or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › New York may ban iPods while crossing city streets
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

New York may ban iPods while crossing city streets

post #1 of 61
Thread Starter 
New Yorkers who heedlessly cross city streets while listening to their Apple iPod or fumbling with other electronics devices, such as cell phones, may soon face a hefty fine from the city.

According to both NBC and the Associated Press, New York State Senator Carl Kruger is expected to introduce legislation today that would impose a $100 fine for people who continue to use their electronics gadgets -- such as iPods, Blackberries, and video games -- while crossing the street.

Kruger said Tuesday that three pedestrians in his Brooklyn district were killed in recent months upon stepping into traffic while distracted by an electronic device.

"Government has an obligation to protect its citizenry," he said in a telephone interview with the AP. "This electronic gadgetry is reaching the point where it's becoming not only endemic but it's creating an atmosphere where we have a major public safety crisis at hand."

New York's streets are frequently consumed with gadget wielding and earbud bearing residents who are looking to fire-off that extra e-mail or pass the brunt of their daily commutes with a tune.

"I'm not trying to intrude on that," Kruger said. "But what's happening is when they're tuning into their iPod or Blackberry or cell phone or video game, they're walking into speeding buses and moving automobiles. It's becoming a nationwide problem."
post #2 of 61
Hmm...

I don't agree with this at all. I'd say these people get exactly what they deserve should they be hit by a vehicle.

I'd prefer to see a law that absolves the motorist of any blame should he hit someone walking along without paying any attention.

Stop protecting stupid people. That only ensures they'll breed more of the same. Additionally, leaving nice painted outlines in the street of the people eliminated in this fashion may help get the message across in a way that some silly law just wouldn't.

p.s. - I also hate seeing people fiddling with all this crap while they drive, so don't assume I'm trying to coddle those bastards...
Do you realize that fluoridation is the most monstrously conceived and dangerous Communist plot we have ever had to face? - Jack D. Ripper
Reply
Do you realize that fluoridation is the most monstrously conceived and dangerous Communist plot we have ever had to face? - Jack D. Ripper
Reply
post #3 of 61
I agree, if they are dumb enough to get hit by NOT paying attention, then Darwinism is at work and doing good for human kind. Why does government continue to legislate everything we do in this life? Must they continue to "protect" us from everything? This law is a BAD idea!
post #4 of 61
That is not the only drawback of these new devices. PEOPLE ARE SERIOUSLY DAMAGING THEIR HEARING!!!

Imagine a world in 20-30 years filled with deaf people. It will arrive. Just remember this post. You will hear your neighbors TV or radio because they will set them too loud to hear them. Then it will be TOO LATE!!!

But I guess money is money... Even for our beloved Apple...
post #5 of 61
The increasing absurdity of NYC's laws is one reason neither Hillary Clinton nor former mayor Rudolph Guiliani will get my vote in 2008. I have an intense dislike of this sort of meddlesome 'nanny state' mindset with its accompanying attitude "we, the elite few, know more than you, the masses." NYC is heading down the same path that's making most major British cities unlivable--criminalizing ordinary behavior while trivializing actual crime.

Under Guiliani, it was claimed that adding and enforcing all sorts of petty meddlesome laws decreased the crime rate. In all probability, the criminals, being both practical and highly mobile, simply moved their operations to nearby communities. And in the end, NYC residents are stuck with a system in which they're more likely to be 'mugged' by a cop and fined by a court enforcing silly laws than they were to be mugged before.

Seattle, where I live, has a similar problem, probably an illustration of its tendency to mimic NYC. The city does nothing to catch teens writing graffati, but it's very zealous at forcing the victims (business and homeowners) to paint over the graffati or pay a fine.

And people in NYC are soooooo passive in the face of these insults to their dignity and intelligence. When Chicago passed a similarly dumb law recently, the law was openly ignored. Restaurants simply gave the banned food another name and the city's law enforcement announced that they had better things to do than enforce that law.

NYC is an entry point for the dreaded Euro-nanny state. Chicago is the Wild West where people take care of themselves and their friends. I prefer the latter.
post #6 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by zunx View Post

That is not the only drawback of these new devices. PEOPLE ARE SERIOUSLY DAMAGING THEIR HEARING!!!

