We see them all the time – pedestrians ambling along with lowered heads and furiously typing thumbs, sidewalk hogs with a bluetooth device planted firmly within the ear who gesticulate wildly during animated conversations, and wild walkers too busy swiping, scrolling, and liking to notice that they are about to careen into you.
Totally annoying.
And common. When I stepped outside to take a photo for this post, I located a distracted pedestrian within ten seconds. Because they are everywhere. It’s not just that their halfalogues annoy the snot out of us, it’s that they are a hazard to others. And themselves.
So why not issue these distracted pedestrians tickets in the same way that we do distracted drivers?
Distracted walking ordinances have popped up in a handful of jurisdictions, but have largely failed.
Utah, however, succeeded. Now one municipality boasts an ordinance that allows police to ticket you for distracted walking, but only around railways. As the Salt Lake Tribune reports:
“The fact we have an ordinance on the books gives our transit police an opportunity to go up and educate [people],” Carpenter said. “It creates an environment where we can have a little more serious conversation than we could without having the ordinance on the books.”
Um, back up the train there, sport. See, here’s the thing. Your police can already go up to people and educate them. You can already have a serious conversation. Adding the ability to cite them for “distracted walking” amps up that police encounter, and gives police officers yet another tool to exert social control over citizens for activities that are so vague and ill-defined that nearly anything might qualify.
How about walking while eating an ice cream cone? Talking to a friend? Disciplining a screaming toddler? Walking an unruly dog? And how does one demonstrate the opposite of distracted walking, anyway?
This is not like distracted driving, no matter how tempting the comparison might be.
Driving is a privilege, not a right. Walking is a right, not a privilege.
Driving involves operating a motor vehicle, which requires a license and holds age requirements. Vehicles are large, powerful machines capable of great speed and have tremendous lethality potential.
The state can, and should, be heavily involved in how citizens drive cars.
The state should stay the hell out of how people walk.
What do you think?
Related articles
- In 3 months, UTA cites 1 for distracted walking (mysanantonio.com)
- Number of pedestrian accidents due to distraction rising (wjla.com)
- Behind The Wheel With Police: Catching Distracted Drivers (minnesota.cbslocal.com)
- Distracted Driving: Texting Isn’t the Only Cause (themarlincompany.com)
- Do You Have to Tell Police Your Name? (crimedime.com)
- Don’t Talk to Police – The Coolest Explanation You Will Ever Get (crimedime.com)
- Dancing Cops, Community Policing, and the Public Trust (crimedime.com)
Michelle Proulx
July 30, 2012
I completely agree. I get that the police are here to help us, but I get worried every time I see a cop car, thinking, “Oh god, am I doing something wrong? I can’t afford a fine!” And obviously I’m a bit paranoid, but it strikes me as a little crazy that people are trying to regulate the way we walk. If a pedestrian is being a legitimate danger, then the police can nab them for public endangerment or something. We don’t need “dangerous walking” charges, or whatever it’s called.
Raven
July 30, 2012
The reason we regulate drivers is because they are operating a killing machine. Lots of people have died bc of cars, not so much from being walked into be pedestrians.
Raven
July 30, 2012
Opps. BY pedestrians.
Raven
July 30, 2012
Argh! I need more coffee. I can’t spell yet. I am TYPOS the Great and Terrible!
Valentine Logar
July 30, 2012
Come on this is a bit much. I am annoyed by them but do we really want to get the police involved? Don’t the police have better things to do? How about we use a wee bit of money and hire Mimes to follow these annoyances, humiliate them as they walk down the street? How about we take pictures of them walking and put nasty comments about them and post them to a dedicated You Tube channel?
But really the police?
anotherboomerblog
July 30, 2012
Good luck with such regulations.
I’m perpetually lost in Boston and if I didn’t have an iPhone with a map in it I’d have a fold out map to figure out where I am walking to. What is more distracted folding and unfolding a map or looking at a map on a screen? Plus I’m Hard of Hearing and I can’t always hear things like horns honking so I’m rubbernecking all the time to keep from being squashed by a vehicle running a red light.
We can make an entire list of problems: Smokers who set themselves on fire and are trying to pat out the burn, people avoiding smoke from smokers, panhandlers, people avoiding panhandlers, kids running amok, the parents of kids that are running amok, the people attempting to avoid the kids running amok, out-of-control dogs and protecting your dog from the out-of-control dogs, and so on and so forth. It’s a jungle out there on the sidewalk (at times). 8^O
However, as this blog pointed out, the reality is that one does not require a license to walk. The blind walk with canes, dogs, or sighted guides, the deaf walk and may miss road noises because no one can see everywhere all the time, people in wheelchairs roll about and sometimes they go up the sides of the road to avoid areas without curb cuts. Drivers need to be alert to all sorts of traffic hazards.
Luddy's Lens
July 31, 2012
Yeah, I’m with the general consensus (as of six comments): Bringing in the police is unmanageable, and an over-reaction. I think, after enough close calls (no pun intended) and dirty looks, people will start to regulate themselves.
peerpressured
August 2, 2012
I live in Utah and (having no car) walk around and ride those trains every day. I’m all for civil liberty, but I’m also deeply concerned that we’re having fatalities on the tracks every single month.I admit I read while I walk, but I am hugely paranoid at intersections when around trains or cars because people drive like maniacs here. Being a pedestrian in Utah demands your full attention. Always. What I’m scared of is that my state may be too stupid to be educated. Because I think so far this year we’re at something like 12 deaths by the trains and I still see idiots dart in front of moving trains to make a light, or worse, amble while not even looking at it. If we’re not smart enough to realize we can’t win a chicken fight with a train, maybe we’re not smart enough to be in charge of our own ambulatory efforts. Bottom line, I both fully support and deeply oppose these ordinances. I don’t know what the answer will finally be.
bastikononion
August 4, 2012
I don’t know if the police is the right authority to do so, but education about how dangerous it can be would be quite good.
It should however not be regulated and people should not be punished. In most cases it’s “only” their life they risk. (For cars it’s the exact opposite)
Be Smart with your Device
October 15, 2012
I agree that the State should not legislate against distracted walkers, it creates a nanny-state that no one wants to live in. However, the problem I see with distracted walking is that it impacts on more than just the people doing it – if you were driving a bus, train, or car, and hit a distracted pedestrian, you would be pretty traumatised. Even more so if the pedestrian passed away.
I see one possible solution to the problem as self-regulation. For this to occur, people need to understand the dangers distracted walking poses to themselves and other people – meaning education is far more important than legislation. Obviously people are not going to completely switch off, but if them stepping to the side of a footpath and stopping while using a smart device could be achieved, it would be a lot safer for everyone.