Nerd Family. Pro-Nerd. Pro-Family.

Google
 
Web blog.nerdfamily.com

Saturday, February 09, 2008

What Do You Think?

Apparently in Muncie, Indiana a man painted his own crosswalk and was charged with criminal mischief. There is an intersection with stop signs in a residential area and people didn't usually stop. So Whitney Stump called the city and the sign department to get a crosswalk painted. The city said that since it wasn't near a school it wasn't necessary. So he went out bought paint and did it himself.

So what do you think about it? Since the pedestrian would have the right away is there really a problem with the crosswalk? The city doesn't have any plans to remove it. The reason I think it might be ok that he painted it himself is that it was forbidden. I don't like the mentality that government seems to have with "if it isn't required it is forbidden". How about you?

(HT: BoingBoing)

Labels:

2 Comments:

  • I think if it was causing danger to pedestrians, then it was a good idea. Boo on the city that wouldn't consider the safety of it's people.

    By Blogger Kim, at 1:59 PM  

  • Unfortunately, painting lines on a road doesn't legally make a pedestrian crossing any more than painting big white arrows on both sides of the road would make it a one way.

    Instead, what he's done is make a death trap. Pedestrian is lured into thinking he has right of way and *bam*.

    I'm really surprised, however, that the city isn't removing the crosswalk immediately. In the event someone is injured or killed on the pseudo-crosswalk, the painter would likely be sued for causing the death, and could even be charged with manslaughter. The municipality could easily be sued as well for leaving a patently dangerous situation untouched.

    I understand the sentiment behind this, but a painted-on crosswalk is a tragedy waiting to happen.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 7:04 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home


 
/body>