Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: "New York may ban iPods while crossing street"

Expand Messages
  • c1ttad1no
    ... Exactly right. The use, while negotiating shared public space, of devices that distract one from the here and now, while deadening/blocking/overloading
    Message 1 of 16 , Feb 7, 2007
      --- In carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com, Todd Edelman <edelman@...> wrote:
      >
      >
      > A person so zoned out in iPodland wont hear bicycle bells, the
      > engine of an approaching bus, their friend calling to them, or the
      > cries of a person needing help.


      Exactly right. The use, while negotiating shared public space, of
      devices that distract one from the here and now, while
      deadening/blocking/overloading physical senses that are required to
      maintain appropriate awareness of the environment and those with whom
      it is shared, is rude, dangerous, and dumb.

      Lose the iPods.


      -Doug (who mounted an air horn on his bicycle to penetrate
      gadget-induced obliviousness)
    • Elliot Schwartz
      ... I m not a big fan of iPods, but I d still argue against such a law. There is already not enough of an onus on those driving heavier, faster vehicles to be
      Message 2 of 16 , Feb 7, 2007
        Todd Edelman <edelman@...> writes:
        > What is the "real" problem? Cars, as you imply, or the larger issue of
        > people cutting themselves off from the streets they move on using ANY
        > type of technology?

        I'm not a big fan of iPods, but I'd still argue against such a law.

        There is already not enough of an onus on those driving heavier, faster
        vehicles to be responsible for their larger momentum. It seems that drivers
        can often get away with excuse like "I didn't see them" or "they came out
        of nowhere," and this would just be another excuse.

        Drivers should bear the responsibility of conducting their inherently
        dangerous activity as safely as possible, even if pedestrians are
        deaf, hearing impared, or wearing an iPod.

        elliot
      • dawie_coetzee
        I would also oppose such a law, firstly for the reason Elliot gives. The very unpredictability of pedestrian movement is an important factor that determines a
        Message 3 of 16 , Feb 8, 2007
          I would also oppose such a law, firstly for the reason Elliot gives.
          The very unpredictability of pedestrian movement is an important
          factor that determines a public space as a predominantly pedestrian
          space in which motor vehicles are rather awkward guests.

          But secondly, I would oppose such a law on the principle that
          endangering oneself is a basic human right. If iPod users are placing
          themselves at risk, I would go to great lengths to defend their right
          to do so. I mean in that way, not only by incurring state violence by
          resisting arrest...

          Thirdly, the absence of regulation (and the anonymity!) is one of the
          great appeals of the pedestrian mode of moving. What's next? Licence
          plates for pedestrians? Speed limits? Turn-signal epaulettes?

          There is an important cultural reason why pedestrians ought to be
          allowed to do pretty much whatever they bloody well like. In the
          West, we have little in the way of rites of initiation, except that
          one is an adult when one may cross the street unattended. Jaywalking
          laws are as insulting to Westerners as addressing him as "boy" is to
          an African man who has gone through agony to earn the right to be
          called "man".

          -Dawie


          --- In carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com, Elliot Schwartz <es@...> wrote:
          >
          >
          > Todd Edelman <edelman@...> writes:
          > > What is the "real" problem? Cars, as you imply, or the larger
          issue of
          > > people cutting themselves off from the streets they move on using
          ANY
          > > type of technology?
          >
          > I'm not a big fan of iPods, but I'd still argue against such a law.
          >
          > There is already not enough of an onus on those driving heavier,
          faster
          > vehicles to be responsible for their larger momentum. It seems that
          drivers
          > can often get away with excuse like "I didn't see them" or "they
          came out
          > of nowhere," and this would just be another excuse.
          >
          > Drivers should bear the responsibility of conducting their
          inherently
          > dangerous activity as safely as possible, even if pedestrians are
          > deaf, hearing impared, or wearing an iPod.
          >
          > elliot
          >
        • Todd Edelman
          Hi again, I am totally against any laws regarding using portable electronic devices whilst walking... on public transport it is a little different as it is a
          Message 4 of 16 , Feb 8, 2007
            Hi again,

            I am totally against any laws regarding using portable electronic
            devices whilst walking... on public transport it is a little different
            as it is a space in which you often cannot re-locate.

