Welcome Guest!
In order to take advantage of all the great features that Waterloo Region Connected has to offer, including participating in the lively discussions below, you're going to have to register. The good news is that it'll take less than a minute and you can get started enjoying Waterloo Region's best online community right away.
or Create an Account




Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Distracted Walking, Cycling, and Driving
#16
(01-04-2019, 01:56 PM)creative Wrote: “a bicycle is a vehicle, just like a car or truck.”

I’m all for the new distracted driving laws. They just need to apply to all. Twice last summer, while cycling, I was almost t-boned by a distracted cyclist. I also walk a lot in the summer and am constantly having close encounters with distracted cyclists riding on the sidewalk.

No, they don't need to apply to all. You are arguing a false equivalence. The potential for damage in a car is very high. The potential for damage on a cycle is moderate. I think you're right that rules around distracted cycling would be beneficial, but I do not at all agree with your assertion that they should be identical.
Reply


#17
Since we’re already completely off-topic, due to trolling, and this has become another pointless war thread between mode users, I’ll point out that on my bike ride at lunch I encountered ten distracted pedestrians I either had to yell at or ding my bell at repeatedly because they were staring at their phones or had headphones on, and weren’t paying attention, and would have caused a crash. This is on Multi-Use Trails where the expectation is that there are other people around them sharing the space.
Reply
#18
I find distracted pedestrians annoying too, sometimes I have to slow down, yell loudly, even wait behind them, but I could not care less about that, in the face of the many drivers who put my life in real danger every day for the same activity.

Complaining about distracted walking in this context is a false equivalence, distracted drivers kill hundreds and maim tens of thousands of Canadians, distracted walkers annoy the same number. But these are not the same thing.

When a driver looks down at their phone for 5 seconds on the average road in KW, they'll travel almost 100 meters, when I do the same thing as a pedestrian, I'll barely travel the width of some of our lanes.

If I'm looking down on my phone and walk head long into someone, I'll impart about 108 joules onto them, and I'm a big guy. If a driver does the same thing, they could impart up to 295, 745 joules onto whatever they hit, although most likely, whatever they hit will not absorb all the energy, and the car will simply proceed through whatever they hit.

These things are not equivalent. The fatality and injury numbers prove this out. The physics proves this out. The only place we see driving and walking being treated equivalently is by certain groups of people, who say things like "pedestrians and drivers both need to make sure our roads are safe".

/fully off topic
Reply
#19
(01-04-2019, 04:17 PM)Canard Wrote: Since we’re already completely off-topic, due to trolling, and this has become another pointless war thread between mode users, I’ll point out that on my bike ride at lunch I encountered ten distracted pedestrians I either had to yell at or ding my bell at repeatedly because they were staring at their phones or had headphones on, and weren’t paying attention, and would have caused a crash. This is on Multi-Use Trails where the expectation is that there are other people around them sharing the space.

I find complaints about other users frustrating and distracting as well, but discussing whether or not the new laws apply to different modes is entirely on topic.

MUTs are relatively new to this area and it's going to take pedestrians time to adapt to them. Cyclists have the most burden of knowledge of any mode of transportation, because we don't really get dedicated infrastructure. Be as accommodating to pedestrians on MUTs as you want cars to be to you on a road.
Reply
#20
(01-04-2019, 05:21 PM)robdrimmie Wrote:
(01-04-2019, 04:17 PM)Canard Wrote: Since we’re already completely off-topic, due to trolling, and this has become another pointless war thread between mode users, I’ll point out that on my bike ride at lunch I encountered ten distracted pedestrians I either had to yell at or ding my bell at repeatedly because they were staring at their phones or had headphones on, and weren’t paying attention, and would have caused a crash. This is on Multi-Use Trails where the expectation is that there are other people around them sharing the space.

I find complaints about other users frustrating and distracting as well, but discussing whether or not the new laws apply to different modes is entirely on topic.

MUTs are relatively new to this area and it's going to take pedestrians time to adapt to them. Cyclists have the most burden of knowledge of any mode of transportation, because we don't really get dedicated infrastructure. Be as accommodating to pedestrians on MUTs as you want cars to be to you on a road.

I don't think this is true, the IHT has been here for decades...the trails near the university, equally as long I believe.
Reply
#21
(01-04-2019, 04:17 PM)Canard Wrote: Since we’re already completely off-topic, due to trolling, and this has become another pointless war thread between mode users, I’ll point out that on my bike ride at lunch I encountered ten distracted pedestrians I either had to yell at or ding my bell at repeatedly because they were staring at their phones or had headphones on, and weren’t paying attention, and would have caused a crash. This is on Multi-Use Trails where the expectation is that there are other people around them sharing the space.

