Off Off Topic: Cool Toronto People's Thread

[digitalmonkey 929]

Walking isn't inherently dangerous. It's only dangerous because of cars and inattentive drivers.

 

Ya, because inattentive walkers or those doing something illegal have never caused an accident.

[gruven 530]

 

Nobody has ever killed anybody by walking.

really? What if I had swerved to avoid the idiot woman and ran into a car other pedestrians? My fault? Or hers?

[FCP Bob 1,312]

Walking isn't inherently dangerous. It's only dangerous because of cars and inattentive drivers.

 

Chris just gave you an example of a walker that almost caused a tragedy.

 

Here is the thing that is really dumb and is why I get frustrated. We all want safer streets, we all agree that the number one cause is bad and inattentive drivers. The side that is most vocal about it is shooting themselves in the foot when they reflexively are against any attempt at educating pedestrians. They aren't being good advocates because the average person when they see somebody say something that is really stupid and they know it will tune out anything else they have to say.

 

The attitude is, "so you think that pedestrians have no responsibility and giving them safety tips is horrible ? Why then should I think anything you're saying about the issue is based on evidence or logic then. You tell me that narrowing lanes is a good idea ? Well you've proven to me that you aren't logical so why should I give your reasons for this any credence.

 

I don't remember what city it was but Zach linked to a pedestrian safety campaign a couple months ago on Twitter and most of the comments from walking advocates was about victim blaming. It was a totally balanced campaign aimed at both driver and pedestrian awareness and it is head shaking that there was anything in the campaign that could have been objectionable.

[mrdannyg 274]

 

 

This is ridiculous.

 

How so? The whole point we are arguing is that victim-blaming takes away from looking at the real, structural issues. It does that by ignoring the real danger is not inattentive pedestrians but unsafe roads and drivers, and if that's what government ads are implying, where is the initiative for real improvement going to come from?

[mrdannyg 274]

I disagree with Zach about the extent of pedestrian fault, but whether it is 0% or some higher number, there is a way of educating pedestrians that makes sense and isn't victim blaming. How about an ad that says "look out for blind corners" instead of "don't wear dark clothes"? Or "it is really dangerous for cops to try to pull over people running red lights so they rarely do it - take an extra look even if you are crossing legally!"

[mrdannyg 274]

Also worth pointing out that Chris' example didn't cause an accident (thankfully) because he was paying attention. I'm not saying that proves my point (there are times when pedestrians definitely cause injuries to others) but for all the times a dumb or inattentive passenger pisses us off, how often do they actually cause injury to others? Sometimes! But I bet the percentage of collisions that are the pedestrians fault (not simply a contribution) and there is a serious injury to someone else are in the low single digits, and we should spend our attention qccordingly.

[Untilted 158]

My take on this whole issue is this:

 

Dustin Hoffman and Oscar Madison are the guilty ones. Not the cars

[gruven 530]

Not sure if this is a comparable, but what about smoking? We all know it's dangerous yet there are still labels warning smokers. Unnecessary? Or does it never hurt to remind you that you can do stupid things to yourself?

[digitalmonkey 929]

 

 

How so? The whole point we are arguing is that victim-blaming takes away from looking at the real, structural issues. It does that by ignoring the real danger is not inattentive pedestrians but unsafe roads and drivers, and if that's what government ads are implying, where is the initiative for real improvement going to come from?

 

It's ridiculous because it's being labeled victim-blaming.

 

Educating people so they are less likely to be a victim is hardly victim-blaming.

[digitalmonkey 929]

I disagree with Zach about the extent of pedestrian fault, but whether it is 0% or some higher number, there is a way of educating pedestrians that makes sense and isn't victim blaming. How about an ad that says "look out for blind corners" instead of "don't wear dark clothes"? Or "it is really dangerous for cops to try to pull over people running red lights so they rarely do it - take an extra look even if you are crossing legally!"

 

Wearing dark clothes while walking at night is a legitimate concern. It's often hard to see people until it's too late.

[mrdannyg 274]

 

 

Wearing dark clothes while walking at night is a legitimate concern. It's often hard to see people until it's too late.

 

Not really, unless one or both of you is crossing illegally or without looking. Which happens often, since our current infrastructure means that cars going at high speeds and pedestrians may well be legally able to share the same space with little or no reaction time in a poorly-lit area. I don't really care if it's 'victim-blaming', I say that Saying people shouldn't wear dark clothes as a reaction to that is short-sighted, misses the point, and helps foster a public view that doesn't lead to real improvements.

 

A sign isn't going to get a pedestrian to pay attention or wear better clothes any more than telling drivers to pay attention or get off their phones. It's common sense (often ignored).

[mrdannyg 274]

Not sure if this is a comparable, but what about smoking? We all know it's dangerous yet there are still labels warning smokers. Unnecessary? Or does it never hurt to remind you that you can do stupid things to yourself?

 

Don't see that as analogous. The dangers of smoking are predictable, can be reasonably expected if you smoke and don't require any illegal or out of the norm actions for what the labels are warning about to happen. Unless you feel our infrastructure is such that regular collisions are unavoidable if pedestrians wear dark clothes, in which case I would hope you are a passionate advocate for better infrastructure or legal steps to stop walking at night!