            It is also fine for people to be anonymous (you don't have to give your
            name if you help or smile at someone on the street...and so on...). The
            problem is being oblivious!

            The main reason for pedestrians to carry ID these days is so if a car
            hits them and they are killed or worse, their family members can be found.

            T

            dawie_coetzee wrote:
            >
            > I would also oppose such a law, firstly for the reason Elliot gives.
            > The very unpredictability of pedestrian movement is an important
            > factor that determines a public space as a predominantly pedestrian
            > space in which motor vehicles are rather awkward guests.
            >





            [...]

            --------------------------------------------

            Todd Edelman
            Director
            Green Idea Factory

            Korunní 72
            CZ-10100 Praha 10
            Czech Republic

            ++420 605 915 970
            ++420 222 517 832
            Skype: toddedelman

            edelman@...
            http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain

            Green Idea Factory,
            a member of World Carfree Network
          • c1ttad1no
            ... I think all this protesting about the sacred right of pedestrians to be free and unfettered while wandering unpredictably through the shared environment
            Message 5 of 16 , Feb 8, 2007
              --- In carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com, "dawie_coetzee"
              <dawie_coetzee@...> wrote:
              >
              > I would also oppose such a law, firstly for the reason Elliot gives.
              > The very unpredictability of pedestrian movement is an important
              > factor that determines a public space as a predominantly pedestrian
              > space in which motor vehicles are rather awkward guests.

              I think all this protesting about the sacred right of pedestrians to
              be free and unfettered while wandering unpredictably through the
              shared environment is, essentially, anti-social.

              At the very least, pedestrians, or others, involved in collisions
              (with vehicles, cyclists, other pedestrians, stationary hazards, etc.)
              while distracting themselves and deadening their senses should be
              presumed responsible, as motorists are presumed responsible for
              collisions with non-motorized traffic in some European nations.

              > But secondly, I would oppose such a law on the principle that
              > endangering oneself is a basic human right.

              Perhaps, but endangering others, or even impeding or inconveniencing
              them, for no better reason than entertainment or personal preference,
              is neither a right nor a privilege. If one wants to endanger oneself,
              it would be courteous to do so where others will not be affected,
              including by the trauma of witnessing or disposing of one's mangled
              corpse.


              -Doug
            • Andrew Hitchcock
              This is ridiculous. ... People have other senses besides there ears. If you are going to automatically blame people who have less-heightened senses, then you
              Message 6 of 16 , Feb 8, 2007
                This is ridiculous.

                c1ttad1no wrote:
                >
                >
                > --- In carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com
                > <mailto:carfree_cities%40yahoogroups.com>, "dawie_coetzee"
                > <dawie_coetzee@...> wrote:
                > >
                > > I would also oppose such a law, firstly for the reason Elliot gives.
                > > The very unpredictability of pedestrian movement is an important
                > > factor that determines a public space as a predominantly pedestrian
                > > space in which motor vehicles are rather awkward guests.
                >
                > I think all this protesting about the sacred right of pedestrians to
                > be free and unfettered while wandering unpredictably through the
                > shared environment is, essentially, anti-social.
                >
                > At the very least, pedestrians, or others, involved in collisions
                > (with vehicles, cyclists, other pedestrians, stationary hazards, etc.)
                > while distracting themselves and deadening their senses should be
                > presumed responsible, as motorists are presumed responsible for
                > collisions with non-motorized traffic in some European nations.

                People have other senses besides there ears. If you are going to
                automatically blame people who have less-heightened senses, then you are
                placing blame on deaf people, blind people, and the elderly.

                >
                > > But secondly, I would oppose such a law on the principle that
                > > endangering oneself is a basic human right.
                >
                > Perhaps, but endangering others, or even impeding or inconveniencing
                > them, for no better reason than entertainment or personal preference,
                > is neither a right nor a privilege. If one wants to endanger oneself,
                > it would be courteous to do so where others will not be affected,
                > including by the trauma of witnessing or disposing of one's mangled
                > corpse.