For what it's worth, if I recall correctly, 'distracted pedestrians' can also be charged. Not in Canada, but in other parts of the world. Very little value of any electronic device if you're in motion and in control of your motion.
Reply
#22
(01-04-2019, 06:11 PM)jeffster Wrote:
(01-04-2019, 04:17 PM)Canard Wrote: Since we’re already completely off-topic, due to trolling, and this has become another pointless war thread between mode users, I’ll point out that on my bike ride at lunch I encountered ten distracted pedestrians I either had to yell at or ding my bell at repeatedly because they were staring at their phones or had headphones on, and weren’t paying attention, and would have caused a crash. This is on Multi-Use Trails where the expectation is that there are other people around them sharing the space.

For what it's worth, if I recall correctly, 'distracted pedestrians' can also be charged. Not in Canada, but in other parts of the world. Very little value of any electronic device if you're in motion and in control of your motion.

Yes, there are a number of jurisdictions which have created utterly ridiculous laws against pedestrians walking.  In some places those penalties are actually more severe and applied more broadly than if you're driving.

Of course, none of those laws are in any way a response to a real problem, and are instead an attempt to create distraction, false fairness, or otherwise absolving drivers of responsibility.

You'll find that you can in fact operate a mobile phone while walking quite easily.  When you're only traveling 1-2 meters per second, it isn't challenge to also be aware of your surroundings, as they change very slowly, this means it isn't even dangerous most of the time.
Reply


#23
(01-04-2019, 02:11 PM)Rainrider22 Wrote:
(01-04-2019, 01:56 PM)creative Wrote: “a bicycle is a vehicle, just like a car or truck.”

I’m all for the new distracted driving laws. They just need to apply to all. Twice last summer, while cycling, I was almost t-boned by a distracted cyclist. I also walk a lot in the summer and am constantly having close encounters with distracted cyclists riding on the sidewalk.

no it isn't for the purpose of Criminal Driving offences and Rule of the road under the Ontario Highway traffic act. A bicycle is a vehicle but not a motor vehicle.... big difference.  You can ride a bicycle if you are a suspended driver which is a vehicle, not a motor vehicle.  A garden tractor is a motor vehicle as an example, you cant operate it even on private property if you are suspended for a criminal code violation...

Are you sure about that? It wouldn’t make sense if true. You don’t need a license to operate a garden tractor on private property (right?), so why would it be a problem if your license was suspended? Now, I’m guessing that most employers for whom you might operate a garden tractor will require a (presumably non-suspended) license, but that is separate from the law.
Reply
#24
(01-04-2019, 06:29 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: You'll find that you can in fact operate a mobile phone while walking quite easily.  When you're only traveling 1-2 meters per second, it isn't challenge to also be aware of your surroundings, as they change very slowly, this means it isn't even dangerous most of the time.

I'm afraid to say, quite frankly, that is your opinion of your abilities. I could also have the opinion (I don't, for what it's worth), that I think I can drive a car and operate a mobile phone at the same time. But it does not make it right.

Most pedestrians I have negative interfaces with on my bicycle are so engrossed in their devices they are absolutely oblivious to everything around them - maybe 0.5 m radius at most, but often less. One time I actually completely stopped my bike just to see what would happen, and just stood there. I waited.... until they walked... right... into... me. Then they looked up with the most horrified look you could imagine, completely shocked and surprised.

But, back to the topic at hand.

How have other countries handled similar bans? Did they start right after mobile devices (smartphones, really) took off, so there was always a culture of not using them while driving? When in Florida in November I was very surprised at the number of people carelessly chatting away or typing, while driving - I guess they don't have any laws there about it (or the penalty/enforcement is low).
Reply
#25
(01-04-2019, 07:14 PM)Canard Wrote:
(01-04-2019, 06:29 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: You'll find that you can in fact operate a mobile phone while walking quite easily.  When you're only traveling 1-2 meters per second, it isn't challenge to also be aware of your surroundings, as they change very slowly, this means it isn't even dangerous most of the time.

I'm afraid to say, quite frankly, that is your opinion of your abilities.  I could also have the opinion (I don't, for what it's worth), that I think I can drive a car and operate a mobile phone at the same time.  But it does not make it right.

