Comment 62383

By A. J. Widdershins (anonymous) | Posted April 16, 2011 at 22:29:03

...Wagner cites section 144 (22) of the Ontario Highway Traffic Act, which states: "Where portions of a roadway are marked for pedestrian use, no pedestrian shall cross the roadway except within a portion so marked."
-- Great, how about the countless crosswalks through Hamilton that receive ZERO maintenance, and at which NO MOTORISTS stop for pedestrians, ever? James St. N and Colbourne St., for example. Or perhaps the numerous crosswalks which are Clear and Visible to motorists, yet across which pedestrians cannot walk safely, regardless, due to blatant motorist neglect?? How often are Motorists ticketed for failing to stop at a crosswalk?? This is an Automatic Fail during Ontario Drive tests, by the way.


... "No person shall walk or stand together with one or more other persons in such a manner as to impede pedestrians or vehicular traffic."
-- Equally outrageous. Does this apply merely to crosswalks? Is Wager here supporting the suggestion that community members aught not engage in any form of dialogue when running into each other along a sidewalk, because it may 'impede pedestrians'? James St N. as an example again -- Market vendors at James and Robert St. line the sidewalks with produce. Businesses rely on a sidewalk, constricted by a pudgy roadway, to attract patronage. This patronage naturally 'impedes pedestrians'. Are groups of businessmen caught chatting on the corner of Hughson and Main going to be ticketed for it? Or just youthful people at King and James who have no where better to go?


... [Wagner] concluded that it comes down to whether a pedestrian "crossing outside the crosswalk area impede[s] vehicular traffic." ... "... 'case law that is in conflict with a statute is overruled by that statute through the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty...' "
-- I.e. "It's our house, it's our rules -- we don't care what you have to say." No?

(From JonD) "The problem is clearly the speed of the vehicles. Its sad to have to dumb it down this much but it seems some need the reminder that this is a city after all, not a transportation network grid that happens to have high buildings and lots of people."
-- I agree! Motorist efficiency in this city has taken priority for too long. There happen to be human beings in Hamilton whose lives exists beyond motorised metal containers, and those humans tend to enjoy interacting with other humans.



The fact of the matter here is that the growing enforcement for piddley laws and by-laws like this is being pushed more and more heavily. Results are that the people who use these spaces are forced to give up, move away, or spend what little money any of us has these days on tickets (or purchasing more vehicles, so they can attain privileged motorist status).

If Hamilton intends to focus its energy on being "the best city to raise a child", perhaps it could begin considering that raising a healthy child can happen within thriving and vibrant communities, made up of individual humans whose lives cannot be contained to white lines and cars on the streets.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds