Crossing the Street

[Zinjanthropos]

Recently in Toronto there's been a spate of pedestrian deaths, people killed after being struck by a vehicle. This article here goes into more detail about this type of fatality worldwide. According to the piece, globally there's the equivalent of a plane full of pedestrians killed crossing the road every day, not to mention many times more injuries. 

So why aren't people more wary of traffic? Something as simple as looking both ways before one crosses the street seems like such an easy fix. I wonder if that's an inherent trait not all of us possess? Or is evolution not keeping pace with society? 

I watch birds at our feeders. They never stop scanning their surroundings for danger. Their eyes dart here and there as if a nervous habit and even if it is such, then it's an evolutionary trait that improves survival chances. 

Trying to think of when it became necessary for humans to look both ways before venturing forward. Would it coincide with the invention of roads,  or something more primitive like worrying about ambush along a jungle trail? We primarily resort to vision, did we use other senses in the past to find danger, know when to stop or run?

Perhaps some are better at calculating their chances when crossing traffic. If so is evolution lagging behind, hasn't adjusted to the speed at which potential danger can physically strike? Are we too consumed with our thoughts (too much on our minds) to make the proper judgments? Do we trust the other persons involved (drivers) too much?

[C C]

Recently in Toronto there's been a spate of pedestrian deaths, people killed after being struck by a vehicle. This article here goes into more detail about this type of fatality worldwide. According to the piece, globally there's the equivalent of a plane full of pedestrians killed crossing the road every day, not to mention many times more injuries. [...]

From that article:

The victims are disproportionately children, seniors and people of color, according to the report.

The elderly and kids are pretty much what I'd expect, for the obvious reasons. But why would people of color have higher risk, regardless of age?

[1] "African Americans make 26 percent more trips by foot than whites, while Hispanics make nearly 45 percent more trips by foot than whites. As a result—and because of constantly decaying transportation infrastructure in low-income communities of color—African Americans and Hispanics experience far more pedestrian fatalities."

Why wouldn't poor whites be similarly affected, or why are they seldom represented as suffering the same effects in studies?[3] Especially since when a subject like the "welfare state" or government benefits in that sector comes up, it's often emphasized that there are actually more whites in poverty than other population groups. One reason or assertion is that they're more "scattered" location-wise.

[2] The poverty that poor African Americans experience is often different from the poverty of poor whites. It's more isolating and concentrated. It extends out the door of a family's home and occupies the entire neighborhood around it, touching the streets, the schools, the grocery stores. [...] In St. Louis, 29.5 percent of poor African Americans live in concentrated poverty. Among poor whites, just 1.6 percent do. Poor whites, in most major metropolitan areas, are spread out. Poor African Americans are not...

- - - - - - -

[1] http://www.activerightofway.org/p/people...he-street/

[2] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk...e-poverty/

[3] In addition to pale-skinned poor being ignorable sometimes in research, the usage of "white" in an umbrella-like manner seems nowadays to include a dismissal of Asians and any other minorities not amply represented in poverty stats for whatever reason (deemed too few, too successful, etc). And "white" becomes broad in meaning when there's a need to negate someone belonging to a population group because of an interracial suspicion that they have too much "white blood":

Melissa Harris-Perry, who said Friday that, as with George Zimmerman [being a white hispanic], the three black police officers charged in the death of Baltimore’s Freddie Gray are not African-American, but are in fact “white’ African-Americans”.

I saw the above incident occur back in 2015 on television, but sites like "ClashDaily" seem to be the only ones that retain such accounts (i.e., the reason for having to use it as a reference). Even the youtube videos appear to have disappeared, or few are marked in a way anymore that clearly indicates they concern that particular event.

- - -

[Syne]

Completely anecdotal, but where I'm from it seems blacks like to walk in the road, even where a good sidewalk is available. There's also a greater potential to not see darker-skinned people at night.

Racial segregation happens most in democrat controlled cities.

[confused2]

I've had a thread start waiting for a while - here is some of it...
Observation (mine) suggests that many car drivers see 'driving' as a race to their destination. The race isn't just about time - it is also about actively preventing anyone else from getting there before them (aka winning).
A pedestrian in the road is both a person ahead of the motorist (competition) and an obstruction potentially causing lost time. My prediction is that many motorists will accelerate towards a pedestrian in the road. While they may ultimately apply the brakes in an attempt to avoid damage to their car it is the acceleration phase that causes the problem. A pedestrian using normal skill and judgement may correctly conclude there is time to cross ahead of a car travelling at constant speed without allowing for the fact that their presence will cause the driver to accelerate. In fairness the gap in the traffic which the pedestrian identifies as "safe" is the same gap which the motorist will have identified as an opportunity to increase speed and eliminate the possibility of another motorist using the gap to cut in front of them. Either way, I predict, on many occasions, the driver killing the pedestrian will be found to have accelerated at some point before the impact. Any screech of brakes before impact is the result of a belated realisation that hitting a human body at speed may damage the car - damage to the vehicle is a consideration in the 'race' outcome but ranks far behind time and beating the opposition. I think we're looking at vermin here.

