• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Jogger arrested for not having ID

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Sounds like she refused to provide her name/address, is that right?

If they did arrest her for something, it's my understanding texas law mandates you provide that information once you are arrested.
 
WelshBloke said:
Only on ATOT.
"But if we don't have laws stopping it people would be leaping in front of speeding cars. We must legislate common sense. People can't be trusted to cross the road safely, get the government involved! "
Click to expand...

http://www.statesman.com/news/news/local/auto-pedestrian-deaths-in-austin-reach-a-record-hi/nS97J/

I know that's 2012, but I'm pretty sure 2013 broke the record again.

People complain a lot about bad drivers, but pedestrians can be just as bad.
 
As someone that just moved into Austin three weeks ago, I would NOT want to be a cop dealing with all the College kids here. It is, as others have put it, a VERY blue dot in a red state and the 18-30 crowd is a bit unruly (Google "austin 6th street violence"). The cop may have been a tool to her, I'll admit, but who the hell goes jogging without at least slipping an ID into their pocket?! If I get hit by a car/have a heart attack/whatever I want to make sure my next of kin is contacted ASAP at the very least...

More on topic with jaywalking, it really is that bad down here with all the joggers, bicycles/unicycles, skateboarders just acting like cars will always stop for them. I refuse to take my car downtown even if I only plan on having one drink, I just don't want to risk having my reflexes dulled and getting a dwi/dui because I clipped some drunk kid that stumbled into the road; $2 bus pass is always worth it to me.
 
Last edited:
Why do you guys debate over the stupidest news and related legal articles. Does anyone individual here really think they will sway some guy on the internets opinion about news? I would question why one would care to do so but I'd rather just state that you're all morons for trying.
 
HeXen said:
Why do you guys debate over the stupidest news and related legal articles. Does anyone individual here really think they will sway some guy on the internets opinion about news? I would question why one would care to do so but I'd rather just state that you're all morons for trying.
Click to expand...

No I'm not. My wife tells me almost fortnightly that I'm like totally the smrtest guy she knows.
 
it's a good thing there is no more crime in texas..

police solved them all obviously...arrested a jay walker...wow texas stay classy.
 
HeXen said:
Why do you guys debate over the stupidest news and related legal articles. Does anyone individual here really think they will sway some guy on the internets opinion about news? I would question why one would care to do so but I'd rather just state that you're all morons for trying.
Click to expand...

It's called "having a conversation". Its one of the differences between us and other apes.

You should try it some time. 😉
 
purbeast0 said:
winner of the "dumbest thing i've read all week" award.

and i'm not saying that anyone should be arrested for jaywalking, it definitely needs to be a discretionary thing. but that is just the dumbest thing i've read all week.
Click to expand...

Hard to know how to respond because you failed to offer any sort of argument so I don't know what point you imagine you are making.

If you are agreeing that "Jaywalking" should not be a crime in itself (and is one almost unique to the US, where it came about as a direct result of very successful car manufacturer lobbying to shift blame from motorists to pedestrians) but that instead any given accident should be looked at objectively in case a pedestrian did (as happens fairly rarely) genuinely jump out in front of a car that could not reasonably have been expected to stop...then I don't see what our disagreement is.

The primary burden of responsibility is with the motorist, because they are the ones who have most control over the situation, as they are the ones controlling the dangerous object. Things like jaywalking laws and silly 'even handed' crackdowns that target pedestrians and cyclists as if they are equally responsible with motorists are just ridiculous attempts to avoid facing a reality that motorists don't want to face. Some countries indeed go further and have strict liability laws where, for civil liability, the motorist is assumed to be responsible unless proved otherwise.

"Jaywalking" is responsible for very few accidents, most of the time its bad driving or bad road design. Indeed the kind of pedestrian who quickly darts across the road on red is less likely to be hurt in an accident than the slow-moving ones.

Of course pedestrians can sometimes be in the wrong, but there is no need for a specific law about crossing the road - its kind of self-limiting as its pedestrians who die when they get it wrong.
 
SketchMaster said:
The cop may have been a tool to her, I'll admit, but who the hell goes jogging without at least slipping an ID into their pocket?!
Click to expand...

Lots of people go out without ID. I thought Americans took pride in not being French! I associate having to have an identity card with France!

But in the unlikely event you are caught breaking a law, its not unreasonable for the police to arrest you if they can't be certain of your identity (what else are they supposed to do?), so if you plan on breaking laws possibly you should take an ID (or a convincing false one, I suppose, according to your proclivities).
 
HeXen said:
Why do you guys debate over the stupidest news and related legal articles. Does anyone individual here really think they will sway some guy on the internets opinion about news? I would question why one would care to do so but I'd rather just state that you're all morons for trying.
Click to expand...

Is there not something self-defeating about this comment?
 
HeXen said:
Why do you guys debate over the stupidest news and related legal articles. Does anyone individual here really think they will sway some guy on the internets opinion about news? I would question why one would care to do so but I'd rather just state that you're all morons for trying.
Click to expand...

It convinced this guy on the internets to stay outta Texas.
 
pmv said:
Hard to know how to respond because you failed to offer any sort of argument so I don't know what point you imagine you are making.

If you are agreeing that "Jaywalking" should not be a crime in itself (and is one almost unique to the US, where it came about as a direct result of very successful car manufacturer lobbying to shift blame from motorists to pedestrians) but that instead any given accident should be looked at objectively in case a pedestrian did (as happens fairly rarely) genuinely jump out in front of a car that could not reasonably have been expected to stop...then I don't see what our disagreement is.

The primary burden of responsibility is with the motorist, because they are the ones who have most control over the situation, as they are the ones controlling the dangerous object. Things like jaywalking laws and silly 'even handed' crackdowns that target pedestrians and cyclists as if they are equally responsible with motorists are just ridiculous attempts to avoid facing a reality that motorists don't want to face. Some countries indeed go further and have strict liability laws where, for civil liability, the motorist is assumed to be responsible unless proved otherwise.

"Jaywalking" is responsible for very few accidents, most of the time its bad driving or bad road design. Indeed the kind of pedestrian who quickly darts across the road on red is less likely to be hurt in an accident than the slow-moving ones.

Of course pedestrians can sometimes be in the wrong, but there is no need for a specific law about crossing the road - its kind of self-limiting as its pedestrians who die when they get it wrong.
Click to expand...

Come to Austin and try to drive downtown before you make sweeping statements that pedestrians are almost never to blame...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top