sure.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I hope that whenever you find yourself in a vulnerable situation you will be met by people with empathy and care, rather than disdain.

In the meantime I also hope you don't run over anybody.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Thanks for the sentiment, however I take responsibility for my own safety. I don’t put that on others and live my life being a victim of other people’s choices.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If only life was that simple. Good luck.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It really is that simple if you take personal responsibility and don’t live life as a victim. It’s kind of an old fashioned idea though.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Tell that to the several people who were killed in an intersection close to where I live. Mowed down while they were walking in the sidewalk. Not even crossing, mind you.

If you think nothing bad will happen to you because you are responsible, think again. There is a lot that is not under our control, no matter how hard we would like it to be true.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You can keep trying to justify yourself to me but it won’t make a single difference you’re in some kind of strange fantasy world and now you’re just googling for stuff to support your point rather than listening to my facts. Whatever.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

now you’re just googling for stuff

I don't need to Google to learn what happened in my neighborhood. I saw the ambulances and the flowers left by their loved ones in the days after the collisions. Yes, collisions because it's happened twice in the same intersection in the past few years.

"Personal responsibility" is the weapon used by those who feel safe to justify not helping others who aren't as fortunate.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

Found the BMW driver.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 year ago

The pedestrians hit by the car when they had the right-of-way are buried right next to the ones who didn't. They weight 15 times your mass and are usually speeding. You.will.die so maybe still look and be alert.

It's gonna hurt your feels but you'll be alive.

Sincerely,

kid who walked down the boulevard of a highway used by logging trucks on the way to 4th grade and didn't die.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You're lucky, your pedestrians hit the crosswalk buttons? Here they just kind of stare at you expecting that's enough for you to stop, and the cyclists? You're lucky if they even slow down. When I was a kid they taught us to make eye contact with the driver before crossing, is that no longer normal? Maybe get off your damn phones.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Maybe get off your damn phones.

Interesting assumption there, but I'm Gen X. Analog childhood, digital adulthood. I love my computers but I tend to forget I even have a smartphone for most of my day.

If you think pedestrians with phones are so terrible for wanting to listen to music or talk on them while moving slowly though, I don't know what to tell you about people who are all armored up in a fast-moving vehicle. That said, I guarantee you more folks will give you the eye contact you crave if you get out of your car (unless they're neurodivergent or they were raised in a culture where eye contact is threatening or intimidating).

Vancouver