[Syne]

Worry about their expensive car is likely not a factor, considering this:

"“One of the most significant trends was that fancy cars were less likely to stop,” said Mr. Piff, adding, “BMW drivers were the worst.”" - https://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/08...-suggests/

[RainbowUnicorn]

Recently in Toronto there's been a spate of pedestrian deaths, people killed after being struck by a vehicle. This article here goes into more detail about this type of fatality worldwide. According to the piece, globally there's the equivalent of a plane full of pedestrians killed crossing the road every day, not to mention many times more injuries. 

So why aren't people more wary of traffic? Something as simple as looking both ways before one crosses the street seems like such an easy fix. I wonder if that's an inherent trait not all of us possess? Or is evolution not keeping pace with society? 

I watch birds at our feeders. They never stop scanning their surroundings for danger. Their eyes dart here and there as if a nervous habit and even if it is such, then it's an evolutionary trait that improves survival chances. 

Trying to think of when it became necessary for humans to look both ways before venturing forward. Would it coincide with the invention of roads,  or something more primitive like worrying about ambush along a jungle trail? We primarily resort to vision, did we use other senses in the past to find danger, know when to stop or run?

Perhaps some are better at calculating their chances when crossing traffic. If so is evolution lagging behind, hasn't adjusted to the speed at which potential danger can physically strike? Are we too consumed with our thoughts (too much on our minds) to make the proper judgments? Do we trust the other persons involved (drivers) too much?

entitlement syndrome/Companion alt-right-ism(they think they should not have to ever look left) entitle-righta-cross-aphlatism ?
they think everything should get out of thier way.
its obviousely getting more virulent.

wait till all cars are silent & no one wants to give way to anyone.

---

Recently in Toronto there's been a spate of pedestrian deaths, people killed after being struck by a vehicle. This article here goes into more detail about this type of fatality worldwide. According to the piece, globally there's the equivalent of a plane full of pedestrians killed crossing the road every day, not to mention many times more injuries. [...]

From that article:
The victims are disproportionately children, seniors and people of color, according to the report.

[2] The poverty that poor African Americans experience is often different from the poverty of poor whites. It's more isolating and concentrated. It extends out the door of a family's home and occupies the entire neighborhood around it, touching the streets, the schools, the grocery stores. [...] In St. Louis, 29.5 percent of poor African Americans live in concentrated poverty. Among poor whites, just 1.6 percent do. Poor whites, in most major metropolitan areas, are spread out. Poor African Americans are not...[/indent]

ok so putting on my serious hat for a moment.

sociological anthropology...
modernisation of thevehicle pedestrian interface by way of varying factors.
1. more high pedestrian zones with vehicle access. Behaviours
2. culture/ more people driving whom think they should not have to look out for others mistakes.
3. culture/ less social accountability as an ongoing de-personalisation of people as a part of society(clearly visible in international politics)
4. culture/ less social responsibility
5. culture/ marginalisation of groups that have no power being subconsciousely loaded into the psyche to be worth less.
regarding number 5 if you think this is not a big issue then you have not seen people drive differently around large vehicles that are much bigger than them and conversly around vehicles that are smaller or drive more coutiousely.
jungle law in effect.

im not sure i want to get into teh black issue.
it is a bllack issue.
i fail to see why it is labelled as a "Black Issue" because north american indians are not african americans and "Dark Skin" as a cultural group is completely useless unles you seek to install bigotted ideological paradigms into racial boundarys to try and miss represent something.

forgot one.
6. conservative litigious narcissism (very american and neo-individualist)

"if im not doing anything wrong i dont have to change what im doing and everyone else is at fault so i am not to blame and its not my fault they got hurt so why should i be to blame because i did not slow down as they ran out and i dont have to look out for people who might cross the road because they are your kids and so itsall your fault and they are not people to me(because its not my fault so i dont have to feel anything except being the  victim) so i wont have any bad conscience about it because its all your fault"