Yes and we all know that Apple sets the volume control to the highest setting when they ship new iPods to purposefully damage everyone's hearing!
post #7 of 61
The governing body's responsibility is to protect the rights and interests of responsible people. This law is a joke..."gee officer I forgot to look before crossing the street because I was using an electronic device" can now be replaced with "gee officer I was still using my electronic device while crossing due to being distracted by an electronic device" We would be better served by having the politician play pick-up sticks in a busy intersection.
post #8 of 61
What? WHAT? What did you say?
post #9 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by gspot2016 View Post

What? WHAT? What did you say?

thank you!
post #10 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inkling View Post

The increasing absurdity of NYC's laws is one reason neither Hillary Clinton nor former mayor Rudolph Guiliani will get my vote in 2008.

I agree that the law would be silly. Hard as government would try, they cannot protect stupid people.

However, I don't understand what US Senator Clinton has to do with New York City laws.
post #11 of 61
People need to be more aware. If not that's their fault. Survival of the wisest and those who use best judgement. What if a large number of people are hit by cars while crossing the street and eating food, or picking their nose. Ban that too?
post #12 of 61
A $100 fine its fair. Stupidity has its price.
Should be more cause its not the device's fault. Its the users

I love USA, always funny stuff
post #13 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomkarl View Post

I agree that the law would be silly. Hard as government would try, they cannot protect stupid people.

However, I don't understand what US Senator Clinton has to do with New York City laws.

Exactly.

Madam Speaker: I need a personal jumbo jet on the people's dime, of course, since I'm "for the people".
White House: Sure.

*double-smack to them both!*
post #14 of 61
Banning ipods crossing streets is like banning breathing instead of banning smoking.

It is not ipods that kill people, it is the cars. In the US over 40,000 people a year are killed on the roads. Cars are a much greater danger to the average person than terrorism.

Just banning cars in NYC. That would make it much safer for everyone. This is done in the core of several European cities. As a side benefit, greenhouse gas emissions would also be reduced and NYC will not be flooded in 100 years. Oh yeah, and by not buying gas, the flow of money would be cut off to Iran and other "enemies" of the US. It is a win-win.
post #15 of 61
I dont see how implementing a $100 penalty on crossing streets while using electronic devices will make a huge difference over the current "you will get killed" penalty
post #16 of 61
As I have always said:


"If you don't want to be hit by a moving vehicle, don't step in front of a car."



~first post, EVER. *bow* *bow*
post #17 of 61
NYC already has a law against jay walking. The law is rarely enforced, but it does exists.
Would this new law it make it OK to jay walk so long as you're not using your phone or iPod?
post #18 of 61
People who walk in NY are ridiculous. I mean, are they color blind? Green means GO, red means STOP, but pedestrians fail to notice that, and they get pissy when you honk at them. Idiots like that deserve to be hit.
ry.n
Reply
ry.n
Reply
post #19 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdunnnyc View Post

NYC already has a law against jay walking. The law is rarely enforced, but it does exists.
Would this new law it make it OK to jay walk so long as you're not using your phone or iPod?

The laws are really there for when an accident happens. If one does happen, the authorities look over the laws that were broken to see who was at fault. If someone gets hit by a car and they were jay walking it will most likely lessen the charge on the driver if not erase it completely.
post #20 of 61
This is even stupider than the ban on cell phones while driving... YOU CAN'T BAN STUPIDITY!!! IT NEVER WORKS!!! (and while we're at it, just try prove that stupid people being killed crossing the street is a nationwide epidemic... or a problem for that matter-lol) Man, if someone is that dumb, how did they ever figure out to sync their iPod? Well, I guess Apple one-ups NY State on figuring out how to idiot proof things...

Laws against idiocy, or technology? Which way is a more effective manner of dealing with the problem of idiocy?

IDEA: New York should spend their taxpayer-extracted cash on side-walks that recognize dazed idiots and stop them from entering with a swift 150,000 volt flying tazer prod which knocks them safely back on their tush and wakes them up quite effectively. :P
>==----Matt-a-mattic-->>
Reply
>==----Matt-a-mattic-->>
Reply
post #21 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by neverending4181 View Post

People who walk in NY are ridiculous. I mean, are they color blind? Green means GO, red means STOP, but pedestrians fail to notice that, and they get pissy when you honk at them. Idiots like that deserve to be hit.

