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

Re: [carfree_cities] "New York may ban iPods while crossing street"

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 16 , Feb 7, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      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 2 of 16 , Feb 8, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        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 3 of 16 , Feb 8, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          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 4 of 16 , Feb 8, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            --- 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 5 of 16 , Feb 8, 2007
            • 0 Attachment
              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 6 of 16 , Feb 8, 2007
              • 0 Attachment
                --- 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 7 of 16 , Feb 8, 2007
                • 0 Attachment
                  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 8 of 16 , Feb 8, 2007
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- 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 9 of 16 , Feb 9, 2007
                    • 0 Attachment
                      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 10 of 16 , Feb 9, 2007
                      • 0 Attachment
                        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 11 of 16 , Feb 9, 2007
                        • 0 Attachment
                          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 12 of 16 , Feb 9, 2007
                          • 0 Attachment
                            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 13 of 16 , Feb 10, 2007
                            • 0 Attachment
                              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.