---

I've had a thread start waiting for a while - here is some of it...
Observation (mine) suggests that many car drivers see 'driving' as a race to their destination. The race isn't just about time - it is also about actively preventing anyone else from getting there before them (aka winning).
A pedestrian in the road is both a person ahead of the motorist (competition) and an obstruction potentially causing lost time. My prediction is that many motorists will accelerate towards a pedestrian in the road. While they may ultimately apply the brakes in an attempt to avoid damage to their car it is the acceleration phase that causes the problem. A pedestrian using normal skill and judgement may correctly conclude there is time to cross ahead of a car travelling at constant speed without allowing for the fact that their presence will cause the driver to accelerate. In fairness the gap in the traffic which the pedestrian identifies as "safe" is the same gap which the motorist will have identified as an opportunity to increase speed and eliminate the possibility of another motorist using the gap to cut in front of them. Either way, I predict, on many occasions, the driver killing the pedestrian will be found to have accelerated at some point before the impact.  Any screech of brakes before impact is the result of a belated realisation that hitting a human body at speed may damage the car - damage to the vehicle is a consideration in the 'race' outcome but ranks far behind time and beating the opposition. I think we're looking at vermin here.

Generically i agree with you.
a few tweeks i would suggest. but on the whole motorists as a % group of drivers percieve all driving as competition.
why ?
surely driving to work is not a loss of time but making money ?
or is it ?
has the government(entity) allowed travel time to work to become a loss making margin to leverage company profits off ?
care for a stroll down the rabbit hole ?

[Zinjanthropos]

I don't see a black/white racial issue here but if I did blend in with the surroundings either by my skin or clothing color then I might stay off a busy street. The closest I ever came to running someone down was on a street when the sun, at a low point in the sky, shone brightly in all drivers' eyes. The guy was jaywalking, so perhaps displaying some smarts could help prevent a fatality. Driver's are trained to watch out for pedestrians but is the reverse true? I think of myself when young, darting out from between two parked cars and barely escaping.

[Secular Sanity]

Observation (mine) suggests that many car drivers see 'driving' as a race to their destination. The race isn't just about time - it is also about actively preventing anyone else from getting there before them (aka winning).
A pedestrian in the road is both a person ahead of the motorist (competition) and an obstruction potentially causing lost time. My prediction is that many motorists will accelerate towards a pedestrian in the road.

Yep, they'll speed up to beat a pedestrian to the crosswalk.

[RainbowUnicorn]

Observation (mine) suggests that many car drivers see 'driving' as a race to their destination. The race isn't just about time - it is also about actively preventing anyone else from getting there before them (aka winning).
A pedestrian in the road is both a person ahead of the motorist (competition) and an obstruction potentially causing lost time. My prediction is that many motorists will accelerate towards a pedestrian in the road.

Yep, they'll speed up to beat a pedestrian to the crosswalk.

there is another social phenomina at play.
because cars come inside queueing, queue behaviour applys.
oddly enough the negative subsets of behavioural issues come in to play regardles of there being any actual queue. all it needs is the predispositional construct of metaphor to be processing.
this can be a single point like a gate, road, cash register, walkway, even a line on the ground.
once the primal nature of the psychosis presents then the trigger is all that is needed.
to coin a phrase "all one must do is place a door for someone to bang their head against".
the social behaviour patterns are clearly defined and when people seek to exceed the limits of those social behaviours to become 1st in the competition of life then they will seek to force those boundarys.
potentially... and i do mean potentially, in canadas current situation they have a vast number of US social & economic refugees flooding in trying to maintain their position in life(and living standard).
thus the issues of pushing against all those social boundarys.

the quick and the dead... US ideological social culture.
no room for the poor, specialy not on the roads.(note compulsory insurance etc...)

note the sense of US entitlement that is played out in queueing, equaly as law of the jungle if someone looses their place.
no holding places, no cutting in... etc etc..

[C C]

So why aren't people more wary of traffic? Something as simple as looking both ways before one crosses the street seems like such an easy fix. I wonder if that's an inherent trait not all of us possess? Or is evolution not keeping pace with society? 

I watch birds at our feeders. They never stop scanning their surroundings for danger. Their eyes dart here and there as if a nervous habit and even if it is such, then it's an evolutionary trait that improves survival chances. 

Fortunately for them, birds don't carry around mobile devices. Both distracted pedestrians that are texting as well as drivers doing that are another contributing factor to the increase in deaths. Another reason why I-gen youth would be well represented in stats, especially (as if they need more).

Device distraction in even impoverished neighborhoods? In news videos it seems like there's no war-torn or destitute place on Earth where local families haven't still scratched up enough money for smart phones. The Rohingya refugees might be an exception. (Maybe social networking isn't more important to them than food, or fringe areas of Myanmar and Bangladesh are rare regions where 1st-world businesses haven't set-up towers yet).

- - -