You are obviously from New Jersey where it is believed cars have the right of way and not pedestrians
post #22 of 61
Fellow New Yorkers, we have been called to action! Let's give Senator Kruger some company on his daily excursions about the city. Be sure to keep your video cell phones at the ready! Hmmm, I wonder... does Senator Kruger always wait for that darned crosswalk light to blink "walk." Would Senator Kruger's busy schedule force him to cut corners, literally, to ... GASP ... jaywalk?! Alas, should such lawbreaking committed by an elected official be captured on video, well, I think as law abiding citizens it's our duty to promptly post such horrendous illegalities committed by Senator Kruger on YouTube. Poor Senator Kruger, his travels around the city are... about... to... slowwww... downnnn...
post #23 of 61
It's really a tax on Darwin Award candidates. There's plenty of free money to be had since there's so many of them around.
post #24 of 61
Please lets just keep up a standard of dialogue concerning common sense. You cant legislate morality nor general use practice of common sense. Dont: follow (these) leaders, watch (mind preoccupying activity) parking meters.
post #25 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by freeny View Post

I dont see how implementing a $100 penalty on crossing streets while using electronic devices will make a huge difference over the current "you will get killed" penalty

My sentiments exactly. Let Darwin do his thing.

As someone else alluded to, the law will be more likely to help in the case of a motorist who is in the right of way (has a green light) and hits a distracted pedestrian who is jaywalking while pecking away at their BlackBerry, etc. instead of paying attention to their surroundings...which is a silly thing to do in a busy place like NYC in the first place...which goes back to the Darwin thing.

Perhaps if we did away with all the laws trying to protect stupid people, we'd see a turnaround in the average level of intelligence in this country in a few generations.
post #26 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by neverending4181 View Post

People who walk in NY are ridiculous. I mean, are they color blind? Green means GO, red means STOP, but pedestrians fail to notice that, and they get pissy when you honk at them. Idiots like that deserve to be hit.

--A $100 fine its fair. Stupidity has its price. Should be more cause its not the device's fault. Its the users--

While I agree that there a lot more stupid people in New York City, That is only the case because we have so many people jammed together. I've worked in the southern states for 3 years and let's just say I no longer complain the NYC public school system.

The thing about New York City that out of towners don't understand is that here, time really is money. I work at an ad agency, I run a website and I have various side gigs. New York is a city where people can hustle and make money or do nothing and get by. People leave all the time because this city chews them up and spits them out.

Shooting off that e-mail while trying to catch a cab may make the difference between a deal and going home empty-handed. I don't condone talking on a phone while driving and I agree that common sense should dictate that looking both ways while crossing the street is more important than IMming your buddy asking who's bringing the beer.

I don't think it's the government's place to impose stupidity to alleviate stupidity. The police have enough trouble out here trying to keep up with real crime. If the city wants to collect more revenue, the officials should just say so. This is nothing more than a ploy to draw attention to an otherwise unknown Senator.

If you want to do something about it, e-mail this pompous fool and tell him how you feel or just shut your trap and don't make any pissy comments about New Yorkers.

KRUGER@SENATE.STATE.NY.US

Thank you for your time and have a pleasant day.
Trade your used music CDs for a new ipod at www.podpacker.com
Reply
Trade your used music CDs for a new ipod at www.podpacker.com
Reply
post #27 of 61
Quote:
"Government has an obligation to protect its citizenry," he said in a telephone interview with the AP. "This electronic gadgetry is reaching the point where it's becoming not only endemic but it's creating an atmosphere where we have a major public safety crisis at hand."

Kruger said Tuesday that three pedestrians in his Brooklyn district were killed in recent months upon stepping into traffic while distracted by an electronic device.

How in the world did this idiot become a lawmaker? Is he high on crack?

Let's disect the problem here:
1) Three pedestrians were killed in recent monthly...
Did he bother surveying what is the pedestrain traffic in his area on a daily basis? If we are talking about 3 accidents out of 1 million... wow, do the math senator! It must be electronic devices fault!

2) Cars are driven by people too, how did senator conclude it's the pedestrians listening to music that are crossing the street recklessly and not the drivers??? Surely, it's the driver who isn't paying too much attention that kills... let's kill car radios? You got my vote on that senator!

