Yeah, here we have both rules, if there was a cop there who cared about giving out tickets, they'd both get tickets, and the driver would be paying more. :)

Some places the details are hyper-technical, too; if you're required to yield to the person already there, there is no emergency, and there is no cause for the horn. This is true even if he was in violation of the crosswalk rules. And if he was scared back onto the island by the actions, that could actually be "criminal mischief," which often includes any time that you're making noise with the purpose of obstructing traffic. The driver could actually go to jail, except that cops only charge pedestrians with "criminal mischief" so it wouldn't happen. But if you scared them back, it would certainly be a failure to yield.

Where I am, drivers know to expect assertive pedestrians who take their turn when the light changes.

I gotta go with, when in Rome do as the Romans do, and the person who doesn't know the local customs should be proactively staying out of the way of the locals passing by them.

You're a real "piece of work" to be calling somebody names over that one, wow.

It is more effective to stop and give them a really nasty mean-face. Pretending to tie your shoes is so passive-aggressive you've lost the aggression, and any potential influence on their future behavior.

If you whack them in the head they'll just learn there are evil people who will assault them. It wouldn't work. But dirty looks in a context where they have to modify their behavior and go around, it can have deep psychological impact on their subconscious attitudes.

All but 1 of those things are the correct, legal way to ride in most places.

In Idaho bicycles can treat stop signs as yield signs. When a bike does a "rolling-stop" through a stop-sign, it is called an "Idaho stop." Many states are legalizing it. It passes most places it is considered. Expect it to be the norm in 20 years. Just like, there was a time where only a few states allowed a right turn at a red light; now it is nearly universal. Because it works. My dad told me a story about driving in the midwest when he was a kid, and they didn't have that rule yet. He made a right turn on red, and had people shouting at him for just brazenly running a light! lol "it just seemed so natural"

In my State bicycles are allowed to use the sidewalks. Also, vechicles with 3-or-less wheels that are hardware limited to 15mph or less are considered bicycles, and can also use the sidewalk. (this was to allow Segways without going into the weeds and endorsing specific wheel configurations) Luckily, pedestrians have the right-of-way and the bicycles are required to always yield.

The speed limit applies to the street, not the sidewalk. They'll beat that ticket. However, many places have a rule that bicycles on the sidewalk have to go walking speed, so there might be a different non-speeding ticket they can get. Most cyclists don't actually go over the 20MPH of a school zone, certainly not over 25 which is the normal real speed. (limit+5 is standard for cars, except in places where it is limit+8)

There are real problems with cyclists that ride poorly and don't follow the rules, but I'm not convinced you know the rules well enough that you're driving according to them. ;)

It depends on the location. In the Pacific Northwest there are clear rules for sharing the road, and if you don't share it with bicyclists you will hit them, because they really do use the space allotted to them. You'll probably lose your license, too, if it was your fault. Vehicle-on-bicycle or -pedestrian is taken seriously. If your phone records show you were distracted, and you kill them, you'll go to prison. Real prison.

As a pedestrian, if it is my turn, I can walk. They *will* yield. I understand, in Boston I'd be dead and even the cops would blame me. But that isn't universal.

He didn't say that. He said might makes win.

Except that in cities we have this concept of "keep right* except when passing." There is room for travel in both directions. If there isn't room, the obstruction is on one person's side, or the other person's side. The person on the side of the obstruction is expected to wait. Some people, mostly youngsters, haven't figured this out. But it is actually somewhat rare. Most of the people will sort themselves to the correct lane if you force them to. You're not in "their" way if you're on the right side of the sidewalk.

* Some locations use a different side than this.

I do that already, and they really do move after you stop. They'll only crash into you when you're both in motion and it is no-fault.

Actually, it is the best way to get through a rough neighborhood. If you can walk tall, confident, but not swaggering or strutting, you can pass right through almost anything. You do have to weave around gang-bangers, you can't crash into them, but if you maintain the right walk they usually won't even see you, you're just background. If they're also walking, they always make room for me, I only have to weave around them when they're loitering. I've done that in most major American cities, and I've never had a problem.

In fact, the places I have had problems have been small towns, usually without sidewalks. Places where it doesn't matter how you walk, because there isn't enough traffic for it to matter.

As somebody who lived in rough neighborhoods as a teen, one thing I picked up on: You're actually less likely to get shot/stabbed or randomly assaulted there. A lot of people have some means of self defense. Picking a fight could get you shot, so people don't pick fights unless you're obviously walking scared. You're unlikely to get robbed in a drug neighborhood, for example, because most people either don't have anything to steal, or have a weapon, or will fight to the death over their last $2. There are people getting robbed, but the perp knows the victim, and knows they have drugs, or knows they have money that they're trying to buy drugs with.

The neighborhood where you might get stabbed over stupid shit is usually a University Neighborhood, the same place where you're likely to be assaulted by strangers. Those high crime neighborhoods, they're stabbing/shooting people that they know, and have a real dispute with. Don't borrow/loan money, don't borrow/loan drugs, don't arrange drug deals that might go bad, etc., and they probably won't involve you.

If they maintain their lane, and just follow the traffic rules robotically then there is no problem. When I was a kid I'd walk and read a book at the same time, no problem. The problem is that people aren't following the traffic rules when they are paying attention, so when they're not paying attention they're just sortof stumbling into the street without knowing what the state is. If they're practiced in following the rules, they can do that on autopilot and they'll wait for the light to change before crossing without consciously even realizing they had stopped for it. And they'll maintain their lane, too.

I mostly agree. I refuse to negotiate over the last bit of the sidewalk on the right-hand side. If forced, I will simply stop and they can run into me, or go around. It is rare, maybe 1 in 250 people I pass, I have to stop. Maybe 1 in 50 waits until they're inside 5' before moving over. The vast majority identify that I'm in the correct lane, and move over. There is no need for negotiation unless you're doing it wrong.

Proven, you really did just show up. Give grandma her laptop back before she grounds you.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

O M F G that is a good one. Quit while you're behind lolol

I'm not "cynical" at all, actually. That just adds to the humor. That they lie to you is the standard practice of their industry. Have you ever even seen the training materials? It isn't cynical it is top-shelf mainstream. Their job is not be moral and ethical, it is feed whatever crap their charts say will make users shut up. In many cases, well above half the callers will actually believe the crap, believe it was all their own fault, agree to faulty charges, agree to keep paying faulty charges every month. A lot of customers will agree to that just based on posturing.

It would be nice to live in a world where honestly was just assumed in customer service, but that isn't the world we live in. I always give people the benefit of the doubt; generally I'm accused of "supporting" all sorts of things that I don't support, just because I defend things when the accusations don't match the evidence. But here, the evidence actually matches standard practices that are taught in the industry.

It was a proper argument. I said, Woobles are to Blargs as Foobars are to Blaz. You obviously disagree, but you instead of trying to substantiate your own opinion, you made a faulty claim that my opinion isn't even able to be considered. I say you simply failed to understand it.

If you don't even know whose lawn this is, you're new to slashdot. Who did you buy your account from? Some kid, from the number.