Most pedestrians I have negative interfaces with on my bicycle are so engrossed in their devices they are absolutely oblivious to everything around them - maybe 0.5 m radius at most, but often less.  One time I actually completely stopped my bike just to see what would happen, and just stood there.  I waited.... until they walked... right... into... me.  Then they looked up with the most horrified look you could imagine, completely shocked and surprised.

But, back to the topic at hand.

How have other countries handled similar bans?  Did they start right after mobile devices (smartphones, really) took off, so there was always a culture of not using them while driving?  When in Florida in November I was very surprised at the number of people carelessly chatting away or typing, while driving - I guess they don't have any laws there about it (or the penalty/enforcement is low).

It's an opinion backed up by physics, statistics, and even your anecdote.  Stats show walking injuries, unlike vehicle collisions, have not gone up with mobile phone use. Physics dictates I am more able to maintain situational awareness because the flow of information is much slower, and physics also dictates the possibility of harm is vastly lower. As for your anecdote, what happened when the person walked into you, they were embarrassed, and you were annoyed, as opposed to you being hospitalized or worse, if they were in a car.

A driver might have the opinion they can use a mobile phone and drive, by I have statistics, physics, and anecdotes which say they can't.

As for the laws, I'm not sure more broadly, in the US at least, states vary quite a bit on this, in many states it is entirely legal to text and drive [1], in fact, there are states where literally drinking while driving a car is legal [2].  Many of these states often have as expected, a higher than average number of traffic collisions.

Florida specifically seems to have limited restrictions and so called "secondary" enforcement, I'm not sure what is meant by that.

So far as I understand, most laws have been reactionary to the traffic collision statistics (and some states are just don't seem to react to traffic deaths at all). To us in this forum, and generally today, the danger makes sense, but I don't think there was a real understanding at first (and even among some people today) that mobile phone use while driving is dangerous, or if I'm more cynical, people didn't care about that danger. For that matter, the first cell phones my family had, or really, were common, were car phones that *ONLY* worked in a car.

That being said, I have to wonder how many people you saw in Florida on their phones, I see probably a dozen people daily here texting and driving, and usually more in Toronto, and we have severe penalties, and I'll be generous and say moderate enforcement.

[1] http://www.ncsl.org/research/transportat...-laws.aspx
[2] https://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2012...tates.html

Edit: This article seems on point for this sidequest of a discussion: https://thebaffler.com/latest/whos-afrai...ian-fraade
Reply
#26
I can contribute a fun, on-topic story: Today I was driven into by a distracted driver!

We were in a parking lot and a woman pulled out of her parking spot spot, drove right into the side of our car as we were driving (slowly) past the front of her SUV. She admitted full fault, that she was tending to her baby in the back seat while pulling out, not looking where she was going.

Damage was relatively minor and I told her to take it easy and enjoy the rest of the sunshine on the day, it wasn't worth losing sleep over. Car is almost 10 years old, already has some other dings and scratches and I'll have it until it doesn't run anymore.
Reply
#27
Tending to her baby and driving? WTF is wrong with people?!
Reply
#28
At the time, I thought about this thread, smirked, and wondered if I should casually mention that it was a good lesson for the upcoming new Distracted Driving Laws... but left it alone, heh.
Reply


#29
(01-05-2019, 10:35 AM)jamincan Wrote: Tending to her baby and driving? WTF is wrong with people?!

And yet … isn't that explicitly excluded from the new distracted driving list?
Reply
#30
(01-04-2019, 09:44 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: It's an opinion backed up by physics, statistics, and even your anecdote.  Stats show walking injuries, unlike vehicle collisions, have not gone up with mobile phone use. Physics dictates I am more able to maintain situational awareness because the flow of information is much slower, and physics also dictates the possibility of harm is vastly lower. As for your anecdote, what happened when the person walked into you, they were embarrassed, and you were annoyed, as opposed to you being hospitalized or worse, if they were in a car.

I don't know how "walking injuries" are counted.

But certainly one of the key risks of distracted walking is that of a pedestrian-motor vehicle collision. A person who is not aware of his or her surroundings may walk into the way of an approaching motor vehicle. Yes, it's only injuring the pedestrian, but that's still an injury, or worse.
Reply
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »



Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

About Waterloo Region Connected

Launched in August 2014, Waterloo Region Connected is an online community that brings together all the things that make Waterloo Region great. Waterloo Region Connected provides user-driven content fueled by a lively discussion forum covering topics like urban development, transportation projects, heritage issues, businesses and other issues of interest to those in Kitchener, Waterloo, Cambridge and the four Townships - North Dumfries, Wellesley, Wilmot, and Woolwich.

              User Links