3) Um.. yes... our public police has nothing better to do than giving people tickets for crossing the streets while listening to music devices. Oh yea baby, our tax money at it's best!
post #28 of 61
This law is unenforceable. Especially if you are wearing a hood in the winter.
post #29 of 61
Although the article is not very clear on this, I would assume that the law will only forbid to operate/manipulate your iPod, i.e. selecting a new song while crossing the street.

And I second a previous poster in that such laws will matter mostly only in case of an accident by making the attribution of guilt less ambiguous.
post #30 of 61
Is this just people who are looking at their iPods? Because deaf people don't get fines and they can't hear traffic either.
post #31 of 61
This sounds too retarded. They are actually putting me in danger now.

Instead of just walking while I have my ipod in my ears and crossing the street normally (like any sensible person do I have the ipod at a safe volume) without fussing with my ipod, I now have to spend the effort stopping the player and taking it off everytime I cross the street? This is inconvient and takes more effort, where I didn't have to pay look at the player and just cross the street, I now have to focus on the player to put it away each and everytime I cross a road.

This actually makes it more dangerous for me, distracting me from the road. Now thousands of people will no longer be walking and listening they'll be walking and putting away. Tons of people will be putting away their devices in the road and while crossing the road, no one will do it before.

And just pausing it isn't enough because it will still look like your breaking the ban.
Quote:
Originally Posted by appleinsider vBulletin Message

You have been banned for the following reason:
Three personal attacks in one post. Congratulations.
Date the ban will be lifted:...
Reply
Quote:
Originally Posted by appleinsider vBulletin Message

You have been banned for the following reason:
Three personal attacks in one post. Congratulations.
Date the ban will be lifted:...
Reply
post #32 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by fazekas View Post

I agree, if they are dumb enough to get hit by NOT paying attention, then Darwinism is at work and doing good for human kind. Why does government continue to legislate everything we do in this life? Must they continue to "protect" us from everything? This law is a BAD idea!

I'm not crazy about living in a "nanny state" either. But I can see good reasons for a law like this... protecting drivers and innocent by-standers.

Hitting a person with your car, even if you're ultimately found not to be at fault, would not be a pleasant experience. It would be an ugly and traumatic experience even if no other consequences whatsoever ensued. And quite often those other consequences would ensue.

You might end up involved in long criminal and civil proceedings before you're cleared of guilt and liability. Your vehicle may be damaged. You might hurt yourself or an innocent by-stander when you try to react quickly to avoid hitting the distracted person, or by having the person you hit fly through your windshield into your face at high speed.

It's a mistake to immediately write off this kind of law as protecting people from their own stupidity when these people are in fact subjecting others to major risks as well.
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
Reply
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
Reply
post #33 of 61
You beat me to it, shetline. All these knee-jerk "let 'em die" reactions are just so narrow-minded.

But the proposed law itself will do nothing. People who don't care really don't need gadgets to distract them.
post #34 of 61
So, are they also going to write tickets to school children who don't look both ways before crossing?

Why not? That's just as dangerous.

Maybe for an encore, they'll issue tickets for not wearing a warm enough coat (as defined by a bunch of suits that never set foot outdoors, of course.)

This whole thing is just a lame excuse to write lots of $100 tickets and make some extra cash.
post #35 of 61
does this mean it will be illegal to be fiddling with the controls while walking or listening as well?
post #36 of 61
No different than looking at a sexy woman and getting run over by a cab. Should we ban females from crossing our streets!?
post #37 of 61
If people (term used loosely) weren't JAYWALKING when using their devices they wouldn't have been hit by anything. So, if anything enforce the jaywalking if it could be enforced at all. I am a native NYer from the lower east side... people are getting run over because they don't cross when the WALK sign is green it's because they're running through traffic in and out of crosswalks!
post #38 of 61
Lawyers, lawyers, lawyers... also wanting a piece of Apple like everyone else suing them. Swine that they are (for the most part).
post #39 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inkling View Post

....criminalizing ordinary behavior while trivializing actual crime.......

Wow. That is a GREAT line.
post #40 of 61
I've seen people reading books crossing the street. Ban them too.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › New York may ban iPods while crossing city streets