Slashdot Mirror
NJ Legislator Proposes Fine For Walking While Phone-Distracted (philly.com)
schwit1 writes: A bill proposed this week by Assemblywoman Pamela R. Lampitt (D., Camden) would impose a fine of up to $50 and possibly 15 days in jail for pedestrians caught using their cellphones without hands-free devices while walking on public sidewalks and along roadways. If the bill becomes law, 'petextrians' — people who text while walking — would face the same penalties as jaywalkers in New Jersey. From the article: Researchers say distracted walkers are more likely to ignore traffic lights or fail to look both ways before crossing the street. ... Lampitt said she wants that message to hit home in New Jersey for pedestrians and motorists who could easily be distracted while looking at mobile devices. Her bill, however, faces an uncertain future in the Legislature. It has not been posted for a vote and Lampitt acknowledged she might have a tough time getting it passed." Distracted pedestrians surely pose some risks, but they don't budge the needle compared to overbearing officialdom.
to give police to arrest someone for some other pretense.
Distracted pedestrians (and anyone else distracted while doing something else) just need to be properly assigned responsibility for the problems they cause.
If a distracted pedestrian, not obeying traffic laws gets mowed down, then that is on them, 100%. Driver walks away scot-free. If they cause an accident, they pay for damages, 100%. If they cause any financial hardship on anyone for their distractedness, they own it, 100%.
Oh, but wait. That requires a society that recognizes personal responsibility and this is the US we are talking about here. Never mind silly old me.
In a state where everything is legislated, the people in it are assumed by the state to be mindless slaves who would stop functioning without constant instruction in minute details of life. And they are probably correct in that judgement.
You should take these stories personally. I think it would be difficult to over react. You can see countless examples of such laws already enacted.
You think you're so intelligent that such laws would never affect you. But there are such laws that affect you.
Instead of making excuses for the signs of your government's tyranny, you should inventory the examples.
I think most anyone who has the discipline to do this will come to the conclusion that they are not a respected citizen of the state.
Maybe if enough people were to harden themselves in this way there could be an opportunity for freedom for those who deserve it.
If you're not jaywalking, what's the problem? If you are jaywalking, then you can already be cited for jaywalking.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Who spend their time diddling away at ridiculous bills when there are real problems to be solved.
It's worth noting here that all laws are, by their very definition, "evil". If such a term truly exists, then surely it applies to the deprivation of natural rights by a foreign body.
Now, in some cases the alternative is worse than the law; it's a necessary evil. We can all agree that a law prohibiting the taking of a human life for sport to be a better evil than the alternative. However, it doesn't diminish the threat laws impose upon the governed.
I wish more people understood this. At the very least, I wish our law makers understood this rather basic concept. If they did, we might never have to deal with idiotic laws like the one proposed.
Dear Assemblywoman Pamela R. Lampitt, I propose a new law; No legislating while drunk, which you so clearly are if you think this is a good use of the public's energy.
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
dictating your lives since you had lives to dictate.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
+1. It's virtually impossible for a "distracted" pedestrian to injure a driver, but very easy for a driver to kill a pedestrian. Responsibility should fall on those who are creating the most risk for others.
An earlier proposal — from Ms. Lampitt's fellow female Democrat from Essex — would've made it mandatory for bicycles to be registered in the State.
Kinda reflects badly on the national Party trying to portray itself as the defender of personal freedoms and individual rights.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Because jaywalking laws aren't enforced, so we totally need another law. /s
It's like all of the "State Law: Keep right except to pass" signs on the highway here that work soooo well. Nobody keeps right except to pass because it's not enforced, so a new law was passed that mandated these signs being placed on the highway (instead of mandating that the actual law be enforced). Obviously, nobody's driving habits changed.
If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
Same penalty for jaywalkers, as in a law that cops would never enforce
In California a few weeks back work colleagues kept dragging me back to stop me crossing empty roads in case the police stopped me for jaywalking.
It really is an asinine and pointless law. It also slowed down drivers as I had to wait on an empty road for a light to turn red, by which time a car had arrived and had to stop for me to cross. If I'd just walked over when I reached the road I'd have been across and gone with no delay to myself or the car.