EXCLUSIVE: Union claims laws behind Vision Zero plan, allowing cops to arrest drivers, are too vague

[BreeddekalbL]

The laws governing the city’s Vision Zero plan to eliminate traffic deaths are unconstitutionally vague, the Transport Workers Union charges in a new suit.

Local Law 29, allowing cops to arrest drivers, including MTA bus operators, for failing to exercise “due care” in a crash that injures or kills a pedestrian in a crosswalk, doesn’t actually define proper driver behavior, the union argues in the suit to be filed Monday in Brooklyn Federal Court.

“Its ambiguous treatment of ‘due care’ fails to put a person of ordinary intelligence in notice of the elements of the offense,” court papers say. The union has railed against Mayor de Blasio’s initiative, which it says has led to bus drivers in cuffs due to accidents with no evidence of recklessness.

The suit cites an MTA bus driver who was arrested after his bus hit and killed an elderly man in Brooklyn while driving 3 mph.

“The world has been turned upside down when NYC believes it’s a smart idea to arrest a veteran bus operator who was going 3 miles an hour and exercising the utmost care,” TWU Local 100 President John Samuelsen said.

 

A City Hall spokesman said, “The new failure-to-yield law is a vital tool in our efforts to protect pedestrians and make our streets safer.”

 

A Law Department spokesman said the suit would be reviewed.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/union-claims-laws-behind-vision-zero-plan-vague-article-1.2191282                 

           

 

here's the lawsuit too btw

http://www.twulocal100.org/sites/twulocal100.org/files/twuvcitynyrevisionzerolaw.pdf

[N6 Limited]

Good. Vision Zero is a farce, do you see how these pedestrians and cyclists cross the street? 

[BreeddekalbL]

Good. Vision Zero is a farce, do you see how these pedestrians and cyclists cross the street? 

 

AGREED! this gavone freaking gave pedestrians a licnese to jaywalk and cyclists a license to be wreckless

[bobtehpanda]

We already have a metric crapton of legal standards that aren't defined in the laws that specify them, because our judges have these things called "brains" and "common sense." This case has basically no legal standing.

[QM1to6Ave]

We already have a metric crapton of legal standards that aren't defined in the laws that specify them, because our judges have these things called "brains" and "common sense." This case has basically no legal standing.

I used to work in the legal field, and let me tell you, many of the judges I dealt with seemed to have turned off their brains and common sense years ago

[MHV9218]

Good. Vision Zero is a farce, do you see how these pedestrians and cyclists cross the street? 

 

 

AGREED! this gavone freaking gave pedestrians a licnese to jaywalk and cyclists a license to be wreckless

 

You guys are ridiculous and averse to facts. Laws that crack down on bad driving are not laws that endorse reckless pedestrian or cyclist behavior. In fact, in the real world, cyclists are being arrested left and right. 

 

Furthermore, in principle: rules should be more stringent for drivers than pedestrians and cyclists. Why? Because two tons of metal kills you when it runs a red light, but a guy on a bike or a woman crossing the street against a signal might cause a bruise in a collision.

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

You guys are ridiculous and averse to facts. Laws that crack down on bad driving are not laws that endorse reckless pedestrian or cyclist behavior. In fact, in the real world, cyclists are being arrested left and right. 

 

Furthermore, in principle: rules should be more stringent for drivers than pedestrians and cyclists. Why? Because two tons of metal kills you when it runs a red light, but a guy on a bike or a woman crossing the street against a signal might cause a bruise in a collision.

Bikes have caused deaths too. One happened in Central Park sometime last year.

[NewFlyer 230]

Wasn't the police suppose to give tickets to people that jay walked. Lol the city will be rich by giving Jay walkers tickets in Flushing.

[BreeddekalbL]

Im sorry i STRONGLY disagree with you, the law is very flawed, its like he's trying to bring a European version of the law here, this law is not a one size fits all.

[MHV9218]

Bikes have caused deaths too. One happened in Central Park sometime last year.