[digitalmonkey 929]

 

 

Not really, unless one or both of you is crossing illegally or without looking. Which happens often, since our current infrastructure means that cars going at high speeds and pedestrians may well be legally able to share the same space with little or no reaction time in a poorly-lit area. I don't really care if it's 'victim-blaming', I say that Saying people shouldn't wear dark clothes as a reaction to that is short-sighted, misses the point, and helps foster a public view that doesn't lead to real improvements.

 

A sign isn't going to get a pedestrian to pay attention or wear better clothes any more than telling drivers to pay attention or get off their phones. It's common sense (often ignored).

 

You seem to be only talking about pedestrians and cars in one specific area. I've been driving for a long time and I'm telling you that when it's dark...and even worse when it's raining too...I sometimes have trouble seeing people walking on the side of the road when they're wearing dark clothes.

[digitalmonkey 929]

I don't really care if it's 'victim-blaming', I say that Saying people shouldn't wear dark clothes as a reaction to that is short-sighted, misses the point, and helps foster a public view that doesn't lead to real improvements.

 

Know what else misses the point and doesn't lead to real improvements?

 

Complaining about things and being overly sensitive by labeling them as victim-blaming instead of viewing things as potential helpful advice that could save your life.

 

This is a dumb conversation.

[Babying 613]

The golf courses are slowly opening.

[Dubey 1,035]

You should move to Alberta, my golf course opened Feb 25th this year. In 2015, I golfed my last round of the year on November 9th.

[MapleLeafpoker 1,462]

im hoping that like the Jays, the Raptors have a playoff run so good that we here decide they need their own thread.

 

(in the hockey forum)

[FCP Bob 1,312]

im hoping that like the Jays, the Raptors have a playoff run so good that we here decide they need their own thread.

 

(in the hockey forum)

 

not a lot of smarts on the Raptors team so I wouldn't hold out much hope. Casey showing again that he isn't a good tactical playoff coach and Derozan just not smart at all.

[MapleLeafpoker 1,462]

sigh, what a letdown.

[FCP Bob 1,312]

that was a much better game

 

Powell and Joseph should be getting any minutes that Ross is.

 

Emar Erozan (no D) is showing how is a good but limited player. You can not run your offense through him against good defensive teams and he is a below average defender.

 

They need to be playing Pat Pat about 35 minutes per game which means he needs to be starting and can get proper rest.

 

Carroll is not healthy and can't defend anybody right now. They should be using Powell against George as much as possible. I have such a huge man crush on Powell

[MapleLeafpoker 1,462]

I'm with you on Powell. His D and tenacity were so much fun to watch last night, what a steal that trade was. He should be starting on this team.

 

I cant recall why, but I watched a few Atlanta games last year in the playoffs, and Carroll was an absolute beast. He is but a shadow of his former self, its sad to see, because I was elated when the Raps signed him.

 

So disappointed with Demar. I never believed in him....until this year. I never liked his game, thought he was way too weak, easily pushed around and crap on D on top of it all, but then the more I watched this year, the more I thought I just dont appreciate his work in getting to the rim and drawing contact, at least he is willing to do that and can shoot as well. But I guess now in the playoffs when they dont call everything, he is no longer anywhere near the threat he is.

In the 4th quarter, I could not help thinking.....hmm, look at this team play, do they really need to resign Demar for max money?

 

Lowry was great last night, JV's play excites me for his future, and I love the depth players on this team so much. My man crush is on guys like Pat Pat, BB and Joseph. I love the bench so much on this team. Even Ross I still hold out hope for. lol

[pezeveng 207]

Powell came to my store tonight.

 

Seems like a nice guy, wished him luck in Indy.

[FCP Bob 1,312]

Powell came to my store tonight.

 

Seems like a nice guy, wished him luck in Indy.

 

from Twitter

 

[FCP Bob 1,312]

I hope Derozan doesn't truly think this way but based on his history I think he does in which case Casey will have to sit him down.

 

Later, asked what he was happy with over his first two games, DeRozan said something that should give his coach pause: He said he was pleased he kept shooting, and that he wouldn’t want to finish with just a handful of attempts.

 

And that gets back to Casey’s assessment of whether the team could win without him scoring.

 

“If DeMar is a facilitator and is making plays for other guys, yes, I think, no question, because I think we have other capable guys,” the coach said.

 

“But he has to be a facilitator. He can’t keep forcing the issue of just going in there and not getting a call and forcing that play. There’s other things he can do.”

[MapleLeafpoker 1,462]

thats pretty cool Pez...Bob, im assuming thats just a random pic you found, just a fan taking a pic with him? Wheres Sev in that shot!!!

 

re:Raptors....I haven't been this emotionally invested in a playoff series for some time. Thursday cant get here fast enough, I'm anxious about what the short term future holds for this team.

 

ooops, ok, forgot about the Blue Jays...but otherwise, years.

Its interesting how much my immediate group of friends and family were into the Jays, but the Raptors....eh, not so much outside of the guys I play ball with and my FIL who is a huge fan.