                I live near a college campus, the sidewalks are fairly crowded and many,
                many people use iPods or other digital audio players. Despite this, I
                have yet to see any 12 human pileups resulting in loss of life.
                Amazingly, people still know how to walk while listening to music.

                Meanwhile, people in my city are hit in crosswalks when they have the
                right of way even without using headphones.

                I used to wear headphones all the time when walking around. I don't now
                because I know lots of people so I'm always saying hi or stopping to
                chat. However, sometimes when I'm not feeling social (either deep in
                thought or in a bad mood), I'll use my iPod.

                If you want to ban all anti-social activities (such as listening to
                headphones in public), well, I might as well unsubscribe from this list
                now, because the carfree city you envision is very different than the
                carfree city I envision, and one in which I would not want to live.

                Andrew

                >
                > -Doug
                >
                >
              • c1ttad1no
                ... I don t think it is ridiculous at all. Indeed, I think that the angry, selfish insistence, by some here, on absolute freedom from responsibility for
                Message 7 of 16 , Feb 8, 2007
                  --- In carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com, Andrew Hitchcock <mail@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > This is ridiculous.

                  I don't think it is ridiculous at all. Indeed, I think that the
                  angry, selfish insistence, by some here, on absolute freedom from
                  responsibility for behavior in shared space, is profoundly immature
                  (at least in a sociological sense).

                  > People have other senses besides there ears.

                  They do, indeed. Hearing, however, is comparatively omnidirectional,
                  and is thus especially important in maintaining awareness, and
                  exercising judgment, while traversing shared public spaces.

                  > If you are going to
                  > automatically blame people who have less-heightened senses,

                  Please re-read what I have written. It says nothing about "blame."
                  Rather, I have spoken about responsibility.

                  > then you are
                  > placing blame on deaf people, blind people, and the elderly.

                  Of course I am not. People whose hearing, or sight, or mobility, is
                  impaired or altered by illness (or otherwise) are 1) very few in
                  number by comparison with the hordes of plugged-in space cadets and
                  cellphone yakkers who clog our streets and sidewalks, and 2) typically
                  especially alert and careful to maintain awareness of the
                  environment, and often specifically trained in methods for doing so.

                  In fact, the very presence of fellow humans who may not see, hear or
                  move with as much facility as others makes it incumbent upon the rest
                  of us to proceed with special caution and awareness.

                  > Amazingly, people still know how to walk while listening to music.

                  I believe that the evidence strongly suggests that they generally do
                  *not* walk safely, or with courtesy and respect for others, while
                  absorbed in an altered reality generated by recorded music, cellphone
                  conversations with distant people, peripatetic text messaging, etc.

                  Walk (or pedal, drive, skate, etc.) now. Chat and entertain yourself
                  later.


                  -Doug
                • J.H. Crawford
                  Hi All, Time to turn down the heat in this discussion. Your moderator, ... J.H. Crawford Carfree Cities
                  Message 8 of 16 , Feb 8, 2007
                    Hi All,

                    Time to turn down the heat in this discussion.

                    Your moderator,




                    ----- ### -----
                    J.H. Crawford Carfree Cities
                    mailbox@... http://www.carfree.com
                  • dawie_coetzee
                    ... list ... Thanks, Andrew. There is a disturbing tendency to associate urban social life with abject servility. I see an opposite potential -D
                    Message 9 of 16 , Feb 8, 2007
                      --- In carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com, Andrew Hitchcock <mail@...>
                      wrote:
                      >
                      > If you want to ban all anti-social activities (such as listening to
                      > headphones in public), well, I might as well unsubscribe from this
                      list
                      > now, because the carfree city you envision is very different than the
                      > carfree city I envision, and one in which I would not want to live.
                      >
                      > Andrew
                      >
                      Thanks, Andrew. There is a disturbing tendency to associate urban
                      social life with abject servility. I see an opposite potential -D
                    • Carlos F. Pardo SUTP
                      If an iPod is dangerous for a person moving along the street, what about a car? What about an SUV? -- Carlos F. Pardo Coordinador de Proyecto GTZ - Proyecto de
                      Message 10 of 16 , Feb 9, 2007
                        If an iPod is dangerous for a person moving along the street, what about
                        a car? What about an SUV?

                        --
                        Carlos F. Pardo
                        Coordinador de Proyecto
                        GTZ - Proyecto de Transporte Sostenible (SUTP, SUTP-LAC)
                        Cl 126 # 52A-28 of 404
                        Bogotá D.C., Colombia
                        Tel: +57 (1) 215 7812
                        Mobile: +57 (3) 15 296 0662
                        e-mail: carlos.pardo@...
                        Página: www.sutp.org
                      • eileen
                        Or what the TV in the SUV? e ... From: Carlos F. Pardo SUTP To: carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, February 09, 2007 8:33 AM Subject:
                        Message 11 of 16 , Feb 9, 2007
                          Or what the TV in the SUV?

                          e
                          ----- Original Message -----
                          From: Carlos F. Pardo SUTP
                          To: carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com
                          Sent: Friday, February 09, 2007 8:33 AM
                          Subject: [carfree_cities] Re: "New York may ban iPods while crossing street"


                          If an iPod is dangerous for a person moving along the street, what about
                          a car? What about an SUV?

                          --
                          Carlos F. Pardo
                          Coordinador de Proyecto
                          GTZ - Proyecto de Transporte Sostenible (SUTP, SUTP-LAC)
                          Cl 126 # 52A-28 of 404
                          Bogotá D.C., Colombia
                          Tel: +57 (1) 215 7812
                          Mobile: +57 (3) 15 296 0662
                          e-mail: carlos.pardo@...
                          Página: www.sutp.org





                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • kerstin heinrich
                          what is an Ipod , i am from a tri....you would call it third world, but we love bikes... eileen schrieb:
                          Message 12 of 16 , Feb 9, 2007
                            what is an Ipod , i am from a tri....you would call it third world, but we love bikes...

                            eileen <eileenbyrnes@...> schrieb: Or what the TV in the SUV?

                            e
                            ----- Original Message -----
                            From: Carlos F. Pardo SUTP
                            To: carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com
                            Sent: Friday, February 09, 2007 8:33 AM
                            Subject: [carfree_cities] Re: "New York may ban iPods while crossing street"

                            If an iPod is dangerous for a person moving along the street, what about
                            a car? What about an SUV?

                            --
                            Carlos F. Pardo
                            Coordinador de Proyecto
                            GTZ - Proyecto de Transporte Sostenible (SUTP, SUTP-LAC)
                            Cl 126 # 52A-28 of 404
                            Bogotá D.C., Colombia
                            Tel: +57 (1) 215 7812
                            Mobile: +57 (3) 15 296 0662
                            e-mail: carlos.pardo@...
                            Página: www.sutp.org

                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






                            ---------------------------------
                            Was ist Glück? Schlafen Fische überhaupt? Die Antworten gibt’s auf Yahoo! Clever.

                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          • Robert J. Matter
                            ... I used to listen to books on tape/CD while cycling in Chicago. I stopped because the street noise blared out too much of the material; sirens, construction
                            Message 13 of 16 , Feb 9, 2007
                              Todd Edelman wrote:

                              > By choice, I don't and never have used any kind of portable listening
                              > device on the street. I think it is an insult to the Street. I assume
                              > many people feel the same way. Why do we need to isolate ourselves while
                              > in public?
                              >
                              > I am not for a law making portable devices illegal while walking, and I
                              > recognize that their use brings pleasure on e.g. long commutes, but on
                              > the other hand I am very curious if many pedestrian-friendly and compact
                              > places also have low use of these devices. Personalised music doesn't
                              > make dangerous noise go away, it just covers it up.