 

When a woman wearing headphones walked into oncoming traffic with a red light. It was a tragedy, but when it's a question of fault... Besides, a car kills somebody nearly every day, whereas bikes it's years between.

[CenSin]

Wasn't the police suppose to give tickets to people that jay walked. Lol the city will be rich by giving Jay walkers tickets in Flushing.

Chinatown and 8 Avenue (Brooklyn) too. Like the Jews, the Chinese are always in a rush for some reason.

[NewFlyer 230]

Chinatown and 8 Avenue (Brooklyn) too. Like the Jews, the Chinese are always in a rush for some reason.

A majority of them don't understand English that well so they ignore signs. I can see a lot of confusion in Flushing if the Q44 got SBS. I know on my home lines the Q17/Q25 they tend to get on the Q17 more if it says Flushing then the Q25. They always ask Q25 drivers if it goes to Flushing.

 

 

Most of the crashes that happen are because pedestrians are distracted but of course they are always right smh lol. The logic of that is so screwed up in a way that if a lady was crossing the street and her phone dropped in the middle of the street and she happened to notice it when she is safely on the sidewalk she is right for running into the street to pick it up even if a car is coming and accidentally hits and it kills her.

And DeBlasio was correct for changing the speed limit? That is what makes traffic worst in the most congested areas and that is not changing anything. You can get killed by a car going 10 mph just depends on how you got hit and how strong your body is. Instead of focusing on that there should be a bigger focus on pedestrian crossing and giving tickets to jay walkers and improving transportation. Next year I will have to rely on the subway to go to college but I know the and are a pain in the behind to get on in the morning and the takes too many stops. If only some express routes went to downtown Brooklyn from Queens.

[bobtehpanda]

A majority of them don't understand English that well so they ignore signs. I can see a lot of confusion in Flushing if the Q44 got SBS. I know on my home lines the Q17/Q25 they tend to get on the Q17 more if it says Flushing then the Q25. They always ask Q25 drivers if it goes to Flushing.

 

 

Most of the crashes that happen are because pedestrians are distracted but of course they are always right smh lol. The logic of that is so screwed up in a way that if a lady was crossing the street and her phone dropped in the middle of the street and she happened to notice it when she is safely on the sidewalk she is right for running into the street to pick it up even if a car is coming and accidentally hits and it kills her.

And DeBlasio was correct for changing the speed limit? That is what makes traffic worst in the most congested areas and that is not changing anything. You can get killed by a car going 10 mph just depends on how you got hit and how strong your body is. Instead of focusing on that there should be a bigger focus on pedestrian crossing and giving tickets to jay walkers and improving transportation. Next year I will have to rely on the subway to go to college but I know the and are a pain in the behind to get on in the morning and the takes too many stops. If only some express routes went to downtown Brooklyn from Queens.

 

In the most congested areas, lowering the speed limit by 5mph isn't going to do shit, because the odds of you getting up to and maintaining the speed limit for it to actually make a difference in a place like Downtown Flushing doesn't really matter. Your average speed is still going to be 10 mph if it was 10mph before.

 

Not to mention, in this city at least you generally don't get ticketed unless you're going ten above the speed limit. All this fuss has no merit.

[paulrivera]

In the most congested areas, lowering the speed limit by 5mph isn't going to do shit, because the odds of you getting up to and maintaining the speed limit for it to actually make a difference in a place like Downtown Flushing doesn't really matter. Your average speed is still going to be 10 mph if it was 10mph before.

I think the lower speed limit has encouraged pedestrians to dart across major streets. I mean flat out jaywalking on a red light crossing a 4-lane street, who in their right mind would do that?

 

As far as congested areas goes, there is room for some improvement if the traffic lights get re-timed. Then again, the city is very high on traffic calming techniques...

[N6 Limited]

For those who think this law is ok, just stand at any intersection in Manhattan (especially) and watch pedestrians cross.

[bobtehpanda]

I think the lower speed limit has encouraged pedestrians to dart across major streets. I mean flat out jaywalking on a red light crossing a 4-lane street, who in their right mind would do that?

