Crosswalks

From The Rumford Reporter

Proper Placement of Crosswalks Vital to Pedestrian Safety

What was the point of that video? Was it to show that there is ample time to recognize that a pedestrian is in the crosswalk and stop for said pedestrian? Did I not see a streetlamp at one end of it? The other end is not visible in the video, so I can't say for sure about that one. I'll have to look.

I read the article in th SJ twice, and both times I read that the pedestrian was not in the crosswalk. Before I go further, let me say this. I do feel bad that he got hit, and I hope for the best for him, and his family.

That being said, the crosswalk really had nothing to do with this accident. He was not in it.

But that doesn't matter. TRR wants to champion a baseless cause at the emotional expense of someone's family. Why do that? I'm sorry if I am spouting off "emotional rhetoric". And by pushing this agenda, TRR is implying that the driver of the vehicle failed to tield to a pedestrian in a crosswalk.

Let it rest. That driver now has to deal with the accident. Why does TRR want to make it harder for him?

Now, a little tip on crosswalks. When one does decide to cross in a crosswalk, the pedestrian is REQUIRED to give oncoming traffic ample time to stop. Pedestrians cannot just bolt out in front of traffic. This also boils down to (dare I say it?) common sense and responsibility on the part of the pedestrian. I hope nobody is upset that I am implying people be resposible for their own actions.

Traffic, on the other hand is required to stop for pedestrians in the crosswalk AND people showing intent to use the crosswalk. It is also illegal to pass a vehicle that is stopped at a crosswalk.

There are responsibilities on both sides of the crosswalk issue.

Again, I hope for the best for all invilved in the accident.

That was an awfully long (2.5 minutes) video to make what point?

Perhaps the town should consider consistency when painting "crosswalks" so they all look the same.

Perhaps you are right, C. Standardization is always useful with traffic control devices.

I would ask, though, that any discussion about crosswalks be done in a different thread. I make this request to seperate discussion of crosswalks from the issue of the accident. As I said earlier, the accident had nothing to do with the crosswalk. I just don't want to fuel a fire that really shouldn't be burning. Thanks.

You are all so boring.

Jennifer Stowell Norris wrote:You are all so boring.

That sounds like a personal insult. Pretty mean spirited.

Your crosswalk philosophy sounds like a cold hearted statement coming from someone who doesn't give a damn about the person who is still in a coma!

Maybe you could explain what the crosswalk has to do with the accident. He was not in the crosswalk. And if you read my post, you would see that I do, in fact, care. I can see you, though, dragging the family through alot of heartache for nothing. Will you use them to promote your campaign on crosswalks? Only for them to be told that? Who is the one who really doesn't give a damn about the person in a coma?

Were you there? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!

I didn't think so!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Nice points!!! !!! !!!

Wow!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You DO like those exclamtion points!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


How do you know I wasn't there? Were you? How do you know I wasn't sitting in traffic waithing for the road to re-open?

How do you know I didn't read the article that said the accident occurred just beyone the crosswalk? Oh, wait! You DO know I read it because I SAID I read it twice. Way to gather your facts.

Maybe you are a cop just like I suspected.

Maybe the vehicle pushed him beyond the crosswalk.

Way to diss a person who is laying in the hospital.

I am not "dissing" anyone in a hospital. I am "dissing" you. This is how you try to twist everything to suit your own twisted sense of the world. Grow up. Stop acting so childish.

Stop lying!

The UNIONS suck! They are ripping off our town and we are sick and tired of your crap. We are sick of you lying, manipulating, and taking out your frustrations on teenagers and anyone that doesn't look right to you. Give it up! David Mitchell wasn't one of your buddies obviously or you wouldn't be dissing him.

Pot calling the kettle black? Did I hit a nerve?

YOU are the one who keeps bringing him up to "diss". I merely stated that the crosswalk was not part of the equation for the accident.

Obviously, I did because you are not denying any of it. We don't even have that many people under the age of 35 for you to mess with so you mess with the same people over and over. If they knew their rights, you wouldn't be able to get away with it to begin with. And, another thing, why are your conviction rates so low? Huh?

Oh and a fast moving vehicle isn't going to push a human body a few feet down the road after smacking them head on? Come on!

I don't need to be a cop to figure that one out! Did you breathalyze the guy or what?

Z wrote:I am not "dissing" anyone in a hospital.

You obviously missed this part.

So now you are accusing the driver of being drunk?

Were they? You certainly have no problem making the victim out to be doing something wrong. They were not in the crosswalk so they deserved what they got. Heartless! Was the driver a buddy of yours or what?

You really don't pay attention, do you? You are a bitter, vindictive, venomous, mailicious, angry person.