Well, California has decriminalized petty theft…
Less excuses for cops to harass people. Sounds good.
Dashcam is more effective than Officer Donut anyway.
DougBH
24
Fine. Don’t prosecute for jaywalking. If you cross at an unsafe location, however, any negative result should be on you unless it is show that the other person acted intentionally.
1 Like
Oh snap that’s right. Give the California maggotry a taste of fweedom they fall in love!
Phil Ting is a racist that wants black and brown Californians to get killed by cars.
Yeah, looks like it:
“…disproportionately given to people of color and in low-income communities. His office cited a study of California Racial and Identity Profiling Act data showing Black residents are stopped 4.5 times more for jaywalking than their White counterparts”.
At least in part. I bet it was used as a variation of “stop and frisk”.
1 Like
Those people get jaywalking tickets without a moving car in sight. Cops just want an excuse to make contact.
woop woop I saw you jaywalk that 25mph road–time to run those pockets.
1 Like
You know this how?
Stick to the “racial profiling/ stop and frisk” narrative, might stick.
Smyrna
31
These laws were enacted due to cars entering into the equation and people dying. It wasn’t motivated by cops wanting to make contact. IMO…California is evolving into a chaotic mess due to these lib policies. The reason the laws were enacted are still prevalent and if anything…exacerbated. Here’s a prediction; deaths due to this law being rescinded will begin to happen immediately.
Aside: when I saw the name Phil Ting I thought about Night Court and Dan Fielding … nothing racist but boy am I prone to puns and other silliness, even when there is no one else around.
1 Like
It wasn’t long ago that a bunch of young men were milling about on a street (in dark clothes and at night) when what looked like a Mercedes that was speeding piled through them, sending several flying and some of those died. Driver (who was clearly an idiot to be driving that fast on a city/neighborhood street) may not have even noticed them till it was too late.
Wouldn’t that be vehicular manslaughter?
And also in the case you describe the new law would not apply because that would still be illegal for the pedestrian to do that.
“had the “fweedom” to do so?”
There’s a proposition on the CA ballot this year to make flavored tobacco illegal. Do you think it should be?
San Francisco is controlled by morons.
While the bill author is from SF, this is CA wide.
How much are you in danger if a car isn’t coming?
You’re wrong. We say “freedom”.
When I posted this thread last night I thought to myself, I bet even though this law gives greater liberty (even if a tiny and inconsequential amount), by virtue that its coming from the left, most of the righties here will mock and complain about it.
Of course I bet if it were reversed, with jaywalking not being illegal, but then the left introduced a bill making it illegal, the righties here would being going on about how unjustified this is and how CA is authoritarian.
1 Like
Smyrna
38
Now let’s watch, both of us going forward…you think this is a good idea and I do not. Can we agree that any increase in these types of deaths going forward is the result of this law? If so, how many add’l deaths does it take for you to consider this a bad law? I looked at the current average and from the best I can tell, it was nearly 7,500 pedestrians have died in California between 2009 and 2018 or 750 per year. If I’m understanding this correctly, this number does not include those that may have died too in the same accident but they were in their cars. That said, this is with the current laws in effect. There’s the basis and it will be interesting to watch going forward so let’s just keep track?
1 Like
Good. Next, they should consider criminalizing shoplifting.
4 Likes
Come On Man! You should be grateful Gavin is throwing them a tiny crumb. 
1 Like
STODR
41
I have no problem with the way it is written. However I think cops will find away around it.