                              I used to listen to books on tape/CD while cycling in Chicago. I stopped
                              because the street noise blared out too much of the material; sirens,
                              construction equipment, accelerating trucks, honking horns, L trains
                              passing overhead, etc. I just listen to music now (when the weather is
                              warmer) where such interruptions aren't critical. I don't think I could
                              tolerate listening to music at the volume it would require to block out
                              Chicago's street noise. As a matter of fact, I sort of consider my
                              headphones as personal safety equipment to protect my hearing. One time
                              a Chicago cop drove by me when I didn't have my headphones on and
                              sounded his buzzer (probably because I was riding outside the door
                              zone). It knocked out my hearing in my left ear for about 10 minutes and
                              my ears rang for about half an hour after that. When angry cagers honk
                              at me for taking a lane my headphones help muffle their loud, shrill
                              horns. I am less inclined to respond to their screaming at me to get off
                              the road, get on the sidewalk, etc. when I have headphones on too. I
                              always ride with a mirror so I know what's going on around me 360
                              degrees. Even with headphones I can still hear enough traffic noise to
                              not jeopardize my safety. I don't need to hear that traffic noise at
                              full volume.

                              --Bob Matter
                            • Todd Edelman
                              ... I WOULD imagine that using headphones while cycling is illegal in Chicago, but of course using a Bluetooth etc device in one ear while driving is not...
                              Message 14 of 16 , Feb 10, 2007
                                Robert J. Matter wrote:
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                > I used to listen to books on tape/CD while cycling in Chicago.
                                >



                                I WOULD imagine that using headphones while cycling is illegal in
                                Chicago, but of course using a Bluetooth etc device in one ear while
                                driving is not...

                                > I stopped
                                > because the street noise blared out too much of the material; sirens,
                                > construction equipment, accelerating trucks, honking horns, L trains
                                > passing overhead, etc.
                                >




                                GOOD point.

                                > I just listen to music now (when the weather is
                                > warmer) where such interruptions aren't critical. I don't think I could
                                > tolerate listening to music at the volume it would require to block out
                                > Chicago's street noise.
                                >




                                THERE is just too much noise in general.


                                > As a matter of fact, I sort of consider my
                                > headphones as personal safety equipment to protect my hearing. One time
                                > a Chicago cop drove by me when I didn't have my headphones on and
                                > sounded his buzzer (probably because I was riding outside the door
                                > zone). It knocked out my hearing in my left ear for about 10 minutes and
                                > my ears rang for about half an hour after that. When angry cagers honk
                                > at me for taking a lane my headphones help muffle their loud, shrill
                                > horns. I am less inclined to respond to their screaming at me to get off
                                > the road, get on the sidewalk, etc. when I have headphones on too.
                                >








                                I HAVE heard before on this list or elsewhere that emergency vehicles of
                                all sorts have actually had to increase the volume of their sirens and
                                things to compensate for automobiles being better insulated against
                                external noise and also because air conditioning is standard equipment,
                                so car windows are closed all the time. It might also be because drivers
                                are doing so many other things in their cars.

                                > I
                                > always ride with a mirror so I know what's going on around me 360
                                > degrees. Even with headphones I can still hear enough traffic noise to
                                > not jeopardize my safety. I don't need to hear that traffic noise at
                                > full volume.
                                >





                                HOW about the safety of others? Okay, I don't want to dwell on the issue
                                of cyclists saying they still hear enough with headphones on, but while
                                cycling I hear lots of important things which are barely audible above
                                the din, which tells me I should not wear headphones, even if I had
                                mirrors.

                                So it seems the situation we have is one where everyone is passing the
                                buck with their/of their habits, and it is going in a circle and we are
                                all suffering.

                                When there is almost no background noise EXTERNAL to my body, I hear a
                                ringing caused in part by exposure to some very loud music and other
                                sounds in the past. So even silence is not ideal.

                                T


                                >
                                > --Bob Matter
                                >
                                >
                                > _._,___


                                --
                                --------------------------------------------

                                Todd Edelman
                                Director
                                Green Idea Factory

                                Korunní 72
                                CZ-10100 Praha 10
                                Czech Republic

                                ++420 605 915 970
                                ++420 222 517 832
                                Skype: toddedelman

                                edelman@...
                                http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain

                                Green Idea Factory,
                                a member of World Carfree Network
                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.