 

As far as congested areas goes, there is room for some improvement if the traffic lights get re-timed. Then again, the city is very high on traffic calming techniques...

 

If you think jaywalking across major streets is new in this city, I have a bridge to sell you. People in this town have been jaywalking for as long as I can remember. Heck, I've been jaywalking all my life here. And if you think 4 lanes is a "major" street to be jaywalking against, clearly you haven't been around to the wider roads in Queens or Manhattan where this is still common, and has been common for quite a long time.

 

Pedestrian fatalities fell from 180 in 2013 to 132 in 2014, which is a huge improvement. The law is working as intended.

[MHV9218]

For those who think this law is ok, just stand at any intersection in Manhattan (especially) and watch pedestrians cross.

 

Reckless pedestrian behavior is entirely independent of reckless driver behavior. This is not how laws work.

[CenSin]

Remember folks: correlation does not imply causation.

[161 New York]

Reckless pedestrian behavior is entirely independent of reckless driver behavior. This is not how laws work.

 

False. That is not how it works in relation to civil torts. 

 

N.Y. CVP. LAW § 1411 : NY Code - Section 1411: Damages recoverable when contributory negligence or assumption of risk is established

 

In any action to recover damages for personal injury, injury to property, or wrongful death, the culpable conduct attributable to the claimant or to the decedent, including contributory negligence or assumption of risk, shall not bar recovery, but the amount of damages otherwise recoverable shall be diminished in the proportion which the culpable conduct attributable to the claimant or decedent bears to the culpable conduct which caused the damages. - See more at: 

 

See more at: http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/nycode/CVP/14-A/1411#sthash.n1VXfz3x.dpuf

 

Q. How is this applicable to pedestrians?

 

First, to successfully prove that another party's negligence resulted in your injury, you'll have to show that the other party owed you a duty of care. For example, if you have the right of way in a crosswalk, then drivers have a duty of care not to turn into the crosswalk and hit you. Unfortunately, too often reckless drivers breach this duty of care.

 

New York's negligence laws allow for the plaintiff's recovery to be reduced to the extent that the plaintiff's negligence caused the injury. This legal concept is called contributory negligence or comparative negligence, and it may be particularly relevant in pedestrian accident cases in which the defendant accuses the pedestrian of jaywalking or otherwise not following the rules.

 

 

Source: http://www.nyaccidentcase.com/blog/2015/01/contributor-negligence-doesnt-necessarily-bar-compensation-for-pedestrians.shtml

As for how the applicable sections within Vision Zero will play out in relation to NYC Administrative/Criminal law vs NYS Vehicle & Traffic Law remains to be seen as the litigation/appeals runs through the federal/state court systems and hopefully forces the Mayor to rewrite or abandon the section of the law.

[bobtehpanda]

False. That is not how it works in relation to civil torts. 

 

N.Y. CVP. LAW § 1411 : NY Code - Section 1411: Damages recoverable when contributory negligence or assumption of risk is established

See more at: http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/nycode/CVP/14-A/1411#sthash.n1VXfz3x.dpuf

 

Q. How is this applicable to pedestrians?

 

Source: http://www.nyaccidentcase.com/blog/2015/01/contributor-negligence-doesnt-necessarily-bar-compensation-for-pedestrians.shtml

As for how the applicable sections within Vision Zero will play out in relation to NYC Administrative/Criminal law vs NYS Vehicle & Traffic Law remains to be seen as the litigation/appeals runs through the federal/state court systems and hopefully forces the Mayor to rewrite or abandon the section of the law.

 

I don't understand how this impacts the right-of-way law, since it can only be used for pedestrians who actually do have the right-of-way, and has only been in cases where the pedestrian has the right-of-way. In fact, the examples you're quoting literally provide an example of when it applies to pedestrians who are injured by a driver not exercising due care and have the right-of-way.

[AndrewJC]

Good. Vision Zero is a farce, do you see how these pedestrians and cyclists cross the street? 

 

I see pedestrians who cross the street with the light and expect motorists to yield to them, as the law requires. The TWU is asserting that its members should not be held responsible when they break the law and strike and kill pedestrians who are crossing the street in the crosswalk with the light in their favor.

 

I also see pedestrians who - perhaps having had bad experiences with crossing the officially sanctioned way - also cross against the light when they see that no traffic is approaching. There is nothing wrong with that, and as long as many drivers fail to yield, it can often be safer than waiting for the light.

 

Remember also that pedestrians crossing in marked or unmarked crosswalks at uncontrolled intersections have the legal right of way, and motorists are required to yield to them as well.

 

The law also requires that motorists exercise due care to avoid colliding with pedestrians and cyclists, regardless of who is otherwise in the right.

 

Sorry if you don't like these laws, but they correctly recognize the potential danger that motorists uniquely pose. If only the police would enforce them...

[Express Bus Operator]

Good. Vision Zero is a farce, do you see how these pedestrians and cyclists cross the street? 

Thank You!!!!!

[Express Bus Operator]

Arresting a Bus Operator for an accident is faulty in my eyes. Both Pedestrians and Cyclists also doesn't obey the traffic law. The "Don't Walk" or "Hand Stop" signals means not to cross. I understand you have to Yield for  pedestrians to cross but I believe common sense and courtesy to double check to see if the driver will stop or sees you trying to cross will save you from ether being injured or fatally worst.. I drive the Access A Ride 20ft Mini Bus 6 days a week. Out of the 6 days a week, I always practice safety first by preventing hitting not only Motorist but both Pedestrians and Cyclists and I still get challenge where people just cross right in front of me as I'm coming down the road or near the intersection. What bothers me a lot is seeing sometimes they're on their electronic devices and are clueless that a vehicle is making a turn to even be sure if that driver sees them.

 

We're all sharing the road, if we can help each other out, I believe these accidents situations would be preventable. But nothing is always perfect or operates the way you want things to function.

[N6 Limited]

Arresting a Bus Operator for an accident is faulty in my eyes. Both Pedestrians and Cyclists also doesn't obey the traffic law. The "Don't Walk" or "Hand Stop" signals means not to cross. I understand you have to Yield for  pedestrians to cross but I believe common sense and courtesy to double check to see if the driver will stop or sees you trying to cross will save you from ether being injured or fatally worst.. I drive the Access A Ride 20ft Mini Bus 6 days a week. Out of the 6 days a week, I always practice safety first by preventing hitting not only Motorist but both Pedestrians and Cyclists and I still get challenge where people just cross right in front of me as I'm coming down the road or near the intersection. What bothers me a lot is seeing sometimes they're on their electronic devices and are clueless that a vehicle is making a turn to even be sure if that driver sees them.

 

We're all sharing the road, if we can help each other out, I believe these accidents situations would be preventable. But nothing is always perfect or operates the way you want things to function.

Exactly, most of the time the pedestrians or cyclists aren't even paying attention! 

 

One time I was driving up one of the Manhattan Avenues about to make a right turn, there was NO ONE in the crosswalk or walking toward the crosswalk, however there was a woman at the corner just looking around. As I'm about to turn she decides to waltz into the street without looking    . 

[MHV9218]

Exactly, most of the time the pedestrians or cyclists aren't even paying attention! 

 

One time I was driving up one of the Manhattan Avenues about to make a right turn, there was NO ONE in the crosswalk or walking toward the crosswalk, however there was a woman at the corner just looking around. As I'm about to turn she decides to waltz into the street without looking    . 

 

It's not most of the time. It is some of the time, because there are some poorly-behaved cyclists and pedestrians just as there are some poorly-behaved drivers. [Perhaps many, really.] It's just not that hard to stay alert in a car, and it's a shame that motorists have to be such whiners about the basic skills they should know: yes, you do need to pay attention while driving, and yes, you do need to act defensively. I drove this morning, I walked earlier in the afternoon, and I'm gonna bike in about an hour. I'm pretty familiar with the modes of transportation in this city, and it's simply not as clear-cut "these are the bad guys" as you think. I'm not biased about this one way or another because I utilize all modes of transportation.